HomeMy WebLinkAbout47-Planning
CI-R OF SAN HRNARDlfIb - REQU&Or FOR COUNCIL ACQ)N
From:
R. Ann Siracusa
Director of Planning
Planning
Su~~: Change of Zone No. 88-4
Mayor and Council Meeting 0
July 18, 1988, 2:00 p,m,
Oept:
Oau: July 5, 1988
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Previous Planning Commission action:
At the June 21, 1988 meeting of the Planning Commission, the
Commission voted to recommend denial of Change of Zone No.
88-4.
Vote: Unanimous (1 abstention, 2 absent),
Recommended motion:
That the Mayor and Council deny Change of Zone No. 88-4,
~
Signature
R. Ann Siracusa
Supporting data attached:
Staff Report
Phone: 384-5057
Ward: 5
Contact person:
R. Ann Siracusa
FUNOING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
nil
Source: (Acct, No,)
(Acct, Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
Anpnrt::l ItAm Nn
1r
~ITfJ OF SAN BERNARDlfo - REQUEfilr FOR COUNCIL AC-i?ON
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Change of Zone No. 88-4
Mayor and Council Meeting of July 18, 1988
REOUEST
The applicants requests a change of zone from C-l Neighbor-
hood Commercial to C-2 Community Commercial for a parcel of
2.4 acres on the southeastern corner of Kendall Drive and
University Parkway.
RN;;~~_ROUND
The June 13, 1988 staff report (Attachment A) to the Planning
Commission provides the background and the analysis on the
change of zone request. That report concluded the following:
The size and shape of the site is adequate to
accommodate the more intensive uses permitted
within a C-2 Community Commercial zone. The change
of zone is consistent with the letters from the
State Office of Planning and Research. Impacts of
traffic generated by the change of zone as well as
circulation concerns could be addressed at the time
of proposed development. The site has buffers from
some of the surrounding uses and additional stan-
dards relative to setbacks and building height
which insure compatibility with the surrounding
area.
The staff's recommendation was for approval of the zone
change.
The Planning Commission considered this item at their June
21, 1988 meeting. The Commission voted by a unanimous vote,
with one abstention and two absent, to recommend to the Mayor
and Common Council denial of the petition request for the
zone change. The concerns stated during that meeting were:
* Traffic congestion would increase because of the more
intense commercial uses that would be allowed (fast-food
drive-through restaurants).
*
The desire to keep the
not have drive-through
policy along Hospitality
College Area more "upscale"
restaurants, similar to
Lane.
and
the
* The Planning Commission is losing credibility with the
residents of the area because their desires for the area
are not being followed.
*
The only reason to allow the zone change is to allow
.
o
o
o
o
Change of Zone No. 88-4
Mayor and Council Meeting of July 18, 1988
Page 2
drive-through restaurants in this area. The majority of
the Planning Commission thought that drive-through
restaurants were not appropriate for this area.
CONCLUSION
A planning policy decision needs to be made by the Mayor and
Council regarding drive-through restaUrants in the College
Area. The Planning Commission and some residents would
prefer that they not be allowed.
~YOR. .A~!>_ .c_QQN~:u,. .OPTIONS
Deny Change of Zone No. 88-4
or
Approve Change of Zone No. 88-4, and direct the City Attorney
to prepare the necessary ordinance changing the zone dis-
trict, and to adopt the Negative Declaration.
RECOMM1tIit?~:r_I_QN
Planning Commission's recommendation:
That the Mayor and Council deny Change of Zone No. 88-4.
Prepared by: John Montgomery, Principal Planner
for R. Ann Siracusa, Director of Planning
Attachment A: Planning Commission Staff Report of June 21,
1988 with Initial Study
mkf/7/5/88
M&CCAGENDA:CZ884
. '0
o
o
o
r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT "',
SUMMARY
"-
AGENDA ITEM 6
HEARING DATE 6/21/88
WARn 5
~
APPLICANT: Dennis stafford
647 N. Main St. Ste. 2A
Riverside, CA 92501
OWNER: University Square
647 N. Main St. Ste. 2A
Riverside, CA 92501
Change of ~one No. 88-4
~
1&1
::)
2
Cl
....
cr
1&1
a:
cr
The applicant requests a change of zone from C-l, Neighborhood
Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial.
