HomeMy WebLinkAbout32-Development Services
.,
.
,
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: James Funk, Directorc ",- ", . L
Dept: Development Service ;. l 10., I . . i i
Subject: General Plan Amendment No. 01-
04 - To change the land use designation of
approximately .91-acres from CH,
Commercial Heavy to RS, Residential
Suburban. The project site is located on the
west side and adjacent to the 215 Freeway
approximately 980.35 feet north of Baseline
Street on Home Avenue.
Date: January 28,2002
MCC Date: February 19, 2002
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
None
Recommended Motion:
That the public hearing be closed and General Plan Amendment No. 01-04 be denied based on the
F""",,, ofF'" m dre M,yoc "" c_ c"'moil-k~
James Funk
Contact Person:
Aron Lianl!:
Phone:
384-5057
Supporting data attached: Staff Report
Ward:
I
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/ A
Source: (Acct. No.)
Finance:
Council Notes:
~h9 JOCY
~(
Agenda Item No.
\
\
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 01-04
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of February 19, 2002
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Alvarez and Associates
201 North E Street, No. 202
San Bernardino, CA 92401
(909) 383-2858
REQUEST
The applicant requests to change the land use designation from CH, Commercial Heavy to RS,
Residential Suburban, for approximately .9l-acres. The project site is located adjacent to the
215 Freeway on the west side on Home Avenue approximately 980.35 feet north of Baseline
Street (Exhibit A).
A detailed analysis of the project is contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report
(Exhibit B). The .9l-acres site is currently vacant and consists of six separate parcels at 6,625
square feet each, slightly smaller than the required RS minimum lot size. The RS district
allows a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The lots are existing lots of record and are
consistent with the existing adjacent parcels to the north and west areas. The applicant
believes that the proposal would provide additional opportunities for housing development and
that any single-family development proposal would conform to all applicable provisions of the
Development Code and RS standards for setbacks, lot coverage and height requirements.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission first heard this proposal on January 8, 2002. At the hearing, the
Planning Commission received two letters dated January 8, 2002, from two surrounding
business owners opposing the amendment request. Based on the letters, the Planning
Commission felt that more details were needed from the two surrounding business owners. As
a result, the hearing was continued to January 22, 2002, to allow time for staff to obtain more
information from the business owners (Exhibit C). In accordance with the Planning
Commission's request, staff learned that the two business owners are in negotiations to acquire
properties south of the proposed amendment area and are planning to expand their businesses.
Their concerns are that any zone change to allow residential development would not be
compatible with their future expansion plans (Exhibit D).
"
"
The proposed amendment was again heard by the Planning Commission on January 22, 2002.
The above-referenced business owners appeared before the Planning Commission and spoke
against the amendment request. The Planning Commission voted to deny General Plan
Amendment No. 01-04. Commissioner's Coute, Durr, Enciso, Lockett, Sauerbrun, Welch and
Thrasher voted to deny the proposal. Commissioner Derry abstained and Commissioner
Ramirez voted in favor of the proposal.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Development Code Section 19.50,050 states that an amendment to the General Plan may be
adopted only if all of the four enumerated findings are made. Staff believes that based on the
testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission, the following two fmdings
support denial of General Plan Amendment No. 01-04:
1) The proposed amendment would be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or welfare of the City.
General Plan Policy 14.1.1 states:
"Prohibit the new development of housing, health care facilities, schools, libraries,
religious facilities, and other noise sensitive uses in areas where existing or future noise
levels exceed an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior if the noise
cannot be reduced to these levels. "
The proposed amendment would allow the development of new single family residences in
an area that is affected by excessive noise levels. The amendment site is adjacent to the 1-
215 and the Santa Fe Railroad tracks, both of which generate constant noise on a 24-hour
basis. In addition, the area is transitioning to non-residential uses. The proposed
amendment would not promote the development of residential units in a high quality
suburban setting.
2) The subject parcel is not physically suitable (including, but not limited to, access,
provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of
physical constraints) for the requested land use designation and anticipated land use
development.
The proposed amendment includes six separate vacant parcels that are each approximately
6,625 square feet. The relatively small size of the parcels along with the excessive noise
level from adjacent uses would make the proposed amendment not physically suitable for
the requested land use designation and anticipated land use development.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None. The applicant submitted an application and paid the amendment processing fee.
RECOMMENDATION
That the public hearing be closed and General Plan Amendment NO. 01-04 be denied based on
the Findings of Fact in the Mayor and Common Council staff report.
