The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About28-Water Department CITV OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTlDN From: Bernard C. Kersey, General Manager '~10\.", ,r;::;-, ,\,J/ Water '~ \:c I j 'U L -" l~ Subject: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-1. .: Date: September 23,2002 Synopsis of Previo~s Council Action: None Recommended motion: Adopt Resolution . Signature Contact person: Bernard C. Kersev. General Manaoer Phone: 384-5091 Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: ALL =UNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source:(Acct. No.) Water Department (Acct. Description) Finance: :ouncil Notes: . ;"0282 Agenda Item No. 11/1~2- ;;J.g CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION . STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Agreement for Sewer Service between the City of San Bernardino, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department and County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-I BACKGROUND: The City of San Bernardino has been in negotiations with the County of San Bernardino Special Districts to provide sewer service to an area that is outside the corporate limits of the City of San Bernardino known as the Donut Hole. The Donut Hole is an unincorporated island, bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, Lugonia Avenue and State Highway 30 (1-210), that is surrounded on all sides with property that is within the corporate limits of the City of Red lands. The Donut Hole has been an area of considerable discussion for several years because of fundamental disagreements regarding development standards between the developers of the area and the City of Redlands. Special state legislation was enacted which took the Donut Hole area. out of the City of Red lands' sphere of influence. Subsequently, the County of San Bernardino prepared a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which, in part, evaluated several options for water and sewer service for the project area. One of the options that was evaluated was to obtain water and sewer service from the City of San Bernardino. With previous direction from the Board of Water Commissioners, the Mayor, and members of the Council it .as determined that the City should not provide water service to the area but that sewer service ould be considered. The County of San Bernardino Special Districts and the City of Red lands did develop an agreement for municipal services, including water and sewer service that was approved on January 8, 2002. The Redlands Association has challenged that agreement with multiple lawsuits. One of the property owners within the Donut Hole, along with County of San Bernardino Special Districts Department representatives, began discussions with the City of San Bernardino for a sewer service agreement in April 2002 because the developer was trying to ha,ve a portion of their development built by April 2003- They did not want to wait for all of the legal determinations to be resolved over the agreement with Redlands. Representatives of the City have had meetings with representatives of the County of San Bernardino Special Districts Department, Majestic Realty Company, and their respective legal counsels. Throughout these negotiation meetings, the county and the developer were advised that there are two agreements that had to be negotiated in order for the Donut Hole to receive sewer service from the City of San Bernardino. One agreement would cover the technical and operational aspects for the provisions of sewer service. The second agreement would be between the City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino and would cover additional remuneration to the City for making sewer service available for development of this area, to offset the potential negative consequences to sales tax generation in the City and property tax losses that could occur through direct competition for development of retail and .ommercial/industrial projects. Agreement for Sewer Service Page 2 PROPOSED SEWER SERVICE AGREEMENT: Attached is a copy of the Agreement for Sewer Service Between the City of San Bernardino and County . Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l (CSA 70 EV-l). The significant terms ofthe agreement are as follows: .. City will provide sewer service for the Donut Hole up to a level of 322,500 gallons per day. This represents a portion of the unused capacity of the sewer transmission line the City has that would be allocated to this area. The level was determined in coordination with the Deputy Director of Development Services after a review of the recently completed Sewer Master Plan. This level of service was selected because the existing facilities, both the city's sewage collection system and treatment works, have adequate capacity for this level of service without requiring any upgrades or expansion. Service beyond this level would have to be evaluated and a scope of project defined. There is insufficient information available to prepare or complete these future planning studies, and it would be premature to speculate on whether and to what extent any new facilities would be required. · Any additional service beyond the above stated allocated capacity must be agreed to by both parties and all costs for additional transmission pipeline capacity related to service for the Donut hole must be borne by County Special Districts. · CSA 70 EV-l is to do all billing and collection based upon the sewer rates and fees currently and subsequently adopted by the City of San Bernardino, including monthly sewer service charges, connection fees, and capacity fees. The County is to pay the City based upon billings, not collections, on a bi-monthly basis. · CSA 70 EV-l is to obey and require all persons and customers discharging into or using the City's . sewer system to obey all federal, state, and city ordinances resolutions, rules and regulations and shall not allow prohibited discharges. CSA 70 EV-l will contract with our department to conduct the non-domestic wastewater inspection and permitting program on their behalf. · The term of the agreement is until the later of (a) thirty years, (b) annexation to an existing or incorporated into a new city and LAFCO makes a determination as to which entity will be the sewer service provider, or (c) termination by' CSA EV-I if they decide to select a different sewer service option, (d) termination by the City if the Inducement Agreement is not approved and signed by the . County, or (e) by mutual agreement of the Parties. . · Whenever the consent or approval of either of the parties is required, that Party shall not unreasonable withhold or delay such consent or approval. · In the event that the Inducement Agreement between the County and the City is not approved and executed, then any duty on the part of the City to provide collection or wastewater capacity and treatment is terminated. If the Inducement Agreement is subsequently breached or terminated, then the City is only obligated to continue service to those connections in place prior to the breach or termination. INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT: Discussions have occurred with representatives of the City of San Bernardino and County of San Bernardino to develop an agreement wherein the County would provide consideration to the City of San Bernardino if it provides sewer service pursuant to the agreement referenced hereinabove. Representatives of the respective agencies have reached accord on th.e additional agreement and the .n~\Icement Agreement is to be presented to the Mayor and Common Council under separate council actIOn. Agreement for Sewer Service Page 3 . COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT: The County's Board of Supervisors specifically contemplated that the City would provide wastewater services, as set forth in the proposed agreement, and this provision of services was one of the potential actions included in the project when the County certified the EIR for the project, in its role as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). . Under the terlris of CEQA, as they pertain to this Agreement, the City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department would be considered responsible agencies and their duty is to consider only those aspects of a project that are subject to the responsible agency's jurisdiction. In this case, the City's jurisdiction is over the sewer collection aspects of the project, as well as the wastewater capacity and treatment components. Public Resources Code Section 21104,21153, 21069. The lead agency is responsible for overall compliance with CEQA; once the lead agency has acted, the responsible agency must generally rely on the lead agency's CEQA document and ordinarily is not entitled to prepare a separate EIR or negative declaration. . See, Bakman v. Department ofTransp. (1979) 99 C.A3d 665, 678. A responsible agency must adopt findings when it approves a project subject to CEQA for which an EIR was prepared. See, 14 Cal Code Regs Section 15096(h). The language in this regulation may properly be interpreted to require findings only for those effects within the scope of the responsible agency's specialized jurisdiction. If necessary, a responsible agency must adopt a statement of overriding considerations as well. . The responsible agency must file a notice of determination but need not state that the EIR or negative declaration complies with CEQA. In the notice, the agency should state that it considered the EIR or negative declaration as prepared by a lead agency. A subsequent or supplemental EIR may also be required if there are substantial changes to the project or surrounding circumstances or significant new information becomes available. City of San Bernardino staff have determined that, at this time, the provision of sewer services under the proposed agreement, as limited by the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with the sewer services that maybe required under the approved City of San Bernardino General Plan, is not expected to require the construction of new facilities beyond those described in the County's EIR. At some point in the future, the parties to the proposed. agreement intend to undertake a planning study to determine if the construction of additional physical facilities will be required to provide sewer service in excess of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with other future sewer services which the City may decide to provide to other areas in the future. At this time, there is insufficient information available to prepare or complete these future planning studies, and it would be premature to speculate .on whether and to what extent any new facilities would be required. The City and CSA 70 EV -I will use the results of these future planning studies to determine whether or not the provision of sewer services for the Donut Hole should be expanded beyond the Allocated Pipeline Capacity. CSA 70 EV-I (or County of San Bernardino) shall act as lead agency .under CEQA for any environmental review of facilities that are necessary for sewer service for the. Donut Hole in excess of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity. . . . Agreement for Sewer Service Page 4 FINDINGS: Staffreconunends that the Mayor and Common Council make the follawing findings in connection with approval of the Agreement for Sewer Service: I. . Pursuant to its role as lead agency, the County of San Bernardino certified and adopted its Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 1999101123, as so noticed in its Notice of Determination filed October 23,2001, copies of which have been distributed with this staff report, along with other supporting documentation from the County's certification of the subsequent EIR. 2. The County of San Bernardino contemplated and reviewed the option of having the City of San Bernardino provide sewer connection and wastewater capacity and treatment through an Agreement for Sewer Service as a discretionary action and no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for this proposed agreement under Public Resources Code Section 21166. 3. The County of San Bernardino made specific findings (Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations FSEIR SCH#1999101123, Findings 5.8.2 and 5.8.3) regarding sewer services that are hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in their entirety . 4. Provision of sewer services under the proposed Agreement, as limited by the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with the sewer services that may be required under the approved City of San Bernardino General Plan, is not expected to require the construction of new facilities beyond those described in the County's EIR. 5. The parties to this proposed Agreement intend to undertake a planning study to determine if the construction of additional physical facilities will be required to provide sewer service in excess of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with other future sewer services which the City may decide to provide to other areas in the future. At this time, further determination will be made as to any additional environmental analyses that must be conducted. 6. . The City and CSA 70 EV -1 shall use the results of these future planning studies to determine whether or not the provision of sewer services for the Donut Hole should be expanded beyond the Allocated Pipeline Capacity. 7. The City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department are responsible agencies under CEQA. 8. Within the scope of their jurisdiction, the City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department find that there are no additional effects, not. contemplated by the County's EIR, requiring further analysis or mitigation. I Agreement for Sewer Service Page 5 FINANCIAL IMPACT: . The City of San Bernardino will receive financial' incentives, in the form of an Inducement Agreement, to provide the services in the Agreement for Sewer Service. Additionally, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department will receive sewer connection, sewer capacity and sewer lreatment- associated fees. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution and direct stafPto file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk's office for the County of San Bernardino. . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 fl8 cf" ~"I !~\~~" W RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-1. WHEREAS, the geographic area know as the "Donut Hole" is located in the unincorporated area of the County of San Bernardino and is bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, Lugonia Avenue and State Highway 30 (1-210); and, WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino, County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1 and the County of San Bernardino have an interest in the provision of adequate sewer service to the Donut Hole; and, WHEREAS, the County of San Bernardino's Board of Supervisors, by .unanimous vote, has approved. amendments to its General Plan, repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, amendments of the County Development Code, the adoption of a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for the Donut Hole, including various options for the provision of water supply and wastewater treatment as described in the Facilities Plan, modifications to previous planning approvals and certified an Environme'ntal Impact Report (EIR) for such actions; and , WHEREAS, County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1 has pursued alternative options for obtaining sewer services for the Donut Hole pursuant to the Facilities Plan and the EIR certified by the County's Board of Supervisors for the Facilities Plan and other actions affecting the Donut Hole, including the option of contracting with the City for treatment of wastewater as described in the EIR; and -1- 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV - 1. WHEREAS, the City of. San Bernardino, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, and County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l have developed and agreement with terms that are acceptable to each of the parties that governs the rights and obligations of the parties relating to provision of sewer service to County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l by the City of San Bernardino; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department are responsible agencies for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department have considered the County of San Bernardino's Final Subsequent EIR and have determined that the County of San Bernardino contemplated all effects within the scope of their jurisdiction; NOW, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Mayor and Common Council adopt the following findings relative to compliance with the California 20. Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ,,8 (a) Pursuant to its role. as lead agency, the County of San Bernardino certified and adopted' its Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) , State Clearinghouse No. 1999101123, as so noticed in its Notice of Determination filed October 23, 2001, copies of which have been distributed with this staff report, along with other suPP?rting documentation from the County's certification of the -2- 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 .8 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-l. subsequent EIR, (b) The County of San Bernardino contemplated and reviewed the option of having the City of San B'ernardino provide sewer connection and wastewater capacity and treatment through an Agreement for 'Sewer Service as a, discretionary action and no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for this proposed agreement under Public Resources Code Section 21166. (c) The County of San Bernardino made specific findings (Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations FSEIR SCH#1999101123, Findings 5.8.2 and 5.8.3) regarding services sewer that are hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in their entirety. (d) Provision of sewer services under the proposed Agreement, as limited by the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with the sewer services that may be. required under the approved City of San Bernardino General Plan, is not expected to require the construction of facilities new beyond those described in the County's EIR. (e) The parties to this proposed Agreement intend to undertake a planning study to determine if the construction of additional physical facilities will be required to provide sewer service in excess of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with other future sewer services which the City may decide to -3- 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 .28 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-1. provide to otqer areas in the future. At this time, further determination will be made as to any additional environmental analyses that must be conducted. (f) The City and CSA 70 EV-l shall use the results of these future planning studies to determine whether or not the provision of sewer services for the Donut Hole should be expanded beyond the Allocated Pipeline Capacity. (g) The City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department are responsible agencies under CEQA. (h) Within the scope of their jurisdiction, the City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department find that there are no additional effects, not contemplated by the County's EIR, requiring further analysis or mitigation. SECTION 2. The AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERIVCE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV -1, a copy of which is attached hereto marked "Exhibit 1" -and is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth at length herein, is approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute this Agreement. I I I I I I I I I I II -4- 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . 15 16 17 18 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-l. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the ., 2002, by the following vote, to wit: day of COUNCIL MEMBERS AYES NAYS ABSENT ABSTAIN ESTRADA LIEN MCGINNIS DERRY SUAREZ ANDERSON MCCAMMACK Rachel Clark, City Clerk The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 20 19 day of 21 22 23 24 , 2002. Approved as to form and legal content: Judith Valles, Mayor City of San Bernardino 26 25 JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney 27 By: . 28 -5- 1 .2 .15 16 28 . 3 City Attorney DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-l 4 5 6 THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is by and between the City of San Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department by and through its Board of Water Commissioners (jointly and severally called "City") and. County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l ("CSA 70 EV-l"). The City and CSA 70 EV-l 7 8 9 10 11 are sometimes referred to jointly as "Parties" and individually as a "Party." This Agreement governs the rights and obligations of the Parties relating to provision of sewer service to CSA 70 EV-l by the City. This Agreement is effective as of the date last approved 12 13 14 by the Parties, and terminates in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 17 RECITALS 18 WHEREAS, the geographic area known as the "Donut Hole" and as 19 more fully described in the attached Exhibit "A", Donut Hole 20 Description, is located in the unincorporated area of the County of 21 San Bernardino ("County"); and, 22 WHEREAS, The City, CSA 70 EV-l and the County have an interest 23 in the provision of adequate sewer service to the Donut Hole; and, WHEREAS, The County's Board of Supervisors, by unanimous vote, has approved amendments to its General Plan, repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, amendments of the County Development Code, the adoption of a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan ("Facilities Plan") for the Donut Hole (including various options 24 25 26 27 -1- City Attorney DRAFT 1 for the provision of water supply and wastewater treatment as ~ 2 described in the Facilities Plan), modifications to previous 3 planning approvals and certified an Environmental Impact Report 4 ("EIR") for such actions; and, 5 WHEREAS, CSA 70 EV-l is pursuing alternative options for 6 obtaining sewer services for the Donut Hole pursuant to the 7 Facilities Plan and the EIR certified by the County's Board of 8 Supervisors for the Facilities Plan and other actions affecting the 9 Donut Hole, including the option of contracting with the City for. 10 treatment of wastewater as described in the EIR; 11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, in consideration of the 12 promises and mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the 13 Parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 14 .15 16 AGREEMENT Section 1. SEWER SERVICE. 17 1.1 Both the City and CSA 70 EV-l will acquire, construct and, 18 except as herein provided, maintain, repair, manage, operate and 19 control independently from each other facilities for the collection 20 of sewage. The City will also acquire, construct, maintain, 21 repair, manage, operate and control, independently from CSA 70 EV- 22 1, facilities for the treatment and disposal of sewage. The parts 23 of said City facilities involved in this Agreement are the 24 Southeast Industrial Sewer Line, appurtenances and any required 25 relief line (s) ("City Transmission Pipeline") and the facilities 26 connected thereto for the treatment and disposal of lOlewage ("City 27 Wastewater Treatment Facility"). The City Transmission Pipeline is . 28 shown on Exhibit "B", City Transmission Pipeline. Said City -2- City Attorney DRAFT . 2 and shall be owned solely by the City. 1 Transmission Pipeline and City Wastewater Treatment Facility are The City shall operate, 3 maintain and preserve said City Transmission Pipeline and City 4 Wastewater Treatment Facility in good repair and working order in 5 accordance with generally recognized engineering practices. 6 1.2 Sewer capacity for the Donut Hole will be provided by the 7 City to CSA 70 EV-1. The City warrants and represents that (i) it 8 will provide adequate capacity in its wastewater collection systems 9 to meet the demands of new development in the Donut Hole as 10 development occurs, up to a level of 322,500 gallons per day 11 ("Allocated Pipeline Capacity"), and (ii) that it has adequate 12 capacity in its City Wastewater Treatment Facility to serve the 13 Donut Hole. During the term of this Agreement, and subject to its 14 terms, the City will provide sewer treatment capacity to CSA 70 EV- 1 so that CSA 70 EV-1 can provide sewer service to the Donut Hole properties as necessary to accommodate development of such .5 16 17 properties. Provision of sewer service by the City to CSA 70 EV-1 18 shall not be subject to moratorium unless, (1) required by Federal 19 or State law, or (2) imposed by the City which moratorium must be 20 (a) imposed on a City-wide basis on new connections only, and (b) 21 imposed in response to Federal or State regulatory violations. 22 Nothing set forth herein is intended to prevent CSA 70 EV-1 from 23 pursuing, at any time during the term of this Agreement, the other 24 options for obtaining sewer services as set forth in the Facilities 25 Plan for the Donut Hole in lieu of the services provided under this 26 Agreement or terminating this Agreement in its entirety. If CSA 70 27 EV-l elects to terminate this Agreement in its entirety or elects 28 one of the other options set forth in the Facilities Plan, (i) CSA . -3- City Attorney DRAF-r 1 70 EV-l shall give written notice of such election to City, and ~2 (ii) City shall be entitled to retain all fees or other payments of 3 any kind received pursuant to this Agreement. The City's 4 obligation to provide capacity in its wastewater collection and 5 treatment system is contingent upon approval and execution of the 6 Inducement Agreement by and between the County of San Bernardino 7 ("County") and the City. In the event that the Inducement 8 Agreement is not approved and executed by the County and the City 9 on .or before October 8, 2002, the City's obligation to provide any 10 capacity in its wastewater collection and treatment system for the 11 Donut Hole shall thereupon be immediately terminated without any 12 further action on the part of the City and without any notice being 13 required to be dispatched from the City to the County. In such 14 event, this Agreement shall be deemed to be thereupon terminated .5 16 and shall be of no further force and effect as between the City and County nor shall any third parties have any rights under this 17 Agreement to prevent or delay any such termination. If the 18 Inducement Agreement is approved and executed by the County and the 19 City, but is subsequently breached by the County or terminated by 20 the City or the County for the reasons permitted therein, the 21 City's obligation to provide capacity in its wastewater collection 22 and treatment system shall be limited to those connections in place 23 at the time of any such breach or termination. 24 1.3 Sewer treatment capacity fees ("Sewer Treatment Capacity 25 Fees") are set forth in the City's Resolution No. 95-102, attached 26 as Exhibit "C", Resolution No. 95-102, and account for regional 27 charges imposed for treatment at the San Bernardino Wastewater 28 Treatment Facility. . Monthly usage fees ("Monthly Usage Fees") are -4- L.ny ""Horney DRAFT 1 set forth in the City's Resolution No. 98-12, attached as Exhibit . 2 "D", Resolution No. 98-12, and account for the charges associated 3 with treatment of specific quantities of waste. Sewer Treatment 4 Capacity Fees and Monthly Usage Fees are amounts that are based on 5 the same fee structure for properties located within the City 6 accessing City sewer services. Transmission pipelines are 7 necessary to bring wastewater from the Donut Hole to the City 8 Wastewater Treatment Facility. Sewer collection system maintenance 9 fees ("Sewer Collection System Maintenance Fees") shall be a 10 component of the Monthly Usage Fees and account for maintenance of 11 the sewer collection system. Such Sewer Collection System 12 Maintenance Fees shall be subject to the provisions of this 13 Agreement. 14 1.4 CSA 70 EV-1 acknowledges that the sewer collection system is administered through the City of San Bernardino's Development Services Department and the sewage treatment system is administered .15 16 17 through the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, 18 through its Board of Water commissioners. As such, payment of fees 19 will be governed by this Agreement but administered through the 20 department within the City with requisite jurisdiction and 21 authority. 22 1.5 Attached hereto as Exhibit "E", Resolution No. 89-510, 23 is City Resolution No. 89-510, which sets forth the charges for 24 inspection and connection fees for any property connected to the 25 City sewer ("Inspection and Connection Fees"). CSA 70 EV-1 26 acknowledges that the Inspection and Connection Fees may be amended 27 and the Inspection and Connection Fees may increase or decrease, 28 provided, however, that any such increase or decrease shall be . -5- City Attorney O. .!t:31 Il'l -"'!!."" 'h,,~t" d 1 consistent with increases or decreases for property within the City . 2 accessing City sewer services. .15 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . That portion of Exhibit "E", 3 Resolution No. 89-510, dealing with Inspection Fees will not apply 4 to CSA 70 EV-1. Instead CSA 70 EV-1 will pay the City's actual cost 5 of inspecting CSA 70 EV-1's initial connection to the City 6 Transmission Pipeline. 7 1.6 The City shall provide sewer services pursuant to this 8 Agreement up to the limit of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity. City 9 and CSA 70 EV-1 shall coordinate with each other, on a quarterly 10 basis, in making a determination as to the percentage of Allocated 11 Pipeline Capacity that has been utilized by CSA 70 EV-l as of the 12 end of each quarter. Within six months after the actual sewage 13 flow reaches 75 percent of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, CSA 70 14 EV-1 shall make a determination as to which option under the Facilities Plan (or as otherwise permitted by law) it intends to exercise to obtain additional sewer capacity to serve the remainder 17 of the Donut Hole (of which one option is to obtain the additional capacity from the City which option is referred to herein as the 18 "City Option") . Upon making such determination, CSA 70 EV-1 shall give written notice to City of the option under the Facilities Plan that it intends to exercise. If CSA 70 EV-1 selects one of the options other than the City Option, then this Agreement shall, at CSA 70 EV-1' s option, continue for the remainder of the term set forth in Section 7 hereof subject to the permanent limitation of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity (which means that when the actual sewage flow reaches the full amount of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, City shall have no further obligation to accept additional sewage flow). If CSA 70 EV-l, with City's consent, -6- City Attorney DRAFT 1 elects the City Option, the Parties will undertake a planning study ... 2 to determine if the construction of an additional pipeline will be 3 required to provide transmission capacity to service the Donut 4 Hole. If the Parties determine that additional pipeline facilities 5 will be necessary, CSA 70 EV-l will construct, at its sole or 6 proportionate cost, the pipeline facilities (herein "Additional 7 Facilities") reasonably determined by the Parties (subject to 8 arbitration as provided below) to be necessary to meet the sewer 9 capacity needs for the Donut Hole in excess of the Allocated 10 Pipeline Capacity. If City and CSA 70 EV-l do not agree as to the 11 need for or the scope of the Additional Facilities needed to 12 service the remainder of the Donut Hole, CSA 70 EV-l and City shall 13 conduct good-faith negotiations for not less than thirty (30) days 14 in an attempt to resolve the dispute. If the dispute continues ",15 16 after the 30 days of good-faith negotiations, either CSA 70 EV-l or City may subsequently submit the dispute to non-binding arbitration 17 under JAMS Comprehensive Arbitration Rules and Provisions. The 18 Parties agree that CSA 70 EV-l may allow any real party in interest 19 to participate (to the extent determined by CSA 70 EV-l in its sole 20 discretion) in any of the negotiations and/or arbitrations with the 21 City contemplated by this Section 1.6. Upon completion of 22 construction of the Additional Facilities by CSA 70 EV-l, the 23 obligations of City under this Agreement for the remainder of the 24 term of this Agreement shall no longer be subject to the limitation 25 of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, but such obligations shall be 26 limited to the Allocated Pipeline Capacity plus the capacity of the 27 Additional Facilities, but not to exceed 1. 74 million gallons per 28 day. ... -7- 1 .2 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . City Attorney DRAFT 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.7 The Monthly Usage Fees to CSA 70 EV-l will be calculated in accordance with the City's Resolution No. 98-12, attached as Exhibit "D", Resolution No. 98-12, as it may be subsequently amended, in the same manner calculated for other similar customers of the City; provided, however, that the Parties recognize and agree that the City will not be providing sewer service directly to customers within the Donut Hole. CSA 70 EV-1 will install individual water meters for each customer to which it provides water service within the Donut Hole. The remittance for service from CSA 70 EV-1 to the City shall be as provided at Section 1.9 of this Agreement. 1.8 CSA 70 EV-1 shall pay the City's then current Sewer Treatment Capacity Fees and Inspection and Connection Fees for providing sewer capacity requested by CSA 70 EV-1, in the amount calculated and provided in a statement by the City to CSA 70 EV-1, as a condition of issuance of a building permit for any development project in the Donut Hole requiring such sewer capacity from CSA 70 EV-1. Sewer connections within CSA 70 EV-1 may require additional transmission capacity over the Allocated Pipeline Capacity that is provided for in this Agreement. 1.9 CSA 70 EV-l will remit all amounts due to the City on a bi-monthly basis, in arrears. CSA 70 EV-1 will pay the City within sixty (60) days of mailing of the bi-monthly bill. Payments not made within sixty (60) days of mailing of the bi-monthly bill will be subject to interest charges at the current prevailing prime rate of interest per annum from the date of the bill until paid. / / / / / / / / / / -8- City Attorney' DRtlFT 1 Section 2. LIMITATIONS ON RECEIPT OF SEWAGE AND COMPLIANCE . 2 WITH LAWS GOVERNING COLLECTION, 3 DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE AND WASTES. TRANSMISSION, TREATMENT AND 4 2.1 CSA 70 EV-l shall obey and shall require all persons and 5 customers of every kind and nature discharging into or using the 6 City's collection, transmission and treatment system to obey all 7 ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations of the City 8 concerning the type and condition of sewage and wastes permitted to 9 be discharged into City sewers and shall not allow prohibited 10 discharges into the City's collection, transmission and treatment 11 system. CSA 70 EV-l shall also conform to all Federal and State 12 statutes, rules and regulations relating to the collection, 13 transmission, treatment and disposal of sewage and wastes. If CSA 14 70 EV-l fails to cause its customers to comply with the provisions of this Section 2, City shall, in accordance with Section 8.2, be entitled to obtain equitable relief in the form of an injunction .5 16 17 requiring such compliance. 18 2.2 CSA 70 EV-l shall not allow or cause any surface or storm 19 waters, excessive infiltration or cooling waters to be discharged 20 into its sewer system or into any other sewer facilities emptying 21 into its sewer system or into any other sewer facilities over which 22 it has control or into the City's collection, transmission or 23 treatment system. 24 2.3 CSA 70 EV-l shall cooperate and use its best efforts to 25 assist the City in any investigation by a Federal or State agency 26 relating to receipt by the City of the CSA 70 EV-l's sewage. 27 / / / / / 28 / / / / / . -9- r ------ City Attorney DRAFT 1 Section 3. CSA 70 RECORDS, ACCOUNTS, INSPECTION AND AUDIT. ~ 2 EV-l shall maintain a current list of all customers receiving sewer ~15 16 3 service from CSA 70 EV-l pursuant to this Agreement. The Ci ty 4 shall maintain and complete transactional current records 5 reflecting costs and charges passed through to CSA 70 EV-l. Both 6 CSA 70 EV-l and the City agree to provide access on reasonable 7 notice to each other for the purpose of review of records or audit. 8 9 Section 4. ASSIGNMENT. Neither this Agreement nor any clause 10 or provision contained herein may be assigned, transferred or 11 +eleased without the express written consent of the Parties. 12 13 14 Section 5. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, clause, phrase, or word of this Agreement, or the application thereof, to either public agency or to any other person or circumstance is for 17 any reason held invalid, it shall be deemed severable and the validity of the remainder of the Agreement or the application of such provision to the other public agency or to any other persons 18 19 or circumstance shall not be affected thereby. Each public agency 20 declares that it would have entered into this Agreement and each 21 section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase and word thereof 22 irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, 23 sentence, clause, phrase or work, or the application thereof to 24 either public agency, or any person or circumstance is held 25 invalid. 26 27 Section 6. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES CREATED. Nothing in 28 this Agreement creates an obligation or duty on the part of the ~ -10- City Attorney DRAFT 1 City to provide sewer service to any person or entity other than ... 2 CSA 70 EV-l as provided in this Agreement. There is no third party 3 beneficiary contemplated in this Agreement. 4 5 Section 7. TERM AND TERMINATION FOR BREACH. This Agreement 6 shall continue in full force and effect from its effective date 7 until the later of (a) thirty years, or (b) all of the parcels 8 comprising the Donut Hole become annexed to an existing city or 9 incorporated into any newly created city and the San Bernardino 10 Local Agency Formation Commission has made a determination as to 11 which entity or entities will be the sewer service provider(s) for 12 the Donut Hole, or (c) termination by CSA 70 EV-l as provided for 13 in Section 1.2, above, or (d) termination by the City as provided 14 for in Section 1.2 above. Except as provided in Section 1.2, "'15 16 above, no remedy of termination of this Agreement shall be available to the City or CSA 70 EV-l, or their successors or 17 assigns, with regard to any breach hereof, but all other remedies 18 at law or in equity shall be available with respect to any breach 19 hereof. Notwithstanding the above, the Parties may mutually agree 20 to terminate this Agreement. 21 22 Section 8. REMEDIES ON DEFAULT. 23 8.1 In the event of any material default by the City, CSA 70 24 EV-l may seek monetary damages or other equitable relief, provided 25 that CSA 70 EV-l must first give the City the chance to cure the 26 default by providing written notice of default. The City shall 27 then have sixty (60) days to cure the default. If the cure cannot 28 reasonably be completed within the sixty (60) day period, CSA 70 ... -11- C"",>",",, , '~ ' \, ~,. 1.e.1 D"I; W"',',', jOj "', '~,"".~t , ";.,, "'I ,,_ ~ ,..i ~ Il r"'.. ! ; 1 EV-l may not seek monetary damages or other equitable relief, so .2 long as City is diligently and continuously pursuing cure of the 3 default. Notwithstanding the preceding, if City defaults under 4 this Agreement by refusing or failing to provide sewer service 5 pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, CSA 70 EV-l shall be 6 entitled to seek immediate equitable relief to cause such sewer 7 services to recommence immediately. 8 8.2 In the event of any material default by CSA 70 EV-l, City 9 must continue providing sewer service and may only seek monetary 10 damages or other equitable relief, provided that the City must 11 first give CSA 70 EV-l the chance to cure the default by providing 12 written notice of default. CSA 70 EV-l shall then have sixty (60) 13 days to cure the default. If the cure cannot reasonably be 14 completed within the sixty (60) day period, City may not seek .5 16 monetary damages or other equitable relief, so long as CSA 70 EV-l is diligently and continuously pursuing cure of the default. 17 Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the covenants set forth in 18 Section 2.1 hereof (dealing with prohibited discharges) are being 19 breached by any customer(s) of CSA 70 EV-l, and CSA 70 EV-l does 20 not promptly obtain compliance with such covenants, City shall be 21 entitled to enforce compliance with Section 2 by seeking an 22 immediate injunction to cause CSA 70 EV-l to terminate service to 23 such customer{s) . 24 8.3 The Parties understand that the performance required 25 under this Agreement is unique and for that reason, among others, 26 the Parties to this Agreement will be irreparably damaged if this 27 Agreement is not specifically enforced. Accordingly, in the event 28 that City fails to timely provide sewer service to CSA 70 EV-l, . -12- City Attorney DRAFT .2 specifically enforced. 1 CSA 70 EV-1 will be irreparably damaged if this Agreement is not Accordingly, in the event of any 3 controversy concerning the City'S obligation to timely provide 4 sewer service hereunder, City's obligation to provide such services 5 shall be enforceable by CSA 70 EV-1, in a court of equity by a 6 decree of specific performance or by injunction if CSA 70 EV-1 7 prevails. The Parties hereto waive any argument that monetary 8 damages are adequate. Such remedies and all other rights and 9 remedies set forth herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive and 10 shall be in addition to any and all other remedies which CSA 11 70 EV-1 may have hereunder at law or in equity. 12 8.4 In the event of material default, any Party may agree to 13 waive any penalties or remedies for default, but any such waiver 14 shall be in writing and signed by the party against whom such .5 16 waiver is being enforced. 8.5 Nothing herein shall limit the right of any Party to 17 recover real and consequential damages arising from material 18 default or breach of this Agreement. 19 20 Section 9. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT, NATURE OF OBLIGATIONS 21 9.1 Nothing in this Agreement to the contrary 22 notwithstanding, the general fund of the City shall not be liable 23 for the payment of any moneys required to be expended or paid by it 24 in the performance of this Agreement, nor is the general credit of 25 the City pledged to the performance of any such obligation, nor may 26 CSA 70 EV-1 compel the exercise of the taxing power of the City to 27 raise funds for the performance of any such obligation. Any moneys 28 required to be paid or expended by the City under the terms of this . -13- City AC!orney L' }" f! ,(3 U::l',- _~ Ii li""1, I 1 Agreement are required solely from (a) the available proceeds from ... 2 the sale of any revenue bonds or other bonds or evidence of 3 indebtedness authorized and issued for the purpose of such payment 4 or expenditure and (b) the revenues from sewer service charges and 5 other revenues of its sewer system. 6 9.2 CSA 70 EV-l agrees that it will prescribe, revise and 7 collect such rates and charges for the services, facilities and use 8 of its sewer system as will produce, after allowance for 9 contingencies and error in estimates, sufficient revenues to 10 discharge all obligations under this Agreement and all other 11 obligations of CSA 70 EV-l which are a charge upon or payable from 12 such revenues. 13 9.3 The expenses of and claims against CSA 70 EV-l under this 14 Agreement are general obligations of CSA 70 EV-l, and if CSA 70 EV- .15 16 1 has no revenues or if the revenues of CSA 70 EV-l are, or in the judgement of its governing body are likely to be inadequate to pay 17 debts, expenses and claims against CSA 70 EV-l, including all 18 expenses and claims payable under this Agreement, the governing 19 body shall either increase its charges or use good faith efforts to 20 cause an election to be held to establish a special annual tax to 21 be levied upon the taxable property in the CSA EV-l service area 22 sufficient to pay all expenses and claims payable under this 23 Agreement. All moneys derived from such charges, tax and all other 24 moneys allocated and designated for the payment of said 25 obligations, including all expenses and claims, payable under this 26 Agreement shall be placed in a iilpecial fund of CSA 70 EV-l and 27 until all of said obligations have been fully paid the moneys in 28 said fund shall be used for no other purpose than the payment of . -14- ('if,,- l: ";-0~'" ......" 1 r', ".; , 1'.., ,.:-.-C:,' t .~) 1 said obligations. CSA 70 EV-l shall notify the City of the name of ~ 2 said special fund on its establishment. 3 9.4 Nothing herein shall be construed as prohibiting the City 4 or CSA 70 EV-l from issuing revenue bonds or other evidences of 5 indebtedness payable from the revenues from sewer service charges 6 or other sewer system revenues and which have, as to said sewer 7 charges and revenues, from any sums required for the payment or 8 security of the principal thereof or interest thereon a priority 9 over obligations payable under this Agreement. 10 9 . 5 Nothing in this Agreement to the contrary 11 notwithstanding, the general fund of the County shall not be liable 12 for the payment of any moneys required to be expended or paid by 13 CSA 70 EV-l in the performance of this Agreement, nor is the 14 general credit of the County pledged to the performance of any such obligation, nor may CSA 70 EV-l or the City compel the exercise of the taxing power of the County to raise funds for the performance .5 16 17 of any such obligation. Any moneys required to be paid or expended 18 by CSA 70 EV-l under the terms of this Agreement are required 19 solely from CSA 70 EV-l. 20 21 Section 10. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. 22 10.1 The City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the 23 County, CSA 70 EV-l and their authorized officers, employees, 24 agents and volunteers from any and all claims, actions, losses, 25 damages, and/or liability arising from the City's and its 26 authorized officers', employees', agents' and volunteers' negligent 27 acts, errors, or omissions, which result from its obligations under 28 this Agreement, except where such indemnification is prohibited by . -15- City Attornev D R' '1 r.""" 1 . If'. ~'I\t' .,) ~ ,~'CA II ~ 1 law. . 