HomeMy WebLinkAbout41-Planning
~ITY OF SAN BERN4DINO - REQUEST Fa. COUNCIL ACTION
F~
Delr:'
Larry E. Reed, Director
Subject:
Appeal of DRC Approval of
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
Planning and Building Services
Da~: September 19, 1990
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
October 1, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On July 19, 1990, the Development Review Committee approved Lot Line
Adjustment No. 90-23.
On August 20, 1990, the Council referred the appeal of Lot Line Adjust-
ment 90-23 to the Planning Commission for a recommendation.
On September 11, 1990, the Planning Commission considered the Council's
request to make a recommendation on the appeal of Lot Line Adjustment
90-23. The Commission's vote on a motion to recommend denial of the
appeal resulted in a tie vote of 4 to 4.
Recommended motion:
o
That the Mayor and Council deny the appeal, and approve Lot Line
Adjustment No. 90-23 subject to the findings and conditons of aEprQval
contained in the July 23, 1990 letter of approval, Attachment ~C" .,;
(Supports DRC action.) " c,
'"."
..~.. .
4 Ck/;C
. Signature'
Larry E. Reed
Contact person:
Larry Eo Reed
Phone:
384-5357
1
Supporting data attached: l'lraff Report
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: N I A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Descriotion)
Finance:
COI Notes:
75-0262
An"'nrl~ l'tArn I\In
/./1
CITY OF SAN BERN~DINO - REQUEST FO COUNCIL ACTION
o
o
o
75-0264
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Appeal of Development Review Committee (DRC)
Approval of Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
Mayor and Council Meeting of
October 1, 1990, 2:00 p.m.
REOUEST
The appellant, John Lightburn, is appealing the approval of
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23 by the Development Review
Committee. The appellant requests that the Mayor and
Council reconsider the approval and "set aside the approval
of Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23 until such time a thorough
environmental review is conducted in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ...". (See
Appeal Letter, Attachment "A".)
BACKGROUND
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23 combines 13 lots into 2 lots
consisting of a total of 3.3 acres located at the northwest
corner of Court Street and Arrowhead Avenue. Parcel No. 1
will consist of Assessor Parcel Numbers 135-151-4, 5, 10-16,
and 20. Parcel No. 2 will consist of Assessor Parcel Numbers
135-151-17, 18 and 19. (See Attachment "B", Lot Line
Adjustment Plat.)
On July 19, 1990, .the Development Review Committee approved
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23.
On August 20, 1990, the Council referred the appeal to the
Planning Commission for a recommendation. On September 11,
1990, the Planning Commission reviewed the appeal and voted 4
to 4 on a motion to recommend denial of the appeal. This "no
recommendation" resulted because of confusion over issues
unrelated to the appeal. Lot Line Adjustments are
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA (Section
15305), if new parcels are not created. The proposed
configuration complies with all pertinent criteria set forth
in the Municipal Code and is consistent with the General
Plan.
o
o
o
L
o
o
Appeal of Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
Mayor and Council Meeting of October 1, 1990
Page 2
BASIS OF APPEAL
The main point of the appeal letter is that the Lot Line
Adjustment is an "integral" part of a development plan
related to the expans~on of the Sun Company, and that, as
such, the "cumulative impacts" may have a significant effect
on the environment and "compromise long-term environmental
goals" by not taking into effect the implications of related
projects. These related projects are inferred to be illegal
or inappropriate.
ANALYSIS OF APPEAL
Lot Line Adjustments are legal instruments affecting boundar-
ies of existing parcels and have no environmental
consequences, cumulatively of individually. For this reason
they have been categorically exempted from the provisions of
CEQA. They may be important in implementing a development
project for financing or legal reasons, but they do not
produce a physical change to the environment. Thus, the
appeal has no valid basis.
The safety issues raised by his questions about related
projects are being addressed by the Department through the
appropriate legal and technical review procedures.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Mayor and Council deny the appeal
and approve Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23.
