The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About35-Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Michael E. Hays, Director Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 Dept: Planning & Building Services Date: r 0"'''''''"' ~L (II Un U,.'I MCC Date: July 21, 1997 Synopsis of Previous Counell Action: July 7, 1997 The Mayor and Common Council continued this item without discussion to July 21, 1997. Recommended Motion: That the Mayor and Common Council close the Public Hearing and deny the appeal; adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; approve Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01; and approve Parcel Map No. 15038 based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements contained in the May 20 Planning Commission Staff Report; or continue the matter until August 4, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. to allow staff time to prepare written responses to issues raised by the appellant. iPf~ Jf.e. Contact person: Michael E. HlIys Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: Staff Re.port Ward(s): 1 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acet. No.) N/A (Acet. Description) Finance: Council Notes: AGENDA ITEM NO. ; 5 112-llql CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDmONAL USE PERMIT NO. 97-01 AND PARCEL MAP NO. 15038 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 21,1997 OWNER: Economic Development Agency and Various 201 North "E" Street, 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92401-1507 Phone: (909) 384-5081 APPLICANTS: MDA San Bernardino Associates 300 Continental Blvd., Ste 360 El Segundo, CA 90245 Phone: (310) 416-1100 APPELLANTS: Mano Management, Inc. c/o Harry L. Gershon, Esq. Richards, Watson and Gershon 333 South Hope Street, 38th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 626-8484 REQUEST: The appellant is appealing the Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038. The appellant claims that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is not appropriate for the project and that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/WCATION: The conditional use permit application is a request to construct a 20-Screen theater complex and three related retail structures. The parcel map application is a request to subdivide 5.19 acres into 7 parcels to accommodate the theater complex and retail buildings. The 5.19 acre site is located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and "E" Street in the CR-2, Commercial Regional land use designation. The July 7, 1997 Mayor and Common Council staff report and the Planning Commission Staff Report prepared for the May 20, 1997 Planning Commission meeting contained therein provide the detailed background and analysis of this project. Appeal of Planning Commission Approval Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 July 21, 1997 Page 2 BACKGROUND At the July 7, 1997 meeting of the Mayor and Common Council, the item was continued without discussion based on the request of the appellant. KEY POINTS o The environmental review process was completed correctly and staff believes that the Initial Study with a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. See Background in July 7, 1977 Mayor and Common Council staff report. o The appellant has challenged the appropriateness of a Mitigated Negative Declaration by raising questions about the Traffic Analysis, Parking Analysis and making claims that a Socioeconomic Study should have been conducted and further stated that an Environmental Impact Report for the project should have been prepared. However, the appellant has only raised questions regarding these issues and has provided no evidence to support their claims. See Exhibit 2 of July 7, 1997 Mayor and Common Council staff report. o The appellant has provided additional written comments on the Traffic Analysis/Parking Analysis. Staff has reviewed these comments and determined that none of the comments raise any significant new issues that would change the conclusions of the project Initial Study or call into question the appropriateness of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. o Based upon the letter from the appellant's attorney (Exhibit A), additional facts and/or testimony is anticipated from the appellant at the public hearing. This information may or may not support their claims. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council open the Public Hearing, receive all testimony, close the Public Hearing and: Deny the appeal, adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approve Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 based upon the Findings of Fact and subject to the Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements contained in the May 20 Planning Commission Staff Report; or, Appeal of Planning Commission Approval Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 July 21, 1997 Page 3 Continue the matter until August 4, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. to allow staff time to prepare written responses to the issues raised by the appellant. Prepared by: Michael R. Finn, Senior Planner for MICHAEL HAYS, Director of Planning & Building Services Exhibit A - Letter from Appellant's Attorney RICHARDS W1\~ & ~ P. e2/07 .JUL-07-1997 13:18 -"'- -...-y --..- --..~ -..- -..- _0.- -.-'" -~- ~:'=fr. S;'-lW} ~;a:- --..- -...- -..- -...- -...- -...- .....~r -.. _0. ..- ~",IIWoI'lIU.1f1 -..- -..- -...- RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON "TT~"TLAW A~ JM.~ftON ........-...- ~ MXJ'I'M MaN"""'" ~ ANO&D. ~,.. ,-...l1A...."..... ClU,-""'" 1IA~'f~ .........,.. '-Orwgl".eom ~~~~ ~.,.,.. -...- -- ~-=-.. ..... ...- ........... -"""'" .....-. - ..-- -...- _..~. =r~ _T.~ =:-'~ -......... :.=.-- ~r~l~ -~- ...- --- _...- ~~I;'- -'" Ol"MA.~WDI...,w -...- ......PI'\r ~~ TWO ....~"'o-" CENftIIlI ....- UlNMN ..h.. .~ _.."."''',","1 ..~~ ....... ,M::eM.B ..... ...,- 410. ~~...ODIII - ot'OOI-V'~ lOUIoWK _ July 7, 1997 00809T1 ...........- 111"-00002 via Facsimile , U.S. Mail Jame. F. Penman, Esq. City Attorney city ot San Bernardino 300 North D street Room 668 San Bernardino, California 92418 Re: Appeal of Planning CODmission Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 Dear Mr. penman: In accordance with our telephone discussion on July 3rd, as confirmed by my letter to you of that date, I am transmittinq to you a copy of a letter to me from Peter K. Pirzadeh, P.E., dated July 7, 1997, constitutinq Mr. Pirzadeh'S initial findinqs relative to the traffic and parking studies performed by the City in connection with the application for the above-referenced Conditional Use Permit. As we also discussed, in view of the relative brevity of the report and the desirability of forwardinq it to you as early as possible, I have not made the requisite copies for use by city staff and for inolusion in the Administrative ~ecord of this appeal. It is my understanding that your office will have the necessary copies made for these purposes. Also as referenced in our discussion and in my July 3rd letter, the enclosed report is subject to amplification and supplementation by oral testimony and exhibits and computations to be presented at the rescheduled hearing on this appeal. While this letter was beinq written, I received a telephone call from your office, advisinq me that Robert curci of carousel Mall, would be requesting a further continuance of the hearinq beyond the date of July 21st to which you and I had EXHIBIT A :JUL-B7-1997 13:18 R I CHFlRDS WFlTSGl & GERSHlN P. B3/07 FlICHNlDS. WAT80N .. o.ReHON Jame. F. Penman, Esq. July 7, 1997 paqe 2 aqree4. I advised your office that the 4ates of Auqust 4th or Auqust 18th woul4 ]:)e aqre..]:)l. for such fUrther continuance, ]:)ut that I would J3e out of the country an4 unavalla]:)l. trOll Au~.t 19th until after Labor Day. Would you pl.as. have your office advise .. of the date and tim. to which the hearinq 1s ultl111lltelY continued? HLG:slw 0080911 Enclosure .JUL-07-1997 13:19 RIOf<RDS WATSGl 8. ~ P.04/07 .' PIRZADEH "ASSOCIATES . Thonsparl4lCiOll 1'1IInning. EnJintmng & PrajtCt Malwgtnltlll July 7, 1997 Mr. Harry L. GershOn, ESQ. Richards, Watson & Gershon Thirty-Eight Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 510071.1469 ~ttorn~.cllllnt Infannatlan Subject: San Bernardino Entertainment Center Dear Mr. Gershon: Pursuant to your request we have reviewed the traffic study (March 3, 1997) for the proposed San Bernardino Entertainment Center. This study was prepared by Linscott. Law & Greenspan for MOA-San Bernardino Associates, LLC. We have also reviewed the following relevant material 10 gain more information about the proposed project and the project site: 1. ConditiOnal Use Pennit (No. 97-01) Application 2. Project Initial Study, prepared by Tom Dodson & Associates (March 13, 1997) 3. Shared Parking Analysis, San Bernardino Entertainment Center, prepared by Linscott Law & Greenspan (Febl\lary 24, 1997) We have found key elements of the trafl'lC study to be very difficult to follow and, in our opinion, defICient. Based on the information presented in the report. it is recogn~ed that the analysis methodology has been reviewed by the City of San Bernardino. However, we belle". that tI'1e methOdology is inappropriate for this type of impact analysis. The follOWing represents our concerns and comments regarding lhe analysis: I JIllI c.nwr;." R.... s.iJ.D ,.... CA 9W4 T,,,,,..... nUSl 'u, '0"''''' 7lUSISJ 7J !U.-0'?-199'7 10:00 714 851 51?9 '37"" P.02 . .JUL-07-19S7 13:19 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSl-ON P. 05/07 Mr. Harry L. Gel$hon. Esq. July 7. 1997 Page 2 Trip O.n.....tion In our opinion, the daily trip generation rate used for the theaters is very low. We recognize that ITE does not have a daily rate for movie thaatel$. However, based on san Diego Association of Govemments (SANDAG) trip generation data, the daily trip rate for movie theaters is 1.8 trips per seat. Based on this trip generation rate. the movie theater will generate 8,280 daily trips compared to the 3,450 trips used in the traffic study. The trip generation for the site has been reduced by 20 percent due to Its "Multi-U$e' nature. The proposed site does not qualify as a "Multi-Use" site. Typically, it rnulti-uS81ite will include multi-purpose destinations such as OffiCI, shopping, restaurant, banks, supermar1<etJdNg store, and similar uses. While some visitors to the site may use the retail and thaalers, the application of a 20 percent trip generation reduction to the entire site is very aggressiVe and unreasonable. Based on the location of the proposed project, and the uses within it, we do not believe that application of any trip generation reduction rate to this site is warranted. It should be noted that, as shown on Table 4, the 'Superblock" project that is more of a "Multi-Use" faciity did not receive a 20 pereent trip rate reduction. Additionally. the outdoor plaza, which is antlclpated to be utilized in conjunction with the restaurant uses, has been ignored for the purposes of the site trip generation calculation. As shown in the parking study. City code requires additional parking for this use. According to this study. 5.000 square feet of the outdoor plaz:a is subject to parking requirements. Therefore. this area shOuld be added to the retail/restaurant uses for trip generation calculation purposes. Inclusion of this area wftl increase the site trip generation by 889 daily trips. 74 a.m. peak hour trips, and 28 p.m. peak hour trips. The site trip generation does not aSSume any "Fast Food. type uses in the project. If such a use is proposed for the center, the trip generation for the site Will be increased signifICantly. In conclusion, we believe the following data should be used as the site trip generation forecast: &,anll UC. J.lAISl DAilv Trtac ,...elTrta.l LM. PII Mr rR2t.rfrlasl P IL Pit Hr lhtaITrlacl Cin8ll111 R.staurant 4.800 s... 25.000 sJ 1.8018.280 0.'0 0.081278 177.87/4.447 1..81/370 12.82/323 Toml Pn:lject Trlpl 12.131 37Q S&KI :J.-0'-1997 10:01 714 851 Sl '7'3 96Y. P .113 .JlJL.-07-1997 13:20 RICHARDS WATSON & GERsHON P. B6/e7 Mr. HarTY L. Gershon, Esq. July 7.1997 Page 3 TrIP DlstrlL'ullcn and Assignment Based on the data provided in the report. this part of the analysis is very difficult to follow. However, it appears that the consultant has used the off site par1<ing structures as a major element of the project trip distribution assumption. The use of off site parking facilities can be justified when they are in clOse proxlmity (about 500 feet) to the project site. Additionally, other factors such as, convenience, safety, and ease of access will impact the feasibility of use of off site facilities. The traffic study for the project does not provide any information regarding these factors to Justify the trip distribution methodology. The project parking analysis indicates a de1iciency in the supply of parldng in the area. Also, the application of shared parking analysis for any facility that Is more than 750 feet from the project site is inconsistent with established criteria and practice. Additionany, there is no evidence of an agreement with any of the existing parking facilities for the use of any available spaces. Therefore, we believe that the project trip distribution should be reevaluated and be revised to use the project site as the origin and destination point ImMctlAnalysiA Area As stated above, it appears that the analysis uses the off site parking facilitieS as the origin and destination point for the project related trips. However, the number and location of the analyzed intersections are limited to those adjacent to the project site only. Either the impact area must be expanded to include other intersections and madways or the trip distribution and assignment must be changed. The actual impact of the project on the circulation system cannot be assessed In the absence of rev18ing one or both of lhese study elements. 8uil~.out Analvsis The traffic study does not address the project Impacts in the General Plan build~t scenario. This is an important element or any traffic analysis that must be evaluated In the environmental review process. The analysis uses 2002 as the horizon year. However. the difference between the existing peak hour volume and 2002 appear to be all related to Phase 1 of Superblock project only. It is reasonable to expect more of an Increase in the peak hour intersection volumes especially at the intersections adjacent to the site. :~-07-199? 1a:a: 7:4 851 517'3 $6~ P.04 .. .JUL-07-1997 13'20 RICHARDS WATsoN & ~ P.Iil7/07 Mr. Harry L. Gershon, Esq. July 7.1997 Page 4 PArking AnalvAi. The shared parking analysis appears to ignore the distance between the project site and the potential parking facUities. The study states that parking faoilities wtthin a 1600 foot radius were considered in the analysis. W. find this to be an excessive distance for many people to walk especially at night time. Based on the location of the proposed project and the SUlTOunding environment. we do not believe that potential shred use of any parking outside Zone I oan be justified for this project. As shown on Table 5 of the parking .nalysis, the demand for parking in Zone I. which is closest to the project site. will exceed the avaDable parking supply, In fact, as shown on Table 9, and Table 10 of the Parking Study. the ULI methodology demonstrates a parking deficiency for Zones I and II during weekdays and weekends. In conclusion, the parking analysis indicates that the proposed project will not provide sufficient parking to meet the expected demand. This deficiency will have an adverse impact on the operation of the clrculatlon system in the viCinity of the project. Mitigation Measures The project mitigation measures must be established based on the revised trip generation projections and trip distribution. Additionally. the feasibility of the proposed mitigation measures must be discussed in the report. This should include requirements for any revisions to the roadway. traffic control equipment and adjaCent r1ght~f.way. In general, we do not believe that the projed traffic and parking studies have demonstrated the full impacts of the proposed project. Please call me if you have any questions regarding our comments. Sincerely, ~K~ Peter K. Pirzadeh, P.E. Principal ..., I. ......ulr""l....... - - -- .