EXHIBITS
A. Location Map
B. Planning Commission Staff Report
C. Opposition Letters
D. Memorandum to the Planning Commission
'.
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DIVISION
LOCATION MAP
LAND USE DISTRICTS
PROJECT: GPA NO. OJ.I).)
u
HEARING DATE: [ SO::
NORTH
J :1.1 ~Iv IIJ ,-.. ~ I ~Jf?~~. I
TIn\l In ~~. :," .
W , ~..::::J I ...u.=wti, !,'. ..a'~lrff I ~,'
[T."Tool ~ [d""; ~ ~ c:::iw Q" : fil
. _1"1, 9; ". i ~l!'
, '. I ,~
P1~ G:JM~I ~ ~ I T l'-b~
(il iGJO ..I '''i" 1 ,r- ,,~II jftloft:
.;..~ ~',~/ J '~I<<r- , ~,':.~: (L,,'11
~OME A vE~LE . . ~I {2..\". ,.J. "or '
i ~11~'..J1 .... ,I'" ' ~.. HI' I 0,. ~ I ..
! .:3i .' .- J - ~ ~IUl! . ;I! !~I
.r ~: I..~... !'f,11 ,H-U1Z I :i I 4f'1~1! cA"~'L
I~ ~ ..,'1. 1fT ..,~ I f ,,~~~ ." -L.J i I
I BASELINE STREET . _ _ L--" .=' .., iT ....-,.... ~
[F U i~ ~ i1. -=~'II~'l
=' C\ ~i J~ 1'\'JI i'~: 'l
.-J /-.~ C:::j ft r:;:.M- '.; ;; ~ll ! I
l t.~..1 V")'.ol i I I~
. ~'N r--l li~m'"
~ t:l --I~" i ! I_S- JI ,lv'1Uj~
- D~[3i. I I .J 'JDJ~~' Tij'
LIt; .....; Irrrn- I ( Jq ~ I I
L.. ~ I~ =~
2U'!~nn.o,-.~ C.Jnnl~.1 -fff...t:
I '.
EXHIBIT B
SUMMARY
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
CASE:
AGENDA ITEM:
HEARING DATE:
WARD:
General Plan Amendment No. 01-04
3
January 8, 2001
1
OWNER/ APPLICANT:
Alvarez and Associates
201 North E Street, No. 202
San Bernardino, CA 92401
(909) 383-2858
REQUEST/LOCATION:
The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of
approximately .91-acres from CH, Commercial Heavy to RS, Residential Suburban. The location
for the proposed amendment is on the west side and adjacent to the 215 Freeway approximately
980.35 feet north of Baseline Street on Home Avenue.
CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS:
None
ENVffiONMENTAL FINDINGS:
o Not Applicable
. Exempt, Section 15332 - In-fill development
o No Significant Effects
o Potential Effects
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
. Approval
o Conditions
o Denial
o Continuance to:
Gf 11 Plan Amendment No. 01-04
,vleeting Date: January 8, 2002
Page 2
REOUEST AND LOCATION
The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment under the authority of
Development Code ~ 19.50 to change the land use designation of six parcels of approximately
.91-acres from CH, Commercial Heavy to RS, Residential Suburban, land use district. The
project is located on the west side and adjacent to the 215 Freeway approximately 980,35 feet
north of Baseline Street on Home A venue (Attachment A & B).
Pursuant to the Development Code, Section 19.04, Table 04.02, the RS land use district allows
a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. Although the proposed parcels are slightly smaller
than the required minimum lot size at 6,625 square feet (50x132.5 each), they are based on
existing lots of record and consistent with the existing adjacent parcels to the north and west
areas. Any single-family development proposal would be required to comply with the RS
development standards that are already in place such as: dwelling size, lot coverage, structure
height and setback requirements.
SETTING/SITE CHARACTE RISTICS
The .91-acre site is a vacant rectangularly shaped parcel of land. To the north, west and
adjacent to the site is single-family residential in the RS, Residential Suburban, land use
district. To the south, across Home Avenue is a vacant lot in the CH, Commercial Heavy,
land use district. To the east is Interstate 215 Freeway.
BACKGROUND
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed General Plan Amendment No. 01-04 on
June 27, 2001, and cleared it to the Planning Commission.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
1. 1s the proposed amendment internally consistent with the General Plan?
Yes, the proposed use is consistent with General Plan Policy 1.11.10, in that it would;
"Permit the development of single-family detached residential units at a density
of up to 4.5 units per gross acre and height of two and one-half stories including
a loft (35 feet) in areas designated as RS "Residential Suburban" .
2. 1s the proposed amendment detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or welfare of the City?
The proposal would allow the property to be developed consistent with the RS land use
district for single-family detached uses. Any single-family development proposal would
be required to meet the extensive development standards that are already in place and
comply with all applicable provisions of the Development Code, as such, the proposal
would not pose any threat to the public health, safety and welfare of the City.
!-
Ge 11 Plan Amendment No. 01-04
Aeeting Date: January 8, 2002
Page 3
3. Does the proposed amendment maintain the appropriate balance of land uses
within the City?
The property is adjacent to other residential uses in the RS land use district and is
consistent with the General Plan Policy 1.11.10 as mentioned in Finding No. 1. The
proposal would provide additional opportunities for housing development. The General
Plan Amendment does not adversely impact the balance of land uses within the City.
4. Is the subject parcel physically suitable (including, but not limited to, access,
provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of
physical constraints) for the requested land use designation and anticipated land
use development ?
All agencies responsible for reviewing access, and providing water, sanitation and other
public services have all had the opportunity to review the proposal, and none have
indicated an inability to serve the project for residential uses. The proposed amendment
area is bounded by developed, dedicated streets and existing infrastructure suitable for
urban development. All future single-family detached development proposal on the site
must conform to all applicable provisions of the Development Code and RS standards
for setbacks, lot coverage and height requirements.
CONCLUSION
The proposal meets all the necessary Findings of Fact for approval of General Plan
Amendment No. 01-04.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend that the Mayor and Common Council:
Approve General Plan Amendment No. 01-04, based upon the Findings of Fact contained in
this Staff Report.
Respectfully Submitted,
Ja~{j'~rJF-
Director of Development Services
~
Aron Liang
Associate Planner
Attachment A
Attachment B
Location Map
Site Plan
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DIVISION
LOCATION MAP
LAND USE DISTRICTS
PROJECT:GPA NO. OJ-I!-+
u
HEARING DATE: I 8 O~
NORTH
J ~T i ~ -" Ir==- ~,~ ~-'f~ ~
IJn~ , Iv 7.7 II "TT ~~ '":" :,r1 IIII--&r.:
I .,_1 ~ ~"".! .. ~ I a I "....~ ~iJ rrr:
- -'.(, 9:i, '" '-1 ili"
I! ~ .-~ · ·
. :'_~, I ~ _ ~
r-1 --::; ll\.l q -w=- T. T
, ~ t: ~ ~'(m;W'
~: ~GJc] ~,"$ I aa:~~ -i, ~ . I
.. I~.--..~ I :1 7'" t- t- I!~~ \~ III
~/ H T I ,.1 I~, ~"I
t"H.OME AVE~0E . ~ I ~ , )""', ~"or~ :
i !-~I: ~~f ...~~1. ' ''k-f~'lI;; ~~ II ~r~~' r-
- OT II., . (..,IY . 11/1 f ~II H-L4iZ~ :111 4f~1! (;A"1'L
IC!II ~'I. ill'"' I f !.t::.J~. ~ ".'-:;;'L.Ji I
~ BASELINE STREET p _ _ _-=, ~'1 ~...."., ....--'-l'C
II. [~~ ~~... >- ~ ~-J~ . ~ ~'I~"-ij
,[ II;: ' ~ .~ "1\), Ii i~' L~
,- 0 - ~U< - -=1 ~~
1 ={ 1Z~L,w~l ~J4,.cjj j 'l1i I II
, ;:::; r--l 11~m"'l
~ t: I ~ ~ "i -"-S; JI .lv~Ujl!f
~ [l~ nl' ,: " 'J9.; ~n
~_lJ '- LJi.. LJII ~~
iU;ilI n.no T' C:J nn ~ 1~1 ;.J~ ~ L ..1:
l\I
t\I
...
:!:
~
'l3
!!"
:o~
IS"'..
~.~
"-to-
~~ ..
C:llc:~
~~~
, , \
(\j0l'il'
~~~
- --,
(\j(\j(\j
~a:ia:i
~~~
.c CI)"": .
,:;I ~ ~
<1)01=:
't:I <:( Q)
~~~
_0;[:
"'a .
~~:g .
" ..., c::
tftf~
-~t....~.....
c
r'DNlIW'NiJ",
. 99IKH>>.....,..S
4
I
r.
a.
" .
.... . ~
l:J
eo
III
.LJ.JIJ..L~I..
, QS"l:cr
@ -
@ CIl
@ If)
@ .
@
@...
@ ..
I
@--~
I
I
e ..
e ..
8 ~
e ::
e ~
0 !:!
~ e !
.. r,;-, '"
.
. ,~o-
.
.. ::: .
.. ..
'S-. ;0 @ ~ft.l
.. ~
i
I
.a. ..;-
~--~-.J.33~.LS
: I .
. @
N
.. @
N ~@.....
.,@
" @.
N
!!! @
!! @
!:o
~.os<fl.,
..
..
@
L
~
-
"""T"'.
,
.S"
, I ~
'w
.~
~
J
, ,."~"'.' ';,
":"i.i:"
::;';,'
~. ."-
,
..
.'-'"
" ;.' "~'
~'
. '.::mil~f;'
,.,';.\;':~;'!< ~..:;'
"~ .
.~ -.....;' .;: ,;;:t .... b:
" ".::1 ,. ."
, ..q~ ':,; I',"
~''iI!~' " '''09
,~ -.1."
..-tj
'0:.
.':t; .
..
- - - - -1.1-
q
.. @ ~
i' '
..
---_._-
T
Ytl.L 4-:.14 d'.,o
"aiL ~.-o,\.
@ ~-'
}ID
.'~
e
@
@
@
@
,0
. " ~ ~
. ~ @
.
0
,
,Fr ,is .r.F
___L.
. . I
"" " .
\tv '>"
..~~
. . (lY5\ .'
.\W
,.,
(i)
@.
@ ':~ ..~j /::',:,
's- -,'w ':,'
-;,it> :'
': :i" ~""".
. ~,'-""
.~. . .
.. " ..
.. .. ..
@; w ~e CiP
~
0 ~
:J:
;:
. -,.,,:,
Irl- In..
. .
@~: ..f;
~ ~. .~;
.~, . ".' '1
-I' ~".,
,r.s- .~9'SS :.41,"
SI~~3d-:-.~~-+--~ .
....I:r
G~~ O\-O~
o
@
S,Te: 'Pt~w
o
o ~
~,
~~~~~
0'>.<< ~S.ii
~
~
~S
. Q." "
" "'~
~~l!
~.,. "
....~ E
=-~
,,~c:
::: "~,,
<qll:l'"
.u
'ii
:: E _.'
";2-
.~ ~
~!i3
!lll-S
~
.
!!!
.
.
.
~~,;,;';,~,,~";L~~i:~.j,~L:.Q;""~l~'~...i..., ...
. .:...~~::/;;._;..:.::.,~~;;,..i
EXHIBIT C
970 Reece St.,. San Bernardino CA 92411
Phone 800-739-3979 Fax 800-739-3920
January 8, 2002
Planning Commission City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
OO~~~8~@
CfTY OF SAN BERNAIlOl~O
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
Ref: Amendment Petition No. 01-04
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Ron Rezek, my commercial property and business is located at 970 West Reece
Street, extending from Reece Street to 13th Street. At times our operation runs twenty-four
hours a day and includes semi trucks, trailers and large equipment entering and exiting our
yard. Daily there is a heavy volume of semi delivery trucks. These trucks use Reece Street,
Montgomery, 13111. and at times "I" Street creating noise and large traffic volume. Therefore, I
see no benefit to the neighborhood or businesses in our area in changing the zoning.
%:4
Ron Rezek
JBRliCh-.JLEY ENVliRONMlf11~T AL
Environmental Remediation Contractor
City of San Bernardino
San Bernardino Planning Commission
300 N. "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
ill@~~~~
Of SAN BE1IN~r"":?
C~EUlPMENT SEI\'. ,~'"~
DEPARTMENT
January 7,2002
Subject:
General Plan Amendment No. 01-04 Ward No.1
Dear Commission Members:
We are business and property owners in the CH area under consideration for an
amendment to the general plan from CH to RS. We are opposed to any such
amendment and feel the current zoning serves the business and residential climate well
by providing a buffer between businesses and adjacent homeowners. Our trucks
frequently use Montgomery Street, "I" Street and 13th Street. We feel any zone change
other than commercial use would ultimately have a negative impact in the way we
conduct business. We have been at our current location of 953, 955 & 957 West Reece
Street for over 20 years and recently acquired the property on the SE corner of 13th and
Montgomery for future use.
Please contact us if there are any questions or any further information is needed.
Sincerely,
~
r4d$,t;
;
/'l f'd-
fh#/lJ.b)~
Sh'":~t I /
Brickley "-1
957 Reece Street, San Bernardino, CA 92411, Lie. No. 610414 CAUOSHA No. 49
909-888-2010 800-530-3366 FAX 909-381-3433
2V .7'7<$(.., (.ell
. .
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department - Planning Division
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission
Aron Lian~ti~anner
FROM:
SUBJECT:
General Plan Amendment No. 01-04 - Agenda Item No.2
DATE:
January 17,2002
COPIES:
Pursuant to the Planning Commission Meeting on January 8, 2002, this is to inform you
that staff has contacted business owners, Mr. Ron Rezek with Rezek-Equipment located
at 970 Reece Street, and Mr. Tim Brickley with Brickley Environmental located at 957
Reece Street regarding the referenced subject.
Staff has learned that the business owners own properties within the commercial heavy
zone area south of 13th Street and Montgomery Street. They have interests in this area
due to their contemplation to expand their businesses. Presently, the business owners are
in negotiations to acquire properties located south of the proposed General Plan
Amendment area. The business owners have indicated that these parcels are needed in
order to accommodate their expansion plan. Their concerns are that any zone change to
allow residential development would not be compatible with their future business
expansion plans.
~
,
-
BNSF
e'.
.'
ROBERT E. BRENDZA
Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Director, Facility Development
740 East Carnegie Drive
San Bernardino. CA 92408
February 19,2002
File: San Bernardino
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, California 92418-0001
Re: General Plan Amendment 01-04
Home Avenue West of the 215 Freeway, between 13th and 14th Streets
Dear Mayor Valles and Council Members:
The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad Company ("BNSF") has received
information regarding the above-referenced General Plan Amendment, and requests that the City
deny the project (i) because it would expand inconsistent land uses in an area zoned for
industrial uses, and (ii) because General Plan Amendment 01-04 is not exempt from CEQA.
1. Inconsistent Land Uses in the Immediate Area.
The BNSF owns and operates the transcontinental main railway line located adjacent to
and directly to the east of the proposed project. As you know, alongside the railway and directly
to the east of the proposed project is the 215 Freeway. Within the next decade, the number of
trains operating on the main railway line will increase substantially, as will the number of cars
on the 215 Freeway.
In addition to_ the rail and freeway traffic located next to the proposed project, there are
several existing industrial operations located immediately to the south. One such company is
Rezek Equipment, an large equipment rental company.
We object to General Plan Amendment 01-04 because it would extend residential
development, an already incompatible land use, into the industrial zoned area.
2. General Plan Amendment 01-04 is Not Exempt from CEQA.
In addition, the City has determined that the project qualifies for a CEQA exemption;
however, we submit that it is not exempt. Public Resources Code section 21080.7 contains an
exemption for housing projects that are consistent with the General Plan. In this instance, the
proposed residential development requires a General Plan Amendment. Therefore, it does not
qualify for a CEQA exemption.
BNSF-City of San Bemardino-O 1
ft3J-
~ /111{)~
. .
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
4 February 19, 2002
Page 2
For these reasons, we ask that the City deny General Plan Amendment 01-04.
Sincerely,
L&b1ul~
Robert E. Brendza
REBI
BNSF-City of San Bernardino-Ol
-,
.
.
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
RAcHEL G. CLARK, C.M.C. - CITY CLERK
,.
P.O. Box 1318' San Bernardino' CA92402
300 North "D" Street. San Bernardino' CA 92418-0001
909.384.5002' Fax: 909.384.5158
Business Registration Division: 909.384.5302
Passport Acceptance Facility: 909.384.5128
www.cLsan-bernardino.ca.us
February 21,2002
Alvarez and Associates
201 North "E" Street, #202
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Gentlemen:
At the Mayor and Common Council meeting held on February 19, 2002, the following
action was taken relative to the public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 01-04, to
change the land use designation from CH, Commercial Heavy, to RS, Residential
Suburban, for approximately .91 acres located adjacent to the 215 Freeway, north of
Baseline Street on Home Avenue:
That the hearing be closed; and that the Mayor and Common Council deny
General Plan Amendment No. 01-04, based on the Findings of Fact
contained in the Mayor and Council staff report dated January 28, 2002,
from James Funk, Director of Development Services.
If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
~ruMJJ f10AL
Rachel G. Clark, CMC f!!A/K.-
City Clerk
RC:ls
cc: Development Services
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ADOPTED SHARED VALUES: Integrity' Accountability' Respect for Human Dignity' Honesty