2 10.2 CSA 70 EV-1 agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the 3 City, County and their authorized officers, employees, agents and .15 16 4 volunteers from any and all claims, actions, losses, damages, 5 and/or liability arising from the CSA 70 EV-1's and its authorized 6 officers', employees', agents' and volunteers' negligent acts, 7 errors, or omissions, which result from its obligations under this Agreement, except where such indemnification is prohibited by law. 8 9 10.3 In the event CSA 70 EV-1 and/or the City is found to be 10 comparatively at fault for any claim, action, loss or damage which results from their respective obligations under this Agreement, CSA 11 12 70 EV-1 and/or City shall indemnify the other to the extent of its 13 comparative fault. 14 10.4 Furthermore, if CSA 70 EV-1 or the City attempts to seek recovery from the other for Workers Compensation benefits paid to an employee, CSA 70 EV-1 and City agree that any alleged negligence of the employee shall not be construed against the employer of that employee. 17 18 19 10.5 Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, 20 CSA 70 EV-1 agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, 21 the Economic Development Agency of the City of San Bernardino 22 (EDA) , any departments, agencies, divisions, boards or commissions 23 of either the City or EDA as well as any predecessors, successors, 24 assigns, agents, directors, elected officials, officers, employees, 25 representatives and attorneys of either the City or EDA from any 26 claim, action, or proceeding against any of the foregoing persons 27 or entities, arising from or related to any third party challenge 28 to the City's approval of this Agreement or to the City's provision . -16- Cit\! l\Horn,:yy D ~ /71"1;- ., ':. "p";., 1f;..,.,.1';. k...-.l , , , f t, Ai'-,- ~ " 1 of sewer services pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not ... 2 limited to any claim, action or proceeding brought under the 3 California Environmental Quality Act Public Resources Code 4 Section 21000 et seq.). The parties agree that the aforementioned 5 Inducement Agreement shall contain a similar provision requiring 6 the County to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City from any 7 claim, action, or proceeding arising from or related to any third 8 party challenge to the City's approval of this Agreement or the 9 Inducement .Agreement or to the City's provision of sewer services 10 pursuant to this Agreement. 11 12 Section 11. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY. 13 11.1 The City, its officers, employees, and agents shall act 14 in an independent capacity during the term of this Agreement and .5 16 not as officers, employees, or agents of the County and/or CSA 70 EV-l, nor shall they have authority to contract for or on behalf of, or incur obligations on behalf of, the County and/or CSA 70 EV- 17 18 1. 19 11.2 CSA 70 EV-l, its officers, employees, and agents shall 20 act in an independent capacity during the term of this Agreement 21 and not as officers, employees, or agents of the City and/or the 22 County, nor shall they have authority to contract for or on behalf 23 of, or incur obligations on behalf of, the City and/or the County. 24 25 Section 12. WAIVER. 26 Any waiver by one of the Parties of any breach of anyone or 27 more of the terms of this Agreement shall not be construed to be a 28 waiver of any subsequent or other term thereof. Failure on the . -17- (' ~r, i.:' "> '.'.'..' .\"h1.' ..,~ j'i'il( .: \,~.._ " ;,;~' r ~ ..r'~"j 1 J 1 part of one of the Parties to require exact, full, and complete . 2 compliance with any terms of this Agreement by the other Party 3 shall not be construed as in any manner changing the terms of this 4 Agreement, nor stopping the enforcement thereof. 5 6 Section 13. GOVERNING LAW. 7 This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance 8 with the laws of the State of California. 9 10 Section 14. VENUE. 11 This Agreement was entered into and is intended to be 12 performed in San Bernardino County, California. Venue for any 13 action brought by either of the Parties shall be the Superior Court 14 of California, County of San Bernardino, Central District, unless .15 16 either party demonstrates that, in fairness and equity, the venue should be changed. In the event that venue is changed, it shall be 17 limited to the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside, 18 Central District. If any action concerning this Agreement is 19 brought by a third party, both Parties shall use their best efforts 20 to obtain a change of venue to San Bernardino County. 21 Section 15. ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS. 22 If any legal action is instituted to enforce any of the 23 Parties' rights, each party, including the prevailing party shall 24 pay its own attorneys' fees and costs. This Section shall not 25 apply to those costs and attorneys' fees directly arising from any 26 third party legal action against any Party, including such costs 27 and attorneys' fees payable untler Section 10, INDEMNIFICATION AND 28 HOLD HARMLESS. . -18- 1 .2 .5 16 ,L, [~' i~ f ..,~-~ r" i:'r) '$ Section 16. EXHIBITS. 3 All exhibits attached to this Agreement are incorporated by 4 reference. 5 6 Section 17. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS. 7 The are Recitals specifically incorporated into this 8 Agreement. 9 10 Section 18. SECTIONS AND CAPTIONS. 11 All references to Sections refer to Sections in this Agreement 12 unless otherwise stated. Captions are for convenience of reference 13 only and do not constitute a portion of this Agreement. 14 Section 19. FURTHER ASSURANCES. Each of the Parties shall, upon the request of the other 17 party, take such actions and sign such other documents (in 18 recordable form if required) as may be reasonably required to effectuate the terms and intent of this Agreement. / / / / / Section 20. CONSENT. Whenever consent or approval of either of the Parties is 19 20 21 22 23 required, that Party shall not unreasonably withhold or delay such 24 consent or approval. 25 26 Section 21. JURY TRIAL WAIVER. 27 CSA 70 EV-1 and City hereby waive their respective rights to 28 trial by jury and agree to accept trial by judge alone for any . -19- r-,i+',,' \'1't,,c'lf';":BY ;""~...... 1 cause of action, claim, counterclaim, or cross-complaint in any ~ 2 action, proceeding, and/or hearing brought by either of the Parties 3 against the other (s) on any matter arising out of, or in any way 4 connected with, this Agreement, the relationship of the Parties or 5 any claim of injury or damage, or the enforcement of any remedy 6 under any law, statue, or regulation, emergency or otherwise, now 7 or hereafter in effect. 8 9 Section 22. NOTICES. 10 Any notice, demand, request, approval, consent, or 11 communication that either party desires or is required to give to 12 the other party or any other person shall be in writing and either 13 served personally or sent by prepaid, first-class mail. Any 14 notice, demand, request, consent, approval, or communication that "5 either party desires or is required to give to the other party 16 shall be addressed to the other party at the address set forth 17 below. Either party may change its address by notifying the other 18 party of the change of address. Notice shall be deemed 19 communicated two (2) working days of CSA 70 EV-l from the time of 20 mailing if mailed as provided in this paragraph. 21 CSA 70 EV-l's address: 22 23 24 With a copy to: 25 26 City'S address: 27 28 . With a copy to: Director of Special Districts 157 West Fifth Street Second Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415 County Counsel 385 North Arrowhead Avenue Fourth Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0140 General Manager, City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department P.O. Box 710 San Bernardino, CA 92402 City Attorney -20- 1 .2 Cih L',l ~'?""'>1l_':,W' j L f.,tl'; ~..,.~~ gr ~: i~>Y"f~ 3 4 City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street Fifth Floor San Bernardino, CA 92418 The failure to deliver a "copy" shall not invalidate a notice 5 otherwise properly given. 6 Section 23. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL 7 QUALITY ACT. 8 9 10 The provision of sewer services by the City was one of the options studied by the' County's Board of Supervisors in the EIR, and the provision of wastewater services by the City as set forth in this Agreement was one of the potential actions included in the 11 12 13 project contemplated by the County's Board of Supervisors when it certified the EIR for the project as lead agency under the 14 California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The City staff have .5 indicated that at this time the provision of sewer services under 16 this Agreement as limited by the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along . 17 18 with the sewer services that may be required under the approved City of San Bernardino General Plan, is not expected to require the construction of new facilities beyond those described in the EIR. At some point in the future, the Parties intend to undertake a planning study to determine if the construction of additional physical facilities will be required to provide sewer service in 19 20 21 22 23 24 excess of the Allocated Pipeline Capacity, along with other future 25 sewer services which the City may decide to provide to other areas in the future. At this time, there is insufficient information 26 27 available to prepare or complete these future-planning studies, and it would be premature to speculate on whether and to what extent 28 any new facilities would be required. The City and CSA 70 EV-1 -21- 1 shall use the results of these future-planning studies to determine .2 whether or not the provision of sewer services for the Donut Hole 3 should be expanded beyond the Allocated Pipeline Capacity. CSA 70 4 EV-l (or County) shall act as lead agency under CEQA for any 5 environmental review of facilities that are necessary for sewer 6 service for the Donut Hole in excess of the Allocated Pipeline 7 Capacity. CSA 70 EV-l staff have determined, and expect to 8 recommend that the Board acting as lead agency under CEQA find that 9 this Agreement is part of the discretionary actions included in the 10 project previously reviewed and approved by the Board under the 11 EIR, and that no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact 12 report is required for this Agreement under Public Resources Code 13 section 21166. The City may act as a responsible agency under CEQA 14 for the project and make a similar determination under CEQA. -: Section 24. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. 17 This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding 18 of the Parties with respect to the subject matter herein. There 19 are no oral understandings, terms, conditions or promises, and 20 neither of the Parties has relied upon any representation, express 21 or implied, not contained in this Agreement. This Agreement may 22 only be modified or amended in writing and must be signed by each 23 of the Parties. 24 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement 25 as of the dates below. 26 COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV -1: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO: 27 28 Fred Aguiar, Chairman, By: Judith Valles, Mayor . -22- .15 16 . 10 By: 11 12 Dated: Deputy 13 Approved as to Legal Form: 14 ALAN K. MARKS County Counsel By: 17 Rex A. Hinesley Chief Deputy 18 19 Dated: 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 \..oILY MllUIlIt:y f;" 1";:; T ",,""fs, r Dated: ATTEST: Rachael Clark, City Clerk By: Deputy Dated: Approved as to Form and Legal Content: JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney By: JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney Dated: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT: By: Warren B. Cocke, President Board of Water Commissioners Dated: ATTEST: Stacy Aldstadt Secretary of Board -23- _ :.'y l'H[i..h-rl:J~( ~'~"":,~ ;,',--''Pcl~\ ;!t-"'\..;,:;';..~ ",j) .r",. ,...... ~.' .."~ ~ ~..$:U li/iT'<';1:, iiI 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 By: Stacy Aldstadt Dated: Approved as to Form and Legal Content: JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney By: JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney Dated: .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . -24- . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Bernard C. Kersey General Manager Subject: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR tND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF (~ ~ P\\.jSAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE \~ ~::/ , lJ EXECUTION OF AN INDUCEMENT , AGREEMENT BE1WEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BE1WEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-1. MICC Date: September 23, 2002 Dept: Water Date: September 20, 2002 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution Contact person: Mayor Judith Valles Phone: 5133 Supporting data attached: yes Ward: All FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: None Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. W. s- i (8 ) . . . CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report Subject: Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services Between the City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino Background: The Donut Hole is an unincorporated island of the County of San Bernardino, bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, Lugonia Avenue and State Highway 30 (1- 210), that is surrounded on all sides by the City of Redlands. The County of San Bernardino Special Districts and the City of Redlands entered into an agreement in January 2002 for the City of Redlands to provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole. That agreement, though, is the subject of multiple pending legal actions that prevent the City of Redlands from providing such sewer and water services to the Donut Hole, until the legal actions are resolved. One of the property owners within the Donut Hole, along with County of San Bernardino Special Districts Department representatives, began discussions with the City of San Bernardino regarding a sewer service agreement in April 2002. The property owner is trying to develop part of its property by April 2003 and does not want to wait for all of the legal actions regarding the County/Redlands Agreement to be resolved. With previous direction from the Board of Water Commissioners, the Mayor, and members of the Common Council, it was determined that the City should not provide water service to the area, but that sewer service could be considered. The City of San Bernardino's position throughout the discussions has always been that two agreements are required for the City to provide sewer service to the Donut Hole: (I) one agreement covering the technical and operational aspects of the provision of such sewer service and (2) a second agreement between the City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino covering the inducements from the County to the City to provide sewer service for development in the Donut Hole, to attempt to offset the potential loss of sales tax and property tax to the City that may result from direct competition for retail and commercial/industrial projects between development within the City and development within the Donut Hole. Representatives of the City and County Service Area 70, Improvement District EV-l ("CSA 70 EV-I") have developed an agreement for sewer service for the Donut Hole that is subject to the approval of the attached Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services. The proposed Sewer Service Agreement developed between representatives of the City of San Bernardino and CSA 70 EV-l is being presented to the Mayor and Common Council under separate Request for Council Action. Representatives of the City and the County developed the attached Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services containing the financial and other inducements the County of San Bernardino is willing to make to the City in return for the City providing sewer service to the Donut Hole through CSA 70 EV-1. . Proposed Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services/Financial Impact: The City of San Bernardino will receive the following consideration from the County of San Bernardino in return for providing sewer service to the Donut Hole, under the terms of the associated Sewer Service Agreement: 1. $675,000 payable over the first 5 years of the Inducement Agreement in equal annual installments of $135,000; and 2. Prior to any annexation of lands within the Donut Hole by the City of Redlands, the County shall obtain the agreement of the City of Redlands to waive and release its interests in part of a 1992 Agency Settlement Agreement with the Inland Valley Development Agency (the "IVDA") limiting the use of tax increment funds received by the IVDA from the Donut Hole and requiring the City of Redlands' approval before any such expenditure by the IVDA. The City of Redlands waiving and releasing these limitations would allow the IVDA to spend tax increment funds received from the Donut Hole without any limitations, other than those imposed by law. The City is a significant beneficiary of the expenditure of tax increment funds by the IVDA because the IVDA Redevelopment Project area covers a substantial portion of the City. If the County does not obtain the agreement of the City of Redlands, as described above, the County must pay the City the amount of the tax increment that remains restricted under the terms of the 1992 Agency Settlement Agreement; and . 3. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino will receive 20% of the tax increment generated from 125 acres of property within the Donut Hole. The source of these funds will be either: (1) legally available funds of the County or (2) tax increment received by the IVDA and deposited into the IVDA's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund, for the term of the IVDA Redevelopment Plan, regardless of whether the area remains County unincorporated land or is annexed into the City of Redlands; and 4. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino will receive a one-time grant of $1,000,000 of County housing funds, during the 2002-03 fiscal year for rehabilitation or demolition of residential buildings, relocation of residents or repair, construction or installation of streets, utility infrastructure or landscaping within a qualified census tract area of the City to be determined in the sole discretion of the City. Also, any breach of the Inducement Agreement allows the City to stop providing any additional sewer connections within the Donut Hole, under the Sewer Service Agreement. . California Environmental Quality Act Compliance: The payment of funds or performance of actions under the attached Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services has no specifically identifiable potential significant impact on the environment, separate or distinct from the Sewer Service Agreement to which it relates. The County of San Bernardino prepared a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that, in part, evaluated the environmental . . . impacts of obtaining water and sewer service for the Donut Hole from the City of San Bernardino. The Request for Council Action regarding the Sewer Service Agreement sets forth in detail the actions necessary by the City of San Bernardino to comply with its responsibilities pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act relative to the provision of sewer service to the Donut Hole under the terms of the Sewer Service Agreement and specific findings related thereto, all of which are incorporated into this report by this reference. Recommendation: Adopt Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino Authorizing Execution of an Inducement Agreement between the City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino and direct City of San Bernardino Water Department staff to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk's office for the County of San Bernardino. 1 .2 r ~(Q)[?W RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. 3 4 5 WHEREAS, the geographic area generally known as the "Donut 6 Hole" is located in an unincorporated area of the County of San 7 Bernardino bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, 8 Lugonia Avenue and State Highway 30 (1-210) , outside the 9 jurisdictional boundaries of the City of San Bernardino; and 10 WHEREAS, the ci ty of San Bernardino, County Service Area 70, 11 Improvement Zone EV-l and the County of San Bernardino have an 12 interest in the provision of adequate sewer service to the Donut 13 Hole; and 14 WHEREAS, the County of San Bernardino's Board of Supervisors, .15 by unanimous vote, amended the County's General Plan, repealed the 16 East Valley Corridor Specific plan, amended the County Development 17 Code, adopted a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for the Donut 18 Hole, including various options for the provision of water supply 19 and wastewater treatment, modified previous planning approvals and 20 certified a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for 21 such actions; and 22 WHEREAS, County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV -1, has 23 pursued alternative options for obtaining sewer services for the 24 Donut Hole, pursuant to the Facilities Plan and the EIR certified 25 by the County's Board of Supervisors for the Facilities plan and 26 other actions affecting the Donut Hole, including the option of 27 contracting with the City for treatment of wastewater as described 28 in the EIR; and . September 23, 2002 Page 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-l. 1 .2 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, and County Service Area 70, 3 Improvement Zone EV-l, developed an agreement relating to the 4 provision of sewer service to the Donut Hole through County Service 5 Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l, by the City of San Bernardino; and 6 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino is a responsible agency 7 under the California Environmental Quality Act relative to the 8 provision of sewer service to the Donut Hole by the City; and 9 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino considered the County of 10 San Bernardino's Final Subsequent EIR and determined that the 11 County of San Bernardino evaluated all potential significant 12 environmental impacts from the provision of sewer service to the 13 Donut Hole by the City of San Bernardino, as contemplated in the 14 Agreement for Sewer Services between the City of San Bernardino, .5 16 the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, and County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l and the associated 17 Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services between the City of San 18 Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino; and 19 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino previously adopted CEQA 20 findings in conjunction with approval of the Agreement for Sewer 21 Service between the City of San Bernardino, the City of San 22 Bernardino Municipal Water Department and the County of San 23 Bernardino Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l; and 24 WHEREAS, the County of San Bernardino agreed to provide 25 certain inducements to the City of San Bernardino, as part of the 26 consideration for the Agreement for Sewer Services, which are set 27 forth in the Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services between the 28 City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino; and . September 23, 2002 Page 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL 0," THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-l. 1 WHEREAS, it is appropriate for the mayor and Common Council to . 2 take action with respect to the Inducement Agreement for Sewer 3 Services between the City of San Bernardino and the County of San 4 Bernardino; 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL 6 OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AS FOLLOWS: 7 SECTION 1. The INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICES 8 BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN 9 BERNARDINO, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as 10 "Exhibit 1" and incorporated herein by this reference, as though 11 fully set forth herein, is hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby 12 authorized to execute such agreement on behalf of the City. 13 SECTION 2. The California Environmental Quality Act 14 (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.) ("CEQA") findings . 15 and determinations of the City of San Bernardino made in approving 16 the associated Agreement for Sewer Services between the City of San 17 Bernardino, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, 18 and County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l, are incorporated 19 herein by this reference. The City of San Bernardino Water 20 Department is hereby authorized to file a Notice of Determination 21 in compliance with CEQA relating to the approval of the Inducement 22 Agreement for Sewer Services by this Resolution. 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 . September 23, 2002 Page 3 1 .2 .15 16 28 . A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-l. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 3 Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the 4 day of 5 6 COUNCIL MEMBERS AYES 7 ESTRADA 8 LIEN 9 MCGINNIS 10 DERRY 11 SUAREZ 12 ANDERSON 13 MCCAMMACK , 2002, by the following vote, to wit: NAYS ABSENT ABSTAIN 14 Rachel Clark, City Clerk 17 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 18 day of , 2002. 19 20 21 22 Approved as to form and legal content: Judith Valles, Mayor City of San Bernardino 23 24 JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney 25 26 By: 27 September 23, 2002 Page 4 1 .2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . September 23. 2002 Exhibit 1 Inducement Agreement for Sewer Services Page 5 1 e2 .5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . DRAFT 3 4 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT FOR SEWER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 FOR (thi SEWER SERVICE THIS INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT "Agreement") is entered into by and between the City of Sa Bernardino (the "City" ) and the County of San Bernardino (th "County") and is dated as of September 23, 2002, fo convenience. The City and the County are sometimes referred t in this Agreement jointly as the "Parties" or individually as "Party." This Agreement creates additional rights obligations of the Parties relating to the basis on which City shall make available sewer service to County Service Are 70, Improvement Zone EV-l ("CSA 70 EV-l") under that certai Agreement for Sewer Services between the City of San Bernardino, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-l, of even dat herewith. This Agreement is effective as of the date it i approved by both of the Parties, and shall terminate i accordance with its terms. RECITALS WHEREAS, the geographic area generally known as the "Donu Hole," which is more fully described in the attached Exhibit "A" ("Donut Hole Description"), is located in an unincorporated are of the County; and WHEREAS, the City, CSA 70 EV-l and the County are all interested in the provision of adequate sewer service to th Donut Hole; and INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY SB2002,31935.1 1 DRAFT 1 e2 WHEREAS, the County's Board of Supervisors, by unanimou vote, amended its General Plan, repealed the East 3 Corridor Specific Plan, amended to the County Development Code, 4 adopted a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan ("Facilitie 5 Plan" ) for the Donut Hole (including various options 6 provision of water supply and wastewater treatment), 7 previous planning approvals and certified a Final Subsequen 8 Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR"), State Clearinghouse No. 9 1999101123, for such actions; and 10 WHEREAS, CSA 70 EV-l is pursuing alternative options 20 Bernardino, the City of San Bernardino Municipal 11 obtaining sewer services for the Donut Hole pursuant to 12 Facilities Plan and the EIR certified by the County's Board 0 13 Supervisors for the Facilities Plan and other actions 14 the Donut Hole, including the option of contracting with 4It15 City for treatment of wastewater as described in the EIR; and 16 WHEREAS, but for this Agreement and the commitments mad 17 herein by the County to the City, the City would not otherwis 18 be willing to provide sewer services to CSA 70 EV-l pursuant t 19 that certain Agreement for Sewer Service between the City 21 Department and CSA 70 EV-l (the "Sewer Services Agreement") . 22 23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, in consideration of th 24 promises and mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, 25 the Parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 26 27 28 . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 2 DRAFT 1 e2 AGREEMENT 3 Section 1. INDUCEMENT TO PROVIDE SEWER SERVICES. I 4 exchange for the promises made herein by the County to the City, 5 as generally forth in the August 16, 2002, letter from Count 6 Supervisor Hansberger to Mayor Valles of the City outlining th 7 issues agreed to by and between the Parties, a true and correc 8 copy of which is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit "B", 9 City is willing to provide the sewer services pursuant to 10 Sewer Services Agreement, provided that each and every promis 11 and covenant of the County set forth in the Exhibit "B" 12 as further set forth in Section 2 of this Agreement, is full 13 performed by the County in the manner required in Section 2 of 14 this Agreement. .5 16 Section 2. INDUCEMENTS FROM THE COUNTY TO THE CITY. 17 18 2.1 The County shall pay to the City, from legall 19 available funds of the County, the sum of six Hundred Seventy- 20 Five thousand Dollars ($675,000), payable in five (5) equal 21 annual installments of One Hundred Thirty-Five Thousand Dollar 22 ($135,000) each, commencing on the first anniversary of the dat 23 of this Agreement and, thereafter, on each of the consecutivel 24 following four anniversaries of the date of this Agreement. 25 26 2.2 The County agrees and covenants to the City that, 27 prior to the completion of any annexation by the City 0 28 Redlands of any property or portion thereof within the Donu . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 3 DRAFT 1 e2 Hole, the County shall obtain an enforceable .5 16 initiation of any such proceedings. calendar days of The County acknowledge acceptable to the County from the City of Redlands 3 City of Redlands waives and releases its rights, pursuant t 4 Section 5.2(1), (2) , (3) and (4) of that certain Agenc 5 Settlement Agreement by and among the Inland Valley Developmen 6 Agency, the City of Redlands, the City of Highland and the Eas 7 Valley Association, dated as of April 28, 1992 (the 8 Agreement"), and releases, in favor of the IVDA, its interest i 9 any tax increment funds received from properties within 10 Donut Hole held in the account established pursuant to 11 5.2 (3) of the Settlement Agreement. The County shall 12 notice to the City of the initiation by the City of Redlands 0 13 any proceedings to annex any property or portion thereof withi 14 the Donut Hole, within thirty (30) 17 that the City is a third-party beneficiary of the expenditure the Inland Valley Development Agency of tax increment funds, 18 the Redevelopment Plan for the Inland Valley Redevelopmen 19 proj ect Area covers a substantial geographic area of the City. 20 If the County fails to perform the covenants of this Section 2.2 21 of this Agreement, the City shall be entitled to payment fro 22 the County, in legally available funds of the County, of a 23 equal to the amount of tax increment revenues generated 24 properties within the Donut Hole, as often and for as long a 25 tax increment is allocated and paid under the Redevelopment 26 for the Inland Valley Redevelopment Project Area or 27 extension thereof. 28 . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 4 DRAFT .2 1 2.3 The County agrees and covenants to the City to pay t 6 increment revenues received from the following describe the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino, 3 either (1) legally available funds of the County or (2) suc 4 funds as the County may cause the IVDA to assign to 5 Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino from ta 7 property and deposited into the Low and Moderate Income 8 Fund of the IVDA, a sum equal to twenty percent (20%) of 9 increment payable to the Inland Valley Development Agency fro 10 those certain properties described in County of San Bernardin 11 Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742, as set forth in Exhibit "C" t 12 this Agreement, from the date of this Agreement, as often 13 for as long as tax increment is allocated and paid under l4 Redevelopment Plan for the Inland Valley Redevelopment projec .15 16 Area or any extension thereof. The County shall make suc 17 payments regardless of whether the affected properties remain a unincorporated areas of the County or are annexed into the Cit 18 of Redlands. 19 20 2.4 The County shall pay to the Redevelopment Agency of 21 the City of San Bernardino, on behalf of the City, from legal I 22 available housing funds of the County not otherwise designate 23 for distribution to or allocated to the City, the sum of 25 rehabilitation or demolition of residential buildings, 24 Million Dollars ($1,000,000) by June 30, 2003, fo 26 relocation of residents or repair, construction or installatio 27 of streets, utility infrastructure or landscaping within 28 qualified census tract area of the City to be determined in th . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY SB2QQ2:31935.1 5 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . DRAFT sole discretion of the City before June 30, 2003. At election of the County, set forth in a written notice of suc election delivered to the Mayor of the City on or before Octobe 31, 2002, the County may pay the sum to be paid to Redevelopment Agency of the ci ty of San Bernardino under thi Section 2.4 in equal installment payments made at the end each fiscal quarter of the County, so long as the entire sum t be paid is received by the Redevelopment Agency of the City 0 San Bernardino on or before June 30, 2003. Section 3. RECORDS, ACCOUNTS, INSPECTION AND AUDIT. County shall maintain current records readily accessible to th City for the purposes of verifying all financial informatio serving as the basis for the dollar amounts to be City or the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardin pursuant to this Agreement. The County agrees to provide acces to such records on reasonable notice from the City for purpose of reviewing or auditing such records. Section 4. ASSIGNMENT. Nei ther this Agreement nor an clause or provision contained herein may be assigned, transferred or released without the express written consent 0 both of the Parties. Section 5. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, clause, phrase, or word in this Agreement, or the applicatio thereof, to either Party or to any other person or circumstanc is for any reason held invalid, it shall be deemed severable 5B2002,31935.1 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 6 DRAFT 1 .2 the validity of the remainder of the Agreement or th application of such provision to the other Party or to any othe 3 person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby. Eac 4 Party declares that it would have entered into this Agreemen 5 and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase and wor 6 thereof irrespective of the fact that one or more section(s), 7 subsection(s), sentence{s), clause(s), phrase{s) or word(s), 0 8 the application thereof to either Party, or any other person 0 9 circumstance is held invalid. 10 11 Section 6. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES CREATED. 12 in this Agreement creates an obligation or duty on the 13 the City to provide sewer service to any person or entity othe 14 than CSA 70 EV -1, as provided in the Sewer Service Agreement. "'5 There is no third party beneficiary contemplated in thi 16 Agreement and any benefits accruing to the City pursuant to thi 17 Agreement shall accrue solely to the City and not to any thir 18 parties. No third party shall have any rights pursuant to th 19 Sewer Service Agreement to receive continued sewer services, 20 except in the manner as provide therein. 21 22 Section 7. TERM AND TERMINATION FOR BREACH. 23 Agreement shall continue in full force and effect from 24 effective date until the later of (a) thirty years, or (b) 25 performance of all obligations set forth in Section 2 26 Agreement by the County, or (c) termination of this Agreement, 27 as provided for in Section 1.2 of the Sewer Service Agreement. 28 Except as provided in Section 1.2 of the Sewer Servic . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 7 DRAFT 1 .2 Agreement, the County, or its successors or assigns, shall hav no right to terminate this Agreement due to any breach hereof, but the City shall have the right to exercise all remedies unde 7 Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties ma 3 4 contract, at law or in equity with respect to any breach of thi 5 Agreement by the County, including the right to terminate thi 6 Agreement pursuant to Section 1.2 of the Sewer Servic 8 mutually agree to terminate this Agreement, at any time. 9 10 Section 8. REMEDIES ON DEFAULT. 11 12 8.1 In the event of any material default of this Agreemen the defaul t . The County shall have sixty (60) calendar 13 by the County, the City may seek monetary damages or equitabl 14 relief, provided that the City first give the County .15 16 opportunity to cure the default by providing written notice 17 from receipt of the City's notice of default to cure 18 default. If the cure cannot reasonably be completed within 19 sixty (60) calendar day period, the City may not seek moneta 20 damages or equitable relief, so long as County is diligently an 21 continuously pursuing cure of the default. 22 23 8.2 In the event of any material default by the County, 24 the City must continue providing sewer service to thos 25 customers that are connected to the City sewer system as 26 date of such material default, if the City terminates the Sewe 27 Service Agreement. 28 . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY SB2QQ2:31935.1 B 1 e2 .5 16 28 e DRAFT 8.3 The Parties understand that the performances under this Agreement are specific to each of them and unique an 3 for that reason, among others, the Parties to this Agreemen 4 will be irreparably damaged, if this Agreement is 5 specifically enforced. Accordingly, if the County fails t 6 timely make the payments or fails to undertake and complete 7 performances and covenants required in Section 2 of thi 8 Agreement, the City will be irreparably damaged, if thi 9 Agreement is not specifically enforced. Accordingly, 10 event of any controversy concerning the County's obligation t 11 timely undertake and complete the performances and covenants an 12 remit the payments specified in Section 2, this Agreement shall 13 be specifically enforceable by the City, in a court of equity 14 a decree of specific performance or by injunctive relief, appropriate. The Parties hereto waive any argument 17 monetary damages are adequate. Such remedies and all 18 rights and remedies set forth herein shall be cumulative and no 19 exclusive and shall be in addition to any and all 20 that the City may have under this Agreement, equity. at law or i 21 22 23 8.4 In the event of a material default, any Party ma 24 agree to waive any penalties or remedies for such default, bu 25 any such waiver shall be in writing and signed by the Part 26 against whom such waiver is sought to be enforced. 27 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 9 DRAFT 1 8.5 Nothing herein shall limit the right of any Party t .2 recover real or consequential damages arising from any material 3 default or breach of this Agreement. 4 5 Section 9. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT, NATURE OF OBLIGATIONS. 6 The County shall remit all required payments under thi 7 Agreement from lawfully available funds of the County, 8 shall not be an indebtedness of the County, but which shall be 9 contractual obligation of the County offered to the City 11 Agreement. The City shall be entitled to equitable relief, 10 exchange for the execution and delivery of the Sewer Servic 12 monetary damages and any other remedies as a court may award i 13 the event of any breach of this Agreement by the County. 14 .5 16 Section 10. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. 17 10.1 The County agrees to indemnify, defend and hol 18 harmless the City and its elected officials, officers, 19 employees, attorneys, agents and volunteers from any and all 20 claims, actions, losses, damages, and/or liability arising fro 23 omissions, related to this Agreement, except where 21 the County's or its elected officials', officers', employees', 22 attorneys', agents' and volunteers' negligent acts, errors, 24 indemnification is prohibited by law. 25 26 10.2 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the County agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless th City, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardin 27 28 . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 10 .2 .15 16 DRAFT 1 (RDA) , departments, agencies, divisions, boards any o commissions either an of City the well RDA or as as 3 predecessors, successors, assigns, agents, directors, electe 4 officials, officers, employees, representatives and attorneys of 5 either the City or RDA from any claim, action, or proceedin 6 against any of the foregoing persons or entities, arising fro 7 or related to any third party challenge to the City's approval 8 of this Agreement, to the City's provision of sewer service 9 related to this Agreement, or the City's or the RDA's receipt 0 10 expenditure of funds pursuant to this Agreement, including, 11 not limited to any claim, action or proceeding brought under 12 California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources 13 Section 21000 et seq.) or to invalidate this Agreement. 14 Section 11. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY. 17 18 11.1 The City, its elected officials, officers, employees, attorneys and agents shall act in an independent capacity durin the term of this Agreement and not as elected officials, officers, employees, attorneys or agents of the County and/o 19 20 21 22 CSA 70 EV-1, nor shall any of them have authority to contrac for or on behalf of, or incur obligations on behalf of, 23 24 County and/or CSA 70 EV-1. 25 26 11.2 The officers, its County, elected officials, 27 employees, attorneys and agents shall act on behalf of th 28 County during the term of this Agreement and not as electe . officials, officers, employees, attorneys or agents of the City, INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 5B2002,31935.1 11 1 . 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . DRAFT nor shall any of them have authority to contract for or 0 behalf of, or incur obligations on behalf of, the City. Section 12. WAIVER. Any waiver by a Party of any breach of anyone or more of the terms of this Agreement shall not be construed to be waiver of any subsequent breach of the same term or any term of this Agreement. Failure on the part of one of Parties to require exact, full, and complete compliance with term of this Agreement by the other Party shall not be construe as, in any manner, changing the terms of this Agreement waiving the enforcement thereof. Section 13. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be governed and construed i accordance with the laws of the State of California. Section 14. VENUE. This Agreement was entered into and is intended to performed in San Bernardino County, California. Venue for action related to this Agreement brought by either of Parties shall be the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino, Central District, unless either Part demonstrates that, in fairness and equity, the venue should b changed. In the event that the venue is to be changed, it shall be limited to the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Riverside, Central District. If any action concernin this Agreement is brought by a third party, both Parties shall INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002:31935.1 12 .2 .15 16 . DRAFT 1 use their best efforts to establish venue in San Bernardin County. 3 4 Section 15. ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS. 5 In any legal action between the Parties arising from thi 6 Agreement, each Party, including the prevailing party 7 its own attorneys' fees and costs of suit. This Section shall 8 not apply to those costs of suit and attorneys I fees directl 9 relating to any third-party legal action against any Part 10 arising from this Agreement, including such costs of 11 attorneys' fees la, entitle payable under Section 12 INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. 13 14 Section 16. EXHIBITS. All exhibits attached to this Agreement are incorporate into this Agreement by this reference. 17 18 Section 17. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS. 19 The Recitals are specifically incorporated into thi 20 Agreement by this reference. 21 22 Section 18. SECTIONS AND CAPTIONS. 23 All references to Sections refer to Sections in thi 24 Agreement, unless otherwise stated. Captions are fo 25 convenience of reference only and do not constitute a portion of 26 this Agreement. 27 28 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 13 . .5 16 . DRAFT 1 Section 19. FURTHER ASSURANCES. Each Party shall, upon the request of the other Party, tak 3 such actions and execute such other documents (in recordabl 4 form, if required) as may be reasonably required to effectuat 5 the terms and intent of this Agreement. 6 7 Section 20. CONSENT. 8 Whenever consent or approval of either Party is required, 9 that Party shall not unreasonably withhold or delay such consen 10 or approval. 11 12 Section 21. JURY TRIAL WAIVER. 13 The County and the City hereby waive their respectiv 14 rights to trial by jury and agree to accept trial by a court fo any cause of action, claim, counterclaim, or cross-complaint i any action, proceeding, and/or hearing brought by either Part 17 against the other on any matter arising out of, 18 connected with, this Agreement. 19 20 Section 22. NOTICES. 21 notice, demand, Any approval, request, consent, o 22 communication that either Party desires or is required to to the other Party or any other person shall be in writing an either served personally or sent by prepaid, first-class Unite 23 24 25 States mail. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval, 0 26 communication that either Party desires or is required to giv 27 to the other Party shall be addressed to the other Party at th 28 address set forth below. Either Party may change its INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY SB2002:31935.1 14 DRAFT 1 notifying the other Party of such change of address. Notic tIb shall be deemed communicated two (2) business days of the Count 3 from the time of mailing, if mailed as provided in this Sectio .5 16 . 