The subject propert:" is located on the southeasterly corner of
Kendall Drive and University Parkway and consists of
approximately 2.4 acres.
PROPERTY
EXISTING
LAND USE
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION.
ZONING
Subject
North
South
East
West
C-l
o & R-3-3000
R-1-7200
R-1-7200
R-3-300
Multi-Family
Multi-Family
Multi-Family
Multi-Family
Mul ti-Family
Vacant
Vacant/Multi-Family
Single Family
Single Family
Multi-Family
GEOLOGIC / SEISMIC
HAZARD ZONE
DYES
K3tNo
FLOOD HAZARD DyES OZONE A
ZONE JGNO OZONE B
iil YES
SEWERS 0 NO
HIGH FIRE DYES AIRPORT NOISE / oVES REDEVELOPMENT aVES
HAZARD ZONE x~O CRASH ZONE J@NO PROJECT AREA oNO
..J o NOT o POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z IXk APPROVAL
~ APPLICABLE EFFECTS 0
WITH MITIGATING - 0
ZU) MEASURES NO E.I.R. tc CONDITIONS
1&1(1) o EXEMPT o E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO II.Q 0
2Z II.ffi DENIAL
Z- SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
OQ ~2
a::Z WITH MITIGATING 0 CONTINUANCE TO
:;iL MEASURES 02
laND 0
Z o SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS fd
1&1 SIGNIFICANT SEE ATTACHED E. R C.
EFFECTS MINUTES a::
NOY. '..1 REVIIEO JULY 1'1'
...
. '0
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNlt~G DEPARTMENT
. CASE CZ 88-4
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 6
HEARING DATE 6/21/88
S.,
,
1. REOUEST
The applicant is requesting approval
from C-l, Neighborhood Commercial
Commercial.
to change the zone
to C-2, Community
2. LOCATION
The subject property
parcel, located on
University Parkway and
is an
the
Kendall
approximately
southeasterly
Drive.
2.4 acre
corner of
3. MUNICI.EAk~_QI)Ep^~I). (;;&~E~:r. .PLAN CONFQ~NC~
The proposed project, Change of
consistent with the Interim Policy
May 23, 1988, and amended on June 6,
Zone No.
Douclllent
1988.
88-4. is
adopted on
4. CEOA STATUS
An Initial Study was prepared by staff which addressed
environmental concerns for the site (Attachment "A").
The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial
Study on May 5, 1988 and a Negative Declaration was I
recommended. The Initial Study was available for public
review from May 12 to May 25. No comments were
received.
5. BACKGR.Q.llliIl
Two applications for changes of zone from R-3-3000,
Multi-Family Residential to C-l, Neighborhood Commercial
have been approved for this site. Change of zone 86-29
which included most of the site was approved June 2,
1987, by the Mayor and Common Council. Change of zone
87-14 which included the area of street vacation and the
two northwesterly parcels was approved March 7, 1988 by
the Mayor and Common Council. A Lot Line Adjustment,
88-2, to delete interior lot lines and incorporate the
vacated portion of State Street was approved February 5,
1988 by the Development Review Committee. Review of
Plans 86-143, to construct a commercial center was
submitted for the site. This project was held up by the
moratorium. It is currently able to proceed and the
applicant is revising site plans for Development Review.
lo...
'0
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE CZ 88-4
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM 6
HEARING DATE 6/21/88
~.~
6. ANALYSIS
G~neral Vicinity
The site of the proposed change of zone is surrounded by
residential uses. Single-Family Residential Uses are
located to the east and Multi-Family is located to the
northeast and to the west. Open space is located north
of the site. An elementary school and church are
located south of the site and California State
University San Bernardino is located northerly.
Comoatibilj ty wi tho !;n~ . SurrouMing Area
The site currently has a commercial zone. An easement
for high power lines to the west provides a buffer to
the multi-family uses in that area and Kendall Drive, a
State Highway, separate this use from the multi-family
uses to the northeast. The proposed C-2, Community
Commercial zone includes additional standards relative
to setbacks and building height to insure compatibility.
~ro9osed~and Use Alte~native
This proposal is consistent with the
alternative which was adopted by
designated the site as CG, Commercial
preferred land use
the Council that
General.
