Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout50- Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN SER[ IRDINO - REQUEST 711 COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey , Director Subject: Appeal of Planning Comm. Denial of : ° Tentative Tract No . 14473/CUP 92-16 Dept: Planning & Building Services ° Tentative Tract No . 14949 (EOT) Date: June 25 , 1993 MCC meeting of July 6 , 1993 @ 2 pm Synopsis of Previous Council action: No previous Council action . 05 / 18/93 -- The Planning Commission denied Tentative Tract No . 14473/Conditional Use Permit No . 92-16 and Tentative Tract No . 14949 (Extension of Time) . Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and deny Tentative Tract No . 14473/Conditional Use Permit No . 92-16 based on the Findings of Fact . And That the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and deny the extension of time for Tentative Tract No . 14949 based on the Findings of Fact . Or That the Mayor and Common Council approve Tentative Tract No . 14473/Conditional Use Permit No . 92-16 in concept and refer back to the DRC and Planning Commission for redesign . !�?_ And That the MCC approve the extension /r _.%� . ' of time for Tentative Tract No . 14949 '�5ignatt�re and direct staff to re are Findings of Fact in �- " support , p p g � Al Boughey , Directo Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 5057 Supporting data attached:_ Y e s Ward:-5 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: Z7-A 0 0 REQUEST: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14473/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-16 AND APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14949 (EXTENSION OF TIME) REQUEST/LOCATION: The applicant requests approval of Tentative Tract No. 14473 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 to subdivide 25. 8 acres into 38 single-family lots in the RL, Residential Low and HM, Hillside Management Overlay District. The site is located on the north side of future Verdemont Drive, approximately 200 feet east-southeast of the termination of Magnolia Avenue. The applicant also requests a one-year extension of time, from February 5, 1993 to February 5, 1994 for Tentative Tract No. 14949, an application to subdivide 8 . 03 acres into 21 single family lots. The site is located on the north side of future Verdemont Drive, approximately 1, 400 feet east-southeast of the termination of Magnolia Avenue. BACKGROUND: The owner and applicant are the same for both Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 and Tentative Tract No. 14949 (Extension of Time) . The issues which provided the foundation for the Planning Commissions denial of both of these projects is the same. The analysis provided for the projects have been combined. However, since the projects are separate, separate motions will be required and have been provided. KEY ISSUES: There are several key issues identified as follows: O Development Code Section 19. 30. 200 (6) requires at least 2 different standard routes for ingress and egress to the projects. Approximately 1, 185 feet of right-of-way for Verdemont Drive, between Tentative Tract No 14949 and Palm Avenue does not exist. Without the right-of-way, neither subdivision has a second standard route of access. Please see Exhibit "A" . O The 1, 185 feet of right-of-way for Verdemont Avenue necessary to provide the second standard means of access to the two subdivisions was contained within Tentative Tract No. 14687 . When Tentative Tract 14949 was approved by the Planning Commission, the approval for Tentative Tract No. 14687 was still valid with nearly one and a half years remaining of the approval (TT 14687 was approved by the Planning Commission on August 21, 1990, TT 14949 was approved February 5, 1991) . Tentative Tract No. 14687 expired on August 21, 1992 . The right-of-way for Verdemont Drive contained within Tentative Tract No. 14687 was never dedicated to the City. 0 Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 Tentative Tract No. 14949 (Extension of Time) Mayor and Common Council Meeting July 6, 1993 Page 2 O Both subdivisions could be conditioned to acquire the right-of-way necessary to provide the second means of access. However, pursuant to the State Subdivision Map Act Section 66462 .5, if the applicant failed to obtain the right-of-way, the City could not refuse approval of the final map for failure to meet the condition, and could be compelled to acquire the right-of-way for the applicant through negotiation or eminent domain. The City would have 120 days from the date of the filing of the final map to acquire the right-of-way or the condition for right-of-way acquisition would be deemed waived. O The right-of-way for Verdemont Drive does exist beginning at Magnolia Avenue east to the eastern edge of Tentative Tract No. 14949 to Magnolia Avenue, but on the north side of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line. Both Tentative Tracts 15188 and 14949 were approved with a design to split the right-of- way, with half on the north side of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, and half on the south. The right-of- way south of the Rancho Line would be acquired through additional dedication at time of subdivision of the properties to the south, as was proposed with Tentative Tract No. 14687 (now expired) . O The applicant has designed Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 so that the alignment of Verdemont Drive matches that approved for Tentative Tracts 15188 and 14949 (ie. with the right-of-way split across the Rancho Line) . However, the applicant does not hold title to the additional 30 feet on the south of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line necessary to accomplish this alignment. Shifting the alignment of Verdemont Drive south 30 feet would require the demolition and removal of a barn and a portion of a horse corral on the property to the south. A condition of approval could be added requiring right-of-way acquisition, but the City could be compelled to acquire the right-of-way for the applicant through eminent domain pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act. o Leaving the alignment north of the Rancho line would necessitate a jog in Verdemont Drive at the eastern end of TT14473/CUP 29-16 to match the alignment approved for TT15188 and TT14949. 0 Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 Tentative Tract No. 14949 (Extension of Time) Mayor and Common Council Meeting July 6, 1993 Page 3 Please see the analysis and attachments contained in Exhibits "C" and "D" , Staff Reports to the Planning Commission. OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL: The Mayor and Common Council may: 1. Deny both projects based upon the lack of right-of-way for Verdemont Avenue necessary to provide the second standard means of access, subject to the attached Findings of Fact contained in Exhibits "C" and "D" . 2 . Require a condition of approval to be added to both projects requiring acquisition of the right-of-way for Verdemont Avenue between Tentative Tract No. 14949 and Palm Avenue, approving in concept the condemnation of the right-of-way, if necessary, through eminent domain pursuant to Section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act. 3 . Require a condition of approval for Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 to design a transition for the alignment of Verdemont Drive from that approved for the TT15188 and TT14949, and to maintain the Verdemont Avenue right-of-way on the north side of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line to avoid condemnation of the property to the south and the demolition of the barn and coral. 4. Require a condition of approval for Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 to acquire the right-of-way necessary to align Verdemont Avenue from Magnolia Avenue to the proposed subdivisions on the east in such a manner as to match the proposed alignments approved for those tracts; approving in concept the condemnation of the right-of-way pursuant to Section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14473/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-16 - The Planning Commission voted 6-0 with 4 absences, to deny the project based upon the Findings of Fact contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report, Exhibit "C". TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14949 (EXTENSION OF TIME) - The Planning Commission voted 6-0 with 4 absences to deny the time extension based upon the Findings of Fact contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report, Exhibit "D" . Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 Tentative Tract No. 14949 (Extension of Time) Mayor and Common Council Meeting July 6, 1993 Page 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14473/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-16 - Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and deny Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16, based upon the Findings of Fact contained in Exhibit "C" . TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14949 (EXTENSION OF TIME) - Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and deny the extension of time for Tentative Tract No. 14949, based upon the Findings of Fact contained in Exhibit "D" . Prepared by: Michael R. Finn, Associate Planner For: Al Boughey, Director, Planning and Building Services EXHIBITS: A - Location Map and Area Tracts and Status B - Applicant's Appeal Letter C - Tentative Tract No. 14473/Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments D - Tentative Tract No. 14949 (Extension of Time) Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM # CASE TT14473/CUP 92-16 LOCATION TT14949 (ECT) HEARING DATE 7 /6/9 3 1 TT 14473 �-t TT 15188 Fqq� O.a,TT 14949 C� 0 / ::::: siacc :c„ ts. TT 14687 0 • • ..% • MSC �� I4p-a TT 14400 Q a If V Q � � I t Fr b f1b .� If I RwWaI I P�1 OF 1 (s•ao) AREA TRACTS AND STATUS Tract Number No. Lots Expiration Date Status TT14473 38 N/A TT15188 39 9/17/93 Approx. 5 months remain of original approval . Cond. for access acquisition/ improvement. TT14949 21 2/5/93 TT14687 22 8/21/92 Expired TT14400 24 11/21/93 Approx. 6 months remain of 1st EOT ISSUES 1. TT14473 , TT15188, and TT14949 do not have a second means of access (with expiration of TT14687) . Primary access via existing unimproved right-of-way on Magnolia north of Ohio and along Verdemont Drive to TT14473 . Conditioning projects for the access could result in City using imminent domain to acquire right-of-way east of TT14949 to Palm Avenue if owners unable to do so. 2 . Right-of-way of Verdemont Drive proposed by TT14473 , TT15188 , TT14949, and the now expired TT14687 has one half of right-of- way on the north of and one half on the south of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line. Existing right-of-way for Verdemont Drive from TT14473 west to Magnolia is all located on the north side (full width) of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line. Approval would necessitate either accepting right-of-way mismatch, or conditioning TT14473 to acquire the necessary right-of-way to Magnolia Avenue on the south side of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line. Conditioning for right-of-way could result in City again using imminent domain to acquire the right-of-way if the owners are unable to do so. JOSEPH E . BONAOIMAN & ASSOCIATES , INC . E N G I N E E R I N G A R C H I T E C T U R E K L A N N I N G 250 S.LENA RD. • SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS:P.O.BOX 5852 SAN BERNARDINO,CA 92412•(714)885-3806 July 6 , 1993 Mayor, & City Council ON City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 ~' -- k_n With this letter I wish to ask for a 30 day continuation to that appeal of the Planning Commission Denial of Tentative Tract No. 14473/ Conditional Use Permit Number 92-16 and Planning Commission Denial of Tentaitive Tract Map No. 14949 (Extension. of Time) . This continuation is necessary to provide time for additional discussion with staff so as to prepare for the Mayor and Council a more complete presentation of these two items . Sind-rel , Jos ph VCBonadiman, P.E . JCB:db I i- ATTACHMENT "B" J O S E P H E . B O N A D I M A N & A S S O C I A T E S , INC. C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S Joseph E. Bonadiman, P.E. 1903 - 1990 Fifty-One Years Of Charles F. Bonadiman, L.S. 1898 - 1986 Engineering Innovations May 26, 1993 Mayor & City Council City of San Bernardino San Bernardino, CA With this letter I wish to appeal the City Planning Commission's denial of our request for extension of Tentative Tract No. 14949 and the denial of a tentative tract for Map no. 14473. Both these tracts were items on last week's Planning Commission Agenda, appearing as items number 5 and 6. The principle reasons for the denial of these tracts had to do with access and the requirements for that access, and City Council policy. We wish to use this appeal to present to the City Council our argument for the reversal of the Planning Department's recommendation. We feel that our reasons are solidly backed by not only the physical nature of the property and the City's General Plan, but also by State law in the form of the Subdivision Map Act. We have been informed by the Planning staff that these two items will be accepted as one in that the reasons for denial are similar. Therefore, we are inclosed ony one appeal fee with this request. Thank you for your positive action on this request. 7 Sin y, Joseph . Bonadiman PingCmsn 250 S. LENA ROAD - MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 5852 -SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92412 PHONE. (909)WS-3806 FAX(909) 381-1721 � - ATTACHMENT "C" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM #5 SUMMARY HEARING DATE 5 / 18/93 WARD 5 TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 14473 APPLICANT:Bonadiman Engineers P.O. Box 5852 W AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT San Bernardino, CA 92412 Cl) NO. 92-16 OWNER: Vemon Ltd. V 659 Grant Street Upland, CA 91768 An application to subdivide 25 . 8 acres into 38 single-family lots in the RL, Residential Low and HMOD, Hillside W Management Overlay District. U Located north of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, approximately W 200 feet east southeast of the termination of Magnolia Avenue. W Q EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION Subject Vacant RL & HMOD Residential Low & Hillside Management Overlay District North Vacant RC Resource Conversation Cus. Forest South Single Family Homes RL Residential Low East Vacant RL Residential Low West Vacant RL Residential Low GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC YES FLOOD HAZARD ❑ YES El ZONE A SEWERS: YES HAZARD ZONE: ❑ NO ZONE: XX NO ❑ ZONE B O NO HIGH FIRE 2X YES AIRPORT NOISE/ ❑ YES =REDEVELOPMENT ❑ YES HAZARD ZONE: ❑ NO CRASH ZONE: AREA: Xg NO X$NO Q ❑ NOT 2WOTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z ❑ APPROVAL APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH Q H MITIGATING MEASURES Z Cl) W NO E.I.R. C 13 CONDITIONS W M Z ❑ EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO LL Z DENIAL Z C SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Q W OZ WITH MITIGATING !— 2 M M MEASURES 2 ❑ CONTINUANCE TO Z ❑ NO SIGNIFICANT ❑ SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS V W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W MINUTES MY OF SM e9.wo v C*NTRALPF§NTM20McFS PLAN-9.02 PAGE 1 OF 1 (4-90) AGENDA ITEM #5 HEARING DATE 5-18-93 WARD 5 PAGE 1 REQUEST The applicant requests the approval of Tentative Tract No. 14473 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16, to subdivide 25. 8 acres into 38 single-family lots in the RL, Residential Low and HMOD, Hillside Management Overlay Districts. LOCATION The subject site is located north of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, approximately 200 feet east southeast of the termination of Magnolia Avenue (See Location Map Attachment "C") . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT An Initial Study for the proposal was prepared by staff and presented to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on July 22, 1992 . The ERC proposed a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The ERC's proposal was made with the understanding that project design was subject to minor revisions and that the outstanding access issues would be resolved. The Initial Study was made available for public review and comment from July 9, 1992 to July 29, 1992 . No comments were received. BACKGROUND The proposal was presented to Development Review Committee (DRC) on July 22, 1992. The DRC did not clear the project for hearing because of unresolved access issues. Specifically, the project proposes to take access from future Verdemont Drive via either Palm Avenue or Magnolia Avenue, and insufficient right-of-way exists to pave Verdemont Drive between Magnolia and Palm. In an effort to resolve the outstanding access issue, Engineering and Planning staff met with the applicant on August 11, 1992 , and then with Henry Empeno of the City Attorney's Office on August 21, 1992. None of the issues have been resolved as a result of those meetings. By October, the access issue had remained unresolved. California State Government Code Section 65950 requires that projects must be approved or denied within 6 months of being deemed complete. The projects had been deemed complete on May 29, 1992 , giving the City until November 29, 1992 to act upon the projects. Pursuant to Section 66451. 