--~ .~."~ .".. eo:. '>17'l 96r. P.05 TOTAL P. 8'7 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Michael E. Hays, Director Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 Dept: Planning and Building Services Date: June 26, 1997 MCC Date: July 7, 1997 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None Recommended Motion: That the Mayor and Common Council close the Public Hearing and deny the appeal; adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; approve Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01; and approve Parcel Map No. 15038 based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements contained in the May 20 Planning Commission Staff Report; or continue the matter until August 4, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. to allow staff time to prepare written responses to issues raised by the appellant. ({Pi ~E Ihy. Contact Person: Michael Hays Phone: 5357 Supporting Data Attached: Staff Re.port Ward: 1 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct.No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: Previously - f 'It! - (? 7/07/'1] AGElIDA *35 t/7);/?7 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDffiONAL USE PERMIT NO. 97-01 AND PARCEL MAP NO. 15038 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 7, 1997 OWNER: Economic Development Agency and Various 201 North "E" Street, 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92401-1507 Phone: (909) 384-5081 APPLICANTS: MDA San Bernardino Associates 300 Continental Blvd., Ste 360 E1 Segundo, CA 90245 Phone: (310) 416-1100 APPELLANTS: Mano Management, Inc. c/o Harry L. Gershon, Esq. Richards, Watson and Gershon 333 South Hope Street, 38th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 626-8484 REQUEST: The appellant is appealing the Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038. The appellant claims that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is not appropriate for the project and that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: The conditional use permit application is a request to construct a 20-Screen theater complex and three related retail structures. The parcel map application is a request to subdivide 5.19 acres into 7 parcels to accommodate the theater complex and retail buildings. The 5.19 acre site is located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and "E" Street in the CR-2, Commercial Regional land use designation. See Exhibit 1. BACKGROUND In October of 1996, prior to submittal of the project, Planning and Public Works staff met with the applicant several times to discuss the environmental issues and project processing. Staff identified air quality and traffic as potential concerns, and recommended that the applicant hire a traffic engineer to prepare the traffic study and a local environmental consultant, qualified in air quality analysis, to prepare the Initial Study. Appeal of Planning Commission Approval Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 July 7, 1997 Page 2 On January 30, 1997, the applicant submitted the application and identified Linscott, Law, & Greenspan as the traffic consultant and Tom Dodson as the environmental consultant the applicant had retained for preparing the Initial Study. Public Works staff met several times with the traffic consultant to determine the scope of the traffic study consistent with the Public Works Traffic Policy Manual. The traffic study was forwarded to Mr. Dodson for inclusion in the Initial Study and preparation of the air quality analysis consistent with AQMD guidelines. In early March, prior to distribution of the Initial Study to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC), staff thoroughly reviewed and commented on a screen check of the Initial Study prepared by Mr. Dodson. Suggested changes and corrections were made to the screen check based on comments provided by staff. Staff concurred with the conclusion of a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the analysis contained in the Initial Study and the Initial study was circulated to the ERC for Review. On March 13, 1997, the ERC, based upon their review of the Initial Study, concurred with the recommendation for a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Staff prepared the Notice of Preparation and Noticing for the proposed environmental determination. Since the project was of region- wide interest, it was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento, and was subject to a 30-day review. Copies of the Initial Study were circulated to the Planning Commission during the public review period. The public review period extended from March 20, 1997 to Apri121, 1997. Only two comment letters were received: one from the County Traffic Engineer (Gary Kuhlman) and one from Dr. Mulvihill, CSUSB professor. The comments were forwarded to the City Traffic Engineer; Tom Dodson, and Richard Baretto of Linscott, Law, & Greenspan. Draft responses were provided to staff for review/revision by Tom Dodson, prior to their circulation to ERC. Planning and Public Works staff concurred with the adequacy of the responses, and circulated them to the ERC. On Apri124, 1997, the ERC reviewed the comments and responses and cleared the project onto Planning Commission with a recommendation to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. In early May, Mr. Dodson prepared a Draft Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is that document that contains a listing of all the mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study and the procedures for monitoring and documenting their completion. Revisions were made based on comments made by staff, and circulated to the Planning Commission as an attachment to the Planning Commission Staff Report. Appeal of Planning Commission Approval Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 July 7, 1997 Page 3 On May 20, 1997, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the project. No members of the public had any questions or concerns regarding the environmental determination. Most comments raised by the Planning Commission related to project financing. The Planning Commission adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration, approved the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approved the project. In summary, the environmental review process was completed correctly and staff believes that the Initial Study with a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. KEY POINTS o The appellant has challenged the appropriateness of a Mitigated Negative Declaration by raising questions about the Traffic Analysis, Parking Analysis and making claims that a Socioeconomic Study should have been conducted and further stated that an Environmental Impact Report for the project should have been prepared. However, the appellant has only raised questions regarding these issues and has provided no evidence to support their claims. See Exhibit 2. o The Initial Study addresses the pertinent issues and contains the necessary documentation to support it conclusions. See Exhibit 3, Attachment F. o The appellant has indicated that additional facts and! or testimony will be presented at the public hearing. This information mayor may not support their claims. The Planning Commission Staff Report prepared for the May 20, 1997 Planning Commission meeting provides the detailed background and analysis of this project (Refer to Exhibit 3). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council close the Public Hearing and: Deny the appeal, adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approve Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 based upon the Findings of Fact and subject to the Conditions of Approval and Standard Requirements contained in the May 20 Planning Commission Staff Report; or, Continue the matter until August 4, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. to allow staff time to prepare written responses to the issues raised by the appellant. Appeal of Planning Commission Approval Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 July 7, 1997 Page 4 Prepared by: Michael R. Finn, Senior Planner for MICHAEL HAYS, Director of Planning & Building Services EXHIBITS: 1 - Site Location Map 2 - Appeal 3 - May 20, 1997 Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments Attachment A Location Map Attachment B Site Plan (B-1), Floor Plan (B-2), Elevations (B-3), and Parcel Map (B-4) Development Code and General Plan Consistency Table Conditions of Approval Standard Requirements Initial Study (forwarded to the Planning Commission March 19, 1997 under cover memo) Initial Study Comments and Responses to Comments Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Attachment F Attachment G Attachment H EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE AGENDA ITEM # LOCATION HEARING DATE - Hg 1711 CII"l' f>> ... -...0 --- Pl..M-I.l1 PAGE1OF1 (.t-IOI ~ EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 300 North ~. Str<<t, 3rd FUxw, SDII BenumJino, Cd 92418 Phone (909) 384-5057 Faz (909) 384-5080 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF A DIRECTOR DETERMINATION, DEVELOPMENI'/ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITrEE DETERMINATION OR PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION Appellant's Name, Address & Phone MANO MANAGEMENT, INC. c/o Harry L. Gershon, Esq. Contact Person, Address & Phone HARRY L. GERSHON, ESQ. Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 South Hope Street, 38th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 (213) 626-8484 Pursuant to Section 19.52.100 of the Development (Municipal) Code, all appeal must be filed on a City application form within 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the appropriate fee. Appeals are normally scheduled for a determination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and Common Council within 30 days of the filing date of the appeal. You will be notified, in writing, of the specific date and time. Date Appeal Filed <.t/t/)17 , Received by ~~ ',.2.b ~ Receipt No. <17 vo/9103 Receipt Amount fD)rn@rnowrnrm In) JUN 0 4 1997 ill; CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & BUILDING SERVICES -~L-'iL.O'2--l ~ Appeal Application Page 2 The following information must be completed: Specific action being appealed and date of that action SEE ATTACHED Specific grounds for the appeal SEE ATTACHED Action sought SEE ATTACHED Additional information SEE ATTACHED June :l, 1997 Date APPLICATION FOR APPEAL SUPPLEMENTAL PAGE 1 Project Under Appeal: San Bernardino Entertainment Center (CUP No. 97-01) Specific action being appealed and date of that action: The City of San Bernardino Planning Commission's approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01, for the development of the San Bernardino Entertainment Center (the "Project"), parcel map no. 15038, and approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared therefor, which occurred at the hearing held on May 20, 1997. Specific grounds for the appeal: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), a negative declaration is improper where there is substantial evidence to support a fair argument that a proposed project may have significant adverse effects on the environment. According to the Initial Study (p. 3), the proposed project includes a theater complex (115,000 square feet, with 4,600 seats); ancillary retaillrestaurant (total of 20,000 square feet); and, a central landscaped public plaza area (consisting of about 68,285 square feet). In this instance, the Mitigated Negative Declaration is inadequate under CEQA for the following reasons: 1. Traffic Impacts: a. Circulation Impacts: (i) The traffic study fails to analyze the traffic trips generated by those members of the public who will use the central landscaped public plaza area. Since these additional trips were not included in the analysis, the Project's impacts on traffic circulation are not fully disclosed and will be greater than anticipated in the Initial Study. (ii) The traffic study fails to account for the concentration of incoming and outgoing traffic generated by theater patrons at the start of and at the end of movie showings, resulting in an underestimation of impacts from the Project. IIIII IIIII IIIII APPLICATION FOR APPEAL SUPPLEMENTAL PAGE 2 Project Under Appeal: San Bernardino Entertainment Center (CUP No. 97-01) b. Parking Impacts: (i) The Shared Parking Analysis underestimates the parking demand to be generated by the Project as it does not consider nor analyze the impacts of traffic to the central landscaped public plaza area. As with the traffic impacts discussed above, the Project's impact on parking resources is necessarily underestimated in the Initial Study. Inasmuch as the Initial Study and the Shared parking Analysis show only a slight positive margin of parking supply, the demands to be created by the Project on the existing, limited parking resources will cause an adverse impact which requires further analysis in an Environmental Impact Report to satisfy the requirements of CEQA. (ii) Neither the Initial Study nor the Shared Parking Analysis consider the impact upon the parking supply from the long- term parking requirements of theater patrons as compared to the long duration of parking periods for other users of the proposed parking facilities. This analysis also fails to account for the impacts which result from incoming or outgoing movie patrons who will be competing for those scarce parking spaces. (iii) The Shared Parking Analysis states that the Project will rely heavily on the use of the "Caltrans" or "State" parking structure, as well as the City's Civic Center Parking structure, to support its projected weekday evening and weekend parking needs. However, according to the Initial Study there is only a proposal to use the State of California's Superblock parking structure, and, the Conditions of Approval, #2(i) , indicates that presentation of an approved parking agreement between the EDA and Caltrans must occur prior to building occupancy. There is no analysis in the Initial Study to show where parking may be available if no agreement is reached with Caltrans. IIIII IIIII IIIII APPLICATION FOR APPEAL SUPPLEMENTAL PAGE 3 Project Under Appeal: San Bernardino Entertainment Center (CUP No. 97-01) c. Cumulative Impacts: The traffic study prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan in support of the Project does not analyze the impacts of "Phase 2 of the 'Superblock' Project", even though that phase is planned to be developed by the year 2010 and is a reasonably foreseeable probable future project. The traffic report does not analyze any cumulative impacts beyond the year 2002 2. Socioeconomic Impacts: a. The Initial Study fails to analyze the Project's potential impact on other nearby, existing theater complexes, including the Carousel Mall Theaters (4 screens), the Inland Center Theaters (5 screens), and the Del Rosa Cinema (8 screens). In the Initial Study, the City recognizes that such impacts may occur when it states that the Project "may result in shifting of movie patrons in the community", and that, as an offset to air quality impacts, the Project is expected to draw local residents to the Project rather than going to other theaters being built in cities such as Redlands, Fontana, Ontario and Riverside. b. The traffic study indicates, and estimates, that the average non-work trip to the Project will be between 4.7 and 6.1 miles. Clearly, both the Carousel Mall Theaters and the Inland Center Theaters fall within the 4.7 mile radius of the Project, and, the Del Rosa Cinema is within 6.1. The "shifting of local movie patrons" will impact those theaters, which may then be forced to eliminate screens and possibly close down theaters. Such vacancies are physical impacts on the environment causing blight and resulting in boarded up buildings. The Initial Study indicates that such would be a result of the Project by shifting local movie patrons, therefore, a socioeconomic study is necessary to determine the scope of those impacts. Action sought: To rescind or set aside the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared therefore, and instead direct the preparation by the City .. .." ..... APPLICATION FOR APPEAL SUPPLEMENTAL PAGE 4 Project Under Appeal: San Bernardino Entertainment Center (CUP No. 97-01) of an Environmental Impact Report to fully consider all of the potential impacts from the development of the San Bernardino Entertainment Center (CUP #97-01). Additional Information: In further support of these grounds for appeal of the Planning Commission approval of CUP 97-01, and approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Appellant will present additional facts and/or testimony at the hearing on this appeal. . SUMMARY EXHIBIT 3 . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DMSION =============================================== CASE: Contitional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 AGENDA ITEM: HEARING DATE: WARD: 3 5-20-97 1 APPUCANT: Jason Kamm MDA San Bernardino Associates 300 Continental Blvd., Ste 360 EI Segundo, CA 90245 OWNER: Economic Development Agency & Others 201 North "E" Street 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92401-1507 ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- REQUEST I WCATION - A request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 20-screen theater complex and three related retail structures. The request also includes a Parcel map to subdivide 5.19 acres into 7 parcels to accommodate the theater complex and retail buildings. The site is located at the northwest comer of 4th Street and "E" Street in the CR-2, Commercial Regional land use designation. =============================================== PROPERTY ExISTING LAND USE LAND USE DESIGNATION SUBJECT NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST Office, Retail & Public Parking County Social Services (DPSS) Parking Structure and Mall Superblock and Parking Structure California Theater, Technical College and Public Parking CR-2, Commercial Regional CR-2, Commercial Regional CR-2, Commercial Regional CR-2, Commercial Regional CR-2, Commercial Regional GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC YES lJ FLOOD HAZARD YES lJ SEWERS: YES. HAZARD ZONE: NO . ZONE: Zone X SOO NO . NO lJ Yr mGH FIRE HAZARD YES lJ AIRPORT YES lJ REDEVELOPMENT YES. ZONE: NO . NOISE/CRASH NO . PROJECT AREA: NO lJ ZONE: Central City RDA ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 0 Not Applicable 0 E.I.R. wI Significant . APPROVAL 0 Exempt Effects 0 No Significant . CONDmONS Effects 0 Significant Effects, . Potential Effects, See Attached E.R.C. 0 DENIAL Mitigating Minutes Measures, o CONTINUANCE No E.I.R. TO: . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 1 REOUEST AND LOCATION The applicant requests the approval of a Conditional Use Permit under the authority of Development Code Section 19.06.020(E)(2) to construct a 2Q-screen theater complex and three related retail structures. The applicant also requests the approval of a Parcel map to subdivide 5.19 acres into 7 parcels to accommodate the theater complex and retail buildings. The 5.19 acre site is located at the northwest comer of 4th Street and "E" Street in the CR-2, Commercial Regional land use designation. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The theater complex is proposed to contain 20 theaters in a total of 115,000 square feet of building space. The 20 theaters will provide an estimated 4,600 seats. The theater footprint will encompass approximately 80,000 square feet and the structure will be two stories (43 feet in height). The complex also includes three additional commercial retail structures totalling approximately 20,000 square feet. It is anticipated that these retail structures will house restaurants and other related retail shops. Conceptual signage, including a changeable copy sign, is included with the proposal. The theater and retail shops will be arranged around a central landscaped public plaza area that will contain approximately 68,285 square feet. Parking for the facility will be provided in surrounding public parking lots. It is anticipated that parking will also be available in the parking structure currently under construction for Superblock. Hours of operation for the facility will vary from early morning to late evening for retail operations and from early to late evening for the movie theaters during the week. On weekends the movie theater may open up as early as noon. In addition the theater may conduct weekday matinee operations. The parcel map will subdivide ten parcels totalling 5.19 acres into seven commercial parcels ranging in size from 7,680 square feet in area to 110,882 square feet in area. The parcel map is for the purpose of providing separate parcels for the theater, retail buildings, and public plaza, and existing City parking. SETIING/SITE CHARACTERISTICS The site is located at the northwest comer of 4th Street and "E" Street. The site is relatively flat with a 1-2% slope to the south. The site is currently developed with the former Social Security Office, a parking lot, and a music retail store and religious retail store. These structure will be demolished in order to construct the theater complex and associated retail buildings. Surrounding land uses include the California Theater and existing public parking to the west, 5th Street and County Department of Social Services to the north, Superblock and associated parking . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-<1l Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 2 structure across "E" Street on the East, and Carousel Mall and parking structure across 4th Street to the south. BACKGROUND Central City Parldng Place Commission The theater complex is dependent upon existing public parking in the Downtown. This requires a shared parking plan to be submitted to the Public Works Department for review by the Central City Parking Place Commission and final approval of the parking plan by the Mayor and Common Council. The Shared Parking Plan was previously circulated to the Planning Commission as part of the project Initial Study. The parking plan was presented to the Central City Parking Place Commission on March 6, 1997. The Parking Place Commission recommended approval of the Plan to the Mayor and Common Council at that meeting. The Shared Parking Plan has been scheduled for review and approval by the Mayor and Common Council on May 19, 1997. Development Review Committee The project was reviewed by the Development Review Committee and cleared onto Planning Commission on April 24, 1997. The Public Works Department, Development Services Division, Fire Department and Water Department have all provided Standard Requirements for the proposal. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOA) STATUS o The Initial Study was prepared by Tom Dodson and Associates, was independently reviewed by staff, and presented to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on March 13, 1997. The ERC proposed a Mitigated Negative Declaration. See Initial Study, Attachment F. o The Initial Study was circulated to the State Office of Planning and Research, and was made available for Public Review and Comment from March 19, 1997 to April 21, 1997. Comments were received from the San Bernardino County Traffic Engineer and Dr. James Mulvihill, California State University, San Bernardino. Responses to the comments were prepared by Tom Dodson and Associates for the City and were independently reviewed by staff. The comments and the City's responses to the comments have been included as Attachment G. o On April 24, 1997, the Environmental Review Committee, reviewed the comments and responses, and finding them adequate and acceptable, recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97 -{) 1 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 3 o The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared by Tom Dodson, reviewed by staff, and determined to be adequate and acceptable. See Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Attachment H. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit 1. The proposed use is conditionally pennitted within, and would not impair the integrity and character of the of the subject land use district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of this Development Code. Pursuant to Development Code Section 19.06.020(E)(2), theaters are permitted in the CR-21and use district subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The associated retail uses are permitted subject to a development permit, but are part of the entertainment complex and are in the conditional use permit. The proposed complex complies with all applicable provisions of the Development Code as shown in Attachment C. Front setbacks are allowed at the ground level if the area is designed as a pedestrian plaza, as per Section 19.19.040(3) of the Development Code. To qualify as a plaza it must be a minimum of 10 feet deep and the width of the entire store front, include enhanced or textured paving, and landscaping. The western most restaurant building facing 4th Street has been setback 10+ feet and meets this criteria. The project has been conditioned to treat this area with enhanced paving and landscaping. Development Code Section 19.19.040(1)(A) allows up to 50 percent of a building face to be set back. The eastern most building facing 4th Street meets this criteria and has included its setback portion into the pedestrian plaza associated with retail building on the west. The northern end of the theater along "E" Street is set back to accommodate a future retail area. U nill the retail is built, this area will be developed as a mini -pedestrian plaza with enhanced paving and landscaping, consistent with that along 4th Street. The complex and associated plazas will create a much needed public space in the downtown and will complement the Superblock building and its associated public plaza across "E" Street to the east. Hence, the proposal will improve and not impair the character of the CR-2 land use district. Conceptual identification signage and a changeable copy sign is included with the project. The applicant proposes to place movie posters along the "E" Street side of the theater to help to maintain the pedestrian orientation of the facility. A sign program for the complex will be submitted to identify the specific signage including type, amount, location, size and design, consistent with Development Code requirements. . . Conditional Use Permit No. 9Hll Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 4 2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. The proposal is consistent with General Plan Policy 1.3.3, which states: "Allow for the development of region-serving hotel and convention, entertainment, cultural, and supporting uses in areas designated as: a. 'Commercial Regional-Downtown (CR-2)' ,..." The proposal is also consistent with General Plan Policy 1.16.31 which states: "Encourage that buildings be located within twenty-five feet of the sidewalk, except for setbacks to allow for outdoor dining, pedestrian-oriented plazas, courtyards and landscaped areas provided that: a. the setback is not separated from the abutting sidewalks by walls, continuous planters, or other barriers: b. the set back is at or approximate to the elevation of the abutting sidewalks, except where a distinctive and usable open space can be created which transitions "smoothly" from the abutting sidewalk; c. the setback is landscaped and incorporates pedestrian oriented amenities; and d. no automobiles or trucks may be parked in this area. " Review of the site plan (Attachment B-1) shows that the design of the proposal is consistent with this policy. 3. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 19.20.030(6) of the Development Code. As noted in the discussion on CEQA Status, an Initial Study was prepared and circulated for public review and comment in compliance with CEQA. Mitigation measures have been identified and are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. All mitigation measures have been made project Conditions of Approval. All CEQA requirement have been met. 4. There will be no potentially significant negative impacts upon environmental quality and natural resources that could not be properly mitigated and monitored. As identified in the Initial Study, the project will not result in any potentially significant negative impacts upon environmental quality and resources. All mitigation measures will be properly monitored as Identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment H). . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 5 5. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located and will not create significant noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable or detrimental to other permitted uses in the vicinity or adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The proposal is in compliance with all applicable Development Code Standards and is consistent with the General Plan as noted elsewhere in this staff report. The proposal will not create any significant noise, traffic, or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable as identified in the project Initial Study. As such, the proposal will not be detrimental to other permitted uses in the vicinity and will not create any situation adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City. 6. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed. The site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of the project being proposed as evidenced by project compliance with all applicable Development Code Standards. 7. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety. All agencies responsible for reviewing access, and providing water, sanitation and other public services have all had the opportunity to review the proposal, and none have indicated an inability to serve the project. The proposal will not be detrimental to the public health and safety. Parcel Map 1. The proposed map is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan in that the map conforms to the standards concerning distribution, location, and extent of uses covered by the General Plan as noted in the discussion for Finding #2 for the Conditional Use Permit above. There are no applicable specific plans. 2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The proposed design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan as noted in the discussion for Finding #2 for the Conditional Use Permit above. There are no applicable specific plans. . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 6 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that the lots created meet the minimum lot standards specified by the Development Code and summarized in Attachment C. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. As noted in the discussion for Finding #1 of the conditional use permit above, the proposal complies with all applicable Development Code Standards and is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably i'!iure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as addressed in the Initial Study. 6. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems as addressed in the project Initial Study. 7. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, propeny within the proposed subdivision. Several utility easement exist in the area where the theater is to be constructed. These easements exist to provide utility services to the former social security building and the existing retail music and religious facilities which are to be demolished. However, the design of the subdivision and proposed improvements will not conflict with these easements since they will be abandoned or relocated by the Public WorkslEngineering Department through processing of the Final Map. CONCLUSION The proposal meets all necessary Findings of Fact for approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map. . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 7 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and 2. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map 15038, based upon the Findings of Fact contained in this Staff Report and subject to the Conditions of Approval (Attachment D) and Standard Requirements (Attachment E). ~{~ Director of Planning and Building Services J.udwJ;.J- ~ Michael R. Finn Associate Planner Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Attachment F Attachment G Attachment H Location Map Site Plan (B-1), Parcel Map (B-2) Floor Plan and Elevations are on file in the Planning and Building Services Department Development Code and General Plan Consistency Table Conditions of Approval Standard Requirements Initial Study (forwarded to the Planning Commission March 19, 1997 under cover memo) Initial Study Comments and Responses to Comments Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program . ATTACHMENT A . i' i 1,' " f ' i ~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CASE AGENDA ITEM # LOCATION HEARING DATE - ........11 P.....1aF1 (..eo) .1 " I mml B e I_fOOl... ~mm J .=a~ ~~,~!~,H ~ i EB~ ~ z O. i= <( o o ..J I . . . I I --=~.;==.. -.- .1..111 I I I I s m';!I~~ !ilL i , ~ .... r . l- e ~ <( I ~~ ~ ~i:5 ~ ii t ~& ~ il a!~~~ !Ii l- I ... t ~i!ll!l dIU I~~~I . ! I , , , l_ L.'~_-!I'. !o ATTACHMENT B-1 -.. ... II , I l.., , , ..._...._... 01 -., . i I I- '" I- '" J: l- on ! I 01 b I ! Lll ~- 0:: ILl ~ ILl < :I:z 1-'" o::~f <~. I- 0 I ~il ~Oi ILI~' Z~! -.... OlD . x~ ILl'" ..J 0- J o N I' D t EB ... o . ,... 01 ~ ::> o ... "lie ~.III:~z 11:"'. eZoll: CO.zll:l&, 11)_11:111_ IL.....IIIID...l IIlDz.c ~O E z.co -z.. e(/)I&, ~ l; _1&,0 CILI!i 11.0111 ~C o~'" z.. cS ......c W.Ii>...... L.. z ~z(/) r- -:) 00 U . .! iii t=-....!!!-...........- -,..~ " .. I I I' l-d 'I I ~ I I: ~t-r., f _ I I...." ~i: t It I II . . I' .C-r-'-.,.- ~ .1., s 1 s /lr--..!.-J ; :1.. I (~~i ~ .Yo.--H--:i--+--: . __ a I, : I ~ I : I ~ · . :1 ii I : I; .. E TiC ------+--' '. ~ .. .. _, ~ I I ~ ~ 5 ; i ;. I ..; I .. - ... I" I I" I '-~~ - ....... - =4- ATTACHMENT". I I . ,II i 1111 .., I~ '1~ I . '0" t i!,pl" I!i! ~!'!aq, '''!i c 11:'1' Ill. r,i'Il!;' .",:nll oJ!! Ii i'~'i loll '- 1111, ,.. II "II !f:! =1;:,1'; ~ (l'iWI ii !:"Iili ..~ I "'Iil !I l'le:' . 'I n~'I, :lliil~1 u ,ilill: I. I, 'II"'! ,!', '"I' I 1'1' IIl.ill;I~~1 II Ii. 'I I 'I d: I Iii T"'! 4 . IL~ litLL ~ ~ ,I, ~ 11!li ,Hili I it ill II is I ,II 1=; !!I 'USI!"ll I!II I II I 1111'" ; n; tledl II li:1 ;..." II ~, I ~-....... III I! ! ! I ~.. .... .... '~1!'~" ::(:[,'- '!-~- Ii [;{ '\ \:, ,,:' \ 'jJ' :: : . 'i~ ;:: 0): :'Ii "I~: ; :",,- ~Yi~H' ;--~-, ~~7~N' '~~'i -' -~,fi,~:\" ;-..' , '3~'~!;\r ~;,<. ;llJ '7'J;'~\ \ " - \' i' " , ~,f1iil; ~':~ j - Ji< [:. '. ,,"\ "~-4.'~ . ~, _ __i " . { ",,' ....,rJI:'!-.. · , , t' j, .,F-=<; ""','1 " .j!,!J.",J ~I./ rE)' ,'I',., 't'" I :~~" :..t .;..:,', J............. ~. I I ' " ...... . t- '.t. ..:. . : ;:;";:-.. t ~!: : : ,: : I"..~ L'. I > I {' , -.. .: ..~.... ~ ~ ~ I . +1" 1 ~ " .... " "..w- ".,*\. I',:'.'...,; " + ""'t" :',~:. : \H -~~~' a f '.,..~.: ~~ \.~ t .~ . ~ ..~; , "\ ;-':'-'r: ..'1 :j;'~" ....., _ . ,... 't::l II ~ '2:' ,,':.~"S"?~/",~.~~":~-j;.;':i..T~E-;-:lJ;~~d ' _ __--- __ __.- _ _ -- ~"..';;" _-::rr - .~.._. -'-;-.1*,;;. ,', -- - - ~;iE""';''::';'.l. ,-~,,::_-_.._. . ,. ;.: ur--: ~ < . - .:.."l ~~:~ ..-;~,~=,;.,;....~.: ,I. I;:; ,'i; i J' ",' ,", . I' . ; ,J , ~""'" 1 I; :->: I' ~J. ;. ;y, '. '" ,} i>- ;l... ~: .,.' , , '.'-;1 :.. :;" - ... I I, Ii Ii Ii I~ . ~'I' , i..; .1' I. all: ". I. . " . . II i , . ~n Illl'! E I:J II' Ii :1 . . . . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 11 ATIACHMENT C DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Development General Catef:ory Prooosal Code Plan Permitted Use 2D-plex Theater and Permitted subject to Permitted Associate Retail Conditional Use Permit Height 2 Story No defined No defined Stories (43 feet) Height Umit Height Umit Setbacks Front o to 10 feet' o feet < 25 feet Street Side o feet o feet < 25 feet Landscaping 68285 square feet 20,250 square feet N/A (51 percent) (15 percent) Lot Coverage 55 percent 100 percent N/A , Pursuant to Development Code Section 19.19.040(3), front setbacks are allowed at the ground level if the area is designed as a pedestrian plaza. See discussion on Page 3 of this staff report. ~---- . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97'{)1 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 12 ATIACHMENT D CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 1. Within two years of development approval, the parcel map shall be recorded and commencement of construction on improvements shall have occurred or the permit/approval shall become null and void. In addition, if after commencement of construction, work is discontinued for a period of one year, then the permit/approval shall become null and void. Project: Expiration Date: Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 May 20, 1999 2. The review authority may, upon application being filed 30 days prior to the expiration date and for good cause, grant one time extension not to exceed 12 months. The review authority shall ensure that the project complies with all current Development Code provisions. 3. 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 or her obligation under this condition. 4. Construction shall be in substantial conformance with the planes) approved by the Director, Development Review Committee, Planning Commission or Mayor and Common Council. Minor modification to the planes) shall be subject to approval by the Director through a minor modification permit process. Any modification which exceeds 10% of the following allowable measurable design/site considerations shall require the refiling of the origina1 application and a subsequent hearing by the appropriate hearing review authority if applicable. a. On-site circulation and parking, loading and landscaping; b. Placement and/or height of walls, fences and structures; c. Reconfiguration of architectural features, including colors, and! or modification of finished materials that do not alter or compromise the previously approved theme; and, . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 13 d. A reduction in density or intensity of a development project. 5. No vacant, relocated, altered, repaired or hereafter erected structure shall be occupied or no change of use of land or structure(s) shall be inaugurated, or no new business commenced as authorized by this permit until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by the Department. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued by the Department subject to the conditions imposed on the use, provided that a deposit is ftled with the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of the Certificate. The deposit or security shall guarantee the faithful performance and completion of all terms, conditions and performance standards imposed on the intended use by this permit. 6. This permit or approval is subject to all the applicable provisions of the Development Code in effect at the time of approval. This includes Chapter 19.20 - Property Development Standards, and includes: dust and dirt control during construction and grading activities; emission control of fumes, vapors, gases and other forms of air pollution; glare control; exterior lightning design and control; noise control; odor control; screening; signs, off-street parking and off-street loading; and, vibration control. Screening and sign regulations compliance are important considerations to the developer because they will delay the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy until they are complied with. Any exterior structural equipment, or utility transformers, boxes, ducts or meter cabinets shall be architecturally screened by wall or structural element, blending with the building design and include landscaping when on the ground. 7. All mitigation measures identified by the project Initial Study and listed in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment H to this staff report) are incorporated herein as project Conditions of Approval. 8. The area identified as a future retail area along "E" Street at the northeast comer of the theater building shall be developed as a mini-pedestrian plaza. This shall include treatment with enhanced paving/textured concrete, and landscaping consistent with the interior theater plaza in materials and design. 9. The area of setback adjacent to the retail buildings along 4th Street has been permitted for the purpose of creating a pedestrian plaza area along 4th Street. This area shall be treated with enhance paving/textured concrete, and landscaping consistent with the interior theater plaza in materials and design. 10. A sign program shall be submitted for the complex that includes the type, amount, location, size and design consistent with Chapter 19.22 of the Development Code. 11. Demolition permits shall be obtained for the demolition and removal of the former social security building and the music and religious retail buildings on the site. . . Conditional Use Permit No. 9Hll Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 14 12. No final parcel map shall be med and no building permits shall be issued until the Economic Development Agency or Developer has obtained title to all parcels comprising the project site (APN's 134-131-01,02, 06, 15, 16, 18; 134-121-12, 17, 19, and 20. 13. This permit or approval is subject to the attached conditions or requirements of the following City Departments or Divisions: a. Public Works (Engineering) Department b. Building Services Division of the Planning and Building Services Department c. Water Department d. Fire Department e. Parks and Recreation Department ATTACHMENT "E" STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS! CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF "E" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: . NOTE TO APPUCANT: Where separate Engineering plans are required, the applicant Is responsible for submitting the Engineering plans directly to the Engineering Division. They may be submitted prior to submittal of Building Plans. 1. Drainaae and Flood Control a) 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. b) Applicant shall mitigate on-site storm water discharge sufficiently to maintain compliance with the City's NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit Requirements. A "Notice of Intent (NOI)" shall be filed with the State Water Quality Control Board for construction disturbing 5 acres of more of land. c) The City Engineer, prior to grading plan approval, shall approve an Erosion Control Plan. The plan shall be designed to control erosion due to water and wind, including blowing dust, during all phases of construction, including graded areas which are not proposed to be immediately built upon. 2. Gradina and LandscaDina a) If more than l' of fill or 2' of cut is proposed, the site/ploUgrading 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. Page 1 of 10 Pages 5114197 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF liE" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: b) 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. c) A liquefaction evaluation is required for the site. This evaluation must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit. Any grading requirements or structural design requirements recommended by the approved liquefaction evaluation shall be incorporated in the grading plan and building plans. d) 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"). e) Retaining walls, block walls and all on-site fencing shall be designed and detailed on the On-site Improvement Plan. This work shall be part of the On- site Improvement permit issued by the Department of Public Works/City Engineer. f) The on-site improvement plan shall include details of on-site lighting, including light location, type of poles and fixtures, foundation design, conduit location and size, and the number and size of conductors. Photometry calculations shall be provided which show that the proposed on-site lighting design will meet the intensity and distribution criteria specified by the City Police Department. Page 2 of 10 Pages 5/14/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF liE" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: g) The on-site improvement shall include all details of the modifications that are shown on the approved Conditional Use Permit Plan to be made to Central City Parking District Lot #1, including designation and marking of handicap parking spaces. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall approve the details of the modification. h) An easement or reciprocal access & parking rights will be required from the property owner at the northeast corner of "F" Street and 4th Street to allow improvement of District Lot #1 on property belonging to that parcel owner. i) A copy of the approved parking agreement between the Economic Development Agency and Caltrans regarding use of the Caltrans parking structure by theater patrons shall be provided to the Department of Public/City Engineer prior to building occupancy. j) The design of on-site improvements shall also comply with all requirements of The California Building Code, Title 24, relating to handicap parking and accessibility. k) A handicap accessible path of travel shall be provided from the public way to the building entrance. All pathways shall be paved and shall provide a minimum clear width of 4 feet. Where parking overhangs the pathway, the minimum paved width shall be 6 feet. I) A reciprocal easement shall be recorded prior to grading plan approval if reciprocal drainage, access, sewer, and/or parking are proposed to cross lot lines. Page 3 of 10 Pages 5/14/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF liE" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: m) The project Landscape Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. Submit 5 copies to the Engineering Division for Checking. 3. Utilities a) 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 (Cable TV optional for commercial, industrial, or institutional uses). b) Backflow preventers shall be installed for any building with the finished floor elevation below the rim elevation of the nearest upstream manhole. c) 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. d) Utility services shall be placed underground and easements provided as required. e) Existing Utilities which interfere with new construction shall be relocated at the Developer's expense as directed by the City Engineer, except overhead lines, if required by provisions of the Development Code to be undergrounded. See Development Code Section 19.20. Page 4 of 10 Pages 5114/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/WCORNER OF "E" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: f) 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 approved by the City Engineer will be required. This plan can be incorporated in the grading plan, where practical. 4. Maooina a) A Parcel Map based upon field survey will be required. b) 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. c) If this Map is located in an Assessment District and the assessment has not been paid off, the subdivider shall submit an apportionment application to the Real Property section of the Department of Public Works/City Engineer. Application forms can be obtained form the Real Property Section at (909) 384- 5026. d) Assessment District Apportionment Fees: . Parcel Map of 4 or fewer Parcels - $ 1.100.00. Page 5 of 10 Pages 5114/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF liE" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: 5. ImDrovement ComDletion a) Street, sewer, and drainage improvement plans for the entire project shall be completed, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, prior to the Map recordation. b) If the required improvements are not completed prior to Map recordation, an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the developer and the City will be required. 6. Street ImDrovement and Dedications a) All 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 modifications, relocation of public or private facilities which interfere with new construction, striping, 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. b) "E" Street between 4th and 5th Street and 4th Street between "F" and "E" Street shall be modified as shown in concept on the approved Conditional Use Permit plan and the project traffic analysis. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall approve details of the modification. Page 6 of 10 Pages 5114/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS! CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF "E" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: c) During the first 6 months of operation of the theater, the City will evaluate the need for a pedestrian crosswalk across "E" Street approximately 100 feet north of 4th Street. If the crosswalk is determined to be needed, then the Economic Development Agency of the City shall fund the design and construction of the crosswalk, including the possible reduction of street width and pedestrian signals, in accordance with the requirements of the Director of public Works/City Engineer. d) Handicap parking spaces shown along "E" Street shall not be counted toward the projects required number of handicap parking spaces. e) The bus stops on 4th Street and "E" Street adjacent to the site shall be relocated to a new location mutually acceptable to the City and Omnitrans. f) The applicant shall apply for vacation of the portion of 4th Street that is shown to be incorporated in the site plan. g) A signing program conforming to the Main Street theme shall be installed to direct theater patrons to public parking lots that are available for use by theater customers. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall approve the signing program. h) Construct Handicap Ramps in accordance with City Standard No. 205 at all curb returns adjacent to the project site. Dedicate sufficient right-of-way at the corner to accommodate the ramp. i) Construct Driveway Approaches per City Standard No. 204, Type II, including Handicap by-pass. Remove existing driveway approaches that are not part of the approved plan and replace with full height curb & gutter and sidewalk. Page 7 of 10 Pages 5/14/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF "E" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: j) Install Street Lights adjacent to the site in accordance with City Standard Nos. SL-1 and SL-2 modified to conform to the Main Street Theme. 7. Phasina a) If the project is to be developed in phases, each individual phase shall be designed to provide maximum public safety, convenience 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: b) Improvement plans for the total project or sufficient plans beyond the phase boundary to verify the feasibility of the design shall be complete to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; c) A Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Division, Fire, and Planning Departments indicating what improvements will be constructed with the given phase, subject to the following: d) Dead-end streets shall be provided with a minimum 32 foot radius paved width; and, e) Drainage facilities, such as storm drains, channels, earth berms, and block walls, shall be constructed, as necessary, to protect the development from off- site flows; and, f) A properly designed water system shall be constructed which is capable of providing required fire flow, perhaps looping or extending beyond the phase boundaries; and, Page 8 of 10 Pages 5114/97 ~ STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 BLDGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF liE" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: g) Pads that are not proposed for immediate building construction shall be landscaped; and, h) Easements for any of the above and the installation of necessary utilities shall be completed. 8. Reauired Enaineerina Permits a) Grading permit (If applicable.). b) On-site improvements construction permit (except buildings - see Planning and Building Services), including landscaping. c) Off-site improvement construction permit. 9. Applicable Enaineerina Fees1 a) Map Checking fee - $ 1,000.00 plus $ 30.00 per parcel. b) Plan check and inspection fees for off-site improvements - 4% and 4%, respectively, of the estimated construction cose of the off-site improvements. I All Fees are subject to change without notice. 'Estimated Construction Cost for Off-Site Improvements is based on a list of standard unit prices on file with the Department of Public Works/City Engineer. Page 9 of 10 Pages 5/14/97 STANDARD REQUIREMENTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSI CASE NO. CUP 97-01 CITY ENGINEER & PM 15038 DESCRIPTION: 20 PLEX. 80.000 SF THEA TER AND 3 SLOGS OF 20.000 SF LOCATION: N/W CORNER OF liE" ST AND 4TH STREET HEARING DATE AGENDA ITEM PAGE NO: c) Plan check and inspection fees for on-site improvements (except buildings - See Planning and Building Services) - 2% and 3%, respectively, of the estimated construction case of the on-site improvements, including landscaping. d) Plan check and inspection fees for grading (If permit required) - Fee Schedule available at the Engineering Division Counter. e) Drainage fee in the approximate amount of .J14.205. Based on 169.340 total Square Feet @ $ 0.388 per square foot for the first 3,000 square feet of impervious lot area (169,340 SF - 68,285 SF = 101,055 SF) then $ 0.133 per square foot of remaining impervious lot area or fraction thereof. f) Traffic system fee in the estimated amount of .J86.714 . Based on 5.610 trips per day @ $ 15.457 per new trip generated by the project. The City Traffic Engineer shall determine exact amount at time of application for Building Permit. g) Sewer Connection fee in the approximate amount of .J10.316 . Based on_ 135.000 Square Feet of Bldg Area @ $ 219.49 per 3,000 square feet or fraction thereof. h) Sewer inspection fee in the amount of _$74.04. Based on....!...- connection @ ~18.51 per connection. 3 Estimated Construct/on Cost for On-Site Improvements Is based on a list of standard unit prices on file with the Department of Public Works/City Engineer. Page 10 of 10 Pages 5114/97 . . Conditional Use Permit No. 91-01 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 1 BUILDING DIVISION STANDARD REQUIREMENTS 1. Submit plans prepared by a Registered Building Architect or Civil or Structural Engineer. 2. Submit a complete lateral and structural analysis prepared by a Registered Civil or Structural Engineer or Architect. 3. Submit State of California Title 24 Energy Calculation Forms for non-residential buildings including a signed compliance statement. 4. Submit floor plan of existing structure. Label all uses and existing materials of construction. 5. Submit four (6) complete sets of construction plans including: (a) Copy of conditions (5 copies) (b) Energy Calculations (3 copies) (c) Structural Calculation (3 copies) 6. Submit a single line drawing of the electrical service. Show all equipment, conduit and wire sizes and types. Show the service ground size and grounding electrode. 7. Submit panel schedule(s) and electrical plans. (Tenant Improvement Drawings) 8 Permit required for demolition of existing buildings on site. 9. Submit a plan of the heating, ventilating or air conditioning system. (Clearly identify the location and rating of the equipment and the sizes and material of all ducts, registers and the location of all fIre dampers). Show means of providing mechanical ventilation as required by the 1991 Uniform Building Code. (Tenant Improvement Drawings) 10. Submit gas pipe loads, sizing calculations and isometrics. (Tenant Improvement Drawings) II. Provide a plot plan showing the location of the proposed sewer system. 12. Submit isometric plans of cold and hot water and drain waste and vent systems. (Tenant Improvement Drawings) 13. Show compliance with Title 24 disabled access. . . Conditional Use Permit No. 97-{)1 Parcel Map No. 15038 Hearing Date: 5-20-97 Page 2 14. Submit plans approved by the County Health Department. (Tenant Improvement Drawing) 15. Fire Sprinklers Required: Plans for fire sprink1ers shall be submitted to the Fire Department and approved prior to installation. No building inspections shall be performed beyond "framing and ventilation" until fire sprinkler plans are approved. 16. City of San Bernardino named as certificate holder for Worker's Compensation Insurance. 17. Assessor's Parcel Number. 134-131-01,02,06, 15, 16, & 18; 134-121-12 & 17 18. Contractor's City license. 19. Contractor's State license. 20. Sewer capacity rights from Water Department, 384-5093. 21. School fees from Unified School District, 381-1179. 22. Other: Plan Check time is aonroximately 2 -3 weeks. 23. Deposit: $12,544.88. Plan Check fees required for development. APJ 134--13i~OI020(PISi\P18 I '~t-/'Z.l. lz..; 17,"9/.' I ~'TT60: 2- 13/97 1i SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT ~~ f,e"s (pOlPQ I STANDARD REQUIREMENTS Review of Plans: ~ ~ 0 ~ Owner/Developer: I D. ", " Type of Project: ~-r~ CoM 1'''fIf Location: tJ IN CclQJt7R. 4 - if "6 " WATER DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING: Contact: ~I LL g~y06J Date Compiled: 'Z- J I 01 f) 7 IF .. Compiled By: P J 1..6750.1 Number of Units: (rer~ .t([JjItflt'."E:." tt lop,) - Phone: :3~4-.'7 So <:} I Fax: --.3134 ~$3 z.. Note: All Water Services are Subject to the Rules & Regulations of the Water Department. 8~ 0 jiI.>., , 7H .. ., o Size of Main Adjacent the Project: t-/r /,.) 5 - ~ J 4 - , I Z ., c. II' ,,,.} E /-ow z-J6 i o Approximate Water Pressure: ~, Elevation of Water Storage: It4f Fr Hydrant Flow@20 psi: > I~~ o Type, Size, Location, and Distance to Nearest Fire Hydrant: I 0 \.I'(t>K'Mr~J 0,.1 r~6Cr ~IME'T6R <:66 MAPS 19' ~ fiJ~ t...oc.A/lOJ. ~ P6TAit...S o Pressure Regulator Required on Customer's Side on the Meter. o Off-site Water Facilities Required. o Area Not Served by San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. o Comments: WATER OUALITY CONTROL: Contact: o R.P.P. Backflow Device Required at Service Connection. o Double Check Backflow Device Required at Service Connection. o Air Gap Required at Service Connection. o No Backflow Device Required at This Time. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL/INDUSTRIAL WASTE: Contact:M!:Jtj CA~Tf<c, Phone: Fax: Phone: ~~4 %0 7 Fax: '?84- S4-B7 Note: No Regenerative Water Softeners May be Installed. o Industrial Waste Permit Required. t-.lo 'KEQu1~bJ7S '?6i<': 'D,C, t./+/rr? o Grease Trap Required. o Pre-treatment Required. SEWER CAPACITY INFORMATION: Contact: Mf':.i I Tj,DNI~PJ Phone: 3~4.- 5093 Fax: ~-5~/S Note: Proof of Payment Must be Submitted to the Building & Safety Department Prior to Issuance of the Building Permit. o No Sewer Capacity Fee Applicable at This Time. ~wer Capacity Fee Must Be Paid to the Water Department for /q71-A Gallons Per Day, Equivalent Dwelling Units: 7D il'Subject to Recalculation of Fee Prior to the Issuance of Building Permit. Breakdown of Estimated Gallons Per Day: t./, 3~g ~ C..fJ,w1u) If ~ ~ dl( t../O ..,.. ~/~ s./. td.;J e .Ol~ ; '#;0" ;n,..lOO -/.1(.1 'r"-" It.f>5 C#".J.-".. .3. J.,,~/J,:,d. (~..c~ ';>~:y. ~" f'/..7tA -p1~'I.I"a' SuJ.p fi> ~'f.~ -.(4" ..f.>r- -/bod S"-f'V;'<.. SrDREQUI2.FRM (4194) CITY OF N BERNARDINO FIRE DARTMENT STANDARD REQUIREMENTS Case: (u\) q1- oJ Date: ---/d/'" Reviewed'By: '12. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: g / Provide one additional set of construction plans to Building and Safety for Fire Department use at time of plan check. (If'" Contact the City of San Bernardino Fire Department at (909) 384-5388 for specific detailed requirements. il-""'The developer shall provide for adequate fire flow as computed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. Minimum fire flow requirements shall be based on square footage, construction features, and exposure information supplied by the developer and must be available .w:i.2I: to placing combustible materials on site. WATER PURVEYOR FOR FIRE PROTECTION: ~ The fire protection water service for the area of this project is provided by: ra.Aan Bernardino Municipal Water nepartment - En~lino..ering (909) 384.5391 o East Valley Water District - Engineering (909) 888-8986 o Other Water Purveyor: Phone: PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES: V Public fire hydrants are required along streets at intervals not to exceed 300 feet for commercial and multi-residential areas and at intervals not to exceed 500 feet for residential areas. o Fire hydrant minimum flow rates of 1,500 gpm at a 20 psi minimum residual pressure are required for commercial and multi-residential areas. Minimum fire hydrant flow rates of 1,000 gpm at a 20 psi minimum residual pressure are required for residential areas. o ,Fire flow requirements may be met from the combined flow of two adjacent fire hydrants. Fire flow requirements may be adjusted, as deemed ~ / appropriate by the Fire Department, based on individual site specific conditions and available mitigations. if Fire hydrant type and specific location shall be jointly determined by the City of San Bernardino Fire Department in conjunction with the water purveyor. Fire hydrant materials and installation shall conform to the standards and specifications of the water purveyor. o Public fire hydrants, fire services, and public water facilities necessary to meet Fire Department requirements are the developer's financial responsibility and shall be installed by the water purveyor or by the developer at the water purveyor's discretion. Contact the water purveyor indicated above for additional information. ACCESS: o Provide two separate, dedicated routes of ingress/egress to the property entrance. The routes shall be paved, all weather. ~Provide an access road to each building for fire apparatus. Access roadway shall have an all-weather driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width. ~Extend roadway to within 1 50 feet of aU portions of the exterior wall of all single story buildings. if""'" Extend roadway to within 50 feet of the exterior wall of all multiple-story buildings. g./' Provide "NO 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 - M.C. See 15.16". o Dead-end streets shall not exceed 500 feet in length and shall have a minimum 40 foot radius turnaround. o The names of any new streets (public or private) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. SITE: o All access roads and streets are to be constructed and usable prior to combustible construction. ~ Private fire hydrants shall be installed to protect each building located more than 150 feet from the curb line. No fire hydrants should be within 40 feet of any exterior wall. The hydrants shall be Wet Barrel type, with one 21/2 inch and 4 inch outlet, and approved by the Fire Department. Fire hydrants shall be designated as a "NO PARKING" zone by painting an 8 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. BUILDINGS: ~ 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 address numerals shall be 6 inches tall, single family address numerals shall be 4 inches tall. The color of the numerals shall contrast with the color of the background. o Identify each gas and electric meter with the number of the unit it serves. o Fire Extinguishers must be installed prior to the building being occupied. The minimum rating for any fire extinguisher is 2A 10B/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. o Apartment houses with 16 or more units, hotels (motels) with 20 or more units, or apartments or hotels (motels) three stories or more in height shall be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers designed to NFPA standards. rJ.-'"' All buildings, other than residential, over 5,000 square feet,_ shall be equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system designed to NFPA standards. This includes existing buildings vacant over 365 days. I!r"'"" Submit plans for the fire protection system to the Fire Department prior to beginning construction of the system. ~ Tenant improvements in all sprinklered buildings are to be approved by the Fire Department prior to start of construction. l:::r _ Provide fire alarm (required throughout). Plan must be approved by the Fire Department prior to start of installation. B--" Fire Department connection to (sprinkler system/standpipe system) shall be required at Fire Department approved location. fJl,I(~ -TO FPB 170 (11.94l ".-.'