Traff.i.s::._.md Cir~uJ.at.i.Q.n
Concerns of traffic and circulation for the site must be
addressed at the time of proposed development when the
type of traffic generated and point of ingress and
egress are identified (see Initial Study, Attachme~t
"A") .
Imolications of the Chanqe of Zone
The change of zone to C-2, Community Commercial will
allow more intense and diverse commercial uses than the
existing C-l, Neighborhood Commercial. These uses would
include used car sales, o~and off-site sale of alcohol
'"-
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
. CASE CZ 88-4
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM ,;
HEARING DATE ,;" 1 I II II
~
and fast-food restaurants, all of which require approval
of a Conditional Use Permit. Uses permitted in the C-2
zone include: Department Stores, Medical Laboratories,
Dry Cleaning, Ice Storage Houses and Paint Stores. The
front setback requirement is 5 feet in the C-2 zone, 5
feet less than the 10 foot required in the C-l zone.
7. QPpMF.NTS RECEIVED
The State Department of Transportation reviewed the
proposed zone change. Their letter indicates that the
traffic and drainage generated by the proposal does not
appear to have a significant effect on the State Highway
System. However, the cumulative impacts must be
considered. They have requested any measures to
mitigate the cumulative impact of traffic and drainage
should be provided prior to or with development of this
area.
8. CONCLUSI Ol'l
The size and shape of the site is adequate to
accommodate the more intensive uses permitted with a C-
2, community Commercial zone. The change of zone is
consistent with the letters from the State Office of
Planning and Research. Impacts of traffic generated by
the change of zone as well as circulation concerns
should be addressed at the time of proposed development.
The site has buffers from some of the surrounding uses
and additional standards relative to setbacks and
building height which insure compatibility with the
surrounding area.
9. RECOMMENP~~ON
It is recommended that the planning Commission:
1. Approve the Negative Declaration, and,
2. Approve Change of Zone No. 88-4
'0
o
o
o
, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE CZ 88-4
OBSERVATIONS
AGENDA ITEM
HEARING DATE
PAGE
6
6/21/88
l;.
Respectfully submitted,
R. ANN SIRACUSA
Director of Planning
.c-- /' ,) ~
/j;.t. ~&/:0-
!-a-rid i Paulsen
Senior Planner
SP:cms
pcagenda
cz9940
6/13/88
Attachment "A" - Initial Study
Attachment "B" - Location Map
'\..
'0
o
o
o
ATTACHMENT A
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF SAN &ERNARDINO
Initial Study
for
Environmental Review
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 88-4
To change the zone on an approximately
2.4 acre site located at the
southeasterly corner of Kendall Drive
and University Parkway
May 5, 1988
Prepared by:
Mary Lanier
Planning Department
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
(714) 384-5057
Prepared for:
Dennis Stafford
647 N. Main Street, Suite 2A
Riverside, CA 92501
o
Section
l.O
2.0
2.1
2.2
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
5.0
6.0
o
o
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . .
. . . .
. . .
. . . . .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .... . . . . . . . .
Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Project Impacts .............
PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . .
Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Site and Project Characteristics . . . . .
Existing Conditions .... . . . . . . .
Project Characteristics .........
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS .. . . . . . .
Environmental Setting .. . . . . . . . .
Environmental Effects .. . . . . . . . .
High Wind ................
General Plan Land Use ..........
Traffic and Circulation . . . . . . . . .
REFERENCES .
. . . . . .
. . . .
. . .
. .
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix A - Environmental Impact
Checklist ..... . . . . . . . .
Appendix B - Site Map . . . . . . . .
Appendix C - Location Map . . . . . .
. . .
. . .
. .
. .
o
Page
1-1
2-1
2-1
2-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-2
5-1
6-1
6-2
6-10
6-11
o
o
o
o
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is provided by the City of San
Bernardino as an Initial Study for Change of Zone
No. 88-4 to change the zone from C-l to c-2 at the
southeasterly corner of Kendall Drive and
University Parkway.
As stated
California
Guidelines,
to:
in Section 15063 of the State of
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
the purposes of an Initial Study are
1.
Provide
use as
prepare
the Lead Agency with information to
the basis for deciding whether to
an EIR or a Negative Declaration.