1 (a) of the Subdivision Map Act, the time limits for acting on maps may be continued by mutual consent of the subdivider and the City. However, the applicant was unwilling to consent to waive the time limits for processing the map, and the projects were AGENDA ITEM #5 HEARING DATE 5-18-93 WARD 5 PAGE 2 scheduled for hearing by the Planning Commission on November 4, 1992. On October 23, 1992, the applicant changed his position and requested a waiver of the time limits until January 30, 1993. As a result, at the Planning Commission meeting of November 4, 1992, the Planning Commission continued the projects until January 5, 1993 to allow staff to work with the applicant to resolve the issues. By December 3 , 1992 , it had become apparent to the applicant that the issues would not be resolved by either the January 5, 1993 Planning Commission meeting or by January 30, 1993 . The applicant requested a waiver of the time limits until March 30, 1993 and a continuance from the January 5, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. On January 5, 1993 , the Planning Commission continued the projects for an indefinite period with direction to staff to renotice for any future hearings. On January 20, 1993 Vemon Limited, the project owner, indicated that Bonadiman Engineering would no longer be acting as the project applicant and that Bonadiman Associates would be taking over the projects as the applicant and representative for the owner. On March 11, 1993 , Bonadiman Associates requested a waiver of the processing time limits for an unspecified period of time. It has been over 10 months since the issues were first identified, 6 months since the project was first taken before the Planning Commission, and over a year that the project has been in process with the City. However, as of the writing of this staff report, the outstanding issues remain unresolved, with no evidence of resolution of any of the issues identified by the City, or any indication that they will be resolved in the near future. ANALYSIS Proposal Tentative Tract No 14473 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 propose to subdivide 25.8 acres into 38 single-family lots. Proposed lots range in size from 9, 375 square feet to 18, 832 square feet. Approximately 10 of the lots are proposed to be located within the Hillside Management Overlay District. Site and Area characteristics The site is nearly rectangular in shape and is located north of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, approximately 200 feet east of the termination of Magnolia Avenue. The Muscupiabe Rancho Line forms AGENDA ITEM #5 HEARING DATE 5-18-93 WARD 5 PAGE 3 the southern boundary of the future Verdemont Drive. The site is bounded on the south by a dirt road (future Verdemont Drive) . A barn, horse corrals and two single-family homes lie south of the future Verdemont Drive to the south. The remaining sides of the property border vacant, undeveloped, residentially designated land, with the northeastern boundary of the property abutting the Chestnut debris basin. Elevations on the site range from about 1,955 feet m.s.l. at the southwest corner of the site to about 2,580 feet m.s. l. at the northeast corner of the site. Development Code Consistency The smallest lot proposed is Lot 13 which is 9, 375 square feet in area. The average lot size for the subdivision is 11, 902 square feet. Pursuant to General Plan Policy 1. 10.30 and Development Code Section 19.04 . 030 (1) the minimum lot size permitted in the Residential Low land use designation is 10, 800 square feet. Lot 13 , therefore does not comply with the minimum lot size standards of either the General Plan or the Development Code. Since the access issues could ultimately affect project circulation and design, subjecting the subdivision map to further revisions, the project has not been completely reviewed against the Development Code. Any conclusions other than those issues previously discussed above relating to Development Code consistency cannot be made. Hence the necessary Findings for project approval cannot be made. Access The subdivision is proposed to take access from the future Verdemont Drive via either Magnolia Avenue or Palm Avenue. At present, only part of the necessary dedicated right-of-way for Verdemont Drive exists between Palm and Magnolia. The eastern most portion of the Verdemont Drive right-of-way between the tract and Palm Avenue does not exist (specifically, that portion to the east of Tentative Tract 14949, see Attachment "C") . The western most part of the right-of-way, between the tract and Magnolia Avenue exists north of the Muscupiabe Rancho line, but is not improved. Without the full length of right-of-way along Verdemont Drive between Magnolia and Palm Avenues, the proposed subdivision has only one means of access. This was discussed at DRC meeting of July 22, 1992. Pursuant to Development Code Section 19. 30.200(6) , a tentative tract or parcel map shall provide for at least two different standard means of access. Without the full right-of-way for Verdemont Drive between Magnolia Avenue and Palm, Tentative Tract AGENDA ITEM #5 HEARING DATE 5-18-93 WARD 5 PAGE 4 No. 14473 does not provide for the required two different standard means of access and is not consistent with the Development Code. The project could be conditioned to acquire the necessary Verdemont Drive right-of-way to provide the second means of access prior to recordation of the Final Map. Of concern however, is that if such a condition were placed on Tentative Tract No. 14473 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16, the City might be forced to acquire the necessary right-of-way for the subdivider through the process of eminent domain. Specifically, under the State Subdivision Map Act Section 66462.5, should the subdivider fail in his efforts to obtain the necessary right-of-way for Verdemont Drive under a project condition of approval, the City must acquire the necessary right-of-way for the owner or applicant through negotiation or eminent domain proceedings. Based upon these concerns, the DRC did not clear the project for hearing by the Planning Commission and requested Planning and Public works staff to meet with the applicant to resolve the issue. As noted previously, staff was unable to resolve the issues. Some of the points raised by the applicant at the meeting of August 11, 1992 are discussed in detail below. Other Tracts - Similar Circumstances At staff's meeting with the applicant on August 11, 1992, the applicant cited Tentative Tract No. 15188 as an example of a subdivision that had been approved with a condition requiring the subdivider to provide and improve two standard means of access when the right-of-way did not exist. Of significance is that Tentative Tract No. 15188 is located immediately adjacent to Tentative Tract No. 14473 on the east, and is also dependent upon Verdemont Drive via Magnolia and Palm Avenues for access. Staff researched and confirmed the existence of such a condition on Tentative Tract No. 15188. Hence, the potential already exists for the City to be forced to acquire the Verdemont Drive right-of-way through negotiation or eminent domain, should the subdivider of Tentative Tract No. 15188 fail in his efforts to obtain it. Tentative Tract No. 15188 was approved on September 17 , 1991. No Final Map has been filed to date. Considering the present economic climate and the fact that less than 4 months remain of the original approval of Tentative Tract No. 15188, the City may never be forced to acquire the right-of-way for Verdemont Drive through eminent domain as a result of conditions placed on that subdivision. On the other hand, the City would be at risk for having to use eminent domain an additional 20 months beyond the 4 months that remain on Tentative Tract No. 15188, is a similar condition of approval were placed on Tentative Tract No. 14473 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16. AGENDA ITEM #5 HEARING DATE 5-18-93 WARD 5 PAGE 5 In more recent actions, on Tentative Tract No 15228 for example, the Mayor and Common Council have indicated that they do not want to put the City in a position where the City has to acquire the right-of-way or easements through eminent domain. Timing Other than Tentative Tract No. 15188, no other development of the magnitude or density of the proposed project has been proposed in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Most other similar development has occurred east of the Chestnut Equestrian Trail, almost 1/4 of a mile to the east south east of the project site. Very little development other than Tentative Tract No. 15188 and the subject project have been proposed north of the Muscupiabe Rancho Line (future Verdemont Drive) . It is inevitable that the development of area will continue to the west toward the subdivision site. The lack of sufficient right-of- way to improve Verdemont Drive may be a result of project timing since development tends to provide the right-of-way and infrastructure necessary for further development. As development continues to the west, the necessary right-of-way to extend Verdemont Drive between Magnolia and Palm will likely become available. CONCLUSION The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the Development Code in that the subdivision does not provide for the required two means of access required by the Development Code for subdivisions. In addition, the project has not been completely reviewed for General Plan and Development Code Compliance, pending resolution of the assess issue. The applicant has not provided any documentation of efforts made to acquire the right-of-way on Verdemont Drive necessary to provide the two standard means of access required by the Development Code. The project could be conditioned to acquire the necessary right-of-way prior to map recordation, but if 'the subdivider failed in his efforts to acquire the necessary right-of- way, the City would be compelled under the Subdivision Map Act (Section 66462. 5) to acquire it under eminent domain. AGENDA ITEM #5 HEARING DATE 5-18-93 WARD 5 PAGE 6 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Tentative Tract No. 14473 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-16 based upon the Attached Findings of Fact (Attachment "A") . Res ec ully ubmitted A Dir t 'ng and Building Services Michael R. Finn Associate Planner Attachment "A-1" - Tentative Tract Findings of Fact Attachment "A-2" - Conditional Use Permit Findings of Fact Attachment "B" - Tentative Map Attachment "C" - Location Map 4 ATTACHMENT "A-1" TENTATIVE TRACT FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan, in that the proposal conforms to the standards concerning distribution, location, and extent of uses covered by the General Plan. 2. The design of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the General Plan, in that the proposal does not conform to the standards specified for the RL, Residential Low land use designation. Whereas the General Plan requires a minimum lot size of 10, 800 square feet, the subdivision proposes a minimum lot size of 9, 375 square feet. 3 . The site may be physically suitable for the type of development, in that lots could be created that meet the minimum lot standards specified by the Development Code in terms of area, width, and depth. However, the proposed subdivision does not meet these the minimum lot area standards as noted in Finding No. 2. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development, in that the site is of sufficient size to accommodate the proposed subdivision at a density of 1.47 units to the acre. 5. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that an Initial Study was prepared based on the assumption that the access issue would be resolved and the environmental impacts associated with the project have been mitigated or reduced to a level of insignificance. 6. The design of the subdivision might cause serious public health problems, in that two standard means of ingress/egress have not been provided to the residential lots created. 7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. ATTACHMENT "A-2" CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed subdivision is a permitted use within the RL, Residential Low and HMOD, Hillside Management Overlay District, although the project as proposed does not comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Development Code as noted elsewhere in these findings. 2. The proposed subdivision could impair the integrity and character of the land use district in which it is to be located, in that infrastructure or right-of-way necessary for development of the subdivision has not been provided. 3. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of land use being proposed, in that the site can likely accommodate the proposed subdivision in conformance with applicable Development Code Standards. However, as designed the subdivision does not conform to these standards. 4. The proposed use is compatible with the land uses presently on the subject property, in that the site is not developed and is designated for single-family residential development. 5. The proposed subdivision will be compatible with existing and future land uses in the general area in which the proposed use is located, in that the proposal is compatible with the surrounding vacant residentially designated land and residential land uses. 6. The proposed use is not compatible in scale, mass, coverage, density and intensity with all adjacent land uses, in that the proposed subdivision does not conform with all applicable Development Code standards. The minimum lot size proposed does not meet the minimum lot area standards specified by the Development Code for the RL land use district. 7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the proposed project has been reviewed by the agencies responsible for providing these services and none of them has indicated an inability to provide services to the site. 8. There will not be adequate provisions for public access to serve the proposed subdivision, in that right-of-way for Verdemont Drive necessary to provide the two standard means of access required by Development Code Section 19. 30.200(6) to serve the site has not been provided. 0 9. There may be harmful effects upon desirable neighborhood characteristics, in that the conditions of approval necessary to mitigate such harmful effects have not been provided. 10. A market/feasibility study is not required for a project of this type. 11. The proposed use is not consistent with the General Plan, in that it does not comply with the minimum lot standards for the RL land use district specified by the General Plan. 12. There will not be significant harmful effects upon environmental quality and natural resources, in that development will occur according to the conditions of approval and standard requirements contained in this staff report. 13. The negative environmental impacts of the proposed use are mitigated, in that an Initial Study was prepared based on the assumption of resolution of the access issues and the environmental impacts associated with the project can be mitigated or reduced to a level of insignificance once the access issues are resolved. 14 . The proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use could be detrimental to the public interests, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, in that two standard means of access have not been provided for the subdivision. 4.X mv FOS \ 'lia-, i - - t! .at 1(1�1�.♦v.\i � F Y OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM# 5 CASE TT 14473 , LOCATION HEARING DATE 5 I <� I . SITE s-� `� TT 15116 Gip is T 14949 / V O�/ Mvsc�p f IV 1� i � I ••. b� I ) tr _ s �V 4 �,M. n era„ +wt,OF 1 14" ATTACHMENT "D" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM #6 SUMMARY HEARING DATE 5 1 WARD APPLICANT: Joseph E . Bonadiman & Ass c P 0 Box '5852 W (A Tentative Tract No . 14949 San Bernardino , CA 92412 Q (Extension of Time) OWNER: Vemon Ltd . V 659 Grant Street Upland , CA 91786 The applicant requests a one year extension of time , from February 5 , 1993 until February 5 , 1994 , for Tentative Tract W No . 14949 for a 21 unit single family development located on D the north side of the proposed Verdemont Drive , about 1 ,400 Q feet easterly of Magnolia Avenue . W W Q EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION Subject Vacant RL Residential Low North South East West GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC ❑ YES FLOOD HAZARD [AYES E ZONE A SEWERS: M YES HAZARD ZONE: $] NO ZONE: ❑ NO ❑ ZONE B ❑ NO HIGH FIRE C YES AIRPORT NOISE/ ❑ YES REDEVELOPMENT ❑ YES HAZARD ZONE: ❑ NO CRASH ZONE: PROJECT AREA: ® NO ® NO J ❑ NOT JL—] POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z ❑ APPROVAL Q APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH Q E— MITIGATING MEASURES 'Z U)NO E.I.R. Q El 2 Z ❑ EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO W 2 El DENIAL Z G SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Q W O Z WITH MITIGATING H M M M MEASURES N M ❑ CONTINUANCE TO Z ❑ NO SIGNIFICANT ❑ SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS V W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W MINUTES MY OF SM �ADF40 asVg V Y Tentative Tract No. 14949 Extension of Time Agenda Item• #6 Hearing Date: 5-18-93 Page 1 APPLICANT: Joseph C. Bonadiman & Associates P.O. Box 5852 San Bernardino, CA. 92412 Owner: Vemon Ltd. 659 Grant Street Upland, CA. 91786 REQUEST Under the authority of Development Code Section 19. 66. 170, the applicant requests a one-year extension of time, from February 5, 1993 until February 5, 1994 , for Tentative Tract No. 14949, an application to subdivide approximately 8. 03 acres into 21 single- family lots. SITE LOCATION The site consists of an irregularly shaped parcel of land consisting of 8. 03 acres having a frontage of about 695 feet on the north side of the proposed Verdemont Drive and located about 1,400 feet easterly of the centerline of Magnolia Avenue. The site is located in the RL, Residential Low, General Plan land use designation with a minimum lot size of 10, 800 square feet. BACKGROUND The tentative tract was approved originally by the Planning Commission on February 5, 1991. The findings of consistency were based upon conformance with the General Plan, the Urgency Ordinance, and Title 18 of the Municipal Code (See Original Staff Report, Attachment 11411) . A variance was granted because of the length of the cul-de-sac streets; however, the variance is no longer needed because of new requirements in the Development Code. The applicant is requesting the time extension since processing of the final map was delayed because of the economy (see Letter of Request for the Time Extension, Attachment 11311) . ANALYSIS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN The tentative map has been reviewed by staff for consistency with the subdivision requirements in the Development Code. The proposed subdivision meets all applicable Development Code requirements except for the issues of access and perimeter walls. Tentative Tract No. 14949 Extension of Time Agenda Item• Yb Hearing Date: 5-18-93 Page 2 Access to the proposed subdivision will be provided by the future Verdemont Drive via Magnolia Avenue to the west and Palm Avenue to the east. At present, only part of the necessary dedicated right- of-way for Verdemont Drive exists between Palm and Magnolia. The eastern most portion of the Verdemont right-of-way between this tract and Palm Avenue does not exist. In addition, only a portion of the right-of-way to the west, that portion west of TT 14473, exists but it is unimproved. Without the full length of right-of- way along Verdemont between Magnolia and Palm avenues, the proposed subdivision will not have two means of dedicated access. The proposed northerly extension of Chestnut Avenue from Ohio to the future Verdemont is proposed to be vacated and to be used as a trail. Pursuant to Development Code Section 19. 30.200(6) , a tentative tract or parcel map shall provide for at least two different routes for ingress and egress. Without the full length of right-of-way between Magnolia Avenue and Palm Avenue, the proposed tentative map does not have the two means of access. The tentative map, however, has been conditioned to require that two standard means of access- be provided prior to the issuance of building permits. In similar situations there has been a concern expressed that the City might be forced to acquire the necessary right-of-way for the subdivider. Specifically, under the State Subdivision Map Act Section 66462. 