Prepared by: John E. Montgomery, AICP
Principal Planner
Attachments: A - Letter of Appeal to Mayor and Common
council
B - Lot Line Adjustment Plot
C - DRe Letter of Approval, July 23, 1990
/ke:7/27/90
M&CCAGENDA:
LLA9023APPEAL
o
o
hllyor llnet. Common Counci I
City of Slln Bernllrdino
300 North 0 Street
Slln Bernllrdino, Cll. 9240 1 .. 25 P 2 01
'90 v"JL :
Subject: Appelll of Lot Line Adjustment 90-23,
Sun Compllny
Reference: Review of Plens 87-28 & 88-47
ATTACHllENT h
o
RECE,"e!'.. ~.r" ~'-ER.
July 25, 1990
Dellr Mllyor llnd Members of the Council,
111m llWllre thllt the Development Review Committee llpproved Lot Line
Adjustment 90-23 on July 19, 1990.
By WilY of this letter, 111m llppellling the ORC decision of llpprovlllllnd
request thllt this mlltter be set for II hellring before the Mllyor llnd Common
Council.
The grounds for llppelllllre liS follows:
o
1. The lot line lldjustment is integrlll Pllrt of II mUlti-phllse, multi-step
development pllln reloted to the expllnsion of the Sun Compllny/USA Todoy
monufocturing plont which begon in 1981 llnd continues tOdey.
2. The environmentol review llnd evoluotion of the totol project,
specificlllly Review of PIons 87-28 & 8B-47 ond the previous 1981
exponsion, wos inodeQuote ond should be evoluoted liS required by IllW.
(Ref: JL Itr. to S. Edwins, 7-9-90 llnd Rpt. to Plonning Commission
4-17-90)
3. Due to the "cumulotive impllcts" of post llnd future phoses of the
expension project, Lot Line Adjustment 90-23 is not exempt from the
Colifornio Environmentel Quolity Act or Title 14 of the Celifornie
Administrotive Code. (CAC, Title 14, Sections 15130 ond 15355 (b), ond
Public Resources Code, Section 21083 (b))
4. These projects moy hove II significont effect on the environment ond
hove the potentiol to degrllde the Quolity of the environment ond
compromise long-term environmentol gools. Those significont effects
thllt should be considered include:
o 0) Conflict with lldopted environmental plans ond goals of the City;
b) Substantial, demonstrative negative aesthetic effect;
c) Substantial degradation of water supply;
d) Contomination of public woter supply;
o
o
o
Pllge Two. - Appelll o~t Line Adjustment 90-:'23 0
e) Substllntilll degrlldlltion of or depletion of ground wllter resources;
f) Substllntilll interference of ground wllter rechllrge;
g) Adverse llffect on II property llnd structure of historico1 llnd culturlll
significllnce;
h) Adverse llffect on trllffic, circulotion llnd porking requirements;
i) Substllntilll increllse of 11mbient noise levels;
k) Expose people llnd structures to mlljor geo/seismic hllzllrds;
1) Disruption of the physiclllorrllngement of the centrlll city llrell;
m) Adverse llffect on the 11mbient llir QUlllity.
5. Lot Line Adjustment 90-23 did not tllke into considerlltion the
development ond environmentlll impliclltions of Review of Plllns 67-268.
66-47 llnd the circumstllnces surrounding the previous illegllllot line
odjustments, llnd the invlllid Lot Line Adjustments 63-01 llnd 62-12.
(Ref: JL ltr. to L. Reed.. 5-9-90)
Bosed on the foregoing, 10m requesting thot the Mllyor ond Common Council
set llside the opprovlll of Lot Line Adjustment 90-23 until such time 0
thorough environmentlll review is conducted in llccordllnce with the
Californill Environmental Quality Act, Title 14 of the Clllifomia
Administlltive Code llnd other llpplicllble provisions of the municiplll code.
o
f""
~
\l
-
0 ~
~
.,
-.
-.
!
-,
\
o
~~ ~\)\-\ ("'"\)\'"
~~ -'~:T ~-.
