HomeMy WebLinkAbout32-Planning
o
o
o
~~
o
C I T Y 0 F SAN B ERN A R DIN 0
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
8702-302
TO: The Mayor and Common Council
FROM: Frank A. Schuma, Planning Director
SUBJECT: General Plan Revision Work Program
DATE:
February 12, 1987
(6981)
COPIES:
Raymond D. Schweitzer, City Administrator
The Planning Department, at the direction of Mayor Wilcox,
has prepared a work program to revise the City's General
Plan. The work program outlines the scope of the revision, a
timeframe for completion, citizen participation, the use of
consultants, staffing needs and cost estimates.
The General Plan Revision Program should be a comprehensive
effott which addresses all aspects of development thtoughout
the City as a whole, rather than on a piecemeal basis. It
should provide goals and objectives for City-wide and
tegional issues. The General Plan revision should yield a
City-wide land use plan without the use of separate
individual Area Plan Citizen Advisory Committees. Although
subcommittees may provide detail by subarea, the City-wide
Advisory Committee should assume responsibility for the
entire plan.
Work on the General Plan reV1Slon should begin as soon as
possible. Initial stages of the program will require a
tremendous amount of time for coordination and setup.
Recruitment of the planning, clerical and intern positions
will also take some time. Therefore, the Planning Department
would recommend that the Mayor and Common Council direct
staff to immediately incorporate current work on the Highland
Area Plan into the General Plan Revision Program.
Establishment of a Citizen Advisory Committee will be one of
the most important components of the revision program. The
Committee must include at least one Councilmember and one
Planning Commissioner. Staff will submit, at a later date,
other recommendations for Committee size and membership
criteria.
In ordet to assure good communication and accuracy of
information being disseminated, staff would also recommend:
1. A central information source regarding all aspects
~
-
o
o
o
o
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8702-302
General Plan Revision Work Program
February 12, 1987
page 2
of the General Plan Revision Program, and
2. An active, ongoing, public education program to
familiatize San Bernardino residents with the
thtee-year process.
Finally, staff would urge the Council to appoint a General
Plan Task Force to visit communities that have recently
revised their General Plans. Among the places recommended
are the cities of poway, San Jose, San Rafael, Signal Hill
and Los Angeles. Each of these communities has either won
awards for their Plan or has received commendation for
various aspects of their revision effort. The Task Force
would generally lay the groundwork for the revision program.
Attached please find a copy of the General Plan Revision Work
Program outlining details of this effort.
FRANK A. SCHUMA
Planning Director
VAB/mkf
attachment
-
o
~~"
G~~~
;.;.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
o
o
o
o
GENERAL PLAN REVISION PROGRAM
~
I. Scope of Program 1
II. Timeframe 5
III. Citizen Participation 5
IV. Use of Consultants 7
V. Staffing Needs 7
VI. Cost Estimates 9
-1-
_ 41-
-
-
o
o
o
o
I. SCOPE OF PROGRAM
A. Overview
It has been 22 years since the City of
San Bernardino's General Plan was adopted in 1964.
Since that time, the City (and the entire country)
has witnessed vast changes in life styles, the
economy, and the advancement of technical
knowledge. Consequently, the Plan we now have is,
in many respects, based on assumptions and data
which are no longer applicable or valid.
For example, the City's population has increased
from 92,050 in 1960 to 137,372 in April of 1986.
The Plan, however, had projected the City's
population to be approximately 180,000 by 1980.
This projection was based on the assumption that
Highland would become part of the CitY1 if this had
been the case, the projection would have been
fulfilled.
The social make-up of the City has also changed.
The City has followed national population trends
with a declining birthrate and a larget number of
elderly persons. Also, the cultural diversity of
the City's population has changed markedly in
recent years.
Changes in economic ttends have greatly influenced
cities throughout the country and San Bernardino is
no exception. More and more families and
individuals own automobiles and rely to a lesser
extent on public forms of transportation.
Contrastingly, fewer and fewer households are able
to afford to purchase homes. Consequently, demand
for rental and small housing units has incteased.
The median house value fot San Bernardino was
$11,800 in 1960. By 1970, the cost approximately
doubled to $22,000. In 1986 the average price for
existing homes in San Betnardino was $78,000.
