HomeMy WebLinkAboutS3-Planning
CITY.OF SAN BERN RDINO
REQUEST I iR COUNCIL ACTION
From: Larry E. Reed
De~: Planning and Building Services
Su~~t: General Plan Amendment No. 89-2
To Change the Land Use Designa-
tion From RS to CG-1.
Date:
February 9, 1990
r1ayor and Common Council Meeting
of March 19. 1990. 2:00 9.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
At it's regular meeting of February 6, 1990, the Planning Commission
recommended the adoption of a Negative Declaration in accordance with
Section 21080.1 of the California Environmental Quality Act and approval
of an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Hap to change the designation
from RS, Residential Suburban, to CG-1, Commercial General, for the
northwest corner of 5th and Flores Street.
There was no previous Council action.
::::1
w'.l
: .I C)
-, <::1
C' -,
~:; ,
r.c 1 x-..
..,;. r:::.J
_.:;:
,......
~.~~
-.' C;,)
..,.,
c. " .....,
Recommended motion:
Adopt Resolution.
Et
.za /;- /LL'
LIE Z- Signature
arry .
Contact person:
Larry E. Reed
Phone: 384-5057
Supporting data attached: Staff Report and Resolution
Ward:
3
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: 1;/ A
Source: (Acct, No,)
(Acct, Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
An<>nrl" I t..m Nn
$-3
CITY .OF SAN BERh~RDINO - REQUEST ...OR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Subject: General Plan Amendment No. 89-2
Mayor and Common council Meeting,
March 19, 1990
REOUEST
The proposed amendment is to change the land use designation
from RS, Residential Suburban, to CG-l, Commercial General,
on the northwest corner of 5th Street and Flores Street. The
property consists of two parcels, APN's 138-081-18 and 19,
with a combined area of 0.77 acres.
BACKGROUND
Staff evaluated two alternatives to the above proposal in the
staff report to the Planning Commission. Neither
alternatives was recommended for approval.
The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the
proposed amendment and, there being no
environmental impacts, recommended that
declaration be adopted. The proposed amendment
with the objectives and policies of the General
applicants'
significant
a negative
is consistent
Plan.
At its regular meeting of February 6, 1990, the Planning
commission recommended the adoption of a negative declaration
in accordance with section 21080.1 of the California
Environmental Quality Act, and approval of an amendment to
the General Plan Land Use Map to change the designation from
RS, Residential Suburban to CG-1, Commercial General for the
northwest corner of 5th Street and Flores Street. (For
further background analysis please review the attached
February 6, 1990, Planning commission staff report).
MAYOR AND COUNCIL OPTIONS
The Mayor and
Amendment No.
Amendment No.
Council may approve
89-2 or may deny
89-2.
the proposed General Plan
the proposed General Plan
SUPPLEMENTAL JUSTIFICATION:
GPA 89-2 was legally advertised in the Sun newspaper for a Public
Hearing to be held on March 19, 1990. Therefore, it is necessary
that this item be considered by the Mayor and Council on this
date since individuals who read the legal notice may be there to
testify for or against the project.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 89-2
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 19, 1990
FEBRUARY 9, 1990
PAGE 2
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council approve
General Plan Amendment No. 89-2.
Prepared By:
John R. Burke, Assistant Planner
for Larry E. Reed, Director of
Planning and Building Services
Attachment:
A - staff Report to the Planning commission
jke
GP:GPA892
CITY OF- SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
4
2-6-90
6
&&.I
en
<t
(J
General Plan Amendment 89-2
APPLICANT Charles and Mary Parker
310 East Walnut Avenue
Rialto, CA 92376
OWNER. Same
~
&&.I
:::)
(3
II'
a:
"
<t
&&.I
a:
<t
To change the land use designation from Residential Suburban
(RS) to Commercial General (CG-1) on the northwest corner of
5th Street and Flores Street.
PROPERTY
SUbJect
North
South
East
"'lest
EXISTING
LAND USE
Commercl.al
Residential
Public Flood Control
Residential
Residential
ZONING
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
RS
RS
PFC
RS
RS
GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC DYES FLOOD HAZARD DYES OZONE A C SEWERS [11 YES )
HAZARD ZONE [3 NO ZONE IE NO OZONE B oNO
DYES AIRPORT NOISE I DYES REDEVEL.OPMENT DYES
g)NO CRASH ZONE ilNO PROJECT AREA ~NO
..J o NOT o POTENTIAL. SIGNIFICANT Z ~ APPROVAL
< APPLICABL.E EFFECTS 2
~ WITH MITIGATING ti 0 CONDITIONS
Ztn MEASURES NO E.I.R.
&&.Ie!) o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO iL,C D DENIAL
2Z iL,ffi
z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS j!2
00 WITH MITIGATING 0 CONTINUANCE TO
a:Z MEASURES tn2
:;U: 0
E:J NO o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS (J
Z U.I
U.I SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E.R. C. a:
.. EFFECTS MINUTES
NOV 19.. RIVISIO ~UI.Y I..a
SICY ^ -r"- J. ;' .1 j A ....,..J -r ^
, CITY OF SA.i BERNARDINO PLA~I..ING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 89-2
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 4
HEARING DATE 2-6-90
PAGE
r
""'\
REOUEST
The applicant requests that the land use designation be
changed from RS, Residential Suburban, to CG-l, Commercial
General, at the northwest corner of 5th and Flores Streets.