4 22. 5 6 The County address: County of San Bernardino 7 157 West Fifth Street 8 Second Floor 9 San Bernardino, CA 92415 10 11 12 With a copy to: County Counsel 385 North Arrowhead Avenue 13 14 Fourth Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0140 17 City's address: City Administrator, City of San 18 Bernardino 19 300 North "D" Street, Sixth Floor 20 San Bernardino, CA 92418 21 22 With a copy to: City Attorney, City of San 23 Bernardino 24 300 North "D" Street, Sixth Floor 25 San Bernardino, CA 92418 26 27 The failure to deliver a "copy" shall not invalidate a notic otherwise properly given. 28 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 15 DRAFT 1 .2 Section 23. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL 3 QUALITY ACT. 4 The provision of sewer services by the City was one of th 5 options studied by the County's Board of Supervisors in the EIR, 6 and the provision of wastewater services by the City as 7 forth in the Sewer Service Agreement was one of the potentia 8 actions included in the project contemplated by the County' 9 Board of Supervisors when it certified the EIR for the 10 as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Ac 11 ("CEQA"). As further set forth in Section 23 of the 12 13 14 Service Agreement, any limitations imposed upon the pursuant to said agreement by reason of CEQA shall not in manner limit or excuse the obligations to be performed by County under this Agreement. -: 17 Section 24. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. 18 This Agreement contains the entire agreement 19 understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matte 21 promises, and neither of the Parties relied upon 20 herein. There are no oral understandings, terms, conditions 0 22 representation, express or implied, not contained in 23 Agreement. This Agreement may only be modified or amended in 24 writing signed by each of the Parties. 25 26 27 28 . INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 8B2002,31935.1 16 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, DRAFT the Parties have executed thi ~ 2 Agreement as of the dates set forth below. 3 4 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO: 5 6 Fred Aguiar, Chairman, 7 Board of Supervisors 8 9 Dated: 10 SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD 11 12 13 J. Renee Bastian, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 14 _15 ,. By: 16 . Deputy 17 18 Dated: 19 Approved as to Legal Form: 20 ALAN K. MARKS County Counsel 21 22 23 By: 24 Rex A. Hinesley Chief Deputy 25 Dated: 26 27 28 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO: By: Judith Valles, Mayor Dated: ATTEST: Rachael Clark, City Clerk By: Deputy Dated: Approved as to Form and Legal Content: JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney By: JAMES F. PENMAN City Attorney Dated: 5B2002,31935.1 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 17 1 .2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . 8B2002:31935.1 DRAFT Exhibit "An Donut Hole Description INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN. THE CITY AND COUNTY 18 ':';, , " ie '. , I , ! l I j , ! j .. Je j EXHIBIT "A" DONUT HOLE DESCRIPTION LAFCO 2867 , , DETACHMENT FROM THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY Of REDLANDS (QONUT HOLE) REVISiON NO.2, 5 OCTOBER 2000 " . ~ . , PORil6NS OF SECTION 16, ANO 21, T1S, R3W, SBBM; MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ' . .." '_~ ;,11;1" ~.. . FOLLOWlijG THE ;:VAAlOUS COURSES OF THE EXISTINQ RED~DS CITY LIMITS, BEGINNIN<J AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CITY OF REOLANDlI AS ORIGINAlLY INCORPORATED. SAID UNE ALSO BEING THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER SECTION UNE OF SECTION 21. , T1S,' R3W, SB8M, WITH THE EAST AND WEST QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SAID .&CTION 21: . , ' (COllRSE itj THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE N'ORTH SECTION UNE OF sAID'SecTIoN 21 AND CONTINUING ALONQ THE EAST, AND WEST QUARTER SECTION UNE 0.. SECTION 20, T1S, R3W, SBBM. N 88'38'37" W 2.&73.3e FEET: (COllRSE '12) THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE EAST AND WEST QUAR~ SECTION LINE OF SAlD SECTION 21 ANI), CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTH SECTION LINE OF SECTION 20, T1S, Raw. S8BM, S 119'2T54" W 4,032.21 FEET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOOTHERL Y PROLONGATION OF THE EAST LINE OF LOTS 8 AND 3 OF BLOCK II, OF THE HENRY L. WillIAMS TRACT, AS RECORDED IN BOOK 1" PAQE 17 IN THE OFFICE OF ,THE COUNTY RECORDEI;l. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CAliFORNIA. LAST .'. .,~~'tAID INTERSElrrlON BEING 1,320 FEET MORE OR LESS EAST, OF THE INTERSECTION . 'OF THE CENrERLINES OF LUGONIAAVENUE AND CALIFORNIA STREET; , . (COURSE 0) THENC~ N 00'34'48" .w 1,305.50 FEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF LOTS II AND S AND 'THE PRQLONGATlON THEREOF" TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF ALMONQ A~UE; (COURSE H) THENCE' N 89'49'35" If{ 1,316.68 FEET ALONG THE CENTeALINE OF ALMOND AVENUE 1,31e;&8 FEET TO ITS INTERSECTION wITH THE CENTERLINE OF CAIJI'ORNIA &TREEn I (COURe fl6) THENCE N 00"18'>48" W, 3,959.99 FEET AlONG THE CENTERLINE OF CAlJFORNIA STREET Tq ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF PALM,ETTO AVENUE: (~OURSE fI') THENCE ,$ <<9'2N8" E"2;645.64' t:'EET ALONa 'THE CeNTERLI/'fE elF PALMETTO AVENUE TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF NEVADA STREET; (COURSE 17) THENCE N 00"34'65" e 1,320.22 FEET ALONa THE CENTERLINE OF NEVADA STREET TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THI; SOUTH LINE OF PINE STREET (VACATED): , ' (COURSE iI,) THENCe S 89'27'46" E 1,318.13 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF PINE STREET (VACATED) TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION-OF THE EAST UNE OF LOT 3. BLOCK 1 OF BROWNS SUBDIVISION OF THE HENRY L. WILLIAMS TRACT AS RECORDED IN BOOK II OF MAPS. PAGE 96, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, COI.!NTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA; . -.' EXHIBIT "A" DQNUT HOLE DESCRIPTION ' I Page 1 of 5 . (COURSE 119) THENCE N 0'35'17'. E -661.14 FEET ALONG LAST SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION AND EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 3 TO ITS INTERSECTioN WITH THE NORT.HERL Y LINE OF LOTS 3 AND 2, BLOCK 1 OF BROWNS SUBDIVISION: (COURSE it10) THENCE S 79'40'16" E 453.20 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2; - (COURSE'11) THENCE S 58'40'18" E 640.00 FEET; . .. (COURSe '1Z) THENCE S 89'10:16' E ~90.61 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RlGHT-oF"WAY LINE OF AlABAMA S.TREET; . (COURSE 1113) THENCE S 89'10'16' E 20.00 FEET ALONG lAST SAID EASTERLY PROLONGATION LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF AJ:.NJNAA STREE1'j (COURSE'14) THENCE N 00'34'57' E 88.63 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF AlABAMA STREET. TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SHOULDER OF THE BLUFF OF THE SOUTH BANK OF THE SANTA ANA RIYER: (COURSE IHIS) THENCE N 89'39'20" E 49.29 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY_ PROLONGATION OF A LINE. DESCRIBED IN GRANT DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 8,1882 IN BOOK 5832, PAGE 746. OFfiCIAL RECORDS OF SAIl) COUNTY; - THENCE ALONG VARIOUS COURSES IN THE SHOULDER OF THE BLUFF OF THE SOUTH BANK OF SAID SANTA ANA RIVER. DESCRIBED IN SAID GRANT DEED AS FOLLOWS: (COURSE 'Hi) THENCE N 89.'39'20" E, ALONG SAID SHqULDER, 83~is FEET; . . (COURSE'17) THENCE N 79'43;10" E, ALONG SAID SHOULDER, 295.94 FEET; (COURSEtl1') THENC.E N 73'08'3ll" E, ALONG SAID SHOULDER, 404,77 FEET: (COURSE tl1S) THENCE N ~1'19'60' E. ALONG SAID SHOULDER. 221,48 FEET; (COURSE 1120) THENCE N 68"09'30' E, ALONG' SAID SHOULDER. 297.10 FEET; (COURSE #21) THENCE N 83'00'20" E, ALONG SAID SHOULDER, '149.58 FEET; (COURSE#22) THENCE N 84"05'2S" E, ALONG SAID SHOULDER, 181.82 FEET; (COURSE#23) THENCE N 86"38'W E, ALONG SAID SHOULDER, 191.55 FEET; (COURSE it2") THENCE N 67'03'32' E, -ALONG SAID SHOULDER, 9.36 FEET; 1 (COURSE #25) THENCE LEAVING THE SHOULDER OF THE BLUFF OF THE SOUTH BANK OF THE SANTA ANA RIVER S 67'03'32" W 40U9 FEET; .\ "... ., . '1. j 'e 'l ~ .~- . I I 1- ; (COURSE IIU) THENCE N 72'52'22" E 262.23 FEET TO TI-/E RIGHT OF WAY OF THE STATE j OF-CALIFORNIA FOR STATE HIGHWAY 30; . (COURSE 1127) THENCE ALONG SAID STATE RIGHT OF WAY N 00'10'18" W 441.13 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 17, T1$, IUW. SB8M; I j i. J , i I . EXHIBIT "A"F DONUT HOLE DESCRIPTION Page 2 of 5 I .. - . 1. . . (COURSE #128) THENCE S 89'14'55" E 347.32 FEET AlONG TI:fE NORTH LINE OF SECTIONS 17 AND 16, T1S, R3W, SB6M, TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF SAID SECTION fSi . . (COURSE #29) THENCE S 00'39'45" E 3,891.74 ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF SAID SECTION 16 TO ITSINTEF\SECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF PIONEER ~VENUE; . THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF PIONEER AVENUE lliE FOLLOWING COURSES /11'10 DISTANCES: .. (COURSE #130) THENCE ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTH-EASTERLY, 'HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET, A RADIAL BEARING SEARS S 04'59'53" W, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15'45'68", A DISTANCE OF 137.69 FEET; (COURSE #31) THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE N S"'4'08" W 207.111 FEET: . . . .. (COURSE il32) THENCE ALONG A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A'RADIUS OF 1,100.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE.OF 20'41'68", It. DISTANCE OF 3117.38 FEI;T: (COURSE #33) THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE N 89'66'04" W 12.11 FEET TO A POINT ',944.8 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 18, Tf8, R3W, 8B8M: . (COURSE 134) THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE, S 00"32'31' W 74U8FEET: (COIIRSE#3ti) THENCE WEST 480.80 FEET; (COURSE #3ts) THENCE S. 01'18'16" W 7~S.79 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE;. (CO'URSE #131) THENCE S 89'SS'4r E 1,267.87 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE ,OF SECTION 21, ns, R3W. SBBM: (COURSE #l38) THENCE S 00'19'3r E 2,607,71 ALONG LAST SAID QUARTER LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. . CONTAINS 1104 ACRES MORE OR LESS. AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "S" ATTACHED HERETO AND ~E A PART HERE OF. EXPIRES 12131/200 EXHIBIT "A" DONUT HOLE DESCRIPTION Page 3 of 5 0167171 130000 0292 041 05 0000 0292041 OB 0000 . 0292 041 09 0000 --, 029204110??oo j 0292041 11 0000 0292041 120000 0292 041 150000 0292 041 16 0000 0292 041 17 0000 0292 041 1B 0000 0292 041 19 0000 0292 041 34 0000 0292 041 350000 0292 042 01 0000 0292042020000 0292042070000 0292 042 OB 0000 0292 043 01 ??oo 0292 043 02 0000 0292 043 03 0000 0292 043 04 0000 0292 043 05 0000 0292 043 06 0000 0292 043 07 0000 0292 043 OB 0000 0292 043 09 0000 0292 043 10 0000 M292 043 11 0000 . "292 051 01 0000 0292 051 02 0000 0292 051 03 0000 0292 051 04 0000 0292 051 05 0000 0292 051 06 0000 0292 051 07 0000 0292 051 OB 0000 0292 051 09 0000 0292 051 10??oo 0292051110000 0292 051 12 0000 029205113 ??oo 0292 051 14 0000 029205115 ??oo 0292051 170000 029205119 ??oo 029205120 ??oo 0292 051 21 0000 0292 052 01 0000 0292052 03 0000 0292 052 04 ??oo 0292 052 06 ??oo 0292 052 OB 0000 0292 052 10 0000 0292 052 11 0000 0292052120000 0292052 130000 0292052 150000 0292 052 16 0000 0292 053 03 0000 0292 053 04 0000 0292 053 08 0000 0292 053 12 0000 0292 053 13 0000 0292 054 02 0000 0292 054 03 0000 0292054 04 0000 0292054 05 ??oo 0292 054 06 0000 0292054 07 0000 0292 054 08 0000 0292 054 09 0000 0292054 10 0000 0292054120000 0292054 13 ??oo 0292054140000 0292 054 16 0000 0292054170000 0292 055 01 0000 0292055 02 ??oo 0292 055 03 0000 0292 055 04 0000 0292 055 05 ??oo 0292 055 06 ??oo 0292 055 07 0000 0292 055 08 0000 0292 055 09 0000 0292055100000 0292 071 06 0000 0292071100000 0292 071 15 0000 0292071180000 0292071210000 -..- --- no___ 0292 071 22 0000 0292 071 23 0000 0292 071 24 0000 0292 071 25 0000 0292 071 260000 0292 071 27 0000 0292071 28 0000 0292071 29 0000 0292071 30 0000 0292 071 33 0000 0292071 35 ??oo 0292 071 38 ??oo 0292071 39 ??oo 0292071 40 0000 0292071 41 0000 0292 071 43 ??oo 0292071 44 0000 0292 071 45 0000 , ! ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS IN DONUT HOLE . EXHIBIT "A" DONUT HOLE DESCRIPTION 0292 072 01 ??oo 0292 072 02 ??oo 0292 072 04 ??oo 0292 07210 ??oo 0292 072 11 ??oo 0292061 01 ??oo 0292081 02 ??oo 0292081 03 ??oo 0292 081 04 ??oo . 0292 081 06 ??oo 0292 081 07 ??oo 0292 081 08 ??oo 0292 081 12 ??oo 0292 081 14 ??oo 0292 081 15 ??oo 029208118??oo 0292 081 19 ??oo 0292 081 22 ??oo - 02921181 UOOOO- 0292 081 24 ??oo 0292 081 28 ??oo 029208127??oo 0292 081 28 ??oo 0292 081 29 ??oo 0292 081 32 ??oo Page 4 of 5 ~... I I II I" I . . ~ I 2 al , I i ~.~ . i . II i l:~ iVI . 'e ~ \I i . , , ., ~d d. , '. ' . 'lill ,,8.. I I I T ' I ~ a gf '. : . . . ~. "1._/1 .... . . s j" ~ " _ t/UllIn "m.~, o I ~I ~ ~~.,. l. "Ii Z 0;/01 , :i< .~ a: ''Q.' . ~.; ;::: . D:att/l..., .' , ,!!" .. II ~ I , . ";( :c " ~~&.,.ri...s . .. 4 " . i l!K Iil ~ !i "" I' . . r I ..e- I . . I' . ' - ': 1 .. \ ,~. 8 " , '''-..Ij , JiJ,llJ.r .,.0..;1311 3 I ~!'!lbi':~l;_~~~k!llI~C.. .- ~:tm!~~~!!"en! J . .. ' 1 ~1.~~~~~ ~ uttiRU~BB~~iI~ ~.~1IftQ&2U.zaaft.as_ :.;....,.......~="!!::'~,~.~ I '1 . c Ul . UoI . 8 I I \-. r "'" - I . I " .I.D~' N~O~n'lO 1 " ....~I ....., .... -'EI . .._..._... '.9'.' ._. EXHIBIT "A" DONUT HOLE DESCRIPTION Page 5 of 5 1 .2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 . 8B2002,31935.1 DRAFT Exhibit "B" August 16, 2002 letter from Supervisor Dennis Hansberger to Mayor Valles INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY 19 .- iiuarll of ~uptrui.5ur.!i OLnunty uf ~an iitmarllinu DENNIS HANSBERGER SUPERVISOR, THIRD DISTRICT . August 16, 2002 Honorable Judith Valles Mayor, City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418-0001 . Dear Mayor Valles: . I am responding to your letter of August 13,2002, regarding our recent discussions as to the City of San Bernardino providing sewer service to the County's unincorporated area commonly referred to as the "Donut Hole." Our counter proposal is as follows: .1. The City of San Bernardino would receive a payment of$135,000 per year from the date of the Agreement for a term equal to 5 years. 2. The County would agree that there would be no annexation of any portion of the Donut Hole into the City of Redlands until an agreement was entered into with the City of Redlands whereby the City of Redlands relinquishes control over the expenditure of the non-housing portion of the IVDA tax increment revenues generated within the Donut Hole after an annexation. This is similar to the provision that was contained in the prior County/Redlands agreement from January ofthis year. This provision would allow the IVDA full discretion over the use of the non-housing portion of the tax increment generated within the Donut Hole both before and after an annexation by the City of Red lands and would essentially modify the applicable section of the 1992 RedlandslIVDA Settlement Agreement. . 3. The City of San Bernardino would receive the 20% Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund generated by the IVDA Redevelopment Project Area within the Donut Hole for the term of the Redevelopment Plan regardless of whether the area remained as County unincorporated or was annexed into the City ofRedJands. This would occur either by an assignment by the County of San Bernardino or by direct action of theIVDA. This is for the 125 acres of Majestic Realty property only. San Bernardino County Government Center. 385 North ArroWhead Avenue, Fifth Floor. San Bernardino, CA 92415-0110 . (909) 387-4855 Yucca Valley Office. 57407l1ventynine Palms Highway. Yucca Valley, CA 92284 . (780) 228-5400 Big Bear Lake OffICe' 477 Summit Boulevard' Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 . (909) 866-0140 Twin Peaks Office. 26010 State l-4inhW::W.1AQ. Twin "o..l.o.. r,. 0""10'1 .. In",,\ ......"" ....._... ~ . . . -2- 4. The City of San Bernardino would receive a one-time grant of$I,OOO,OOO ofCouoty housing funds, during the 2002-Q3 fiscal year for a "to be determined" targeted area within the City of San Bernardino. Such funds would be used by the City of San Bernardino for the rehabilitation and demolition of houses, the relocation of residents and the upgrade of streets, utilities and landscaping within this targeted area. The previously drafted and yet to be approved Sewer Service Agreement provides that the City of San Bernardino and the City Water Department wiU receive aU typical connection fees, capacity fees and monthly service charges for aU development in the Donut Hole that connects to the City of San Bernardino sewer system and the Sewer Treatment Plant. The Donut Hole properties will construct at their expense aU transmission lines required to connect to the City of San Bernardino existing 24" sewer line ptese~tly terminating at Mountain View Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue. The County's counter proposal is for your consideration, and if approved by the City of San Bernardino at their Council meeting on August 13, 2002, I will ask iliat this proposal be considered at a Board of Supervisors meeting shortly thereafter. Sincerely, ~.~~ DENNIS HANSBERGER Vice Chairman Supervisor, Third District 1 .2 .5 16 27 28 . DRAFT Exhibit "C" County of San Bernardino Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY. AND COUNTY SB2002,31935.1 20 CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL - MAJESTIc REALTY CO. PAGE 1 of7 CONDmONS OF AFPROY AL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-00071E273-97/IPM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 200 1 West Red1ands, California! S3 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742 CONDmONS of APPROVAL ON-GOING PROCEDURAL OR OPERATIONAL CONDmONS OF APPROVAL LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - Current Planning Division (909) 387-4131 1. Project Description: Tentative Parcel Map 14742 is a commercial parcel map that re-subdivides existing parcels into 39 numbered commercial parcels and II lettered parcels for common driveways and reciprocal parking areas within a commercial center. The site includes approximately 128 gross acres and 120 net acres. The project site is located in an area bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Highway 30, Lugonia Avenue and Alabama Street in the East Yalley Corridor Planning Area. Included are current Assessor Parcel Numbers 0292-081-01, 02, 03, 04, 06, 07, 08, 12, 14, IS, 18, 19,23,26,27,28, 29 & 32. 2. The site has a proposed Preliminary Development Plan and Final Development Plan for Phase I that are concurrent filings with this Tentative Parcel Map. All lots shall adhere to the design standards set forth in the Planned Development text and the adopted Preliminary and Final Development Plan maps. The roads around the perimeter of the project shall be dedicated, but will not be required to be paved with this approval. Each road segment shall be required to be paved, prior to the first occupancy in each respective phase. . 3. Additional fees may be required prior to issuance of development pennits and shall be paid as specified in adopted fee ordinances. 4. This Conditional Approval shall become null and void unless all conditions have been complied with and recordation of the final map authorized by such approval has taken place within thirty-six (36) months after the date of approval of project. Extensions of time not to exceed five (5) years may be granted, not to exceed the maximums allowed by State law and the associated Developer Agreement. A written request must be submitted with the appropriate fee prior to the date of expiration. 5. The applicant/owner shall ascertain and comply with requirements of all Federal, State, County and Local Agencies as are applicable to the project/site area. These include, but are not limited to: STATE: Regional Water Quality Control Board and Caltrans, COUNTY: Code Enforcement (weed abatement) Environmental Health Services (water/sewer, food, noise and vectors), Fire Warden, Fire-Hazardous Materials, Planning, Public Works, Flood Control District, Special Districts [CSA 70- EY -1] and Building and Safety. . 6. The applicant shall agree to defend at their sole expense any action brought against the County, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval in compliance with San Bernardino County Ordinance #2684. The applicant shall reimburse the County, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fees which the County, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The County may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligation under this condition. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] · = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES listed inltalics & brackets as [Mitigation Measure #] If[~:r~r]lf @JlfOCWrg I i ....- ',<#J.",~.."" IE,;;._.. .._~..... ......""..... ~. !N!l@. ! i . ~. : ~.... ,_ .. __.. M M. 'iJ@J~~~ I I ; i: " 'I I 'T"-"-~-; :l;tlt. .~~:-. ... - '_'M -". . -.. ----.-----. . _...,.;: ............. -, e.' , I \1 ."eL .s ~l ~ ...."" Jl. .....-.. r..... ,.~..., \ \ ..'....1 !~... .......' .,1\ ' : t, - , :' . 11\ I: i j' j .' ; l~ , .'; I., .,., .~' .... "'>>"-.;0 ~ .. ~ .U :>., ;=, :Q i"\i )01 t; ;(l. ist; :kI' :(-li :< ~ 'I-<. ;(Q ~ 1"4<." '}'~:.e;:::''''''' . ';'-:;~'~'.:^' -"w ,",.<t." ;.....~"'>+'...; ~~,.. ~ . ""CA' !~ ; .,:..:..~~"r. '.~.~.I.-i,..1 ~:."<U'" ;.... ~.., . .;.... , >ouo<......,..j ... j ...lTI.... ~ _.~ ;f~ .. I .~~~.., ',:;,a.. i ..".,.... ;::l':r.\;:,!';",,'lO" ;-..:4 .--..-------.. -. ~.- II .:J!i.. b~',' .,,,,,,,. . L...: . J .:l"""" i ''',''':1 I II 2. . -.- STREET SECTIONS u''fIM.JJ_M i 111 -- ~ 1: ;:j: - I~ -.-\ ::::t::.:1.-...t. I --~~~J.... ...=1~:~ \ I I ~,.... VICINITY MAP "".. .... PARCEL TABlA..ATlON . ~~~.- ~_.~j LUGONIA AVENUE ew LEGEND "oIICQ.N.. "",,Uf4CllltS'l . U, Z .0. . .ft . - . .4 . .. , .. . - . .. :~ :::~ .: z.ao 1) ::,0' .. ~ It 1.1' '.,M " :." :: :::: :Ill LI' U' ~ ... .. .~ , , I J',&JtCQ.".. Mt"(ACIlOI ~ t:l u ~ .. ~ D I.'. . .. j! t; .. - . ~ U '4 H ~ e t:r . .. .. ~ , ~ . .. .: ~ . - TorAL Her AReAl I.:lO.O AC' SAN BERNARDINO A VEMJE ALABAMA STREET F"RONTAGE ROAD 'LTlattllll 1X1lIHWn'11III-"--.- IXNflCIl.lIG~"-'_.- ......:=.: ~i7~~:~~~~i1-~;r;~;j lX,aN ~~M~~~~_'M__'._~_~~"_M II1EDlEPWHI'. --------- -. CC---..u. . .~ ... :::--- ~._.:'i.. ..--- - --==.. --- -~- R MLD'nC MALTY co. ="."="'==-=- --...-- PROPERTY DESCRPTION k..lii".MIIllftNIOT...=io IIIGl/hl,......ltaT... ~. IMIOIMlNll n...tt STATE/.ENT oF OWT\ERSHP UIP:r~ ~T":-,:N =::tnJ IICCIDMU~.IIlJCIIHDI$TO .......,....... .-a 11.1-.:: a 4I'rII ... f:. ", .,. THEREDLANDSA~OO~ "/H/oL P.O. BOX 7656 REDLANDS, CALlFOFU;IA !l?~7" re Agenda Item S I September 23, 2002 ~)J,~ City Cle"'CDC Sley City of San Bemardlle .~,-':::' City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street San Bernardino, California 92418 -.... Subject: Comments on Proposal to Supply Sewer Services to the Donut Hole Gentlemen: As you know, the quest for water and sewer services for the Donut Hole, which is an island completely surrounded by the City of Redlands, has been lengthy, contentious and convoluted. The developers of the Citrus Plaza project and the County of San Bernardino are now attempting to complete acquisition of sewer servicesfrom the City of San Bernardino. Consequently, the City of San Bernardino, as the agency that would carry out the project of providing sewer services and laying the necessary sewer connection pipelines to provide sewer service to the Donut Hole (the "Project"), is a "Responsible Agency" as that term is used in the State CEQA Guidelines (the "Guidelines") authorized by the California Environmental Quality Act. As a Responsible Agency, the City of San Bernardino is obligated to consider alternatives and mitigating measures as provided in the Guidelines. The following significant environmental impacts, their causes, alternatives and mitigating measures for the Project have not been adequately considered by the City as required by CEQA. 1. The potential effects of the diversion of San Bernardino sewage treatment capacity to the service of the Donut Hole on the other agencies served by San Bernardino's facilities as described in Mayor Judith Valles' March 12, 2001 letter to Majestic Realty have not been considered. The affected entities include the cities of Highland, Loma Linda and Colton. 2. Both San Bernardino's and the City of Redlands' sewage treatment plants have been financed by both state and/or federal funds, with some of Redlands' funds being used to pay for existing sewer Comments on Donut Hole Sewer Service, p 2 Soptember 23, 2002 infrastructure and treatment facilities in the Donut Hole. The supersedure of the existing sewer infrastructure in the Donut Hole by San Bernardino's facilities means that state and federal money spent for San Bernardino's sewer facilities will be used for an area intended to be covered by Redlands. As a result, some portion of the sewer services covered by the state and federal funds provided for the San Bernardino facilities will no longer be available for their intended purposes. 3. The City has not considered the no-impact alternative of having the Project's purposes met by simply connecting to the existing City of Redlands infrastructure and facilities under Guidelines Sec. 15096 (g). A City of Redlands sewer line runs along both the eastern and northern boundaries of the Citrus Plaza Project. 4. The environmental impacts on existing businesses and business districts in the City of San Bernardino of additional substantial competition have not been considered. The Fiscal and Competitive Impact Analysis of Citrus Plaza Phase I and Phase II prepared by Alfred Gobar & Associates (the "Gobar Report") at the behest of the Citrus Plaza developer contains revenue (sales) projections for Phase I and Phase II of the Citrus Plaza Project. That forecast indicates that 31.8% of the anticipated Phase I annual sales volume of $94,100,00 will be cannibalized from surrounding area business establishments. Thirty one point eight per cent of the forecast sales volume of $94,100,000 is $29,923,000. If only one third of the sales volume forecast to be taken from other regional retailers - or about $10 million - comes from Carousel Mall, Inland Center Mall, Hospitality Lane and other San Bernardino retailers it will have a serious detrimental effect on all of those retailers' economic viability. A further deterioration in the health of these retailers will be reflected in the vitality and attractiveness of the downtown and other shopping areas in the City which have been struggling with safety and blight issues for years. Comparable numbers for Phase II of Citrus Plaza from the Gobar Report for Phase II of Citrus Plaza are annual sales volumes of $285,700,000, of which 43%, or $122,850,000 will be cannibalized from other regional businesses. The annual potential lost Phase I sales taxes of approximately $100,000 nearly equal the one- time payment proposed to be paid for San Bernardino's sewage treatment capacity. In addition, the Citrus Plaza development will be a magnet for existing San Bernardino businesses. To the extent that existing San Bernardino businesses relocate to new facilities in the Donut Hole, the C<Dmments on Donut Hole Sewer Service, p 3 September 23, 2002 vacancy rate for existing rental space will increase and contribute to the blight already encountered by the City of San Bernardino. 5. The comments dated December 22, 2000 of the City of San Bernardino relating to the provision of water and sewer services to the Donut Hole as incorporated in the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report dated June 2001 have been repudiated by the City. Letters dated February 12, 2001 and March 12, 2001 from Bernard Kersey, Water Department General Manger to the Board of Water Commissioners and the Mayor and from Mayor Valles to Majestic Realty, respectively, rule out the City providing water and sewer service to the Donut Hole, The concerns raised in these two letters have not been addressed with the specificity required for implementation of the Project under CEQA. 6. The effect of using the existing sewer line in San Bernardino Avenue to handle Donut Hole wastewater on the interests of both Loma Linda and the City of Redlands in that pipeline has not been addressed. 7, The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report dated June 2001 provides only project level review information, and as such, is not detailed enough to provide a detailed project level review adequate to assure that CEQA requirements have been satisfied. Therefore, a separate detailed Project-level review to meet CEQA review requirements is necessary. 8. The environmental effects of allocating part of the City's existing sewage treatment capacity to servicing the Donut Hole upon the City's future needs for expanded sewage treatment facilities and associated environmental effects, as described in the Water Department General Manager's July 31, 2002 memo to the board of Water Commissioners, has not been addressed. g, The environmental effects of additional effluent flow resulting from providing sewage treatment services to the Donut Hole upon downstream entities in the Santa Ana River Basin have not been addressed, 10, The City has not considered the growth inducing impacts of the Donut Hole and Citrus Plaza development upon the City of San Bernardino and its infrastructure, 11 , The City has not considered the alternative of "no project" that is within its powers and which would result in no environmental impact. Oomments on Donut Hole Sewer Service, p 4 September 23, 2002 12. The City has not compared the environmental effects of the proposed sewer system with those that could be provided by the City of Redlands, including, without limitation, visual esthetics, noise, traffic and air quality considerations associated with the Project. The Redlands Association respectfully requests that the City of San Bernardino fully address its obligations under all applicable state law and as the Project's Responsible agency to evaluate all potential impacts before proceeding with the proposed agreement. ~ceJ)'_ ~ ~ Secretary ~I ... U)~ I\) '"2 en("')("') (DO;:;: <3'< -030 ~(D"" l/l~en _-I\) ol/l~ -om ::T~(D (D '"0 ... O::J.~ o 0 ~ ~"'O 0- co _0 -l/l~ :r:1\)0 0- -- (DO '"0 a < c: CD en I I VAN BLARCOM LEIBOLD MCCLENDON & MANN 23422 MILL CREEK DRIVE, SUITE 105 . LAGUNA HILLS, CAUFORNIA 92653 TEL 949.457.6300 . FAX 949.457.6305 A PI.OfBS510NA~ COA'OlATIOH MEMORANDUM (Confidential Attorney-Client Communication) Entered into RlIC8ftIlI Counr.il/CmvDevCml M1I: -'~lo~ To: Board of Directors The Redlands Association b~ re Ay~nda Item ..3 :u From: John G. McClendon Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.e. C?:.~!oJ.~ q~ r Re: Potential CEQA Problems for the City.of San Bern'CitVif~:':= >L,. -" i4 ,.. Date: October 4, 2002 The following is a brief explanation of the CEQA problems that the City of San Bernardino ("City") would encounter if it approves the proposal to provide sewer service to the Donut Hole. I suspect that the County and Redlands Joint Venture, LLC ("RJV") are approaching the proposal from the political side (e.g., the Mayor and Common Council); I would suggest that you instead bring to the City Attorney's attention several of the legal problems that would be associated with the City's approval of the Resolutions regarding the City's provision of sewer service to the Donut Hole. Ifhe is like most city attorneys, he will be willing to take an objective look at the legal problems that the City's approval of the Resolutions could cause his client. For starters, the City Attorney may not even be aware of the following facts: . That in 1997, Judge Edwards issued a permanent injunction barring the County and RJV from taking any actions in connection with the development of Citrus Plaza, and the County and RJV have both admitted under penalty ofoeljurv that they violated Judge Edwards' injunction. . That the County and RJV tried desperately to "bounce" Judge Edwards from our current lawsuit, taking the matter all the way to the California Supreme Court, but failed. . That by certifying that the Final EIR for Citrus Plaza is part of the record of proceedings in our lawsuit, the County itself placed the issue of the EIR's adequacy before Judge Edwards. . That in less than 48 hours from the City's consideration of the Resolutions - Wednesday, October 9th - the hearing on our lawsuit will be held before Judge Edwards on the adequacy of the Final EIR for Citrus Plaza. In the event that Judge Edwards issues a ruling ordering the EIR to be set aside, then any City action taken in reliance on the EIR is open to challenge, and if challenged, will be voided. (This is shown in the recent case Friends of the Santa Clara River v. Castaic Lake Water Agency (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 1373.) Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.c. Potential CEQA Problems for the City of San Bernardino October 4, 2002 Page 2 I suggest that you provide the City Attorney with copies of all of the briefs (ours and RJV' s) that were filed in connection with the October 9th hearing before Judge Edwards. Let the City Attorney review them and make his own assessment as to which party is likely to prevail. He can then advise his client (i.e., the Mayor and Common Council) as to the wisdom of rushing the decision on sewer service or waiting until after Judge Edwards has issued his ruling. Also, I have reviewed the agenda materials dated September 20th and 23m for the Resolutions. It appears that the City staff is recommending that the City use the Final EIR for Citrus Plaza as its CEQA compliance document for approving the two agreements. However, in reviewing the agreements, Section 23 of both agreements "fudge" the CEQA process by punting CEQA analysis for the provision of sewer service in connection with "construction of additional physical facilities" in the Donut Hole to a future date. Case law shows that this violates CEQA. I This is because the City will, by approving the agreements, be triggering the commencement of development within the Donut Hole that will make the need for additional sewer service from the City inevitable. Moreover, from an economic standpoint, it seems incredible that the City would go along with a deal structure that (I) leaves so much money on the table, and (2) could potentially cost the City significantly more than the pittance it will receive under the terms of the "Inducement Agreement." As for the first point, the City is settling for significantly less than Redlands was to receive under the now-terminated 2002 "Donut Hole Agreement." Since the City already knows what the County and RJV were willing to pay Redlands for utility service, it makes no sense for the City not to insist on a deal that's at least as "sweet" as the one that the County and RJV were willing to cut with Redlands. As for the second point, it is no secret that the County and RJV are leaving the door open to create a new city out of the Donut Hole - a city with RJV in control. I would be curious to know if the Mayor and Common Council members have ever talked with officials in any of the cities surrounding the City ofIndustry and heard their gripes about all of the sales taxes that has been lost to their general funds on account of retail business that were enticed away. One doesn't have to be For example, see City of Antioch v. City Council (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 1325, 1327-\328 ["In sum, our decision in this case arises out of the realization that the sole reason to construct the road and sewer oroieet is to orovide a catalvst for further develooment in the immediate area. Because construction of the project could not easily be undone, and because achievement of its purpose would almost certainly have significant environmental impacts, construction should not be permitted to commence until such impacts are evaluated in the manner prescribed by CEQA. . . . the fact that a particular development which now appears reasonably foreseeable may, in fact, never occur does not release it from the ElR process. . . . Similarly, the fact that future development may take several forms does not excuse environmental review."]; Slanislaus Audubon Society. Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144; 158 ["The record here clearly contains substantial evidence supporting a fair argument the orooosed countrv club mav induce housinl! develooment in the surroundinl! area. The fact that the exact extent and location of such growth cannot now be determined does not excuse the County from preparation of an ElR."] . . Van Blarcam, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.c. Potential CEQA Problems for the City of San Bernardino October 4, 2002 Page 3 an economist to surmise that the City stands to lose far more in sales and use tax revenue from retail businesses and auto dealerships that relocate to the Donut Hole than it will receive under the terms of the Inducement Agreement. In a nutshell, providing sewer service to the Donut Hole could have economically disastrous consequences to the City. And, by the way, these could, in turn, result in environmental impacts to the City and other surrounding communities that have not been addressed in the EIR. Finally, the City Attorney should be apprised of the central CEQA argument in our brieffor the October 9th hearing: that the February, 2001, Settlement Agreement that we are challenging made the subsequent Final EIR a farce by contractually eliminating the environmentally superior and feasible alternative for water and sewer service to the Donut Hole - service from the City of Redlands-as a feasible alternative. You should call his attention to Redlands' October 12, 2000, letter commenting on the 1999 draft subsequent EIR for the Mall Project, in which Redlands repeatedly slammed the County on the EIR's failure "to compare the environmental advantages/ disadvantages of the proposed water and sewer system options with those of the facilities that would be provided by the City of Red lands, pursuant to existing County and City of Red lands policies and previous approvals concerning the Citrus Plaza project." For example, the City of Redlands noted that: . "Comments regarding Area "A" fail to indicate that the City of Red lands has adequate water and sewer service to meet the needs of this area. . .. There is also no description of the construction requirements and environmental disruptions that would be involved during installation of the Phase II water and sewer improvements to service development beyond Citrus Plaza." . "This analysis fails to note that provision of water and wastewater service to the IVDA Area by the City of Red lands could be the most cost-effective way of using existing infrastructure facilities to serve this area. Without some comparative cost/benefits analysis between the proposed water and sewer service options versus service by the City of Red lands, the analysis as presented is deficient." . The conclusion that construction of the water infrastructure facilities would not, in and of itself, result in an increase in water demand is correct; however, it completely ignores the potential impacts that the project would have if water service comes from other than the City of Red lands, as previously planned." . "The DSEIR states that the proposed water and sewer facilities would provide infrastructure that is currently lacking or undersized/incomplete. This ignores the ready availability of adequate water and infrastructure that could be provided from City of Redlands facilities in the immediate area." . As for the EIR's "Alternatives" section dealing with alternatives regarding Citrus Plaza, Redlands said that it "needs to be completely rewritten to address an alternative to the proposed site plan revisions that would reduce one or more of the significant environmental effects of those revisions, which have not been identified anywhere in the DSEIR. This assessment would likelv focus on reducing the environmental imoacts resultinl! from the provision of water and sewer infrastructure to this site from sources other than the City of \ ~ ,', Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.C Potential CEQA Problems for the City of San Bernardino October 4, 2002 Page 4 Redlands. oarticularly those adverse effects that would not occur if service were provided by the City of Redlands." CEQA (unlike its federal counterpart "NEPA") contains a substantive mandate that public agencies refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if "there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures" that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects. Public Resources Code Section 21002 states: "The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public a!!encies should not aoorove oroiects as Dfoposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantiallv lessen the sil!I1ificant environmental effects of such proiects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." (Emphasis added.) To implement this legislative policy, CEQA "requires public agencies to deny approval of a project with significant adverse effects when feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures can substantially lessen such effects." (Citizens For Quality Growth v. City of Moun I Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433,440-441.) Consequently, the City's action approving the agreements would violate CEQA's substantive mandate, since the City of Red lands is ready, willing and able to provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole in a manner which no one denies would be environmentally superior to any other alternative - including service from the City of San Bernardino. - ~. VAN BLARCOM LEIBOLD . MCCLENDON & MANN JOHN G. McCLENDON john@CEQA.com RECEIVr :1-CIT'f ClEHK 23422 MILL CREEK DRIVE, SUITE 105 . LAOJ/~~' CAUFORNlA 92653 'OZ TOC~~57l:'61~' FAX 949.457.6305 A PlOFESSIONAl COIlPO""TlON October 24. 2002 VIA UNITED STATES MAIL Ms. Rachel G. Clark, C.M.C. - City Clerk % OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK City of San Bemardino P.O. Box 1318 San Bemardino, Califomia 92402 Re: Notice of Commencement of Legal Action Dear Ms. Clark: . Please take notice that The Redlands Association intends to commence an action against the City of San Bemardino and its Municipal Water Department to set aside the City's decision to approve provide sewer service to County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV -I with regard to an unincorporated area surrounded by the City of Redlands and commonly called "the Donut Hole." The litigation will allege (among other things) the City's violation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines for Implementing CEQA (Califomia Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000, et seq.). This written notice is provided pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21167.5. Very truly yours, VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.c. .... :t. .-..-' By: John G. McClendon . . ~ 1i: (Y) 7".-1- . ~ . ~~ -v ~"e&.-l.; _ I' . ,S, ~ VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN A Professional Corporation JOHN G. McCLENDON (State Bar No. 145077) STEPHEN M. MILES (State Bar No. 185596) 23422 Mill Creek Drive Suite 105 Laguna Hills, California 92653 Tele{lhone: (949) 457-6300 FacSImile: (949) 457-6305 Attorneys for Petitioner THE REDLANDS ASSOCIATION SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO THE REDLANDS ASSOCIATION, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, Petitioner, v. THE CITY OFREDLANDS, a municipal corporation, THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a public body, corporate and politic, Respondents, 21 REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE LLC, a 22 California limited liability company, and DOES I THROUGH 100, inclusive, 23 24 Real Party in Interest 25 26 27 28 Case No. SCVSS 79374 Assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Judge James A. Edwards PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE [Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith] Date: October 9,2002 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept: S-15 PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE .' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 dd 13 i~ 9 .... 14 ~~ ::!1~ 15 ~~ 16 e9;; ~Il! 17 ~.f 18 ~< '"' 19 !Xl ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 II. STATEMENT OF FACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 1. THE UNDISPUTED FACTUAL BACKGROUND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 A. B. C. D. E. F. G. The CEQA and Entitlements Lawsuit ......................... 3 The Utili!)' Services Contract Lawsuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 The Pipelme Easement Lawsuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 State Water Resources Control Board Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 The RNlHershey's Project Lawsuit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 The County General Plan Amendments Lawsuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 The CountylHershey's Project Lawsuit ........................ 9 2. THE LEGISLATIVE END RUN: ASSEMBLY BILLS 1553 AND 1544 .. 9 3. SEWING THINGS UP: THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. . . . . . . . .. 11 4. THE COUNTY DUMMIES UP A CEQA "RECORD" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16 III. ISSUE PRESENTED. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17 IV. AN OVERVIEW OF CEQA ............................................ 18 1. THE IMPORTANCE OF CEQA AND THE EIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 2. CEQA APPLIES TO "PROJECTS" ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 3. THE THREE STEP CEQA REVIEW PROCESS ..................... 20 4. THE PUBLIC'S "PRIVILEGED POSmON" IN THE PROCESS . . . . . .. 20 V. STANDARD OF REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 VI. ARGUMENT ........................................................ 23 I. THE COUNTY'S APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CONSTITUTED THE "APPROVAL" OF A "PROJECT" UNDER CEQA .................................. 23 A. There was a "Project" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 B. There was an "Approval" .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25 2. THE COUNTY VIOLATED CEQA WHEN IT APPROVED THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EIGHT MONTHS BEFORE CERTIFYING THE SUBSEQUENT EIR FOR THE DONUT HOLE 25 VII. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28 PETmONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -i- 1----; , , 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ) 12 <Ie! 13 ~~ ~~ 14 ~~ 15 ~~ 16 m~ ....:I1il 17 ~&! 18 ~< ~ 19 ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 CASES Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com. (1975) 13 Ca1.3d 263 ................. 19,27 California v. Superior Court of California (1987) 482 U.S. 400 .................... 