HomeMy WebLinkAbout34-Planning and Building
CITY OF SAN BERNAOINO - REQUEST FaoCOUNCIL ACTION
.
.
General Plan Amendment No. 91~03 to
Subject: chan~e the land use designation from RM
to CG-1 on the northwest corner of 3rd
Street and Victoria Avenue.
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
April I, 1991, 2:00 p.m.
From: Larry E. Reed, Di rector
Dept: Pl anni ng and Bui 1 di ng Servi ces
Dete: March 13, 1991
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
The northwest corner of 3rd Street and Victoria Avenue was designated RM,
Residential Medium with adoption of the General Plan on June 2, 1989.
Recommended motion:
That the hearing be closed and the resolution be adopted.
r
Signature
Director
Contact person:
Larry E. Reed
Phone:
384-5357
1
Supporting data attached:
Staff Report
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. DescriDtionl
Finance:
Council Notes:
'7",_n?h"
Agenda Item No
-:jJ./
CITY OF SAN BERNAOINO - REQUEST FCO COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
General Plan Amendment No. 91-03
Mayor and Common Council Meetinq of
Apr 11 1. 1991
SUBJECT
REOUEST
This City initiated qeneral plan amendment is to chanqe the land
use desiqnation from RH, Residential Medium to CG-1, Commercial
General on 0.60 acres located at the northwest corner of 3rd Street
and Victoria Avenue (2792 East 3rd Street). (See Exhibit A of
Attachment A to the Planninq Commission Staff Report).
BACKGROUND
The site is developed with a commercial use. Durinq the land use
hearinqs for the General Plan. the site was desiqnated for multi-
family uses. Under Title 19. Chapter 19.66 of the San Bernardino
Municipal Code, the existinq commercial buildinq and use are leqal
nonconforminq.
ENVIRONMENTAL
The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial Study
(Attachment A to the Planninq Commission Staff Report), prepared to
evaluate the CG-1 desiqnation, and recommended a Neqative
Declaration.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The proposed amendment was considered by the Planninq Commission at
a noticed publiC hearinq on March 6, 1991. The Planninq Commission
recommended adoption of the Neqative Declaration and adoption of
General Plan Amendment No. 91-03 to chanqe the land use desiqnation
from RH. Residential Medium to CG-1. Commercial General for a site
containinq 0.60 acres of land.
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS
1. The Mayor and Common Council may adopt the Neqative
Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 91-03 based
on findinqs in the resolution.
2. The Mayor and Common Council may direct staff to address
alternative land use desiqnations.
75.0264
JJL
,
General Plan Amendm~t No. 91-03
.
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of
April 1, 1991
Paqe 2
o
3. The Mayor and Common Council may deny General Plan Amendment
No. 91-03.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the
resolution, copy attached, which adopts the Negative Declaration
and approves General Plan Amendment No. 91-03 as presented.
Deborah Woldruff. Associate Planner
for Larry E. Reed, Director
Department of Planning and Building Services
Attachment 1: Staff Report to Planning Commission
March 6. 1991
Prepared by:
Attachment A: Initial Study
Exhibit A: Site Location and Land
Use Designation Map
Attachment 2: Resolution
Attachment A: Location Map
Attachment B: Legal Description
-
II
. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
WARD
8
3-6-91
1
r',,--. .....
r APPUCANT: City Initiated
11.I
tn GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-03 Donald H. Lepper
< OWNER:
CJ 24444 Scotch Lane
Colton, CA 92324
,,--.
m A proposal to change the land use designation from RM, Residential Medium to
CG-1, Commercial General on 0.60 acres. The amendment site is located
::::l on the northwest corner of Third Street and Victoria Avenue, at 2792
" East Third Street.
11.I
I:
-
<
11.I
I:
<
-
\...J ~
r EXISTING GENERAl PLAN
PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING Of;SIGNA TION
Subject Commercial Building and Use RM Residential Medium
North Norton Air Force Base Housing RM Residential Medium
South Norton Air Force Base Air Field PF Public Facility
East Vacant Land, Commercial Serving
and Single Family Residenital
Uses City of Highland
~Iest Norton Air Force Base Housing RM Residential Medium
( GEOLOGIC I SEISMIC o YES )1 FLOOD HAZARD 0 YES 0 ZONE A )( SEWERS: Xl YES )
HAZARD ZONE: iXJ NO ZONE: I[JNO OZONE B ~ NO
( HIGH FIRE o YES )( AIRPORT NOISE1 IXlves ) ( REDEVELOPMENT III YES I
HAZARD ZONE: QI NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA:
ONO ONO
,.---..., r ,.---..., r
.... o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z ~ APPROVAl
~ APPUCABLE EFFECTS WITH 0
MIT1GAnNG MEASURES -
Ztn NO E.I.R. !C 0 CONDITIONS
11.I0 II.Q
::Iz o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO II.Z 0 DENiAl
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS <11.I
OQ WITH IotTIGAnNG =>>::1
I:~ MEASURES ~ 0 CONTINUANCE TO
-II.
> rn NO SIGNIFICANT o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Z CJ
11.I EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. 11.I
MINUTES 1:)
./ )
...- --- ...,j
=rlm~ aM ~ ~
Pl.M-LCIZ PMIE 1 OF 1 l~
ATTACHMENT 1
.
-
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
GPA NO. 91-03
8
3-6-91
2
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
~
REOUEST & LOCATION
This City initiated proposal is to chanqe the General Plan land use
desiqnation from RH. Residential Medium to CG-l, Commercial General
for a site developed with a commercial structure. The site
contains approximately 0.60 acres and is located on the northwest
corner of Third Street and Victoria Avenue, at 2792 East Third
Street (see Exhibit A of the Initial Study).
AREA CHARACTERISTICS
The amendment site is a flat, trianqular shaped parcel. The north
and west sides of the parcel abut the Norton housinq. East of the
site, across Victoria Avenue, is vacant land with a mix of
commercial and residential uses in the City of Hiqhland. To the
south. across Third Street, is Norton Air Force Base (AFB) in an
area desiqnated PF. Public Facility. Because of its proximity to
Norton AFB, the site is located in Airport District IV.
MUNICIPAL CODE
The existinq commercial use on site is not permitted in the RH,
Residential Medium land use desiqnation and is leqal nonconforminq.
The General Plan permits only minor expansions of nonconforminq
uses. If the structure becomes vacant for a period of 180 days or
more, the nonconforminq use cannot be reestablished and future land
uses must conform with the RH desiqnation.
CALIFORlCIA ENVIRONMENTAL OOALITY ACT (CEOAI STATUS
The General Plan amendment is subject to CEQA. The Environmental
Review Committee reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study
(Attachment AI on February 7. 1991 and determined that the proposed
amendment would not have an adverse impact on the environment and
recommended a Neqative Declaration. The publiC review period for
the Initial Study and the Neqative Declaration beqan on February
14, 1991 and ended on March 6, 1991.
Io.c
llllnllt- r
. ~
P\.MoLOI PaGE 10Ft (44GI
r"a
r
. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE GPA NO. 91-03
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8
OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 3-6-91
.... PAGE 3
.... """II
COMMENTS RECEIVED
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, TRAFFIC
DIVISION
The Traffic Division has determined that the proposal does not meet
the minimum criteria for a traffic impact study and will not cause
a siqnificant impact on the adjacent street system.
OTHER COMMENTS
Comments received from other aqencies address project specific
concerns and do not pertain to the qenera1 plan amendment.
ANALYSIS
Existina Land Use Desianation
The site and the land north and west of it are desiqnated RH,
Residential Medium. The RM desiqnation permits a diversity of
multi-family uses. As stated previously, the existinq commercial
bUi1dinq and land use are not permitted in this desiqnation and are
1eqa1 nonconforminq.
prooosed Land Use Desianation And Comoatibi1itv
The purpose of the CG-1 desiqnation is to meet the City's
objective, as follows:
.Provide for the continued use, enhancement, and new
development of retail. personal service. entertainment,
office and related commercial uses alonq major
transportation corridors and intersections to serve the
needs of the residents; reinforcinq existinq commercial
corridors and centers and establishinq new locations as
new residential qrowth occurs,. (General Plan Objective
1. 19)
The CG-1, Commercial General land use desiqnation permits a
~
~= -
__ P_,QF, C"'"
~':"":"-
OBSERVATIONS
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
GPA NO. 91-03
8
3-6-91
4
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
.
~
"""III
diversity of community-servinq retail and service uses.
entertainment uses, and professional and financial offices. The
commercial buildinq and use existinq on the site are permitted in
the CG-l desiqnation and the parcel meets all of the minimum lot
standards.
The precedinq passaqe (General Plan Objective 1.19) reflects the
City's intent to retain and enhance eXistinq commercial uses alonq
major transportation corridors. The amendment site is well
established in the neiqhborhood and has contained the commercial
buildinq and use for well over a decade. Essentiall y. the
amendment proposal will not chanqe the status quo of the site or
the neiqhborhood and, it will not create impacts related to land
use compatibility or circulation.
The site is located in Airport District IV and as such, is subject
to hiqh noise levels related to airfield operation. Based upon the
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZl, the San Bernardino
Municipal Code (SBMCl has identified low intensity uses that would
be less impacted by airport qenerated noise. The existinq
commercial use on the site qualifies as a low intensity use.
Therefore, redesiqnation of the site to CG-l would be consistent
with the General Plan and the AICUZ and would eliminate the
nonconforminq status.
Reuse of the site, after Norton Air Force Base ceases military
uses, has the same potential for noise impacts.
CONCLUSION!:i
There are no impacts associated with the General Plan amendment and
it is consistent with the General Plan and compatible with the
surroundinq uses.
llll'olt~ "'.
~ ~
PI.MoIJII PJGE' OF , ~
FINDINGS OF FACT
CASE
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
GPA NO. 91-03
.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
8
3-6-91
5
.
~
"""II
FINDINGS
The proposed amendment is consistent with the qoals. objectives and
policies of the General Plan in that redesiqnation of the site from
RH to CG-l is compatible with surroundinq uses.
The amendment will not be detrimental to the publiC interest,
health. safety. convenience, or welfare of the City as addressed in
the Initial Study. The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the
Initial Study and recommended that a Neqative Declaration be
adopted.
The amendment proposes to redesiqnate 0.60 acres from RM;
Residential Medium to CG-l. Commercial General uses. Because the
site is developed with a commercial use. the City's housinq stock
won't be affected and the housinq balance will be minimally
impacted.
The subject land is physically suitable for the CG-l. Commercial
General land use desiqnation and any anticipated future development
on it.
...
l::nl: I:: 11 fit
....
PUIM.DI PAGE 1 OF 1 (4?IOl
,.. -
, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE GPA NO. 91-03
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT .
AGENDA ITEM 8
OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 3-6-91
PAGE 6 -oil
~
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the P1anninq Commission make a recommendation
to the Hayor and Common Council:
1. That a Neqative Declaration be adopted in accordance with
Section 21080.1 of the California Environmental Quality
Act for General Plan Amendment No. 91-03.
2. That the application for General Plan Amendment No. 91-03
be approved.
Respectively submitted
~..., . r- -6-t /'
~~ Reed, Director
Planninq and Buildinq Services Department
n;~IJ~
~orah Woldruff
Associate Planner
Attachment A: Initial Study
Exhibit A: Land Use Desiqnation and
Site Location Hap
::n: = IT
.......... ~_, Cll' , (..ocl)
--~-...,
CITY OF SAN BERNAQNO PLANNING AND BUILDING
VICES DEPARTMENT
.
INITIAL STUDY
~
"""'l
GENERAL PLAN ~NDMENT NO. 91.::)
Proiect De~otion: To chanqe the land use desiqnation from RH.
Residential Medium to CG-1. Commercial General on 0.60 acres.
Proiect Location. The site is located on the northwest corners of
East 3rd Street and North Victoria Avenue. at 2792 East 3rd Street.
IAssessor Parcel Number 289-252-17)
Date: January 30. 1991
ADDlicant(s) Name and Addresst
City Initiated Application
fxgoerty Own.rls) Name and Address:
Donald H. Lepper
24444 Scotch Lane
Colton. CA 92324
Initial Study PreDar.d by:
Valeri. C. Ross.
Senior Planner
City of San Bernardino
Depar~nt of PlanninG and BUildinG
300 Rorth -D- Str.et
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Services
....
=-=:-- J
-- -."" c_
..
o
o
. ,
General Plan Amendment 91-3
Initial Study
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is provided by the City of San Bernardino as
an Initial Study for General Plan Amendment No. 91-3
which proposes to chanqe the land use desiqnation from
Residential Medium to CG-1. Commercial General for a site
consistinq of approximately 0.60 acres. (See Exhibit Al
This amendment proposal is a City initiated project.
As stated in Section 15063 of the California
Environmental Quality Act qUidelines, the purposes of an
Initial Study are to:
1. Provide the Lead Aqency with information to use as
the basis for decidinq whether
Environmental Impact Report (EIRl
Declaration:
to prepare an
or a Neqative.
2. Enable an applicant or Lead Aqency to modify a
project, mitiqatinq adverse impacts before an EIR
is prepared. thereby enablinq the project to
qualify for Neqative Declaration:
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR. if one is
required, by:
IAl Focusinq the EIR on the effects determined to
be siqnificant,
(Bl Identify the effects determined not to be
siqnificant. and
IC) Explaininq the reasons for determining that
potentially siqnificant effects would not be
siqnificant.
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the
desiqn of a project:
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the
findinq in iI Neqative Declaration that a project
will not have a siqnificant effect on the
otnvironment:
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs;
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could
be used with the project.
. "S-"""~.~"".~,,...-
o
o
General Plan Amendment 91-3
Initial Study
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
This CitY-initiated proposal is to chanqe the City' 5
General Plan land use desiqnation for a site located at
the northwest corners of 3rd Street and Victoria Avenue
at 2792 East 3rd Street. The site is a trianqular shape
parcel consistinq of approximately 26.000 square feet.
The oroposed CG-l, Commercial General desiqnat ion permi ts
a diversity of retail and service commercial uses.
2.1 Amendment Site and Surroundinq Area Characteristics
The site contains a commercial structure and
the north and west sides of the parcel abut
the Norton housinq. East of the site. across
Victoria Avenue. is vacant land in the City of
Hiqhland and south of the site. across 3rd
Street. is Norton Air Force Base. desiqnated
PFC. Public Flood Control.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
3.1 Environmental Settinq
The site is located in an Airport District and
subject to noise from Norton Air Force Base.
,,,,,,,,,,"'''''.~'"'
. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
,..
""'I
A. BACKGROUND
........lCa1iO. 'n Num"-r: l~r: 1,::-. ,- " I ' t",.' -'1",'- \', .! - .~
,.,...,... YW _....~.~- - '. ..-\.1...\1......,
Project OelCription:
~
.... ,.' 1',.,1" I'....'..." - r -:...... 'p-"': t:~..,,_I.l
.,.- ._ ," ,", _ '::.. ..t; _', _' oJ ,~
~~.
(':;>-.....:....-..:i:t;_I.:~.. 't' - :!j"'l ..:~,.,t..~C~..jf,.'.....r..,~:;.;'I.....
Location: I.:." -, '
: '.. ..."~ i' " ,.
- -
~-... ~:
I h.. _:;;0 01. ,. i,'""
151-"!'"
,'~. "! .-
."' ,.,' ~
';.....:.
Environm.ntal Constr8inlS Ar_:
II:., ,- _
'-... 1.'-
1.i-...oP."i'1:!>
I
; '" ...
- --
Gen.ral Plan Designation: i::'r-: ;; '''I ~... > ,'- ,\:.. /-' ~~, 'U',
Zoning Designetion:
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain _. where ~., an a MPllr.. lIIlaChlld ShHt
1. Earth Rnou_ Wilth. proposalresu. in: Ves No Maybe
L Earth movement (cut and/or Iii) 0110,000 cubic
yanll or mo,.?
b. Dewlopmelll and/or grading an a IIope g""r A-
than 15% natu'" grade?
Co o....lopmelll within !he A1quist.f'riolo SpecieJ
Studies lane .. alinlId in Sec:Iion 12.0 - Geologic "
& Seismic, Figura 47, ofth. CIy'I Gen.... Plan?
d. Modfticalion of any unique geologic or physical '\
I"ur.?
.. Development within .,... delinlId lor high polenIiaJ lor
_r or wind erosion .. iderdilld in Saclion 12.0 -
Geologic & Seismic, FIlIU,. 53, of !he ClIy'I Gene'"
Plan?
I. Modfticatlon of . channel, crHk or river?
\
...
==~:
.....
PUNoI.OI PAGE 1 OF _ (11.
~
r.
-
.
g. Developmant within en area subjact to Iandslid..,
mudsllclas, Iiquafaction or other similar hazards as
idantifiad in Section 12.0 - Geologic & Seismic,
Flllurn 48, 52 and 53 of the City's General Plen?
h. Other?
2. AIr f!Mourcaa: Wllltha proposal rasuK in:
L Substantial air emissions or en affac:l upon ambient
air quality as defined by AQMD?
b. The creation of objaclionable odors?
c. Devalopment within a high wind hazard araa .. idantKied
in Saction 15.0 - Wind & Fire, Figura 59, of tha City's
General Plan?
3. Water Raaourcaa: Wlllthe proposal rasuK in:
L Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff due to
impermeable surfacas?
b. Changas in tha course or flow of flood waters?
c. Discharga into surface waters or any deration
of surface water quality?
d. Change in the quantity of quality of ground watar?
ao Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as
idantified in the Fedaral Emarganc:y Menagamant
Aganc:y's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Penal
Number 060281 -, and Sac:tion 16.0-
Flooc:ling, Flllura 62, of tha City's General Plan?
f. Other?
4. Biological Raaourcaa: Could the proposal r.uK in:
L Development within tha B1?1ogicaI Rasoun:as
Managemant Overlay, as identified in Saction 10.0
- Natural Raaoun::aa, Flllura "1. of the Clty's
General Pian?
b. Change in the number of any unique, rare or
ancfangared IpaCias of plants or !hair habitat including
stands of traas?
c. Change in the number of any unique, rare or
ancfangared spacias of animala or thair habitat?
d. Removal of viable, matura traaa? (8" or greatar)
a. Other?
5. No"': Could tha propoaal ...uK in:
L Developmant of houIing. haalth care faciliIias.1ChooIa.
Iitnrias, religious facilKias or athar "noiIeo sansilIva _
in .... whara uiating or futura noise Iaftls UCMd an
Ldn of 85 dB(A) utarior and an Ldn ale dB(A) interior
as idantiflad in Saction 1".0. NoiIa. FIllUrH 14-6 and
1...13 of the City's General Plan?
l...
=-=. -
Yes
f"'\
No
>.
,
.x,
x..
x
"
,
X,.
x
';..,
^
'j.
Maybe
",
....
IIUN-UI "JGl20t:_ (11""
-- ,,~
~ - - ~
b. Develapment of new or expansion of axisting industrial. Ves No Maybe
oommardel or othar u... which g_a noise I_Is on
.... c:orn.ining housing. ~. hedh CMl f8Cililies
or other aenalllva us. above an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior ,
or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior? )<
c. Olhar?
I. Land U..: Willtha proposal resutt in:
L A changa in tha land u.. as designated on the y.
Genaral Plan?
b. Developmant within an Airport District as idantWiad in the
Air Installation Compatibla Usa Zona (AICUZ) Raport and ;"
tha Land U.. Zoning District Map? ' .
c. Developmant within FoothiU F'lI'a Zonas A & B. or C as X
idantniad on the Land U.. Zoning Distric:l Map?
d. Olhar?
7. Man-Made Hazarda: Willtha projecl:
L U.., store, transport or dispo.. of hazardous or
Illxic materials (including but not Imtted III oil. \.
pesticidas. chemicals or radiation)?
,
b. Involvathe releasa of hazardous substances? ,A
c. Expoae people III tha poIentiaJ heallhlsafaty hazards? /
d. Olhar?
8. Houalng: Will tha proposal:
L Remove axisting housing or c:ruta a demand X
for addttional housing?
b. Olhar?
.. T~/Cln:uIatlon: Couldthepl'll~II". in
c:ompariaon with tha Cln:ulaIion Plan as idantlIiad in Sac:tion
6.0 - Circulation of the Clty's General Plan. raaulln:
L An i_ in traffic that is ~ than the land- X
UN designated on the GanaraI Plan?
b. U.. 01 uiating. or demand for new. parking ).;,
IaciltiaaIstrucr..?
c. Impacl upon existing public transportation ayatama? X'
d. AIlaration 01 praMnt paIIarna 01 cin:uIation? ,~
a. Impacllll rail or air traffic? ),;'
f. Incrusad safety hazaJda III vehicln. bqdIla or >(
padaatriana?
g. A disjointed paIIarn of ro.dway ~? X
h. Sign'icanI inc:re_ in traffic voIumas on the IIladwaya :X
or intaraac:tiona?
L Olhar?
=::.:. - 11 l'\.NM.GI 'aGl3~_ tn.mt
r'
-
"I
.
10. Public Servl_: Win the proposal impeclthe following
beyonct the capebilily ID provide adequallllevels of service?
L F". protection?
b. Police proIection?
c. Schools ~.e., aIIenctence, bounctlllies, overload. etc.)?
d. Parks or other rKtllalion" lecililies?
e. Medicallid?
I. Solkl Waste?
g. Other?
11. Utllltlee: Win the proposal:
L Impecl the following beyonct the c:apabnily ID
provide adaqu.e levels of service or require the
construction 01 new l.alil..?
1. Natural gu?
2. Elactricity?
3. Water?
4. S-r?
5. Other?
.
b. Rasuft in a disjointed pattam GI utiIiIy mension.?
c. Require the construction 01 _11ICI1Iias?
12. Anlhatlcla:
L Could the plIlpCIAl rasulI in the obslruclion 01 any
_ic view?
b. Wi. the visual irnpect ollila projac:l be dalrimantal
10 the surrounding ....?
c. Other?
13. CUltural Aa8ouran: Could IIla proposal rasuft in:
L l1Ie daraIiion or dawuction 01 a prahisloric or
hilloric an:hMoIogicel site by develllpmM wtlhin an
an:hMoIogicel Hnsilive .... as idanIifiad in Section
3.0 - Hisloricel. Figura 8. GItha CIly'a General Plan?
b. AlIeldon or dH1ruclion 01 a hillOricel sile, atrucIura
or object as listed in tha CIty'. H'-ic Raouroa
Aeconnaissanw SuI'Vtly?
c. Other?
...
~~
Vas
-
No
Maybe
x
\
\
\
"
\,
\:.
"-
\.
\
'<
)..
x.
x
x
\:
,
~ PMlUClO'_ 1'_
_.~_. .
~
-
-
14. Mandnlry FkIdlnga of SlgnlfJcllnce (s.dicln 15065)
The Calilomia Emri_melUl Cu.uty AD. st.as th. n any 01 the Iollowing c:en be ans_red yes or
maybe, the pnlject mey have a signnicant lIIIect on the environment and an Environmental Impact
Report shall be preparad.
Ves
No
Maybe
L Does the project h_ the potantiallo degrade the
quality of the all\lilQllmant, substantially reduca the
habilat of a fiah or wildlife ipeCies, cause . lish or
wildlife populalion 10 drop below seN sustaining levels,
thnsaten 10 eliminate a plant or animal CIlmmunity,
reduca the number or rwtricI the range of . rara or
endqe'" plant or animal or eliminllla important
examples of the major periods cA CalnGmia history
or prehistory?
b. eo.. tha project h_ the potential 10 achieve short.
term, to the disadvantage of Iong.tarm, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the emrironment is one
which ClCCUtI in a relatively brial, delinitive pericld
of time whila Iong-tarm impacts will endure wall into
the lutura.)
>..'
x
c. eo.. tha project have impacts which are individuaUy
lim_eel, but cumulativllly CDnsic:tarable? (A projec:t may
impact on two or mora saparate resources where the
impact on each resource is ralativllly .maU, but whare
the lIIIect of the total of thoH impacts on tha
amrironmant is .ignnicant.)
d. Does tha projec:t h_ anvironmarrtalllllacts which will
causallUbslantial__lIIIacts on human beings,
a.her diractly or indinsctly?
i
I'
/
C. DISCIISSlClN OF ENYIROIItlEtfTAL EVALUA110N AND IIIl1GAnON MEASURES
(Attach.haaIs. -rv.)
~ . ~iTt:~T'..
l
=.:-
~ ~_IOF_ 111....
-'",,'
o
o
General Plan Amendment 91-3
Initial Study
3.2
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
3.2.1
Earth Resources
a. throuqh q.
The site is relatively flat and developed with
a commercial use. Any reuse of the site for
other commercial uses would involve little or
no oradinq.
The site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo
Special Studies Zone and contains no unique
oeologic or physical features or waterways.
It is not subject to wind or water erosion.
3.2.2
Air Resources
2.a. .b.
The site is developed with a commercial use
and redesionation will not have an effect on
air qual i ty. Reuse of the site for other
commercial uses will not lead to an increase
in emissions that are siqnificant. The CG-l
desiqnation does not permit uses that create
objectionable odors.
2.c.
The site is not located in a hiqh wind hazard
area and the potential for dust emissions is
minimal.
3.2.3
Water Resources
3.a.
Since the site is developed. it already
contains impermeable surfaces. Improvements
to or reconstruction of the site/buildinq
could lead to chanqes in absorption rates.
drainaqe patterns and the amount of runoff.
This chanqe would not be siqnificant because
improvements or reconstruction would not be
substantially different than what exists.
3.e.
The site is not located in a flood hazard area
as identified on the FEMA maps.
o
o
General Plan Amendment 91-3
Initial Study
3.2.4
Biological Resources
4.a. through d.
All natural veqetation that may have existed
on this site was removed when development
occurred. The site is not located in the
Bioloqical Resource Manaqement Overlay and no
unique, rare or endanqered plant or animal
species are known to exist.
3.2.5
Noise
5.a. .b.
The site is located in Airport District IV and
subject to noise levels from 70-75 dB(Al as
identified in the Air Installation Compatible
Use Zone and the City's General Plan Existinq
Noise Map. Commercial uses. which do not
require useable outdoor. open space, can
mitigate to ensure that interior noise levels
do not exceed 45 dBIA). Proposed reuse of
Norton Air Force Base may contain an airport
and the noise constraints associated with one.
3.2.6
Land Use
6.a.
The project is a chanqe to the City's General Plan Land
Use Plan. The existinq commercial use is a nonconforminq
use under the RH. Residential Medium land use
desiqnation.
6.b.
See discussion in Section 3.2.5. Noise.
6.c.
The site is not in a fire hazard area as identified in
the City's General Plan.
3.2.7
Man-Made Hazards
7.a. through c.
The existinq business does not use. store. transport or
dispose of any measurable hazardous materials.
.
o
o
General Plan Amendment 91-3
Initial Study
3.2.8
3.2.9
3.2.10
3.2.11
3.2.12
Reuse of the site for other commercial uses could involve
the use of hazardous materials. A proposal would be
evaluated to determine if there were project specific
impacts.
Housinq
8.a.
The proposed qeneral plan amendment would not remove
exist inq housinO' or create a demand for additional
housinq.
Transportation/Circulation
9.a. throuqh h.
The site is located northwest of the intersection of 3rd
Street, a major arterial. and Victoria Avenue, a
secondary arterial. Chanqinq the land use desiqnation
will not increase traffic volumes or affect existinq
patterns of circulation because the site is developed
with a commercial use. Reuse of the site for other
commercial uses would have minimal impacts on traffic and
circulation.
The proposed land use desiqnation chanO'e won't create
impacts to the public transit system, air or rail traffic
or vehicles, pedestrians or bicyclists.
Public Services
10.a. throuqh f.
Since the site is developed with a commercial use.
redesiqnation to CG-l will not create impacts on public
services. Reuse of the site would not create additional
impacts.
Utili ties
II.a. throuqh c.
The site already has utilities and construction of
additional facilities is not anticipated.
Aesthetics
12.a. ,b.
The existinq use or reuse of the site for other
o
o
General Plan Amendment 91-3
Initial Study
commercial uses would not obstruct any scenic views.
Development of a new commercial use would be evaluated on
a project specific basis to ensure that there are no
visual impacts.
3.2.13
Cultural Resources
13.a. .b.
The site is not located in an area havinq potential
archaeoloqic or historic resources. Demol i tion of the
existinq bUildinq for reuse of the site would not remove
a historic structure.
3.2.14
Mandatory Findinqs Of Siqnificance
14.a. throuqh c.
The site is developed with
redesiqnation to CG-l will not
impacts from a continuation of
other commercial uses.
a commercial use and
create any siqnificant
that use or reuse with
-
. D. DETERMlNAnON
On the bais of this initiallludy,
GThe proposed project COULD NOT heve a signiflCllnt elfect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA-
TION will be praparad.
O The p~poHd project could have a signiflCllRt elfect on the environment, although thare will not be a sign~icant
affact In thIS case bacau.. the mitigatIOn measures described above have baan added to the project. A
NEGATIVE DEClARATION win be pNpIlred.
o The proposed project MAY have a signWicant affect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
::J:fW fI!o~IIfE.,eY. ~AI~/,;9G. ~N'~
Name and TIIta I
~~
Date: c:iI--7-"1
~
ll:oll:-:
Pl.NlIoI..- ~__OF_ It'.
.....
_ CITY (~ SAN BERN.' ~UINU
GENERAL PLAtt' AMENDMENT Nd. 91-3
,-
TITLE !and Use Designation and Site Location Map
t
..
,,~-I
Si+
"m 1-0 C.Gt-1
G:PA ~ 1-3
NO RTON
I
FiORCE
AIR
BASE
~
.~
EXHIBIT A
.
1
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
o
o
Resolution No.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-03 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND THE COMMON COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. 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. 91-03 to the General
Plan of the City of San Bernardino was considered by the
Planning Commission on March 6, 1991, after a noticed public
hearing, and the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval has been considered by the Mayor and Common Council.
(c) An Initial Study was prepared on February 7, 1991
and reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the
Planning Commission who both determined that General Plan
Amendment No. 91-03 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 21 day
public review period from February 14, 1991 through March 6,
1991 and all comments relative thereto have been reviewed by
the Planning Commission and the Mayor and Common Council in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and
local regulations.
IIII
IIII
1
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~
21
~
~
~
~
26
27
~
RESOLUTION...~PTING THE NEGATIVE<=> DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
91-03 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
OF
NO.
(e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public
hearing and fully reviewed and considered proposed General
Plan Amendment No. 91-03 and the Planning Division Staff
Report on April 1, 1991.
(f) The adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 91-03 is
deemed in the interest of the orderly development of the City
and is consistent with the goals, Objectives and policies of
the existing General Plan.
SECTION 2. Neaative Declaration
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 effect of this proposed amendment is
hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted.
SECTION 3. Findinas
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council
of the City of San Bernardino that:
A. The change of designation from RM, Residential Medium to
CG-1, Commercial General on 0.60 acres located on the
northwest corner of Third Street and Victoria Avenue
(2792 East Third Street) for the proposed amendment will
change the land use map only and is not in conflict with
the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan.
IIII
IIII
2
.
1
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
RESOLUTION...<<:tPTING THE NEGATIVE<=> DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
91-03 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
OF
NO.
B. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the
public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare
of the city.
C. All public services are available to the study area. Any
development permissible under the CG-l,
Commercial
General designation proposed by this amendment would not
impact on such services.