LOCATION
The proposed amendment site is located at the northwest
corner of 5th and Flores Streets and is comprised of two
parcels that total approximately 0.77 acre.
BACKGROUND
The northwest corner of 5th Street and Flores Street is
developed with an operating car wash on the parcel that
fronts on Flores Street and a vacant commercial building on
the parcel that fronts on 5th Street. The parcels that front
on 5th Street, east of Flores Street contain a small
apartment building, a church with parking and three (3)
vacant parcels (see Exhibit B). The area to the north of
these parcels contains single-family homes.
The previous zoning was C-3A, Limited General Commercial, for
the parcels at the northwest corner of 5th Street and Flores
Street and on 5th Street between Flores Street and Gardena
Street. The parcels on 5th Street east of Gardena Street
were zoned C-2, Community Commercial. The residential area
to the north was zoned R-2, TWo-Family Residential.
The carwash is a non-conforming use within the RS designated
area. The building on the southernmost parcel of the
amendment site has been vacant for more than 180 days and has
lost its non-conforming status. The parcel will have to be
developed according to the requirements of the RS
designation.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Municipal Code: Not applicable.
General Plan: This request is to change the General Plan
land use designation.
~
-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 89-2
OBSERVATIONS
41
2-6-90
,
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
-....
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS lCEOA)
The General Plan Amendment is subject to. CEQA. The
Environmental Review Committee reviewed the application on
December 21, 1989 and determined that alternatives 1 and 2
would not have an impact on the environment and a Negative
Declaration was recommended. However, the Environmental
Review Committee recommended that an Environmental Impact
Report be required for Alternative 3 due to possible crime
problems associated with the development of apartments as
identified by the police Department.
A public review period was held from December 28, 1989 to
January 10, 1990 to consider/review the Initial Study and the
proposed Negative Declaration.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
No comments have been received.
ANALYSIS
Staff has identified a study area to better analyze the
request and to determine impacts. The study area consists of
the parcels between 5th and 6th Streets and Lytle Creek Wash
and the parcels east of and fronting on Gardena Street.
Exhibit A shows the boundaries and the surrounding land use
designations.
Staff has also evaluated two alternatives to the applicant's
proposal. Alternative 1, Exhibit C, shows the applicant's
proposal. Alternative 2, Exhibit D, proposes changing the
designation of the amendment site and the parcels fronting on
5th Street to CG-l.
Exhibit E is Alternative 3 proposed by staff to change the
designation at the amendment site and the parcels fronting on
5th Street to RM, Residential Medium.
GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The RS, Residential Suburban, designation
family residences with a minimum lot size
feet. The maximum density is 4.5 dwelling
permits single-
of 7,200 square'
units per gross
\..
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE r.PA Rq-2
OBSERVATIONS
q
;l-b-9U
4
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
~
acre. Commercial activity is not permitted in the RS
designation.
The objective of the RS designation is
development of single-family detached units
suburban setting." (General Plan Objective
to "Promote the
in a high quality
loll) .
5th street is a major arterial and as such is not conducive
to single-family development. General Plan Policy 6.1.5 in
part states that the City is responsible for "...enforcing
access standards regarding new driveways and other
encroachments to arterial highways so as to minimize side
frictions that are detrimental to safe and efficient
functioning of arterials." In addition, policy 6.2.3 states
that the City "Require, wherever possible, a buffer zone
between residential land uses and highway facilities."
Parcels fronting on and having access onto 5th street are not
really intrinsic to the residential neighborhood to the north
which is already developed and the neighborhood should not be
considered part of the 5th street corridor.
A designation of CG-1 permits a range of retail and office
uses. The objective of the Community-Serving Commercial use,
of which CG-1 is a part, is to:
"Provide for the continued use, enhancement and new
development of retail, personal service, entertainment,
office and related commercial uses along major
transportation corridors and intersections to service
the needs of the residents: reinforcing existing
commercial corridors and centers and establishing new
locations as new residential growth occurs." (General
Plan Objective 1.19).
The RM designation permits a density of 14 dwelling units per
gross acre. The present lot size would only permit duplexes
to be developed along 5th Street. Any larger project would
require lot combining. As RM designation would have the same
concerns as RS as per General Plan Policies 6.1.5 and 6.2.3
which refer to side frictions and residential buffering.
FINDINGS
The change of designation to CG-1 for Alternative 1 will
change the land use map only and is not in conflict with the
'"
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE GPA 89-2
OBSERVATIONS
4
2-6-90
5
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
,.
~
Objectives and Policies of the General Plan.
Alternatives 1 and 2 will not be detrimental to the public
interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the
city. Alternative 3 has been determined by the Environmental
Review Committee to be of possible concern in the areas of
safety and welfare and would require an Environmental Impact
Report to be initiated.
All public services are available to the study
development permissable under the designations
Alternatives 1 through 3 would not impact on such
area. Any
proposed in
services.
The proposed amendment is to redesignate less than an acre of
land so the balance of land uses within the city will be
minimally impacted.
The amendment site is physically suitable for the requested
land use designation. Anticipated future land use has been
analyzed in the Initial Study (attached) and it has been
determined that project specific mitigation measures will be
sufficient to eliminate any environmental impacts.
CONCLUSION
The proposed amendment (Alternative 1) is not in conflict
with the Objectives and Polices of the General Plan. The car
wash has been in operation prior to the adoption of the
General Plan and the other commercial structure has been used
for commercial purposes in the past. The continued
commercial use will not impact the surrounding use nor will
there be a negative impact on the environment. The
Environmental Review Committee recommended a Negative
Declaration.