23 Citizens Assn. for Sensible Development of Bishop Area v. County of In yo (1985) 172 Ca1.App.3d 151 ..................................... 19 Citizens For Quality Growth v. City of Mount Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433 ........................................... 13 Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553 .............. 28 City of Antioch v. City Council (1986) 187 Ca1.App.3d 1325 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19,27 City of Carmel- by- the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 183 Ca1.App.3d 229 ................................................. 27 Cityof:6~:ell.~;:4~39~~~~~~.~~".".~~d~~~.(~??~~............................. 27 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Concerned Citizens of Costa Mesa, Inc. v. 32nd Dist. Agricultural Association (1986) 42 Cal.3d 929. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20 County of Del Norte v. City of Crescent City (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 965 .............. 9 County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 1178 .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 21 County of In yo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 795 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 Del Mar Terrace Conservancy, Inc. v. City Council (1992) 10 Ca1.App.4th 712 . . . . . . .. 23 East Peninsula Education Council, Inc. v. Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (1989) 210 Ca1.App.3d 155 ........................ 22 Emminf~5n ClA~;3f49i~ ~~~~~~~o:.~~~t.~~~~~ ~~~~:~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 Environmental Protection Information Center v. Johnson (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 604 .............................................. 21, 22 Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California, (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18, 19,25,26 Mozzetti v. City of Brisbane (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 565 ........................... 23 No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Ca1.3d 68 ..... . .. . . . . . . . . .. 20,21,25,26 People v. Superior Court (Smolin) (1986) 41 Ca1.3d 758 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 Rio Vista Farm Bureau v. County of Solano (1992) 5 Ca1.AppAth 351 ............... 19 PETmONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -ii- " 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 <Ill 13 z o~ ~S 14 ~~ 15 @~ 16 ~t;l ...:l~ 17 if 0< 18 ~ Q::l 19 ~ 20 21 1 Rural Landowners Association v. Lodi City Council (1983) 143 Ca.App.3d 1013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 22 Sierra Club v. State Board of Forestry (1994) 7 Ca1.4th 1215 ...................... 22 2 3 Village Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors 4 (1982) 1311 Cal.App.3d 1022. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. . . .. 25 5 Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Cal.4th 559 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 6 7 25 26 27 28 Evidence Code section 453 .................................................. 2 Evidence Code section 459 ................................................. 23 Government Code section 56000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Government Code section 56001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Government Code section 56076 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 PETmONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETmON FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -iii- .' 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 o:cl 13 ~~ ~~ 14 ~~ 15 :f~ 16 00 I!lt;; "'~ ..:llll 17 ~~ 18 ~< lXl 19 ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Government Code section 56425 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 10 2 Public Resources Code section 21002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 3 Public Resources Code section 21005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 4 Public Resources Code section 21167.6 .................................... 16,17 5 PublicResourcesCodesection21168.5 .................................... 21,22 6 Public Resources Code section 21168.9 ....................................... 27 Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, Local Rules of Court Rule 592 ........................................................... 2 Title 14, California Code of Regulations, section 15096 .......................... 15 PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -iv- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 o(l 13 z ~~ 14 ~~ 15 ::?J8 ci:;j 16 ...J~ ~l;l "'~ ...l~ 17 .0 :EO< 00.. 18 u": ~ ...J i:O 19 ~ >- 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I. INTRODUCTION In its Second Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate ("Petition"), petitioner The Redlands Association (the "Association") alleges that the County of San Bernardino (the "County") and the City of Red lands ("Redlands) violated various state laws by approving a certain settlement agreement ("Settlement Agreement") dated February 2, 2001. On June 19, 2002, this Court severed the Petition's causes of action alleging violation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21000 et seq., hereinafter "CEQA") and the Guidelines for Implementation ofCEQA (Cal. Code of Regs., title 14, ~ 15000 et seq., hereinafter "State CEQA Guidelines") so that the Court could expeditiously issue a ruling on them. Thereafter, the parties stipulated to a briefing schedule on the CEQA issues; this is the Association's opening brief. The Settlement Agreement involves the development of the now infamous "Donut Hole" -an unincorporated area of about 1,200 acres surrounded by the City of Red lands. The Petition's CEQA causes of action allege that the County violated CEQA by approving the Settlement Agreement without Drn1 completing the environmental review process required by CEQA. This was done for the express purpose of facilitating the development of the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall (the "Mall Project") by real party in interest Redlands Joint Venture, LLC ("RJV"). That the CEQA process has been rendered a farce comes as no surprise to observers of the proposed development of the Donut Hole. As detailed in the statement of facts, the Mall Project is a textbook example of abysmal land use planning wherein the County and RJV insisted on snubbing the obvious provider of water and sewer service to the Donut Hole - Redlands - in favor of years oflitigation and, finally, special legislation. However, that special legislation did not grant the County a special dispensation to ignore CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. Simply stated, the Settlement Agreement deprived the public of the "privileged position" that it holds in the CEQA review process and turned that process into a post hoc rationalization. The Association urges this Court to void the approval of the Settlement Agreement because of this failure to comply with CEQA. In doing so, the Court will affirm CEQA's mandate that a project is to be analyzed for its significant effects on the environment before it is approved. PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -1- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ ~ 12 o(j 13 iSz ffi~ 14 ....0 u:! 15 ~8 :j'<! 16 ~~ ::J[i! 17 .0 ::g~ 8< 18 ~ .... 19 ~ ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 II. STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. THE UNDISPUTED FACTUAL BACKGROUND In "II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND" of Redlands' Motion for Summary Adjudication as to the Association's CEQA cause of action, Redlands' counsel did a commendable job of presenting the underlying facts which led to Redlands, the County, and RN entering into the Settlement Agreement. Redlands supported these facts with a Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, and the Association did not dispute these facts. Notably, neither the County nor RJV objected in any way to these facts. According to Rule 592 of the Superior Court of Cali fomi a, County of San Bernardino, Local Rules of Court , "Failure to serve and file written opposition may be deemed a waiver of any objections and an admission that the motion or demurrer is meritorious." Consequently, in accordance with Evidence Code sections 452( d) and 453, and Rule 592, the Association requests that the Court take judicial notice of (1) the facts presented in Part II (pages 2-8) of Redlands' Motion for Sununary Adjudication, and (2) the County's and RN's failure to serve and file any written opposition to Redlands' Motion for Sununary Adjudication. Accordingly, the undisputed facts from Redlands' Motion for Summary Adjudication are set forth below in italics in their entirety. On February 2, 2001, the City Council of the City approved the Settlement Agreement which is the subject of the Association's Petition (Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts No. 1/1. On or about February 13, 2001, the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino approved the Settlement Agreement (Sep. Stat. No.2). This Court may take judicial notice of the fact that neither the City or the County have provided this Court with any record of their proceedings associated with execution of the Settlement Agreement that evidences the undertaking of any environmental review for their respective approvals of that document. I Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts is hereinafter referred to as "(Sep. Stat. No. -J." PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 o<l 13 z z ~~ 14 ~o tdii! 15 ::g8 -:;! ~$ 16 !!lUl ;H! 17 _0 ::18: 0..: 18 ~ ...I ~ 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Settlement Agreement, among other things, resulted in stipulations for entry of judgment for three complex lawsuits that were pending among the City, the County and RJVl! (Sep. Stat. No.2). The Settlement Agreement also providedfor afinal resolution of the disputes among the City, County and RJV relating to the provision of utility services in the "donut hole" which were pending before the State Water Resources Control Board (Sep. Stat. No.3). Afourth lawsuit between the parties, in which the Court ruled that the County's approval ofRJV's Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project violated CEQA and the County's General and Specific Plans, was addressed by the Settlement Agreement by requiring the City to "waive" any rights it had under that ruling, and not assert its victory in any fUture legal proceeding. J! (Sep. Stat. No.4). Finally, two other lawsuits between the County and the City, while not part of the Settlement Agreement, are factually relevant to understanding the County's purpose for proposing the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement Agreement's effect. Those two relate to the City's challenge of the County's General Plan amendments affecting utilities and land use decisions in the "donut hole," and the County's challenge to Redlands' approval of a private development project.lI A review of the jacts and procedural background of these lawsuits, and the land use disputes relating to the County's "donut hole," is critical to this Court's understanding of why the County and RJV proposed the Settlement Agreement to Redlands, the scope and effect of that Settlement Agreement, and the roles that the County and City each play, or in Redlands' case -- does not play -- in carrying out and implementing the Settlement Agreement. A. The CEQA and Entitlements Lawsuit. RJV is the developer of the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project (the "Mall Project 'J(Sep. Stat. No.5). The Mall Project is a proposed commercial development located on a 125-acre site 2 The three lawsuits were: Riverside Superior Court Case No. 293/98 (The City of Redlands v. The County of San Bernardino and Redlands Venture); San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV38504 (City of Redlands v. Majestic Realty Co. et. al.); and San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCVSS 73615 (Redlands Joint Venture and United Donut Hole Owner's Property Association v. The City of Redlands et. al.j. J San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV 38504. 4 San Bernardino Superior Court Case Nos. SCVSS 60//6 and 74079. PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 12 <l/l 13 ~z ~ 14 ~~ 15 ::as g:o! 16 o~ e!lgii "'", 17 ....l~ .0 :E'" 0"- 18 ~< ..J 19 Q:l ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 in an unincorporated area of the County (Sep. Stat. No.6). The Mall Project site is bordered by the City, but not within the City's sphere of influence (Sep. Stat. No.7). Atfull build-out, the Mall Project will include approximately 1.85 million square feet of mixed commercial uses (Sep. Stat. No.8). On January 9, 1996, the County certified a final environmental impact report ("EIR 'J for the Mall Project pursuant to CEQA, and approved several land-use entitlements for the Mall Project (Sep. Stat. No.9). At the time of these approvals, the County conditioned the Mall Project on receiving water and sewer services from the City (Sep. Stat. No.1 0). Thereafter, RJV sought to change the Mall Project and authorize a scheme by which the Mall Project would be served by onsite water and sewage facilities. Under this scheme, RJV proposed to construct on-site water extraction, treatment, storage and distribution facilities and on-site sewage collection, treatment and disposal facilities. RJV further proposed that these facilities be transferred to the County upon completion of construction to be owned and operated by the County for the benefit of the Mall Project (Sep. Stat. No. 11). In April of 1996, the County approved the creation of Improvement Zone EV-l within its County Service Area ("CSA 'J No. 70. EV-I serves as a vehicle to accommodate the County's ownership and operation of the water and sewage facilities necessary to serve the Mall Project (Sep. Stat. No. 12). RJV then requested a number of modifications to its Mall Project approvals to implement its new scheme for on-site water and sewage facilities. On November 19, 1996, the County certified a final supplemental environmental impact report and revised utility entitlements for the Mall Project (Sep. Stat. No. 13). In December of 1996, the City filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Injunctive Relief alleging that the County 's supplemental EIR and revised approvals for the Mall Project were unlawful and in violation ofCEQA, the County's General Plan and the County's East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (Sep. Stat. No. 14). After a hearing on the City's Petition, the Court ruled in the City's favor finding that the County's actions violated both the County's General Plan and Specific Plan which required that utilities to the Mall Project be provided by Redlands, and that the County violated CEQA by failing to prepare an adequate EIR (Sep. Stat. PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PEmrON FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -4- 1--- J o(j ~z ~s ~~ ::>18 ":I @~ !at;; ~i:! "0 ~t u< j !Xl ~ 1 No. 15). The County and RJV appealed, but dismissed their appeals of the City's victory on the 2 day the Court of Appeal was to consider the matter (Sep. Stat. No. 16). 3 However, as part of the Settlement Agreement, the County required the City to "waive, 4 release and discharge all rights" the City obtained from the Court's ruling, and extracted a 5 promise from the City that Redlands would never assert its Court victory in any fUture judicial 6 proceeding. The rulings of the Court in this lawsuit, though. were otherwise unaffected by the 7 Settlement Agreement and they remain valid and set the stage for an understanding of the other 8 lawsuits between the County and City, and the purpose and iif/i!ct of the Settlement Agreement. 9 B. The Utilitv Services Contract Lawsuit. 10 In 1980, the County, and the cities of Loma Linda and Redlands, initiated a 11 comprehensive joint planning effort designed to develop policies, standards and regulations 12 governing land uses within the East Valley Corridor Area (Sep. Stat. No. 17). The East Valley 13 Corridor Area comprises approximately 4300 acres of land adjacent to Interstate 10 and Route 14 210 bounded by the cities of Redlands, Loma Linda and San Bernardino (Sep. Stat. No. 18). 15 Portions of the East Valley Corridor Area are within the city limits of the Cities of Red lands and 16 Loma Linda. The balance of the East Valley Corridor Area, -- which is the 1200 acre island of 17 unincorporated County territory known as the "donut hole" -- is not within the sphere of 18 influence of any city (Sep. Stat. No. 19). 19 In 1984, the City and County entered into a contract regarding formation of a CSA for 20 the East Valley Corridor Area which provided that the CSA would not construct, operate or 21 maintain any utility facilities or improvements on land within the sphere of influence of Red lands 22 without approval of the City (Sep. Stat. No. 20). At the time that contract was entered into, the 23 1200 acre "donut hole" was within Redlands' sphere of influence (Sep. Stat. No. 21). 24 As mentioned above, in January, 1996, the County granted approvals for RlV's Mall 25 Project, which allowed for on-site water and sewer treatment facilities to be operated and 26 constructed by the County to serve the Mall Project. Redlands notified the County that the 27 County was legally required to obtain the City's consent before approving those proposed utility 28 facilities. The County disagreed. and Redlandsfiled a Complaint against the County for breach PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -5- ~ ::E dd ~~ ~~ d~ ~8 6~ ....z 00 ~m .0 ::;~ 0< ~ .... en ~ :> 1 of the 1984 contract with the City, and for a declaration that the County's actions were 2 inconsistent with the County's General Plan and Specific Plan and illegally duplicated the City's 3 existing water facilities in the "donut hole." (Sep. Stat. No. 22). 4 However, as part of the Settlement Agreement, the County required Redlands' lawsuit to 5 be dismissed, which resulted in the County obtaining ''permission'' to construct water and sewer 6 facilities for the "donut hole" without adequate environmental review, contrary to the 1984 7 contract, and in violation of the County's General Plan and Specific Plan as determined by the 8 Court's ruling in the "CEQA and Entitlements" lawsuit mentioned above (Sep. Stat. No. 13). 9 c. The Piveline Easement Lawsuit. 10 Prior to its Mall Project approvals being declared invalidfor violation ofCEQA and the 11 County's General Plan and Specific Plan, RJV commenced grading and construction on the site 12 of its Mall Project. Since approximately 1954, Redlands has maintained an easement across the 13 Mall Project site in connection with an underground City sewer pipeline that traverses the site 14 (Sep. Stat. No. 14). RJV's plans for the Mall Project proposed construction over the City's 15 pipeline. Fearing that the pipeline would be damaged by RJV's construction, the City filed suit 16 against RJV to enjoin its construction activities. The City's injunction was granted, and RJV 17 filed a cross-complaint against the City alleging that the pipeline easement was invalid (Sep. 18 Stat. No. 25). 19 The Settlement Agreement required Redlantis to abandon its easement, permit Redlands' 20 sewer pipeline to be located to a location of RJV's choosing, and required the City to grant a , 21 "blanket" easement to the County that permitted the County to locate utility lines anywhere the 22 County wished within the City, without obtaining any City permits or undertaking any CEQA 23 review (Sep. Stat. No. 26). 24 D. State Water Resources Control Board Disvutes. 25 On Apri/18, 1997, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana 26 Region, ("Regional board'~ issued its Order No. 97-11 relating to a N.P.D.E.S. discharge permit 27 and a permit to discharge reclaimed water for RJV's Mall Project (Sep. Stat. No. 27). On or 28 about May 14, 1997, the City filed a Petition for Review with the State of California, State Water PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -6- ~ dCI ~z ~~ ~o u:a ~8 ":;! ~z ~~ .0 ::l:'" 00.. u< ~ .... Q:l ?i :> 1 Resource Control Board ("State Board'~ regarding Order No. 97-11, which challenged the 2 issuance of that Order by the Regional Board because of the County's (and the Regional Board's) 3 failure to comply with CEQA.1! In addition, prior to November 2000, the City requested the 4 Regional Board to modifY Order No. 9711. The Regional board delayed action on the City's 5 request and on or about December 18, 2000, the City filed a Petition for Review of Decision of 6 Regional Board, Re: Resolution No. 00-93, amending Order No. 97-11 (Sep. Stat. No. 28). 7 The Settlement Agreement, however, required Redlands to abandon and dismiss its 8 pending disputes before the Regional Board and State Board which challenged the County's 9 ability to provide water and sewer services to the County "donut hole" (Sep. Stat. No. 29). And, 10 once more, the Settlement Agreement resulted in the County being permitted to provide utility 11 services to the "donut hole" without adequate environmental review and contrary to the County's 12 General and Specific Plans. 13 E. The RJV/Hershey's Proiect Lawsuit. 14 On December 19,2000, the City approved certain land use entitlements and a negative 15 declaration pursuant to CEQA for the development and construction of an approximately 16 600,000 square foot distribution facility proposed to be used by Hershey Foods (Sep. Stat. No. 17 30). RJV and the County, in January, 2000, filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate challenging the 18 City's approval of the project alleging that the City's CEQA review failed to properly account 19 for purported impacts of the Hershey's Project on the County's "donut hole" (Sep. Stat. No. 31). 20 The Settlement Agreement caused RJV to dismiss its challenge to the Hershey's project. 21 The Settlement Agreement did not, however, have any effect on the County's pursuit of its CEQA 22 lawsuit against the City and the Hershey's project (Sep. Stat. No. 32). 23 24 25 26 F. The County General Plan Amendments Lawsuit.~ , These permits were issued by responsible agencies under CEQA who had relied upon the County EIR 27 which was determined inadequate by the Court in San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV 38504. 28 6 City of Red lands et. al. v. County of San Bernardino. San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCVSS 60116. PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETmON FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -7- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 o(j 13 ~z 09 ~~ 14 15 ~8 . ~ ~z 16 ~~ ~11! 17 .0 ~t 0< 18 ~ 19 CQ ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 As a result of the adverse judicial decision it received in the entitlements and CEQA case described above, the County's Board of Supervisors ordered County planning staff to prepare an amendment to the County's General Plan that would "ensure that policies meant to promote cooperation with cities cannot be interpreted as a forfeiture of the authority of the County Board of Supervisors " and "clarifY the County's land use planning authority and development approval discretion in its sphere of influence areas..." The County's Planning staff complied and gave public notice of February 25th, 1999, that it had prepared an initial study under CEQA and recommended a negative declaration for a comprehensive General Plan amendment that would affect, county-wide, the cities' sphere of influence areas and respond to the Supervisors' request (Sep. Stat. No. 33). On July 27, 1999, the Board adopted that General Plan amendment (Sep. Stat. No. 34), and on August 27, 1999, Redlands filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate requesting the Court invalidate and set aside the negative declaration and General Plan amendment and require the County to prepare ajUll EIR (Sep. Stat. No. 35). On October 30, 2000, the Court entered judgment in favor of the City, holding that the County's adoption of its General Plan amendment, amending the County's land use, planning and annexation policies in Redlands' sphere of influence area (ie, the "donut hole'~, violated CEQA. The Court also set aside the General Plan amendment and prohibited the County from readopting the amendment, or any similar amendments to the County's General Plan, unless the County first prepared and considered an EIR thatjUlly complied with CEQA (Sep. Stat. No. 36). The County subsequently appealed. While that appeal was pending, the County proposed a second "settlement agreement" by which it would dismiss its lawsuit challenging the City's approval of the Hershey's project, ifRedlands would abandon its Superior Court victory holding that the County General Plan amendment was unlawfUl. That second "settlement agreement" was entered into by the County and the City on February 2, 2001. Again, this second ''settlement agreement" helped the County to accomplish what it could not do through the series of law suits and other actions it had previously taken -- that is, amend its General Plan and Specific Plan that govern the "donut hole, "without afull E1R in compliance with CEQA, to allow the provision PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -8- ~ o(j 5z ~~ gi ~8 ~~ elVl ~H! _0 ~~ u< ~ .... ~ ~ ;> 1 of utility facilities and to make land use decisions in the "donut hole" without the input of 2 Redlands (Sep. Stat. No. 37). 3 G. The County/Hershey's Proiect Lawsuit.?! 4 As mentioned above, in January 2000, the County filed suit challenging the City's CEQA 5 approval of the Hershey's project. The City filed a demurrer alleging the County's Petition failed 6 to state a cause of action, which the Court upheld, but with leave to amend. Subsequently, prior 7 to a hearing being held on the merits of the County's lawsuit, the County and City entered into 8 the second "settlement agreement" whereby the County dismissed its CEQA challenge to the 9 Hershey's project ifin exchange for Redlands' abandonment of its victory in the City's lawsuit 10 challenging the County's General Plan amendments, described above. 11 12 13 2. THE LEGISLATNE END RUN: ASSEMBLY BILLS 1553 AND 1544 14 The net effect of Red lands' successes in the various lawsuits was to prevent the County 15 and RJV from developing the Mall Project - unless the Donut Hole was annexed into the City.J!I 16 Like many cities do, Redlands' strategy was to use the provision ofwaterand sewer to the Donut 17 Hole as a way to induce annexation of Donut Hole properties into the City. This not only made 18 good sense from an economic standpoint,21 but it also fostered efficient land use planning. 19 20 1 County of San Bernardino v. City of Red Ian tis et. al. San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCVSS 74079. 21 8 As RN's own attorney (Chris Garrett) conceded, "It is precisely because the City of Redlands has 22 refused to provide water and sewer service to the Citrus Plaza project that the Citrus Plaza project has not gone forward as approved by the Board of Supervisors in January of 1996." (AR, p. 3574.) 23 9 In County of Del Norte v. City of Crescent City (1999) 71 CaI.App.4" 965, Del Norte County sued 24 Crescent City for using municipal utilities as a tool to induce owners of developing properties to annex into the city. Del Norte County sought to compel the city to provide water service without annexation and without 25 receiving county fiscal concessions. The trial court delved into the city's alleged motives and, in turn, ordered the city to provide water connections to the unincorporated properties: 26 "So basically it's blackmail? . .. It appears that the decision is based solely on the desire to require new hook ups to annex to the city. Counsel stated that is a legal means that the city may 27 use. It may be legal. But is it moral? Is it not arbitrary to deny solely because one is on the other side of the city boundary line and for no other reason?" 28 In overturning the trial court, the appellate court looked to the objective reasons for the city's position, noting that providing water without annexation would cost the city money: PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -9- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 12 <1d 13 8~ ~~ 14 ~~ 15 ::gS :f:;! 16 ~~ 1';1 ::Jr:! 17 .0 :Of 0< 18 ~ ..J I!l 19 ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 In carrying out the Legislative policies stated in the Cortese-Knox Local Governmental Reorganization Act of 1985 (Government Code section 56000 et seq.: "LAFCO Act"),lW the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") had previously placed the Donut Hole within Redlands' "sphere ofinfluence.".l!I Consequently, LAFCO had alrea<ly: determined that Redlands was the logical service provider with the capacity to efficiently provide adequate water and sewer service to the Donut Hole..!Y To surmount this hurdle, RJV sought a legislative fix in Sacramento. On August 16, 1999, Assembly Bill 1553 was abruptly gutted and amended to override existing laws and preempt the local approval processes applicable to the Donut Hole..!lI In its September 3, 1999, Legislative Bulletin, the League of California Cities called AB 1553 "special-interest legislation "Supplying new hookups . . . without requiring annexation and without a revenue-sharing agreement gives the County the upper hand in managing economic growth and reaping the tax revenue benefits therefrom. Additionally, if new subdivisions do not have to aoolv for annexation to I!lIin access to City water. the City loses out on increased subvention fundinl!: from the state based on nODulation increases." [Emphasis added.] The appellate court went on to affirm the legitimacy of cities using municipal utility service as a land use tool: "It is not against the law or public policy to use utilities as a tool to manage growth." 10 "The Legislature [mds and declares that it is the policy of the state to encourage orderly growth and development which are essential to the social, fiscal, and economic well-being of the state. The Legislature recognizes that the logical formation and determination of local agency boundaries is an important factor in promoting orderly development and in balancing that development with sometimes competing state interests of discouraging urban sprawl, preserving open-space and prime agricultural lands, and efficiently extending government services. . . . Therefore, the Legislature further [mds and declares that this policy should be effected by the logical formation and modification of the boundaries of local agencies, with a preference granted to accommodating additional growth within, or through the expansion of, the boundaries of those local agencies which can best accommodate and provide necessary governmental services and housing for persons and families of all incomes in the most efficient manner feasible." (Government Code ~ 5600 I.) \I ""Sphere ofinfluence" means a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area ofa local agency, as determined by the commission." (Government Code ~ 56076.) 12 Government Code section 56425 states, "(a) In order to carry out its purposes and responsibilities for planning and shaping the logical and orderly development and coordination of local governmental agencies so as to advantageously provide for the present and future needs of the county and its communities, the commission shall develop and determine the sphere of influence of each local governmental agency within the county and enact policies designed to promote the logical and orderly development of areas within the sphere. . . . (e) In determininl!: the sohere of influence of each local a!!encv. the commission shall consider and oreoare a written statement of its determinations with resnect to each of the followin!!: (I) The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open-space lands. (2) The oresent and orobable need for public facilities and services in the area. (3) The oresent caoacitv of oublic facilities and adeouacv ofoublic services that the a!!COcv orovides or is authorized to orovide." (Emphasis added.) 13 See Exhibit I to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -10- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II ~ 12 .t6 13 iz ~ 14 ...,;:! UO ul:! 15 ::a8 :f :;;! 16 o?S !!l1n ~11! 17 .0 l<f 0<( 18 ~ ..., ~ 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 at its worst" and urged its constituency to "Hold Your Nose Because This One Stinks, Then Write Governor to Urge Veto.,,141 The League's alarm apparently worked, because on October 10,1999, the Governor vetoed AB 1553.llI Not to be dissuaded, RJV tried again. On January 13,2000, Assembly Bill 1544, a bill dealing with leaf blowers, was abruptly gutted and restuffed with the provisions of AB l553.lW' The League issued a press release urging a veto on this "revived Donut Hole bill."I71 However, on July 14, 2000, the Governor signed AB 1544.!!I 3. SEWING THINGS UP: THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Although RJV and the County now had AB 1544 in hand, several things still prevented them from moving forward with the Mall Project. f'.i!]t, and as a practical matter, obtaining financing for the Project was out of the question, because Redlands immediately filed, dismissed, and then refiled a Petition for Writ of Mandate; Complaint for Declaratory Relief against the State of California in the Sacramento County Superior Court challenging AB 1544 as unconstitutional speciallegislation..!2I Redlands' AB 1544 challenge eventually found its way into the Utility Services Contract Lawsuit (see I.B., infra}W via Redlands' Motion for Sununary Adjudication as to AB 1544's constitutionality that was set for hearing on February 9, 200l.W 14 See Exhibit 2 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. 15 See Exhibit 3 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. 16 See Exhibit 4 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. 17 See Exhibit 5 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. 18 See Exhibit 6 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. 19 See Exhibit 7 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. 20 The City of Redlands v. The County of San Bernardino and Redlands Venture [Riverside Superior Court Case No. 293198, filed October 16, 1996]. The Settlement Agreement calls it the "Riverside Lawsuit" " See Exhibit 8 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice filed concurrently herewith. PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -ll- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 :z ~ 12 0<1 13 ~:z ~S 14 "';:i d~ 15 ~8 ci:;! 16 cl~ ~~ 17 " 0 ::!!~ 0<( 18 ~ !Xl 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Second, although AB 1544 allowed County service areas, municipal water districts, and the IVDA to construct and maintain water and sewer facilities for the Donut Hole, it did not exempt them from compliance with CEQA, and the County's and RJV's losses in court on CEQA meant that the Mall Project's 1996 requirement that it obtain water and sewer service from Redlands was still operative}Y This Court's Judgment and Order Granting Petitionfor Writ of Mandate; Stay and Permanent Injunction in the above-referenced CEQA and Entitlements Lawsuit (see I.A., infra) [City of Redlands v. County of San Bernardino, et al. (San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV 34737Jll' had "ordered, adjudged and decreed" the County to "vacate and set aside" its approvals of the Citrus Plaza project and its certification of the supplemental EIR, and had "enjoined and restrained" RJV "from taking any action to carry out, or implement the Citrus Plaza project as modified, or any development, construction, or use in furtherance of the project.,,241 Moreover, this Court's October 30,2000, judgment in the above-referenced County General Plan Amendments Lawsuit (see I.F., infra) had prevented the County from amending its General Plan so as to deprive Redlands of its singular right to determine who would provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole unless and until an EIR analyzing the environmental impacts of changing service providers was prepared and certified.llI Third, even if CEQA was complied with so that another service provider could provide water and sewer, Redlands' win in the Pipeline Easement Lawsuit (see I.C., infra) prevented RN from building the Mall Project over Redlands' sewer trunk line that bisected RJV's 22 See Administrative Record, pp. 3704; 3749. 23 A request for the Court to take judicial notice of its September 24, 1997 Judgment and Order Granting Petition for Writ of Mandate; Stay and Permanent Injunction was previously made by the Association in its Request for Judicial Notice; Memorandum of Points and Authorities that was filed with the Court on or about October 11, 2001. Copies of the Judgment and Writ were attached thereto as Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively. 24 RJV's own attorney acknowledged that, "the [East Valley Corridor] Specific Plan, as interpreted by Judge Edwards, blocks anyone but the City of Red lands from providing water and sewer service to the donut hole and IVDA areas. ... it appears that the court has interpreted the [County's] General Planas prohibiting provision of sewer other than by the City ofRedlands. . . . The City ofRedlands General Plan does not permit provision of sewer service unless the IVDA area is annexed to the City of Red lands." (AR, pp. 3574 & 3577.) 2S "The East Yalley Corridor Specific Plan (EYCSP) is a significant obstacle to planning for water and sewer service to be provided within the "Doughnut Hole" by any entity other than the City of Redlands." (County Planning Department Staff Report [AR, p. 2294].) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -12- ,------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 z ~ 12 <iii 13 ~~ ~~ 14 do ~~ 15 -:;I ~ ;,;. 16 !S~ .'jr:! 17 _0 :1f 8< 18 ~ .... 19 !Xl ~ > 20 21 property. (AR, pp. 2791-2797.) Fourth. Redlands was still challenging the County's and Regional Water Quality Control Board's failure to comply with CEQA. (See I.D., infra.) Fifth, Redlands held - and always would hold - the CEQA trump card for the Donut Hole. This was because CEQA (unlike it federal counterpart "NEPA") contains a substantive mandate that public agencies refrain from approving projects with significant environmental effects if''there are feasible altematives or mitigation measures" that can substantially lessen or avoid those effects. Public Resources Code Section 21002 states: "The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not aPllrove proiects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects. and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects lind the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." (Emphasis added.) To implement this legislative policy, CEQA "requires public agencies to deny approval of a project with significant adverse effects when feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures can substantially lessen such effects." (Citizens For Quality Growth v. City of Mount 22 Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433,440-441.) 23 Redlands city taxpayers had already shelled out $5.5 million in water and sewer 24 infrastructure to provide services to the Donut Hole,~ and Redlands was already providing water 25 service to customers in the area.llI Redlands had a sewer trunk line that traversed the Mall 26 27 2. See page 4 of Exhibit 2 to the Association's Request for Judicial Notice. 28 27 "Minimal water service to individual customers (less than 10 customers) is provided by the City of Redlands to IVDA Area A.n (AR, p. 1068.) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -13- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 .td 13 z o ~ or: 14 15.:2 "'0 Idi:! 15 ~8 o:;;! 16 i5~ m~ 17 ....:I1ll :i~ 0< 18 ~ ..J 19 tn ~ :> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Project property, and Redlands' pipelines provided water to the property.281 Moreover, one couldn't easily unring the bell on LAFCO's determination that Redlands was the logical and most efficient provider of adequate water and sewer service to the Donut Hole. Consequently, application ofCEQA's substantive mandate meant that a future CEQA review ofthe County's and RJV's proposed alternatives to Redlands providing water and/or sewer services to the Donut Hole - if undertaken with all options on the table - would invariably conclude that those alternatives would have to be rejected since water and sewer service from Redlands was both environmentally superior and entirely feasible.w 2. "According to the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, water supply to the Citrus Plaza site is currently provided by two local wells as well as 12-inch ninelines located within Nevada Street. Colton Avenue. and LUl!onia Avenue." (AR, p. 1068; emphasis added.) 29 fu fact, Redlands knew it held the CEQA trump card and was aggressively playing it. fu its October 12,2000, letter commenting on the 1999 draft subsequent EIR for the Mall Project, Redlands repeatedly slammed the County on the DSElR's failure "to compare the environmental advantages/disadvantages of the proposed water and sewer system options with those of the facilities that would be provided by the City of Redlands, pursuant to existing County and City of Redlands policies and previous approvals concerning the Citrus Plaza project." (AR, p. 425.) "Comments regarding Area" A" fail to indicate that the City of Red lands has adequate water and sewer service to meet the needs of this area. . .. There is also no description of the construction requirements and environmental disruptions that would be involved during installation of the Phase II water and sewer improvements to service development beyond Citrus Plaza." (AR, pp. 413-414.) "This analysis fails to note that provision of water and wastewater service to the IVDA Area by the City of Redlands could be the most cost-effective way of using existing infrastructure facilities to serve this area. Without some comparative costlbenefits analysis between the proposed water and sewer service options versus service by the City of Redlands, the analysis as presented is deficient." (AR, p. 416.) The conclusion that construction of the water infrastructure facilities would not, in and ofitself, result in an increase in water demand is correct; however, it completely ignores the potential impacts that the project would have if water service comes from other than the City of Redlands, as previously planned." (AR, p. 4l9.) "The DSEIR states that the proposed water and sewer facilities would provide infrastructure that is currently lacking or undersized/inc6mplete. This ignores the ready availability of adequate water and infrastructure that could be provided from City of Redlands facilities in the immediate area." (AR, p. 423.) As for the DSElR's "Alternatives" section dealing with alternatives regarding the Mall Project site, Redlands said that it "needs to be completely rewritten to address an alternative to the proposed site plan revisions that would reduce one or more of the significant environmental effect ofthose revisions, which have not been identified anywhere in the DSEIR. This assessment would likelv focus on reducinl! the environmental imnacts resultinl! from the provision of water and sewer infrastructure to this site from sources other than the Citv of Redlands. uarticularlv those adverse effects that would not occur if service were provided bv the Citv ofRedlands." (AR, p. 426; emphasis added.) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -14- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to II ~ 12 old 13 :z: ~~ 14 g~ IS ::S8 ':;! ~~ 16 ~- ...l~ 17 ,0 ::. '" 00.. 18 ~< .... 19 j:Q ~ ;;. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Settlement Agreement vitiated each of the above five hindrances to the Mall Project. First, Section 2 of the Settlement Agreement halted Redlands' imminent Motion for Summary Adjudication on AB 1544's constitutionality, Section 8 barred Redlands from ever challenging or otherwise undermining the provisions of AB 1544, and for good measure, Section 5 actually expanded the scope of AB 1544. Secon4, Section 6 and of the Settlement Agreement required Redlands to drop any further objections to the Mall Project - including CEQA objections, and Section 18 required Redlands to covenant not to raise any further challenges to it. Henceforth, Redlands was to take an ostrichlike stance toward the Mall Project, even in the face of legal requirements that it do otherwise. (Cf Title 14, California Code of Regulations, section 15096.) Section 18 also required Redlands to unconditionally waive and release "any rights it may have under the Judgment entered in San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV 34737, and the City covenants that it shall not assert that such judgment is entitled to any res judicata or collateral estoppel effect in any future judicial proceedings." In other words, Redlands contractually agreed to keep quiet about the fact that the County and RJV were already acting in open contempt of this Court's 1997 permanent injunction. (See AR, p. 3820.) Third. Sections 3(a) and 5 of the Settlement Agreement addressed Redlands' in-the-way sewer trunk line by ending the lawsuit over it and allowing RJV to relocate it. Fourth, Sections 3( c) and 18 of the Settlement Agreement required Redlands to terminate the State Water Resources Control Board Disputes (see 1.0., infra) and not reassert them. Fifth, and most important, the parties to the Settlement Agreement contractually agreed to eliminate the environmentally superior and altogether feasible alternative of Redlands providing water to the Donut Hole as option in any future CEQA review. In Section 4 of the Settlement Agreement, they agreed that others besides Redlands and those specified in AB 1544 could provide water, sewer and utility services in the Donut Hole. Then, in Section 7 of the Settlement Agreement, Redlands was eliminated as a service provider: "The City agrees that prior to June 1,2025, it shall not seek approval pursuant to Government Code Section 56133 to provide Public Services to the Donut Hole PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -15- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 12 dll 13 Zz ~~ 14 ~~ ~ga 15 :;a8 ci:;! 16 -'z 00 !ljrn .