Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout32- Development Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO—REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Michael E. Hays Subject: General Plan Amendment 99-07 — A request to change the land use designation of Dept: Development Services 2.97 acres from CCS-1, Central City South (general retail) to CCS-2, Central City South Date: January 27 2000 (service commercial). The proposed use is rY , located at 420 South 'E' Street. Rp1 !114 ! A I �; f i ML MCC Date: March 6, 2000 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None Recommended Motion: That the public hearing be closed, and that the resolution be adopted. Y�ivGMN MichaLA E. Hays Contact person: Margaret Park Phnne- 384-5057 Supporting data attached: Staff Report: resolution Ward: 3 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Arrt Dp-rr' tin Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL. ACTION STAFF REPORT Subject: General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 Mayor and Common Council Meeting Of March 6, 2000 OWNER APPLICANT Cross Family Trust Gary W. Miller, Architect & Associates P.O. Box 729 350 West 5" Street, Suite 201 Fontana, CA 92334 San Bernardino, CA 92401 (909) 829-8187 (909) 889-4480 BACKGROUND The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 2.97 acres from CCS-1, Central City South (general retail) to CCS-2, Central City South (service commercial). The change in land use designation would allow businesses involved in limited manufacturing, warehousing and service commercial uses. The existing buildings were constructed as warehouses, but cannot be used for such light industrial uses under the current land use designation approved as part of the Central City South plan. The proposal would allow the property to be reused for warehousing and light manufacturing uses. The existing buildings on site were constructed for service commercial & light industrial uses and will be upgraded where possible. At its meeting of January 11, 2000, the Planning Commission recommended that the Mayor and Common Council approve General Plan Amendment 99-07. Commissioners Adams, Durr, Enciso, Garcia, Lockett, Ramirez, Thrasher and Welch voted in favor of the motion. FINANCIAL IMPACT None. The applicant submitted the required application fees. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment 99-07 based on the Findings of Fact in the Planning Commission Staff Report. Exhibits: 1. Location Map j 2. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 11, 2000 3. Resolution 1 i i I { EXHIBIT 1 CITY SAN BERNARDINO PROJECT: GPA99-07 PLANNING DIVISION LOCATION MAP LAND USE DISTRICTS HEARING DATE: 1/11/00 NORTH o - d - jlk 9 CCS-1 to .. mri<wsre, Ir CG-1 < o q � s « c<h —km----- OAK ST., -- vslie; Q ILJ CCS -1 --- ., - e ' 1� IL a l: 1 I _ e h - LL STREET - rJ MI i t/ b CG-1 EXHIBIT 2 SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION CASE: General Plan Amendment 99-07 AGENDAITEM: 3 HEARING DATE: January 11, 2000 WARD: 3 APPLICANT OWNER: Gary W. Miller, Architect & Associates Cross Family Trust 350 West 5" Street, STE 201 P.O. Box 729 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Fontana, CA 92334 REQliEST/LOCATION: The applicant requests the change of land use designation of 2.97 acres from CCS-1, Central City South (general retail to CCS-2 Central City South service co (g ) ( commercial). proposed use is located at 420 South Y ) P P `E' Street. CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS: Subsidence/Liquefaction ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: i ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Exempt, Section 0 No Significant Effects, Negative Declaration ❑ Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 0 Approval ❑ Denial ❑ Continuance to: i i 1 General Plan Amendment 99-07 Meeting Date:January 11, 2000 Page 2 REOUEST AND LOCATION The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 2.97 acres from CCS-1, Central City South (general retail) to CCS-2, Central City South (service commercial). The change in land use designation would allow businesses involved in limited manufacturing, warehousing and service commercial uses. The existing buildings were constructed as warehouses, but cannot be used for such light industrial uses under the current land use designation approved as part of the Central City South plan. The project is located on the west side of South `E' Street, north of Mill Street in the CCS-1, Central City South land use district. SETTING/SITE CHARACTERISTICS The 2.97-acre site is adjacent to commercial development to the north, south and across `E' Street to the east. A rail line runs along the rear of the parcel on vacant land. The property is developed with 64,654 square feet of warehouse and office space. BACKGROUND A demolition permit was issued for the demolition of the small commercial structure at the front of the property (identified as 410 S. E Street) on September 20, 1999. The building was removed to allow additional parking at the front of the building. In addition, an administrative Development Permit Type 1 was approved for modifications to the existing parking lot and the fagades of the existing buildings. The Development Review Committee (DRC) initially reviewed General Plan Amendment 99-07 on October 7, 1999. An Initial Study was prepared and resented to the Environmental Review Committee (E RC)P ( RC) on October 28, 1999. After the required 21-day public review period, no comments were received regarding the proposed Negative Declaration and at the December 2, 1999 ERC/DRC meeting, the project was cleared to the Planning Commission. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS 1. Is the proposed amendment internally consistent with the General Plan? General Plan Goal 1G is to "Achieve a pattern and distribution of land uses which provide for the revitalization, adaptive reuse, and upgrade of deteriorated neighborhoods and districts." The existing buildings along this portion of E Street have either been continuously occupied by service commercial businesses or have gone vacant. The change to CCS-2 would allow the reuse of this vacant property as service commercial, thus adaptively reusing the site. 2. Is the ro osed amendment detrimental t p p o the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City? The proposal would allow the property to be reused for warehousing and light manufacturing uses. The existing buildings on site were constructed for service commercial & light industrial uses and will be upgraded where possible. All uses allowed under the CCS-2 must be conducted inside structures. The change in land use will be in conformance with all applicable City and State requirements, and as such, it will not pose any threat to the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of San Bernardino. General Plan Amendment 99-07 Meeting Date:January 11, 2000 Page 3 3. Does the proposed amendment maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City? The property is adjacent to other service commercial uses and will allow the reuse of a historically service commercialilight industrial property. It will not introduce land uses that could have an impact on existing sensitive uses, nor will it affect the balance of uses throughout the City. 4. Is the subject parcel physically suitable (including, but not limited to, access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints)for the requested land use designation and anticipated land use development? All agencies responsible for reviewing access, and providing water, sanitation and other public services have all had the opportunity to review the proposal, and none have indicated an inability to serve the project as a service commercial land use district. The site meets the minimum requirements of the Development Code in regards to lot size, access, and circulation for the CCS-2 land use designation. All future development that would be permitted on site must also conform to all Development Code standards. CONCLUSION The proposal meets all the necessary Findings of Fact for approval of General Plan Amendment 99-07. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend that the Mayor and Common Council: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration, and; 2. Approve General Plan Amendment 99-07, based upon the Findings of Fact contained in this Staff Report. Respectfully Submitted, Michael E. Hays Director of Development Services Margaret Park,AICP Senior Planner Attachment A Location Map Attachment B Initial Study ATTACHMENT B CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO INITIAL STUDY FOR General Plan Amendment 99-07 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONILOCATION: A request to change the land use designation of approximately three acres from CCS-1, Central City South(general retail)to CCS-2, Central City South(service commercial). The change of land use designation would allow for limited manufacturing, warehousing and service commercial uses. The subject property is located at 420 South `E' Street in the CCS-1, Central City South land use districts DATE: October 28, 1999 PREPARED FOR: Gary Miller, Architect&Associates 350 West 5`s Street, STE 201 San Bernardino, CA 92401 PREPARED BY: Michael Martin Assistant Planner City of San Bernardino Development Services Department 300 North `D' Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 (909) 384-5057 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the preparation of an Initial Study when a proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a governmental agency and is not exempt from CEQA. The purpose of the Initial Study is to determine whether or not a proposal, not exempt from CEQA, qualifies for a Negative Declaration or whether or not an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared. 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 2. Lead Agency Name: City of San Bernardino Address: 300 North 'D' Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 3. Contact Person: Michael Martin Phone Number: (909) 384-5057 4. Project Location (Address/Nearest cross-streets): 420 South 'E' Street 5. Project Sponsor: Gary Miller, Architect & Associates Address: 350 West 5th Street, STE 201 San Bernardino, CA 92401 6. General Plan Designation: CCS-1, Central City South 7. Description of Project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary): A request to change the land use designation of approximately three acres from CCS-1, Central City South (general retail) to CCS-2, Central City South (service commercial). The change of land use designation would allow for limited manufacturing, warehousing and service commercial uses. 8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The property is on the west side of 'E' Street north of Mill Street. The site is adjacent to commcerial development to the north, south and across E Street to the east. A rail line runs along the rear of the parcel on vacant land. 9. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, finance approval, or participation agreement) None IS I CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Earth Resources ❑ Energy and Mineral Resources ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Water ❑ Hazards ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination. On the basis of this Initial Study, the City of San Bernardino, Environmental Review Committee finds: That the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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. That the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. / Av4 -,ew October 28, 1999 Signature V Date Michael Martin, Assistant Planner Printed Name IS 2 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Will the proposal result in: a) A conflict with the land use as designated ❑ ❑ ® ❑ based on the review of the General Plan Land Use Plan/Zoning Districts Map? b) Development within an Airport District ❑ ❑ ❑ as identified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Land Use Zoning District Map? C) Development within Foothill Fire Zones ❑ ❑ ❑ A &B, or C as identified on the Land Use Districts Zoning Map? d) Other?_____ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Will the proposal: a) Remove existing housing (including ❑ ❑ ❑ affordable housing) as verified by a site survey/evaluation? b) Create a significant demand for ❑ ❑ El additional housing based on the proposed use and evaluation of project size? C) Induce substantial growth in an area ❑ ❑ ❑ either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or an extension of major infrastructure)? d) Other? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ICI IS 3 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY III. EARTH RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in: a) Earth movement (cut and/or fill) on ❑ ❑ ❑ slopes of 15% or more based on information contained in the Preliminary Project Description Form No. D? b) Development and or grading on a slope ❑ ❑ ❑ greater than 15% natural grade based on review of General Plan HMOD map? C) Erosion, dust or unstable soil conditions ❑ ❑ ® ❑ from excavation, grading or fill? d) Development within the Alquist-Priolo ❑ ❑ ❑ Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0-Geologic & Seismic, Figure 47, of the City's General Plan? e) Modification of any unique geologic or ❑ ❑ ❑ physical feature based on field review? f) Development within areas defined as ❑ ❑ ❑ having high potential for water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0- Geologic & Seismic, Figure 53, of the City's General Plan? g) Modification of a channel, creek or river ❑ ❑ ❑ based on a field review or review of USGS Topographic Map San Bernardino South Quadrangle? h) Development within an area subject to ❑ ❑ ❑ landslides, mudslides, subsidence or other similar hazards as identified in Section 12.0-Geologic & Seismic, Figures 48, 51, 52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? IS 4 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY i) Development within an area subject to [] ❑ ❑ liquefaction as shown in Section 12.9- Geologic & Seismic, Figure 48, of the City's General Plan? j) Other?..... ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ IV. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage ❑ ❑ ❑ patterns, or the rate and amount of - surface runoff due to impermeable surfaces that cannot be mitigated by Public Works Standard Requirements to contain and convey runoff to approved storm drain based on review of the proposed site plan? b) Significant alteration in the course or ❑ ❑ ❑ flow of flood waters based on consultation with Public Works staff? C) Discharge into surface waters or any ❑ ❑ ❑ alteration of surface water quality based on requirements of Public Works to have runoff directed to approved storm drains? d) Changes in the quantity or quality of ❑ ❑ ❑ CK ground water? e) Exposure of people or property to flood ❑ ❑ ❑ hazards as identified in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 8681, and Section 16.0- Flooding, Figure 62, of the City's General Plan? f) Other?----- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i { i rs s i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY V. AIR QUALITY. Will the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ ❑ ❑ contribute to an existing or projected.air quality violation based on the thresholds in the SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook"? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ❑ ❑ ❑ C) Alter air movement, moisture, or ❑ ❑ ❑ temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors based on ❑ ❑ ❑ information contained in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form? VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Could the proposal result in: a) A significant increase in traffic volumes ❑ ❑ (z ❑ on the roadways or intersections or an increase that is siertificantly greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? b) Alteration of present patterns of ❑ ❑ ❑ circulation? C) A disjointed pattern of roadway ❑ ❑ ❑ improvements? d) Impact to rail or air traffic? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or ❑ ❑ ❑ off-site based on the requirements in Chapter 19.24 of the Development Code? f) Increased safety hazards to vehicles, ❑ EEEI El bicyclists or pedestrians? g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting ❑ ❑ alternative transportation? IS 6 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY h) Inadequate emergency access or access to ❑ ❑ ❑ nearby uses? - i) Other?----- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Could the proposal result in: a) Development within the Biological ❑ ❑ ❑ Resources Management Overlay, as identified in Section 10.0-Natural Resources, Figure 41, of the City's General Plan? b) Impacts to endangered, threatened or rare ❑ ❑ ❑ species or their habitat (including, but not limited to, plants, mammals, fish, insects and birds)? C) Impacts to the wildlife disbursal or ❑ ❑ ❑ migration corridors? d) Impacts to wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, ❑ ❑ ❑ riparian and vernal pool)? e) Removal of viable, mature trees based on ❑ ❑ ❑ information contained in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form and verified by site survey/evaluation (6" or greater trunk diameter at 4' above the ground)? f) Other?----- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy ❑ ❑ ❑ conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a ❑ ❑ ❑ wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a ❑ ❑ ❑ known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? IS 7 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY IX. HAZARDS. Will the proposal: a) Use, store, transport or dispose of ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous or toxic materials based on information contained in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form, No. G(l) and G(2) (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides. chemicals or radiation)? b) Involve the release of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑ substances? C) Expose people to the potential ❑ ❑ ❑ health/safety hazards? d) Other?_____ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ X. NOISE. Could the proposal result in: a) Development of housing, health care ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities, schools, libraries, religious facilities or other noise sensitive uses in areas where existing or future noise levels exceed an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior as identified in Section 14.0-Noise, Figures 57 and 58 of the City's General Plan? b) Development of new or expansion of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ existing industrial, commercial or other uses which generate noise levels above an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior that may affect areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities or other sensitive uses based on information in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form No. G(1) and evaluation of surrounding land uses No. C, and verified by site survey/evaluation? C) Other?_____ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ is 8 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Medical Aid? ❑ ❑ ❑ C) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Parks or other recreational facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Solid waste disposal? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Maintenance of public facilities, ❑ ❑ ❑ including roads? h) Other governmental services? ❑ ❑ ❑ XH. UTILITIES: Will the proposal, based on the responses of the responsible Agencies, Departments, or Utility Company, impact the following beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service or require the construction of new facilities? a) Natural gas? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Electricity? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Communications systems? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Water distribution? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Water treatment or sewer? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Storm water drainage? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Result in a disjointed pattern of utility ❑ ❑ ❑ extensions based on review of existing patterns and proposed extensions? h) Other?_____ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ IS 9 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY XIII. AESTHETICS. a) Could the proposal result in the ❑ ❑ ❑ obstruction of any significant or important scenic view based on evaluation of the view shed verified by site survey/evaluation? b) Will the visual impact of the project ❑ ❑ ❑ create aesthetically offensive changes in the existing visual setting based on a site survey and evaluation of the proposed elevations? C) Create significant light or glare that could ❑ ❑ ❑ impact sensitive receptors? d) Other?_____ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Could the proposal result in: a) Development in a sensitive ❑ ❑ ❑ archaeological area as identified in Section 3.0-Historical, Figure 8, of the City's General Plan? b) The alteration or destruction of a ❑ ❑ ❑ prehistoric or historic archaeological site by development within an archaeological sensitive area as identified in Section 3.0- Historical, Figure 8, of the City's General Plan? C) Alteration or destruction of a historical ❑ ❑ ❑ site, structure or object as listed in the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey? d) Other?_____ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ IS l0 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or ❑ ❑ ❑ regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational ❑ ❑ ❑ opportunities? XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 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 animal, or eliminate 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? C) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ ❑ individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Does the project have environmental ❑ ❑ ❑ effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 1S 11 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES INITIAL STUDY REFERENCES. The followine references cited in the Initial Study are on file in the Planning and Building Services Department/Public Works Department. 