Alternative 2 should not be considered at this time as
General Plan Amendment 90-1, which has been submitted during
the processing of this case, will include the parcels along
5th Street east of Flores Street.
Alternative 3, which proposes an RM designation at the
amendment site and the parcels along 5th street, should not
be considered. The side frictions generated by residential
uses along major arterials, as well as the lack of buffering
between the major arterials and residential uses do not
\..
r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT """I
CASE
~?a
Rq-?
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
4
2-b-~U
~
r
further the objectives of the General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a
recommendation to the Mayor and Common Council that:
1.
A Negative Declaration
with section 21080.1 of
amendment.
be adopted
CEQA for
in accordance
the proposed
2. The General Plan Land Use Map be changed from RS,
Residential Suburban, to CG-l, Commercial General,
for the northwest corner of 5th street and Flores
street (APNs 138-081-18 and 19).
Respectfully submitted,
~t~~
Larry E. Reed
Director
Planning and Building Services
- t<L~~
,/ John Burke
Assistant Planner
ATTACHMENT:
A- Initial Study
'"
~
,
~ITY OF SAN BERN/'OINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
Applicant(s)
Address
City, State
Zip
MISC:
IS PREPARATION
ke/9-1-89
Initial Study tor Environmental Impacts
For .;,2 /VIE. a.. A L. P...I4N RmerJbrnlilli" R'3-.J.
Project Number
Date D.::.ctmltl=~ 21. JCJg'j
Prepared for:
WlClQ.I...H ir 1'11111.11 P.4a.~H....
_-:J C c:. i.J A.1..."'c..Ir /4v ~.
C, AU"O, LA 9137k
Prepared by:
:J0 J-, /'oJ bl.l a. I!.:.
Name
Pw::.1JNIi2.. I
Title
City ot San Bernardino
Planninq Department
300 N. "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
..-.
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
It.
INITIAL STUDY
...
r
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is provided by the city of San Bernardino as
an Initial study for General Plan Amendment No. 89-2 to
change the land use designation from RS, Residential
Suburban to CG-l, Commercial General at the northwest
corner of 5th Street and Flores Street. It also
addresses two alternatives proposed by staff.
As stated in section
Environmental Quality Act
an Initial study are to:
15063 of
guidelines,
the California
the purposes of
1. Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as
the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or
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 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) Identify the effects determined not to be
significant, and
(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;
....
...
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
"'"
5.
Provide documentation
finding in a Negative
will not have a
environment:
of the factual basis
Declaration that a
significant effect
for the
project
on the
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs:
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could
be used with the project.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is to amend the City's General Plan
Land Use map to change the land use designation from RS,
Residential Surburban to CG-l, Commercial General for a
site located at the northwest corner of 5th street and
Flores Street. It is comprised of two parcels of land,
rectangular in shape, consisting of approximately 0.77
acres combined (Assessor's Parcel Nos. 138-081-18 and
19) . RS, Residential Suburban permits single family
dwelling units at a density of 4.5 units per gross acre.
CG-l, Commercial General permits a range of retail and
office uses.
To better analyze the request, Staff has defined a study
area consisting of the parcels between 5th and 6th
Streets and Lytle Creek Wash and the parcels east of and
fronting on Gardena Street. Exhibit A shows the
boundaries of the study area and the surrounding land
use designations. Exhibit B shows the existing land
uses and Exhibit C, Alternative 1, shows the amendment
requested by the applicant.
Alternative 2 (as shown on Exhibit D) proposes to change
the land use designation from RS, Residential Suburban
to CG-l, Commercial General for the parcels requested by
the applicant and the parcels fronting on 5th Street.
Alternative 3 (as shown on Exhibit E) proposes to change
the land use designation from RS, Residential Suburban
to RM, Residential Medium for the parcels fronting on
5th Street and including the parcels owned by the
.J
...
,.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
..."
INITIAL STUDY
~
,.
amendment applicant. RM permits multiple family
dwelling units at a density of 14 units per gross acre.
2.1 AMENDMENT SITE AND STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
a. Amendment site
The site is comprised of two developed parcels of
land. The northernmost parcel that fronts on
Flores Street has an operating car wash on it. The
parcel that fronts on 5th Street contains a
commericaljoffice structure and parking.
b. Study Area
The study area consists of the amendment site as
described above and single family residences with
the exception of 5th Street. The parcels along 5th
Street contain a small apartment building and a
small church with adjoining parking. The remainder
of the parcels are vacant.
North and northeast of the study area are single
family residences. Omnitrans is located to the east
of the study area and Nunez Park is to the
southeast. South and southwest of the study area
is vacant land and a flood control channel. The
land to the west is vacant.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
3.1 Environmental Setting
The amendment site is rectangular in shape, flat, and
developed. It and the total study area is in an area of
moderately high to moderate liquefaction. A high
liquefaction zone is located on the south side of 5th
Street. The San Jacinto Fault Zone is approximately 300
feet to the southeast of the project site.
.J
\.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
"'"
BACKGROYlID
Application Number:
Project Description:
~ ~,'O.JH. Pt.AU ~tI1fN ;)Me,J T 89 - 2..