-dl! 17 ...0 :::;g; 0< 18 ~ >Q 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Area, and will object if others seek such approval for the City to provide Public Services to the Donut Hole Area, unless the City obtains the prior written consent of the property owners within the Donut Hole Area with fifty percent (50%) or more of the assessed property value within the Donut Hole Area. The City agrees that it will not object, and will not support in any way the objection of others, to any LAFCO approval that may be necessary or desirable for the provision of Public Services by any Public Service Providers to the Donut Hole Area." Simply stated, the parties to the Settlement Agreement contractually agreed to "fix" the outcome of the County's pending CEQA review ofRJV's long-sought changes to the Mall Project. By using the Settlement Agreement to eliminate Redlands - the logical and environmentally superior water and sewer provider with facilities already in place to serve the Donut Hole - the County's subsequent CEQA review on water and sewer service options for the Donut Hole became little more than a post hoc rationalization for a decision already made. 4. THE COUNTY DUMMIES UP A CEOA "RECORD" On February 2, 200 I, the Redlands City Council met in closed session and approved the Settlement Agreement by a vote of 3 to 2. Judging from the signature dates on the Settlement Agreement, the County's Board of Supervisors apparently approved the Settlement Agreement on or about February 13,2001. The Association filed its Petition for Writ of Mandate on July 2, 200 I, and served it on Redlands and the County the next day along with a Notice to Prepare Record of Proceedings ("Notice'') directed to each entity in accordance with subdivision (a) of Public Resources Code section 21167.6. Redlands promptly served its response to the Notice on July 26, 200 I - well within the statutorily mandated 60 day period - stating that "there is no record of proceedings that can be prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.6." Like the Notice to Redlands, the Notice to the County had been clear and concise in the 28 record it requested: PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -16- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 12 <1d 13 z 815 ~i 14 15 ~8 g:;;! 16 015 1!l1>l "'~ ....l. ~ 17 :Of 0..: 18 ~ .... 19 I1l ~ ;> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 "PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.6 (a) and (b), petitioner, The RedIands Association, hereby requests that respondent County of San Bernardino prepare the record of proceedings before the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino in connection with the Board's approval of that certain "Settlement Agreement" dated February 2,2001, by and among the City of Red lands, the County of San Bernardino, and Redlands Joint Venture LLC." However, as the September 1,2001, deadline approached for responding to the Notice, the County said it needed more time to produce its record, and the Association gave the County a one month extension in exchange for the County's agreement to actually serve its record (and not just a notice of lodgement of the record with the court) on the parties. When October 1 st came, the County and RJV concocted a pretext for further delaying production of the County's record, and the County did not produce it until the following January. A review of what the County purports is its "record of proceedings before the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino in connection with the Board's approval of that certain "Settlement Agreement" dated February 2, 2001," reveals why the County waited so long in producing it: in approving the Settlement Agreement in February, 200 1, the County failed to take any steps to comply with CEQA. For example, the contents of Volumes I. II. VI and VII. and parts of Volumes V and VIII of the AR. did not even exist in February. 2001. The County was merely stalling for time in order to pad its "record" with post-approval materials.MY m. ISSUE PRESENTED The Association contends that a writ of mandate should be issued by this Court because the County violated CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and this Court's prior permanent 30 As this Court correctly noted in its December 21,200 I, Order Granting Summary Adjudication of the Fourth Cause of Action of Petitioner's Writ of Mandate in Favor of Respondent City of Redlands, "CEQA requires that the environmental effects ofa project he ascertained urior to approval of that project, not subseauent to the project's approval." PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -17- I 0(1 ~s "':i c;l~ ~8 o:;! .....0 z o 1!lF;; ::H! _0 ::<~ 0<( ~ ~ ~ ;> I injunction and judgments, when the County approved the Settlement Agreement ei~ht months 2 before it certified the final subsequent EIR for its "General Plan, Specific Plan and Development 3 Code Amendments for the IVDA Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for 4 Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project." 5 6 IV. AN OVERVIEW OF CEOA 7 8 1. THE IMPORTANCE OF CEQA AND THE EIR 9 lOIn its seminal CEQA case, Laurel Heights ImprovementAssn. v. Regents of the University II of California, (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 390-392 ("Laurel Heights"), the California Supreme Court 12 provided a concise overview ofCEQA and the importance of the EIR: 13 ''The foremost principle under CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act 'to 14 be interpreted in such manner as to afford the fullest possible protection to the 15 environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.' [Citation.] 16 More than a decade ago, we observed that, 'It is of course, too late to argue for a 17 grudging, miserly reading ofCEQA.' [Citation.)" 18 The EIR has been aptly described as "the 'heart' ofCEQA." (CEQA Guidelines ~ 15003(a) 19 quoting County of In yo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 795,810.) Again quoting Laurel Heights, 20 the Supreme Court stated: 21 "The Legislature has made clear that an EIR is 'an informational document' and 22 that '[t]he purpose of an environmental impact report is to provide public agencies 23 and the public in general with detailed information about the effect which a 24 proposed project is likely to have on the environment ... .''' 25 "An EIR is an' environmental "alarm bell" whose purpose is to alert the public 26 and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached 27 ecological points of no return.' [Citations.] The EIR is also intended 'to 28 demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -18- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 ~ 13 z ~~ 14 UO ~~ 15 ci :;! 16 <S~ I!ll;l "'::3 17 ....l.. .0 ;:gg; 0< 18 ~ ~ 19 z <( ;> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 considered the ecological implications of its action.' [Citations.] Because the EIR must be certified or rejected by public officials, it is a document of accountability. If CEQA is scrupulously followed, the public will know the basis on which its responsible officials either approve or reject environmentally significant action, and the public, being duly informed, can respond accordingly to action with which it disagrees. [Citations.] The EIR process protects not only the environment but also informed self-government." (47 Ca1.3d at p. 392). 2. CEQA APPLIES TO "PROJECTS" Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a "project" under CEQA to mean "the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately. .. ." In deference to this definition of a "project," courts have consistently found that "piecemealing" a project through the CEQA review process, i.e., breaking a project up into its constituent parts, and then incrementally approving each of those parts without an EIR, violates both the letter and the spirit ofCEQA and sections 15004, 15051, and 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines. As the court noted in Rio Vista Farm Bureau v. County of Solano (1992) 5 Cal.AppAth 351, 370: "The requirements ofCEQA cannot be avoided by piecemeal review which results from 'chopping a large project into many little ones-each with a minimal potential impact on the environment-which cumulatively may have disastrous consequences.' (Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com. (1975) 13 Ca1.3d 263, 283-284 [118 Ca1.Rptr. 249, 529 P.2d 1017]; City of Antioch v. City Council (1986) 187 Ca1.App.3d 1325, 1333 [232 Ca1.Rptr. 507].)" (See also, Citizens Assn. for Sensible Development of Bishop Area v. County of Inyo (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 151.) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -19- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 12 <<l 13 ~~ ~~ 14 t;!~ 15 ::E8 -:;! ~el 16 ~Ol 17 ~ ':it. ~< 18 .... 19 ~ ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. THE THREE STEP CEOA REVIEW PROCESS CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines establish a three-tiered structure for reviewing a project. (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 74-75.) First, if a project is exempt from CEQA, no further agency evaluation is required. (Id.) Second, if there is a possibility that a non-exempt project may have a significant effect on the environment, the agency undertakes an initial study. (Id.) If the initial study (I) demonstrates that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, or (2) identifies potentially significant project impacts which revisions to the project will mitigate to insignificance, the agency adopts a negative declaration. (CEQA ~ 21080(c).) Third, "[i]fthere is substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the lead agency that the project may have a significant on the environment, an environmental impact report shall be prepared." (CEQA ~ 21080(d).) 4. THE PUBLIC'S "PRIVILEGED POSITION" IN THE PROCESS As the California Supreme Court stated in Concerned Citizens of Costa Mesa, Inc. v. 32nd Vist. Agricultural Association (1986) 42 CalJd 929,935-936: "Public participation is an essential part of the CEQA process" (Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 14, ~~ 15201), and several CEQAprovisionsrecognize its importance. . .. As one commentator has noted, ..the 'privileged position' that members of the public hold in the CEOA \lrocess . . . is based on a belief that citizens can make important contributions to environmental protection and on notions of democratic decision-making. . .." (Selmi, The Judicial Development of the California Environmental Quality Act (1984) 18 U.C. Davis L.Rev. 197,215-216.) CEOA compels an interactive process of assessment of environmental impacts and responsive proiect modification which must be ~enuine. It must be open to the public. premised upon a full and meaningful disclosure ofthe scope. pw:poses. and effect of a consistentlv described proiect. with flexibility to respond to unforeseen PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PErmON FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -20- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 <Id 13 ~z ~~ 14 ~~ 15 ~8 Q~ 16 "'>z 00 i!l<;; "'~ ...:I~ 17 .0 ~g: 18 u< ~ ...> 19 i%l ~ :> 20 21 22 23 24 25 insights that emerge from the process." (County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 1178, 1185 [207 Ca1.Rptr. 425].) In short, a project must be open for public discussion and subject to agency modification during the CEQA process. (Ibid.) This process helps demonstrate to the public that the agency has in fact analyzed and considered the environmental implications of its action. (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68,86 [118 Ca1.Rptr. 34,529 P.2d 66].)" (Emphasis added.) Moreover, "compliance with the EIR provisions of CEQA serves the important function of enabling the public to make an "independent, reasoned judgment" about a proposed project." (Emmington v. Solano County Redevelopment Agency (1987) 195 Ca1.App.3d 491, 503.) "Full compliance with the letter of CEQA is essential to the maintenance of its important public purpose." (Environmental Protection Information Center v. Johnson (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 604, 623.) This is because reviewing courts "must be satisfied that [public] agencies have fully complied with the procedural requirements ofCEQA, since only in this way can the important public purposes ofCEQA be protected from subversion." (Ibid.) V. STANDARD OF REVIEW The County violated CEQA by failing to conduct any environmental analysis (or, apparently, any public hearing) prior to approving the Settlement Agreement. Public Resources Code section 21168.5 governs the Court's review of this action: "[T]he [Court's] inquiry shall extend only to whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse of discretion is established if the agency has not proceeded in a manner required by law or if the determination or decision is not supported by substantial evidence." As the facts above indicate, this is a case that arises under both prongs of the test: (1) failure to follow the law, and (2) no substantial 26 evidence to support the determination. 27 Public Resources Code section 21005 provides legislative guidance for applying the 28 abuse of discretion standard: PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -21- . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 ~ 13 8~ z~ 14 ~~ 15 ~8 ci:;;! 16 6~ ~~ 17 .0 ::0'" 0"" 18 u< j ~ 19 ~ ;> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 "(a) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that noncompliance with the information disclosure provisions of [CEQA] which precludes relevant information from being presented to the public agency, or noncompliance with substantive requirements of this division, may constitute a prejudicial abuse of discretion within the meaning of Sections 21168 and 21168.5, regardless of whether a different outcome would have resulted if the public agency had complied with those provisions. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that, in undertaking judicial review pursuant to Sections 21168 and 21168.5, courts shall continue to follow the established principle that there is no presumption that error is prejudicial." However, it should be noted that, by approvingly citing Environmental Protection Information Center v. Johnson, supra, 170 Cal.App.3d 604, Rural Landowners Association v. Ladi City Council (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 1013, and East Peninsula Education Council, Inc. v. Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (1989) 210 Cal.App.3d 155 in its Sierra Club v. State Board of Forestry (1994) 7 Cal.41h 1215 decision, the California Supreme Court has apparently endorsed the view that the "conventional 'harmless error' standard" has no place in CEQA.lli Given that most ofthe "record" that the County lodged in this action is padded with post- February, 2001 documents, this Court will also need to rule on what actually constitutes the record in this action, and the California Supreme Court again provides guidance on this issue: "We need not decide whether courts may take judicial notice of evidence not contained in the administrative record when reviewing a quasi-legislative decision for substantial evidence under Public ResourCes Code section 21168.5. (See Evid. Code, ~ 451.) In light of the analogy we draw in this case, it would seem logical to conclude that the rules governing judicial notice in such instances would be Jl See a/so County of Amador v. E/ Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 931, 946, where the court stated: "In other words, when an agency fails to proceed as required by CEQA, harmless error analysis is inapplicable. The failure to comply with the law subverts the purposes ofCEQA if it omits material necessary to informed decisionmaking and informed public participation. Case law is clear that, in such cases, the error is prejudicial." PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -22- ] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ]0 11 ~ ]2 d1J 13 ~e5 Cl- ~S 14 UO u::l 15 ::E8 ":;! @:.. 16 I:!l~ :lJ ]7 ~t 18 u<( ~ ... 19 p;j ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 akin to those applicable in reviewing courts. (Id., ~ 459.) However, it would never be proper to take judicial notice of evidence that (1) is absent from the administrative record, and (2) was not before the agency at the time it made its decision. This is so because only relevant evidence is subject to judicial notice (People v. Superior Court (Smolin) (1986) 41 Cal.3d 758, 768 [225 Cal.Rptr. 438, 716 P.2d 99]], revd. on other grounds sub nom. California v. Superior Court of California (]987) 482 U.S.400 [96 L.Ed.2d 332, 107 S.Ct. 2433]; Mozzetti v. City of Brisbane (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 565, 578 [136 Cal.Rptr. 751]), and the onlv evidence that is relevant to the question of whether there was substantial evidence to support a Iluasi-legislative adn1inistrative decision under Public Resources Code section 21168.5 is that which was before the alZencv at the time it made its decision. (Del Mar Terrace Conservancy, Inc. v. City Council, supra, 10 Cal.App.4th 712, 744.)" (Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 CalAth 559, fit 4; emphasis added.) VI. ARGUMENT The Association's CEQA argument is simple and straightforward: the County's approval of the Settlement Agreement constituted the County's approval ofa project under CEQA eight months before it certified a fmal ElR for that project. I. THE COUNTY'S APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CONSTITUTED THE "APPROVAL" OF A "PROJECT" UNDER CEOA A. There was a "Proiect" Prior to entering into the Settlement Agreement, the County attempted (unsuccessfully) to the push through the CEQA process an EIR (1996) and a negative declaration (1999) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -23- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 <I!l 13 ~~ 0;:: 14 15 :i ....0 1li:! 15 ::>18 Q~ 16 a~ ~~ 17 .0 =-c: 0< 18 ~ 15 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 addressing those changes to its General and Specific Plans and the Mall Project needed in order for someone other than Redlands to provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole. Eight months MkI the County approved the Settlement Agreement, the County certified a subsequent EIR for those changes. Consequently, the County has clearly conceded that the changes needed in order for someone other than Redlands to provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole -changes only made possible by the Settlement A~reement-collectively constitute a "project" under CEQA requiring the preparation and certification of an EIR.32/ Moreover, Section 15050 (a) of the State CEQA Guidelines states, "Where a project is to be carried out or approved by more than one public agency, one public agency shall be responsible for preparing an EIR or negative declaration for the project. This agency shall be called the lead agency." Therefore, unless there is first a "project" under CEQA, there is no "lead agency." Pursuant to a stipulation signed as an order by the Court on October 19,2001, the County is the lead agency for the project alleged in the Association's Petition: the Settlement Agreement. Thus, by stipulation, all of the parties to this action have conceded that the Settlement Agreement constitutes a project under CEQA. Finally, RJV's counsel has admitted - under penalty of peIjury - that, by entering into the Settlement Agreement, the County and RJV were attempting to carry out and implement the Mall Proj ect: "The underlying action and [S]ettlement [A]greement concerned a commercial development in an area in the County of San Bernardino called the "Donut Hole." The commercial development is known as the "Citrus Plaza Development" . .. ." (Declaration of Dan G. McKinney in Support of Joint Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Prepare Administrative Record, 2: 17 -20, filed on October 1, 2001.) J2 Section 15153 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that "the lead agency may use an earlier EIR prepared in connection with an earlier project to apply to a later project, if the circumstances of the proiects are essentiallv the same. .. . An EIR oreoared for an earlier oroiect shall not be used as the EIR for a later oroiect ifanv of the conditions described in Section 15162 would reauire oreoaration ofa subsequent or supolemental BIR." (Emphasis added.) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -24- 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 l 12 <l/l 13 ;z: o?5 ffi~ 14 ~~ 15 :28 9:;;! 16 o?5 eJOl ....d! 17 .0 ~f 18 u<( ~ ..l 19 CQ ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 B. There was an "Approval" 2 Section 15352 ofthe State CEQA Guidelines provides the definition of "approval" under 3 CEQA: "(a) "Approval" means the decision by a public agency which commits the agency to a definite course of action in regard to a project intended to be carried out by any person. . .. (b) With private projects, approval occurs upon the earliest commitment to issue or the issuance by the public agency of a discretionary contract, grant, subsidy, loan, or other form of financial assistance, lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use of the project. On its face, the Settlement Agreement was a discretionary contract that committed the parties to a definite course of action in regard to the Donut Hole and the Mall Project. Therefore, its execution by the County constituted the County's "approval" ofa "project" under CEQA. 2. THE COUNTY VIOLATED CEOA WHEN IT APPROVED THE SETILEMENT AGREEMENT EIGHT MONTHS BEFORE CERTIFYING THE SUBSEQUENT EIR FOR THE DONUT HOLE In Laurel Heights, the California Supreme Court made it abundantly clear that CEQA compliance is a prerequisite to project approval: ""CEQA requires that an agency determine whether a project may have a significant environmental impact, and thus whether an EIR is required, before it approves that project." (No Oil, supra, 13 Ca1.3d 68, 79, italics by court; Village Laguna of Laguna Beach, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 1022, 1026 [185 Cal.Rptr. 41).) This requirement is obvious in several sections ofCEQA. For example, section 21081 refers to approval ofa project for which an EIR "has been completed," and section 21151 requires an EIR for a project an agency "[intends] to carry out or approve." (Italics added.) The Guidelines provide even more explicitly that "Before granting any approval of a project PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -25- . I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II ) 12 dd 13 ~~ ffi~ 14 ~~ 15 :a8 ':;! ~~ 16 ~m 17 .0 ::Ef 0..( 18 ~ 5 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 subject to CEQA, every lead agency... shall consider a final EIR ...." (Guidelines, ~ 15004 subd. (a), italics added.) A fundamental purpose of an EIR is to provide decision makers with information they can use in deciding whether to approve a proposed project, not to inform them of the environmental effects of projects that they have already approved. If postan,proval environmental review were allowed. EIR's would likely become nothiUlz more than post hoc rationalizations to su,p,port action already taken. We have expressly condemned this use ofEIR's. (No Oil, supra, 13 Cal.3d at p. 79.) The Regents' view that their approval of a project is the predicate for an EIR stands this principle on its head." (Laurel Heights. supra, at 47 Cal.3d at 394; emphasis added.) As noted in Laurel Heights, the State CEQA Guidelines unequivocally state that a final EIR must be prepared and certified before a project is approved.llI Consistent with these authorities, this Court previously ruled in its December 21,2001, Order Granting Summary Aq;udication of the Fourth Cause of Action of Petitioner's Writ of Mandate in Favor of Respondent City of Redlands that, as to the County's subsequent EIR, "The environmental documents alleged by Petitioner The Redlands Association to have been prepared by Respondent County or San Bernardino subsequent to the date of approval of the February 2001 Settlement Agreement that is challenged by the Petition cannot serve as the basis for finding Respondent City of Redlands is a Responsible Agency pursuant to CEQA for purposes of approval of the Settlement Agreement. CEOA requires that the environmental effects of a \?roiect be ascertained prior to ap,proval of that proiect not subsequent to the proiect's ap,proval." (Emphasis added.) lJ "The Lead Agency shall prepare a final EIR before aoorovinl! the oroiect." (State CEQA Guidelines 9 15089.) "Prior to aoorovinl! a oroiect the lead agency shall certify that: (I) The final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; (2) The final EIR was presented to the decision-making body ofthe lead agency, and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to approvinl! the oroiect; and (3) The final EIR reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis." (State CEQA Guidelines 9 15090.) "After considerinl! the final EIR and in conjunction with making findings under Section 15091, the Lead Agency may decide whether or how to approve or carry out the project." (State CEQA Guidelines 9 15092.) (Emphasis added.) PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -26- '.' . , I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II ~ 12 o(l 13 Zz 00 ~~ 14 UO u ::z 15 ::218 ci':;! 16 is a el Ii! ~!f 17 .0 ~f 18 u<( j I'Q 19 ~ 20 21 In City of Antioch v. City Council, supra, 187 Cal.App.3d, at 1333, the court explained why CEQA review was important before a project was approved: "Under CEQA, the agency must consider the cumulative environmental effects of its action before a proiect ~ains irreversible momentum. (Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 263,282 [118 Cal.Rptr. 249, 529 P.2d 1017]; City of Carmel- by- the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 183 Cal.App.3d 229, 242 [227 Cal.Rptr. 899].) As the California Supreme Court stated in Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com., supra, 13 Ca1.3d 263, 282: "CEQA . . . requires governmental agencies 'at all levels' to consider environmental factors. Obviously it is desirable that the precise information concerning environmental consequences which an EIR affords be furnished and considered at the earliest possible stage. The Guidelines express this principle in a variety of ways. Thus, 'EIR's should be prepared as early in the planning process as possible to enable environmental considerations to influence project, program or design.'" (Emphasis added.) As was shown above, the Settlement Agreement was the key to maki!1g RJV's development of a Mall Project possible - the critical trigger to the Mall Project gaining irreversible momentum. Only through the Settlement Agreement could RJV and the County "game" the subsequent CEQA review process such that water and sewer service for the Donut Hole could be obtained from some entity other than Redlands. Therefore, since the County did not prepare and certify the final subsequent EIR for the Donut Hole until after it approved the Settlement Agreement, its violation of CEQA is 22 transparent, and the Court's response is clear: 23 "Under Public Resources Code section 21 168.9, upon a finding of the agency's 24 noncompliance with CEQA, the court must enter an order mandating that the 25 al!encv set aside its decision and take any necessary action to achieve 26 compliance." (Emphasis added.) (City of Redlands v. County of San Bernardino 27 (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 398, 414-415.) 28 PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -27- .' . ~,: . 1 Vll.CONCLUmON 2 3 In Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Ca1.3d 553, 576, the 4 California Supreme Court stated that CEQA should be "scrupulously followed," so that "the 5 public will know the basis on which its responsible officials either approve or reject 6 environmentally significant action," and will be able to "respond accordingly to action with 7 which it disagrees." As shown above, the County and the City contractually agreed to ignore the 8 Supreme Court's advice and take the public out of the loop. Therefore, this Court should issue 9 a writ of mandate (I) voiding the approval of the Settlement Agreement, and (2) requiring that 10 the County and the City comply with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prior to taking any action 11 to reapprove it. ~ 12 o<l 13 Dated: August 19,2002 ~:z ~~ 14 ~~ 15 ::28 c:;! 16 cl~ I!l<;l :H! 17 .0 :;: '" 00.. 18 ~< ....l 19 a:l ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, MCCLENDON & MANN, P.C. By: PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE -28- . ".< <J" .. PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 23422 Mill Creek Drive, Suite 105, Laguna Hills, California 92653. On August 19,2002, I served the foregoing document entitled "PETITIONER'S TRIAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF WRIT OF MANDATE" on the parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: Daniel J. McHugh, City Attorney CITY OF REDLANDS - City Hall 35 Cajon Street Redlands, California 92353 Mitchell L. Norton, Deputy County Counsel SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY COUNSEL 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, 4th Floor San Bernardino, California 92415-0140 Donald F. Powell, Esq. REID & HELLYER, P.C. 3880 Lemon Street, 5th Floor Riverside, California 92502-2415 I caused such envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States Mail at Laguna Hills, California. I am "readily familiar" with the practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Laguna Hills, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation or postage meter date is more than one (I) day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare under penalty of perjury ofthe laws ofthe State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 19, 2002, at Laguna Hills, California. tf.!:/ /IJ.tU-- J hn G. McClendon ,. . . . ? , . I.. .. . 1 REID & HELLYER A Professional Corporation 2 DONALD F. POWELL, State Bar No. 38176 DAN G. MCKINNEY, State Bar No.1 01 095 3 DANIEL E. KATZ, State BarNo. 185139 3880 Lemon Street, Fifth Floor 4 Post Office Box 1300 Riverside, California 92502-1300 5 Telephone: (909) 682-1771 Facsimile: (909) 686-2415 6 7 8 9 10 11 gO 12 u lil A.-1~"- 13 oe(lL I:: C~ m: &l~ lLIu::$fD 14 ~t;;~i ..Jw~_ ~~5~ 15 llIS~uif Q Q~ 16 ~~~I!! 17 :=!a: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Attorneys for Real Party in Interest Redlands Joint Venture, LLC SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO THE REDLANDS ASSOCIATION, ) CASE NO. SCVSS 79374 ) ) The Hon. James A. Edwards ) Dept. S15 ) ) REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS ) JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE ) TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS ) ) DATE: October 7,2002 ) TIME: 8:30 a.m. ) DEPT: S-15 ) ) REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC, a ) California limited liability company, and DOES) 1 through 100, inclusive, ) ) ) ) ) , Petitioner, v. CITY OF REDLANDS, a municipal corporation, and the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a public body, corporate and politic, Respondents. Real Party in Interest, Real Party in Interest Redlands Joint Venture, LLC ("RJV'') hereby presents the following Trial Brief on Petitioner Redlands Association ("PETITIONER'')' s Petition for Writ of Mandate on its CEQA causes of action: III 26 III 27 III 28 II I S:\WP\R08381002\PLBADINOIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEP.OO2.fun -1- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS r . , " I 2 3 I 4 II 5 III 6 IV 7 8 V 9 10 II o::g 12 VI [JOw o~ Q...Jc.:,.... 13 c(Uo.or:;: ~~., ~ 0I0f.1 Wu:$!D 14 ~tiiH ...I~fte w -w 15 VII J: ~~ ollz .:1: QO~1h 16 -iliu;-' w-'o::j!! D::2~ 17 l!lo:: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS bB INTRODUCTION .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT .............................. 7 STANDARD OF REVIEW AND BURDEN OF PROOF ....................... 10 THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY RJV AND THE EVIDENCE CONTAINED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD IS ADMISSIBLE........................ to CEQA WAS NOT VIOLATED ........................................... 11 a. PETITIONER has not Met its Burden of Demonstrating that the Approval of the Settlement Agreement is an Approval of a Project under CEQA. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. II b. The Settlement Agreement is not a Project under CEQA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14 PETITIONER'S CLAIM IS MOOT .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 a. Introduction - the Appropriate Remedy. ............................... 19 b. The CEQA Claim is Moot. ......................................... 19 CONCLUSION ........................................................ 20 S:\WP\R0838\002\Pleading\RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEF.OO1.wpd -i- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS I. '. ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 "'8 12 oo~ l:Lg~.... 13 <("':;:1:: t"'- 0:: ON Wii:~~ 14 > .Zg ::It;~~ w..._ w~-w 15 ::c -'z <0 .z~:r QO~fb 16 -illu;~ w"''''1!! D::lil~ 17 [ll", TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Pal!e Kaufman & Broad - South Bay, Inc. v. Morgan Hill Unified School District (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 464, 468, 474, 476 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Keeler v. Superior Court (1956) 46 Cal.2d 596 .................................................... 10 Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376 .................................................... 10 San Jose v. Country Club Apartments v. County of Santa Clara (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 948 . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. 19 Stand Tall on Principles v. Shasta Union High School District (1991) 235 Ca1.App.3d 772, 780-781 .. ....... ......... .......... ..... .. 17 Wester States Petroleum Association v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Cal.4th 559 ...................................................... 11 Wright v. Stang Manufacturing Company (1997) 54 Ca1.AppAth 1218 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .. ... .. 13 STATUTES CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal.Code of Regs. ~15378(b) .............................16 18 Civil Code ~3532 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 19 Evidence Code ~1523 . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . 13 20 Government Code ~ 56133 . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . 9 21 Government Code ~ 56429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 22 Government Code ~ 25210.70a .......... ....... . . . ......................... ... 8 23 Government Code ~~ 26210.70, 56425 and 56429 . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 10 24 Public Resources Code ~ 21063 25 Public Resources Code ~ 21168.5 26 Public Resources Code ~ 21065 27 14 Cal.Code of Regs. ~ 15301 28 14 Cal. Code of Regs. ~ 15378(b) ................................................6 ...............................................10 ...............................................16 ............................................,...6 . . ..... . . . . . . " . . . . .. ... ... . . ... . . ,.... .. . .. . . . 18 S:\WP\RO&38\OO2\Plcading\RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OOl.wpd -11- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS I , '. o8~ ~ltSI:: ;1''''- ~[LSI~ wu:$1IJ ::i ~~ g- ..Jw~e wo:3w ::Clii~~ 05zouif Q Ow -~u;'" ll:!:;:~~ ~- ..'" 1 2 3 4 5 14 Cal.Code of Regs. ~15378(b) . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. 18 Cal. Code ofRe~s. ~15352 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 4 Cat Code ofRe~s. ~15061(b) Cal. Code of Re~s. ~ 15061 (b) Cal. Code ofRel!s. ~15378(b) .. . ....... ..... . .. .. ....... ............ . . .. .....5 ..... ..... ..... ... " ...... '" ... . . ...... ... .... 16 . .... ..... ....................... . ..... .. .. .... 16 ................................................6 ................................................7 .. ............................................. 10 . ......... ....... .. ............ .. .............. 19 ................................................8 . . ... .... ...... ................... ....... . ..... 10 Water Code section 71694 Water Code ~71694 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 13 14 15 16 OTHER Rutter Group, California Practice Guide, Civil Procedure Before Trial (2002 17 ed.), ~ 10: 194, page 10-63 . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . .. 13 6 Cal. Code of Rel!s. ~~ 15378, 15379 7 Code of Civil Procedure ~ 389 8 Code of Civil Procedure ~ 1085 9 Code of Civil Procedure ~ 389 10 Health & Safety Code ~33492.42 11 Health and SafetY Code ~ 33492.42 12 ..................................................... 10 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 S:\WP\R0838\OO2\Pleading\RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OOI.wpd -11]- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 a::g 12 ~o'" o~ ~N"'" 13 c(...~~ a::~~;:; wu::,sZ 14 ~lii~( .Jr- w -w 15 :z: ""z olIi~~ Q clli 16 - ~.... ~:il~1!! :go:: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I INTRODUCTION The instant action was filed by PETITIONER to set aside a settlement agreement dated February 2, 200 I (hereinafter, the "Settlement Agreement"), I which resolved three separate lawsuits and other disputes that have arisen by and among the City of Redlands ("CITY") and the County of San Bernardino ("COUNTY") regarding a commercial development of RJV called, the "Citrus Plaza Project" ("Citrus Plaza"). Citrus Plaza is a 125 acre master-planned commercial project, located within an unincorporatedIVDA Redevelopment Project area called the "Donut Hole." Citrus Plaza is intended to be a mixed-use regional center which will include restaurants, entertainment and retail units. (Administrative Record ["AR"], p. 858.) COUNTY is the lead agency under CEQA for Citrus Plaza. (AR, p. 854.) It is acknowledged in the Settlement Agreement and not disputed by PETITIONER that the Donut Hole is surrounded by, but not contained in CITY nor is within CITY's sphere of influence. (Second Amended Petition ("SAP''), , 2; Settlement Agreement, Section 7, page 7.) The three separate lawsuits resolved by way of the Settlement Agreement include The City of Redlands v. The County of San Bernardino, Riverside Superior Court case number 293198 (referred to in the Settlement Agreement at the "Riverside Lawsuit''); The City ofRedlands v. Majestic Realty Comnanv San Bernardino Superior Court case number SCV 38504 (referred to in the Settlement Agreement as the "San Bernardino Lawsuit"); and Red1ands Joint Venture. et al. v. The City of Redlands. et al.. San Bernardino Superior Court case number SCVSS 73615 (referred to in the Settlement Agreement as the "Hershey Lawsuit"). (Settlement Agreement, Section 1.) The foregoing actions entailed, among others, disputes between CITY and COUNTY regarding which should be responsible for providing public water, and sewer services to Citrus Plaza and the Donut Hole. Final Judgments have been entered as to all three actions. (See Settlement Agreement, Sections 2 and 3; Exhibits "B," "C" and "0" attached to RJV's Request for Judicial Notice filed 25 concurrently herewith.) 26 /I / 27 The Settlement Agreement is attached to PETITIONER's Original Petition and is part of 28 the court file. SolWP\R08381OO2\PLEADINGIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEF.OO2.fn. -2- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS \ '. a:g ug:2 IL...J~'" <("':ill:: It:t&:;:; w;;::SlS >I'z" .... "'0 .... 0.. w ~w :c <z OlSZ<>'~ QO~8i -~Ul~ 8:!offi lS~ n'" 1 Prior to adopting the Settlement Agreement, COUNTY and RN undertook to the task of 2 completing the environmental review process for Citrus Plaza. Although an initial EIR for Citrus Plaza 3 was certified in or about December, 1995 and went unchallenged, it contemplated the provision of 4 public water and sewer services from CITY. (AR, p. 849.) When it became apparent that the concept 5 of CITY being the exclusive provider of public water and sewer services was not a possibility, 6 COUNTY, in or about November, 1996, certified a Supplemental EIR which contemplated on-site 7 water and sewer facilities. (AR, p. 849.) The CITY filed a CEQA Action styled, City ofRed1ands v. 8 County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino Superior Court case number SCV 34737 (hereinafter 9 referred to as the "Prior CEQA Action."), seeking to set aside the COUNTY's certification of the 10 Supplemental EIR. On August 25, 1997, this Court issued a decision on CITY's Petition for a Writ of 11 Mandate, finding in favor of CITY. The Court found, among other things, that the Supplemental EIR 12 did not adequately address certain environmental impacts as required by CEQA and that a subsequent 13 EIR would be needed to address the cumulative effects of on-site, package water and sewer systems. 14 (See Tentative Decision in Prior CEQA Action, AR, p. 491; See also Judgment and Writ of Mandate 15 in Prior CEQA Action, attached to RN's Request for Judicial Notice as Exhibits "E" and "F," 16 respectively.) 17 Thereafter, on or about October 18, 1999, PETITIONER served a Notice of Preparation for 18 Draft Subsequent EIR for the purpose of correcting all issues raised by way of the Court's September 19 24,1997, writ of mandate in the Prior CEQA Action. (AR, pp. 1209-1221; see also Exhibit "I" to the 20 Settlement Agreement. The County certified the Subsequent EIR in or about October 23, 200 I. (AR, 21 p.2780.) 22 While the environmental review for Citrus Plaza was pending, the lawsuits that are the subject 23 of the Settlement Agreement arose. They were resolved on or about February 2, 2001, by way of the 24 Settlement Agreement, more than 14 months after the final environmental review process for Citrus 25 Plaza commenced. 26 PETITIONER filed this action on July 2, 2001. While not challenging the on-going CEQA 27 process that was underway, PETITIONER contends that COUNTY and CITY's decision to enter in 28 / / I S'IWP\R0838\002\PLEADINGIRESPONSlVE TRIAL BRIEF.D02.fun -3- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE; CEQA CLAIMS . '. 0:0 12 oolil 0- CL-'c:...... 13 <C"'o~ t"'- It:: &:~ wii:$lll 14 ~ti~l> ~w~i w1!'5'" 15 %(1) ~ Illz .J: ~~i~ 16 O:i~ 17 llla: 1 the Settlement Agreement was a project under CEQA and that CEQA was violated since the Settlement 2 Agreement was approved prior to completion of the environmental review process. 3 In November, 2001, the Court granted CITY summary adjudication of PETITIONER's CEQA 4 cause of action and accordingly, COUNTY is the only Respondent to PETITIONER's CEQA claims 5 (the fourth and fifth causes of action of the Second Amended Petitioner ["SAP'1). 6 By way of its prayer for relief, PETITIONER seeks an order directing COUNTY to set aside 7 its approval of the Settlement Agreement and that COUNTY be ordered to refrain from any further 8 steps in implementing the Settlement Agreement. PETITIONER by way of its SAP alleges that this 9 action is not designed to contest the merits of any of the lawsuits resolved by way of the Settlement 10 Agreement. (SAP, 'If 3.) Moreover, PETITIONER, by way of this action, does not seek to set aside the II COUNTY's approval of Citrus Plaza. With regard to the merits of PETITIONER's claim, it is submitted that a review of the Settlement Agreement demonstrates that there is no basis for the contention that it would have the potential for an adverse effect on the environment. The Settlement Agreement is a commitment by COUNTY and CITY to resolve contentious litigation. Furthermore, Section of 6 provides that CITY will not object to Citrus Plaza and the on-going CEQA process, as the project and CEQA process are described in the Notice of Preparation, dated October 18, 1999, attached to the Settlement Agreement, 18 as Exhibit "I." 19 Addition,aJly, all covenants complained of by PETITIONER (alleged exclusion of CITY as a 20 possible service provider and commitment to a course of action due to CITY's agreement not to object 21 to Citrus Plaza) are made by CITY, which is not a party to this action.2 Essentially, PETITIONER has 22 framed the Settlement Agreement as amounting to commitments made by CITY to refrain from 23 providing public water and sewer services to the Donut Hole and that the Settlement Agreement 24 removed what had theretofore been the only barrier to development of the Donut Hole and committed 25 COUNTY and RN to a "definite course of action" (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code of Ree:s. 26 ~15352(a)) with regard to Citrus Plaza. (pETITIONER's Trial Brief, pp. 24, 25.) Even if these 27 2The Court granted CITY's motion for summary adjudication of the 4th and 5th causes 28 of action. S:\WPlR0838\002\PLEADINOIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEF.OO2.fnn -4- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS . . '. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ",0 12 ug2 ~....;i;~ 13 u.~!:: a:~CD~ wu:$; 14 > ,zf j~~- w 5w 15 :z: z olIz .li! ~nm 16 17 18 19 20 21 contentions regarding the construction and scope of the Settlement Agreement were accurate (which they are not), it is submitted that these covenants by CITY do not amount to a CEQA violation by COUNTY, the respondent to this claim. COUNTY did nothing more than agree with CITY that the pending litigation between them should be resolved. CEQA recognizes a common sense approach to determining whether or not a given activity or approval has the potential to adversely impact the environment. If no such potential exists, as is the case with the Settlement Agreement, it does not fit within the definition of the term "project" and CEQA does not apply (See Hinesley Declaration; See also 14 Cal. Code ofRel!s. ~ 15061(b )(3).) Based on the foregoing, it is submitted that there are no activities authorized by the Settlement Agreement that COUNTY is agreeing to engage in that could possibly have any effect on the environmene Furthermore, even if the Settlement Agreement was deemed to be a project under CEQA, RJV submits that any and all issues raised by PETITIONER in this action are now moot. The Citrus Plaza Project has been approved by COUNTY pursuant to the completed environmental analysis set out in the Subsequent EIR. (AR, p. 2780.) This action is being asserted for the limited purpose of setting aside the Settlement Agreement. There are no allegations or prayers for relief in the SAP that seek to stop Citrus Plaza or to direct COUNTY to set aside its approval of Citrus Plaza. Moreover, there is no request that the judgments be set aside. Although, PETITIONER's prayer for relief requests that RJV be enjoined from any further act of implementing the Settlement Agreement, based on what he has plead, the only act of implementation would be the entry of judgments in the lawsuits addressed by the Settlement Agreement. It is submitted that setting aside the Settlement Agreement will have no bearing on the life of Citrus Plaza. Moreover, the entire environmental review process for Citrus Plaza under 22 CEQA is now complete. 23 As to the merits of PETITIONER's contentions, it is submitted that PETITIONER has failed 24 to sustain its burden of demonstrating that the Settlement Agreement or any component ofit, is a project 25 III 26 27 28 RJV submits that the Settlement Agreement did not commit any of the parties to a definite course of action. Nothing regarding Citrus Plaza was to be decided upon until after the CEQA process was completed. S:\WP\R0838\002IPLEADING\RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEF.D02.rnn -5- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 8 9 10 11 ",0 12 ~9~- 13 <1L:&r:: .It:tS:~ wu::si8 14 ~liii:!!Gi' ..J~12~ w ~w 15 :c z O/Sz .~ ow.. Q~gw 16 - .,-' ~o~1!! ~'" 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 under CEQA. In fact, PETITIONER has produced little, if any, admissible evidence in support of this 2 claim. 