The City still remains a commercial/governmental
center for the region. Many new offices and retail
structures have been built recently, the State
College Industrial Park has expanded, and
residential growth has occurred in all parts of the
City.
Many of the assumptions contained in the General
Plan have also changed due to the advancement of
technical knowledge in various fields. Fot
example, we are now much more aware of seismic
hazards and othet geological factors. Also,
determination of environmental constraints
affecting development is much more sophisticated
_1_
'~..
-
-
-
~
o
o
o
o
now in areas 'such as groundwater conditions, noise
and air quality.
The current General Plan does not contain all of
the State-mandated elements. The Land Use and
Citculation Elements are found in the basic
document, but the Housing Element, adopted in 1982,
is separate. All other elements are "borrowed" and
adopted from the original San Bernatdino County
General Plan which, incidentally, was revised in
1980 and is currently undergoing another revision.
The revised county elements were never adopted by
the City, therefore, they technically are not a
part of the City's General Plan. Moreover, the
lack of specificity in the county plan's elements
and concerns limits their usefulness to the City.
The State Office of Planning and Research has
published a document entitled General Plan
Guidelines. Page 13 of that document states, " . .
. a General Plan based upon outdated information
and invalid projects is not the long term plan
required by law and legally deficient as a basis
for day-to day decision making." Cities with
inadequate or deficient General Plans also run the
risk of being disqualified for Federal, State or
County funding programs. Typically, eligibility
for housing assistance ptograms is based, in part,
on the public policy established in the Housing
Element of the General Plan.
Revising the General Plan would greatly assist the
City's ability to make good shott term and long
tetm decisions regarding development. Good govern-
ment requires a comprehensive set of goals,
objectives, and policies on which to base decisions
affecting its future. Because the size and make-up
of the City has changed so much in recent years,
many of its stated goals and objectives may be in
need of revision. A General Plan Revision Program
provides the City an opportunity to re-evaluate its
goals, objectives, and policies in a consistent and
comprehensive manner.
B. Pteparation of the Plan
The Mayor and Common Council
of progress on the General
monthly written reports
"milestone" presentations.
will be kept infotmed
Plan revision through
and guarterly or
Generally, the
-2-
o
following
Plan:
Phase 1:
Phase 2:
Phase 3:
Phase 4:
Phase 5:
- -
o
o
o
steps will be involved in revising the
Collecting and analyzing information
This step will involve several months of
data collection, mapping and analysis.
At least five technical reports will be
produced which document existing
conditions with tegatd to public
facilities, demographics, traffic, land
use and environmental concerns.
Identifving issues/selecting goals and
obiectives
A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) will
identify the main issues affecting the
City of San Bernardino now and for the
next 5 to 15 years. Each issue is
worded as a concern and a proposed
solution. Similar issues are then
grouped into elements which are addressed
in the Plan. The CAC then would
establish the major goal(s) to be
achieved for each element or group of
issues. Each goal is implemented by a
set of objectives, and each objective
would contain one or more policies.
DevelODing and testing alternatives
Once all the technical data has been
documented and the goals and objectives
established, several land use alterna-
tives will be ptepared based on all
available information. A general
envitonmental assessment will be made of
the preferred plan and its alternatives.
Detailing the Plan
This step involves the pteparation of the
General Plan report and completion of the
environmental impact report (EIR). All
tables, charts, maps and other graphics
will be included. Detailed development
standards will be part of the General
Plan text.
Reviewin9 and adoDting the Plan
Once completed, the General Plan and EIR
will go through public heatings at both
the Planning Commission and the Mayor and
Common Council levels.
-1-
- ~
c
o
o
o
C. Required and Optional Elements
A new General Plan would, by law, include the following
elements of concern:
o Land Use
o Citculation
o Housing
o Consetvation
o Open Space
o Noise
o Seismic and Public Safety
The Planning Department recommends that the following
elements also be included to ensute discussion of these
important issues:
o Redevelopment
o Historic Preservation
o Community Design
o Scenic Corridors
o Public Services and Facilities
o Infrastructure
D. Environmental Analysis
The Plan shall be analyzed for potential environmental
effects in a complete Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
The EIR would then aid decision makers, staff,
developers and citizens alike in determining the
feasibility and desirability of future projects. Such
an EIR would result in cost savings to developers and
the City by teducing the need to prepate extensive
envitonmental impact reports for vatious individual
projects.