T,: UJ/hlC.i riff. LA~!) /J.s.,:, D,s",v4r":/J ,-<:t!..()/11 k~)")eMr'~L
SLJAJJ2./lAIo./ (P..S) 1'1: ~''''d.,,,.uIA'' 6.~N~AL ((6 ./') 00.. ~esl i)iN TTAI.. nlcJlUM / 1!./1).
Location: N",,'c.rl1 (mE N 5r4 S"lli.(,r :1,,;r_'E..,,,m,, ,,-',<Sf SJf)1f c" f,-,;,:~s {.-rili~T'
+-r, r",t:. l; IH r <;, I I'll: i:': :~ <J':' t>,; IV ~ :; ~ fLU- r
Environmental Constraints Areas: y~s
General Plan Designation: Q~SIO&:Nii';l-- S"~t.i.).f;A,J
zoning Designation: ~ J~
B. ~NVIBONM~NTAL IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
l. Ea~th 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?
c. Development within the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone?
x.
x
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature?
><
\...
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 1 OF 8
(.
Maybe
"""
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction or
hazards?
h. Other?
2. bIR_RESOU~: Will the proposal
result in:
a.
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
Substantial
an effect
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area?
3.
WillE_RESOURCES:
proposal result in:
Will
the
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces?
b. Changes in the course or flow
of flood waters?
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
~
Yes
}{
No
x
;(
X'
x
>(
X'
;(
:J
'<
;(
x
;<
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 2 OF 8
,
Maybe
"'"
Yes
No
4 .
BIOLOGICbL R~SOURC~~:
proposal result in:
Could the
a.
Change
unique,
species
habitat
trees?
b.
Change
unique,
species
habitat?
c. Other?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of plants or their
including stands of
:<
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of animals or their
x
x
5. NOISE: Could the proposal result
In:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
b. Exposure of people to exterior
noise levels over 65 dB or
interior noise levels over 45
dB?
c. Other?
6.
LAND_~:
result in:
'X
Will the
proposal
a. A change in the land use as
designated on the General
Plan? X
b. Development within an Airport
District?
c. Development within "Greenbelt"
Zone A,S, or C?
d. Development within a high fire
hazard zone?
e. Other?
~
REVISED 10/87
X
X
x
><
)(
J(
~
PAGE 3 OF 8
,.
7.
MAN-MADE HAEb~p:
project:
Will
the
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials (including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b. Involve the release
hazardous substances?
of
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
d. Other?
8. HOUSING: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
b. Other?
9. ~RANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan?
b. Use of existing, or demand for
new, parking facilities/
structures?
c. Impact upon existing public
transport~tion systems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
~
REVISED 10/87
fes
No
Maybe
"""
x
x
,(
)(
x
;(
)(
<
;<
x
x
x
~
PAGE 4 OF 8
g.
h.
Yes
No
Maybe
A disjointed pattern
roadway improvements?
of
x
X
Other?
10. ~UBLI~ SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Fire protection?
>(
police protection?
x
Schools (i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
;('
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
x
Medical aid?
;(
x.
Solid waste?
Other?
>(
ll. 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?
)(
)(
4. Sewer?
x
5. Other?
x
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
x
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
;<
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 5 OF 8
,
Yes
No
Maybe
"""
12. AESTHETI~:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view?
X'
b. Will the visual impact of the
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area?
)(
c. Other?
;<
13.
~P~1URA~--F~SQURCES:
proposal result in:
Could the
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
x
b.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
)(
c. Other?
.I{
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 10/87
PAGE 6 OF 8
Yes
No
Maybe
important examples of the
.ajor 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. )
x
)(
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?
x
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
siJ=. ,4TT~Ct+~ lJ _ <:::(",e~ r S
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 7 OF 8
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
~
"""
It.
,.
3.2
Environmental Effects
3.2.1 Earth Resources
log.
The amendment site is developed and there would be no
liquefaction impacts from a change in this land use
designation as shown in Alternative 1.
Alternative 2 would subject the properties fronting on
5th street to possible further commercial development.
Development under Alternative 3 would be a change from
the existing land use. Liquefaction potential can be
mitigated through project specific design. This would
apply to any additional uses or new uses constructed
under any of the alternatives.
There will be no unavoidable adverse impacts from
adoption of Alternative 1, 2 or 3.
3.2.2
Noise
5. a,b.
since the project site is developed, a land use
designat~on change would not have an impact on the noise
levels 1n the area. Future development of uses
permitted in the CG-l or RM areas could be mitigated to
ensure interior noise levels below 45 dB and exterior
noise levels below 65 dB. In Alternative 2, future
commercial development would buffer the single family
residences from the 5th street traffic noise. Likewise,
Alternative 3 would also buffer traffic noise, however,
without combining lots the development would be limited
to duplexes due to lot size. Such development is
similar to single family residences in that it is
difficult to mitigate private outdoor access. However,
such development would not have a noise impact on the RS
area.
~
It..
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
""'I
,.
There will be no unavoidable adverse impacts from
adoption of Alternative 1, 2 or 3.
3 .2. 3 .
Land Use
6.a.
The proposal, and alternatives will change the General
Plan Land Use designation.
3.2.4.
Transportation/Circulation
9.a,b,c.
A change to the land use designation as per Alternative
1 would not have an impact on traffic. Currently, 5th
street handles 15,600 average daily trips (ACTs)
adjacent to the study area. The daily capacity for 5th
Street at this location is 30,000 ACTs. Future
development on the amendment site of a traffic intensive
use such as a fast food restaurant with drive through
service could generate up to an additional 1500 ACTs.