5, should the subdivider fail to obtain the necessary right-of-way along Verdemont Drive from the subject tract to Palm Avenue, the City would have to acquire the necessary right-of-way for the subdivider through either negotiations or eminent domain. The Mayor and City Council have taken a position that they do not want the City to be in a position which would require the City to acquire right-of-way for private developments. Regarding the issue of perimeter walls, the City's subdivision standards did not require perimeter walls when the map was originally approved, although, because of biological constraints, a decorative blockwall was required along the westerly property line. The Development Code subdivision standards now requires additional perimeter walls along the northerly and easterly property lines so that each lot located on the exterior boundary of the subdivision shall have a wall adequate to prevent access between the lot and the adjacent properties. In addition, perimeter walls are required to be decorative in nature as stipulated by the Residential Design Guidelines and the Property Development Standards of the Development Code. 0 Tentative Tract No. 14949 Extension of Time Agenda Item• #6 Hearing Date: 5-18-93 Page 3 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) The Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were adopted by the Planning Commission at the time of project approval (See Original Staff Report, Attachment 11411) . Staff has reviewed the Initial Study and environmental documents and has concluded that no changes in environmental conditions or circumstances have occurred since the original approval and that the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are still valid. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the request at its April 8, 1993 meeting. At the DRC meeting, the Building Services Division, Police, Fire, Public Works/Engineering and Water Departments all reviewed the Standard Requirements provided for the original approval. The DRC also reviewed the lack of two means of dedicated access to the proposed subdivision. Given the Mayor and Common Council's concern, the Committee recommended to the Planning Commission that the time extension request be denied unless the access issue can be resolved. If the issue were resolved, the DRC indicated it would recommend approval of the time extension with an added condition to require decorative perimeter walls. CONCLUSION The proposed subdivision lacks the two means of access for subdivisions as required by the Development Code. The original map was conditioned to require the acquisition of the additional right- of-way and could be so conditioned for the time extension. However, the City would be compelled under the Map Act to acquire the right-of-way if the developer were not able to do so. As it is Council policy to not put the City in this position, the extension of time request must be denied. Tentative Tract No. 14949 Extension of Time Agenda Item• #6 Hearin Date: 5-18-93 Page RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the request for an-Extension of Time for Tentative Tract No. 14949 for a period of one-year, from February 5, 1993 to February 5, 1994 , based on the and Findings of Fact (Attachment 11211) . Respectfully Submitted, Al oug D' ec ning and Building Services Yv ' )ohn W. Lampe Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: 111" - Development Code and General Plan Conformance 112" - Findings of Fact 113" - Letter of Request for Time Extension 114" - Original Staff Report including Attachments 115" - Site Vicinity and Land Use Designation Map Tentative Tract No. 14949 Extension of Time Agenda Item: #6 Hearing Date: 5-18-93 Page 1 ATTACHMENT 111" DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Development General Category Proposal Code Plan Permitted Use Single-Family Permitted Permitted Subdivision Lot Size 10,800 s. f. 10,800 s. f. 10, 800 s. f. minimum minimum minimum Lot Width Interior Lot 80 feet 80 feet N/A minimum minimum Corner Lot 88 feet 88 feet N/A minimum minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet N/A minimum minimum Density 2 . 62 du/ac 3 . 1 du/ac 3 . 1 du/ac 0 Tentative Tract No. 14949 Extension of Time Agenda Item• #6 Hearing Date: 5-18-93 Page 1 ATTACHMENT 112" FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed map is not consistent with the General Plan, in that it can not be ensured that adequate infrastructure in the form of two means of access can be provided. 2 . The design of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the General Plan, in that the proposal does not conform to the standard of providing for two means of access. 3. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development, in that two means of access are not provided. 4. The design of the subdivision might cause serious public health problems, in that two standard means of ingress/egress have not been provided to the proposed residential lots. ATTACHMENT 113" JOSEPH E . BONAOIMAN & ASSOCIATES , INC . E N G I N E E R I N G A R C H I T E C T U R E P L A N N I N G 250 S.LENA RD. • SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA • MAILING ADDRESS:P.O.BOX 5852 • SAN BERNARDINO,CA 92412•(714)885-3806 ,7anuary 12 1993 Mr. All Bcughev Director or the Denartment of ?'lanninc? & Buildina Services 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino CA 92415 RE:" Tentative Tract -tan #14949 Dear Mr. Boughev With this letter we respectfully request a one year extension to Tentative Tract Plan #14949. Due to the poor housing market and aggravated by the deep recession that we find ourselves in; we have not been able to proceed with this Tract. As I'm sure you're aware, it is virtually impossible in our area to borrow money fcr the develonment of tracts. Our clients; Vemon Ltd Partnershin, is diligently proceeding to develop the tract, however, due to the above described circumstances have not been able to at this time. The one year extension will allow additional time for our clients to find necessary financing and/or to find a developer who can obtain that financing to develop the oronerty. Thank 7you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, J e E. Bonadi & Associates, Inc. Jose h C Bonadusan, P.E. JCB/sd ATTACHMENT "411 F�"1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 SUMMARY HEARING DATE 2-5-91 WARD 5 APPLICANT: J.E. Bondiman & Associates W 250 S. Lena Road U) San Bernardino, CA 92108 Q Tentative Tract Niap No. 14949 OWNER: Dr. Ong , Vernon Limited U 659 Gant Street Upland, CA 91786 Th subdivide approximately 8.03 acres into 21 single family residential F- lots. The subject site is located on the north side of proposed Verdemont WDrive at the northerly terminus of Chestnut Avenue. Q W Q W Q Q EXISTING GENERAL PLAN PROPERTY LAND USE ZONING DESIGNATION Subject Vacant RL Residential Low North Vacant RL Residential Low South Vacant RL Residential Low East Vacant RL Residential Iaw west Vacant RL Residential Low GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC ❑ YES CFL D HA ZARD [3 YES I3 ZONE A SEWERS: (t YES HAZARD ZONE: $] NO : ❑ NO ❑ ZONE B ❑ NO HIGH FIRE X YES AIRPORT NOISE/ O YES =PROJECT OPMENT ❑ YES HAZARD ZONE: ❑ NO CRASH ZONE: AREA: IB NO KI NO __3 NOT POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT Z J APPLICABLE EFFECTS WITH 0 ® APPROVAL MITIGATING MEASURES W a Z (/) O ® CONDITIONS M Z ❑ EXEMPT ❑ E.I.R. REQUIRED BUT NO LL Z ❑ DENIAL Z G SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Q W 0 Z WITH MITIGATING F—M Q X MEASURES rn z ❑ CONTINUANCE TO Z 0 NO SIGNIFICANT ❑ SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 0 W EFFECTS SEE ATTACHED E.R.C. W MINUTES Q �.�i M��� PLAN-9j02 PAGE 1 OF 1 14-901 f F Y OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE Tr 14949 BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 O B S E R VATI O N S HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE 2 REQUEST The applicant requests approval of Tentative Tract Map 14949 to create a 21 lot single family subdivision on approximately 8. 03 acres. The site is designated RL, Residential Low. LOCATION The subject property is an irregularly shaped parcel of land in the Verdemont area, located on the north side of proposed Verdemont Avenue at the northerly terminus of Chestnut Avenue (Attachment K) . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS An Initial Study was prepared by staff and presented to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on December 20, 1990. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended. The Initial Study was made available for public review and comment from December 27, 1990 to January 17, 1991. No comments were received regarding the proposal (See Attachment E) . A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared for the proposed subdivision (Attachment F) . BACKGROUND The project was reviewed by the Development Review Committee (DRC) on December 6, 1990 and December 20, 1990. Revisions were requested and the project gained a recommendation for approval to the Planning Commission on November 20, 1990. Staff had concerns with the proposed cul-de-sac lengths. Street A is approximately 395 feet in length and Street B is approximately 630 feet long. The Verdemont area standards for property in High Fire, Zone B restrict cul-de-sac lengths to 350 feet. Staff directed the applicant to revise the map to shorten the cul-de-sacs. The applicant did not revise the map. Therefore, staff informed the applicant that a variance would be required. An application for a variance was sub- mitted (Attachment I) . In addition, a letter of support from the Fire Marshal was also submitted. The Fire Department supports the variance if the homes beyond the 350 foot cul de-sac length are equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. The DRC also supports the variance since the proposed Development Code is less restrictive and would allow for 500 foot cul-de-sacs without a condition for fire sprinklers (Attachment B) . CM 6 Sr1 ""OvAn D cExzPftW"-0*Eff.'M PLAN4MB PAGE 1 OF 1 ({-M CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE Tr 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 OBSERVATIONS HEARING 2 -5-91 In addition, Street B is only a temporary cul-de-sac. Staff as well as the DRC expressed concern with future access in the foothills. As a result 25 foot half width right-of-way was required at the northeast portion of the site. Future subdivisions to the north and east will also be required to dedicate land for this road connection. Another concern was the requirement in the Verdemont Plan for the continuation of the Chestnut trail system. The concep- tual plan for the equestrian trail shows this portion of the trail along Chestnut Avenue (vacated) north of proposed Verdemont Avenue, across the foothills to the east to Olive Avenue. After various consultations with the applicant it was determined that the trail would be most appropriate in the existing 25 foot wide Chestnut storm drain easement on the west. The 8. 1 acre site is vacant with the exception of a number of trees and a USGS-designated (United States Geologic Survey) intermittent blue-line stream at the west property boundary. The project is also located in the Biological Resources Management Overlay; an area of archeological concern; the high wind area; the moderate fire zone; Zone C, and the 100 year flood plain. These environmental concerns have been discussed extensively in the attached Initial Study. However, due to their sensitivity biological and water resources constraints will be discussed below. ANALYSIS Lot Characteristics As mentioned previously, the proposed subdivision is located in the RL, Residential Low land use designation. The RL standards require a minimum lot size of 10,800 square feet with a maximum allowable density of 3.1 units per gross acre. The proposal consists of lots ranging up to 14,375 square feet. The proposed density is 2.6 dwelling units to the acre. PUW-B PAGE 1 OF 1 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 OBSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE A Access and Circulation Two means of access conforming to Chapter 18.40. 160 of the Municipal Code shall be provided for this project. Each access shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide, paved, and dedicated. This may require acquisition of off-site right- of-way. The primary means of access to the subdivision is provided via proposed Verdemont Avenue from Palm Avenue and Magnolia Avenue. The lots are accessed by proposed Streets A and B. A minimum of 28 feet of pavement is required on proposed Verdemont Avenue adjacent to the site. Palm Avenue is paved and partially improved. Tentative Tract 14687 to the east was approved by the Commission and is conditioned to provide that portion of Verdemont Avenue. This will provide the primary means of access for this subdivision. Secondary access will be provided via the extension of Verdemont Avenue to the west south to Magnolia Avenue. If Tentative Tract 14687 does not construct Verdemont Avenue to Palm Avenue, Tract 14949 is required to construct that portion in order to provide two means of access. A Condition of Approval has been added requiring all standard means of access to be paved and improved per Engineering Department Standard Requirements prior to the issuance of building permits for construction of homes on the subdivision. City and State Requirements The proposed subdivision map is consistent with the provis- ions of Title 18 of the Municipal Code and the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, in that each lot is of sufficient size, width and depth and all lots front on a dedicated street. Compatibility The site is surrounded by vacant residentially designated land. A single-family subdivision, Tentative Tract 14687, to the east was recently approved by the Planning Commission. To ensure compatiblity with the surrounding vacant residentially designated land and the nearby single-family developments, the architecture, construction materials, site plans and floor plans of homes proposed for the subdivision will be reviewed by the Development Review Committee for approval under the Review of Plans process prior to the issuance of any building permits. C&m% wnro'�° PLAN-8.38 PAGE I OF 1 14-�I CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 OBSERVATIONS HEARING GE 2-5-91 Traffic The proposal was reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer who has indicated that the project-generated traffic would not significantly impact the streets in the vicinity. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS As mentioned previously, the project is located in a number of environmental constraint areas. However, the most critical of these constraints are the presence of the USGS designated blue-line stream. The west portion of the project site is located in Flood Zone A and is designated as a USGS blue-line stream (Attachment G) . A 25 foot easement for the Chestnut storm drain is located in this stream. The disturbance of the stream for the storm drain was covered in an agreement with the Department of Public Works and the Department of Fish and Game. Since this area would be disturbed for the storm drain, it was determined that this would also be the most appropriate location for an equestrian trail. Therefore, a 25 foot easement for the equestrian trail will be dedicated over the 25 foot wide Chestnut storm drain easement. In addition, a landscape maintenance District shall be implemented to maintain landscaping within the existing Chestnut wash and the Chestnut storm drain easement. The developer is also required to obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the Department of Fish and Game and the Corp of Engineers. C. OF° cem " O1D PLAN-SM PAGE t OF 1 (4-90) .wi+Twc cra LAN'D OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 UILDI NG SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 BSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-6 PAGE � Furthermore, this west portion of the site is located in the Biological Resources Management Overlay District. As a result a biological survey was conducted on the subject site by Tierra Madre Consultants, Inc. The biologist concluded that the proposed subdivision would indirectly impact the stream channel and its associated reparian habitat by increasing human activity and predatory domestic animals (housecats) . In order to mitigate these impacts Tierra Madre recommended the prohibition of grading, fencing, landscaping, grazing, or other activities or disturbances west of the western boundaries of lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 . They also recommended that housecats and off-road vehicles be excluded from the area by providing a chain link fence on the western property boundaries of lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 ; on the western property boundary of the tract; and on the northern boundary of Verdemont Avenue. The DRC conditioned the project to provide a decorative block wall along the western boundaries of lots 1, 2 , 3 and 4 and to prohibit grading, fencing, or other activities west of the west boundaries of lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 except for the location of an equestrian trail in the 25 foot wide Chestnut storm drain easement. There are also a number of trees on site which may be removed due to grading. Each tree removed is required to be replaced on site with 36" box trees at a 2:1 ratio in accordance with the Department of Parks and Recreation. COMMENTS RECEIVED City Departments The City Departments of Building and Safety, Police, Fire, Engineering and Water, all reviewed the proposal at the Development Review Committee meetings. The Building and Safety, Engineering, Fire and Water Departments have attached Standard Requirements. Postmaster The Postmaster has requested that developer identify specific locations for centralized mail delivery units to the ' satisfaction of the Postal Service and the Public Works Department. The postmaster further requests that the final map show easements or other mapped provisions for the place- ment of centralized mail delivery units. LAN'D OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 ILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM s BSERVATIONS HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE 7 San Bernardino Unified School District Current developer fees collected by the district are inadequate to finance all the costs associated with school Construction. The District requests the establishment of supplemental fees to finance new school off-site improvements and a separate fee to generate revenues for purchasing school sites in the Verdemont/Devore area. The City is currently investigating the establishment of supplemental developer fees to fund these off-site improvements. Conditions of Approval requiring developer participation in any supple- mental fee program established by the City to help finance new school off-site improvements, will reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance (Attachment H) . CONCLUSION Tentative Tract Map 14949 will be compatible with all surrounding vacant residenitally designated land and nearby single-family subdivisions excluding the cul-de-sac lengths. The subdivision meets or exceeds all standards of the Municipal Code. In addition, it is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, CEQA, and the General Plan. The cul-de- sac lengths will not pose a fire hazard to the subdivision in that the Fire Department has determined that equipping all residences beyond the 350 foot cul-de-sac length with automa- tic fire sprinklers will reduce potential fire impacts to a level of insignificance. The proposed parcels are of sufficient size, width, depth and the project has adequate access. Environmental concerns have been addressed in the attached Initial Study and recommended mitigation measures will serve to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance.. The ERC has proposed a Mitigated Negative Declaration. EWTPu POINrOG PLAN4J)6 PAGE 1 OF 1 14-ti0) CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 OBSERVATIONS HEARING 2 -5891 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; 2 . Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (Attachment F) ; and 3 . Approve Tentative Tract 14949 subject to the following Findings of Fact (Attachment B) , Conditions of Approval (Attachment C) , and Standard Requirements (Attachment D) . Respectfully submitted, Lar E. Reed, Director Planning and Building Services Edalia Olivo-Gomez Associate Planner Attachments: A - Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance B - Findings of Fact C - Conditions of Approval D - Standard Requirements E - Initial Study F - Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program G - USGS-designated blue-line stream H - Off Site Improvement I - Applicant's response to Variance Findings J - Tract Map K - Location Map /das PCAGENDA TT149490 ATTACHMENT A CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949- AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 OBSERVATIONS HEARING AGE G-,991 MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Category Proposal Municipal Code General Plan Permitted Use Single- RL, Residential RL Family Low Residential Lot Size 10, 800 sq ft 10,800 sq. ft. 10,800 sq. or More Minimum ft. Minimum Lot Depth 100 ft. or 100 ft. N/A More Minimum Lot Width 80 ft. or 80 ft. N/A More Minimum Corner Lot Width 88 ft. or 88 ft. N/A More Minimum Density 2.6 du/acre 3.1 du/acre 3 . 1 du/acre Maximum Maximum Frontage on All Lots Required for N/A dedicated street All Lots O�C �� �M � P1 AMA no DEG.nc. ...... rttacrunent "�' CITY OF SAN BEk.,4ARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEW - R FINDINGS OF FACT HEARINGPDACTE i -�5-91 1. The requested subdivision is consistent with the minimum lot development standards of the RL, Residential Low, land use designation and is consistent with the General Plan adopted by the Mayor and Common Council on June 2, 1989, in that the density of the proposed tract is 2.6 dwelling units per gross acre while the plan will allow 3.1 dwelling units per gross acre. 2. All lots created meet Municipal Code requirements in that they and each rectangular lot has a minimum width of 80 feet (88 feet on corner lots) and depth of 100 feet. The irregular lots meet Code requirements. 3 . The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or cause serious public health problems, in that development will occur according to the conditions of approval and standard requirements contained in this report. 4. The proposed tract meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance (Title 18) and the State Subdivision Map Act. All lots will have frontage on dedicated streets. 5. All proposed streets meet the minimum requirement of the Department of Public works for street improvements. 6. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision in that no public agency has stated comments regarding required easements. PLANa.Ot PAGE t OF t 1441M i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM DATE 2-5-91 FINDINGS OF FACT HEARING PAGE 11 VARIANCE FINDINGS (Section 19.74.020 SBMC) 1 ._ There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, which do not apply generally to other property in the same zoning district and neighborhood in that the property to the north is undeveloped. Access to the northern parcels will be provided via proposed Street "B" ; however, at the present time a temporary cul-de-sac in excess of 350 feet is necessary until the northern parcels develop. Proposed Street "A" also exceeds the cul-de-sac length of 350 feet. Due to the presence of a blue-line stream at the eastern property boundary the subdivision has been designed as to preserve this stream. This design incorporates a cul-de-sac in excess of 350 feet. 2 . The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant in that this property should provide access to the northerly parcel as to not landlock said parcel. The variance will also allow the development of this parcel at 2 .6 units to the acre where as maximum density of 3 . 1 units to the acre are permitted. 3 . The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the zoning district and neighborhood in which the property is located in that the Fire Department has determined that the cul-de-sac lengths with a condition to provide fire sprinklers for those lots beyond the 350 foot cul-de-sac lengths will provide adequate fire protection. In addition, a future through street is necessary to provide adequate circula- tion and access to future development to the north. 4 . The granting of such a variance will not be contrary to . the objectives of the General Plan in that the 350 foot maximum cul-de-sac length requirement is imposed for fire protection. Providing sprinklers for the homes which exceed the 350 foot length for cul-de-sacs will provide adequate fire protection. ATTACHMENT "C" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 CONDITIONS HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE 12 _j 1. Two standard means of access shall be provided and improved per Engineering Department Standard Requirements for the subdivision prior to the issuance of building permits for the construction of homes on the subdivision. 2 . Obtain a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and comply with an additional mitigation required by COE in the course of their permitting process. 3 . Obtain a permit from the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) under Chapter 6, Sections 1601-3 of the Fish and Game Code and comply with any additional mitigation required by DFG in the course of their permitting process. 4 . All trees affected by grading of construction shall be replaced at a ratio of 2 : 1. Replacement trees shall be at least 36" box trees. 5. The proposal shall comply with the Verdemont Area Plan and the Greenbelt Foothill Fire Zone Standards for Greenbelt Zone "C". 6. The developer shall participate in any supplemental fee program established by the City to help finance new school off-site improvements or with the City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 995 School Fee Mitigation Agreement. 7. A qualified archeological monitor shall be present during the initial grading stages. If such materials are encountered construction shall be temporarily stopped. The Planning department shall be notified, the material shall be evaluated, and appropriate data recovery/protection measures shall be implemented. C..OF w, 2E1.iu1).o CENTRAL PPONrOPOSERIAGES PLANAM PA('.0 t ng t ri�n C!T( OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA MEM 8 CONDITIONS HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE 13 STANDARD CONDITIONS 8• Minor modifications to the plan shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. An increase of more than 10 percent of the square footage or a significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to (Planning Commission and Development Review Committee) review and approval. Construction shall be in substantial conformance with the Plans approved by the Development Review Committee, Planning Commission or Director of Planning. 9' The developer is to submit a complete master landscape and irrigation plan (4 copies) . for the entire development to the Engineering Department with the required fee for approval, the landscape plans will be forwarded to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services and the Planning Department for review and approval. (Note: the issuance of a building permit, by the Department of Building and Safety of the City of San Bernardino, does t= waive these requirements/conditions. ) No grading permits will be issued prior to approval of landscape plans. The design shall include, but not be limited to the following: X Street trees shall be planted on 30 foot center spacing unless otherwise indicated by the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services. The Parks Department shall determine the varieties and locations prior to planting. All trees shall be 24" box specimens. . Trees are to be inspected by a Park Division representative prior to planting. Planters shall be enclosed with concrete curbing. vuw.a= rAGr I OF I �..ao► CITY OF SAN B..iNARDINO PLANNING C. _ TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA STEM 8 CONDITIONS HEARING DATE 2- PAGE _ }4 The setbacks from the north south , east , west property line shall be bermed at a maximum 3 : 1 slope and shall be planted with a tall fescue type turfgrass. A Landscape buffer zone shall be installed between facilities and street. The landscape and irrigation plans shall comply with the "Procedure and Policy for Landscape and Irrigation" (available from the Parks Department) . - Subject to the Conditions of the Department of Parks and Recreation (attached) . 10. Trees, shrubs and groundcover of a type and quality generally consistent or compatible with that characterizing single- family homes shall be provided in the front yard and that portion of th side yards which are visible from the street. All landscaped areas must be provided with an automatic irrigation system adequate to insure their viability. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Department. At all times the business will be operated in a manner which does not produce obnoxious noise, vibration, odor, dust, snake, glare, or other nuisance. A sign program for the multi-tenant commercial/industrial center shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 11. In the event that this approval is legally challenged, the City will promptly notify the applicant of any claim or action and will cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of San Bernardino. The applicant further agrees to reimburse the City of any costs and' attorneys' fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligation under this condition. 12. CcWliance with Foothill Fire Zone, C Develogmnt Standards (See Initial Study) . 0M ap �j PL4%A M .AM i OF 1 1.40 Attachment "D" FAND Y OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 BUILDIN G SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA REM 8 DARD REQUIREMENT S HEARINGPACT7 S DEVELOPMENT 1. tentative Tract 14949 shall be in effect for a period of months from the date of approval by the Planning Commission and/or Planning Department. However, if the final map has not been filed with the County Recorder's Office at the end of the 24 month time period, the approval shall expire. Additional time may be approved by the Planning Commission upon written request of the applicant if made 30 days prior to expiration of the 24 month time period. Expiration Date: February 5, 1992 COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR P.R.D. a. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC & R's) shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract maps. The CC & R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior of all buildings. The CC & R's shall also include a statement that no radio frequency antenna shall be included within the complex except for central antenna systems. b. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned orjointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of . said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC & R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC & R's shall permit enforcement by the City of provisions required by the City as conditions to approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the Commission prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. C. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the common areas and facilities. Cr" CP ..NAROM an.,. PLAN4.10 PAGE 7 of 1 (6-W CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS HEARING D TE 2-Y-91 d. Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be provided for in the CC & R's. e. The CC & R's shall contain wording prohibiting the storage or parking of trailers, boats, campers, motor homes, and similar vehicles outside of the specified common areas. 2' PARKING: a. This development shall be required to maintain a minimum of 2 parking spaces. per dwelling unit enclosed in a garage. b. All parking and driving aisles shall be surfaced with two inches of AC over a suitable base or equivalent as approved by the City Engineer. Parking spaces shall be striped and have wheel stops installed at least three feet from any building, wall, fence, property .line, or walkway. C. Whenever an off-street parking area is adjacent to or across an alley from property zoned residential, a solid decorative wall six feet in height shall be erected and maintained along the property line so as to separate the parking area physically from the residentially zoned property, provided such wall shall be three feet in height when located within the required front or street side yard setback. Where no front or street side yard is required, such wall shall be three feet in height when located within ten feet of the street line. Said wall shall be located on the north , south east F west or peripheral property lines. d. Whenever an off-street parking area is located across the street from property zoned for residential uses, a solid decorative wall or equivalent landscaped berm not less than three feet in height shall be erected and maintained along the street side of the lot not closer to the street than the required depth of the yard in the adjoining residential area. No fence or wall located in the front setback shall obscure the required front setback landscaping. Said wall shall be located on the north , south east west or peripheral property lines. All parking areas and vehicle storage areas shall be lighted during hours of darkness for security and protection. Recreational vehicle storage areas shall be screened by at least a six-foot high decorative wall with screened gates. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS HEARING AGE 2-5-91 i:7 J There shall be provided for each unit, within the garage or carport, or other specifically designated area, a loft or other usable storage area with a minimum of 150 cubic feet in addition to standard utility storage. Traffic bumps provided on the interior private roads shall be subject to the City Traffic Engineer's approval. A commercial-type drive approach, as shown on Standard Drawing No. 204 or equivalent, shall be constructed at each entrance to the development. Location and design shall be subject to approval of the Engineering Division. Prior to issuance of any building permit, access rights shall be granted to the City for the purpose of allowing access over the private drives within the project for all necessary City vehicles including fire, police, and refuse disposal vehicles, and any other emergency vehicles. The documents covering this matter shall be prepared by the owner and approved by the Planning Department. All refuse storage areas are to be enclosed with a decorative wall. Location, size, type and design of wall are subject to the approval of the Planning Department and Division of Public Services Superintendent. Energy and noise insulation shall comply with all state and local requirements. 3• LANDSCAPING: a. Four (4) copies of a master landscape plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1) Size, type, and location of plant material proposed. 2) Irrigation plan. 3) Such other alternate plants, materials and design concepts as may be proposed. 4) Erosion control plans. b. Tree varieties and exact locations will be determined prior to planting by the Director of the Parks and Recreation Department or his/her designee. A minimum number of one inch caliper/15 gallon, multi-branched trees shall b cm O Mw EIMMOO CEMIWMI PP@WnWER*= PI AALY'n Du_r nC ....w. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM g STANDARD REQUIREMENTS HEARING AGE 2 8 91 planted within the parkway for each of the following types of lots, as per the City's specifications: 1) Cul-de-sac lot -- one tree; 2) Interior lot -- two trees; 3) Corner lot -- three trees. C. To protect against damage by erosion and negative visual impact, surfaces of all cut slopes more than five feet in height and fill slopes more than three feet in height shall be protected by planting with grass or ground cover plants. Slopes exceeding 15 feet in vertical height shall also be planted with shrubs, spaced at not to exceed ten feet on centers; or trees, spaced at not to exceed 20 feet on centers; or a combination of shrubs and trees as cover plants. The plants selected and planting methods used shall be suitable for the soil and climatic conditions of the site: Trees 10%, 15 gallon; 40% 5 gallon; 50$, 1 gallon. Shrubs 20%, 5 gallon; 80%, 1 gallon. Ground cover 100% coverage. d. Slopes required to be planted shall be provided with an irrigation system approved by the Parks and Recreation Department. e. The maintenance of graded slopes and landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer until the transfer to individual ownership. f. All grading and drainage facilities, including erosion control planting of graded slopes, shall be done in accordance with a grading plan approved by the City Engineer. A grading permit shall be obtained prior to any grading being done. 4. All lots shall have a minimum area of 10,800 square feet, a minimum depth of 100 feet, and a minimum width of 80 feet, ( 88feet on corner lots) . In addition, each lot on a cul-de- sac or on a curved street where the side lot lines thereof are diverging from the front to rear of the lot, shall have a width of not less than 60 feet measured at the right angle to the lot depth at the midway point between the front and rear lot lines, and a width of not less than 40 feet measured along the front cawrk aP" tia�"s PI ANA 7R DEC I nc I i._enm CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS HEARING PAGE 2 5 91 19 J lot line as delineated on the tract map. 5. Where lots occur on the bulb of the cul-de-sac, a minimum lot depth of 100 feet will be permitted. If the proposed depth is less than 100 feet, a plot plan must be submitted to demonstrate that a buildable lot area is possible and to justify the lesser depth. 