2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify
a project, mitigating adverse impacts before
an EIR is prepared, thereby, enabling the
project to qualify for a Negative
Declaration.
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is
required by:
a.
Focusing the EIR on the
determined to be significant.
effects
b. Identifying the effects determined not
to be significant.
c. Explaining the reasons for determining
that potentially significant effects
would not be significant.
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in
the design of a project.
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis
for the finding in a Negative Declaration
that a project will not have a significant
effect on the environment.
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIR's.
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR
could be used with the project.
1-1
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4
C-l to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway
May 5, 1988
2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1 Proposed Project
To change the zone from C-l,Neighborhood
Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial on an
approximately 2.4 acre site located at the
southeasterly corner of Kendall drive and
University Parkway.
2.2
Impacts identified in the
include:
attached
checklist
2.c. Development within a High Wind Hazard Area.
6.a. A change in the land use as designated on the
General Plan.
9.a. An increase in traffic that is greater than
the land use designated on the General Plan.
9.b. Use of existing, or demand for new, parking
facilities/structures.
9.d. Alteration of
circulation.
present
patterns
of
2-1
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4
C-l to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway
May 5, 1988
3.1 LOCATION
The proposed change of zone is located in the State
College Redevelopment Area at the southeasterly
corner of Kendall drive and University Parkway.
3.2
3.2.1
Site and Project Characteristics
Existing Conditions
The site is an irregularly shaped parcel consisting
of approximately 2.4 acres. The site is currently
vacant and has frontage on Kendall Drive, a State
Highway, and Sheridan Road. It also includes a
vacated section of State Street. The surrounding
uses include single family residences, and multiple
family residences.
3.2.2
Project Characteristics
To change the zone from C-l, Neighborhood
Commercial to C-2, Community Commercial.
3-1
.
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4
C-1 to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway
May 5, 1988
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
4.1 Environmental Setting
The site is vacant and irregularly shaped. The
site is relatively flat with sparse vegetation. It
is surrounded by single family homes and
apartments. The surrounding area has been
developed.
4.2 Environmental Effects
The Environmental Checklist identifies six areas of
potential concern. Each item checked "maybe" or
"yes" on the checklist is identified below and
followed by a recommended mitigation measure.
4.2.1
High Wind
2. ~~~_~esources: Will the proposal result in:
c. Development within a high wind hazard
area?
4.2.2
The site of the proposed change of zone
is located in a high wind hazard area.
There would be no impact on this change
of zone, however mitigation measures
would be required at the time of
development.
General Plan Land Use
6. LAPd Use: Will the proposal result in:
a. A change in the land use as designated
on the General Plan?
The proposal is consistent with the
letters dated June 11, 1987, July 3,
1987 and August 18, 1987, January 20,
1988, February 5, 1988 and March 16,
1988 from the State Office of Planning
and Research to the City of San Bernard
which stipulate that". . . land uses
proposed during the period of the
extension will be consistent with the
purpose of the updated general plan
provisions. . ."
4-1
.
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4
C-1 to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University parkway
May 5, 1988
4.2.3
Traffic and Circulation
9.
Transportation/Circulation:
proposal result in:
Could
the
a.
An increase in
than the land
General Plan?
traffic that is greater
use designated on the
The change of zone may have several
impacts on existing transportation
system. The first impact could be an
increase of traffic, and the second
impact could be the increase of traffic
onto Sheridan into a residential
neighborhood. The type and amount of
traffic generated must be determined at
the time of development for this site.
According to the City Engineering
Department, a traffic study would not
be required for the change of zone,
however the city does reserve the right
to require one at the time of
development.
b. Use of existing or demand for new
parking facilities/structures?
The change of zone could increase
demand for parking. Parking
requirements would be dependent upon
the use proposed and would be
determined at the time of development.
c.
Alteration of
circulation?
present
patterns of
Access from Kendall onto the site is
shown on the site map to be limited.
This may impact the present circulation
patterns of the area. This impact
should be determined at the time of
development when ingress and egress for
the site is proposed.
4-2
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4
C-l to C-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway
May 5, 1988
5.0 REFERENCES
Mr. Huston T. Carlyle, Jr.