Such an increase could be absorbed by 5th Street. If,
in the future, such a use was developed on the current
location of the car wash, (Alternatives 1 & 2) then the
Flores street ACTs of about 1000 could increase by 2 1/2
times. However, 80\ of the increase coud be anticipated
to enter and exit via 5th Stret. There wouldn't be an
impact to Flores Street as a result of this parcel
redevelopment under Alternatives 1 & 2. Such a project
would be reviewed for site specific access and traffic
circulation impacts. Mitigating conditions, such as
traffic signal installation, could be imposed if deemed
necessary.
If the land use designation was changed
Alternative 3, and the area was developed
of 30 dwelling units (at the rate of 14
per acre) then the ADTs would increase
negligible impact on the study area.
to RM, as in
to the maximum
dwelling units
by 300 having a
~
....
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
...
""\
,.
There will be no avoidable adverse impacts from adoption
of Alternatives 1, 2 or 3.
3.2.5
Public Services
lO.b.
Alternative 3 could impact police services because 5th
Street is a well traveled arterial and apartments would
generate additional people. Also, the area has a high
crime rate according to the Police Department and the
addition of apartments in the area could impact the
ability to provide adequate police protection.
3.2.6.
Aesthetics
12.b.
Alternatives 1 through 3 in and of themselves will have
no impacts on the aesthetics of the area. Specific
projects will be reviewed for consistency with the
General Plan and with all city codes. They will also be
addressed for compatibility with the other uses within
the study area.
There will be no avoidable adverse impacts from adoption
of Alternatives 1, 2, or 3.
/ke
GP:GPA89-2
....
"'"
DETERMI~h1'JON
On the basis of this initial study,
~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
O 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. .
~~he proposed project ~~Y have a significant effect on the
~ ~nvironment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
,,~AJ E. ,vfD~~"ff~~' /~~~~;fc.. /l4W,v~e'
Name and Title
~'- 1. ~.~
S nature
Date: ().- c;f-€i
~ ~
REVISED 12/87 PAGE 8 OF 8
,
LOCATION
CASE GPA89-2
~ ~ AGENDA """
ITEM #:
4
CITY OF. SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE
2-6-90
....
~ ...
...01
I ..,. ,VI I I ~ I I i I I I ' zz I I ' ..~_: G\.-..:;...r~'.H:: ^
\ ~ II . ~~:"" tli ~
".\ : Zl ~ r I '4- ~: 21 . ~' ,~~.. I ~- - N
\,' 'Zo,~ : .. ~ : 'ZO 'UJ' -,~~' ~ .~ ·
...... ,\' : 19 \ '~6 ' 19 . ~. ~. __' r~. It ~ !'Ilmf
~: . . 'e~, ~~%7 . 18~U.~l~7..&.:': j~;~i~I~~lO~i
: ~ ~ \: 17 N,: I e '1 17 ca. J .r-H~: t.-_~ft.r ~l;~ajf!~~'~ ~
. .. _.. ...; !So : · a'~ I 14 ~ ,
" ,\ l.. \. I~ . '.~ 9 : 16 . ~ %~~_' ~-:;..::;- -1 u ._--~i.~.
. . ~ ' '\\l~ ~. ~ '~'O ;~ IS t, ~~'~~&A&l ; : .; % i ~-jf-{i'~ ~
~.? ... , ~ ';.' . : 11~ ~ ~ ~ 11 ~; I: : I' ~.:~_... r-i-::~ ff ~. is -1:1i '2.1 -~ 4
~..-.:? . ;'. ~Q . ,,,,, i .~':? ~ II ,r~ H .l~ ~ , Ii ,.1.60._ , _.~ ~ ~:--\g---i'o-i ..
. \,J.., -\.....;;.--!D6~ .~2"'..,~, . S"T:- if'..... .-..& i!' ..,;;; -:::..;':1
,....... ~ iiP " : _ 0" Tj4 C
~ ~ 1" ~ '_,V . ~~ ~ ! : I ..1:
s Z~ :~:~~ t ' 23 "'B'. .I.t .s
, 22L:~"Z.~ : ZZL'~ 'i~_..'
. 21 il'''''' ~4"'" 2\ iJ'~ . "~o.L,,:
. 20 ( ! B) ~ S. "': "" 20 c(: ~ : ~ .&. ~ '
. I~ ~L, . (6 .: "l9~ I ~ . i 6. .
Ii>. r ,I P . U 7 . Ie r--, ^ ' 0,7. u :
S I T E ..:l~.!'f"'" I&J . .I .. 17:' A..
. ~::::.':t::::~ ti . ,g .: ~ N r:, ~g.. .... I
. -......... ~gpi6~::~~ 0 :: ..I.''- ~ ~ ,1i9 oS ~ II ~~ =
["... .., l-r . "' L.. ~~~
::: :::. ::l I...l. .~" .3 V\:i
:~ ~ ~1 ~ ,j II 10 I~ \4~. ! rz 11
. ~............. Ill..::;:' :...., L....~ _ _' _~ _ ~ ...:. :>,..1.... en
. ~~. A.,o.o.~,.~7.,~1. . "~~~:'. 'J.. .Sl:i\
~ .~.- '. . ~ . fiI'o... .~ ~.,;..:~...::...:..'~::::.,...~t:..,:,.::-.::",>':'.;..'.::..:..:::;....".....'!>; ..