\tI., 0 I,j~ ~~
:) -
~ ~\SI I>> C"\:> _
~ i.~ ~!i i
~ :! \S'~. ~
~ 0 -" ~
:\1" :!oS' '" ~! ""
;r.~ ~ 6.l~@
~'" ~@~~@
~sl ~t l~@
~'! ~.@~~
<<".:0' ~_ f" :J
3~ ~.~ " tf
,,~ ",,- -.
~. u.;.@ 5
-. ~. -.
j - ~
~ t'I .:
" Y ::l
~ i ~
""
....." _ o;f"..
..," . ~ .'.
~
..
,
HiT--
, 11\
fl_" I.w
~<a)o - -\:o~
: ~
I '
I
I
,
I.
I
I
,
-;'i3.'..
'"
..
..
'"
'"
.,. \
. I
-fJ.:.."..-".": -
'"
..
~ ~ ..-
'"
.. n'"
I 7.i/l! it
..r'
e54.25 . f
f
~
AvENue .. I
.
~
II'"
I ,~
- .. - I~
~.
c....!-~ S'~
" ... 0_
.,. - .
t'~~ jv
-~~
- .
ii...~
~~-
'"
ATTACHMENT B 0
.~~
V t ~ .
~ :
&
.
STftlCT ~
~ D ---.-
,
I
=
,
-'.
(I
is "I
I I ~ I
f) 1~18~~1",
I I ~ I
I I' ~ I .
I I ~ I
=,,~~~nf- L -,------..~\-..
l" ....., W.
-+" )C
~ ~ I ~.
\l', ....,
\3 \"\ I -.,
j"' :3
. ~I. ~
~ ~,..::~~ '\ '-. ,';ll
j~-I ,~"
)-~~~~::.: - ,-_.~.._....~~:,:, ~
---- -- -~ -t:-t .
. ';:' - --:~~ "
.1 I R:~"'V\.~ \;:
, ,
j- ~"JI; -It I: ...~~ <!J' .~
~. . ~. '\..
~~~ - Ui--k-tUl'--,
\ ~~ (t ~ '.' I .f'\. ~
~ ~ - -~ ~'r-~"'---\._----- .
. ~~ .
e
.
I I
<"-
~'.5t7' -:
/(Ij/'
,
I '"' '\..~
I \::tf ,.
" '-.!
.....M~ '\.. " '\.. " " '.1
,J. ':
I
t.
<!l
d.
'-
: .."ROWHEAD
-
tI;LA 90-28
'-
!e
'~~H'I..~
.,,"
. I
.
i
~
a
-t
~
_.
:)
~
~
t:.
~
~
a
~
i
/
o
o
o
~-"
o
o
ATTACHMENT C
., - .\
- .
'~: <~:.j~tJ~ I
~"""\.-. '.: ';~
~;;I;L; ~
CITY OF
San Bernardino
DI'ARTMINT 0' 'LANNING AND IUILDINQ IIRVIC.I
LARRY E. REED
DIRECTOR
July 23, 1990
Charles Schultz
Reid & Hellyer
P.O. Box 1300
Riverside, CA 92509
RE: Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
Dear Mr. Shultz:
At their meetinq of July 19, 1990, the Development Review
Committee took the followinq action:
That the application for Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23, to
consolidate thirteen parcels into two was approved.
Said approval is subject to compliance with the conditions
listed below.
In accordance with San Bernardino Municipal Code Section
18.64 and Resolution No. MC-521, the followinq applies to Lot
Line Adjustments.
The Development Review Committee shall deny the application
for a lot line adjustment unless it finds that:
The proposed confiquration complies
pertinent criteria set forth in Titles 18
the San Bernardino Municipal Code.
B. The proposed confiquration is consistent with the
General Plan.
A.
with all
and 19 of"
Any person adversely affected by the decision of the
Development Review Committee may appeal, in writinq, to the
Planninq Commission in accordance with the provisions of the
Municipal Code.
300 NOATH 0 STREET. SAN BERNARDINO.
CALIFORNIA 924'8-0001 ('14)3....071'.1.7
o
o
o
o
o
Charles Schultz
July 23, 1990
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
paqe 2
If no appeal is made within 10 days of the date of the
decision, the action of the Committee shall be final.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. A certificate of compliance shall be recorded prior to
issuance of buildinq permits.