Director
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
(Letter of August 18, 1987)
Persons Contacted:
Michael Grubbs, Civil Engineering AssOCiation,
City Public Works
5-1
..' 0
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Change of Zone No. 88-4
c-l to c-2 at SEC Kendall Drive and University Parkway
May 5, 1988
6.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A - Environmental Impact Checklist
Appendix B - Site Map
Appendix C - Location Map
csj/5-5-88
DOC:MISC
ISCOZ884
6-1
.0
o
o
o
APPENDIX - A
~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT CHECKLIST
IIlo... . ~
r "
A. BACKGRO!,lND
Application Number: Change of Zone No. 88-4
Project Description: Chanqe zone from C-1 to C-2
Location: Southeasterly corner of_University Parkway and
Kenda 11 nriVA
Environmental Constraints Areas: Hiqh Wind Hazard Area
General Plan Designation: Res. Medium 8-14 du/ac
Zoning Designation: (;:-1 r Npiqhhnrhnnn rnmmpr~;~l
B. ~FYIB~~~-18PACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. ~~th~ources Will the proposal result in:
Yes No Maybe
a. Earth movement (cut and/or
fill) of 10,000 cubic yards or
more? X
b. Development and/or grading on
a slope greater than 15'
natural grade? X
c. Development within the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone? X
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature? X
"'" ~
REVISED 12/87
ML/csj
PAGE 1 OF 8
6-2
.
o
o
o
o
COZ 88-4
,
Maybe
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction or
hazards?
h. Other?
2. ~IR_RESQY~: Will the proposal
result in:
a.
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
substantial
an effect
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area? X
3.
W~TEB RESOURCES:
proposal result in:
Will
the
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to illlpermeable surfaces?
b. Changes in the course or flow
of flood waters?
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
d. Change. in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
\..
REVISED 12187
Yec.
No
X
X
X
X
....
X
X
.
X
X
X
X
X
y
~
PAGE 2 OF 8
.
o
o
o
o
,
COZ 88-4
Yes
NO
Maybe
""""'l
4.
BIOLOGIc6~~~OURCE~:
proposal result in:
Could the
a.
Change
unique,
species
habitat
trees?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of plants or their
including stands of
x
b.
Change
unique,
species
habitat?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of animals or their
x
c. Other?
x
5. NOISE: Could the proposal result
in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
x
b.
Exposure of people to
noise levels over 65
interior noise levels
dB?
exterior
dB or
over 4S
x
x
c. Other?
6.
~_ USE:
result in:
Will the
proposal
a. A change in the land use as
designated on the General
Plan?
x
b. Development within an Airport
District?
x
c. Development within "Greenbelt"
Zone A,B, or C?
x
d. Development within a high fire
hazard zone?
x
e. Other?
x
11IIo....
~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 3 OF 8
.
c
o
o
~
Yes
7.
MAN-MADE HA';~N>~:
project:
Will
the
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials (including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b. Involve the release
hazardous substances?
of
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
d. Other?
8. HQY~: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
b. Other?
9. 1EbNSPQETATIQN/CIBCULATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan?
b.
Use of existing,
new, parking
structures?
or demand for
facilities/
c. Impact upon existing public
transportation -systems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
\...
REVISED 10/87
Maybe
o
'"
COZ 88-4
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
~
PAGE 4 OF 8
.
()
,
\..
g.
h.
o
o
A disjointed pattern
roadway improvements?
of
Other?
10. PUBLI~_SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Fire protection?
police protection?
Schools (i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Medical aid?
Solid waste?
Other?
ll. Y1!LITIES: Will the proposal:
REVISED 10/87
a. Impact the fOllowing beyond
the capability to provide
adequate levels of service or
require the construction of
new facilities?
1. Natural gas?
2. Electricity?
3. Water?
4. Sewer?
5. Other?
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
Yes
Maybe
o
.....
COZ 88-4
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1(
x
x
~
PAGE 5 OF 8
~
o
o
o
COZ 88-4
o
r
Maybe
""'l
12. AES'l'HETI~:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view?
b. Will the visual impact of the
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area?
c. Other?
Yes
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
.
~
13.
Could the
~P~1U~~~ESQURCES:
proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
b.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
c. Other?