6. Variable front building setback lines of at least 25 feet and averaging 30 feet, and side street building setback lines 15 feet shall be delineated on the final tract map. All garage entrances on a dedicated street shall have a minimum setback of 18 feet. 7. Perimeter walls and walls required along the rear of all double frontage lots shall be designed and constructed to incorporate design features such as tree planter wells, variable setback, decorative masonry, columns, or other such features to provide visual and physical relief along the wall face. The developer shall obtain Planning Department approval of the visual or engineering design of the proposed wall. 8. When graded slopes occur within or between individual lots, the slope face shall be a part of the downhill lot. Exceptions to this requirement must be approved by the City Engineer. 9• Grading and revegetation shall be staged as required by the City Engineer in order to reduce the amount of bare soil exposed to precipitation. Compliance with all recommendations of the Geology Report shall be required (if applicablej . Any clubhouse, swimming pool, spa, putting green, picnic areas or other amenities shall be installed in the manner indicated on the approved site plan. 10. During construction the City Engineer may require a fence around all or a portion of the periphery of the tract site to minimize wind and debris damage to adjacent properties. The type of fencing shall be approved by the City Engineer to assure adequate project site mainte-:ance, clean-up and dust control. =1 OF ..� G&n%&.� Ci♦u_a n o.r_r.r.r. ..�. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS HEARINGPAGE n 1 11. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued prior to compliance with these Standard Requirements as well as all provisions of the San Bernardino Municipal Code. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT: a. All utility service boxes, connections and service lines shall be painted to match the building exterior on which they are located. b. All existing overhead utility services and wiring shall be relocated underground. C. No roof-mounted equipment shall be placed on any building (except for solar collection panels) . d. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer and Cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, Cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residences. C&ffPALPftWft.G2EWe4M �j PLAN-8.10 PAGE 1 OF 1 µ-pq CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING CASE TT 14949 AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM 8 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS HEARING AGE 2-211 13. COMPOSITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN A Composite Development Plan (CDP) shall be filed with the Engineering, Planning, and Building & Safety Departments prior to Final or Parcel Map processing by the City pursuant to Ordinance No. MC-592. The CDP shall provide additional survey and map information including, but not limited to, building criteria (e.g. setbacks) , flood control criteria, seismic and geological criteria, environmental criteria and easements of record. The CDP shall be labeled with the title "Composite Development Plan" , and contain a section entitled "Composite Development Plan Notes" . The applicant shall have listed under the CDP Notes section the following conditions of approval and mitigating measures required for the development of the subject property. 14. The property owner shall sign a covenant running with the land agreeing that if the required landscaping is not maintained, the City may enter on the the property and install and main- tain the required landscaping and may lien the property for the costs. The covenant shall be signed and recorded with the County of San Bernardino Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy. In addition, land- scape maintenance easement shall be filed with the Recorder's Office, which gives the City the right to enter the property and perform maintenance to the required landscaping. lat10/9/90 DOC:PCAGENDA DOCUMENTS. 1 QWTX-A• sEgS= CITY OF $At' 3ERNARDINO PUBLC WORKS/E Ot cA$E TR 14949 STANDARD REMAREWNTS AGENDA ITEM 8 HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE 22 NOTE TO APPLICANT : Where separate Engineering plans are required , t e applicant is responsible for submitting the Engineering plans directly to the Engineering Division . They may be submitted prior to submittal of Building Plans . Drainage and Flood Control 15. X All necessary drainage and flood control measures shall be subject to requirements of the City Engineer; which may be based in part on the recommendations of the San Bernardino Flood Control District. The developer ' s Engineer shall furnish all necessary data relating to drainage and flood control . 16. X A local drainage study will be required for the project. Any drainage improvements , structures or storm drains needed to mitigate downstream impacts or protect the development shall be designed and constructed at the developer ' s expense , and right-of-way dedicated as necessary . The development is located within Zone A on the Federal Insurance Rate Maps ; therefore , a Special Flood Hazard Area Permit issued by the City Engineer shall be required . The development is located within Zone B on the Federal Insurance Rate Maps ; therefore, all building pads shall be raised above the surrounding area as approved by the City Engineer . Comprehensive storm drain Project No . is master planned in the vicinity of your development. T is rain shall be designed and constructed by your project unless your Engineer can conclusively show that the drain is not needed to protect your development or mitigate downstream impacts . 17. _y All drainage from the development shall be directed to an approved public drainage facility . If not feasible , proper drainage facilities and easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 18. X A storm drain shall be constructed in Verdemont Drive to intercept flows from Street "B " . Storm drain shall outlet into storm drain .;roposed by Tract No . 14687 . 19. X Drainage from the North shall be taken in a debris/detention basin and/or storm drain and conveyed through the site to an acceptable outlet . If a debris basin is not provided , the d;r'ainage system shall be oversized by 50% for bulking . CITY OF SANCERNARDINO PUBLK5*VORKS/EWK c"E STANDARD REQUIREMENTS AGENDA IT 8 HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAG 23 Grading 20. X If more than 1 ' of fill or 2 ' of cut is proposed , the site/plot/ grading and drainage plan shall be signed by a Registered Civil Engineer and a grading permit will be required . The grading plan shall be prepared in strict accordance with the City ' s "Grading Policies and Procedures " and the City ' s " Standard Drawings " , unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer in advance . 21. X If more than 5 ,000 cubic yards of earthwork is proposed , a grading bond will be required and the grading shall be supervised in accordance with Section 7012 ( c ) of the Uniform Building Code . A liquefaction report is required for the site . This report must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit. Any grading requirements recommended by the approved liquefaction report shall be incorporated in the grading plan . An on-site Improvement Plan is required for this project . Where feasible , this plan shall be incorporated with the grading plan and shall conform to all requirements of Section 15 .04-167 of the Municipal Code ( See "Grading Policies and Procedures " ) . The on-site Improvement Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer . A reciprocal easement shall be recorded prior to grading plan approval if reciprocal drainage , access , sewer , and/or parking is proposed to cross lot lines , or a lot line adjustment shall be recorded to remove the interior lot lines . 2`' X The project Landscape Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. Submit 4 copies to the Engineering Division for checking . An on-site Lighting. Plan for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer . This plan can be incorporated with the grading plan , or on-site improvement plan , if practical . 23. X Separate sets of landscape plans will be required for front yards , landscape maintenance district , and erosion control . pTY OF SAK jERNARDINO PUBU, WORKS/04O L GME - STANDNO REOUREMENTS T R 14949 AGENDA ITEM HEARING DATE 2- 91 PAGE 24 Utilities : 24• X Design and construct all public utilities to serve the site in accordance with City Code , City Standards and requirements of the serving utility , including gas , electric , telephone , water , sewer and cable TV . 25. X Each parcel shall be provided with separate water and sewer facilities so it can be served by the City or the agency providing such services in the area . 26. X Sewer main extensions required to serve the site shall be constructed at the Developer ' s expense . Sewer systems shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City ' s " Sewer Policy and Procedures " and City Standard Drawings . 27. X Utility services shall be placed underground and easements provided as required . 28. X All existing overhead utilities adjacent to or traversing the site on either side of the street shall be undergrounded in accordance with Ordinance No . MC-601 ( Subdivisions ) or Resolution No . 88-65 ( Non-subdivisions ) . 29. X Existing utilities which interfere with new construction shall be relocated at the Developer ' s expense as directed by the City Engineer . Sewers within private streets or private parking lots will not be maintained by the City but shall be designed and constructed to City Standards and inspected under a City On-Site Construction Permit . A private sewer plan designed by the Developer ' s Engineer and EDproved by the City Engineer will be required . This plan can be incorporated in the grading plan , where practical . 30. X A "Communication Conduit" shall be installed in all streets within and adjacent to this project. The conduit shall be dedicated to the City and its primary use shall be for Cable TV installed by the Cable TV Company under permit from the City of San Bernardino. CITY OF $AN RNARDINO PU6LK WORKa/ENOA, casE . TAMARD REQUIREMENTS T R 14 rd AGENDA ITEM 8 HEARING DATE 2=5-91 PAGE Street Improvement and Dedications : 31. y_AlI public streets within and adjacent to the development shall be improved to include combination curb and gutter , paving , handicap ramps , street lights , sidewalks and appurtenances , including , but not limited to , traffic signals , traffic signal modification , relocation of public or private facilities which interfere with new construction , striping , signing , pavement marking and markers , and street name signing . All design and construction shall be accomplished in accordance with the City of San Bernardino " Street Improvement Policy " and City " Standard Drawings " , unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer . Street lighting , when required , shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City ' s " Street Lighting Policies and Procedures " . Street lighting shall be shown on street improvement plans except where otherwise approved by the City Engineer . 32. X For the streets listed below, dedication of adequate street right-of-way ( R . W . ) to provide the distance from street centerline to property line and placement of the curb line ( C . L . ) in relation to the street centerline shall be as follows : Street Name Right-of-Way ( Ft . ) Curb Line ( Ft . ) Verdemont Drive 30 ' 20 ' Streets "A" , "B" 25 ' 18 ' Street "C" 30 ' 18 ' All rights of vehicular ingress/egress shall be dedicated from the following streets : 33. X A temporary turn-around satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be constructed at the Northerly terminus of Street "B " . 34. X A mini mum of 28 ' of pavement shall be provided on Verdemont Drive adjacent to the site . 35. X Two means of access conforming to Chapter 18 . 40 . 160 of the Municipal Code shall be provided for this project . Each access shall be 24 ' minimum wide , paved and dedicated . This may require acquisition of off-site right-of-way . CITY OF SAA BERNARDINO PUBLIC WORKS/0401 L CASE STANRD DA REQUIREMENTS AGENDA T R 14 9 4 9 8 _ ITEM HEARING DATE �- 5 9r_ PAGE 26 FRequired Engineering Permits : 36. rading perm i it (if appl i cable ) . On-site improvements construction permit ( except buildings - see Building and Safety ) . 37. X Off-site improvements construction permit . Applicable Engineering rees :4 ( Subject to change without notice ) . 38. X Plan check fee for Final /Parcel Map . 39. X Plan check and inspection fees for off-site improvements . 40. X Plan check and inspection fees for on-site improvements ( except buildings ; see Building and Safety ) . 41. X Plan check and inspection fees for grading ( if permit required ) . i 42• X Bridge improvement fee in amount of $ 43. X Drainage fee . Exact amount of fee shall be determined by Department of Building and Safety at time of application for building permit . 44. X Landscape P l a n Review Fee: 1% of the astii ated i nndscapi ng cost. 45. X Traffic System Fee of S 12.92 per vehicle trip for City-wide traffic mitigation . The total amount of the Traffic System Fee shall be determined by the City Traffic Engineer at time of application for building permit . 46. X Street Light Energy Fee to pay cost of street light energy for a period of 4 years . Exact amount to be determined prior to map recording . 47. X A Landscape Maintenance District shall be implemented to maintain landscaping within the following areas : Existing Chestnut wash area and Chestnut Storm Drain Easement 48. X An easement for landscape maintenance p purposes shall be dedicated to the City over the existing Chestnut wash area and Chestnut Storm Drain Easement. An easement for equestrian trail purposes shall be dedicated nar thp 2; '-wide Chestnut Storm Drain Easement. qTY Of SAK ARNARDINO PUBL1� WORKS/E $WL STANDARD REQUIREMENTS AGENDA ITEM 8 HEARING DATE 2- 5-91 PAGE 49. X If the project is to be developed in phases , each individual phase shall be designed to provide maximum public safety , conven- ience for public service vehicles , and proper traffic circulation . In order to meet this requirement , the following will be required prior to the finalization of any phase : a . Completion of the improvement plans for the total project or sufficient plans beyond the phase boundary to verify the feasibility of the design to the satisfaction of the City Engineer . b . A Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Division , Fire , and Planning Departments indica- ting what improvements will be constructed with the given phase, subject to the following : ( 1 ) Dead-end streets shall be provided with a minimum 32-foot radius paved turnaround area , ( 2 ) Half width streets shall be provided with a minimum 28-foot paved width , ( 3 ) Street improvements beyond the phase boundaries , as necessary to provide secondary access , ( 4 ) Drainage facilities , such as storm drains , channels , earth berms , and block walls , as necessary , to protect the development from off-site flows , ( 5 ) A properly designed water system capable of providing required fire flow, perhaps looping or extending beyond the phase boundaries , ( 6 ) Easements for any of the above and the installation of necessary utilities , and ( 7 ) Phase boundaries shall correspond to the lot lines shown on the approved tentative map . c • An Erosion Control Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits . Provisions shall be included in the Plan to control blowing dust and storm water erosion on areas which are graded but on which no building construction is immediately proposed . qTY OF SAN ARNARDiNO PUBLIb RORKS/E!101t, C.6m STANDARD REOUREMENTS T R 1 a 9 a 9 AGENDA ITEM 8 HEARING DATE 2-b-91 PAGE ?A lMajp p in 50. X A Final /Parcel Map based upon field survey will be required . 51. X All street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer prior to Map approval . 52. X Additional survey and map information including , but not limited to , building setbacks , flooding and zones , seismic lines and setbacks , geologic mapping and archeological sites shall be filed with the City Engineer in accordance with Ordinance No MC-592 . Improvement Completion 53. X Street , sewer , and drainage improvement plans for the entire project shall be completed , subject to the approval of the City Engineer , prior to the recordation of the Final /Parcel Map . 54. X If the required improvements are not completed prior to recordation of the Final /Parcel Map , an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the developer and the City will be required . If the required improvements are not completed prior to record- ation of the Parcel Map , an improvement certificate shall be placed upon the Map stating that they will be completed upon development . Applicable to parcel maps consisting of less than 5 lots only . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PUBLIC WORKS/E KK CASE TR STANDARD REQUIREMENTS AGENDA ITEM 1 x 9 8 9 HEARING DATE 2-5-91 PAGE 29 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 55. X A landscape maintenance easement shall be dedicated over the setback areas of each lot adjacent to public streets and a landscape maintenance district formed over these areas to maintain the landscaping in case of owner - neglect. 56. X This development will be required to pay Infrastructure Development Fees prior to issuance of building permits or participate in an alternate Infrastructure Financing Plan in the Verdemont area when approved by the Mayor and Common Council . 57. _ X This single family residential project lies within the proposed Chestnut Storm Drain Assessment District boundary. Therefore, a storm drain Surcharge Fee of $0.13 per square foot shall be paid (not to exceed $2,000.00 per lot) , if the District is not formed prior to approval of building permits. This commercial , industrial , or multiple residential project lies within the proposed Chestnut Storm Drain Assessment District boundary. Therefore, a storm drain Surcharge Fee of $0.135 per square foot for the first 3,000 square feet of building area, paving or other imperfious area, and $0.045 per square foot in excess of 3,000 square feet, shall be paid if the District is not formed prior to approval of building permits. 