Respectfully,
Q..L ~ -
&fohn Montq~ery~AICP
Principal Planner
/ke
Enclosures
cc: Mike Grubbs
Enqineerinq Division
Don Jackson
Buildinq Division
LLA90-23
o
o
o
wel I ve ......'O:-.....U.-..-- . ---'o~ - - _. --.
STANDARD~EQUlREMENTS :=:'I~
-....-......
Project Description: ~ .I.A. SLJ-.z3.
e::ON.A.lNG ,13 ~Ir.r .M';,-,p .2 .:,,prs :
N/AI. ,c"RN~ bF' CdVLr.sY. ~ /t-KR,pi.l/:l~.
Date: ....::rv4Y. /.9. ,1.930
Prepared by: -:I. H. ,1:'. Rn1 ewed By:
Page / of / pages
Applicant:
~,E,lA ~ H~L.4Y~
~ A Certificate of Compliance in a form acceptable to the City Engineer shall
be recorded for the lot line adjustment.
~ Applicable Engineering Fees.
a) Checking Fee - S100.00
b) Recording Fee - Per County Recorder's Fee Schedule
*A11 fees are subject to change without notice.
o
">..
o
,
\
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
JAMES F. PENMAN
City Attorney
October 12, 1990
Opinion No. 90-24
10.39
TO: Mayor, Common Council
RE: Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
Property Owners: The Sun Company and
First American Title Co.
ISSUE
You have inquired whether Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23 is
subject to environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)?
CONCLUSION
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23 is exempt from environmental
review pursuant to statutory exemptions under CEQA because it is
a ministerial project.
FACTS
The Sun Company and First American Title Company in Lot Line
Adjustment No. 90-23, has requested to combine thirteen (13)
lots, consisting of 3.3 acres located at the northeast corner of
Court and "0" Streets, into two lots. Parcel No. 1 will consist
of current Accessor's Parcel Numbers 135-151-4, 5, 10 through 16,
and 20. Parcel No. 2 will consist of current Accessor's Parcel
Numbers 135-151-17, 18, and 19.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) approved Lot Line
Adjustment No. 90-23 on July 19, 1990. John Lightburn,
presumably under San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 18.64.100,
appealed the DRC decision to the Mayor and Common Council on July
25, 1990. At its meeting on August 20, 1990, the Mayor and
Common Council referred the appeal to the Planning Commission for
its recommendation. The Planning Commission reviewed the appeal
on September 11, 1990, and voted four (4) to four (4) on a
.'
[HE/dys/lotline.opn]
CITY HALL
300 NORTH 'D' STREET' SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418
(714) 384-5355
.
LlI
,,~'4
o
o
~
Page
TO:
RE:
Two
Mayor and Common Council
Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
motion to recommend denial of the appeal. This "no
recommendation" resulted because of the complexity of the issues
and because some of the Commissioners may have been confused as
to what issues were relevant to the Appeal.
John Lightburn, in his letter of appeal dated July 25, 1990
(copy attached), requests that the Mayor and Common Council set
aside the approval of Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23 until a
"thorough environmental review is conducted in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act, Title 14 of the
California Administrative Code and other applicable provisions of
the municipal code."
LEGAL ANALYSIS
I
A lot line adjustment is permitted by San Bernardino
Municipal Code Sections 18.64.010 to 18.64.100. California
Government Code Section 66412(d) permits lot line adjustments and
specifically exempts them from the re~uirements of the
Subdivision Map Act. The Subdivision Map Act is applicable to
charter cities. Santa Clara County Contractors Association v.
City of Santa Clara (1965) 232 Cal.App.2d 564.
Government Code Section 66412 states:
"This division [Subdivision Map Act] shall be
inapplicable to: . . .