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance
(Section 15065)
The California Environmental
Quality Act states that if any of
the following can be answered yes
or maybe, the project may have a
significant effect on the
environment and an Environmental
Impact Report shall be prepared.
lil....
a. Does the project have the
potential to degrade the
quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered
plant or anilllal or elilllinate
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 6 OF 8
o
o
o
CZ 88-4
o
r
Yes
No
Maybe
.....
important examples of the
major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the
potential to achieve short
term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts
will endure well into the
future.)
x
x
c. Does the project have impacts
which are individually
limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may
impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on
the environment is
significant.)
d. Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
x
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
~ ~
PAGE 7 OF 8
REVISED 10/87
.'. 0
o
o
o
CZ 88-4
, ~
D. DETERMI~7j~
On the basis of this initial study,
o
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, although there will not be a significant effect in
this case because the mitigation measures described above have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
[2J
o
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
6/fYIf(OI/UliNfA1.,. _1m tQNAlrrraf
Name and Title
YJlM,i.vt. ~
signature
Date:
AJ1 ~ /'181
\..
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 8 OF 8
~
o
9PENDIX - B
o
o
0WlII1lt. ~ .
\J1oI~'" '5A\JMe
6l4~ .... toUo,....."T .Z"
..,...._. CA 9~50'
.,,,,,..-..WW
"""11II "~.'''''''JIW ~.=~-=:::,: \,
-." <:..M...... I / e...".' ."',"'.1' "\
c.......+7I.".'? l KENDALL. '. t.l . ..
_ _ ~ ~ .(~~".u.'_.1 ,..._... _Ie."" ,.",.N!'-4#UJ
. . (..,....~.. ...........~,...,''''+IIUJ..
...... .:::.u...~.: ~""':'J . . . . '.. ." .
.. . .'. ~"'..
/" ,,_''''.11.'';'' . '.
\',. I \
~ ~ I ~",".H:"".
.a.. - . , -.......
~'i~ . .
~I ,,_lo-.
~,~
~~
.
/
LK-~ Oft r.~ :
..OT. ,-, ,'TJItM.T .a.,... I'o\&"~
.... ,""", MO "" , . TC ..,.,
fie fA~ oM/.'4.0 fI\,,,,,, ~,-e
..-r. ...~ \UllcA'l8O
DRIVE
- -~!.!...:. ;.._.. ~ ---
....... ....... -. .
'.1
. el
I
@ .r"'~1 iN" t:A4J""."""A
"""~' IAIII...Nr.
Ai<<..... tTIINtIr "" ""
...-r ,.,.., ""., rr...
~"~L .'1:".11..
IiJ O'41eArlllN '" AIUIlrolllNAL
1l1tU1r-o,.w",y .y .MANT
~D ..'.,.,.~&'.# J:,ONI,-("'''.z.
~ 17~7.. ......4645..
O"W:NIL "',u:,"~.s .
.OCA"ICllI AII..I IIADIU. TA..UIIT UIIIT:
'''''I~'I~''' s~._' 7X." "'~.,~ .
U'.lftf,. ..~. a6.9II' .,:;.......
............ -.-' II. ..' A7..,'
-,.... ....... .... .,. "1.4&'
1---'" f'---:- --
C:URVE DATA
6-10
C~eI8-~
4-/ -88
.
o.
QENDIX - C
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ DEPARTMENT
AGENDA
ITEM #
LOCATION
CASE
CZ 88-4
HEARING DATE
R -3-3000
~
SAN UIlNAROINO STATE COL
.0.
'I
I IT
''0.
R-I
P....
R-I
II -,
M.IA
R-o
.. --.".....
6-11
.
o
Q.TACHMENT "5" 0
o
CITY OF SAN BERNAROINO
AGENDA
ITEM #
LOCATION
PLANNING OEPARTMENT
CZ 88-4
CASE
HEARING OATE
6/21/88
6
11-3-3000
PR 0
14 %e
PRO
140/ac
PRO
l.u/oc
*
.0.
SAN aEIINAROINO STATE COL
T.
II?
"0.
l@
..
,
..
A' .
C-z ~ R-I
.
...
,.. .
0; 0:
..
..
..
~
\
M.IA
..
o
R-'
6-11
R-I
" .T.. p.R.
R-I
It oj
. - ~-.: