Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout37-Planning CI1Q OF SAN BERNARDIQ) - REQUEOr FOR COUNCIL AC'C)oN Frank A. Schuma From: Planning Director Subject: Change of Zone No. 86-28 Dept: Planning Mayor and Council Meeting of February 16, 1987, 2:00 p.m. Date: February 5, 1987 Synopsis of Previous Council ection: Previous Planning Commission action: At the meeting of the Planning Commission on February 3, 1987, the following recommendation was made: The application for Change of Zone No. 86-28 was unanimously recommended for approval. The Negative Declaration for environ- mental impact was also recommended for approval. Recommended motion: To approve the responses to comments and to adopt the Negative Declaration for environmental impact which has been reviewed and considered. To approve, modify or reject the findings and the recommendation of the Planning commission and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. G A ~\ I, . '\. " . ~'('( Signatu re Frank A. Schuma Contact person: Frank A. Schuma Phone: 383-50';7 Supporting data attached: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Staff Report Ward: 1 Amount: Sou ree: Finance: Council Notes: 7...n~:Jf:;.' Agenda Item No oJ? c - o o o , CiTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ SUMMARY .. lIJ :l u AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE WARD 11 2/3/87 1 ~ APPLICANT: 810 Merrill Street Corona, CA 91720 Change of Zone No. 86-28 OWNER: Same as Above ~ :) ~ II: .... CI lIJ II: 4 The applicant requests to change the land use zoning district from M-1, Light Industrial to R-2. Mut1i-Family Residential. Subject property is a rectangularly-sh~ped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.15 acre ,located at the south side of Sixtn Street and being located approximately 380 feet east of the c'.enter1ine of "J" Street. EXISTING LAND USE Vacant Church & Duplex Duplex Single-Family Res. Vacant GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Res. 8-14 dulac Res. 8-14 dulac Res. 8-14 dulac Res. 8-14 dulac Res. 8-14 dulac PROPERTY Subject North South East West ZONING M-1 M-1 M-l M-1 R-3-1200 GEOLOGIC / SEISMIC DYES FLOOD HAZARD DYES OZONE A C SEWERS IXl YES ) HAZARD ZONE \Xl NO ZONE mNO OZONE B DNO HIGH FIRE DYES AIRPORT NOISE 1 DYES REDEVELOPMENT DYES HAZARD ZONE ~NO CRASH ZONE iDNO PROJECT AREA IX! NO ..J o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z ~- APPROVAL ~ APPLICABLE EFFECTS 0 WITH MITIGATING - 0 Z(I) MEASURES NO E,I,R, ti CONDITIONS lIJ(D o EXEMPT o E,I.R, REQUIRED BUT NO ILO 0 2z 1Lj5 DENIAL Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 00 ~:I a:Z WITH MITIGATING 0 CONTINUANCE TO MEASURES (1):1 >ii: Qg NO 0 Z o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS U lIJ SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E, R. C, lIJ EFFECTS MINUTES a: NQV, "" REVIIEO ~ULY 1..1 IKY o o o o CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE r.m: NO Ah_7A OBSERVATIONS , , '1(3/87 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 1. The proposal is to change the land use zoning district from M- 1, Light Industrial to R-3, Multiple Family Residential for a 0.15 acre parcel located on the south side of 6th Street, approximately 380 feet east of "J" Street. 2. The proposed R-3 zone would be consistent with the San Bernardino General Plan which designates the site for Residential, 8-14 units per acre. The maximum density permitted by the General Plan would require a less intense zoning designation of R-3-3000, which provides a density of 14 units per acre. 3. The existing zoning pattern along 6th Street is not consistent with the General Plan which transitions from R-3-l200 east of "J" Street, to M-l beginning with the subject property and terminating with the M-2, Heavy Industrial zone adjacent to the railroad right-of-way and the I-2l5 Freeway over a distance of approximately 685 feet. The R-3 1200 zoning designation to the west permits up to 36 units per acre which is contrary to the General Plan density limitation of 14 units per acre. A similar zoning pattern parallels the I-215 Freeway between 7th Street to the north and Spruce Street to the south. The predominant land use pattern within this area is single family and duplex residential. Approximately 15 out of 36 parcels within the industrial designated areas are currently vacant. Only two lots have developed with an industrial related use including an auto repair facility. to the northeast of the site. The existing M-l and M-2 designations do not permit new residential construction or addition to an existing nonconforming single family residence. 