K;f/Jfj,~flI . I \'.- I' .....:u... "....... ..... ..............-..' ..I.. -,
, .~A.' '.' . ; .\ : ..~.\~:i,:.~;0:.,;!fr~\~~{~~~;It.~:~?:~::t:;.:~t::;;>..>".:::~~~ r.~,{;:
/' : . '~...: \ttXEi.I~~::r?/ ::;.~~~:?::-~;);:.::~\:/::J:;,:.'?~~{~,:::: .
r ~ I \~~,,~:;:i;;:~.~~~::.;~.j~. -:.),::::,;~:.~.:;.,. . A/V Ali::
. ,; If9\ ....: ~~~~(~:~~f~i~:i~~r;:: :~'::~y.~~:~:~:~:::t~~:~:?f. 'S ::'.;:~
. . "1 ~ I ~""'i ,', .... .~-;....~....,....., ....'
I I. ;.::.',~::'.~;...;.,..: 2. '~:<'>':'::'"!..::"p" ~.,~
: '''?:::)r~:~~~::. :.,:>::<i~::'::': '.>.::.~...] ~:( '.' ,
, '.. .,....'. ...L.:" .. .0'.. ". : '. : .... '. ".... '.-
.: · ...."w~~tftt;~1~~f:M~~i!g~~
.. " : --j U.s.. ...... ........... .................
___,,~. ..._ ,. If' N.
.~ .
'. ~'.
.. .~
;.@~~
@
!
"
"
......
......
"
"
"
......
o
6
N
and
SurroundinQ
Land
. I.' '.;.. ..... ,',.;.. '.
'.~!~{:~~:~~~.~.~~~.~.....;...,:. ...;,.......'b
/\.1 I J /v
:~'; .. '. ~
EXHIBIT
A
GPA
89-2
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
Residential
Suburban
IRS)
......
I1II1I11
Public Facilities IPF)
Public Parks IPP)
".. ."
Public
Flood Control
IPFCI
...
-
" . ..,.. .... .4
'>...r.~;,C
'.:- :'~
.'R
l~
6
N
.,
~
6tll.
~
- _ STREET:
___ ~s.
-
.' .~ , ... .. ,.0 ......
- r , ~ ~ , - ,
,7' ", ", , 24 . 24 . t..I l .
-. - -' < . t..I j.~ 1 " . , ~.; ,
I ~ . ~ ,
.
.; II" , - ~ 1---..-- I- .--
In In
. ~:i I I 2". .. ... - - --,
. ;; III; 2
~ I I -, SINGLE F AMIL Y RESIDENCES - ._- -;- f~
.. CI: I I
~ ! 2, r I
, I'! J,!
_. _. ---- --_. -. -.--. - - - ..--
-.j' 4 2/ .- ri I!I
21 I . 7, "~ 4
." ~'C
1--- -- i<o - - .. - - -.- ..- - - --- .. -. -- --
~ !-' -
20 6 6 5 20 (. 5, ., 5
(@) - - B (0, ~2) B C@)
:, 1':1 , 6 19 1/6 -. 6
. , j
- ~- ----- --- ..-.- - - -- -- --
- -
18 . ,~ ' 7 18 I( ~. 6. 7
1-- .- - - - . - -- . -_...-.- -. - .- - - -
"j" \ 8 17 :'S .'i~ 8
CAR WASH - ..- - .--. - - - -- ~ ---- .-.._-
9 16 , r' 9
. \.2 "I!. ~ .,
" -
:.. - - T . --1" - . I I
Vl
to-
VACANT Z - 0 I
/ ~ ), I;> ,,, 10 UJ ,.) :;: ~ '2 " 10
In ~
t..I to- e: :.: ~ <7. :' "
BUILDING ~ . ,.. == a:
\ . VACANT ), a: <: VACANT' ,
<:
-l c. U c. ~
'"- <: :
- , ..., - . I..... I .....#t:" I ~/ ~.. ..- .... - -.:..;,
[J-
@
~tll.
.
STREET ~
,
.51,
-'
-------
EXHIBIT B
GPA 89-2
Current Land Uses
.,
R
..::::::!::!!:.:::: i!!!.:.::
===::::::"...:::: :::-::::
..,.......I........!..HF_..
......... ...tQ.... ...-...
..............................
:::::::::2::::::::::::::::::::
..............................
iI!!!iJiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigiii
..iI.m..j....................
.. . . .........~.........
.. .. ....................
... .. .. .......... .........
..................... .........
'.1............... .........
.. .................
.. .................
.. .................
.. .. .................
.. .................
.. .................
.. .................
.. .................
;,
(@)
.51,
-------
-
....
6
N
6111.
~
. ~ STREET ~
~_ 1158
............... ............ e.. ... ........... ... ...........
:::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::Nii:: I:::::::::: :::::::::::::::::
::::I"jI"::::::::::::::::::' :::",::: fl:::::::::::"c':::::::i::::
iiiimiii~iill~ii~iiiiiiii gijim ;mmmmmlmm:ml
:: :::::: ::::::::::::::::::: ~~~~~~ i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
iiiiiii~~~i~g~~~~~~~~~: ::::::::: .::::::::::::iji::::::Ii:::
;;;;;;:;:: ;:~~:: ~:~ :~:~:;; ~m~ ~~~i ;::!:::::!::::;:!ffi~:::!!!!