..,~ CITY OP SAN BERNARDINO PARKS, RECREATION &: COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT .. . STANDARD REQUIREMENTS Reviewed GIDIBRAL RBQ1T.tIllDlBm'S: pq ~ Commercial Indu.trial and MUlti-Unit Aa....m.nt Di.trict a.aid.ntial Purpo.., Guid.lin.. and submitt.l proc.dur. Irrigation and Land.cap~-Plan.. Contact the City of ilan B.rnardino park.,a.cr.ation and Community S.rvic.. D.partm.nt at (909) 384-5217 or 384-5314 for .p.cific d.tail.d r.quir.m.nt.. S.-cIJ'IC RBQUIRBIIBNTS: PLUl'1' IlATBRIALS ~! !Xl DlSPBCTIOH AND [~ l [ I [ I [ I [ I Xaintenanc. of landsc.p. ar.as Planter Ar.a. Interior Plant.r Ar.a. Irrigation 8ystems S.tback Ar.a. Slop. Ar.a. Ground Cov.r and Bedding Katerial Brodon Control W..d Control Plant list and Str..t Tr..s Plant Xat.rial climatic condition. Size R.quirement. and Ratios o-.nsJ5I< RBQ1T.tRBIIBNTS Irrigation Sy.tam Landscaping Rardscap. Items Str..t tr.. Sp.cification. Arborist R.port Removal or d..truction of tr... Screening R.quirement (City, Dev.Cod.) {rof"{l ~€; :-tv De.- (l/yYlov.J. a1>plicant _.t requ.st, in writing, any chang. s.rv c.. r.quirem.nt.. Additional information , Park., R.cr.ation and MS.jj . JA" e. MC>i VI st. 11'\ ," 6-re~ . . ... :. '. -'., _';;'''-;,...-'~',,_..-o,;, .."'".."---....:...;.~..' . . ATTACHMENT G TOM DODSON & ASSOCIATES 463 N. SIERRA WAY SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 TEL (909) 884-9700 . FAX (909) 889-8050 . .....,..--., ~ MEMORANDUM April 23, 1997 From: Tom Dodson To: Mike Finn, City of San Bernardino Subj: Responses to comments and recommendations for the San Bernardino Entertaimnent Center CEQA environmental determination The 30-day comment period on the proposed Negative Declaration for the San Bernardino Entertainment Center (SBEC) project ended on Monday, April 21, 1997. We received two comment letters on the Initial Study and the proposed Negative Declaration. These letters were from: 1. San Bernardino County TransportationlFlood Control Department 2. Dr. James L. Mulvihill I have prepared responses to these comments relying upon input from the project traffic engineer and your office. The responses are attached for distribution to and consideration by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) at the April 24, 1997 ERC meeting. Based on the input received, it is my recommendation to the ERC that the proposed SBEC project still warrants a Negative Declaration with mitigation measures as the appropriate environmental detennination in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). I will be at the ERC meeting to present my recommendations and to address any questions or comments that arise at the meeting. ~gk Tom Dodson Attachment LETTER 1f1 · nI"U'<Iorvn llo\IIVI'4lr"'U a..;Vl'<l I KUL DEPARTMENT-SURVEYoR as ~.._-- fU; (8llll) Xl"" ",<;.' COUNn' OF SAIf!l~llt... l'lI8I.IQ SI!>.L.JCl=l GiRDUP ..."'.,...;......",,-~.. , . -' ".- ICSNA. WIU.!R .~. ClT\' OF SAN BElINAADlNo Ol!PAlrlMBlr 01' I'U\NNI4II a. SUII..DING 8Ilt\IICS Fik Yd 05 /Fifth Sf1eet. Aptil~ 1997 07YOFSAN~O ~~S,,~~ 300 Nrit oozy StrIet SGnBmrllll&.v, Q\ 924:f8 .ATIN; Mla:lll.U.R. FINN 1-1 Dtm- Mr. Fi1m: Tht TtaffU: Dioistor: J'~J....d the Th!Oic Stw1y p..."..,c4. by Unscott lArD & Q_ JP"'1 jlr tit#: Sa ~ D4.64.........t Onfer. ~ IIIlDt fII1Id.j'rtmz.EtMff 8, "'PM Peat lRr 17oi<<:l TTAffr; Vol;rm(." that thrt: is ~. rn~~ WI 1m &u6t atuI.Fi/HI Street. ~ mpine fh/lt u.: P/ftdd. rIlIlfor :.Je.~ tI1Id,r ~ ~ IptdJiti4h; CItt F.:Iurfft fZIUl . SIr<<b from ~"_.Al1e. fD 7Yp~.l\w.12~tlSlWll. . If you. ~any further~, p1bIst amlactGary Ku1rlmzat. at (9lJ9)S87-m3. ~(\ e:::> c;J~ Y. BABlCO, 1>L aug;T.~ fY8:l.B:1c a:: KtlM:a.L-k44ing File . . -. .IS~' ,., ..~'~'=:':. :~'.. :..:: \!.:.:. ..i:..'l:~'/a ~:: .;;' 7::'~ ~::.:_... "':J:~;"S-.:~.~~ l(.!.7'";.\' /'_:-.:......~.. u....... n.. ~_"'C:(s:.....:.: :;~~'f! ::.h."aI,!:!;(.ti::~ ........ -,.... ".' .~. ...c:\::::.;cn::.s ............... 1Ikcw:.,,:!O~~! ._....~"J~~'E.; ..:.. ...... :'~._~.. ::;'l".~' :!.~1:" :!'J;.U!1t ..... _0' .., ....., :=;'~ ~S::'.::' ,~."I\:~.:.:.... ::~:'::. '., .:.....;..0:;- '1,';:. .:,r" .. ~ . . RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.1 COUNTY TRANSPORTATIONIFLOOD CONTROL DEPARTMENT I-I Please refer to the attached response prepared by the project traffic engineer which indicates that no significant traffic impacts will effect the intersections or streets east of the "E" Street/Fifth Street intersection. LINSCOTT LAW & GREENSPAN ti)rn@[gowrn~ In) APR 2 3 1997 l!:lj . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING a. BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERS & PlANNERS . TRAfFIC, TRANSPORTATION, PARKING ENGINEERS 1580 Corporate Drive, Suite 122 . Costa Mesa, California 92626 Phone: 714 641-1587 . Fax: 714641-0139 April 21, 1997 Mr. Michael R. Finn, Associate Planner CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Planning and Building Services Department 300 North "0" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 VIA FAX: (909) 384-5080 Subject: RESPONSE TO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STAFF COMMENTS TRAFFIC STIJDY REPORT SAN BERNARDINO ENTERTAINMENT CENTER San Bernardino, California Dear Mr. Finn: The following is a response letter prepared to address the comments received on the Traffic Impact Analysis Report for the San Bernardino Entertainment Center, dated March 3, 1997, from the County of San Bernardino TransportationlFlood Control Department-Surveyor. The County comment letter is dated April 9, 1997. County Comment: The Traffic Division reviewed the Traffic Study prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan for the San Bernardino Entertainment Center. We have noted from Exhibit 8, "P.M. Peak Hour Project Traffic Volume," that there is significant traffic proceeding east on Fourth and Fifth Street. We require that the affected major intersections under County jurisdiction, specifically on Fourth and Fifth Streets, from Waterman to Tippecanoe be analyzed as well. LLG Resoonse: Based on the existing street network in the project study area and anticipated project traffic distribution pattern, traffic generated by the proposed San Bernardino Entertainment Center will not significantly impact traffic conditions on 4th Street and 5th Street, east of "0" Street, in the County of San Bernardino. As stated in the report, the project traffic distribution pattern presented in Exhibit 7 of the report was developed based on the assumption that parking for the movie theatre will be provided at the Caltrans Parking Structure. The majority of project traffic, as illustrated in Exhibit 8, utilizes 4th and 5th Street to access the Caltrans Parking Structure. Philip M. Unseal!, P.E. (ReI.) lack M. Greenspan, P.E. William A. law, P.E. {ReU Paul W. Wilkinson. P.E. lohn P. Keating, P.E. David S. Shender, P.E. Pasadena. 818 796.2322 . San Diego - 619 299-3090 . Las Vegas - 702 451-1920 . An lG2W8 Company IINSCOTT [;\\\1 c\: CI.;EI i'\SI'\N . . ENGINEERS Mr. Michael R. Finn CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO April 21, 1997 Page 2 Project generated traffic is not expected to utilize 4th Street, east of "0" Street, given this downtown roadway terminates at Arrowhead Avenue. Thus, project traffic will not impact major intersections under County jurisdiction on 4th Street, between Waterman Avenue and Tippecanoe. The project volumes utilizing 4th Street total 157 trips (66 inbound, 91 outbound) and originate from the south and west, via "E" Street and 4th street (none from the east). Project traffic on 5th Street totals 194 trips. The majority of project generated traffic (143 trips) on 5th Street originates from the north and west of the study area and primarily utilize 5th Street to access the Caltrans Parking Structure. Project generated traffic on 5th, east of "0" Street, total 51 trips (27 inbound, 24 outbound). The traffic impacts of these project- related trips are expected to be insignificant and will dissipate as project traffic disperses to other local roadways prior to Waterman and Tippecanoe. Please note that based on application of the County of San Bernardino CMP impact criteria. the key signalized intersections on 5th Street, between Waterman and Tippecanoe, will not require evaluation. Per the CMP impact criteria, the study area must include intersections where the proposed project will add 80 or more peak hour trips (total of both directions). Since project traffic originating from the east on 5th street totals only 51 trips, at worse, no other intersections east of"D" Street were evaluated. * * * * * * * * * * * * This completes our response package prepared to address comments from County of San Bernardino staff on the Traffic Study Report for the San Bernardino Entertainment Center. If there are any further questions, or you require any additional information, please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, ENGINEERS ~cu4~.'?>~ Richard E. Barretto Transportation Engineer ill attachments cc: Jason Kamm, MDA-San Bernardino Associates, LLC David GauIton, Pacific Development Services Anwar Wagdy, City of San Bernardino 1 850RTC2.DOC . LETTER #2 . ~[i:~~:~~ HKKOBANDUH c:lT'I'OFSANB~.. ~O~- TO: Mr. Michael Finn Planning Department "~A City of San Bernardino:t._,~ 1P J'~' Dr. James L. Mulvihill California State Univers y, San Bernardino FROM: SUBJECT: Comments on the Initial Study, San Bernardino Entertainment Center. CC: File. DATE: April 21, 1997 The Initial Study for this project concludes that a mitigated negative declaration provides sufficient protection to the public for the anticipated negative impacts this project will produce. I have several concerns regarding this conclusion, and request that more complete environmental analysis be required. My concerns fall under five topics: parking, liquefaction, traffic, cumulative impacts and potential for creatine blight. 1) Park;n~: Regarding Initial Study Section A(9)b, Exhibit 3 of the parking study shows parking Zones 3 and 4 are two blocks from the proposed site. On page 15, the study concludes that demand on ~typical~ weekdays and weekends will ~i~n;~icantlv exceed shared parkin~, and these two last zones will be required. 2-1 Use of theaters assumes adjacent parking, or at least "line of sight.~ Assuming that patrons 'Will walk two blocks is a bad assumption. At Ontario Mills parking is adjacent to their 62 screens. Even if you parked at the far en~ of that COMplex, there ~7 be a two block walk, but the large shopping COMplex intervenes and provi~es eome attractive stops along the way. Associated with this already constrained parking situation, what are the plans for festivals such as ~Route 66." I saw nothing in the study regarding this and siailar Main Street events, e.g. tarmers markets, etc. Does the theater have contingency plans for parking during those periods? . . . . Page Two Memorandum: San Bernardino Entertainment Center April 21, 1997 2) Liau..i'.."tinn: Regarding Initial Study Section A(l)h, hi,h liquefaction potential should not be listed as "maybej" it i. a fact. In ~ memory, basements of buildings in .the vicinit7 have had to use pumps 2-2 to keep water levels down. It is a critical concern here because the theaters will be built "below grade." The problem was a major concern in the twin theaters on OranCe Show Road in which the first 5-10 rows were frequently flooded. What doe. this mean for their design? 3) Traffic: Regarding Initial Study Section A(l)a, the letter and executive summary dated Karch 3, 1997, from Mr. Richard E. Barretto of Linscott, Law and Greenspan. concludes that onl,. one of nine intersections will be negativel7 impacted by this development, that at E Street and 5th. Page iii concludes that at peak hour a LOS F will exist at this intersection. The mitigations include: re- striping and eliminating some dialonal parking. Will these sufficiently correct the LOS shortcomings generated by the project. What are the plans for "Route 66," and similar weekends? 2-3 Looking at Initial Study Section A(14)c, mandatory findings regarding cumulative impacts. The Superblock is onlT at Phase 1 in construction. Page ii of the Executive Summary of the Linscott, Law and Greenspan study indicates that cumulative impacts of Phase 2 is ~ included in. this analysis (and I couldn't identify if Phase 1 was completely covered). The Superblock has the potential of generating aany ancillary activities related to the State Office building. In fact, the present report indicates 595,000 SF of additional space is planned in Phase 2 alone! Now we have the opportunity to look more close17 about how this project will limit our future planning. If traffic and parking is tight now, what must we do to assure that future decisions won't be limited bT this project? 4) Rl;~ht: If this project fails, it will have severe blighting impact on its neithborhood, and likely the City as whole. There are other investments, in neighborhoods that will deteriorate further without funding, that can be made with the resources being risked on this project. By assuming this theater will have a "regional 2-4 v ."...............,..., . . Page Three Kemorendum: San Bernardino Entertainment Center April 21, 1997 2-4 cant. draw, tt the marketing study for this project is greatly flawed. Right now, there is a multiplex beina built in Recllends, and there are alread,. 52 screens in Ontario. At best. this project will draw _inl,. from the local community. Without a broader market, this project can't succeed. Also, the $7 .illion BUD Section 108 loan being u~ed to support over halt of this project, use. future CO_nit,. Develop.ent Block Grants as collateral. If this project fails, which -aencies won't we fund? . . . .-"~',.~" '';'h'' .'~ . . RESPONSES TO COMMENT LETTER #2 DR. JAMES L. MULVIHILL 2-1 Your comment is noted and will be made available to the City Planning Commission when it considers this project for a decision. The parking analysis allows the assumptions contained in the parking study. Visual line of site access to the theaters may be preferable as stated in your comment, but in terms of identifYing adequate parking resources the study has shown that adequate parking is available within easy walking distance. Further, although the shops along "E" Street may not be comparable to those at Ontario Mills, many small shops are located in the immediate area that provide a variety of shopping options. Regarding parking during special events, the parking evaluation does not address the "extreme" demand circumstance any more than traffic studies examine the absolute worst case traffic flow condition. The threshold for traffic and parking impacts is based on the average peak demand for circulation and parking resources. Otherwise, infrastructure would be designed for a condition that would occur only one time per year or less (for example the Rose Bowl on New Years day) and the remainder of the time such circulation and parking resources would remain unused. Typically, when too much demand exists for such resources, people will either abandon their recreation or will find an alternative, such as parking further away from the area. Given the typical peak use pattern identified in the parking study can be adequately handled with the available parking resources, but it will require a short hike from the furthest parking locations. Additional analysis would not result in any other findings, so no additional analyses are recommended. 2 . . 2-2 If you read the data carefuUy, you would have discovered that the water table at the site is currently too deep (about 100 feet at this location) to pose any liquefaction hazard. However, historic evidence indicated that the water table can reach depths below ground level at this site that may contribute to liquefaction of the site. This same problem existed for the new state building across the street, and engineering design measures were included in the design to ensure that liquefaction would not cause significant damage to this 13 storey structure. Your comment that the buildings will be built "below grade" is confusing since they will be constructed at grade. The one and two storey structures at the project site will incorporate engineered designs that can ensure the movie theater will not experience significant damage at the site if liquefaction occurs in the future. The geotechnical engineering reports for the state building are available for review at the City Planning and Building Services Department. 2-3 As noted above, the proposed designs for traffic flow deal with the weekday peak hour, i.e. a typical or average situation. For reasons stated above, circulation systems are not designed for the absolute maximum traffic flow. We know of no jurisdictions that utilize such extreme traffic conditions as the basis for assessing the significance of traffic impacts. On weekends when major events are held downtown the local system will be overloaded, but this is not considered a significant traffic impact. The City uses a LOS "E" during the weekday peak hour as the threshold for measuring significant impact to traffic flow. With the proposed mitigation, traffic impacts can be reduced below a significant level. Future decisions about the effects offuture development of the Superblock will have to be reevaulated in a subsequent Initial Study and possible a Subsequent EIR. This will be required because the circumstances at the site will have changed as a result of the movie theater development, and the next phase of the Superblock development will have to identifY the increased impacts and the measures, for both traffic and parking, that will need to be implemented to reduce impacts below a significant level. Bottom line, the timing of the potential demand for the additional commercial space is considered too speculative at this time to justify including this square footage in the traffic evaluation for this project. 2-4 This comment delves into City development policy, specificaUy socioeconomic issues, which is beyond the scope of this Initial Study. It is far too speculative to make a guess about the potential for this facility to succeed or fail economically, and the CEQA does not require evaluating either speculative or socioeconomic issues as part of the Initial Study or an EIR. The concerns identified in this comment will be provided to the decision-makers for this project for their consideration prior to a decision. 3 "",' -,,' .""-",,"+"-.'.";,,-:",,,' -@.....~ ....... . -'lID \ . . ~tate of ~alifomia .-:~ (~_.) ~..~ PETE WILSON GOVERNOR GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 95814 LEE GRISSOM DIRECTOR April 21, 1997 MIKE FINN CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 300 N. "D" STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92418 Subject: SAN BERNARDINO ENTERTAINMENT CENTER SCH #: 97031048 Dear MIKE FINN: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. Sincerely, ~4. ANTERO A. RIVASPLATA Chief, Stat~ Cl~aringhouse ~~A~~~~~~ CITY OF SAN 8ERNARDINO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & BUILDING SERVICES . . I 97031 I .lnJlOTC"_ SCH. .. -J.......c.~ /1 ~ A. I' ~~ J-. 2. ~A,-~ I ~r ,., uc.r",..",,: !. ~~ e..~ :::=:~.3 ',.E' ,J1--;;;",,}"/ :~~, >;;: --'R,---- Hot e Completion and Environment.. cum.nt Transmi<<a' Fo"" . jIJSJTdlhSvcct.SlltnIll&llIO.CA~!I:'_'I6f.uS-0b13 MaillfJ;$IIU1:CIcari ~6/..... - ..~ .lb. ,,--',hJcd'" . .. c....... 6.WifIill211li1u:LSIa1fH"'l'.~ r. RaiI.....!1 /A 4L Ci~1C '*c.w.ioll T..,.. ~ ::;:~'~cLil~ 4. liIo"aWWll" ..... , , 7. DM-' Type CEOA.; 01. E!'Q' ~,=Supplc_~m NEPA; (19, :~OJ. OTHER: 01 . _ I.....SOlSf-~i ICl.I.FO~S1 03. .c,Dcc f..e-.~ 1l..,D:WlDS 01. Dl'a.!\Dk 0-:. ~!'OC 1~.:~ 0.. ....;~OD L '---I Action T~p. 01. ~Gt.nI""l,;p4a1t Il1 ~...~ 03. GuIcrIII'IlIllAmtndlntnl OC.'~"'" ~.=......Mioo ~. ,SpllCif.c,.... G'7.~CIClllllllli:>Pla:I 05.:1l.....~1lI ~ : t.~.;...fSulJdl>i-. ~1~1;!. T:aaMap. PC.) II. )io't"Mh:=I .. O'...e$opmMIt T,.,. 0I'~1lesi6aMiII;. l'~::J_AtIQ_ ".._ O'l.;MiJIiIl.: Mjrw,.} ll1 jotr-: . Si.~~~_~;~"--'" Ol..:~v: '1'!1W m. ~:S(.1"~-~'- 09'j.;"'UItT1$IVllUCry" 04.~: k__~_E~,u_ lo..OCSJtclalll 05. W_FKiIiDu: ~c;!) 11.:..;CMI:: 06.T~: 1.,1'1 ~;~~~;----~,~---------~~~~~;~;;---ron---- -- t..~tl_IDI""""i"~ 01. . iNW (19.;- . oclSr.Jmic e1 . hu:aI.lAnd 10.' _ Iti. 'lIIIQIl(=~a."l.~ OJ.'~ 11.:~1 ~.r-. ha&ok1IUI.'H"IOIlCal 1:,~~_ ::~,c . i~.!",~~lCrl O'J. , l~.:: .'JlllIlI 01. 'JlDnir.a~ 16,~~1l~ ",-~ n. . If. ~:~~ ::-:~. ....~~11, :~ _~Svwll :!.:"'\WrllaM'Riparia ~t:I"''ildlifr :~., OrvwUlllNtuc1n. .:,. Clnt~iWc LNodllM :9.'~I:lUII:;~Effc.cv. ~.t:.0Ihc1 ~~;~~~;~~;;~~--~----~;~---A{~-~:;-------- ~.~:t~~~:~~:~---Ci~--~;--I--------~/---- ;;.-;,:;.:. ;.:-.~;:- -:?'"25-~;~U;-~itt~;:"-~~~';;?].;:r witt, .104.."- ~OtP ~.Y' 4r ~1;.// ~~/?I~'wf State Cle.nnghouse Contact: Project SeD. to the following State Ageades Mr. Chris Belsky (916) 445.{)613 Slate Review Began: ....1-...t1. !12 -1..lL 'I. I( ..J... 18" -A.. Resolrca _Boating Coastal Comm Coastal Consv Colorado Rvr Bel - Conservation ,.... --X-Fish.t:Gamc "....l3- DeltlProteetion _Foreslry ...,IL Porb " RecI.2!!!:. _ Rcclamltion BCne :::::KOWR OES BDS Transp HOIII Aeronautics =x CHP 0- -2L CaJums' -L- _ Trans Planning _ Housina Ii: Devel HeaItb A Welllre _ DrinkinS 1120 MediealWastc SuteICoDlu.er SVCI General Services CaIlEPA ARB ~CAWasleMpltBd SWRC8: Grants SWRCB, Della )( SWRCB, W" QuaJhy _ SWRC8: Wtr Rights -2L Rea. WQCB' ..k DTSC/CTC Dept. Review to Agency Alency Rev 10 SCH SCH COMPLIANCE Plnse note SCH Number on all Commeals 97031048 PIt:ue forward lale commenls dlreclly 10 tile Lad Aaeaty ytbJAdh Correctiou Corrections (adepe.deat Co... _ EnersY Comm NARC PUC _ Santa Mn MIllS -A. S.... Laads Coaun _ TIhoe Ral Plan Odlcr. AQMD/APCO.E (Resou=,~J.b- '. ,~ ~~ . hl:iit: .~.,>': .....-.'.,:. ..,.... ".;~>X --.: :\ :,-"" --- '," .,.;;f;: ,:,~(. .;1:. --.j.': ;:':~~,' '~;T~' 'r:\': ,. ~~.'~: \;".'1::; I . ATTACHMENT H . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO ENTERTAINMENT CENTER MITIGA TION MONITORING PROGRAM Prepared by: Tom Dodson & Associates 463 North Sierra Way San Bernardino, California 92410 May 8,1997 . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO ENTERTAINMENT CENTER A. INTRODUCTION This mitigation monitoring program has been prepared for use by the City of San Bernardino as it implements identified mitigation measures for the San Bernardino Entertainment Center project. This program has been prepared in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and City CEQA Guidelines. Section 21081.6 of the CEQA requires adoption of a reporting or monitoring program for those measures or conditions imposed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment. The law states that the monitoring or reporting program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. This monitoring program contains the following elements: I. All mitigation measures are recorded. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) lists the mitigation measures contained within the Initial Study. The MMRP establishes the actions and procedures necessary to ensure compliance for all mitigation measures as outlined below. 2. A procedure for compliance and verification has been outlined for each mitigation measure. In the attached MMRP sheets, the first section identifies the "General Impact" The second section lists the "Mitigation Measure." Next, the "Specific Process" for monitoring is listed. It is followed in the MMRP sheet by identification of the "Mitigation Milestone" for the mitigation measure and the "Responsible Monitoring Party." Any "Prerequisite Action For" the measure is identified and a signature block is provided for "Verification" that the measure has been implemented. 3. The program contains a separate mitigation monitoring record for each mitigation measure in the format outlined above. Copies of the MMRP and supporting data records will be retained by the City of San Bernardino (City) as part of its project files. 4. The MMRP has been designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for implementing the Program. The total Program, including any modifications, will be retained by the City as part of the project files. The individual measures and the accompanying monitoring/reporting actions follow. They are numbered in the same sequence as present in the Initial Study. PD-0401MMRP Page 1 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program B. MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTll'lED IN THF. INITIAL STUDY General Impact Development subject to landslides, mudslides, subsidence, or similar hazards. Mitigation Measure l.g.l Pursuant to and in compliance with the Cily's Liquefaction Ordinance (MC-676), the applicant shall have a qualified geotechnical professional (Engineering Geologist or Professional Engineer) prepare a geotechnical stndy of the project site prior to completing the final design of the structures. As part of this geotechnical study, the potential for groundshaking, subsidence and liquefaction impacts shall he investigated for this site and, if reqnired, measures to mitigate potential groundshaking and liquefaction hazards shall he identified. This investigation shall include an evaluation of historic water table levels and the role that a rising water table could play in potential for liquefaction. The applicant shall implement those measures required to protect the structures from significant groundshaking, subsidence, and liquefuction hazards. For this project, reduced below a significant impact shall he hased on a design that protects life and minimizes damage to the structures. Specific Process Review and approval of the geotechllical study, engineering drawings, or construction plans by the City's Building and Engineering departments. Mitigation Milestone Prior to issuance of grading and building permits. Copies of the approved geotechllical study and construction drawings shall be kept in the project file. Responsible Monitorinil Party City of San Bernardino Engineering and Building departments PrereQJ.Iisite Action(1l) For Submitted to the City with engineering/construction drawings. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 2 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prognnn General Impact Pollutant emissions associated with the project. Mitigation Measure 2.a.1 The theater operators shall work with Onmitrans to develop employee and attendance package(s) that provide some benefit to attendees that use public transit to travel to the site. Such packages could include reduced ticket prices, free goods, extended transfer hours for bus tickets, or free bus tickets. Specific Process A copy of the agreement between the developer and Omnitrans or notification that the terms of this measure have been met shall be submitted to the City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Department prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. Mitigation Milestone A copy of the agreement between the developer and Omnitrans or written notification that the terms of this measure have been met shall be provided by the City Planning and Building Department prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Department. Prerequisite Action(s) For City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 3 I . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact Increase in noise generation. Miti~ation Measure 5. b.l Exterior construction activities involving noise producing equipment shall be restricted to the hours between 7 :00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., except in the event of an emergency. Specific Process This requirement shall be made a condition of all construction contracts for the project. Non- compliance shall be considered a violation of the contract. Miti~ation Milestone A copy of the executed contract shall be provided to the City Public Works and/or Building departments prior to issuance of construction permits. A copy of the executed contract shall be kept in the project file. Verification of implementation shall be made by City inspectors during site inspections. Inspection reports shall either state the contractor is in compliance or identify the time of violation. Responsible Monitoring Party The City Public Works and/or Building departments shall keep copies of the contracts and inspection reports in the project file, as well as, records of violations and the actions taken to remediate the violations. Prerequisite Action(s) For Approval of construction plans and execution of contracts. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 4 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prognnn General Im.pact Increase in noise generation. Mitigation Measure S.b.2 The applicant shall ensnre that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise control equipment (muffiiers or silencers). Specific Process This requirement shall be made a condition of all construction contracts for the project. Non- compliance shall be considered a violation of the contract. Mitigation Milestone A copy of the executed contract shall be provided to the City Public Works and/or Building departments prior to issuance of construction permits. A copy of the executed contract shall be kept in the project file. Verification of implementation shall be made by City inspectors during site inspections. Inspection reports shall either state the contractor is in compliance or identifiy the time of violation. The inspection report shall also verifY that remediation measures were successfully implemented. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Public Works and/or Building departments. Prerequisite Action(&) For Approval of construction plans and execution of contracts. City verification by: PD-ll4OIMMRP Page 5 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Im-pact Increase in noise generation. Mitiilation Measure 5.b.3 Ifnoise compliants are received from residents, the applicant shall install portable noise reduction walls or barriers to attenuate sound levels to less than 3 dBA greater than backgrmmd sound level. Specific Process This requirement shall be made a condition of all construction contracts for the project. Non- compliance shall be considered a violation of the contract. Mitiilation Milestone A copy of the executed contract shall be provided to the City Public Works and/or Building departments prior to issuance of construction permits. A copy of the executed contract shall be kept in the project file. Verification of implementation shall be made by City inspectors during site inspections after complaints are received. The inspection report shall verify that the remediation measures were successfully implemented to attenuate noise levels to less than 3 dBA greater than background sound levels. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Public Works and/or Building departments. Prerequisite Action(s) For Approval of construction plans and execution of contracts. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 6 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prognnn General Impact Release of hazardous substances. Mitigation Measure 7.b.1 The applicant shall require all contractors to control spills of petrolewn products and, if such spills occur, the contaminated soil or other material shall be collected and/or treated and disposed of at a facility licensed for contaminated soil. Records of spills and clean-up efforts shall be retained by the developer or contractor and made available to the City upon request. Specific Process This requirement shall be made a condition of all construction contracts for the project. Non- compliance shall be considered a violation ofthe contract. Mitigation Milestone A copy of the executed contract shall be provided to the City Public Works and/or Building departments prior to issuance of construction permits. A copy of the executed contract shall be kept in the project file. Verification of implementation shall be made by City inspectors during site inspections. Inspection reports shall either state the contractor is in compliance or identifiy the time of violation. A record ofthe spill and cleanup efforts shall be provided to the inspector immediately after the incident. This record shall be placed in the project file. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Public Works and/or Building departments. Prerequisite Action(s) For Execution of construction contracts. City verification by: PD-ll4O!MMRP Page 7 . . San Bernardino Entertairunent Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact A significant increase in traffic volumes. Mitigation Measure 9.a.l Restripe the north and south legs of"E" Street to provide exclusive left-turn lanes and a shared through-right lane. To accommodate this improvement, some of the existing on-street angled parking and along the east and west side of "E" Street will need to be eliminated or converted to parallel parking spaces. Specific Process Review and approval of street improvement plans. Mitililation Milestone Prior to issuance of road construction permits. Prior to release of street improvement bonds. Responsible Monitorinl1 Party City of San Bernardino Public Works Department and City inspectors. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of street improvement plans. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 8 . . San Bernardino Entertaimnent Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact Road construction impacts. Mitigation Measure 9.[ I The construction contractor or applicant shall provide adequate traffic control resources (signing, protective devices, crossing devices. detours, flagpersons. etc.) to maintain safe traffic flows on all streets affected by construction activities. If construction beneath a road is not completed by the end of the days work, the contractor or applicant shall ensure that an adequate traffic access route exists to all areas where access exists at the time of construction. Specific Process The City Public Works Department shall review and approve a plan to manage traffic during construction prior to issuance of road construction permits. Mitigation Milestone Prior to issuance of road construction permits. Implementation shall be verified by City insepctors. The City inspectors shall maintain a record of non-compliance and remediation measures implemented. Responsible Monitorina: Party City of San Bernardino Public Works Department and City inspectors. PrereqJJisite Action{ s) For Submittal of street improvement plans. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 9 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact Road construction impacts. Mitigation Measure 9.f.2 Traffic hazards that may affect vehicles, bicycles, or pedestrians shall be identified and controlled by the contractor or applicant prior to construction and resources made available to prevent or minimize these hazards during construction. Specific Process The City Public Works Department shall review and approve a plan to manage traffic during construction prior to issuance of road construction permits. Mitigation Milestone Prior to issuance of road construction permits. Implementation shall be verified by City insepctors. The City inspectors shall maintain a record of non-compliance and remediation measures implemented. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Public Works Department and City inspectors. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of street improvement plans. City verification by: PD-0401I\.1rvlRP Page 10 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prop;ram General Impact Impacts to fire service. Mitigation Measure lO.a.1 Require that the project construction meet the standards referenced above related to type of construction, materials and installation of sprinklers during the review of planning, building, and construction drawings. Specific Process The City of San Bernardino Building and Fire departments shall review and approve all building and construction plans prior to assuance of building or construction permits. Mitigation Milestone Plans will be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. Verification of compliance will be provided by City inspectors during inspections and prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Building and Fire departments. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of building and construction plans. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 11 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact Adequate water supply for firefighting. Mitigation Measure 1O.a.2. The applicant shall ensure that adequate infrastructure and water supply are available onsite and per City standards to meet peak flow requirements and that they will be in place and operational prior to occupancy of the new facilities. Specific Process The City of San Bernardino Municipal Water and Building departments shall review and approve all building and construction plans prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation Milestone Plans will be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. Verification of compliance will be provided by City inspectors during inspections and prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party The City of San Bernardino Municipal Water and Building departments. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of building and construction plans. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 12 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prowam General Impact Adequate fire access. Mitigation Measure lO.a.3 The Developer shall be responsible for lbe installation, maintenance, and enforcement of adeqnate access to all facilities for fire equipment within structures and on lbe adjacent roadways. Specific Process The City of San Bernardino Building and Fire departments shall review and approve all building and site development plans prior to issuance of building or construction permits. Mitigation Milestone Plans will be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. Verification of compliance will be provided by City inspectors during inspections and prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Building and Fire departments. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of building and site development plans. City verification by: PD-040~ Page 13 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prognnn General Impact Public safety. Mitigation Measure 1O.b.l The applicant shall confer with the City Police Department and jointly develop a set of reconnnendations for enhancing public safety within the structures and in courtyard areas. These recommendations should address both physical installation of crime prevention deterrents, as well as recommendations for patrolling schedulres and the recommendations shall be implemented by the applicant prior to finalizing building plans. Specific Process The City of San Bernaridno Police and Building departments shall review and approve building and site development plans prior to issuance of site development and building permits. The City Building Department shall obtain written clearance from the Police Department regarding compliance with this mitigation measure prior to issuance of the building and site development permits. Miti~ation Milestone Plans will be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of building and site development permits.' Verification of compliance will be provided by City inspectors during inspections and prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. RellPonsible Monitoring Party The City of San Bernardino Police and Building departments. PrereQlJisite Action(&) For Submittal of building and site development plans. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 14 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Miti"ation Monitorin!! and Reportin" PrO!\Tatn General Impact Solid waste disposal. Mitigation Measure 1O.f. I The applicant/operators shall work with the City Public Services Department to intewate its waste management efforts with a prO!\Tatn of recycling activities by the theaters consistent with City's adopted Source Reduction and Recycling Element. This prowam shall include the identification of methods to reduce wastes at the source and increase the volume of recyclable materials that can be delivered to markets for reuse. Specific types of prO!\TatnS inclne waste segregation (cardboard, plastic, metals, etc.), delivery of waste to the City's proposed Materials Recovery Facility, and delivery of compostable materials to the City's proposed composling facility. Specific Process The City of San Bernardino Planning Department shall obtain a copy of a written agreement between the developer and the City's Public Services Department which identifies the programs that will be implemented to achieve waste reduction, segregation, and recycling. Mitigation Milestone Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Public Services and Planning departments. PrereQJlisite Action( s) For City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 15 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact Energy resources. Mitigation Measure II.a.1 The developer shall confer wi1l1 1I1e City Municipal Water Department regarding 1I1e ability to utilize local geo1l1ermal resources for space heating and cooling. If judged feasible by 1I1e City and developer, 1I1e ge01l1ennal resource shall be developed and used at 1I1e site as an energy source. Specific Process The City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department shall review the building plans for the project and provide written verification to the City Building Department that its recommendations regarding the use of the available geothermal resources have been implemented. Mitigation Milestone Plans will be reviewed and approved prior to issuance ofbuiJding permits. Verification of compliance shall be provided by City inspectors during inspections and prior to issuing certificates of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Municipal Water and Building departments. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of building plans. City verification by: PD-0401MMRP Page 16 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Miti~ation Monitorin~ and Reportin~ Prowam General Impact Cultural resources. Miti~ation Measure 13 .a. 1 The applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologiclhistorian who shall be onsite when any subsurface disturbance activities are undertaken. Specific Process A signed contract with a qualified archaeologist/historian to monitor subsurface disturbance activities shall be provided the City Planning and Building Department prior to issuance of grading and building permits. Miti~ation Milestone A copy of the signed contract shall be provided the City Building Department prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Department. Prerequisite Action(s) For Submittal of grading plans. City verification by: PD-040/MMRP Page 17 . . San Bernardino Entertainment Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program General Impact Cultural resources. Mitit;:ation Measure 13.b.2 If any resources are encountered in an undisturbed condition as determined by the archaeologistlhistorian, construction in that area shall be halted until test pits can be installed. Any cultural resources encountered as a result of the test pits shall be properly mitigated through testing, collection, documentation, and curation. Specific Process Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the developer shall submit a report to the City Building Department from the archaeologist/historian detailing the results ofthe monitoring activities includnig the disposition of any resources recovered. Mitigation Milestone The archaeologistlhistorians reports shall be submitted prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. Responsible Monitoring Party City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Department. Prerequisite Action(s) For Issuance of grading and site development permits. City verification by: PD-04O!MMRP Page 18 GLENN R WATeON ROBI!RT GIo. BI!Vl!RL Y HAl'IAYL-Gm=ll!It1ON 00UGILA8 W. ARQUIi MARK L.. LAMKI!N I!AWINeo~ DAROU:) D. Pl5"1!Fl ALU!!NeoAl!NNeTT ~C"""""" WlLUAM L- l!I'n'IAUU ANTHONY" DAI!WFlY MITCHELL eo AII~ TIMOTHY L- Nl!lJ~El.D GIoAl!GIoORV W. ~ANIClCH FIOCHI!ll..E lIAOWNE MICHAEL JENIONe WlLUAM II. ....DeLJ.. QUINN M. I!IARAOW CAROLW. LYNCH JI!....Fl~ A. RA8IN G1R1!G1ORV M.KUNI!RT THOMAS M. JIMIIO MICHELI! 1leAL.I!IAGINI!FllS AMANDA~. eutIlIKJND FlOBI!AT C. ceCCON ~YAI! Wl!AVI!R l!JTeVEN H. KAUflMANN GN<Y ~ QANO JOHN J. HAFlAI8 KI!VINGIo.I!NNIa RO"N D. HAFlAI8 MOCHAOl- 08TAACA LAURI!NCI!: lIS. WIENeR ..........- MICHAl!L G. COLANT\JONO B.TlLDI!!NIOM C. I!CWAAD DlI..KI!8 F"eTI!Fl M. THOA8ON I!!lAI!NDAL-DlI!Dl!JllCH8 Dl!l!IORAH R HAKMAN ......ND.WI!!INI!Fl 8A8l<lA T. AaAMUAA KAveeR O. BUMI! SAlJL J.##lI'I! CFWGIoA.aTEEU!! T.~RPlI!ACe FII!IM!CCA MAAlf! MADRID D-'VlD l"t08I!P'lT DANleut 8I!!NJAMIN !IN'lINOUW TI!F'lI!NCl!!R.1!IOGIoA DANII!LL-PlNY UOA BOND DlANI! API<CNt GlROel!I ROY,,""""'" AOXANNIE DlAZ MONTlIOMI!FlY AOIIII!ATAllAL8l.Jt!NA EFllKA M. fI1..eMlNaI 0l.JV\A WAI-~ SUAN AMY W. CHINGI RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PAOFES8lONAL CORPORo\TION THIRTY-ElGHTH FLOOR 3M SOUTH HOPE STREET LOS ANGELES, CAUFORNIA 80071-1'" (213) e2e-B4M FACSIMILE (213) e2e-0078 la@rwglaw.com RICHARD RICHARDS (1.1.1888) July 18, 1997 8AN fIRANC~ 0l"l'"lC1! TWO EMB&RC.o\DERO CENTER SUITE ... SAN FRANCISCO, CAUFORNIAe4111-3801 (.15) ....'230 FACSIMILE (.15) 83&-1236 8f@rwglaw.com OF COUNSEL WlUJAM K KRAMER 0080976 OUR F"-E: NUMBER 11199-00002 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council City of San Bernardino 300 North "0" Street San Bernardino, California 92346 Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038 Dear Mayor and Counci1members: We are the attorneys for Mano Manufacturing Co., Inc., the appellant upon the above-described appeal. Please be advised that our client has elected to and does hereby withdraw and abandon said appeal. There will, accordingly, be no appearance by this office at the hearing on said appeal, presently set for July 21, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. HLG:s1w 0080976 Entered into Record.t CouncillCmyDevCms Mtg: '7 / ~ I /17 bV re Agenrta Item 35 ~~~ City Clerk/COC Secy City of San Bernardino \O)rn ~ rn G\Y1rn It' \ill JUl 2 \ \997 ~ CITY Of SAN BE~['t~~1~8 8< DEPA~1~6~JGO~ERVICES 7-21- '17 :#35' KI t J~t'/y v (~JIY M FAX COVER SHEET e If there are any problems with this transmission please contact.., ;') Paul M. Quinton Phone: 619-299-9660 Fax: 619~299-9660 ;:::: c;? ; --, " -~ C)'1 Ul To: Eddie Negrete FIrst Ward 384-5105 Mon, Jul2l, 1997 Fax: Pages: Subject: I'm sorry to be responding with this fax so tardily, but it has just come to my attention that the council wll be hearing the issue of the downtown cinemas again in order to consider charges of negative impacts on the envirionment. My two i decades of experience with the downtown area drive'me to the firm conviction that an absence or delay of the project will have a much more negative impact on the area than any thing connected with its construction. Please, let's move on and not be falsely distracted by those who seem to care less about whether the center of San Bernardino functions or not. The downtown definitely needs the facility in order to function for its people. Further delays are destructive. Sincerely, ~/ dy/ Paul M. Quinton Owner 361-685 N. E. St. -,PI. .T'_L -.2.i. -1,'3'37 ! 1 . -,' -.... '-'... =;:ri,j r.::=::--fT":::HL C I "'-', ':::1 -I-~ J::::-1S1eS 240 CAROUSEL MALL' SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92401 . PHONE (909) 884-1123 ;'.J Dear Mayor and Council ::-?'" -. Luke and V ondey Jewelers respectfully requests that yOIL deny the appeal of the Planning-' Commission approval of the downtown theater project. ~ We believe that the delay will stop the theater project all together and send a negative message to any future investors and the businesses already here about the City or San Bernardino. San Bernardino should feel very fortunate that a large company or any COmpany would invest their time and money in San Bernardino's downtown area, you need to make it as easy as possible for them to build the theaters and all future projects. The decision before you is truly momentous, please use every means at your disposal to assure that tbe theaters move ahead on schedule. Thank You --~~-~ Gtegory LuKe Luke and Vondey 1ewelers Entered into Record It I / Cl 7 Council/CmyDevCms Mtg: 7 ~ / I by re Agenda Itelll ~S ~~ City Clerk/CDC Secy City of San Bernardino TOTHL F'. 01 F', O~ o '0 f3f