4. The existing M-l and M-2 zones along 6th Street are not compatible with the existing Multiple Family Residential zoning to the west nor the existing nonconforming residential units within the M-l and M-2 zoned areas. Given the current General Plan designation for Multiple Family Residential, the conflicts between residential and industrial development relative to traffic, noise fumes, visual impacts and the absence of industrial development on the existing M-l and M-2 zoned properties, the Planning Commission may wish to consider recommending to the Mayor and Common Council that the M-l and M-2 zoned areas adjacent to the I-2l5 Freeway, between 7th Street and Spruce Street, be considered for rezoning to R-3- 3000. "" . o o o o CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNINc~ED~~~Th1_"f'lT OBSERVATIONS .LJ. Z/j//j/ j AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE PAGE 5. The Environmental Review Committee, on January 8, 1987, determined that there were no significant environmental effects and recommended adoption of a Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 86-28. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the observations contained herein, Staff recommends adoption of the proposed negative declaration and approval of Change of Zone No. 86-28 to R-3-3000, in accordance with the maximum General Plan density limitation of 14 units per acre. Respectfully Submitted, FRANK A. SCHUMA, Planning Director ~J/~ DAVE ANDERSON, Principal Planner 110... - . - o o o o ... CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE \... ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST , ... ~ A. BACKGROUND 1. Case Number (s) :Charige of Zone No. 86-28 Date: 1/8/87 2. Project Description: To cham!:e the land use zoning district from M-l to R-3 or more restrictive multiple famil v residential zone on proper tv consisting of aODrox. . 0.15 acre. 3. General Location: South side of 6th St. _ approximately 380 ft. east of the centerline of "J" Street. . B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS YES MAYBE NO 1. Could project change proposed uses of land, as indi- cated on the General Plan, either on project site or within general area? - ~ 2. Would significant increases in either noise levels, dust odors, fumes, vibration or radiation be gener- ated from project area, either during construction or from completed project other than those result- ing from normal construction activity? - ~ 3. Will project involve application, use or disposal of hazardous or toxic materials? ~ - 4. Will any deviation from any established environ- mental standards (air, water, noise, light, etc.) snd/or adopted plans be requested in connection with project? - ~ 5. Will the project require the use of significant amounts of energy which could be reduced by the use of appropriate mitigation measures? X - 6. Could the project create a traffic hazard or congestion? - ~ 7. Could project result in any substantial change in quality, quantity, or accessibility of any portion of region's air or surface and ground water re- sources? X - ... ~ MAY I.. lAC. '011II A ....1,..' . o Change of Zone No. ~28. PC MeetiJ;>2/3/87 o 8. Will project involve construction of facilities in an area which could be flooded during an inter- mediate regional or localized flood? 9. Will project involve construction of facilities or services beyond those presently available or pro- posed in near future? 10. Could the project result in the displacement of community residents? 11. Are there any natural or man-made features in pro- ject area unique or rare (i.e. not normally found in other parts of country or regions)? 12. Are there any known historical or archaelogical sites in vicinity of project area which could be affected by project? 13. Could the project affect the use of a recrea- tional area or area of important aesthetic value or reduce or restrict access to public lands or parks? 14. Are there any known rare or endangered plant species in the project area? 15. Does project area serve as habitat, food source, nesting place, source of water, migratory path, etc., for any rare or endangered wildlife or fish species? 16. Will project be located in immediate area of any adverse geologic nature such as slide prone areas, highly erosible soils, earthquake faults, etc.? 17. Could project substantially affect potential use or conservation of a non-renewable natural resource? 18. Will any grading or excavation be required in connection with project which could alter any existing prominent surface land form, i.e., hill- side, canyons, drainage courses, etc? 19. Will any effects of the subject project together or in conjunction with effects of other projects cause a cumulative significant adverse impact on the environment? l II. YES - KAYBE l!Q .x.. .x.. .x.. .x.. Jl Jl ..x ..x ...x ...x ~ J ~ uc._ A . '0 o COZ NO. 86-38, PC Mtng. 2/3/87 o o r ""'Il C. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS If any of the findings of fact have been answered YES or MAYBE, then a brief clarification of potential impact shall be included as well as a discussion of any cumulative effects (attach additional sheets if needed). D. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe type and anticipated effect of any measures proposed to mitigate or eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts: . E. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation, DO We find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [J We find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. [J We find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environ- ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA JilLtlf/('(fJ.Y (Secretary) V ERIE C. ROSS, DATE: ~stant Planner I 4 1987 110... ~ . MAY II EIlC. I'OIIIl A ~.ft.-. o So . ..~: . . ..L o o o I " ~ , " I , I ti ~ ell ~ r ; I I ! ~~ . U I r r ~~ III 0( '. III , ,I -<l , J I ~ , III .. -<l ~ ... i. .. ~ ~ .r .. ~ ,- I Q] ! LJ ~I.... ~.......... lay. .d'. a...'''lng ....VID. 11071 ..."'.... a...... a...,. N....... C:ellf__"'. .17.0 ~ .71.1 7.4..... ..,U ",^W. ~,.. Vl\oJ~~\.JT ~LAIAIC.. 6'0 1;111Io.". -~~UT ......"'''. GI<.'r"~"''''' "I1?to -Ul-~l ?.... ..., o l . ..-f s - 1 o o o (1)0 o @ 0 UI()) UI e ()) ()) MttlElET Ule (1)0 UI e <i>UI 180"'<0.'" II.. 11.11I . o@ I <:)UI UI @ (3)0 ,'rUIU . UI@ (1)< UI @ ! 000 . I. . il:t .. UI@ (l)UI UI @ OOUI ,. I · I ~ UI@ (J)UI UI @ <l>UI . . q i t I UI@ (1)0 . <1>< (5)@)(iJ . i ,l UlGl (1)0 ..........._........T- i . o@ 0 @n <I>~(I)(I)(J) 0(3) <1>0 @O o < UI<Il <i)< (i) < UI < < (3)< UI Ul@ @Ul UI (i) OOGl UI@ (1)1: \I @ < < <@ 8'1llT& HI_V IW< II < em I @ (i) lit.. T. . ...... "AL ROAD STATE ....-.wAy .,IS I \ ~~ north ~ I / ~I.... ~p'" .VI .d'. a,..ftllnlil e.,.vl.. 11071 ."vep ale... a.... N...... c.......... .,7.a ....... 1'7141 7....... ".",....TT ."'111.:. .,..,.. ""J Vlhlo~f.JT 5AI.AZA~ -.14> 1ol&~"'.L .fILI&T COII<'~'" "",.,"''''00/'. "17LO f'P14J .,....... - - o o 0' o CASE COZ NO R~-7R AGENDA ITEM # CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT LOCATION .J Ef] R-Z 113 CIA IE T R-Z B' =Sz J 0 ] . jBBB JB~ ]~H~D R-2 I 18 EEl R-2 I 18 JJ B 11 HEAR ING DATE ')/ '>, I R 7 I~R-2 ~ _IITN It I r;J~~ T- C'M R-Z R -2 R.2 R-2 R-Z I .. ~'..:: I;;:J~ ~~ eTH It R-2 R-2 II. R-2 R'Z R'Z :; R.Z ::00: M-I II' 112 .l.::_l~~J R-2 2 BBBBElffi B';:: ftEJE]EJBtE ) R -31) R.S .,IM21 ~ . Rol 11I2 ::~ ~: I EI R'S IN I R'2 R-2 R'S \R'S8 C'IA C.3& . r- ~ ~R;: ~I TH , C -II - I ~ '0' C-Il M-2 .s \TS-M-2 M-2 4TH IT, C.4 liD IT. C.4 C.4 C.4 C-Z c... ... C.II C-IA II I" IT. In - ,- o ~ o o - o r' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT '" . APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 86-28 .. OWNER:' Vincent &: Ruth Salazar AD6RESS: 810 Merrill Street Corona, CA 91720 APPLICANT: ADDRESS: SAME .. TEL: (714)7%-3051 TEL: ( M~l J( PROPOSED ZONE: R-2 ' J GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: M.F. Medium nAna:! t.y EXISTING ZONE: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY, (ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY) AssEsSOR'S PARCEL NO, 138-141..09 Lot 6 in Block "A" Waters and Burt Subdivision, in the City of San Bernardino, as per plat recorded in Book 4 of Kaps, Page 42, records of said County. REASON FOR CHANGE OF ZONE REQUEST: Proposed land use would be JIIOre in keeping with r,esidential neighborhood and general 'plan for area, also adjacent property is R-3 8J!:hting zone. SUBMITTALS: 6'l APPLICATION (3 COPIES) PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT OR GRANT DEED ~ 500 FT, PROPERTY OWNER'S MAP (EXHIBIT A) jg] LETTER OF CERTIFICATION (NOTARIZED) ~ LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION (NOTARIZED) J:8I TRANSPARENCY OF MAP ~ MAP OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (10 COPIES, FOLDED TO B V2"XII") f?J PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION FORM g! GUMMED LABELS (2 SETS) SIGNATURE OF LEGAL OWNER (S) DATE: ...J7 e.c:.. DATE: .f').~ DATE: 1)/ (9ft. I"">) 19~~ DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED: DATE APPLICATION ACCEPTED: ( OAPPROVED ODENIED ) E,RC, MEETING P. C, MEETING M/C,C, MEETING MARCH '.4 Ikr c.z, 'OIIM "