58. _ This project lies within the proposed boundary of the Palm Avenue Box Culvert and Traffic Signal Assessment District; therefore, a fee of $0.04 per square foot of net project area shall be paid to the City of the District is not formed prior to the approval of building permits. This project lies within the proposed boundary of the Palm Avenue Improvement Assessment District, therefore, a fee of $0.27 per square foot of net project area shall be paid to the City of the district is not formed prior to the approval of building permits. 59. The above fees for the Chestnut Storm Drain, Palm Avenue Box Culvert and Signal and the Palm Avenue Improvement Districts represent estimates of this project's share of the cost of the improvements. If the Districts are approved, the amount of the fees will be considered payment in full . If any District is not approved, the fee will be retained in a fund for construction of the improvements for which it was paid. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PUBLIC wORKS/E1�1�'i_It, CASE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS AGENDA ITEM 1 4 q 48 HEARING DATE 2- 4-91 PAGE 30 60. X This project is located adjacent to Chestnut Equestrian Trail . Therefore, a fee equivalent to the cost of constructing improvements in accordance with the approved trail and landscaping plan shall be paid for the full width of the trail adjacent to the project, and the developer shall join a landscaping maintenance district for future maintenance of the trail and landscaping. 61' X A wall conforming to the approved Chestnut Trail and Landscaping Plan shall be constructed along the tract boundary adjacent to the trail and storm drain easement. _ r r.n Bernardino City Water Departmt STANDARD REQUIREMENTS Review of Plans: # T.T. No. 14949 Date: Location: N. Side of Verdenmt Dr. at northerly terminus Chestnut Approved: Type of Construction: 21 single-family residential lots Denied: Owner/Developer: Venm Limited/Bonadiman & Assocs. Continued: ENGINEERING: Name: Shirley L. Cismowski Date: 12/3/90 62. [X— P.S. I. Drone 64. Size of Main Adjacent to the Project None Pressure Regulator Required on Customer's Side on the Meter. 65. Off-site Water Facilities Required to Meet Peak Flow Demand. 66- [Z Comments: NOM: This tract can not be served adequately from 2100' Pressure Zone. 67• Subject to the Rules&Regulations of the Water Department in effect at the time of Application for Water Service. This Area is Serviced by East Valley Water District and All Fees/Conditions will be Determined by their Engineering Department. WATER QUALITY CONTROL DEPARTMENT: Name: 'r"ti �����;-� Date: y I SC R.P.P. Backflow Device Required at Service Connection. Double Check Backflow Device Required at Service Connection. Air Gap Required at Service Connection. GE. 2No Backflow Device Required. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL OFFICER: Nam Dater Industrial Waste Permit Required by Environmental Control Officer. Li Grease Trap Required by Environmental Control Officer. Pre-treatment Required by Environmental Control Officer. fyp fiegenerative Water Softeners May be Installed Without Prior Approval. 69. _/Approved by Environmental Control Officer. SEWER CAPACITY INFORMATION: Name: Mlu l 7 f oftiSC•3 Date: C)JZ, ?D No Sewer Capacity Fee Applicable at This Time. 70.X Sewer Capacity Fee Must Be Paid to the City Water Department for the Amount of V 1 Gallons Per Day. Equivalent Dwelling Units: a I Subject to Recalculation of Fee Prior to the Issuance of Building Permit. 71• S� Proof of Payment Must be Submitted to the Building&Safety Department Priorto Issuance of the Building Permit. Breakdown of Estimated Gallons Per Day: M216 13 901 WATP-3.04 CENTRk.NT.e,EC SER Case CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO i. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS Hearing Date Reviewed By FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 72. Provide one extra set of construction plans to Building and Safety for Fire Department use at time of plan check. Contact Fire Department for specific or detailed requirements- IMPORTANT. 73, _>11�The developer shall provide for adequate Fire Flow as computed by the Fire Prevention Bureau.Fire Flow shall be based on square footage,construction features and exposure information as supplied by the developer and may be taken from two hydrants.The must be available prior to placing combustible materials on site. ACCESS: 74. Provide two separate,dedicated routes of ingress/egress to the property entrance.The routes shall be paved,all-weather. 75. Provide an access roadway to each building for fire apparatus. Access roadway shall have an all-weather driving surface of not j��_Iess than 20 feet of unobstructed width. Extend roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of all single-story buildings. Extend roadway to within 50 feet of the exterior walls of all multiple-story buildings. _ Provide­No PARKING"signs whenever parking of vehicles would possibly reduce the clearance of access roadways to less than the required width.Signs are to read"FIRE LANE-NO PARKING"(All caps)."M.C.Sec. 15.16." 76. Dead-end streets shall not exceed 500 feet in length and shall have a minimum 35 foot radius turnaround. 77. The names of any new streets(public or private)shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. SITE: 78. XAll access roads and streets are to be constructed and usable prior to combustible construction. Private fire hvdrants shall be installed to protect each building located more than 150 feet from the curb line.No fire hydrant should be within 40 feet of any exterior wall.The hydrants shall be Wet Barrel type,with one 2 1/2 inch and one 4 inch outlet,and approved by the Fire Department.Fire hydrants are to be protected form damage by providing suitable traffic barriers.The area around the fire hydrant shall be designated as a"NO PARKING"zone by painting an S inch wide,red stripe for 15 feet in each direction in front of the hydrant in such a manner that it will not be blocked by parked vehicles. 79. Public fire hydrants shall be provided along streets at 300 feet intervals for commercial and multi-residential areas and at 500 feet intervals for residential areas. Installation shall conform to City specifications and be installed prior to combustible construction or storage. BUILDING: 80. Address numerals shall be installed on the building at the front or other approved location in such a manner as to be visible from the frontage street.Commercial and multi family shall be six inch,single family shall be 4 inch.The color of the numerals shall contrast with the color of their background. Identify each gas and electric meter with the number of the unit which it services. Fire extinguishers must be installed prior to the building being occupied.The minimum rating for any fire extinguisher is 2A 10 B/C.Minimum distribution of fire extinguishers must be such that no interior part of the building is over 75 feet travel distance from a fire extinguisher. Apartment houses with more than 15 units or hotel(motel)with 20 or more units three or more stories in height shall be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. All buildings,other than residential over 5.000 square feet,shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system,designed to NFPA standards. 1 , >_< Submit plans for the fire protection system to the Fire Department prior to beginning construction on the system. Tenant improvements in all sprinklered buildings are to be approved by the Fire Department prior to construction. Provide an automatic fire alarm(required throughout). Plan must be approved by the Fire Department,prior to installation. Fire Department connection to(sprinkler system/standpipe system)shall be required at curb line. NOTE:The applicant must request, in writing.any change in these or other requirements. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 8."'. 1E�/, c% At Aorlarmrlee nen&r rwq 6f' px, f FPB 170 I4-901 CITE a SAN 6~RDNC FIRE-1.10 CENTRK RRNTNC,SERVICES TT ly°I4 j City of San Bernardino Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department Residential Requirements Front Yard Package A. Irrigation System: (Per Front Yard) Automatic Irrigation Controller (unit must be able to have enough stations for future hook up of possible back yard irrigation) . Electric Valves with anti-siphon devices Pop-Up Type Irrigation Heads (Turf and Shrub areas) B. Landscape : (Per Front Yard) 1-15 gallon tree (double-staked - 4 cinch ties or 4 wonder ties) . C. Turf (no more than 75% of area) - drought tolerant type species. Sod or hydro-seeded. D. Shrub and Planter Area (not less than 25t of area) 70% - 1 gallon shrubs 30% - 5 gallon shrubs Groundcover in planter area under shrubs - 100% coverage when mature or 8" o.c. * NOTE: Shrubs not to exceed more than 5 feet apart. E. Polyethylene Bed Divider or Concrete Mow Strip to separate all turf and planter areas. Type of materials allowed: 6" concrete mowstrips, concrete curbmaker, Black Diamond (or equal)/polyethylene bed divider. 4cl CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEPARTMENTS OF PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES PLANNING DEPARTIONT i PROCEDURE i AND POLICY •f FOR LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION 1 MULTI UNIT COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL January. 1988 Table of Contents I. Purpose II. Submittals A. Number of Plans and Submittal Procedures B. Landscape Plans C. Irrigation Plans Ill . Landscape Areas A. Maintenance of Landscaped Areas B. Planter Areas C. Interior Planter Areas D. Irrigation E. Setback Areas F. Slope G. Ground Cover and Bedding Material H. Erosion Control I. Weed Control IV. Plant Materials A. Plant List and Climatic Conditions B. Street Trees C. Plant Material V. Inspection A. Irrigation System B. Landscaping VI. other Requirements " CITY OF W 1ERNARD'%L) REQUIREMENTS FOR tUDMITTAL A..j APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PLANS: 1. PURPOSE The intent and purpose of these guidelines is to provide: I . Guidance in the required submittal of landscape and irrigation plans. 2. Guidance in sleeting street tree requirements. 3. Guidance in selection of plant material. 4 . Guidance in what the plans (landscape and irrigation) shall Lb ow. II. SUBMITTALS A. NUMBER OF PLANS AXD SUBMITTAL PROCEDURE copies each of landscape and irrigation plans shall be sub- mitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department along with payment of the appropriate Landscape Plan Review Fee. Z. LANDSCAPE PLANS . 1 . Shall be drawn by one of the following: A. A registered landscape architect. B. A licensed landscape contractor who installs the actual landscape. C. A nursery. D. The owner. NOTE: The name, address, telephone number, along with signature of the person(s) who do the design shall be on the plans. Registered landscape architects and licensed landscape contractors shall Include their registration numbers and/or license numbers. 2. Plans shall be legibly drawn to scale on paper no smaller than 18" x 24" and no larger than 24" x 36". 3. Plans shall show location of the property by vicinity map and nearest cross streets and give the property address or assessor's parcel number. 4 . Plans shall show location of existing and proposed utilities - above ground and underground. S. Plans shall show type of zoning, the scale. and northerly directional arrow. 6. Plans shall contain plant legends for all existing and proposed plant material . The legend shall be as follows: plan, all show exiting and IProposee V.. - rattrial drawn to seal it their pture site. 8. Plans shall contain landscape spec!,.-cations and details. y. Plans shall show all required landscape stems protected from parkins stems with eoncrctt curbing. 10. Plans shall show the name•. address, and telephone number o! property owner or developer. C. IRR1CATlON PLANS 1 . All required landscaping shall be provided with an automatic irrigation system. 2. Plans shall be submitted with, attached to. and the same site as landscape plans. 3. Plans shall addresE consrrvstion Of voter and energy. A. Components - low gallonage and low precipitation heads, drip systems and other sub-surface techniques, mini jet heads. moisture sensing devices, controllers with ability Of variable programming. B. Efficiency - velocity shall be close as possible to S feet per second. Plant material with different water requirements shall be on separate valves. Slopes shall be on separate valves. System design shall eliminate costly. wasteful , overthrow and runoff. 4. Plans shall show: A. Static P.S.I. B. Service Main - type. size and length. C. Water Meter - location and size. D. Approved Backflow Prevention Device - location and size. E. All locations of pipe, valves and heads. (includes emmitters. et S. Slopes required to be planted shall be provided with efficient and water conserving irrigation systems. NOTE: Actual water application rates shall be applied. as soil absorption rates dictate. Over watering shall be avoided. 6. All sprinklers shall be installed with approved swing joints. 7. All above ground sprinklers shall be the pop up type. installed flushed with the soil. Exposed sprinklers on risers above ground are acceptable in limited areas with "bubbler" type sprinklers and do not border sidewalks, walkways. or areas subject to pedestrian traffic. 8. Separate water meter for landscape irrigation is optional at owners request and expense. NOTE: Owner must notify the Water Department . 9. Plans shall contain installation specifications and details. 10. Plans shall contain irrigation legends as follows: EQV1PxEAT vr'�o) r;�nufecturc1 1: PIPE , ize Type Class Schedule Note: Pipe sizing. (size) shall also be shown at each section of pipe . (mains and laterals). VALVE CHART Valve Valve Site GYP: 11 2� of 43 1h is 27 12 ETC. ETC. ETC. Total f Valve£ Iota] GPP: Note: All valves shall be numbered. FRICTION (PSI LOSS) " Water Meter PSI Backflou Device PSI Elevation Changes PSI Pipe PSI PSI Valves, Fittings. Miscellaneous PSI Total PSI Loss PSI Original PSI (static) Less Total PSI Loss PSI Equals Minimum to Farthest HD PSI II1. LANDSCAPE AREAS A. MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPED-AREAS Tne ffaintenance of landscaped areas and graded slopes shall be the responsibility of the developer until the transfer to individual ou-nership. E. FLANTFp AFLAS All required landscaping shall be protected by an enclosed concretf curbing . C. INTERIOR f'" T1.A11TING AAL" Interior p-anting shall 'be required and s ._aimed equal to at least 10 percent of the open surfaced parking arc& excluding tht area of ]&ndFC&rinF strip required in the lrilvcYsrecettorcoM+,)or area lracti1on17 include at least one tree for a cry thereof. Measurement& shall be computed from, the inside or perimeter Walls or setback lines. D. IRRIGATION A11 required landscaping shall be provided with automatic sprint-ler facilities -Mliich shall be maintained in an operative condition. Utilise only red�coEdhpii CSVoec�up)Ld�b1i.ETF aTEdperr�ittec'ck valve assembly. rc, at p E. SETBACK AREAS A11 required setbacks abutting a public right-of-way shall be land- scaped (except for walks and driveWays which bisect or encroacl, open the required landscape area). The required setbacks shall be land- scaped with trees. shrubs, and groundcover. Landscaped earth berms shall be erected and maintained within the setback along the above Indicated property line. Bermed areas shall e aimor otherl slope and be planted with a tall fescue typ turf B rass approved landscaping. F, GROUND COVER AND BEDDING MATERIAL Gravel and decorative rock are not appropriate materials to be used as ground cover or bedding material and will be considered handscape. G. SLOPES 1 . To protect against damage by erosion and negative visual impact. surfaces of all cut slopes more than five feet in height and fill. slopes more than three feet in height shall be protected by land- scaping. Slopes exceeding 15 feet in vertical height shall also be landscaped with shrubs, spaced at not to exceed twenty (20) feet on cetners; or a combination of shrubs and trees as cover plants. Plant material selected and planting method used shall be suitable for the soil and climatic conditions of the site. Public Works/Engineering will also approve these. 2. Plant sizes shall be as follows: A. Trees 202 - 24" box 60h - 15 gallon 20i - 5 gallon F.. Shrubs 2W - 5 Fallon 6C"A - l F.,llOn C. Groundcover 1001 - coveTar& when mature or 12" c.c . • ). the ' tenance of graded slope& and 'ndscaped areas shall U the ._sponsibility Of the developer 11 the transfer to Individual ou-netshlp- 4. All grading and drainage facllitirF, including erosion control planting of graded slopeEthe City En 11 dont a A grading permit grading plan approved by Y 6 lneer. shall be obtained prior to any grading being done. H. EROSION CONTROL A11 grading and drainage facilitieF- including erosion control planting of graded e]opea11Ab6rsdinFipe accordance grading by the city Engineer. Frading bcint done. I , WLLD CONTROL Pre-emergence control. post-emergence control and cultural control of Leeds s}ia11 be addressco in the landscaper specifications. It'. PLANT MATERIALS A. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS AND PLANT LISTS Due to the hot and dry climate of San Bernardino. drought and heat tolerant material may be used upon prior app B. STREET TREES Street trees shall be required. Tree varieties and exact location will be determined by the Director of the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department or his/her designee. The Parks, Rec- reation and Community Services Department shall mark locations and Inspect plant material b� clean of tdebpisoprioz planting. urb to marking. and gutter, must notice is required for inspection. (see attached specifications for Street Tree planting and Street Tree list). fie size of the Street Trees shall be: _ All 24 inch box specimans. - . The 24 inch box trees shall be planted as street trees within the public parkway or City property. C. PLANT MATERIAL Landscaped areas shall have plant material selected and planting methods used which are suitable for the soil and climatic conditions of the site. Sizes of the plant matcrials shall eonfors: to the followint u.ix Trees 201, . 24" box; 50',., 15 gallon; 30%, 5 pallor. GToindc0vcr 100 . c0rtrsSc V. I►asr A. IRRICATION S)STD: 1 . InFprctionF shall be performed by a Part. and Recreation Department representativc at the following: A. Pressure test of irrigation main line (150 PSU for 2 hours) B. Coverage test and final acceptance. 2. Do not allow or cause the above itecs to be covered up, until it has been inspected and approved by a Park Department representative . A to hoar notice shall be given prior to anticipated inspectiont. g. LA!�Pf CATlt:;� 1. Inspections shall be performed by a Park and Recreation Department representative at the following: A. Upon completion of finished grade, soil preparation and final ra1:e Out - B. When trees and shrubs are spotted for planting, with one example of planting hole for trees and one for shrubs. C. Final inspection when planting and all other specified work has been completed. 