3 As is set forth in full below, the Settlement Agreement is not a project under CEQA. [t does 4 not commit COUNTY or any of its agencies to any course of action with regard to Citrus Plaza, but 5 merely reaffirms and commits RJV and COUNTY to a process whereby a full environmental review 6 for Citrus Plaza will occur, with the COUNTY being the lead agency (See Exhibit "I" to the Settlement 7 Agreement). Furthermore, the Settlement Agreement acknowledges the settlement ()f the aforementioned and the entry of judgment therein. The vast majority of the remaining provisions of the Settlement Agreement contain acknowledgments of and application of various provisions of AB 1544. Legislative enactments are exempt under CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code ofRells. ~~ 15378,15379 and Public Resources Code ~ 21063.) Moreover, the covenants that PETITIONER takes the most issue with are those whereby CITY agrees to refrain from engaging in certain acts, such as objecting to the provision of public services to the Donut Hole by other service providers. There are no such covenants on the part of COUNTY. The only portions of the Settlement Agreement that contemplate any possible change to the environment are those in Section 5, which relate to remedial repair work that is categorically exempt from CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal.Code ofRel!s. ~ 15301.) COUNTY and RJV have undertaken and completed the CEQA process in response to this Court's ruling in the Prior CEQA Action. The certified Final Subsequent EIR for Citrus Plaza was certified on October 23, 2001, and not challenged. (AR, p. 2780.) Even if the Settlement Agreement is somehow deemed a project, it is respectfully submitted that setting aside the Settlement Agreement would be futile. Final and binding judgments on the merits have been entered in each of the lawsuits. PETITIONER did not attempt to intervene in any of those actions and the judgments embody many of the significant terms of the Settlement Agreement. This action seeks to set aside the Settlement Agreement and nothing more. Setting aside the Settlement Agreement will not stop the Citrus Plaza project and hence, it is submitted that setting aside the Settlement Agreement will amount to nothing more than an idle act, which the Court should refrain from engaging in. (Civil Code ~3532 - "The law neither does nor requires idle acts.") S,I WPlR08381002\PLEADINGIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.fnn -6- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS , '. 11 oU 12 a.-'f 13 <elL l:: IlI:t$~ ~~~i 14 w~Y:w 15 X .~~ olIZ ->: g~U 16 8!:il~ .,- 17 ."" 18 19 20 21 22 1 Additionally, CITY is a party to the Settlement Agreement, but not a party to the CEQA claim. 2 It is submitted that Califomia law does not allow for an action to set aside an agreement without the 3 presence each of the parties thereto in the cause of action. (Code of Civil Procedure ~389.) 4 II 5 SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT4 6 As it pertains to PETITIONER's CEQA claim, the Settlement Agreement provides in pertinent 7 part as follows: 8 The Settlement Agreement also entailed a settlement of a petition for review with the State of 9 California State Water Resources Control Board by CITY regarding order number 97-11 which relates 10 to a permit to discharge reclaimed water. Section 4, entitled "Public Services" provides that public and private water, sewer and utility providers other than CITY, including the COUNTY Service Area 70, COUNTY Service Area 110, the County of San Bemardino, any special district or other subdivision of the COUNTY, such as COUNTY improvement zone EV -1, the IVDA and/or the City of San Bernardino, 1W!Y provide water, sewer and public services and ancillary or related services to the Donut Hole, including the property encompassed by Citrus Plaza Project, in accordance with AB 1544.s This provision of the Settlement Agreement provides that the CITY agrees not to object or seek to prevent, limit or restrict the ability of these other public service providers from providing public services to the Donut Hole area. However, this section of the Settlement Agreement provides "CITY shall not be prohibited from providing water and sewer services to the Donut Hole in accordance with and subject to California law and the terms and provisions of this agreement." As set forth in full below, this provision of the Settlement Agreement is consistent with the provisions of the judgment in the Riverside Lawsuit (that CITY does not have the 23 /I / 24 25 A complete copy of the Settlement Agreement is attached as an exhibit to PETITIONER's original Petition for Writ of Mandate. 26 Contrary to PETITIONER's contentions, the Settlement Agreement does not 27 prevent CITY from providing water and sewer service to the Donut Hole. Moreover, the Subsequent EIR referenced and analyzed the possibility of CITY providing said services. 28 (AR, p. 858.) S:\WP\R0838\OO2\PLEADINGIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEF,002.fnn -7- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS , . I right to object to other service providers providing water and sewer service to the Donut Hole and 2 Citrus Plaza) and the certified Citrus Plaza Subsequent EIR. 3 Section 5, entitled "Use of Streets for Provision of Public Services and Relocation of Sewer 4 Line," provides that the CITY agrees that the public service providers identified in section 4, may cross 5 city streets and other CITY public rights-of-way to provide public services to the property affected by 6 the Settlement Agreement. Section 5 further provides that, pursuant to a judgment entered in the 7 Riverside Lawsuit, and subject to the provisions of the Settlement Agreement, no permits, easements, 8 or other approvals shall be required by the CITY for the placement, construction, operation and/or 9 maintenance by public service providers of utility infrastructure, including without limitation, water 10 pipes, sewer pipes, conduit and other facilities in city streets or other public right-of-ways owned or II controlled by the CITY, for purposes of providing public services to the property affected by the '" g 12 Settlement Agreement. Section 5 further provides that the CITY grants to the COUNTY a utility ~ ~ i!i !:: 13 license and easement in favor of the COUNTY and its successors and assigns, for entry, construction rz=~U~ !:'! it ~.. 14 and opemtion of the "public service infrastructure," but that COUNTY shall have the obligation to ::ilii",g- ...Iw5:!e. ~ ~ ~ ~ 15 restore, at no cost to CITY, any CITY streets and other CITY public improvements damaged by the olIa lil!f~ - ~ ii5 j!! 16 COUNTY in connection with the construction, opemtion and/or maintenance of such public service ~d 17 infrastructure. 18 The remainder of section 5 of the Settlement Agreement provides that the CITY agrees that the 19 existing CITY sewer line located under the subject property (Ex. "H" to the Settlement Agreement) may 20 be relocated by RJV, at RJV's sole cost and expense, to a location under any public street located 21 adjacent to the property, or within the setback area located on the property located adjacent to Spencer 22 Street. In this regard, section 5 of the Settlement Agreement provides that the relocated sewer line 23 (should it be relocated) shall be of the same size and capacity of the existing sewer line under the 24 subject property. The CITY has the right to advise RJV within 60 days of the date of the agreement that 25 it desires to increase the size or capacity of the sewer line. This provision of the Settlement Agreement 26 is consistent with the judgment entered in the San Bemardino Lawsuit (See Exhibit "C" to RJV's 27 Request for Judicial Notice) and the provisions of AB 1544. (Government Code ~ 25210.70a; Health 28 & Safety Code ~33492.42; Water Code F1694.) S:\WP\R0838\O02\PLEADING\RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEF.OO2.frm -8. REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 "'8 12 ~8" ltii: 13 II:~"~ ~-:!; 14 :I~~i :fd~i 15 olIiufil: 16 ~IJ~ :Iii! 17 18 Section 6 of the Settlement Agreement provides that CITY agrees that it will no longer object to the Citrus Plaza Development. Section 6 provides, "The City hereby settles and concludes all claims and causes of action which have been, or could have been stated in the Riverside lawsuit, the San Bernardino lawsuit, and any potential judicial, administrative or other legal challenges arising out of Citrus Plaza, the Citrus Plaza COUNTY approvals, the Citrus Plaza related COUNTY actions and the Regional Board approvals." Furthermore, the CITY agreed that it will not challenge or object to any proceeding before the Regional Board or the State Board relating to the Citrus Plaza Project or the provision of water and/or sewer service to the Donut Hole area or the discharge of water relating thereto. Section 6 provides that CITY is agreeing not to object to Citrus Plaza, provided that the project and the corresponding environmental review process is in substantial conformity with Notice of Preparation, attached as Exhibit "I,"to the Settlement Agreement. Section 7, entitled "LAFCO Proceedings," acknowledges that the DonutHole area was removed from the sphere of influence of CITY, effective October 18,2000. Section 7 provides that from the date of the agreement to January 1,2025, the CITY agrees that "no portion of the Donut Hole area which was removed from the CITY's sphere of influence pursuant to Government Code section 56429, shall be added to CITY's sphere of influence or annexed to CITY, unless the entire Donut Hole area is added to the sphere of influence of CITY and/or annexed, as applicable, pursuant to the procedures set forth in this section 7 (which is established in recognition of Government Code ~ 56429, a component of AB 19 1544). 20 Section 7 further provides that the CITY acknowledges and agrees to refrain from seeking 21 approval pursuantto Government Code section 56133 to provide public services to the Donut Hole area 22 prior to June 1,2025, unless the CITY obtains the prior written consent of the property owners within 23 the Donut Hole area with 50% or more of the assessed property value within the Donut Hole area. 24 With regard to the annexation proceedings, section 7 sets forth the provisions and conditions, 25 consistent with Government Code section 56429, that would allow the Donut Hole property to be 26 annexed to CITY or added to CITY's sphere of influence. 27 / / / 28 / / / S:\WPlR08l8\002\PLEADINGIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.fim -9- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRJAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 10 11 0:8 12 r" ~iE 13 II:~"'~ wu:$o 14 j~~1 ~~~~ 15 05~uif c~n 16 ~n 17 18 19 1 Section 8 provides that the parties agree to end any and all disputes regarding the 2 constitutionality of AB1544 (Government Code sections 26210.70, 56425 and 56429; Water Code 3 section 71694 and Health and Safety Code section 33492.42). 4 III 5 STANDARD OF REVIEW AND BURDEN OF PROOF 6 PETITIONER asserts that the standard of review in this case is prejudicial abuse of discretion, 7 which is analyzed by determining whether or not the public agency has failed to proceed in a manner 8 required by law or if the determination or decision is not supported by substantial evidence. 9 . (pETITIONER's Trial Brief, p. 21.) RJV does not dispute PETITIONER's contentions regarding the standard of review. PETITIONER does have the burden of proving that COUNTY prejudicially abused its discretion by either failing to proceed in a manner required by law or that its determination is not supported by substantial evidence. (Public Resources Code ~21168.5; Laurel Heil!hts ImDrovement Association v. Rel!ents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376,392, fit 5.) IV THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY RJV AND THE EVIDENCE CONTAINED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD IS ADMISSmLE PETITIONER asserts at pages 16 to 17 that COUNTY "dummied up" an administrative record. PETITIONER also takes the position at page 23 that the evidence in the administrative record is not 20 admissible. 21 The administrative record prepared by COUNTY is the administrative record for Citrus Plaza, 22 which is what COUNTY and RJV contend is the relevant project. The decision to approve the 23 Settlement Agreement by COUNTY was done by way of a closed session. (Declaration of Rex Hinesly, 24 ~ 3.) There was no adjudicatory hearing with notice to the public. When an agency's decision-making 25 process for issuance of a permit or other administrative entitlement does not include a hearing, judicial 26 review of the agency's decision takes the form of ordinary mandamus under Code of Civil Procedure 27 III 28 III S:\IVP\RO'3I!\OO2IJ'LEADING\RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.1im -10- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS u8~ A.-'N.... <":ill:: ;Z:N~ ~(i:CD' ~ii:$!i :i~~1 W~::iW :Z:lii<i!j allz<'>" owo. C;l;S!w -~0'" ~offil!! U 1 ~ 1085. (Keelerv. SuoeriorCourt (1956) 46 Cal.2d 596, 599.) In these types of cases, evidence outside 2 the administrative record is admissible. (Wester States Petroleum Association v. Suoerior Court ( 1995) 3 9 Cal.4th 559, 577.) 4 Accordingly, based on the foregoing, that the items comprising the administrative record are 5 admissible, as this is a traditional mandamus case. (Code of Civil Procedure ~ 1085.) 6 7 8 a. V CEQA WAS NOT VIOLATED PETITIONER has not Met its Burden ofDemonstratinll that the Aooroval of the 9 Settlement Allreement is an Aooroval of a Proiect under CEOA. 10 It is submitted at the outset that PETITIONER has failed to sustain its burden of demonstrating 11 a CEQA violation., By way of PETITIONER's Trial Brief and responses to written discovery, 12 PETITIONER contends that COUNTY's approval of the Settlement Agreement removes whathad been 13 the one obstacle to development in the Donut Hole and that the Settlement Agreement commits 14 COUNTY to a course ofaction - to develop Citrus Plaza - by excluding one of the alternative sources 15 for the provision of public water and sewer services to the Donut Hole. (pETITIONER's Trial Brief, 16 p.27)6 17 In its Trial Brief and in its response to written discovery, PETITIONER has failed to identify 18 any specific provision of the Settlement Agreement that constitutes discretionary approval of a project. 19 Instead PETITIONER asserts that the approval of the Settlement Agreement as a whole will or may 20 cause significant adverse effects on the environment. 21 In discovery, PETITIONER was requested to identify any and all provisions of the Settlement 22 Agreement that constitute the approval of a project under CEQA and to identify each provision of the 23 Settlement Agreement that it contends will and/or may result in a direct and/or indirect physical change 24 to the environment. (Special Interrogatories Nos. 1-5, Set One.) PETITIONER was also asked to 25 identify each provision of the Settlement Agreement that it contends will and/or may result in a 26 See also RN's Special Interrogatories Nos. 6 and 7, Set One and PETITIONER's 27 corresponding response. The written discovery requests and responses are summarized below. The requests and responses are attached to the Declarations of Daniel E. Katz, as 28 Exhibits "A" and "B," respectively.) S:\WP\R0838\002\PLEADING\RESPONSlVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.lhn -11- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS , " 0:0 l(9~- <("-a!:: Gl:~&l;i; wu::Si8 >,zl! ....t;"'a; ....~~- w 5w ::c z olS z .!f OW.. Q;;iiew ii1~12'" a::lil~~ lll", 1 significant adverse impact on the environment. (Special Interrogatories Nos. 10-11, Set One.) 2 PETITIONER was asked to state allfacts to support the allegation at paragraph 58 ofits First Amended 3 Petition (paragraph 66 of SAP) that, "the decision to execute the Settlement Agreement will result in 4 potentially significant environmental impacts, including (without limitation) the deterioration of City 5 streets and impacts to land, air, and water resources associated with the extension of public services." 6 (Special Interrogatory No. 14, Set One.) 7 PETITIONER provided the following response to Special Interrogatories No.1 as follows: "It 8 is not any particular provision(s) of the Settlement Agreement that constitute a the approval of'project' 9 under CEQA; rather, it is the discretionary decision of the COUNTY to approve the Settlement 10 Agreement that constitutes the approval of a 'project' under CEQA." 11 PETITIONER, in responding to Special Interrogatories 1-4, 10, 11, 14, did notidentify a single 12 specific provision of the Settlement Agreement that would and/or could trigger direct physical changes 13 to the environment and/or significant adverse effects, but instead, stated that it was the discretionary 14 decision of the COUNTY to approve the Settlement Agreement "as a whole" that could and/or would 15 lead to these effects. 16 PETITIONER was asked to identify the specific direct and/or indirect physical changes and/or 17 significant adverse impacts to the environment that could or would be caused by the Settlement 18 Agreement. (Special Interrogatories, Set One, Nos. 6 - 9,12,13.) PETITIONER, by way of its joint 19 response to Special Interrogatories Nos. 6-9 andjoint response to Special Interrogatories Nos 12-13 did 20 not identify any specific impacts or effects, but asserting the COUNTY's decision to approve the 21 Settlement Agreement as a whole results in CITY not providing water and sewer service to the Donut 22 Hole. 23 In its Trial Brief, PETITIONER offers little, if any, admissible evidence. PETITIONER 24 attempts to set out a factual background at pages 2 through 8 of its Trial Brief by using a Separate 25 Statement of undisputed facts prepared by CITY in connection with a motion for summary adjudication 26 it filed as to the 4th and 5th causes of action in this case. The motion was made by CITY and asserted 27 against PETITIONER. Neither RlV nor COUNTY were parties to CITY's motion. Notwithstanding 28 RN's lack of involvement with CITY's motion for summary adjudication, PETITIONER takes the S:\WPlR0838\002\PLEADINGIRESPONSIVE rRIAL BRIEF,002.rrm -12- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 oU 12 ~it~~ 13 a:~",::i wii:~ill 14 > .z~ ....~'" ..J ~__ w~-w 15 ::c ~z olIz .2 c~~~ 16 8!~~~ 17 18 position that, pursuant to San Bernardino Local Rule 592, the fact that neither RJV nor COUNTY objected to CITY's separate statement of undisputed facts, the facts set forth therein are now binding on RJV and COUNTY. There is no merit to this position by PETITIONER. A response of "undisputed" to an offered fact in a separate statement is only a concession of said fact for the purpose of the snmmary judgment motion in question. (Wril!ht v. Stan.. Manufacturing Companv (1997) 54 Cal.AppAth 1218, 1224; See also Rutter Group, California Practice Guide, Civil Procedure Before Trial (2002 ed.), ~ 10: 194, page 10-63.) Moreover, Local Rule 592 merely provides that a failure to oppose a motion or demurrer may be deemed a waiver of any objections and an admission that the motion or demurrer is meritorious. There is nothing in Local Rule 592 that supports PETITIONER's position that the CITY's Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts offered in its motion for summary adjudication are binding for all purposes in this action against all parties. Accordingly, evidentiary objections to the use of the separate statement are filed concurrently with this Brief. Even if CITY's Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts were admissible, many of the facts asserted by PETITIONER are not supported by the purported undisputed fact to which PETITIONER cites in its Trial Brief. For instance, the text of PETITIONERS's Trial Brief set out at page3, lines 7 though 9 (beginning on line 7 with the word, "was" through the remainder of the paragraph are not supported by the undisputed fact offered (Undisputed Fact No.4). Additionally, PETITIONER's citation to Undisputed Fact Nos. 12, 13,22, 23,24,25 and 28, all contain additional facts that are not 19 present in CITY's separate statement. 20 Moreover, many of the facts asserted in CITY's separate statement, specifically, Undisputed 21 Fact Nos. I through 4,26,29 and 32, all cite to ''the Settlement Agreement." None of these facts quote 22 the language of the Settlement Agreement and there are no references to a section or page number of 23 the Settlement Agreement in the separate statement. As such, in addition to the holding in the Wrillht 24 case (supra), this purported evidence of the terms of the Settlement Agreement is objectionable as 25 violating the secondary evidence rule (Evidence Code 91523.) 26 Thereafter, from pages 9 through II, PETITIONER offers comments regarding the legislative 27 and political history of AB 1544. Not only are these facts not relevant to the legal issues of this 28 proceeding (whether or not COUNTY violated CEQA by approving the Settlement Agreement), many S:\WP\R0838\002\PLEADlNGIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.fnn -13- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 0:8 ug", ~ii!i~ D:~"~ !l!-$o; ...;;:;iH ...Imf2e. ~~5~ Oil ~ -" ow.. ~~e~ a==~ .,0: 1 of them are not supported by admissible evidence. For instance, PETITIONER attempts to judicially 2 notice two copies of the League of California Cities Legislative Bulletin, dated September 3, 1999 (item 3 5 of PETITIONER's Request forJudicial Notice) press release on AB 1544, dated June 16, 2000 (item 4 8 of PETITIONER's Request for Judicial Notice). These items were offered in support of facts that 5 were asserted at pages 10 and 11 of the Trial Brief that AB 1553, a purported precursor to AB 1544, 6 and AB 1544, were bad special interest legislation. The statements from the League of California Cities 7 are in the form of irrelevant opinions as well as inadmissible hearsay. 8 Notably there are few, if any, cites to the administrative record on file set out in PETITIONER's 9 Trial Brief. Moreover, there are no citations to the specific language and/or sections of the Settlement 10 Agreement upon which PETITIONER bases its claim. There are no adverse environmental impacts 11 addressed in PETITIONER's Brief and PETITIONER makes a cursory argument that the Settlement 12 Agreement is a "project" under CEQA. 13 b. The Settlement Al!reement is not a Proiect under CEOA. 14 PETITIONER asserts at pages 23 through 25 of its Trial Brief that the Settlement Agreement 15 is a project. PETITIONER's provides several bases for this contention. PETITIONER's first 16 contention is that, since the Prior CEQA Action dealt with the issue of an entity other than CITY 17 providing public services to Citrus Plaza, the Settlement Agreement, since it addresses the same issues, 18 must be a project. (PETITIONER's Trial Brief, page 23, line 27 to page 24, line 7.) There is no 19 analysis in support of this assertion, nor is there any legal authority cited to support it. Moreover, the 20 language of the Settlement Agreement is not analyzed with regard to this contention. It is submitted 21 that this assertion disregards the language of the Settlement Agreement and the completed 22 environmental review process. The Settlement Agreement provides that CITY is not prohibited from 23 providing public services to the Donut Hole (Settlement Agreement, Section 4, page 5.). Additionally, 24 the Subsequent EIR provides for an analysis of the alternative of seeking public services from CITY. 25 (AR, p. 858.) 26 / /I 27 1/ / 28 /I / So\WPlR08J8\OO2\PLEADINOIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.tim -14- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS ",0 8:;1 ~rti~ dd >- 'il! m- ....tali: ~Wu..- !H~~ 011 z .:Z: QO~~ -iliu; III....'" D::iil~ lllo: 1 Next, PETITIONER asserts that pursuant to a stipulation dated October 19,20017, RJV and 2 COUNTY have "conceded" that the Settlement Agreement is a "project" under CEQA. The stipulation 3 in question provided no such contention. The stipulation was prepared and circulated by CITY's 4 counsel in furtherance of its motion for summary adjudication, which was brought on the ground that 5 CITY is not the lead agency for Citrus Plaza. The stipulation is one paragraph in length and provides, 6 "That the County of San Bernardino is "lead agency," as that term is defined in the California 7 Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.), for the purposes of the 8 aUel!ed Droiect described in the Petition for Writ of Mandate on me herein." (Emphases added.) 9 It is submitted that the stipulation did not provide waiver by RJV or COUNTY on the issue of 10 whether or not the Settlement Agreement is a project under CEQA. It was executed on the 11 acknowledgment that COUNTY is the lead agency for Citrus Plaza and constituted nothing more than 12 an accommodation to counsel for CITY. RJV has responded to these causes of action with a demurrer 13 on the ground that the Settlement Agreement is not a project and has denied those allegations in its 14 answers on file. 15 PETITIONER's final point is to cite to a declaration of Dan G. McKinney where he attests in 16 part, that the Settlement Agreement ["concemed a commercial development in an area in the County 17 of San Bernardino called the 'Donut Hole' ."] There is nothing in this statement that acknowledges or 18 concedes that the Settlement Agreement, or any portion of it, is a project under CEQA. The 19 commercial development that counsel for RJV was referring to is Citrus Plaza, which RJV has never 20 denied being a project. Nothing in the this statement should be construed to mean RJV was conceding 21 that the Settlement Agreement is a project. 22 No other arguments, facts, or citations to the Settlement Agreement, or the administrative record 23 are offered by PETITIONER in support of its assertion that the Settlement Agreement is a project under 24 CEQA. 25 As noted above, prior to the any briefing in this action, RJV served discovery on PETITIONER. 26 Special Interrogatory No.1, Set One, requested an identification of each provision of the Settlement 27 28 7The stipulation was actually entered on October 12, 2001. S:\WP\R0838\002\PLBADINGlRESPONSIVE TRlAL BRIEF.002.fnn -IS- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 "'8 12 UOft ~g~..- 13 "":ili::: ~N~ It: "Ii: ~Il::$.. 14 ...ti~i ...Iwf2_ wa:=~w 15 :J: t; ~ 011 Z _:I: ein 16 8!~~ :Iii: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Agreement that constitutes the approval of a "project" under CEQA. PETITIONER's response failed to provide any specific facts or provisions of the Settlement Agreement that supports its contention that it is a project under CEQA. PETITIONER took the unsubstantiated position that the approval of the Settlement Agreement as a whole, will have significant adverse impact on the environment. It is respectfully submitted that the Settlement Agreement is not a project under CEQA. A project under CEQA is defined generally in the Public Resources Code ~2106S as an ractivity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment."] As set forth above, the commitments in the Settlement Agreement are made by CITY, not COUNTY. COUNTY is the respondent in this cause of action, not CITY. There are no commitments by COUNTY to engage or to refrain from engaging in any activities under the Settlement Agreement. Those commitments are made by CITY. In fact, the only activity that COUNTY did engage in was to make a decision to settle lawsuits to which it was a party. Aside from the commitments made by CITY, the Settlement Agreement amounts to nothing more than a confirmation that the disputes that existed between CITY and COUNTY over the provision of public services to Citrus Plaza are resolved and an affirmation of the provisions of AB 1544, concerning annexation of the Donut Hole and the ability of COUNTY, though its facilities, to construct the sewer improvements necessary for the development. The Settlement Agreement does not amount to an authorization or approval by COUNTY for the construction of Citrus Plaza. It represents a commitment by CITY not to engage in certain activities under the terms of the Agreement. The CEQA Guidelines setout several exemptions to decisions and/or activities of a public entity that may be deemed to be a project. The CEQA Guidelines provide for a common sense exemption for activities that cannot possibly have an effect on the environment. (14 Cal. Code of Rel!s. ~15061(b)(3).) Statewide legislative enactments, such as AB 1544, and proposals for legislative enactments are not included in the definition of the term "project" under CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code ofRel!s. ~15378(b)(1).) Organizational or administrative activities which are political or which are not physical changes to the environment are likewise exempt. (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal.Code ofRel!s. ~15378(b)(5). It is submitted that each of the foregoing exemptions apply. 28 III S:\WPlR0838\002\PLEADlNGIRESPONSlVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.frm -16- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS . .- . "'8 uO.. d..g~... <("-/il!:: ar:~llt~ WiLS: > _z_ jlii2l1 wll!!!,W' :Clii"'z olSz<.l.2 ow.. O~Qw &!!I~ 1 With regard to the common sense exemption, the Settlement Agreement relates to a 2 commitment between CITY and COUNTY to resolve their disputes concerning the provision of public 3 services to Citrus Plaza. There is no dispute that Citrus Plaza is contained within the Donut Hole and 4 is outside the territorial limits of CITY. A commitment to refrain from objecting to other entities 5 providing public services under the terms of the Settlement Agreement is not going to change any of 6 the illtended uses associated with the Donut Hole, nor is it going to lead any significant environmental 7 impacts. 8 Notwithstanding PETITIONER's contentions to the contrary, the Settlement Agreement is not 9 a project under CEQA. In Kaufman & Broad - South Bav. Inc. v. More:an Hill Unified School District 10 (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 464, a petitioner asserted that formation of a community facilities district by the 11 county was a project which required CEQA compliance. It was the petitioner's contention that an 12 EIR was required. Although the trial court issued a writ of mandate, the Court of Appeal reversed. 13 The CFD in question was in an area where development was occurring and was designed to raise funds 14 for use in the future to acquire sites for the construction of schools and the lease or purchase of 15 classrooms and buses and to rehabilitate future facilities. (Kaufinan & Broad, Suml!, 9 Cal.App.4th at 16 468.) 17 The Court of Appeal in ruling that the formation of the CFD was not a project, took note of the 18 issues pertaining to the timing of an EIR. The CFD contended that, although the formation of the CFD 19 may contribute to its ability to ultimately construct new schools, it did not commit to any particular 20 course of action. (Kaufman & Broad, SUDra, 9 Cal.App.4th It 471.) It was the CFD's position that an 21 EIR would not be required until the CFD committed to a definite course of action. The Court of Appeal 22 agreed. The Court reasoned that the formation of the CFD, gave it the mechanism and funding to meet 23 its future goals, but did not colllIllit it to a specific course of action. (Kaufinan & Broad, Suma, 9 24 Cal.App.4th at 474 to 475.) The Kaufinan & Broad Court cited Stand Tallon PrinciDles v. Shasta 25 Union Hi~h School District (1991) 235 Ca1.App.3d 772. 26 Stand Tall involved a school district selecting a preferred site for a school, but made the 27 commitment contingent on the completion of an environmental review. A CEQA challenge was denied 28 on the ground that no commitment to a course of action required that an EIR be prepared before the S:\WPlR08381OO2\PLEADINGIRESPONSlVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.frm -17- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS , '. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 0:8 12 (,)8'" ~~~~ 13 lI:~"~ ~i~~ 14 12~ w -w 15 ::c iSz alIzurf e~fi}~ 16 ~lil~ 17 =0: 18 School District made the contingent decision on the preferred site. The Stand Tall Court emphasized the need to balance the protection provided by early environmental review against the practical requirement of specific infonnation to pennit meaningful environmental assessment. (Kaufinan & Broad. fu!Jm!, 9 Cal.App.4th at 476; Stand Tall. SUDm, 235 Cal.App.3d at 780-781.) It is respectfully submitted that the issue is no different in the case at bar. The Settlement Agreement does not commit COUNTY, CITY or RJV to any course of action with regard to Citrus Plaza. The Settlement Agreement is a commitment to a process and like the creation of the CFD in Kaufinan & Broad, was entered into so that Citrus Plaza could move forward. Like the school district in Stand Tall. all parties to the Settlement Agreement recognized and understood that it entailed COUNTY moving forward with Citrus Plaza as the lead agency and that it would undergo a complete environmental review process (Section 6; Exhibit "I" to Settlement Agreement.) With regard to the legislative enactment exemption (14 Cal. Code ofRe~s. ~15378(bXl)), as noted above, the opemtive provisions of Sections 5 and 7 of the Settlement Agreement restate and acknowledge COUNTY and CITY's rights and obligations pursuant to AB 1544. With regard to the exemption for organizational or administrative activities which are political or which are not physical changes to the environment (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal.Code of Regs. ~ 15378(b )(5), it is submitted that the Settlement Agreement provides for a common sense approach to resolving disputes over which two competing entities are primarily responsible for the decision on who 19 provides public services to the Donut Hole. 20 Finally, with regard to the possibility of any sewer work being perfonned under Section 5 of the 21 Settlement Agreement, CEQA Guidelines 14 Cal. Code ofRel!s. ~ 15301 provides for a categorical 22 exemption for remedial and repair work. 23 In summary, it has been PETITIONER's contention that the Settlement Agreement constitutes 24 a commitment to go forward with .Citrus Plaza, which excludes the alternative of CITY providing 25 public services to the Donut Hole. Such is not the case under the provisions of the Settlement 26 Agreement (Section 4) and the terms of the judgment in the Riverside Lawsuit. 27 Based on the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that COUNTY's entry into the Settlement 28 Agreement is not a project under CEQA and PETITIONER's claim should fail. S:\WP\R0818\OO2\PLEADINOIRESPONSlVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.fnn -18- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS ~EP-I0-2002 rUE 02:53 PM REID & HELLYER FAX NO. 9096862415 p, 02 1 VI 2 PETITIONER'S CLAIM IS MOOT 3 a. rntmduction ,- the A1)tlJ'ODriate Remedy. 4 As noted above, the only remedy sought by PETITIONER is to have the Settlement Agreement 5 set aside. PETITIONER does not request that Citrus Plua be halted II01", does the PEllTIONER 6 request that the judgm"'lN be set aside. Moreover, PETITIONER seeks to set aside the Settlement 7 Agn:ement without the presence of CITY to the cause of action. CITY is not a party to this cause of 8 aon and it is submitted that the Settlement AgIeCmeDt should not be set aside without CITY's 9 presence in this cause of action. Accontingly, the only appropriate remedy is to deny PETITIONER's 10 claim. ~g li!o~ : ~ I € 13 Even asswning for arguments sake that the Settlement Agreement is deemed a "project" under II! ~ II 14 CEQA. it is xespectfu1Iy submitted that an order requiring COUNTY to set aside its approval of the ! i ~ ! 15 Settlement Aareement will amount to nothing mote than an idle act. As noted above, finaljudgments g !!i I ~ 16 have been entered in all of the aons addressed by the SettJem.ent Agn:ement. CITY is not only a party ~ ~l!! I i' 17 to the Settlement Agreement, but a party to each of the actions that Weal settled. CITY is not a party 18 to this cause of action and it is submitted that the Settlement Agreement cannot be set aside without 19 CITY's presence in the action. (Code of Civil 'Prn.-.N!Ul'e 1389(a).) 20 Citrus Plaza has undergone a completed environmental review by COUNTY. COUNTY's 21 certification of the final Subsequent ElR and its rc-approvaI of the Citrus PIa2a Project have not been 22 challenged. It was this certification that led to the approval of Citrus PIa2a by COUNTY, 23 In San Jo~ v. CoUlltrv Club Aoartm""t~ v. County of Santa Clara (1982) 137 Ca1.App.3d 948, 24 the Court of Appeal addressed the issue of mootness in conjunction with a CEQA action. In San Jo.u:. 2S a municipal entity enacted an ordinance that prohibited residential rental age discrimination. No 11 12 Moreover, as set out in filii iml'l..niat"ly below, PBllTIONER's CEQA claim is moot. b. The CEOA Claim is Moot. 26 envirolUIlental assessment was perfiirmed prior to the enactment of ordinance. A mandamus action was 27 brought IIllder CEQA. Whiletbc aon was pending, the County repealed the ordinance, and teadopted 28 it with a mitigated negative declaration. Based on the CoWlly's act of re-adopting the ordinance with S:\WP\RO&J~TRIAL BR1El',OOZolho -19- REAL PART\' IN IN11!REST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRlAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS ' ~n~ 12 13 f~- g:: lag ~~~i 14 ... 12- !!~5~ 15 011 z -% e~~~ 16 &!~I 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 a mitigated negative declaration, the Court of Appeal held that the appeal was moot. It is submitted that 2 the issue is no different here. As PETITIONER acknowledges, the purpose of CEQA is to require 3 public entities to consider the environmental consequences of their decision to commit to a project. 4 There is no concern that this did not occur here, as a full blown unchallenged EIR for Citrus Plaza was 5 performed. 6 VII 7 CONCLUSION 8 PETITIONER couches its contentions and claims in this action by characterizing them as bad 9 faith conduct by COUNTY and RN with regard to its efforts to complete Citrus Plaza. Not only are 10 these claims unsupported by any admissible evidence, they falsely characterize RN and COUNTY's 11 position in this case. RN and COUNTY bent over backwards to comply with this Court's concerns, as set out in the peremptory writ of mandate in the prior CEQA Action. After beginning the fmal environmental review process for Citrus Plaza in October, 1999, in response to this Court's issuance of the writ of mandate, COUNTY and RN diligently worked for two years to complete it. In the meantime, the lawsuits addressed in the Settlement Agreement were filed and were eventually settled. The Settlement Agreement merely confirms the agreement to settle them. PETITIONER never made any attempts to intervene in the lawsuits that are the subject of the Settlement Agreement and more importantly, never challenged the complete environmental review process. This action represents its efforts to derail this project by using the Settlement Agreement as a vehicle for doing so. 1/1 23 1/ I 24 1/ I 25 1/ I 26 1/ I 27 III 28 III S:\WP\R0B38\0021J'L1!ADlNG\RESPONSlVE TRlAL BRlBF.OO2.ftm -20- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 o:~ 12 ~h~ 13 "'~I:: D:~"~ w~~ 14 ~I~~ 15 ~;!i 16 ~!i~ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Based on aU of the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that PETITIONER's CEQA claim is without merit and that judgment should be entered denying its request for a writ of mandate. DATED: September!/-. 2002 REID & HELLYER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION By: J1...v ~ /!..wr DONALD F. POWELL DAN G. MCKINNEY DANIELE. KATZ Attorneys for Real Party in Interest Redlands Joint Venture, LLC S:\WP\R0838\OO2\PLEADINOIRESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF.OO2.fnn -21- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS -~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 "'8 12 ~o'" ~~- 13 c(~~t: II: ",' Wii:iS 14 > - - ~Ig! 15 ~z~~ ci~~ 16 ~dl!! 17 , PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE I am employed in the County of Riverside, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the Within action; my business address is 3880 Lemon Street, Fifth Floor, Post Office Box 1300, Riverside, California 92502-1300. On September 9, 2002, I served the foregoing document described as REAL PARTY IN INTERESTREDLANDS JOINT VENTURE,LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRlEFRE: CEQA CLAIMS on the interested parties in this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows: Mitch Norton, Esq. San Bernardino County C01msel 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 4th Fl. San Bernardino, CA 92415-4069 (909) 387-9022; Fax 387-4069 Daniel J. McHugh, Esq. City Attorney P.O. Box 3005 Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 798-7595; Fax 798.7503 Anomeya for City olltedl.nck John G. McClendon, Esq. VanBlarcom, Liebold, et aI. The Royer Mansion 307 E. Chapman Avenue Orange, CA 92866 (714) 639-6700; Fax 639-7212 AttDnleya for Pditloacr 18 [.I] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY 19 20 21 22 [.I] I delivered such envelope to an authorized courier or driver authorized by the express service camer to receive documents in an envelope or package designated by the express service carrier with delivery fees provided for. I deposited such envelope in a box or facility regularly maintained by the express service camer in an envelope or package designated by the express service carrier with delivery fees provided for. [ ] 23 Executed on September 9, 2002, at Riverside, California. 24 [ .I] (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. 25 26 27 [ ] (Federal) I declare thatI am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. 1Lr Julie M. Ruschell 28 Type or print name S:\WP\R083&\o()2IPLEADINOIRESPONSlVE TRIAL BRIEF.002.fnn -22- REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS " z z <( ~ olJ 56 ~r= "'<:i ""'0 "d~ ~8 ....l 0<( ..... z 00 elC;l ",'" ...<t:: .0 :E'" 00.. u<: ~ ..... I1l ~ > ~ 1 VANBLARCOM, LEIBOLD, MCCLENDON & MANN A Professional Corporation 2 JOHN G. McCLENDON (State BarNo. 145077) STEPHEN M. MILES (State Bar No. 185596) 3 23422 Mill Creek Drive Suite 105 4 Laguna Hills, California 92653 Telephone: (949) 457-6300 5 Facsimile: (949) 457-6305 6 Attorneys for Petitioner THE REDLANDS ASSOCIATION 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 THE REDLANDS ASSOCIATION, a California non-profit public benefit 14 corporation, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 15 Petitioner, 16 v. 17 THE CITY OF RED LANDS, a municipal corporation, THE COUNTY OF 18 SAN BERNARDINO, a public body, corporate and politic, 19 20 21 Respondents, REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE LLC, a 22 California limited liability company, and DOES 1 THROUGH 100, inclusive, 23 24 Real Party in Interest 25 26 27 28 Case No. SCVSS 79374 Assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Judge James A. Edwards PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF TO REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS Date: October 9,2002 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept: S-15 PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF . " PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -i- " . 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 o(! 13 z z 00 ~ ~ 14 "'0 1-5~ 15 ::E8 Q:;l 16 .., z 00 el :;; '" ~ ....l~ 17 .0 ::<8: 8< 18 ~ .., 19 I:Q z < > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 CASES TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1975) 13 Ca1.3d 263 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 City of Antioch v. City Council (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 1325 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11,15 City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 183 Ca1.App.3d 229 ..... 11, 17 County of Amador v. El Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Ca1.App.4th 931 ..... 12 Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 106. . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. 15,16 Deltakeeper v. Oakdale Irrigation District (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 1092 .......... 19, 20 Dusek v. Redevelopment Agency (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 1029 ..................... 23 Friends of the Santa Clara River v. Castaic Lake Water Agency (2b02) 95 Cal. App. 4th 1373 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 22 Kaufman & Broad-South Bay, Inc. v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. (1992) 9 Ca1.App.4th 464 .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . ... 12, 13 Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 91 Ca1.App.4th 342 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 Not About Water Com. v. Board of Supervisors (2002) 95 Ca1.App.4th 982 ........ 12, 13 Orinda Assn. v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 1145 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 People ex rei. Lungren v. Community Redevelopment Agency (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 868 20 Planning & Conservation League v. Department of Water Resources (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 892 ........................................... 12 San Jose v. Country Club Apartments v. County of Santa Clara (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 948 ........................................... 20 Stand Tall on Principles v. Shasta Union High Sch. District (1991) 235 Ca1.App.3d 772. 14 Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144 . . .. 12 Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Ca1.App.3d 298 ..................... 7 Terminal Plaza Corp. v. City and County of San Francisco (1986) 177 Ca1.App.3d 892 . 11 Thatcher v. Lucky Stores, Inc. (2000) 79 Ca1.App.4th 1081 ........................ 10 Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Cal.4th 559 ............ 4,6 Woodward Park Homeowners Assn. v. Garreks, Inc. (2000) 77 Ca1.App.4th 880 . . .. 20,21 Wright v. Stang Manufacturing Company (1997) 54 Ca1.App.4th 1218 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -11- . .. - } 12 dg 13 66 ~ ~ 14 ~~ 15 ~8 lOr :;! 16 ....z 00 eltn "'la 17 ...J.... -0 ~g: 18 u"': Pi .( .... 19 Cll z .( > 20 21 22 23 1 STATUTES 2 Code Civ. Proc., ~ 389 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 3 Code Civ. PlOc., ~ 1085 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 4 Evid. Code, ~ 1523 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 5 Gov. Code, ~ 54950 et seq. .................................................. 5 6 Gov. Code, ~ 54954.2 ...................................................... 5 7 Gov. Code, ~ 54954.5 ...................................................... 5 8 Gov. Code, ~ 54956.5 ...................................................... 5 9 Gov. Code, ~ 54956.7 ...................................................... 5 10 Gov. Code, ~ 54956.9 ...................................................... 5 11 Gov. Code, ~ 54957.1 ...................................................... 5 Gov. Code, ~ 54957.1 ...................................................... 