1. City of San Bernardino General Plan. 2. City of San Bernardino General Plan Land Use Plan/Zoning Districts Map. 3. City of San Bernardino Development Code (Title 19 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code). 4. City of San Bernardino Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey. 5. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Map. 6. South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 7. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps. 8. Public Works Standard Requirements - water. 9. Public Works Standard Requirements - grading. DISCUSSION OF SPECIITED CHECKLIST RESPONSES I a) The proposal will change the land use designation of approximately 3 acres from CCS-1, Central City South (general retail) to CCS-2, Central City South (service commercial). The CCS-1 designation was designed to create a retail corridor in the Central City South area between the Inland Center Mall and the Carousel Mall. The General Plan Amendment is requested to allow the applicant to utilize the subject property for light manufacturing and warehousing, as it was developed. The applicant is proposing retail uses in the front of the building, although retail uses are not required as part of the CCS-2 land use designation. III c) Dust and erosion may result temporarily during tenant improvements and new construction on the site. These impacts are less than significant and will be mitigated by proper grading and erosion controls as outlined in Municipal Code Chapter 15 and the City of San Bernardino Department of Public Works Grading Policy and Procedures including the preparation of a truck routing plan. VI a) The change in the land use designation will not increase traffic beyond the capacity of the existing roadways. The potential increase in vehicle trips by changing the land use designation from CCS- 1 to CCS-2 is less than significant. X b) Within the CCS-2 land use designation, all uses must be contained within a fully enclosed structure. Any noise generated within the building may not be audible beyond the property lines of the site. The site is not located adjacent to any sensitive receptors for noise. IS 12 COPY 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 99-07 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN 3 BERNARDINO, TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION 4 FROM CCS-1, CENTRAL CITY SOUTH (GENERAL RETAIL), TO CCS-2, CENTRAL CITY SOUTH (SERVICE COMMERCIAL), FOR 2.97 ACRES ABOUT 430 FEET 5 NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF MILL STREET AND "E" STREET, BEING 6 IDENTIFIED AS 420 SOUTH "E" STREET. 7 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 8 9 SECTION 1. Recitals 10 (a) WHEREAS, the General Plan for the City of San Bernardino was adopted by the 11 Mayor and Common Council by Resolution No. 89-159 on June 2, 1989. 12 (b) WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 to the General Plan of the City of 13 14 San Bernardino was considered by the Planning Commission on January 11, 2000, after a 15 noticed public hearing, and the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval has been 16 considered by the Mayor and Common Council. 17 (c) WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared on October 28, 1999 and reviewed by 18 the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning Commission who both determined that 19 20 General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 would not have a significant effect on the environment 21 and therefore, recommend that a Negative Declaration be adopted. 22 (d) WHEREAS, the proposed Negative Declaration received a 21-day public review 23 period from November 4, 1999 through November 24, 1999 and all comments relative thereto 24 have been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Mayor and Common Council in 25 26 compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local regulations. © 27 (e) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on 28 January 11, 2000 in order to receive public testimony and written and oral comments on 1 1 General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 (a proposal to change the General Plan Land Use 2 Designation from CCS-I, Central City South (General Retail) to CCS-2, Central City South 3 (Service Commercial) for 2.97 acres about 430 feet north of the intersection of Mill Street and 4 5 °E" Street being identified as 420 South "E" Street and fully reviewed and considered the 6 Planning Division staff report and the recommendation of the Environmental Review 7 Committee- 8 (e) WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public hearing and 9 fully reviewed and considered proposed General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 and the Planning 10 11 Commission and Environmental Review Committee recommendations and Planning Division 12 Staff Report on March 6, 2000. 13 (f) WHEREAS, the adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 is deemed in the 14 interest of the orderly development of the City and is consistent with the goals, objectives and t 15 policies of the existing General Plan. 16 SECTION 2. Negative Declaration 17 18 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the 19 Mayor and Common Council that the proposed amendment to the General Plan of the City of 20 San Bernardino will have no significant effect on the environment, and the Negative 21 Declaration heretofore prepared by the Environmental Review Committee as to the effect of 22 23 this proposed amendment is hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted. 24 SECTION 3. Findings 25 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 26 Bernardino that: I 27 A. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the General Plan in that it meets 28 Goal 1G which encourages the City to achieve a pattern and distribution of land uses 2 I which provide for the revitalization, adaptive reuse, and upgrade of deteriorated 2 neighborhoods and districts by allowing the reuse of this vacant property thus 3 adaptively reusing the site. 4 5 B. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, 6 convenience, or welfare of the City in that the existing buildings on site were 7 constructed for service commercial and light industrial uses and the change in use will 8 be in conformance with all applicable City and State requirements. 9 C. The proposed amendment would not impact the balance of land uses within the City in 10 11 that the property is adjacent to other service commercial uses and will allow the reuse 12 of an established service commercial/light industrial property. 13 D. In the case of an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, the subject parcel(s) is 14 physically suitable (including, but not limited to access, provision of utilities, 15 compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints) for the 16 17 requested land use designation(s) and the anticipated land use development(s) in that the 18 amendment area is flat, has ample frontage on "E" Street, and existing infrastructure 19 suitable for urban development exists at the site. 20 SECTION 4. Amendment 21 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council that: 22 23 A. The Land Use Plan of the General Plan of the City of San Bernardino is amended by 24 changing the land use designation from CCS-1, Central City South (General Retail) to 25 CCS-2, Central City South (Service Commercial) for 2.97 acres about 430 feet north of 26 the intersection of Mill Street and "E" Street being identified as 420 South "E" Street. 0 27 This amendment is designated as General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 and its location 28 3 I is outlined on the map entitled Attachment "A", and further described in Attachment 2 "B", copies of which are attached and incorporated herein for reference. 3 B. General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 shall become effective immediately upon adoption 4 of this resolution. 5 6 SECTION 5. Man Notation 7 This resolution and the amendment affected by it shall be noted on such appropriate 8 General Plan maps as having been previously adopted and approved by the Mayor and 9 Common Council and which are on file in the office of the City Clerk. 10 SECTION 6. Notice of Determination 11 12 The Planning Division is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the 13 County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino certifying the City's compliance with California 14 Environmental Quality Act in preparing the Negative Declaration. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 O27 28 4 1 RESOLUTION. . .ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 99-07 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, TO AMEND THE 2 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM CCS-1, CENTRAL CITY 3 SOUTH (GENERAL RETAIL), TO CCS-2, CENTRAL CITY SOUTH (SERVICE COMMERCIAL), FOR 2.97 ACRES ABOUT 430 FEET NORTH OF THE 4 INTERSECTION OF MILL STREET AND "E" STREET, BEING IDENTIFIED AS 420 SOUTH "E" STREET. 5 6 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and 7 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, 8 held on the day of 2000, by the following vote, to wit: 9 Council Members AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 10 ESTRADA 11 12 LIEN 13 MCGINNIS 14 SCHNETZ 15 SUAREZ 16 ANDERSON 17 18 MILLER 19 20 City Clerk 21 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of 22 2000. 23 24 JUDITH VALLES, Mayor City of San Bernardino 25 Approved as to form and legal content: 26 JAMES F. PENMAN 27 City omey 28 By: /: J 5 ATTACHMENT A CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROJECT: GPA99-07 PLANNING DIVISION LOCATION MAP LAND USE DISTRICTS HEARING DATE: 1/11/00 NORTH 3,' -® I, CCs-1 „ CG-1 i 171 Ia_ _ _ c<n ,� :xrE) e W OAK ST. - ---- - -- w Trm C 1f cn. �� 2 lY•• _ .y ___ _ _ `■■ _ ccs -1 - o IL 1 n it 1• 1 0 1 -MILL STREET ?� CG-1 ` . G PF i L I I ATTACHMENT "B" GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 99-07 Parcels subject to this amendment: Assessor's Parcels: 0136-171-34 0136-171-35 NARp��O �9 D7� C 4 - _ ERNARDINO 300 NORTH"D"STREET, SAN 8ERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 GNpED I. R A C H E L C L A R K C I T Y C L E R K March 8, 2000 Gary W. Miller Architect & Associates 350 West Fifth Street, Suite 201 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Gentlemen: At the meeting of the Mayor and Common Council held on Monday, March 6, 2000, the following action was taken regarding General Plan Amendment No. 99-07 to change the land use designation of 2.97 acres located at 420 South "E" Street from CCS-1, Central City South (General Retail), to CCS-2, Central City South (Service Commercial): The Mayor and Common Council closed the public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2000-48, amending the General Plan land use designation as requested by applicant If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Rachel G. Clark, CMC City Clerk cc: Michael Hays, Director of Development Services Cross Family Trust P. 0 . 00 % iat9 , SAN 0ERNA RDINO , CA 92902 3 0 0 N O R T H D S T R E E T S A N B E R N A R O 1 N O . C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 4 1 8 - 0 0 0 1 ( 0 0 9 3 9 ! - 5 0 0 2 (9 0 9 3 9 9 - S 1 02 F A X -( 9 0 9) 3 9 9 .5 1 5 9 T 0 0 I T T Y -( 9 0 9 1 3 9 4 -S S 4 0