2. A 10 hour notice shall be given prior to anticipated inspections. Vl . OTHER REQUIREMENTS A. Notify Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department of commence- ment of landscaping. Give anticipated time line (start to finish) . B. All landscaping, irrigation and street trees shall be installed and maintained in accordance with City of San Bernardino Municipal Codes, ordinances and standard requirements. C. Material requirement for all plant material shall be number one (1) grade of the California Nursery Industry Certificate as issued by the Agricultural Commissioner of the County of origin. D. All landscape material , irrigation equipment, irrigation components and workmanship shall be guaranteed for a period of not less than one (l ) Vcar fron date of final approval by the Director of Parks, Recreation and Corc-unity ServiceS or his/her designee. The conditions of the FUFTantec will be to insure, but not limited to all plant r.atcrisl hc-inF in hfElth"• condition, and free fror abnormal conditionE wl,icl, tray havr occurred during or after planting, such as defoliation (%r £IrUC1uTt dic::acl.. E. ASSTSSMENT DISTRICTS C-TY OF SAN SERNAPN)INO PLANNMIG DEPARTMEi. i INITIAL STUDY Attactunent "E" Initial Study for Environmental Impacts For 7-Et4T4T►vG -rRAC( "/i p No. Project Number Project description/Location TG- SuBC�►v i n� i}i'� 5 rrF, l S L_ AT�o a N V fL D M nIT- Av EN J i✓ T ThE ND2T�C��1.`� �M I N V6 t,F tt �T tsUr Ay Enl Date NOV EM b&. '- 2lo , ecto Prepared for: Applicant(s) IV- f+0At,-'W - Vr moN L-T y- I; . bQN Q I M AnI $ ASSOC INT's Address 2C71�> S ► ,n►A AD City, State SAS Btf NPgzD"tiO, CPA ITZIGZg Zip Prepared by: -OAL'I A o L-i Vo-Uor-1 EZ Name . p,ss�ciA� �NNE� Title City of San Bernardino Planning Department 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 MISC: ISPREPARATION ke/9-1-89 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND Application Number: I FNTA V E- T1Q,'Y-I- Project Description: To g.0--� Aye- e,�s lti i D '21 �I•.tC-r l✓ FA M 1 L'i' R F=-S, Location: ON i.►C 17-} S I D a✓ O F \/FAD�(yl0►.IT- l�v F.�( 'r. A i 11C L lOiz-n4E9J--f I r R►`-1 ►t..'U-, OF CfA>:STNUT- Ay r=,nlU Environmental Constraints Areas: F-LODD Z6Ql7 A , I{l Ca t ( W'UD AF'26HF1E0L0C IC.'AL_ , 15IOLOC-41CAt_ General Plan Designation: FZ� PiESIDF—NTI,6- - �-�VJ Zoning Designation: r\A f/� B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers,where appropriate, on a separate attached sheet. 1. Earth Resources Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe a. Earth movement (cut and/or fill)of 10,000 cubic yards or more? b. Development and/or grading on a slope greater / than 15% natural grade? c. Development within the Alquist-Prlolo Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0-Geologic / & Seismic, Figure 47,of the City's General Plan? d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical / feature? e. Development within areas defined for high potential for water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0- Geologic& Seismic, Figure 53,of the City's General Plan? f. Modification of a channel,creek or river? �� g. Development within an area subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe mudslides, liquefaction or other similar hazards as identified in Section 12.0-Geologic& Seismic, Figures 48, 52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? h. Other? 2. Air Resources: Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or an effect upon ambient air quality as defined by AQMD? b. The creation of objectionable odors? _ c. Development within a high wind hazard area as identified in Section 15.0-Wind& Fire, Figure 59,of the City's General Plan? 3. Water Resources: Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runoff due to impermeable 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 of quality of 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 060281 C C r'1 -_,�, and Section 16.0- Flooding, Figure 62,of the City's General Plan? f. Other? 4. 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. Change in the number of any unique,rare or endangered species of plants or their habitat including stands of trees? c. Change in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals or their habitat? d. Removal of viable, mature trees? (6'or greater) e. Other? S. 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 14-6 and / 14-13 of the City's General Plan? orr a aw b. Development of new or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe ' commercial or other uses which generate noise levels on areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities or other sensitive uses above an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior / or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior? c. Other? rLMR)F-6�1 L1C91SE,:� 6. Land Uss: Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan? 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 AB,or C as identified on the Land Use Zoning District Map? d. Other? 7. Man-Made Hazards: Will the project: 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 of hazardous substances? VX c. Expose people to the potential health/safety hazards? d. Other? S. Housing: Will the proposal: a. Remove existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? b. Other? 9. Transportation/Circulation: Could the proposal, in comparison with the Circulation Plan as identified in Section 6.0-Circulation of the City's General Plan, result in: a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land / use designated on the General Plan? . t b. Use of existing,or demand for new, parking facilhies/structures? 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 i pedestrians? g. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvements? h. Significant increase in traffic volumes on the roadways or intersections? / i. Other? 10. Public Services: Will the proposal impact the following Yes No Maybe beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service? a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? (/ c. Schools (i.e., attendance, boundaries,overload, etc.)? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Medical aid? f. Solid Waste? g. Other? 11. Utilities: Will the proposal: 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 disjointed pattern of utility extensions? V c. Require the construction of new facilities? 12. Aesthetics: 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? 13. Cultural Resources: Could the proposal result in: a. 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? 1/ b. Alteration or destruction of a historical site,structure or object as listed in the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey? c. Other? CM CF ,µ 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. Yes No Maybe 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? 1 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.) 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? C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Attach sheets as necessary.) CrY CF C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASUFES 1 . EARTH RESOURCES a ) The proposal will result in earth movement ( cut and/or fi li of 50 , 000 cubic yards of cut and 45 , 000 cubic yards of fill . Grading in this quantity may potentially result in various impacts related to erosion and dust control . However , compliance with Public Works/ Engineering standard requirements will serve to reduce any negative impacts associated with grading and soil erosion to a level of insignificance . Specifically , if any development is scheduled to be done between October 15th and April 15th the Engineer shall submi- a detailed erosion control plan including desilting basing -r other temporary drainage or control measures , or both , as may be necessary to protect adjoining public and private property I from damage by erosion , flooding or the deposition of mud or debris which may originate from the site or result from su,-1 development . In addition , dust will be controlled by frequent watering of soil as deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works/Engineering. b) The proposed project will not result in development and/or grading on a slope greater than 15% natural grade . The subject site has a natural grade of approximately 12% . 3a ) Development of the proposed site will reduce the amount of impermeable top soil which will increase surface water runoff . This surface runoff will be carried into proposed storm drains as approved by the Department of Public Works/ Engineering. e) The west portion of the project site is located in Flood Zone A. This portion of the site was previously reviewed due to V/the chestnut storm drain . Potential impacts shall be reduced to a level of insignificance by raising the pad elevations on lots 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4 one foot above the existing grade and obtaining a Flood Hazard Permit for the Department of Public Works/ Engineering. 2 . AIR RESOURCES c ) The site is not located in a high ►.,Mind hazard area as identified in the City ' s General Plan . Standard requirem--rits and conditions of approval pertaining to building constructic,1 will be placed at the Review of Plans stage . 3 . WATER RESOURCES 3a ) Development of the proposed site will reduce the amount of impermeable top soil which will increase surface water runoff . This surface runoff will be carried into proposed storm drains as approved by the Department of Public Works/ Engineering . If , 3b, e ) The west portion of the project sit6 is F =_ Zone A and designated as a USGS blue line strear whi -h also contains the chestnut storm iiain . An esues*r' �i; trail is proposed along or in this portion of the t� -,•_t Negative impacts associated with this prole,-- ,h.=;1 1 reduced to a level of insignificance by obtaining =11 necessary permits and approvals from the DeNart '9ent ,* Fish and Game and The Corps of Engineers for disturbance of this blue line stream . 4 . BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a ) The subject site is located in the Biological Resour,=�-; Management Overlay District as a result a biological surve,.- was conducted on the subject site by Tierra Madre Consultants , Inc . The following mitigation measures are recommended to avoid or mitigate impacts of the proposed development on biological resources : A) No grading, fencing, landscaping, grazing , or other / activities will be allowed west of the western boundaries V of Lots 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4 except for the location of an equestrian trail in the 25-foot chestnut storm drain easement . B) A decorative block wall shall be placed along the boundaries of Lots 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4 . C ) The developer shall secure all necessar- permits nr? approvals for the disturbance of this blue line stream. Compliance with the above mitigation measures shall serve to reduce any potential impacts to biological resources to a level _ _ insignificance . b, c ) There are a number of trees on site which will be rem•_ve3 duo to grading. Each tree removed shall be replaced on site with ✓ a 36" box tree at a 2 : 1 ratio in accordance with Parks an? Recreation Department recommendations . S . NOISE c ) Operation of construction machinery will temporarily increase noise levels in the project area . In consideration of nearby residential development , grading shall be limited to the hours between 7 : 00 AM and 10 : 00 PM. These restricted hours will minimize any potential negative impacts tc a level or insignificance . 6 . LAND USE c ) The project site is located within "Greenbelt " Zone B identified in the Verdemont Area Plan p=age 138 . ' Complian .-�-:- with the attached Greenbelt , Zane P s-a,-idards shall ser%.-e t reduce any impacts to. a level of insignifican,,= ( See Attachment A) . 9 . TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION f , h ) The City' s Traffic Engineer has determined that the prc.�a Will t10t result in increased safety hazards to vehicles . bicyclists or pedestrians and that the project will not rezzul •_ in a significant increase in traffic volumes on the rca3ways . 13 . CULTURAL RESOURCES a , b) The proposal is located in a prehistoric or histoL-1.: archaeological site as identified in Section 3 . 0 , figure o , . page 3-5 of the General Plan . A cultural resource review b the Archaeological Information Center concluded tha`_ n(: cultural resources are known to exist within or - _ the project area. However , because of the possibility of encountering buried cultural deposits during grading of the subject property, as mitigation , a qualified archeoloai, al monitor shall be present during the initial aradina staoes . If such materials are encountered construction shall be temporarily stopped. The Planning Department shall r notified, the material shall be evaluated, and appropriate data recovery/protection measures shall be implemente-J . 14949is D. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial study, E] The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION will be prepared. ( 'The proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,although there will not be a significant L`�'11 effect in this case because the mitigation measures described above have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. El The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Name and Title Sig nature Date: Z - Lo —70 Cln' 6 Sew �IMNOO TIIIII­1_T V. APPENDIX FOOTHILL FIRE ZONE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AS RECOMMENDED BY CRMPT ACCESS/TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ( APPLICABLE ZONES) At least 2 different publicly dedicated ingress egress routes for all residential projects. (A + B + C) Minimum 26 foot paved width with parking on one side of each street. (A + B) ��TE EE T ® 26" �r Maximum cul—de—sac length 350 feet, up to 600 with specific PUD standards and appropriate fire agency approval. (A + B) Minimum of 45 feet for cul—de—sac turn- arounds, radius of curves, dips. (A + B) No dead end streets. require temporary cul—de—sac. (A + B) X. PUD street standards with parking on both sides of street (or allow off—street parking with minimum street width) adjacent to units. (A + B) i ^ x Maximum street grades at 12-14% all weather, non—skid surface. (A + B) L_I_3 50' ( 500,IF PUD) Driveways not to exceed 150 feet in length nor 14% grade unless road standards met. (A) Perimeter streets placed on foothill , 1201@ 1401, side of development. (A + B) OR Minimum 12 foot passable way from public street to the fuel modified area, no fences or trees planted in 12 foot access route (no more than 350 feet apart) . (A + B) t 0 O 0.1YY�.W ..fn. •....-.� 0 O Q O © � o •at M�Ii.RM Ira�M1.1{.tl�....• A.► win .�.Ma...�. .�..Y — 61 — SITE AND STREET IDENTIFICATION Non—combustible and reflective street marker visible for 100 feet. (A + B + C) Non—combustible and reflective building address with 3 inch high lettering and numbers visible at least 100 feet. (A + B + C) ROADSIDE VEGETATION Removal of dead fuel for 10 feet . encourage maintained vegetation. (A + B) Thinning and other vegetation modification for 100 feet. (A + B) WATER SUPPLY Static water sources shall have access on one side of at least 16 feet. (A + B + C) Subdivisions and mobilehome parks are to be provided with 6 inch or larger circulating (loop) mains and storage capacity sufficient to provide the minimum fire flow duration and hydrant spacing under "system standards" indicating below with a residual pressure of 20 pounds per inch . (A + B + C) A minimum of 2 private spigots available facing foothills per building. (A + B) Each hydrant shall be identified with approved blue reflecting street markers. (A + B + C) Each cul—de—sac greater than 300 feet in length requires a minimum of 1 hydrant. (A + B) SYSTEM STANDARDS Fire flow gpm, duration and hydrant spacing according to minimum standards of community jurisdiction or district. (A + B + C) CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT DESIGN A slope analysis shall be filed with all discretionary and nondiscretionary applications. the contour interval shall not be more than 5' and indicate a category of 30% and more. (A + B) No new residential development (including individual lots) or subdivision- of land on slopes above 30% in fire hazard area. (A) No new development in narrow canyon mouths or ridge saddles. (B) Underground utilities for new subdivisions and individual structures. (A + B + C) Open ends of tile roofs must be capped with non—ignitable material to prevent bird nests or other combustible material to be located within the roof structure. (A + B + C) Decking with exterior materials of at least 1 hour fire resistant rating. (A + B) — 62 — Attic vents under the roof shall be located near .,&,e roof edge rather than toward the external wall. (A + B) other vents covered by 1/4 inch corrosion resistant wire mesh, not to exceed 144 square inches. (A + B + C) Minimum 60 foot building separation in Zone A, 30 foot in Zone B. PUD 30 foot separation in clusters. (30 foot minimum setback from adjacent propert', line. ) (A + B) No combustible materials such as patio covers with plastic, bamboo, straw or fiberglass. (A + B) No eave vents facing wildlands/foothills. (A + B) Require retrofitting when more than 25% replacement occurs , i .e. roofing, fencing, room addition. (A + B + C) , Exposed piping shall be non—combustible, all other piping underground. (A + B) Limit all accessory buildings, guest housing and secondary housing to all FIRE ZONE standards. (A + B) UBC exterior 1 hour fire walls. (A + B + C) A) UBC noncumbustible roofing materials, non—wood. (A + B + C) S) UBC fire resistant construction materials, noncombustible sidings. (A + B) W Chimney spark arrestor, 12 guage wire screen 1/2 inch opening mounted in vertical position visible from ground. (A + B + C) 0) Structures supported to any degree by stilts shall have all under floor areas encased to the ground with the same fire retardant material as required for fire walls. (A + B) E) Glazed with extra strength glass or double paned glass facing wildlands. (A + B) F) Non—combustible fencing materials with gates for access. (A + B) (1) All new property lines to be placed at top of slopes. (A + B) g C A D Buildable pads on natural slope of less than 30% and adjacent to slopes greater than 30%. minimum pad setback of 30 feet from edge of slope where slope is greater than 30 feet in height , unless the entire slope or 100 feet, which ever is less is landscaped and fire resistant vegetation is maintained by an irrigation system. (A + B) Slope greater than A 30% (natural vegetation) Slope greater than 3CS If (A) is less than 30 ft. then A (8) must be landscaped with fire 8 resistant vegetaticn. - 63 - Install and equip every o—imming pool or OTner aignii.cai,-, wa,-Q. ��.... that the water may be fined quickly and easily for fighting purposes. (A + B) Vegetation clearance and modification: (A + B + C) 30 feet from structure (some ornamental and ground cover exceptions) ; 100 feet vegetation clearance, thinning and other modification (maintained no lower than 3 inches nor higher than 18 inches; 10 foot clearance from chimney or stove pipe outlet. (May retain "specimen native shrubs" if they are trimmed 2 feet above the ground. do not exceed approximately 7 feet in diameter, are maintained free of all dead wood, duff, dry leaves, etc. and are not closer together than 18 feet air space. ) No residential bonus densities except in PUDs. (A + B) Firewood stacked on a contour away from home. (A + B) Fuel tanks > 10 feet from building with vegetation clearance. (A + B + C) 1 EROSION CONTROL Require compaction on all fills. (A + B) Prior to permit issuance require approval of erosion and drainage control plans prepared by qualified professional for all new projects. (Individual lot and subs.) (See erosion control plan specifics in appendix pages 61 — 65. ) (A + B + C) f Require project referral notices be sent to appropriate Resource Conservation District for erosion control comments just for foothill area. (All new development individual lots and subs. ) (A + B) Where appropriate in erosion control plan, require fire resistant revegetation for erosion control. (A + B) Where appropriate, require PUD Home Owner's Association to maintain firebreak fuel modification zones. (A + B) OTHERS Require that before building permits are issued (individual lots and subdivisions) County Fire Warden or appropriate fire district is notified. (A + B) Require through conditions of approval that new CCR's require all transactions of property involve disclosure to purchaser of high fire hazard restrictions. (A + B + C) Mass mail notice to violators on April 1 to clear brush prior to June 1 . (A + B) - 64 - Inspection on Ju 1 or appropriate date — (brusl, J weed abatement) properties that need clearance will be issued noL_--es of non—compliance and given 15 days to clear. (A + B + C) I£ properties still not cleared. County is authorized to do the clearance using private contractors. owner billed for costs plus administrative charge. If not paid. lien on property. Same provisions for roadways. — 65 — Am SF_ .IFICATIONS FOR AN EROSION CON', L PLAN An erosion control plan should clearly indicate the nature and extent of proposed work and methods to control runoff, erosion and sediment movement. Both temporary and permanent measures should be shown. It may be part of other plans such as plot plans or drainage plans as long as it is clearly labeled. Two sets for each application drawn to scale minimum size of 18" X 24", Minor project proposals (single-family dwellings, minor subdivision of four or less lots, or grading of less than 100 cubic yards) need not consult a professional to draw up the plan. Major proposals must be prepared by a registered professional civil engineer, forester, landscape architect, geologist or approved erosion control specialist. It must be approved before other permits such as building and grading permits will be issued. Plans for major projects must include runoff calculations (for a 10-year storm) demonstrating the adequate capacity of drainage structures. Any other calculations, such as to determine the capacity of sediment catch basins, must also be shown. All Erosion Control Plans shall include the following information in writing and/or diagrams: - Location of the proposed site - Property lines - Details of terrain, including present contours and proposed finish contours - Drainage patterns of the area and proposed drainage facilities including details of surface and subsurface drains - Delineation of areas to be cleared - Proposed construction - Details of all erosion control measures - Revegetation proposals (including cuts and fills) including plant species - Proposed construction schedule (including time of erosion control mesures installation) - North arrow, scale, and name and location of nearest public road intersection - Name and address of owner(s) - Assessor 's parcel number(s) - Name, address, and phone number of person who prepared the plan - septic tank location. Erosion Control Plans will be reviewed to see if they adequately address the concerns listed below. Plans may be altered, conditioned , or returned for major improvements. All measures shown on approved plans must be in place before final inspection and certification. After instated, all erosion controls will be maintained by the landowner or developer. The following requirements should be considered when designing your project and preparing the Erosion Control Plan: - 66 - GRADING AND LAND °STURBANCE Plan the location and construction of the development to keep grading and landclearing to a minimum. If the project is on steep slopes, avoid major grading by using pole . step, or other suitable foundations. Locate access roads so that they do not cross slopes greater than 305 . or require cuts and fills greater than 5 feet in height. - Do not grade in sensitive areas such as natural drainageways and unstable slopes. - Begin landclearing only after approval of your Erosion Control Plan . Landclearing is not permitted on slopes greater than 305 or in sensitive areas such as water supply watersheds. Stock pile and reapply topsoil on slopes less than 205 . RUNOFF CONTROL - If the project is located on very sandy, highly permeable soils , control surface runoff by using infiltration measures such as percolation trenches or drywells. This practice will assist in groundwater recharge and reduction of erosion-causing runoff. Do not use these measures on steep slopes or other geologically unstable areas, or areas of high groundwater. - If infiltration is not feasible, detain cr disperse runoff so t_�at concentrated water leaving t�,e site does not exceed predevelopment levels . Use waterbars, splash blocks , sheet dispersal :nto well-vegetated areas, or other systems that slow down and spread cut concentrated water. - Use nonerodible berms or swales to direct runoff away from vulnerable areas such as cut/fill slopes, cliffs, founc_tior,s, or retaining wal:s . - If runoff must be collected and concentrated , c:nvey it so that it does r.ct cause erosion. On steep slopes or sandy soils use nonerodible conduits such as culverts, lined ditches, or drainage systems. - All culvert and channel outlets need adequate energy dissipators to prevent erosion. - Maintain runoff rates at or below predevelopment levels . - Retain runoff onsite by filtering it back into the soil whenever possible and always where percolation rates are 2" per hour or greater. Consider use of percolation trenches. basins, and dry weds for this purpose. NOTE: Retention is not recommended on unstable slopes or in areas where high water tables exist. - If retention is not possible , detain runoff with detention basins or other runoff collection devices and release it in a controlled fashion , possibly into pipes or lined ditches. - 67 - r Direct released runoff flows onto established vegetation, paved areas, or other adequate energy d133ipator3 such as rock rip rap. Keep sediment on site by filtering runoff with gravel berms. vegetated filter strips, catch basins. etc. Never pile soil where it may wash into streams or drainageways. Use berms or swales to divert runoff away from sensitive areas such as unstable slopes. VEGETATION - Good vegetative cover prevents erosion. Do not remove any more than absolutely necessary. - Stockpile topsoil for reapplication on slopes less than 20% . This will aid in vegetation establishment considerably. - Schedule clearing activities for summer months, if possible. - Revegetation should be in place by October 15. - Use native plants for permanent protection. - Use recommended grass/legume seed mixtures for good temporary soil protection. - Some plants will require adequate preparation, fertilization, water, mulch, and/or maintenance to ensure establishment of a good protective cover. WINTER OPERATIONS (OCTOBER 15 - APRIL 15) - All work during the rainy season requires special precautions to prevent erosion. Disturbed soil must be protected with vegetation, mulch, or other means after October 15. - During construction, temporary measures must be taken to retain sediment on site such as dikes. gravel filter berms, vegetation filter strips, or other effective means. - Install erosion control measures before winter rains (October 15 - April 15) . This includes drainage structures for roads and driveways such as waterbars, culverts. roadside ditches. "Erosion-proof" road surfacing may be necessary. - Protect all disturbed soils with vegetation and/or mulch. Retain sediment with dikes. gravel or vegetated filter strips, and catch basins. - Keep all culverts and drainage facilities free of silt and debris. - Keep emergency erosion control materials such as mulch. plastic sheeting, and sandbags on31te. Install these at the end of each day as necessary. - Operations may be delayed if a high potential for erosion eX13t3. — •68 — Attachment "F" MITIGATION REPORTING/MONITORING PLAN for the Tentative Tract 14949 Mitigated Negative Declaration Introduction In compliance with Public Resource Code Section 21081. 6 (enacted by passage of AB3180 (Cortese) ) , public agencies approving projects which may cause significant environmental impacts must monitor the mitigation of those impacts. This Mitigation Reporting/Monitoring Plan, prepared for Vemon LTD, ensures implementation of the mitigation measures adopted by the Planning Commission in approving the project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Mitigation Measures and Reporting/Monitoring Activities Prior to beginning construction the applicant shall furnish the City Planning Department with a checklist chart to use in tracking the mitigation monitoring and reporting activities. The chart shall list each mitigation measure, monitoring or reporting action and be ruled into columns that are designed to record responsible agency, dates of completion, inspector or other certifying persons and the person recording the information. Water Resources Mitigation Measures lf, 3b,e,4c The project shall be subject to all necessary permits from the Department of Fish and Game and the Corps of Engineers. Water Resources Reporting/Monitoring Action lf, 3b,e,4c The developer shall obtain written certification showing acquisition of permits from the affected agencies at the time such fees are paid and- deliver the certification to the City Building and Safety Department and Planning Department prior to issuance of Building Permits. The planning staff shall retain such certification in the project file and annotate the file to indicate compliance. Biological Resources Mitigation Measures 4a The developer shall insure no grading, fencing, landscaping, grading of other activities west of the western boundary of lots 1, 2, 3 & 4 except for the location of an equestrian trail in the 25 foot chestnut storm drain easement. 4b The Developer shall install a decorative block wall along the western boundaries of lots 1, 2 , 3 & 4 . Biological Resources Reporting/Monitoring Action 4a Upon final acceptance of the site grading by the city engineer notice by the developer shall be given to the planning department in writing of compliance. The planning staff shall retain such certification in the project file and annotate the file to indicate compliance. 4b Upon issuing of the block wall permit the developer shall notify the planning department in writing of compliance. The planning staff shall retain such certification in the project file and annotate the file to indicate compliance. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures 13a,b To mitigate the archaeological review a qualified archaeologist shall be on site during grading operations. Cultural Resources Reporting/Monitoring Action 13a,b The archaeologist shall provide written certifica- tion to the planning department. /das DOC:MISC TT14949 �• � ..____._.'_.. .. __ r-�1,_�r•:e.>,.•,n: .-o• 71�•.� ��0`.••rT"lOi� %2. S� ._. ° . Attachment-"GO' r .. L'' :�; ;.•,�..:;•.; G)sr•::77 - Ltff-•Ili:f I trU l.:;/t •� :,y I tirji;tr9 �� '} r .�''._ /+:!1.•1:70 f3' �:.f , c::SM1a:. ' �''''••'i�::'�:2• t✓ '�: _ /�� it ,' L� C •�-,; ��, � ��. 14 I \ Sri:• ^•• '�� - I i. I` :j ii•` (___ +— — —• — -' I' I '•��• •✓I:f.. .. { I , �I-- .. .. ,��:C{;; ;;` •_ .. I 'I II :QI I i i ,` I' ' r Lirfr UJ LJ � I Fes` �'•_ C`- I ,I...- ' ' -�����?-`.j^-�•�' - •� ._'• '� � ��fir-- � - ••� �- t 1 � -- ^' •� /1l f .i�f'cat `_. ii::c!r f'' •— - lee 10 ♦ .3/ LOT SniCUI � F •+.r.� ��. / t 21 , LEGEND MAP 1 . MITIGATION MEASURES FOR TT 14949. 0 RECOMMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS SCALE: 1":: 100' 9/19/90:m Tierra Madre O MAP SOURCE: BONADIMAN & ASSOCIATES. ConsuHants C1LY ox -W th XMrr"LrQAal M.4 i ML'nrjti1 4 IN1LR0rP7CE MOMRAN= 9009-3330 TO: Rogar G. Sardgrave, Director of Public works/City Engineer FROM: Larry E. Reed, Director of Planning and Building Services SUBJECT: Oft-Site Improvement of School Facilities - Developers Fees DATE: August 228 1990 COPIES: Shauna Edwins - city Administrator, John Montgomery - Principal Planner, Mike Finn - Associate Planner -----------------------------------------------------N-N--- This is a request for you to look into the establishment of supplemental developer fees to fund off-site improvements associated with new school construction in the Verdamont/ Devore area. The San Bernardino Unified School District has indicated in their comments concerning two Tentative Tract applications that the Developer fees are inadequate to finance off-site public improvements associated with new school construction. There are strict criteria concerning what items State school funding will pay for in new school construction, and off-site public improvements is not an item that the State will fund. The District has requested the City to establish a supplemental developer fee to finance these off-site public improvements. This would involve estimating the cost of these off-site improvements, establishing a benefit area and establishing a fee formula. It is realized that developers already pay a school fee, but these fees cannot be used for off-site public improvements. These fees would not be paid to the School District, rather they would be paid to the City to finance the specific public improvements. Thar* seems to be a clear nexus and need to establish these fees. The two Tentative Tract applications commented on by the District have been conditioned to participate in any supplemental fee program established by the City for off-site improvements. I have attached copies of the District's comments on both of the tracts, and a copy of a letter from the District to Gene Klatt outlining the non-eligible expenses for North Vardemont Elementary School which would be covered by the supplemental lees. /Mr/mtb Attactunent "I" ALL APPLICATIONS FORA VARIANCE MUST INCLUDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO EACH OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IN ORDER TO CLEARLY ESTABLISH THE tLLM FOR THE VARIANCE. PLEASE ANSWER ALL ITEMS DIRECTLY ON THIS SHEET. A. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings,the strict application of this Code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical land use district classification; As the ,DroDerty to the north is currently undeveloned and will recruire access thru this parcel, B street should extend to the north nronerty line. Since this narcel is annroximatell, 8 acres circulation thru this parcel will reduce the number of lots which can currently be built; however, should the cite allow B street to extend to the north nronerty line then the circulation issue is resolved. As the city of San Bernardino Fire Marshall has indicated that providing fire snrinklers for the homes which exceed the 350 length for cul-de-sacs the current develonment code recTuirements will be mitigated. B. That granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and land use district and denied to the property for which the Variance is sought; As this nronerty should provide access to the northerlv parcel so as not to landlock said narcel the nronosed variance will allow for the nronerty right of the annroved zoning density for this narcel. C. That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,or welfare,or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and land use district in which the property is located; As the city Fire Marshall has recommend anoroval of the extended length cul-de-sac, and as the nronosed development code allows for a cul-de-sac of 750 feet in length with a maximum of 30 units; therefore, this variance will be in compliance with the nronosed develonment code. C r OF SM dAMM'OMD CENTRAL PFNWTM0G3E s O •u.ry O�r!L.nr.. ...�. D. That granting the Variance does not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use district in which such property is located; As the development nronosed will nrovide for future access to existing landlocking property to the north this variance will not onlv provide for land use consistent with the General "Ilan for the subject nronerty but will also provide for dedicated access to the northerly parcel which is currently landlocked. E. That granting the Variance does not allow a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel; As the current develonernent code allows for 350 foot long cul-de-sac thus no regulation currently allows for this request. F. That granting the Variance will not be inconsistent with the General Plan. As the general nlan density is not being exceeded; therefore, this variance will be consistent with the General elan. When develonnent occurs to the north of this pronerty B Street will extend thru and will no longer be a cul -de-sac thence this variance will be consistent with the general Plan. L �J MY OF W1 EM&%RDM MMMALrwMnaMERMU PLAN-4M PAGES OF 6 (2-40) 0 an bernardino `r F I R E D E P A R T M E N T W I L L I A M L W R I G -1 T E F �c ��. F I R E P R E V E N T 1 O N D I J I S 1 O 1• June 19, 1990 r r� ;P JI �� t n Lonnie Young i� Joseph E. Bonadiman & Associates JUL 0 S 1Q90 P.O. Box 5852 San Bernardino, California 92412 c;-r C'' ���' etR�•s.aFJ:\p & Subject: Tentative Tract 14949 Review of Fire Sprinkler Dear Mr. Young: After reviewing this plan, we feel that if you equipped the homes that are beyond the 350 square feet cul-de-sac length with automatic fire sprinklers, our concerns would be mitigated. Sincerely, WILLIAM L. WRIGHT - FIRE :HIES, f�� v Mikel Park Fire Marshal MK/sm E 6.L)_F01 -7-� •i JU11 ? ! 19,10 PRIDE 2 0 0 E c 5 T T H I R 0 S T R E E T . S e ,; B E is N A R D I NO IN PROs�RLSS C A i i c p R N 1 A 9 2 1 1 0 . 1 B 8 9 �" 7 1 1 3 ! 4 S • ! FAX 7 1 1 3 . 4 '_ 4 I Q Attachment "J" loose !.­�; \ l rri 6 44 � rn �r -s O i l0 VIM W7 Zv LO EET t ..• �• 1 i .t�-� fit• �1`;�..i��•t r+r f i .i •.!s 1 pr C`J1- ATTACHMENT "5" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ITEM x CASE TT 14949 LOCATION HEARING DATE 5-18-93 I n • Q m �'• r I J �""�" °♦ �1'q� SITE / � O `� •• r Wry cp aERVAL ti. i �i N