D. The proposed amendment is to redesignate 0.60 acres to
CG-l, Commercial General.
No housing stock will be
affected.
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
that
project specific mitigation
measures
will
any
sufficient
be
eliminate
to
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 0.60
acres from RM, Residential Medium to CG-l, Commercial
General. This amendment is designated as General Plan
Amendment No. 91-03 and its location is outlined on the
IIII
IIII
IIII
3
<
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~
21
~
~
~
~
26
27
~
RESOLUTION...4:)bPTING THE NEGATIVEC:> DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
91-03 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
B.
OF
NO.
maps entitled Attachment A, and is more specifically
described in the legal description entitled Attachment
B, copies of which are attached and incorporated herein
by reference.
General Plan Amendment No. 91-03 shall be effective
immediately upon adoption of this resolution.
SECTION 5. MaD 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 Division 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.
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
IIII
4
.
-'
1
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
RESOLUTION...c:bPTING THE NEGATIVE<=) DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
91-03 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
OF
NO.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was
duly
adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino at a
meeting therefore, held on the
day of
, 1991, by the following vote, to
wit:
Council Members:
AU2
~
ABSTAIN
ESTRADA
REILLY
FLORES
MAUDSLEY
MINOR
POPE-LUDLAM
MILLER
City Clerk
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
day of
, 1991.
w. R. Holcomb, Mayor
city of San Bernardino
Approved as to
form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
:::n;ttorney .~
27 1"""0 "1 {cW~/l,..
5
00
LOCATION MAP
o?
General Plan Amendment No. 91-03
J II
--; ~311N~1lr-
,...-
@~
Z
...
~
II:
-
..
.O!
~
"'
~
II
I:LS. 113dd3Jr-'~- ~
.,. ~-
@ @
,~
I=:
@) I:r.
I @1
1--
J l
.;
c
.
.
@
....
-..
.so.
.......
..,
G>
.. G n
'"
~
\~ . . - - - - - - --
3.. EJ ..
~
t :L, ~ llJ'1801l t
.
.
.;
.
.
.;
e ~
--u--T---:--
e
:
:z: ~
...
iC
i)j
-------------- ---
"'
.
~
~
b
c
1ft:
""Q
a.&O
o .II.Ii
~1Io'l!
...",g
~e..
:"";
ate
_~o
Claacn
~
1 t
;:
-,
;....
-
i.;~
-.
(i
I
~
.}::
Ii
~
@
.....
-
,,':II
.
--
@
..
.
"
. .
: ~., c,o, OJOd :
.,....
Z9 .~,. .....
_____"J.._
.
~
..
...
-
Cl"
'C
0
II:
..
...
'"
()
>-
..
e <;
-
@ (;i (;5
e
e'
.l
...
@t
:
@
l/
t;):
..
Ii
~~
.;
.....,
Q
~ ~
..
ATTACHMENT A
CI F SAN BE RDINO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-03
TITLE
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
PARCEL
289-252-17
DESCRIPTION
County of San 8ernardino, State of California
That portion of Lot 1, 810ck 62, Rancho San Bernardino, in the
City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of
California, as per map recorded in 800k 7, Page 2 of Maps, in the
Office of the County Recorder of said County, lying southeasterly
of a line bearing North 420 46' 32" East from a paint distant North
890 29' 38" West 310.28 feet along said center line of the East .
Third Street from intersection of the center line of Third Street
and the center line of Victoria Avenue.
Except therefrom those portions of Lot 1, Block 62, Rancho San
Bernardino, in the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino,
State of California, as per map recorded in Book 7, paQe 2 of Maps,
in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, as qranted to
the County of San Bernardi'no, indeed recorded Jul y 9, 1980 as
Instrument No. 80-153537, said portions beinq more'particu1ar1y
described as follows:
Parcel No.1:
The South 52.00 feet of that portion of said Lot 1 as conveyed to
the grantors herein by deed recorded May 18, 1973 in Book 8186 of
Official Records, Page 373, records of said County.
Parcel No.2:
The East 44.00 feet of that portion of said Lot 1, as conveyed to
the grantors herein by deed recorded May 18, 1973, in Book 8186 of
Official Records, Page 373, records of said County.
Parcel No.3:
A triangular shaped parcel of land bounded as follows:
On the South by the North line of said Parcel No.1;
On the East by the West line of said Parcel No.2;
And on the northwest by the arc of a curve concave northwesterly
and having a radius of 20.00 feet, said curve being tangent to
the North line of said Parcel No.1 and tangent to the West line
of said Parcel No.2.
Note: The herei nabove descri bed Parcel, Nos, 1 and 2 are measured
to the centerline of adjoining streets.
.
ATTACHMENT 8