E. Documentation
The revision program will involve the preparation of
four documents as described below.
Document No.1: General Plan
This is the working document used by the Planning
Department, Planning Commission and City Council. It
will incotporate the goals and objectives of the City, a
full discussion of the various elements, and an
implementation section. The Plan will contain specific
land' use designations, as well as detailed policies and
-4-
o
lL
a
-
-
.J. .
o
o
o
standatds. Area Plans developed later on would only
need to address land use details and development
standards unique to the planning area.
Document No.2: General Plan Summary
This document will provide a summary of the General Plan
and its atea plans.
Document No.3: Environmental Imoact Reoort
This document will provide an environmental assessment
of the General Plan.
Document No.4: Technical Reoorts
The technical teports will contain physical, social,
demographic and environmental data that may be updated
on a regular basis.
II. TIMEFRAME
It would take a minimum of two and one-half years to
three years to complete the technical work on the
General Plan. This does not include the public review
and adoption process which the Plan must go through.
Figure I gives an approximate number of months for each
phase of the program. Time estimates assume assigned
staff is available to work exclusively on the General
Plan.
III. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
Citizen involvement in the planning process would occur
on many levels. Initial input could be obtained thtough
widespread surveys and intetviews. Detailed input and
analysis would be obtained through vatious appointed
committees and task forces. Broad public awareness and
education with tegard to the planning process would be
achieved through meetings, heatings, and the news media.
Typically a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) is
appointed by the Mayor and Common Council. Committee
membership should have widespread community
representation including various governmental officials,
residents and business persons. Planning Staff
recommends that two representatives of the Common
Council and Planning Commission serve on the CAC in
-,,-
o
o
o
w
U
o
a:
A.
Z
o
-
to-
e(
a:
e(
A.
W
a:
A.
Z
e(
...
A.
...
e(
a:
w
z
w
e"
C')
~
9-
10
"Cl
CGl
1Il..d
~
bO
CbO
..-IC
),....
Gl~
0.... t:>.c
>011I
Gl "Cl .....
ll<l<",",
..
Gl
..d
~
bO
;l
.....
..-I
IIlC
~1Il
Gl.....
Q",",
"Cl1
CI-<
IIlGl
~
bO.....
c<
....
t:>. bO '"
OdGl
.....0... >
Gl ~'...
>"'~
~~:g
~g
~t!)_~
..-I Gl bO~
>'::l s:: Q
ll-l '" ,....~i~.~
..-I"'~
~..... 0
~o~~~
..... ~1.:
"Cl
~
C
bO 0
d bO....
..-Id~
t:o~ :ll
Gl >. I":
..........0
.....i Sill ll-l
g d
u .....
) I
GlC
..-IGl
~~
o 0
o Gld
UI-<O
. .....
<"Cl~
o d III
UIIl"Cl
d"Cl
Od
bO..-I Ill.....
d'" III
.... '" ) >
do.... Gl 0
d El..-l I-<
lIla>t:>.
.....OGlt:>.
",",U I-< III
C
o
..-I
~
III
I-<ll<l
Ill.....
t:>.lzl
Gl
I-<ll-l
"'"'0
d ~
0..... I-<
..-111I0
~I-<t:>.
IIlGlGl
I-<dll<l
IIlGl
t:>.t!) d
Gl III
I-<ll-l.....
"'"'0"'"'
~
d
Gl'"
!--e
o III
....."Cl
Gld
>11I
Gl~
Q'"
go..... 0
Gl .....ll-l..... d
> Glll-llll 0
ll-l.... > III Glo...
'O~GlGl~d""'~
III '" "Cl '" 0,0 III
~ ~ ::l '" >'''Cl ~ e
..-I Gl"Cl d,o Gl..-l 0
>~dlll Ollllll-l
Gl..... 1Il....."Cl1ll > d
ll<l Ill..... t:>. Gl,o Ill,...
'Ol
~Gl
Ol::l
.... Olll-l
....."'0
..-I 0
..... III d
1Illl-l Gl I-<
1-<0 I-< Gl
Gl 11I0
d bO d
Gldl-<O
t!)..-IOO
Ol
bO~
Cd
~ ....Gl
d '" t:>. El
GlGl::lGl
8::l0.....
iIlOll-<Gl
dOlbO
0......-1 0
ll-l "Cl~
Glll-l d d
l>'. 0 Ill,....
.....
III ..
00l
....~
.a ~
Ot:>.
~~
'"
Gl
Ol ..-I
Gl ~
00 0...
'.....-1 .....
..... > 0....
,0 I-< "Cl 0
;j Gl dill
",",CIlIllll-l
.....
.....
0....
0"Cl
d d 0
;jllld
o 0
U )0....
Gl~
>'..-1 t:>.
~>O
..-IGl"Cl
UI-<1Il
Ot:>.
~1Il
El~
Ol l<
Gl bO Gl
bOd~
d.....
IIld"Cl
..dOd
UNIIl
~
d"Cl
Gld
!1Il~
OlOl>..do
..-I.........O~
.....1Il~lIld
,oOOGlGl
III t!) Gl El
~ ..... I-< Gl
Olll-l,o 0.....
lol OOll-l Gl
1
00
'~ m~
0"Cl..d
~ t:>.
Ol "Cl III
..-Idl-<
::t:lIlbO
....;
-
Gl
Ol
i:)
"Cl
d
III
~
d
o
0...
.....~
o III
..-I.....
ll-l::l
ll-l0
IIII-<
1-<0....
f-<U
~ -;.
I
C Ol
0..... I-<
1-<11I0
.....~~
>dO
CGlIll
lzl El~'
11'\
o
""
'"
cu
d
0...
.....
cu
"Cl
....
c3
C
III
.....
"'"'
.....
III
I-<
cu
d
cu
t!)
cu
~
III
~
CIl
cu
o
I-<
::l
o
CIl
---
~ -
o
o
o
o
order to act as liaison and gain expertise in the
details of the Plan.
AQ active Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is vital to
the success of the Plan tevision effort. Here
membership would consist of representation from various
City and governmental agencies that would utilize the
Plan as policy. Additionally, members would serve on
the TAC by virtue of their expertise Ot agency role.
An effective Plan
involvement and is
The whole process
generating renewed
community affairs.
is developed with active citizen
adopted with broad public support.
can be utilized as a means of
civic pride and public interest in
IV. USE OF CONSULTANTS
The General Plan revision program will require the
assistance of consultants with expettise in the more
technical aspects of the study. The various technical
repotts will be used to complete specific elements of
the General Plan as well as portions of the EIR.
Assistance is required in the fields of traffic,
geology, noise, air quality, cultutal resources,
biology, economics, and engineering.
V. STAFFING NEEDS
The revision program will be coordinated by the Advanced
Planning section of the Planning Department. Staff has
investigated three different approaches to completing
the wotk within the estimated timeftame. Details are
provided below as Options 1, 2 and 3.
Regardless of which option is selected, work will
continue on all current Planning cases as well as other
departmental responsibilities such as the Development
Review Committee, environmental review, the More
Attractive Community program, and others. Existing
staff in Advanced Planning includes four positions, a
Planning Aide, an Assistant Planner, a Senior Planner
and a Principal Planner. The options list the
additional staffing and/or consultant needs to
accomplish the program.
-7-
o
o
o
o
Option I:
This option
perform much
work, a task
to complete.
doing field
ttansferring
uses paid intern contract positions to
of the data collection and land use survey
which would take 9 interns about 4 months
This would include 4 teams of 2 persons
work, plus one person in the office
each day's information onto maps.
In addition, 2 data entry contract positions are needed
to input all available land use data into the City's
computet. This is an important step since the data
would be immediately available to all departments and to
the Mayot and Council for various special studies.
Two additional planning positions and one clerical
position would also be needed. Staff would do the
majority of the work involving data analysis, citizen
participation, mapping, environmental review and wtiting
of informational reports and General Plan text.
Consultants would be used to do technical portions of
the Genetal Plan text as well as most Ot all of the
Environmental Impact Report. Cost estimates are shown
undet Item VI.
Option 2:
This option would expand the role of consultants to do
more of the major components of the General Plan program
such as citizen participation, all aspects of the
Envitonmental Impact Report, all field work and other
data collection, the informational or technical reports,
Ot the General Plan repott. Costs would depend greatly
upon the numbet and scope of the work assigned to
consultants. The amount of additional staff needed to
complete the program would also depend on the amount of
consultant wOtk. Cost estimates are shown under item
VI.
Option 3:
A final approach would be to contract the entire program
out to consultants leaving the staff to coordinate and
monitor the consultants. This would be by far the most
costly method. It would, however, allow staff to
concentrate on other components of the program such as
citizen participation. Cost estimates are shown under
Item VI.
-8-
-
o
o
o
o
VI. COST ESTIMATES
The process of preparing a complete General Plan
revision program is involved and costly. Final costs,
of course, depend on which option is selected by the
City. Three major cost factors were taken into account:
(1) staff costs, (2) consultant costs, and (3)
supplies/printing. Factors 1 and 2 vaty depending on
the option, while factor 3 remains constant. The reason
for this is that, regardless of option selected, the
City would assume responsibility for all graphics and
printing costs in order to keep the ptice of this factor
down to a minimum.
Table 2 gives cost estimates for each factor for the
thtee options.
-Q-
-
.~
o
o
o
o
GENERAL PLAN REVISION PROGRAM
TABLE 2: Cost Estimates
Expenditure Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Staff. 333,960 104,190 79,710
Contractual Services 240,000 440,000 545,000
Printing & Supplies 80 , 42 0 80 , 420 69,820
Total $ 654,380 $ 624,610 $ 694,530
· Includes only proposed positions. Current staff expenditure remains
constant at $ 164,210 for 1 year and $ 492,610 for 3 years.
-
o
o
o
o
GENBRAL PLAN REVISION PROGRAM
Cost Estimates. Staff
1. Proposed positions For Advanced Planninq If General Plan Is Revised:
Position Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Associate Planner (1) 94,460 -0- -0-
Planning Assistant (1) 79,560 -0- -0-
Secretary (ll 57,240 (1) 57,240 (1) 57,240
* Intern (9) 36,720 (6) 24,480 -0-
* Data Entry ( 2) 8,160 ( 2) 8,160 ( 2) 8,160
276,140 89,880 65,400
(Incl. 25' benefits) 333,960 104,190 79,710
* Proposed contract positions (not included to determine benefits) .
2. Amount Budgeted for Advanced Planning:
Position FY 1986-87 Next 3 Years
Director (15') (1) 7,730 (1) 23,180
Principal Planner (1) 42,240 (1) 126,720
Senior Planner (1) 36,520 (1) 109,550
Planning Assistant (1) 26,520 (1) 79,560
Planning Aide (1) 18,360 (1) 55,080
131,370 394,090
(Incl. 25' benefits) 164,210 492,610
o
o
o
o
GENERAL PLAN REVISION PROGRAM
Cost Estimates: Contractual Services
Service Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
1. Traffic & Circulation 60,000 75,000 75,000
2. Noise 25,000 30,000 30,000
3. Geology 25,000 30,000 30,000
4. Biological Assessment 10,000 15,000 15,000
5. Cultural Resources 20,000 25,000 30,000
6. Air Quality 10,000 10,000 10,000
7. Pisca1 Analysis 30,000 30,000 30,000
8. Engineering 60,000 75,000 75,000
9. Program Management -0- 150,000 250,000
240,000 440,000 545,000
'~ '
o
o
o
o
GENERAL PLAN REVISION PROGRAM
Cost Estimates: printing and Supplies
ll!m Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
1. County Computer Mapping 20,000 20,000 20,000
2. Computer Terminal 370 370 370
3. Work Station for Clerical 5,350 5,350 5,350
4. Telephone 600 600 600
5. Copy Machine Charges 6,000 6,000 6,000
6. Meetings , Conferences 1,000 1,000 1,000
7. Legal Advertisements 2,000 2,000 2,000
8. Postage 2,500 2,500 2,500
9. Vehicle 10,600 10,600 -0-
10. Supplies, Equipment 12,000 12,000 12,000
11. Printing 20,000 20,000 20,000
80,420 80,420 69,820