(d) A lot line adjustment between two or more
existing adjacent parcels. where the land taken from
one parcel is added to an adjacent parcel, and where a
greater number of parcels than originally existed is
not thereby created, provided the lot line adjustment
is approved by the local agency, or advisory agency. ~
local agency or advisory agency shall limit its review
and ~oval to a determination of whether or not the
parcels resulting fro. the lot line adjustaent will
confora to local zoning and building ordinances. An
advisory agency or local agency shall not impose
conditions or exactions on its approval of a lot line
adjustment except to conform to local zoning and
building ordinances, or except to facilitate the
relocation of existing utilities, infrastructure, or
easements. .. " (Emphasis added)
[HE/dys/lotline.opn]
.
-:'
o
o
Page
TO:
RE:
Three
M.yor and Common Council
Lot Lin. Adjustment No. 90-23
Gov.rnm.nt Cod. Section 66412(d) is applicable to charter
citi.s and it prohibits the City of San B.rnardino from imposing
condition. or .xactions on its approval of a lot line adjustment
.xc.pt to conform to local zoning and building ordinances or to
facilit.t. the relocation of .xisting utiliti.s, infrastructure,
or ....m.nt..
San B.rnardino Municipal Cod. S.ction 18.64.070 complies
with Gov.rnm.nt Cod. Section 66412(d) and it states the City's
authority in reviewing an application for a lot line adjustment:
"S.ction 18.64.070 Required findings.
Th. Development Review Committe. shall deny the
application for lot line adjustment unless it finds
that:
A.
B.
The proposed configuration complies with all
pertinent criteria s.t forth in Titl.s 18 and
19 of this Cod.;
The proposed configuration is consistent with the
G.neral Plan."
II
A lot line adjustment is ex.mpt from environm.ntal review
under CEQA because it is a ministerial project and not a
discr.tionary project.
Ministerial projects are exempt from the requirements of
CEQA pursuant to Public Resourc.s Cod. Section 21080(b)(1) and
Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15268(a).
"Ministerial" is defined in Title 14 California Code of
Regulations Section 15369:
"'Minist.rial'" describ.s a governmental decision
involving little or no personal judgment by the public
offici.l as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the
project. The public official merely applies the law to
the f.cts as presented but uses no sp.cial discretion
or judgment in reaching a decision. A ministerial
decision involves only the use of fixed standards or
objective measurements, and the public official cannot
us. p.rsonal subjective judgment in deciding whether
or how the pr;'ject should be carried out. . . ."
/ / / /
,
,
.'
[HE/dys/lotline.opn]
. ~
o
o
1
Page Four
TO: Mayor and Common Council
RE: Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
Code
"Discretionary Project" is defined in Title 14 California
of Regulations Section 15357:
"'Discretionary Project'" means a project which
requires the exercise of judgment or deliberation when
the public agency or body decides to approve or
disapprove a particular activity, as distinguished from
situations where the public agency or body merely has
to determine whether there has been conformity with
applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations. . . ."
A lot line adjustment is a ministerial act and not a
discretionary act under the above definitions because the
San Bernardino Municipal Code and State law limit the City's
review authority solely to a determination of whether the lot
line adjustment conforms to the City's zoning ordinances and
General Plan.
IU
The appellant, John Lightburn, in his letter of appeal
states that:
"Due to the 'cumulative impacts' of past and
future phases of the expansion project ["Review of
Plans 87-28, 88-47, and the previous 1981 expansion"],
Lot Line Adjustment 90-23 is not exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act or Title 14 of the
California Administrative Code (CAC, Title 14, Section
15130 and l5355(b), and Public Resources Code, Section
2l083(b)). "
The appellant's concern for cumulative impacts is not
applicable to a consideration of this lot line adjustment.
The CEQA requirement for environmental analysis of
cumulative impacts only applies where an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) is required (Title 14 California Code of Regulations
Section 15130) or where certain categorical exemptions apply
(Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15300.2).
Because a lot line adjustment is a ministerial project and is
thus exempt from CEQA review, an EIR cannot be required and the
categorical exemptions do not apply (Title 14 California Code of
Regulations Section 15300.1). Therefore, a cumulative impact
analysis for this lot line adjustment is not permitted.