~U_iiiiii~ggigiiig giigg iiiiigggiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
!ir:iiii~il~~1 ii~ ~~!mi!f:!~!'!~!~
ffii~~~~H ~n~~~~~g~ti;;;; i~~jji~
mi~i~ ~~~mmmm mmm
~n~~i~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~H~~~~ ~iiiiii~~
mmf:H H~~mmmm gmmi
@
51h,
.
STREH ~
\
EXHIBIT
C
GPA 89-2
ALTERNATIVE 1
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
Residential Suburban (RS)
Commercial General (CG-l)
-
..
6
N
6'ft.
~~
1151
IV-
;,
@])
@
S,ft.
.
STREeT ~
\
.51.
-------
EXHIBIT
D
GPA 89-2
ALTERNATIVE 2
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
...........-
~!...........
Residential Suburban (RS)
Commercial General (CG-l)
-
~
--
-....
6
N
.,
.
6111.
~
STREET :
:'---_ 1151
;,
@ID)
........... ..............
............................
...........................
...........................
...........................
....J!!.I!..................
:::: :1:::::1='=:::::::::::
iiiiiiiiiiiiii5iiii!giiii:
...................
::::::::::::::::::::::::::J:
::::... ;;!:::i"!:::::::::::
iiii::mggffigiggiiii:
:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:::..........
::::....:::::HC::::::::::::
....lr:...II~I...........
.... ...... ...........
.... ....................
............................
H!!HHiiiH!HUiHiiH;;;
............~............
::::II::::s:I::::::::::::
~f:!!f:i!!i~!!!~!!!i
::::IOi:::61::::::::::::
............................
......................
.....................
.....................
......................
.. .....................
......................
.........-.............
::::lI:::::UI::::::::::::
............................
............................
............................
----..--.-
........... .........
........... .........
........... .........
::::1.::: :::::::::
..-....... ....
.............. ....
.............. ....
=::a;:$::a.
..............
.........
::::I.!fi:
:::::iili::=_
.iliiii=iiiiiiiiUiiiiii!ii
'.........i.........I.........
'Eli' ......... .........
.. . . ..................
.. .-..................
"il .:.........:.........
:: :::::M:::::::::IIII:::::1
.. .... ......... .........
.._.....Z......... .........
:: .:iiil::::::::: ::::i::::
.. . .-..................
.. . .-..................
s,,..
~
STREeT ~
\
.51.
-------
EXHIBIT
E
GPA 89-2
ALTERNATIVE 3
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
Residential Suburban (RS)
'~o~o~o~o~og(
oOoOOOOOOOo(
~~o~o~o'!.o~o~
Residential Medium (RM)
1
RESOLUTION NO.
4-
2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE
NEGATPVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING
3 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 89-2 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
4
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
5 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECTION I. Recitals
(a) The General Plan for the City of San Bernardino
was adopted by the Mayor and Common Council by Resolution
No. 89-159 on June 2, 1989.
(b) General Plan Amendment No. 89-2 to the General
Plan of the City of San Bernardino was considered by th~
Planning Commission on February 6, 1990, after a noticed
Planning
commission's
hearing,
and
the
public
recommendation of approval has been considered by the
Mayor and Common Council.
(c) An Initial Study was prepared on December 21,
1989 and reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee
and the Planning Commission who both determined that
General Plan
Amendment No.
89-2 would not have a
significant effect on the environment and therefore,
recommended that a Negative Declaration be adopted.
(d) The proposed Negative Declaration received a 14
day public review period from December 28,
1989 through
January 10, 1990 and all comments relative thereto have
been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Mayor and
Common Council
in
compliance
with
the California
1/11
1.
Environmental Quality Act and local regulations.
2
{e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed
3 public hearing and fully reviewed and considered proposed
4
General Plan
Amendment
No. 89-2 and
the Planning
5 Department Staff Report on March 19, 1990.
6
(f) The adoption of Amendment No. 89-2 is deemed in
7 the interest of the orderly development of the City and is
8 consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
9 existing General Plan.
10 SECTION 2. Neqative Declaration.
11
12
13
]4
]5
]6
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED
:
by the Mayor and Common Council that the proposed
amendment to the General Plan of the City of San
Bernardino will have no significant effect on the
environment,
and the Negative Declaration heretofore
prepared by the Environmental Review Committee as to the
17
effect of this proposed amendment is hereby ratified,
affirmed and adopted.
]8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 I I II
SECTION 3. Findinqs
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common
Council of the City of San Bernardino that:
A.
The change of designation to CG-l for the proposed
amendment will change the land use map only and is not
in conflict with the Objectives and Policies of the
General Plan.
The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the
B.
28
IIII
2.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare
of the city.
C. All public services are available to the study area. Any
development permissable under the
CG-l designation
proposed by this amendment would not impact on such
services.
D.
The proposed amendment is to redesignate less than an
acre of land so the balance of land uses within the City
will be minimally impacted.
E.
The amendment site is physically suitable for the
requested land use designation. Anticipated future land
use has been analyzed in the Initial study and it has
been determined
project specific
mitigation
that
measures
will
sufficient
eliminate
any
to
be
environmental impacts.