5 Gov. Code, ~ 54957.7 ...................................................... 5 Gov. Code, ~ 54957.11 ..................................................... 5 Gov. Code, ~ 56429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21000 et seq. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. 13 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21005. .............................................. 13 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21083 .............................................. 22 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21084 .............................................. 15 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21151 .............................................. 11 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21167.6 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8,22 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21168.5 .............................................. 4 Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21177 ............................................... 6 24 CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS ..................................................... 7,8,10 .......................................................... 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15, 16 25 Title 14, ~ 15002 26 Title 14, ~ 15051 27 Title 14, ~ 15060 28 Title 14, ~ 15061 PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -111- ,'... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 } 12 <I<l 13 ~ 6 !i1 e: 14 Ul;;l ...lo td~ 15 ::E8 ci:;;! 16 ...lz 00 [9<;; ~i1l 17 ~f 18 u< ~ j 19 ~ ~ ;> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Title 14, ~ 15300 ......................................................... 15 Title 14, ~ 15300.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. 15 Title 14, ~ 15301 ......................................................... 15 Title 14, ~ 15378 ...................................................... 10, 14 PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -lV- , " 1 12 cl/J 13 ~~ oe: 14 15;:1 ~~ 15 ::88 0:;1 16 ""z 00 '" - -~ "'~ ....l~ 17 ,0 :;: '" 00.. 18 u<: ~ "" >Q 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF REPLY 1 2 3 4 In Petitioner's Trial Brief in Support of Petition for Writ of Mandate ("Opening Brie!,,), 5 Petitioner, The Redlands Association ("Association"), goes to great lengths to explains how and 6 why the County of San Bernardino (the "County") violated the California Environmental Quality 7 Act (Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21000 et seq., hereinafter "CEQA") and the Guidelines for 8 Implementation ofCEQA (Cal. Code of Regs., title 14, ~ 15000 et seq., hereinafter "State CEQA 9 Guidelines") in connection with its approval of a certain settlement agreement ("Settlement 10 Agreement") dated February 2, 2001, with the City of Red lands ("Redlands) and Redland Joint 11 Venture, LLC ("RJV"). In the Real Party in Interest Redlands Joint Venture, LLC's Responsive Trial Brief Trial Brief re: CEQA Claims ("RJV Briel'), RJV makes the astonishingly candid admission that "The Settlement Agreement. . . was entered into so that Citrus Plaza could move forward." What makes this admission so astonishing is that it flies in the face of a permanent injunction issued by this Court in 1997. Nevertheless, RJV proffers two reasons to explain why no violation of CEQA occurred: (l) the Settlement Agreementisn't a "project" under CEQA, and (2) the CEQA causes of action are now moot. As will be shown, these explanations simply won't work. CEQA has often been called the Holy Grail of California's environmental laws. What most people don't realize is that CEQA was conceived, promoted, and sponsored by California Assembly Republicans back in 1970 as a way to provide California with an environmental disclosure act modeled after the federal National Environmental Protection Act ("NEP A"). In enacting CEQA, the objective was not to create a way of blocking even the most environmentally harmful projects. Rather, as California's premier environmental "sunshine" law, its purpose was to send a simple message to government agencies at all levels: Tell the public your reasons for approving a project despite whatever environmental impacts it may have, and accept the political fallout for your decision. A lot of folks think that's how government 28 ought to work. The Association agrees and brought this action to accomplish this. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -1- , . , 11 ~ < 12 ~ o(j 13 8 ~ d'i ~ 14 ""'0 ~~ 15 ~8 6:1 16 ...., z 00 el ;;; "' ~ ~~ 17 .0 :q; 0< 18 ~ ...., ~ 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 II. RJV'S "SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT" IS FLAWED AND UNDERMINES RJV'S OWN ARGUMENTS 5 In order to take the spotlight offthe County's failure to comply with CEQA in connection 6 with its approval ofthe Settlement Agreement, the RJV Brief tries mightily to distance the Mall 7 Project from the Settlement Agreement. This effort begins in Part II ["Summary of Settlement 8 Agreement"] of the RJV Brief(7:4-10:3), where every effort is made to portray the Settlement 9 Agreement as having no relevance whatsoever to RJV's ongoing quest to develop the Mall 10 Project without annexing into Redlands. To hear RJV tell it, the Settlement Agreement has nothing to do with making the development of the Mall Project possible. Instead, it simply involves a bunch of innocuous concessions, covenants and grants made by Redlands. However, there is much RJV leaves out. In discussing Sections 4 and 7 of the Settlement Agreement, RJV claims that Redlands is not prevented from providing water and sewer service to the Donut Hole. RJV misses the point. As RN's attomeyll and the County's own staff-' acknowledged, because of this Court's prior judgments, only Redlands was able to provide such service to the Donut Hole. Moreover, as noted in the Opening Brief (l3:3-14:8), obtaining such service from Redlands was the environmentally superior alternative under CEQA. Consequently, by entering into the Settlement Agreement, both Redlands and the County each made discretionary decisions approving Redlands' forfeiture of its unique position by permitting Donut Hole property owners to make the call as to whether or not Redlands could supply water and sewer to the Donut Hole. "[T]he [East Valley Corridor] Specific Plan, as interpreted by Judge Edwards, blocks anyone but the City of Red lands from providing water and sewer service to the donut hole and IVDA areas. . . . it appears that the court has interpreted the [County's] General Plan as prohibiting provision of sewer other than by the City of Red lands. . . . The City of Red lands General Plan does not permit provision of sewer service unless the IVDA area is annexed to the City of Red lands." (AR, pp. 3574 & 3577.) 2 "The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) is a significant obstacle to planning for water and sewer service to be provided within the "Doughnut Hole" by any entity other than the City of Redlands." (AR, p. 2294.) PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -2- , . , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 "<l 13 ~z oS 14 i5~ -' 0 'rl~ 15 ::E8 0";;1 16 -'z 00 elin "'~ ...l~ 17 .0 ::; '" 0"- 18 u..: ~ .J I:Q 19 z <: > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Similarly, in discussing Section 5 ofthe Settlement Agreement, RJV glosses over the fact that the provisions therein represent Redlands' discretionary decision to grant easements and permit construction within Redlands rights-of-way and to forfeit any City oversight or control. RJV is silent on the fact that Redlands' and the County's discretionary decision to allow RN to relocate the sewer line would remove the key barrier that was preventing RJV from commencing construction of the Mall Project. Moreover, RJV claims that such relocation "is consistent with. . . and the provisions of AB 1544." To the contrary, AB 1544 says nothing about this activity. Finally, RJV claims that Section 7 of the Settlement Agreement is "consistent with Government Code section 56429. However, as has been previously noted to the Court, Section 7's "all or nothing" requirement for annexation is leagues beyond the LAFCO Act's section 56429's one hundred acre minimum. RJV might want to reconsider the wisdom of its claims that the Settlement Agreement has little, if anything, to do with the Mall Project and is only about decisions Redlands made. Such an argument would lead to the conclusion that Redlands is, in reality, the lead agency under CEQA for a completely separate and unrelated project: the Settlement Agreement.lI In discussing the criteria for identifying the lead agency, CEQA Guidelines section 15051 states: "Where two or more public agencies will be involved with a project, the determination of which agency will be the Lead Agency shall be governed by the following criteria: (a) If the project will be carried out by a public agency, that agency shall be the Lead Agency even if the proiect would be located within the iurisdiction of another public agency." As will be shown, RJV's myopic portrayal of the Settlement Agreement as just a series of "covenants" divorced from any environmental consequences explains why RJV cannot fathom the Settlement Agreement being a "project" under CEQA. 3 To the extent that RJV is intentionally trying to finger Redlands as the lead agency for the Settlement Agreement, the Association would note that the parties to this action have already stipulated that the County was the lead agency for the Settlement Agreement, and it is too late for RJV to dispute the lead agency issue. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -3- ~ ell Zz 00 ~;:: UJ;:i -'0 \d~ :E8 0':;1 -' z 00 O!l<;; UJ~ ....l~ .0 ;:;: '" 00.. U< ~ -' >C ~ > , I III. 2 RJV MISSTATES THE HOLDING IN 3 WESTERN STATES PETROLEUM ASSN. 4 5 In its Opening Brief, the Association noted that "this Court will also need to rule on what 6 actually constitutes the record in this action," and that the California Supreme Court's Western 7 States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Ca1.4'h 559 ("WSPA") decision provides 8 guidance on this issue. The RJV Brief counters with protestations over the facts and evidence 9 proffered by the Association while at the same time claiming that CCP S 1085 and WSP A permit 10 the County and RJV to proffer all sorts of evidence that was not before the County Board of II Supervisors when they approved the Settlement Agreement - including evidence that did not 12 even exist at that time. As WSP A shows, RJV has it exactly backwards. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 Post-February. 2001 Evidence Proffered bv the County Constitutes Extra-Record Evidence That Is Not Admissible Under the Holdin, in Western States Petroleum Assn. 18 The RJV Brief( I 0:22-24) states that, "The decision to approve the Settlement Agreement 19 by COUNTY was done by way of a closed session. ... There was no adjudicatory hearing with 20 notice to the public." Therefore, RJV claims, "evidence outside the administrative record is 21 admissible." This does not quite jibe with what the Supreme Court said in WSPA: 22 ". . . we hold that extra-record evidence is generally not admissible in traditional 23 mandamus actions challenging quasi-legislative administrative decisions on the 24 ground that the agency "has not proceeded in a manner required by law" within the 25 meaning of Public Resources Code section 21 168.5. However, we will continue 26 to allow admission of extra-record evidence in traditional mandamus actions 27 challenging ministerial or informal administrative actions if the facts are in 28 dispute." (WSPA, supra, 9 Ca1.4'h at 576; emphasis added.) PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -4- '. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 z z ~ 12 <Id 13 z z 8~ 14 a1 ;:i --'0 1:;::< 15 ::E8 cl:;i 16 --'z 00 I!lVl "'~ ....lli: 17 .0 ::<'" 00.. 18 u<<: ~ --' >0 19 z <<: > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 One need only consult the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code section 54950 et seq.) to determine that a "closed session" does not constitute either "ministerial" or "informal administrative" actions. The Ralph M. Brown Act provides formal procedures for agendizing closed session items (~~ 54954.2; 54954.5; 54956.5), when closed sessions may and may not be conducted (Id.; ~ 54956.5), and the purposes for which they may be held (~~ 54956.7-54957.1; 54957.11) Subdivision (a) of section 54957.7 provides that "Prior to holding any closed session, the legislative body of the local agency shall disclose, in an open meeting, the item or items to be discussed in the closed session." In turn, subdivision (a) of section 54957.1 provides: "The legislative body of any local agency shall publicly report any action taken in closed session and the vote or abstention of every member present thereon, as follows: *** (3) Approval given to its legal counsel of a settlement of pending litigation, as defined in Section 54956.9, at any stage prior to or during a judicial or quasi- judicial proceeding shall be reported after the settlement is final, as specified below: (A) If the legislative body accepts a settlement offer signed by the opposing party,lI the body shall report its acceptance and identify the substance of the agreement in open session at the public meeting during which the closed session is held." Since the County's approval of the Settlement Agreement in a closed session constituted neither "ministerial" nor "informal administrative" actions, the County cannot avail itself of the exception to the WSP A prohibition on the admission of extra-record evidence as a way to "pad" the record of its February, 2001, approval ofthe Settlement Agreement. The Supreme Court's holding in WSPA also shows that it was improper for the County to include post-February, 2001 materials in its so-called "administrative record" for this action. 4 The dates next to the signatures on the Settlement Agreement indicate that Redlands signed' first. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -5- ~ ~ o(l z z 00 0_ a'i~ ..J 0 1:!~ ::;8 O:;J ..Jz 00 1!3V5 "'~ ....ltt .0 ::<'" 00.. U..: ~ ..J I:Q z <( > '. 1 "Finally, WSP A contends that evidence that could not be produced at the 2 administrative level "in the exercise of reasonable diligence" should be admitted 3 in traditional mandamus proceedings. We agree. ... although we agree that 4 there is such an exception in traditional mandamus proceedings challenging quasi- 5 legislative administrative decisions, this exception is to be very narrowly 6 construed. Extra-record evidence is admissible under this exception only in those 7 rare instances in which (1) the evidence in question existed before the agency 8 made its decision, and (2) it was not possible in the exercise of reasonable 9 diligence to present this evidence to the agency before the decision was made so 10 that it could be considered and included in the administrative record." (WSPA, 11 supra, 9 Cal.4th at 577; italics in original.) 12 13 B. 14 15 The Association's Evidence Is Admissible Under the Holdin~ in Western States Petroleum Assn. 16 By contrast, the above holding in WSPA -coupled with RJV's startling admission that, 17 prior to the County approving the Settlement Agreement, "There was no adjudicatory hearing 18 with notice to the public" - permits the Association to proffer extra-record evidence in this 19 action. Given the secretive manner in which the County approved the Settlement Agreement, 20 it was simply not possible W'the Association, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, to present 21 this evidence to the County so that it could be considered and included in the record of the 22 County's February, 2001 closed session on the Settlement Agreement. This result is also 23 consistent with subdivision (e) ofCEQA section 21177: 24 "This section does not apply to any alleged grounds for noncompliance with this 25 division for which there was no public hearing or other opportunity for members 26 of the public to raise those objections orally or in writing prior to the approval of 27 the project, or ifthe public agency failed to give the notice required by law." 28 PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -6- '. 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ ~ 12 dIJ 13 5~ 01= 14 ~;2 -' 0 'd~ 15 ::E8 0:;1 16 -'z 00 "'- -~ "'~ ....It:: 17 .0 :2'" 00.. 18 u<( ~ -' co 19 ~ ~ 20 21 1 2 3 4 A. 5 IV. THE COUNTY FAILED TO COMPLY WITH CEOA The Burden of CEOA Compliance was Alwavs on the County and the City. not the Public RJV insists that the Association has "failed to sustain its burden of demonstrating a CEQA violation." (RJV Brief 1 1 :10-11.) Once again, RJV has it exactly backwards: "While a fair argument of environmental impact must be based on substantial evidence, mechanical application ofthis rule would defeat the purpose of CEQA where the local agency has failed to undertake an adequate initial study. The a\!encv should not be allowed to hide behind its own failure to gather relevant data. ... CEOA places the burden of environmental investigation on \!overnment rather than the public. If the local agency has failed to study an area of possible environmental impact, a fair argument may be based on the limited facts in the record. Deficiencies in the record mav actually enlarge the scope of fair ar\!Uffient by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inferences." (Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 298, 311; emphasis added.) Contrary to RJV's contention, CEQA places the burden squarely on the County to adduce credible evidence showing that it considered and made a determination as to whether CEQA applied to the Settlement Agreement prior to approving it. 22 23 B. 24 25 26 CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines set out very specific procedural requirements that the 27 County was supposed to follow prior to approving the Settlement Agreement. (CEQA 28 Guidelines ~ 15002(e).) As part ofa "three step process," the County was to: The County's PUIJIorted "Administrative Record" Shows that the County Failed to Comply with CEOA and the CEOA Guidelines PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -7- .. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ ..: 12 ~ cl/J 13 iSz 012 ifl~ 14 '""'0 '<l~ 15 ~8 ':;1 :lz 16 00 "'- _00 ",00 ...l~ 17 .0 ::; '" 00.. 18 u<C ~ '""' a::l 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 "examine the project to determine whether the project is subject to CEQA at all. If the project is exempt, the process does not need to proceed any farther. The agency may prepare a notice of determination." (CEQA Guidelines ~ 15002(k)(I); see also ~ 15060(b)-(c).) Had the County indeed complied with these procedural requirements, then the evidence of its compliance would be contained in the administrative record. This is because Subdivision ( e) of CEQA section 21167.6 provides a mandatory list of those items that the County's record of proceeding on the Settlement Agreement "shall include." Among the items relevant to the County's compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines are the following: "(2) All staff reports and related documents prepared by the respondent public agency with respect to its compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of [CEQA] and with respect to the action on the project. (3) All staff reports and related documents prepared by the respondent public agency and written testimony or documents submitted by any person relevant to any findings or statement of overriding considerations adopted by the respondent agency pursuant to [CEQA]. (4) Any transcript or minutes of the proceedings at which the decisionmaking body of the respondent public agency heard testimony on, or considered any environmental document on, the project, and any transcript or minutes of proceedings before any advisory body to the respondent public agency which were presented to the decisionmaking body prior to action on the environmental documents or on the project. (5) All notices issued by the respondent public agency to comply with [CEQA] or with any other law governing the processing and approval of the project. * * * (7) All written evidence or correspondence submitted to, or transferred from, the respondent public agency with respect to compliance with [CEQA] or with respect to the project. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -8- ~ <( ~ o(j ~~ 0_ ~~ ..Jo ~~ ~8 0":;1 ..J z 00 e3V5 ",00 ....l~ .0 ::; '" 00.. U<( j ~ ~ :> .. 1 * * * 2 (10) Any other written materials relevant to the respondent public agency's 3 compliance with [CEQA] or to its decision on the merits ofthe project, including 4 the initial study, any drafts of any environmental document, or portions thereof, 5 which have been released for public review, and copies of studies or other 6 documents relied upon in any environmental document prepared for the project 7 and either made available to the public during the public review period or included 8 in the respondent public agency's files on the project, and all internal agency 9 communications, including staff notes and memoranda related to the project or to 10 compliance with [CEQA]." 11 One need only inspect the County's so-called "administrative record" for this action to conclude 12 that the County failed to comply with CEQA prior to approving the Settlement Agreement. 13 None of the foregoing items can be found. The County itself prepared and certified this record. 14 Consequently, the record's lack of anything indicating any County compliance with the 15 procedural requirements ofCEQA demonstrates that the County simply either forgot about or 16 ignored those requirements when it approved the Settlement Agreement. 17 18 C. 19 20 21 22 The RJV Brie/focuses its greatest efforts (11:6-18:28) on arguing that the County's Approval ofthe Settlement Agreement Constitutes a "Project" 1. RN Fails to Comprehend the CEOA Definition of a "Project" 23 discretionary approval of the Settlement Agreement does not constitute the approval of a 24 "project" under CEQA. RN trumpets the fact that, in responses to Special Interrogatories, the 25 Association "did not identify" single discreet provisions of the Settlement Agreement that would 26 lead to environmental effects, and gripes that the Association instead asserted that the County's 27 discretionary approval of the Settlement Agreement "as a whole" would result in such effects. 28 In doing so, RJV reveals it basic misunderstanding of the term "project" in CEQA: PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -9- " l o(j Zz 00 "";:: 1:l;2 ~~ ::E8 6:;1 -'z 00 f'l<;; "'~ ....I~ .0 ::;!'" 00.. u<<: ~ -' ~ ~ :> I "A "project" is an activity subject to CEQA. The term "project" has been 2 interpreted to mean far more than the ordinary dictionary definition of the term." 3 (CEQA Guidelines ~ 15002(d).) 4 "Project" means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in 5 either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable 6 indirect physical change in the environment. . . The term "proiect" refers to the 7 activity which is being approved and which may be subiect to several 8 discretionary approvals by governmental agencies. The term "proiect" does not 9 mean each seoarate governmental approval. (CEQA Guidelines ~ 153 78( a) & (c); 10 emphasis added.) II The RJV Briefalso spends a fair amount of time quibbling over the Opening Brief's use 12 ofthe facts presented in Redlands' Motion for Summary Adjudication. However, the case RJV 13 cites (Wright v. Stang Manufacturing Company (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 1218, 1224) does not 14 appear to_stand for the proposition that RJV thinks it does, and RJV's claim of violation of 15 Evidence Code ~ 1523 [regarding oral testimony of a writing] is baffling. In discussing 16 Rule 592, the court of appeal noted that, "Local rules are valid and have the force and effect of 17 law only if they are not inconsistent with higher authority, such as statutes, state rules of court, 18 and case law." (Thatcher v. Lucky Stores, Inc. (2000)79 Cal. App. 4th 1081, 1084-1085.) The 19 Association submits that this Court's application of Rule 592 to Redlands' facts does not traduce 20 any "higher authority." 21 22 23 24 2. The Settlement Agreement was an Essential Prerequisite to the Development of Citrus Plaza and the Donut Hole 25 In contrast to RJV's novel claim that the Settlement Agreement cannot be a "project" 26 unless the Association can identify discreet provisions within it that will cause environmental 27 impacts, the Association went to great lengths in its Opening Brief(11 :9-16: 13; 23:22-24:7) to 28 explain how the net effect of the Settlement Agreement's approval would result in a significant PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -10- .' I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II ~ 12 ::E o<J 13 a~ or:: 14 dl;:i -'0 ~~ 15 ::E8 6~ 16 -'z 00 '" - -'" ",'" ....l~ 17 .0 ::;: '" 00.. 18 u< ~ -' ~ 19 z <( > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 change to the environment by removing the barriers that were preventing Donut Hole development. Courts have repeatedly endorsed this view, holding that CEQA applies to approvals - even paper ones - when their net effect is to remove a barrier to development or serve as a catalyst for development. (See, Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1975) 13 Ca1.3d 263, 281 ["This is not the case of a rancher who feels that his cattle would chew their cuds more contentedly in an incorporated pasture. No one makes any bones about the fact that the impetus for the Bell Ranch annexation is Kaiser's desire to subdivide 677 acres of agricultural land . .. ."]; Terminal Plaza Corp. v. City and County of San Francisco (1986) 177 Ca1.App.3d 892, 904-905 ["Moreover, the ordinance clearlv portends new construction. .. . And of course new construction imports the prospect of silmificant environmental impact. ~ But that the ordinance reasonably portends possible future environmental impacts flowimr from the cumulative effect oforobable replacement construction proiects seems undeniable. . .. Without a threshold evaluation, however, the City leaves its constituents in ignorance of the avoidable dangers CEQA intended to avert. If a "proiect" poses the possibility of si~nificantly influencing the environment. as the subiect ordinance clearly seems to do, the inability of the City to identify impacts ought not to relieve it of the responsibility to prepare an appropriate EIR in accordance with section 21151."]; OrindaAssn. v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 182 Ca1.App.3d 1145; 1171 ["Appellants' attack on the demolition permit rests on their contention that demolition was a phase of the overall Proiect: as such. it was subiect to the same CEQA review as the rest of the Proiect. and the demolition permit could not be issued until the entire CEQA orocess was completed and the overall Proiect lawfullv aooroved. We agree with this contention."]; City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 183 Ca1.App.3d 229, 243 ["Moreover, we find the contention that the rezoning was an isolated incident with no significance of its own to be somewhat disingenuous in light of the fact that during the course of the hearings it became evident that development was planned on the Mission Ranch property. for which rezoning was the first step."]; City of Antioch v. City Council (1986) 187 Ca1.App.3d 1325, 1327-1328 ["In sum, our decision in this case arises out of the realization that the sole reason to construct the road and sewer project is to provide a catalyst for further development in the immediate area. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -11- , ~ d(j z z 00 Cl_ a'i~ ""0 ~:i1 ~8 0':;1 ""z 00 eo; "'~ ....11:: .0 ::;!'" 0"- u<: ~ ..., Q:l ~ :> '. 1 Because construction of the project could not easily be undone, and because achievement of its 2 purpose would almost certainly have significant environmental impacts, construction should not 3 be permitted to commence until such impacts are evaluated in the manner prescribed by CEQA. 4 ... the fact that a particular development which now appears reasonably foreseeable may, in 5 fact, never occur does not release it from the EIR process. . .. Similarly, the fact that future 6 development may take several forms does not excuse environmental review."]; Stanislaus 7 Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144; 158 ["The record here 8 clearly contains substantial evidence supporting a fair argument the proposed countly club mav 9 induce housing development in the surrounding area. The fact that the exact extent and location 10 of such growth cannot now be determined does not excuse the County from preparation of an 11 EIR."]; County of Amadorv. EI Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal.App.4lh 931, 951 12 ["Making 17,000 af/yr of water available for consumptive purposes removes a maior barrier to 13 growth and can virtually ensure development."]; Planning & Conservation League v. 14 Department of Water Resources (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 892 [settlement oflitigation constituted 15 a project requiring EIR]; Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. of 16 Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4lh 342; 368 ["The court recognized that the sole reason for the 17 construction was to provide a catalyst for further development in the immediate area."]; 18 emphasis added.) 19 The above cases all stand for the proposition that if the discretionary approval of 20 something is the "impetus" or "catalyst" for development, "portends," "influences," is a "phase" 21 or "first step" for development, or "removes a major barrier" to development, then CEQA 22 applies to that approval and must be undertaken before that approval is given. In other words, 23 a causal link between the approval and the development triggers CEQA compliance. 24 That RJV does not understand this basic CEQA principle is revealed in its attempt to 25 analogize the Settlement Agreement to the facts in two cases. First, RJV makes the stretch that 26 approval of the Settlement Agreement was the same as the formation of an assessment district 27 as was the subject of Kaufman & Broad-South Bay, Inc. v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. 28 (1992) 9 Cal.App.4lh 464. However, as the court explained recently in Not About Water Com. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -12- '. .' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ <( 12 :;E di:l 13 i5~ 0>:: 14 15;:1 ~~ 15 :;ES 0":;1 16 az ",2 -'" "'~ 17 ....l.. .0 :<'" oc.. 18 u< ~ ..J IXI 19 z <( > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. Board of Supervisors (2002) 95 Cal.AppAth 982, 100r1002, the reason why CEQA did not apply to the fonnation of the district was due to its "peculiarly fonnal character" and the lack of a "causal link between" its fonnation and any environmental impacts: "Petitioners contend the fonnation of assessment district No.1 violated provisions of CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21000 et seq.) We agree with the water district that this challenge lacks merit. Our conclusion follows from the peculiarly fonnal character of an assessment district, as the court explained in Kaufman & Broad-South Bay. Inc. v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. (1992) 9 Cal.AppAth 464. There, a school district had fonned a community facilities district in anticipation of using the revenues "in the future to acquire sites for the construction of schools, to lease or purchase portable classrooms and buses, and to rehabilitate future facilities." (Id. at p. 468.) A developer with property lying within the community services district filed suit to enjoin establishment of the district on the ground that its fonnation violated provisions of CEQA. The court of appeal disagreed, holding that fonnation of the facilities district was not a "project" within the meaning ofCEQA. That conclusion followed, the court of appeal reasoned, from the nature of the facilities district itself. "In our case," the court said, "the causal link between the action (fonnation oHcommunitv facilities district]) and the alleged environmental imoact (construction of new schools) is missing. Unlike the fonnation of a new school district. . ., the fonnation of the facilities district here will not create a need for new schools. Nor is the construction of new school facilities entirely dependent upon the fonnation of[ the community facilities district] . . .. [P] The only foreseeable impact from the fonnation of [the community facilities district] is that when the District does detennine sometime in the future to acquire sites for the construction of schools, to lease or purchase portable classrooms and buses, and to rehabilitate future facilities, it will have some of the funds necessary to do so." (Id. at p. 474.)" (Emphasis added.) PETITIONER'S REPLY BRlEF -13- '." 7 8 9 10 11 ~ ~ 12 dd 13 Zz 00 0- ffi~ 14 ....0 ~~ 15 ::E8 ci~ 16 ....z 00 e3;; "'[2 17 ...<... .0 ;';'" 0"- 18 u": ~ .... ~ 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 By contrast, RJV itself admits the causal link between the Settlement Agreement and the 2 development ofthe Mall Project: "The Settlement Agreement. . . was entered into so that Citrus 3 Plaza could move forward." (RJV BriefI8:7-8.) 4 Similarly, one need only read what the court actually said in Stand Tall on Principles v. 5 Shasta Union High Sch. District (1991) 235 Cal. App. 3d 772,781-782, to see that RJV's 6 reliance on it is also misplaced: "Here, the Board's resolutions regarding the site selection do not constitute an "approval" under CEQA because they do not commit the District to a definite course of action since they are expressly made contingent on CEQA compliance. As the trial court aptly noted, "'approval' of the site by the District is conditioned upon compliance with CEQA." Nor does the definition of "project" support STOP's position. A "project" means "the whole of an action," but again, the action of selecting the preferred site here is expresslv conditioned upon CEQA compliance. Moreover, the examples provided in the "project" definition for an "activity directly undertaken by [a] public agency" are not akin to a contingent site selection. (See Guidelines, ~~ 15378, subd. (a)(I), quoted above.)" (Italics in original; emphasis added.) By contrast, the very reason why the Settlement Agreement was approved was to obtain a commitment to a definite course of action that had heretofore eluded and frustrated the County and RJV: removing Redlands as the sole source of water and sewer service to the Donut Hole and making it impossible for Redlands to serve the Donut Hole unless its property owner( s) gave permission to do so. There was nothing "contingent" about this. Moreover, from a CEQA standpoint, approval ofthe Settlement Agreement went against every tenant of full and open public participation in the process with all alternatives on the table. Two public entities contracted with the private applicant of a proposed development project (for which the CEQA review process had not been completed) to make it impossible for the heretofore designated service provider with the capacity to serve, and the infrastructure already in place to serve, the project, to undertake this role - unless the private applicant said so. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -14- .' z ~ :2: o(j z z 00 0_ ~~ .-> 0 ~:ll :2:8 ':;I 5z 00 I!i i;l "' ~ ...:i~ ,0 :> '" 0'" u< ~ .-> co ~ > 1 3. By Claiming: that Exemptions Ap'ply. RJV Concedes 2 that the Settlement Agreement Constitutes a "Proiect" 3 4 RJV also claims that certain exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines apply to the 5 Settlement Agreement's approval. In making this claim, RJV (perhaps unwittingly) is admitting 6 that the Settlement Agreement is a "project" under CEQA. This is because exemptions under 7 CEQA only apply to projects. ("The guidelines prepared and adopted pursuant to Section 21083 8 shall include a list of classes of proiects which have been determined not to have a significant 9 effect on the environment and which shall be exempt from [CEQA ]." CEQA ~ 21084; emphasis 10 added. See also CEQA Guidelines ~ 15300.) 11 The RJV Brief (18:20-22) claims that the sewer work provided for in the Settlement 12 Agreement is covered by a CEQA Guidelines section 15301 "Class 1" categorical exemption. 13 However, if so, then (1) it must therefore be a project under CEQA, and (2) subdivision (c) of 14 CEQA Guidelines ~ 15300.2 ["A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where 15 there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment 16 due to unusual circumstances."] and City of Antioch v. City Council, supra, 187 Cal.App.3d 17 1325, 1327-1328 ["the sole reason to construcHhe road and sewer project is to provide a catalyst 18 for further development in the immediate area."] make it clear that it cannot be relied on to skirt 19 CEQA compliance. 20 RJV's attempt to rely on the so-called "common sense" exemption is particularly ill- 21 advised. (RJV Brief 5:5-10; 16:20-22; 17:1-7.) Not only does this mean that the Settlement 22 Agreement is a project, but the County is now shown to have failed to proceed in the manner 23 required by law, since it failed to provide any evidentiary support for its reliance on CEQA 24 Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). In Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose (1997) 54 Cal.AppA1h 25 106; 116-117, the court dealt at length with the common sense exemption and held that a public 26 agency must (unlike with categorical exemptions) make findings explaining its reliance on it. 27 "In the case of the commonsense exemption, . . ., the agency's exemption 28 determination is not supported by an implied finding by the Resources Agency PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -15- .' I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II ~ 12 ~ o(! 13 Z;z 00 0_ Gi~ 14 ~~ 15 ~B 0:;1 16 ...J;z 00 :!lE;; "'~ ...l~ 17 .0 '2./t. 0..; 18 ~ ...J ~ 19 ~ ;> 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 that the project will not have a significant environmental impact. Without the benefit of such an implied finding, the agencv must itself provide the support for its decision before the burden shifts to the challenger. Imposing the burden on members of the public in the first instance to prove a possibility for substantial adverse environmental impact would frustrate CEQA's fundamental purpose of ensuring that government officials 'make decisions with environmental consequences in mind.'" (Emphasis added.) Just as the city in Davidon Homes failed to show any preliminary environmental review was conducted, the County's purported "administrative record" contains nothing indicating that any CEQA review at all was conducted prior to approving the Settlement Agreement, and there are no findings to provide support for a decision to rely on the ~ 15061(b)(3) common sense exemption. As the Davidon Homes court explained, this was inadequate and improper: "In this case the city's action was supported only by a conclusory recital in the preamble ofthe ordinance that the project was exempt under Guidelines section 15061, subdivision (b)(3). There is no indication that any preliminary environmental review was conducted before the exemption decision was made. The agency produced no evidence to support its decision and we find no mention of CEQA in the various staff reports. A determination which has the effect of dispensing with further environmental review at the earliest possible stage requires something more. We conclude the agency's exemption determination must be supported by evidence in the record demonstrating that the agency considered possible environmental impacts in reaching its decision." (Id.) 4. The Settlement Agreement was an "End Run" Attempt Around this Court's Prior Judgments "He who digs a pit will fall into it, and a stone will come back upon him who starts it rolling." (Proverbs 26:27.) PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -16- .- I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ?i: ~ 12 did 13 66 ffi~ 14 ""'0 1:l~ 15 ~8 0:;1 16 ""'z 00 E9en "'12 17 ..J~ .0 ::E'" 00.. 18 u": ~ ..... l:Q 19 z <<: >- 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Perhaps the biggest problem with RJV' s attempt to claim that the Settlement Agreement is not a "project" under CEQA is that it is so pathetically absurd. Simply stated, it asks us to ignore the context ofthis dispute and the history ofRJV's efforts to develop the Donut Hole and the Mall Project. That context and history include two efforts by the County and RJV to alter the 1996 conditions of approval for the Mall Project by allowing someone other than Redlands to provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole. This effort to change service providers was twice found to constitute a "project" under CEQA for which a supplemental EIR (1996) and a Negative Declaration (1999) were preparedY Both ofthese were litigated, and both times this Court found violations ofCEQA with regard to this "project" and ordered an EIR to be prepared and certified before other service providers were allowed into the Donut Hole.!F Moreover, in what in hindsight now appears downright comical, in the early days of this litigation, when the County and RJV were scrambling about trying to come up with anything to call the County's administrative record for the Settlement Agreement, the County and RJV both told the Court that the record for the County's approval of the Settlement Agreement was the administrative record for the supplemental EIR that this Court ordered decertified in 1997. In paragraph 5 of the Declaration of Scott M. Runyon in Support of Joint Ex Parte Applicationfor Extension of Time to Prepare Administrative Record andfor Notice of Ex Parte Application ("Runyon Declaration") the Deputy County Counsel declared: 5 "Finally we note that County evidently determined that the rezoning was a project subject to CEQA since it proceeded to prepare its "Environmental Recommendation and Initial Study," step 2 ofthe "Three Step Process." (City of Carme 1- by- the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 183 Ca1.App.3d at 244.) Similarly, by proceeding to prepare an EIR and a Negative Declaration, the County twice "evidently determined" that changing service providers to the Donut Hole constituted a "project subject to CEQA." Consequently, the County and RJV cannot unring that bell and claim that the Settlement Agreement - which was entered into to accomplish the change in service providers - is not a project. 6 This Court's Judgment and Order Granting Petition for Writ of Mandate; Stay and Permanent Injunction in City of Red lands v. County of San Bernardino, et al. [San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV 34737] "ordered, adjudged and decreed" the County to "vacate and set aside" its approvals of the Citrus Plaza project and its certification ofthe supplemental EIR, and had "enjoined and restrained" RJV "from taking any action to carry out, or implement the Citrus Plaza project as modified, or any development, construction, or use in furtherance of the project." Moreover, this Court's October 30, 2000, judgment in the 1999 lawsuit on the Negative Declaration City of Red lands v. County of San Bernardino, et al. [San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCVSS 60116] prevented the County from amending its General Plan so as to deprive Redlands of its singular right to determine who would provide water and sewer service to the Donut Hole unless and until an EIR analyzing the environmental impacts of changing service providers was prepared and certified. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -17- 8 9 10 11 ~ ~ 12 ell 13 z z 89 ffi~ 14 ""0 1:!i2 15 ::gS 0:;1 16 ..., z 00 eltn "'~ ...l~ 17 .0 ::1'" 0"- 18 u": j I'Q 19 ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 "The environmental documents associated with the [Settlement Agreement], 2 consist of a twenty-four (24) volume administrative record lodged in the action 3 styled, City of Redlands v. County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County 4 Superior Court case number SCV 34737 ("the Prior Action")." 5 Similarly, in paragraph 7 of the Declaration of Dan G. McKinney in Support of Joint Ex Parte 6 Application for Extension of Time to Prepare Administrative Record ("McKinney Declaration"), 7 counsel for RJV declared: "The County of San Bernardino prepared an administrative record for the Project, which was lodged on or about August 25, 1997 with the San Bernardino County Superior Court in an action styled, City of Red lands v. County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County Superior Court case number SCV 34737 ("the Prior Action"). The Prior Action involved a challenge to the environmental impact report prepared for the Project. .. ." The Runyon Declaration and the McKinney Declaration each make two things clear. First, that the County and RJV entered into the Settlement Agreement in order to move forward with the "Citrus Plaza" development "Project" that was challenged in the "Prior Action." (McKinney Declaration, 'If 3.) Second, that the County originallv claimed that it relied on the 1996 supplemental EIR as its CEOA compliance for approving the Settlement Agreement. (Runyon Declaration, '\l'\l3 & 5; McKinney Declaration, 'If'lf4, 7 & 8.) However, there were also two thing that counsel for the County and RJV conveniently left out. First, that this Court had issued the following permanent injunctions in the Prior Action: "3. County, its agents, employees, servants and all persons acting under, or in concert with County, are enjoined and restrained from taking action to authorize the implementation of the Citrus Project, as modified, or issuing any permits or other entitlements for development, construction or use or in furtherance of the project; 4. [RJV], their agents, employees, servants and all persons acting under, or in concert with them, are enjoined and restrained from taking action to PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -18- ~ ::E oll 5 z ~ ~ "' ;:i ..J 0 ~~ ::E8 ci~ ..J z 00 al - Oil '" ...l~ .0 :;: .. 00.. u< ~ ..J ~ ~ > I carry out, or implement the Citrus Project, as modified, any development, 2 construction or use or in furtherance of the project."lI 3 Second, the County and RJV failed to acknowledge that the 1996 supplemental EIR was, from 4 a CEQA standpoint, worthless and could not legally be used as a basis for the County's approval 5 of the Settlement Agreement because this Court had also issued the following order: 6 "2. The petition for writ of mandate is granted, and County is directed 7 to vacate and set aside its certification of the [Supplemental EIR] for the project. 8 County is commanded to make and file a return to this writ within 60 days after 9 service, showing what it has done to comply with the writ;" (Id.) 10 Given what has previously transpired in the continuing saga ofits attempts to develop the II Donut Hole outside Redlands' jurisdiction, RJV's efforts to recast the Settlement Agreement as 12 something other than a "project" under CEQA borders on the burlesque. It is simply too late for 13 RJV to claim that such a change from its 1996 approval of the Mall Project is not a "project." 