[HE/dys/lotline.opn]
. ...,-
o
o
,
Page Five
TO: Mayor and Common Council
RE: Lot Line Adjustment No. 90-23
For all of the above-reasons, we advise that Lot Line
Adjustment No. 90-23 is exempt from environmental review pursuant
to statutory exemptions under CEQA because it is a ministerial
project.
Respectfully submitted,
By: :#el~~j
HENRY EMPERO, JR.,
Deputy City Attorney
Attachment
Concur:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
Rachael Krasney, City Clerk
Craig Graves, Treasurer
Shauna Edwins, City Administrator
Larry E. Reed, Director of Planning and Building Services
[HE/dys/lotline.opn]
()
o
,
Mayor and. Common Council
City of Sen Bernerdlno
300Nor'thD St,...t ~EC~"!cr"._~"!" I'.t.EClIO
San Bernenllno, Ceo 92401 'SO JJ. 2S P2 :01
Subject: App.el of Lot Line Adjustment 90-23,
Sun Company
Referenc.: Reylew of Plans 67-28 &. 88-47
July 25, 1990
Deer Meyor end Members of the Council,
I em ewere thet the Deyelopment ReYlew Committee epproyed Lot Line
Adjustment 90-23 on July 19, 1990.
By wey of thts letter, I am appealtng the DRe dectslon of epproyel end
request thet thts matter be set for a heering before the Meyor and Common
Counctl.
Th. grounds for eppeel are as follows:
1. The lot line edjustment is Integrel pert of e multl-phese, mUltl-st.p
development plen related to the expansion of the Sun Compeny/USA Today
menufecturing plent which began in 1981 and continues tOdey.
2. The envIronmental review and eyaluatton of the total project,
specifically Review of Plans 87-28 &. 88-47 and the previous 1981
expansion, was inadequate and should be evaluated as required by law.
(Ref: JL Itr. to S. Edwins, 7-9-90 end Rpt. to Planning CommIssion
4-17-90)
3. Due to the .cumulative impacts. of past and future phases of the
expansion project, Lot Line Adjustment 90-23 is not exempt from the
CaltfomieEnYlronmental Quality Act or Title 14 of the Colifomia
Admlnistretlye Code. (CAC, Title 14, Sections 15130 and 15355 (b), and
Publtc Resources Code, Section 21083 (b))
4. These projects may have a signiflcent effect on the environment and
heye the potential to degrede the quality of the environment and
compromise long-term environmental goals. Those significont effects
that should be considered include:
,
'.
, a) Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the City;
b) Substantial, demonstrative negatIve aesthetic effect;
c) Substantial degradation of water supply;
d) Contamination of public water supply;
\
.'
'.'
.
Page TwO. - AllllealOLot Line Adjustment 90:23 0
e) Substantlal degradation of or depletion of ground weter resources.
f) s...~..ttel tnterference of ground water recnarge; ,
9) AdY"" effect on 0 property end structure of historicol end culturel
stgntftCIIICe;
h) AdYers. effect on traffic, CIrculation end perking reQuirements;
i) Substantial increase of ambient noise leyels;
k) Exposl people and structures to major geo/seismic hazards;
J) Disruption of the phYSIcal arrangement of the central city area;
m) Adyerse affect on the ambient air Quellty.
S. Lot Lln. Adjustment 90-23 did not take into conslderetlon thl
deYelopment and enyironmental implications of ReYlew of Plan. 87-28 &
88-47 and thl ctrcumstances surrounding till prevlousl11egallot line
adjustments, and the inyalld Lot Line Adjustments 83-01 end 82-12.
(Ref: JL Itr. to L. Reed, 5-9-90)
Based on the foregoing, I am reQuesting that the Mayor end Common Council
set aside the approval of Lot Line Adjustment 90-23 until such time a
thorough enYlronmental review is conducted In accordance with the
California EnylrOnmental Quality Act, Title 14 of the California
AdmlnistatlYe Code and other applicable proyislons of the municipal code.
..