SECTION 4. Amendment
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common
Council that:
(A) The Land Use Plan of the General Plan of the City of
San Bernardino is amended by changing approximately .77 acres
located northwest of 5th Street and Flores Street from RS,
Residential Suburban (4.5 dwelling units per gross acre) to
CG-l, Commercial General. This amendment is designated as
General Plan Amendment No. 89-2 and its location is outlined
on the map entitled Attachment 1 and is more specifically
described in the legal description entitled Attachment 2,
IIII
IIII
3 .
1
2
3
4
5
6
copies of which are attached and incorporated herein by
reference.
(B) General Plan Amendment No. 89-2 shall become
effective immediately upon adoption of this resolution.
SECTION 5. Map Notation. This resolution and the
amendment affected by it shall be noted on such appropriate
General Plan maps as have been previously adopted and
approved by the Mayor and Common Council and which are on
file in the office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 6. Notice of Determination. The Planning
Department is hereby directed to file a Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk of the county of San
Bernardino certifying the City's compliance with CEQA in
preparing the Negative Declaration.
i
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Ii
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
IIII
II I I
IIII
I II I
II I I
IIII
I II I
4.
RESOLUTION...ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.
2 89-2 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was
duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City
4 of San Bernardino at a meeting
thereof, held on the day of
5 , 1990, by the following vote, to wit:
6 Council Members
AYES
NAYES
ABSTAIN
i ESTRADA
8 REILLY
9 FLORES
10 MAUDSLEY
11 MINOR
12 POPE- LUDLAM
13 MILLER
14
15
16
Ii
18
19
20
21
City Clerk
The foregoing resolution
day of
is hereby approved this
1990.
W.R. Holcomb, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Approved as to
form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
22 City ~ttorney
23 By:
24 I I I I
25
26 IIII
27
-/
~. -' n
28
I II I
5.
..."
CITY JF SAN BERN. .RDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. M-z,..
TITLE LOCATION MAP
-
-l'
. ,.
--. ..
, '" ~
".
@
~~.
..
.. n
'~ 2
!!
~~
13
I5.ACJ
(Q~D
G>
- -- ----:--=-
~
~
@
6th.
t4 0
f) 0
u 0
fl G)
fa I:D
19 0
18 ~
(~)
. ~"
, ~ 7
: L..I
UJ ~
c:
....
" VI
~ ~
-j"
"J
~o'
B
~
,~.
@ 1 114 0)
..
G) t 23 @
0 -' u @
0 4 el e
0 , to @
~:..:, .~'"
0 6 /9 @
0 7 /8 @
0 8 17 @
16 G
o 9
1\ __ .
, I
c-, l;."'~- --:,.-T~~-. '.5.
~::. I ,;_l
o ~D ~ @ ,;.-
i.1 ~.'_'_'-
@
.~.'
~
! I
, I'; I' 13 ,I
In nii
;".:.1 /,->,
j
.,..i'I~, ~T
~,tL
_J i I
- ..-
I
-"
~j t :
" t! .
1-
.~ VI ,
"
~'?-
. .... .u.. ...._
7e'
.l rlO'
- _ $':"Ii[[. T .. .'~r
----- '"
""'--
~
,0-
G
t
...
€ ~
o
4
(8) ,
B -tr;:::~
CD 6
@
(G) 7
CD 8
, 0 9
, ......
~ r-:- /I I 10
~'~ ',(0 CD @ ,
l:': '
~ ri4)
.,).". .60- _~ ~
STREET t
ATTACHMENT I
~
-2.--
CITY OF SAN BER(\ARDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. ~
"""\
r
TITLE LEGAL DESCRIPTION
"'"
Lots 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 of Tract 2291, La Gardena
Subdivision No.2, Block 8, in the City of San Bernardino,
as per plat recorded in Book 138, of Maps, page 8, of said
County. (Assessor's Parcel No. 138-081-18 and 19.)
ATTACHMENT
~
lilt...
-
"'""I
CITY JF SAN BERf\._\RDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. M-~
.
.. TITLE LOCATION MAP
.
-ll
. r
n~ ~
",.
@
~~, I @
::n
! ~ 2
!!
~~
13
I:5.Ac:J
(QaD
@
.. -- ---:--=-
~
~
6t,..
I".
t4 0
t, 0
22 8
fl CD
fO 0
19 CD
18 ~,
. ',- ,
. ...
. L.J
. L.J
c::
...
" VI
; I"
~'
..,
'~.
~'
B
~
.~
@ , S!4 0)
,.
G) 2 23 @
0 :5 !t @
0 4 tt e
0 , to @
/..("'1 .~
1.-,.. -1
0 6 19 @
8 7 18 @
CD 8 17 @
_J i I
- A-
I
--
'j..:. '
',L.J :
; I.J ,
I~
CI')
~ ~
'?J-#
~~
B
. 0 9 /S G .~
1\ .. .
1':,--- ____~__-J I I
<~ 12 /I I 10 ! I~ ; I'; I' :3' I
~:; ',:'.' ! r, ~,~
~ <:) ~ @ -... I .~ i G ,
....-,r... ~._-- .....,. .,'
, -
!
-- --
@
~tll.
. _. u.. ...,
7el
.., ,.,It
ro-ro:-:-r t"._
...~,..~.r
-----
~
,~
G
t
#A
€ ~
o 4
@ ,
'^""~
u....c.~
o 6
((:) 1
@
o 8
i~ .~ ..,'
~ r-;- /I , 10
~.~ '. 8 0 @ :
c- ,
<3 1/4)
~, .... J<I!"~ ~
STREET t
ATTACHMENT I
_1__