14 15 16 17 18 A. 19 20 The RJV Brief (7:1-3; 19:13-22) claims that this Court cannot set the Settlement V. THE CEOA CAUSES OF ACTION ARE NOT MOOT There is no CCP ~ 389 Problem Since Redlands is a Party to This Action 21 Agreement aside because Redlands is not a party to the CEQA cause of action and has no 22 "presence in the action." The claim is nonsense and easily dismissed. 23 First, Redlands is a party to this action. Second, where is Redlands' joinder (like the 24 County's) to the RJV Brief! Third, the Court need only look to two cases - Deltakeeper v. 25 26 7 See Exhibit I to the Request for Judicial Notice; Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed with the Court - without objection - on October 11,2001, in connection with the Association's opposition to 27 the County's and RN's joint Ex Parte. Despite this Court enjoining RN from "taking action to carry out, or implement the Citrus Project," the RJV Brief {I 8:7-8) now brazenly admits that the Settlement Agreement 28 violates this Court's violates this injunction: "The Settlement Agreement . .. was entered into so that Citrus Plaza could move forward," PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -19- ! o(j Zz 00 0", !'!j;s UO <J :il ::E8 g:i 015 E!li>l "' ~ o-li:: .0 :<'" 00.. u<C ~ ...J ~ Z ~ I Oakdale Irrigation District (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 1092 and People ex rei. Lungren v. 2 Community Redevelopment Agency (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 868, 874-885 - for guidance on how 3 to weigh the four Code of Civil Procedure section 389 factors in a CEQA case such as this and 4 to conclude that these factors clearly weigh in favor of deciding the Association's CEQA claims. 5 6 B. Case Law Demonstrates that the CEOA Claims are Ripe 7 8 The RJV Brief (19:23-20:5) claims that a single case, San Jose v. Country Club 9 Apartments v. County of Santa Clara (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 948, stands for the proposition that 10 the Association's CEQA causes of action are moot. To the contrary, RJV's own account of this II case explains why this case is inapposite and why this Court should grant the relief requested by 12 the Association: 13 "A mandamus action was brought under CEQA. While the action was pending, 14 the County repealed the ordinance, and readopted it with a mitigated negative 15 declaration." (RJV Brief 19:26-27.) 16 The Association submits that, had the parties to the Settlement Agreement voided it and then 17 reexecuted it after complying with CEQA, this would have mooted the Association's CEQA 18 causes of action. However, the parties have chosen not to do so, and therefore, the Association 19 has been forced to seek legal redress for the violation of CEQA. 20 Moreover, a recent CEQA case discusses the mootness issue in depth and articulates why 21 the Association's CEQA causes of action are anything but moot. In Woodward Park 22 Homeowners Assn. v. Garreks, Inc. (2000) 77 Cal. App. 4th 880, 888-890 ("Garreks"), the court 23 dispensed with the mootness claim in a manner that was unequivocally blunt: 24 "The City remarkably takes the position that this case is moot because the project 25 was constructed and operating prior to the court's July 30, 1998, decision on 26 WPHA's petition. It contends environmental review now would not serve any 27 purpose under CEQA. The City's argument is not only against public policy, it is 28 absurd. . . . '1l This case does not present a situation where a ruling by this court PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -20- " : ~ ~ o<l 5z 09 '" ~~ ::E8 0:;1 as I!ltn '" ~ ....l~ ^ 0 :; '" 00.. u< ~ ..J a:l ~ > . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 C. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 can have no practical impact or not provide the parties relief. To the contrary, our 2 ruling can afford WPHA effective relief. As recognized by WPHA, a decision 3 upholding the court's order directing the preparation of an EIR could result in 4 modification of the project to mitigate adverse impacts or even removal of the 5 project altogether." 6 Similarly, a decision by this Court voiding the Settlement Agreement until compliance with 7 CEQA is demonstrated could result in a halt to the Mall Project and restore Redlands' ability to 8 provide water and sewer service to all properties within the entire 1,200 acre Donut Hole. 9 Moreover, in its prior ruling denying the Association's application for a temporary 10 restraining order, this Court put RJV on notice that it was proceeding with development of the 11 Mall Project at its own risk. Therefore, RJV should pay particular attention to what court had 12 to say to the developer in Garreks: 13 "Garreks chose to continue with the project despite the risk that pending litigation Garreks buy into the philosophy ofthe mythical captain ofthe Starship Enterprise, James T. Kirk, who said: "May fortune favor the foolish." We do not. Garreks's decision to complete and operate the project, despite the pending litigation, in no way provides an exemption to CEQA. Therefore, we find the case is not rendered moot." (Id.) RJV's Claim Re\:arding the Administrative Record in this Action Puts the October. 2001 EIR for the Mall Project Before this Court TheRJV Brief{5:20-21; 6:19-20 & 25-26) states that "setting aside the Settlement Agreement will have no bearing on the life of Citrus Plaza. . .. The certified Subsequent EIR for Citrus Plaza was certified on October 23, 2001, and was not challenged. . .. Setting aside the Settlement Agreement will not stop the Citrus Plaza project. .. ." PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -21- " . I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II ~ 12 o(l 13 Zz 00 ~~ 14 ""'0 ~gz 15 ::E8 o:;! 16 5~ e3Vl ;j1@ 17 .0 ::.'" 00.. 18 ~< ...., >0 19 :;; > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Given that the County itself certified that the certified Subsequent EIR is part of the record of proceeding for this action under Public Resources Code section 21167.6, RJV and the County may want to reconsider the wisdom of what they have done. The County cannot have it both ways. If, as the County has certified, the certified Subsequent EIR is part of the procedural record for the County's February, 2001 approval of the Settlement Agreement, then the issue of its adequacy is before this Court. Moreover, if this Court determines that, by entering into the Settlement Agreement, the County distorted the Subsequent EIR's analysis by eliminating Redlands as the feasible and environmentally superior alternative for providing water and sewer service to the Donut Hole, then the Court can void the certification of the Subsequent EIR. That this Court may do so is shown in the recent case Friends of the Santa Clara River v. Castaic Lake Water Agency (2002) 95 Cal.AppAth 1373. There the court found that, since the EIR for the underlying agreement had been found inadequate and ordered decertified, the EIR that had tiered off of the prior EIR was necessarily defective and must also be set aside. The Court is faced with the same situation here. As discussed in the Opening Brief( 13 :3- 14:8), Redlands was the feasible provider of water and sewer services to the Donut Hole that would "substantially lessen the significant environmental effects" of providing such service since it already had the capacity and infrastructure in place to serve the Donut Hole. CEQA's "substantive mandate" (CEQA ~ 21005) prevented the selection of an environmentally inferior service provider as long as service from Redlands was "feasible." The Settlement Agreement was therefore needed in order to circumvent CEQA's substantive mandate by making service from Redlands "infeasible." To make matters worse, unlike the situation in Friends of the Santa Clara River where there was an underlying ElR, nothing was done to comply with CEQA in connection with the Settlement Agreement's approval. Consequently, if this Court finds that the underlying environmental documentation (e.g., nothing) for the Settlement Agreement failed to comply with CEQA, then this Court may order the Supplemental ElR that came after it to be set aside since the County itselfhas put the Supplemental EIR before the Court.~ 8 The Association would not be surprised if the County and RN now backtrack and concede that the October 23, 2001 Supplemental EIR is not part ofthe administrative record for the Settlement Agreement. PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -22- ,. I.. . .. ~ ::E o(l Zz 00 0>:: iE~ ~~ ::E8 Q:;l 5~ eo., "'''' ....ll:: .0 :::;,1::: 0<( ~ ..J ~ ~ :> .' 1 2 3 VII. CONCLUSION 4 As discussed in the Opening Brief (20: 14-21: 15), the California Supreme Court has 5 acknowledged the "privileged position" that the public holds in the CEQA process. Of course 6 litigants can settle their lawsuits, but in doing so, are they allowed to simply ignore the mandates 7 of CEQA? The Association submits that the answer to this question must be an emphatic "No!" 8 Over the last thirty years, a clear pattern has emerged in CEQA litigation. When 9 petitioners bring actions quibbling over the accuracy of this or that detail in an EIR, they usually 10 lose. This is because "in reviewing whether either the ElR or the procedures followed fully 11 comply with CEQA, "the test to be applied is not one demanding of absolute perfection but 12 whether an objective, good faith effort to so comply is demonstrated. "" Dusek v. Redevelopment 13 Agency (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 1029, 1039. 14 On the other hand, petitioners just as surely prevail in those CEQA actions predicated 15 upon either a public agency's failure to honestly disclose environmental impacts, or an agency's 16 manipulation of the process so as to shut the public out of meaningfully participating in that 17 process. A classic case of shutting the public out of the process occurred here. 18 On behalf of its members, the citizens of Redlands and San Bernardino County, and 19 everyone else who was denied public participation in any CEQA review for the Settlement 20 Agreement, the Association respectfully asks this Court to order the requested writ of mandate 21 to issue (1) voiding the approval of the Settlement Agreement, and (2) requiring that the County 22 and Redlands comply with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prior to taking any action to 23 reapprove it. 24 25 26 27 28 PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -23- .' ~ .. . . .. 1 Dated: September 23, 2002 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 o(j 13 56 ~~ 14 ~~ 15 ::S8 ci~ 16 ...Jz 00 elE;J 5e! 17 .0 ~~ 18 u": ~ ...J 19 ~ ~ > 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. By: PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF -24- :" . .. # PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 23422 Mill Creek Drive, Suite 105, Laguna Hills, California 92653. On September 23, 2002, I served the foregoing document entitled "PETITIONER'S REPLY BRIEF TO REAL PARTY IN INTEREST REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC'S RESPONSIVE TRIAL BRIEF RE: CEQA CLAIMS" on the parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: Daniel 1. McHugh, City Attorney CITY OF REDLANDS - City Hall 35 Cajon Street Redlands, California 92353 Mitchell L. Norton, Deputy County Counsel SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY COUNSEL 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, 4th Floor San Bernardino, California 92415-0140 Donald F. Powell, Esq. REID & HELLYER, P.c. 3880 Lemon Street, 5th Floor Riverside, California 92502-2415 I caused such envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States Mail at Laguna Hills, California. I am "readily familiar" with the practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Laguna Hills, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation or postage meter date is more than one (1) day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare under penalty ofpeIjury of the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on September 23, 2002, at Laguna Hills, California. ~iJ;LLL- hnG.McCle don . . I , . URGENT September 20, 2002 Mayor Judith Valles City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street San Bernardino, California 92418 Dear Mayor Valles, It is imperative that the San Bemanlino City Council refuse to provide sewage service to the Donut Hole when you act on the issue next Monday. It would not be in the best interest of the city for it to provide services. You would be supporting businesses that would compete with existing and future businesses in San Bernardino. The history of the Citrus Plaza project reinforces this point. The owner of the Carousel Mall examined the deterioration of downtown San Bernardino and the area on E Street between Second Street and Orange Show Road in the early 1990's and decided to purchase land in the Donut Hole since that general area was more promising. Majestic Realty was hired to develop Citrus Plaza and was advised that the project could be started by attracting two anchor stores from the Carousel Mall and possibly by adding a Toys-R-Us and a Target store. This plan worked, and works, against your hope of redeveloping downtown San Bernardino. Majestic Realty worked feverishly over the next few years to wrest rightful control of the Donut Hole away from Redlands. Majestic purchased enough political clout to change state and county laws so that Donut Hole developers would save tens-to-hundreds of millions of dollars by not paying development impact fees. These savings will be passed on to tenants in the form of cheaper rents than are paid in Redlands, San Bernardino, and all other local communities. Businesses in the Donut Hole will have a competitive advantage over existing businesses. Existing businesses in San Bernardino may move to the Donut Hole to take advantage of cheaper operating costs. Remember that this fear caused the owners of the Inland Center Mall to offer huge financial incentives to entice Harris-Gottschalk to build. It is likely that future businesses will locate in the Donut Hole instead of San Bernardino to take advantage oflower expenses. Do not risk your future by supporting competitors. Warehouses, factories, and commercial enterprises do not have to be built in the Donut Hole. They easily could be built on Hospitality Lane, in the HUB project, in your redevelopment districts, and in many other locations in San Bernardino. Warehouses and factories could also be built at the old Norton Air Force hase, instead of in the Donut Hole. Second, your honor is at stake. You were eager to transport an entourage to Redlands to demand an apology when Mayor Haws disparaged your city and accused it of competing with Redlands. Please do not act hypocritically by seeking to compete now. 31 ql;LjID~ . \ , -2- Third, the financial reward that bas been offered to San Bernardino is miniscule, and will not come close to replacing revenues that will be lost when commercial enterprises in the Donut Hole cannibalize businesses in San Bernardino. Stores in the Donut Hole will not bring large amounts of new revenue to the Inland Empire. Shoppers will simply have more places where they could buy similar goods and services. Target is an especially interesting case. The money that is now spent on AAA hatteries, beef jerky, and gigantic bags oftoilet paper at the two Target stores in San Bernardino will be redistributed over those stores and a new one in the Donut Hole. Finally, technical, environmental, and legal clouds bang over the development ofthe Donut Hole. The legal concerns alone are so serious that you should delay any action until the legal issues are resolved. For example, a case that challenges a relevant settlement agreement made on February 2,2001 will be heard in San Bernardino County Superior Court on October 9, 2002. Many observers believe that the Redlands Association will win, thus demanding that San Bernardino seek permission from Redlands before constructing infrastructure across its territory. More importantly, the Redlands City County would be freed to continue its challenge of AB 1544. If the city prevails, the Donut Hole would return to the sphere of influence of Red lands along with total control over development. The efforts of San Bernardino would be for naught. Thank you for considering my comments. Sincerely, , ~+~ Gary A. Negin, Ph.D. gnegin@aol.com 909-794-6648 CC: Atty Penman San Bernardino City Council Notice of Determination To: ,f Office of Planning and Research From: 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 ,f Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of San Bernardino 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, Second Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0130 Documentary Handling Fee ($35.00) Receipt Number /j 9 c:J:l. 7 . SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Applicant Majestic Realty Company 13191 Cressroads Parkway Nortll City of Industry. CA (917)46-3497 m' ._ .._. Project Description APPLICANT: REOLANOS JOINT VENTURE LLC PROPOSAL: 1) REPEAL EAST VALLEY CORRlOOR SPECIFIC PLAN AS IT PERTAINS TO THE UNINCORPORATED AREA. 21 GENERAL PLAN AMENOMENTTO REVISE WATER WASTE WATER AND LAND USE POLICIES FOR THE IVOA AREA AND ESTABUSH THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA. 3) DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE PROVISIONS OF THE EVCSP AS DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA. ~l REVISIONS TO AN APPROVED PREUMINARY AND FIRST PHASE I'INAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO REVISE TEXT. CONDmONS AND ; SiTE PLAN FOR AN APPROVED REGIONAL MALL (CITRUS PLAZAjOF APPROX.1.85 MILLION SQ. FT. RETAiL AREA. INCLUDING 5 ALTERNATIVE ANAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OPTIONS. WITH ALTERNATIVE SOURCES QFWATER AND WASTE WATER SERVICE AND ALLOWING ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SIGN WITH A 5-SECOND MESSAGE INTERVAL 'I DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO EXTEND APPROVAL TIME FRAMES. n FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FSEIR) THAT ANALyzeS ITEMS 1.e ABOVE AS WELL AS A WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILmES PLAN FOR THE IVOA AREA. LOCA nON:BOUNDED BY SAN BERNARDINO AVE" ALABAMA ST.. LUGONIAAVE. & STATE HWY 30 (1-210) .COMMUNITY: REDLANOSI S-3 JCS: 09434CF ~~!,.~ES~_~~:nv~,~a~~_~oc:late_._[LI~ .Zoiat .. (310) 695-2329 FAX (310) 692-9561 CLERK OF THE BOARD OCT 2 3 2001 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Representative ., State Clearing House Number 1999101123 J.P. McGuckian and Terri Rahhal Lead Agency Contact Person (909) 367-4167 McGuckian (9091 367-4124 . Rahhal Area CodefTelephone Number This is to advise that the County of San Bemardino Board of Supervisors' rgj Lead Agency 0 ResponSible Agency PCR Services Corporation 233 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 130 Santa Monica califomia90401 (310) 451-4466 Phone has approved the above described project on 10/23/01 and conducted first with effective dates of reading on related Ordinances Date 10/23/01 and' 11/29/01 on related Ordinances Date and has made the following determinations regarding the above project: 1. The project [181 will 0 will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. [8l A Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEOA. o A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEOA. 3. Mitigation measures [181 were 0 were not] made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [181 was 0 was not] adopted for this project. 5 in dings [181 were 0 were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This S to ertily that e final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the eral ublic at; S n ardi County Land Use Services Department - Planning Div. rowhead e loor, San Bernardino CA 92415 0182 ') 3 C 1 C"t.:, Date Date received for filing at OPR: Planning - Revised August 1994 G-J 9-2-3 - 02- Notice of Determination To: ./ Office of Planning and Research From: 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 San Bemardino County Land Use Services Department 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, San Bemardino, CA 92415-0182 ./ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of San Bernardino 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, Second Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0130 Documentary Handling Fee ($35.00) Receipt Number J;J 9 t'.J <t s- , , SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. ;_nn. ..... ..ProjectDescription . ... ...... Applicant APPLICANT: REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE LLC Redlands Joint Venture LLC , Majestic Realty Company PROPOSAL: 1) REPEAL EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PlAN 13191 Crossroads Parkway North M IT PERTAINS TO THE UNINCORPORATCO AREA City of Indusby, CA 2) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REVlSE WATER (917)46-3497 WASTE WATER AND lAND USE POLICIES FOR THE IVCA AREA \twD ESTABLISH THE EAST VALLEY CORRiDOR PlANNING AREA. ~) DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE FROVISIONS OF THE EVCSP AS DEVELOPMENT ANO DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PlANNING AREA. '4) REVISIONS TO AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY ANO FIRST PHASE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO REVISE TEXT, CONDITIONS AND , SITE PlAN FOR AN APPROVED REGIONAL MALL [CITRUS PLAZA10F APPROX.1.8S MILLION SQ. FT. RETAIL AREA. INCLUDING S ALTERNATlVE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PlAN OPTIONS. WITH AL TERNATlVE SOURCES :OFWATER AND WASTE WATER SERVICE AND ALLOWING ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SIGN WITH A 5-SECOND MESSAGE INTERVAL '8) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO EXTEND APPROVAL TIME FRAlMES. 7) FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FSEIR) THAT 'ANAL VZES ITEMS 1-5 ABOVE AS WELL AS A WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN FOR THE IVDA AREA. LOCATlON:BOUNDED BY SAN BERNARlCINO AVE.. ALABAMA ST.. LugDnia AYe. & State Hwy 30 (1-210) COMMUNITY: REDlANDSI S-3 JCS: 09434CF REP'RESENTATIVe,l.SAarid AssOCi.t.. iLiiiYd ZOi.j-- --. -.-.... n. (310) 695-2329 FAX (310) 692-9581 CLERK OF THE !'IOARD Nav 0 6 2001 COUNTY OF SAN BERN.ARDINO ReDresentative State Clearing House Number 1999101123 J.P. McGuckian and Terri Rahhal Lead Agency Contact Person (909) 387-4167 McGucklan (909) 367-4124 - Rahhal Area CodefTelephone Number This is to advise that the County of San Bernardino Board of SUDervisors ~ Lead Agency 0 Responsible Agency PCR Services Corporation 233 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 130 Santa Monica califomla9D401 (310) 451-4488 Phone has adopted the second reading of the ordinances reiated to the above described project on 10/30/01 with an effective date of 11/29/01 and has made the following determinations regarding the above project: 1. The project [[gI will 0 will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. 1:8:1 A Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. o A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. itigation measures [[gI were 0 were not] made a condition of the approval of the project. A tatement of Overriding Considerations [~ was 0 was not] adopted for this project. 5. Fin ings [[gI we e 0 were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEOA. This is to c ify that the nal EIR with comments and response and record of project approval is available to the al P Iic at: S n r ar 0 unty Land Use Services D pa ment - Current Planning Division. r d A en e, i t I r, San Bemardino CA 9241 -01 2 C!t Date received for filing at OPR: Planning - Revised 11101 REPORT IRECOMMENDATIOfll TO :THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND RECORD OF ACTION Planning-2nd Cycle 2001 GPAs October 23, 2001 FROM: MICHAEL E. HAYS, Director Land Use Services DepartmenUCurrent Planning Division SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH AN EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA, TO REPEAL AND REPLACE THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AND TO AMEND WATER, WASTEWATER, AND LAND USE POLICIES. REVISE THE APPROVED CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FIRST PHASE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742, WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. APPLICANT: REDLANDS VENTUREj FILE/INDEX: PD/95-0005-07/M273-97/ PDC/ PDF/ TPM147421RM2j WEST REDLANDS/S3 RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing regarding the following proposed actions: 1) Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") a) CERTIFY the Final Subsequent EIR [SEIR] with Errata; b) ADOPT the Findings of Fact and Findings Supporting a Statement of Overriding Consideration; and c) ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 2) General Plan Amendment a) ADOPT Resolution 2001-268 amending the County General Plan included in the Second Cycle 2001 General Plan Amendments to amend Official Land Use District Map and text; b) READ title only of proposed Ordinance amending the County General Plan Official Land Use Maps; and c) WAIVE reading of the entire text and ADOPT Ordinance No. 3832, the same as is set forth in full in Ordinance Book 68, and is entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CODE BY THE AMENDMENT OF THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE OFFICIAL LAND USE PLAN"; 3) Development Code Amendment a) READ title only of the proposed ordinance to amend Title 8 of the San Bernardino County Code to incorporate the regulations and development standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan applicable to the East Valley Corridor Planning Area and to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; cc: LUSD-Hays Planning-Squire / Planning-McGuckian/Rahhal ED/PSG Admin. PWrrransportation PW/Surveyor Bldg. & Safety Co. Counsel-Hinesley/Cochran CAO-Bogart Applicant Representative File Rev 07/97 Page 1 of4 Record of Action of the Board of Supervisors AMEND/APPROV NDATIONS 1,2,5,6.7 & 8; CONT. R ~ 0/30/01 @ 10 A.M. SORS ARDINO MOTION ~ MOVE 4 -s ITEM 047 CITRUS PLAZA - GPNDCNPDP/FDP/PARCEL MAP/DNFSEIR OCTOBER 23, 2001 PAGE 2 OF 4 b) WAIVE reading of the entire text; and c) CONTINUE the ordinance to amend Title 8 to Tuesday, October 30,2001, at 10:00 a.m. for adoption. 4) Develooment Aareement a) READ title only of the proposed ordinance to approve a Development Agreement; and b) WAIVE reading of the entire text and; c) CONTINUE the ordinance to approve a Development Agreement to Tuesday, October 30, 2001, at 10:00 a.m. for adoption. 5\ Revisions to the aooroved oroiect a) APPROVE a revision to an approved Preliminary Development Plan, subject to Conditions of Approval to establish a regional mall with 1.85 million square feet of retail area to be constructed in two major phases, including the use of Rule 20 A funds to underground utilities; b) APPROVE a revision to an approved Final Development Plan for Phase I, subject to Conditions of Approval for a portion of the regional mall with 500,000 square feet of retail area, and c) APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 14742, subject to Conditions of Approval for 50 commercial parcels on 128 ~ acres; 6) ADOPT the Findings for all related actions; 7) FILE a Notice of Determination; and 8) APPROVE the Water and Wastewater Facility Plan for the IVDA Areas "A" and "I" ("WWF Plan")(amended to change November 1, 2001 to January 8, 2002 and adding the following: "Notwithstanding the above provisions of this Section 6, CSA 70 EV-1 shall be authorized to simultaneously analyze and make provision for the pursuit of alternative water and sewer options with the City of Redlands and/or as set forth below,"), acting both as the Board of Supervisors and as the governing body of County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1 (CSA 70 EV-1). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On September 20,2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and unanimously recommended approval of the entire proposal. The proposed project establishes 1) the legal framework upon which the provision of water and waste water facilities can be delivered to this unincorporated area; 2) creates a Planning Area within the County General Plan and Development Code that is fully under the jurisdictional control of the Board of Supervisors; and 3) updates the land use application approvals for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall and associated Development Agreement. The Board of Supervisors approved the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall on January 9, 1996. Subsequent to that action the Board approved a revision to the project on November 19, 1996, to allow the provision of water and wastewater from sources other than the City of Redlands. The City of Redlands then brought a successful legal action against this approval and obtained a court order that rescinded the revision approval. This action left the January 9, 1996, approval in effect as the only valid approval. Following this legal action, the developer pursued various options, including further negotiations with Redlands. Also, the State of California recently passed a law that allows water and wastewater facilities to be provided to an unincorporated area from outside sources through lines that pass through an incorporated city to an unincorporated area. In addition, the property owners within the unincorporated island, known as the "Donut Hole" have successfully petitioned the Local Area CITRUS PLAZA - GPAlDCAlPDP/FDP/PARCEL MAP/DAlFSEIR OCTOBER 23, 2001 PAGE 3 OF 4 Formation Commission [LAFCO] to remove the subject area from the City of Redlands Sphere Of Influence. On January 12, 1999, the Board of Supervisors initiated a General Plan Amendment to revise County Water, Wastewater, and. Land Use Policies as necessary to promote extension of infrastructure and economic development within unincorporated portions of the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Area (IVDA Area). This project resulted in the proposed General Plan text amendments and the development of the WWF Plan. The plan assigns responsibility for retail provision of water and waster water service in the area to CSA 70 EV-1 and identifies the following service alternatives: . Water Service Alternatives: Water may be obtained by connection to the IVDA system at San Bernardino International Airport, by connection to the water distribution systems of the Cities of San Bernardino, Riverside or Redlands, or by development of local wells. . Sewer Services Alternatives: Sewage treatment may be obtained by connection to the sewage treatment plant or either the City of San Bernardino or City of Redlands, by connection to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) Line for ultimate treatment by the Orange County Sanitation District, or by construction of a local wastewater treatment plant facility. . Currently, the County and the City of Redlands are considering an agreement concerning service provision in this area, whereby the City of Redlands could wholesale water and sewage treatment capacity to CSA 70 EV-1, which will then act as the retail water and sewer service purveyor for this area. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was prepared on the impact of the project changes. The Final SEIR identified five environmental issues which cannot be mitigated to less than significant leveis, even with the proposed mitigation measures. These are land use, transportation-circulation, air quality (project and cumulative impacts), noise and energy. According to the 1995 Fiscal Impact Analysis, the County's net annual benefit from the project would be approximately $4.18 million from sales and property taxes. In summary, the proposed project will first establish an East Valley Planning Area in the General Plan and Development Code to replace the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan that is proposed to be repealed. The project modifies other General Plan land use policies and establishes a Water and Wastewater Facility Plan for the provision of water and waste water services for a portion of the unincorporated section of the Inland Valley Development Agency [IVDA] area. This proposal will also revise and update the existing project approvals to conform to the new planning area and add flexibility in the approvals to allow the developer to select alternative commercial layouts in anticipation of fluctuations in market demands. These actions include a commercial parcel map, preliminary and final development plans, and a development agreement that extends the project approvals 15 years to the year 2016. On August 20, 2001, the Development Review Committee (DRC) unanimously recommended approval of the proposed project, subject to the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures outlined in the Final SEIR. The Conditions of Approval include by reference the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program [MMRPJ. CITRUS PLAZA. GPAlDCAiPDP/FDP/PARCEL MAP/DAlFSEIR OCTOBER 23, 2001 PAGE 4 OF 4 One hundred forty (140) Planning Commission Hearing Notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. Staff received only one response, which requested a continuance until a pending lawsuit was resolved. There was no negative public testimony at the September 20, 2001, Planning Commission Hearing. County Counsel stated that the results of the pending legal action should not affect the ability of the Planning Commission to make a recommendation on the merits of the proposed project. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project proposals. REVIEW BY OTHERS: This item has been reviewed by Chief Deputy County Counsel, Rex Hinesley on October 15, 2001; and by the County Administrative Office, Geoffrey Bogart, Administrative Analyst on October 15, 2001. This item was heard by the Planning Commission on September 20, 2001. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There are no financial impacts associated with the approval of this item. SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT(S): 3rd PRESENTER: Randy Scott, Advance Planning Division Chief, 387-4147 **Notification as required has been made by publication in The Sun and the Redlands Daily Facts, and by mailing to the list on file in the Office ofthe Clerk. **On call of the Chairman, no further testimony is taken and the hearing is closed. / FINDINGS . Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Sch #1999101123 . General Plan Amendment . Development Code Amendment . Preliminary and Final Development Plan . Tentative Parcel Map 14742 CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 1 Findings Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, Califomia! S3 FINDINGS: SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #1999101123 1. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report has been presented to the decision- making body of the Lead Agency, the County Board of Supervisors, and that the decision- making body has reviewed and considered the information contained therein prior to acting on the project. 3. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the Lead Agency. FINDINGS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is in the best interest of the public, because it will facilitate provision of public services and economic development in the IVDA Redevelopment Area. 2. The proposed land use district change is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and will provide a reasonable and logical extension of the existing and evolving land use pattern in the surrounding area. Also it brings forward and updates the land use policies of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and incorporates them into a new East Valley Planning Area. 3. The proposed land use district change does not conflict with provisions of the Development Code, or any applicable specific plan, because it establishes a new planning area and continues the same or similar land use designations as those currently established in the area; 4. The potential environmental effects of the proposed General Plan Amendments have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed amendments will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed General Plan Amendment, in spite of its impacts on the environment. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 2 Findings Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, Califomia! S3 FINDINGS: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 1. The proposed Development Code amendment, which includes the repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) is consistent with the General Plan and is in the best interest of the public, because it will facilitate provision of public services and economic development in the IVDA Redevelopment Area. 2. The potential environmental effects of the proposed Development Code Amendments have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed amendments will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed Development Code Amendment, in spite of its impacts on the environment. FINDINGS: PRELIMINARY and FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN for First Phase 1. The proposed Planned Development Preliminary and Final Development Plans together with the provisions for its design and improvement are consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. The first phase Final Development Plan is consistent with the Preliminary Development plan and text. The project is consistent with countywide goals as it provides a reasonable "quality of life," promotes an attractive, healthy and safe living, working and recreational environment; while being fiscally sound; sensitive to land, water and air resources. It has adequate infrastructure and services; protects historic and natural resources and promotes waste stream reduction. The project speCifically implements the following General Plan goals and policies: . GOALS: The project promotes high quality regional commercial development, protects regional groundwater, minimizes soil erosion; protects and enhances positive view sheds and community identity. . POLICIES: Attracts a wide range of employment opportunities; contributes to the development of comprehensive storm drain system; implements design standards to ensure positive views of the planning area; provides safe and convenient access and circulation; develops a comprehensive and convenient pedestrian circulation system; incorporates energy efficient transportation strategies/altematives into the design; recharges local water basins, private roads are maintained, provides off street parking, protects and expands right-of-ways; provides fire emergency access, provides adequate utilities, services and other infrastructure; and enhances/adds scenic elements to streets including long palm rows CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 3 Findings Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, Califomia! 53 2. The potential environmental effects of the proposed project have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed project will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impactswill be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed project, in spite of its impacts on the environment. 3. The physical characteristics of the site have been adequately assessed and the site for the proposed development is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses and all yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls, and fences, parking areas and other required features, because the design standards in the Preliminary Development Plan text are consistent with the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. 4. The site for the proposed development has adequate access from, Lugonia Avenue on the South, Alabama Street on the West, San Bemardino Avenue on the North, and State Route 30 Freeway and Buckeye Road on the East. The development plan and the Conditions of Approval require the installation of onsite and offsite improvements that address the limitations of the existing streets and highways. 5. Adequate public services and facilities are required to be provided by the Conditions of Approval. This project will not cause a reduction of public services to properties in the vicinity, nor will it be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare. An on site law enforcement facility will be provide to enhance security and response times to this facility. 6. The proposed development, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding property and will be compatible with the planned and existing land uses in the surrounding area because the Conditions of Approval will ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses and that the necessary services and improvements will be provided. 7. The improvements required by the Conditions of Approval and the manner of development adequately address all natural and man-made hazards associated with this project because any serious drainage, fire, circulation, and slope concems have been considered in the Conditions of Approval. 8. The proposed development provides for a more efficient use of the land and provides for an excellence of design greater than that, which would be achieved with conventional development standards because there is substantial attention to architectural controls and enhanced landscaping. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL ~edlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 4 Findings Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, Califomia! S3 FINDINGS: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements is consistent with the General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Planning Area because it complies with the adopted design standards and provides the appropriate public services. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development because all physical constraints of the site have been recognized and mitigated, including access, circulation and drainage. 3. The potential environmental effects of the proposed project have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of SuperVisors, and which detennined that the proposed project will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed project, in spite of its impacts on the environment. 4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, because the Conditions of Approval for this map and the related preliminary development plan require compliance with County health and safety standards. 5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, because the Conditions of Approval require all conflicts to be resolved prior to recordation. 6. The design of the subdivision provides to the extent feasible, passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities, because of the predominate north/south orientation of the major buildings and use of skylights where practical. 7. The proposed subdivision, its 'design, density and type of development and improvements confonn to the regulations of the Development Code and the regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law, because all affected agencies were notified and their concems are addressed by the Conditions of Approval, which also comply with County Code regulations. 8. The proposed subdivision is not a land project. DISPLAYS . Exhibit #1 . Map of unincorporated areas within the Inland Valley Development Area . Prelimina.ry Development Plan . Final Development Plan alternatives AI, A2, B 1, B2 and C . Revised Alabama Street intersection display . Tentative Parcel Map 14742 I "'_a', fi :/.. i '$ .r;y f L : i . :r~6""-~:-'.I~ Ii;' :- ~._._.. , . ' ,,\ -:___~ ~. \:....' la,' , :-:~. ~ \ .___.1 r., "'" .. w.. :111 r ~ _'__ . iT~ ,,? :::::,:' ':''-'-',-1/ = n .ill '-'-'" i?t. \ '1 .I~ ~" ~ Ilil:'l ' 0 .... ' """".^ '-': I' l ~ ~'!, ' . ~ ~. '.."" ~:': c' ",," , 1.... H Ira ' ; I~~f'" ......:.1 .,i--...... 1'\ /\ ,- 1 :1\ ~ _.~.~ 'N ~N~J 'i i~~ ..- :;~L ) (~~e ~ 1u1 \.l \, I . h:J:r.t}1\=. T 1]. '"'-b ~ ~ :::; i ~~ ~ ~ f- ,,' ~- -! !..1l1yi~ill :J'4i ~:0) J\ .~ I L [Jl ~.~ ~i; , II . IJ I ~ !:: ';t - ~ l A = , .!l1 ~ ~ : --~>~-T~.....;: -~~i :l~~-~ ;_~'~ ~~lll ~~~,,/~, ,._~ ;;;- ,~_I ~~':' ~ . ~ ~I.~ ::- ~ . -. N i' /~ I '" ....... !.ill ~ m. ~fo;,.,,:: . . - :/, "\ I .l!.. ..~ /' I. . . I' G . ~ i, ~I m ER - ~ tL H~ Lr.- '}:--/ ~ I@ I. I ' ~ .J _ I ....-tt:T ,~_...;<~.'-"- ':':'~"1' oft 1:'1'17 ~." ~ , ,ill. ~ .-<-- I..... //_ "-- -'- . / .........;,;:; -' ..!.I,~,. on ..,,-- t...:.; I- -v-"\ , ....- ... /J /~:;;. . ~:-'~.~:::;:~ . ~ .ii //.J::--f - . :::=~.;;. ---.-.:.--==..=.c: ,...- r .,. l:tJ r ~ - /L ~ ~ ...J<~' '~,I",I! I -..; \. SAN)-~ DINO --:>~ ..-;.!!':.-""-'-'-'-'-'-' I. ., 'E7A' ___,,-- ~-..---, I ; I Ii _ · iNTERN lAI \\ ~ / . "' ;.;.-:-::::.---- -!>,. ~ Ii II I b;~" ._~"f.'7" _ :;..-. I !::<.-- iF- _ '. I PJ .....-:~.... ~ ~~.."'~. -~.~.,..... -u/" J VI ,../r--__,-,-J~.. '_.::==:: 1:-::;;:j":'3~' "'-. i ,. "'0 ",,~._t- ... ... C --..::,._ -' ......._--...... ~, .L L~, 4'~, ~ .~...~::/.----.--. , . -':''-'"' . "-,::::: :::::. - - .~ . ,/ ~ - __ . 1/' /..' ~_. r .' ".='- H ........: .~ ~.. Q!elI' ....-.. I' .......:--~._...-- ..".,-...... ,.-- .-' ._f-"o;,~_"'- "T:: . . J of I~ -I. :r 5:: " };?' j/ ? J::i. ~ ~lt!IiJ ~ k.::T i P PI /.' . _ \Sm1 u+.- . ___'::.:.0, ! . ., '-/,.....I L ::!tIT )>.'. U H_ ~f-'7 )J, .w.. ~IIII ." I f-...'_ .....~.L ~ i~'" ,.11\ 11 -~, ~ \,::-:::. . 'b. .~ ___" .......... I. _11+ ...: l~i -.--1=:=i',!_..~~1, ~.. "M~' ~-. . :....,. -~ \ F.I_ 1\ \. ....<:- _.- . J" (q- ........_ ' . - ~ I 'S '\'\'\ V' ,'1 ~ "';:-'" Ll ~.... '-..1 !""i \" ~ } r- ~ -:-. ~ :! I t.. '"1 .' oX 1._...... I -V-- lit.. "'- ""'- \ I;"'Y ~ ... ,~ \I!II 11111 .~ "S \,.- 'r.<Cl /"i:=~~ ~-E;hi~~: ,~I ~'H' ~*N . Unincorporated Areas Within The -'-"CltyUmlts . . Inland Valley Development Agency Project Area II Unincorpot'llledA/OU .::. _ -.-r... Map Prepared On June 22, 1"9 :3 c: .'. . - -- -.- - -. - - . ---..-.- - . I c:c I I. --.. N. Z ~ ! . ~ ll. .... Z W :;; ll. o ..... w >. w Q .~ .ct Z ~l w ad. ll.' !I .:g ~11 Ii .!. ~.2 \' ...., .1 a II ~ ~i~ I,-t 81~ II tC\) l:~i I',. ~h'B .1, 8 ~sU~ II!I "~e Ii I~B~h 1:1 ,. I 1;1 !I~ . I - -- -. --~- __.w ...-...- _~ngd;qm) ---~ ---... -- ---- ."...--- -- tllllG:l~ 'f1V1d smilO NY'\oI oondcnWC '.HIJ I -< <Cl t1fr--iw I .g 1-" l - V1 f!=~~ -, !'l..~"'~~€ ~'Mi!F.:r.=: ...--- r------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '.11" n Irlll! n!p I .-11.. ! .,.! ,.. '! :::I! !j~ ~ jJe~Il~~ 1 f.ii 'I iii R51 t ~il lji 'l!r iilil <'1' ~ . I~ _ .1 t (; . I 11'1 t - . I i, hll .'" "' r-~_--_ .-:::::::::::::::~ III i l,j. Hmi III i'l l,j. Uilli N I =' \ \. _ llti l! '>!'ii un!1 III i l! i!l ~!lii \\!f!t I <:( ~ > =. ! Ii _. l'RIllI j J I.l! 11 iil~~ U i1!, I I.I! II .1, ijljs! II l'!, 1.....J I ~! tel u! I II .::\ i I i ~:, m! I I! I! ~:I IH! I 0.. ffi ~~ I 1\ ~= ~Jil ~ Imtlli~~ilhiltn~R :t IIl!Hlil:inhiU!il~I~!il ~CI) i ~lll'lllll' , "! II! . no n ., !Iml' .. or: . no n ., 1!I!!I' .. :1:) c. ~fl , <( ~il I 11111 II r, <( I III II II r, P. rr- i.Q a: ~! hi d.. ii . = ~ Il:j :> I. ill: g; ~ I i I !: Ij tL-! ~ gl~ jji j II ~ ~ i~li ~ I !!I.: I ~ ~ I !II.: I l' Ct c; ~-~; lill. I : $ Hi: i lIjUljll hII 11111111 In ~ ~ lljUljll jjU 11111111111 :1 OJ if j=<~61I1111 ..iit~-- ___________.J <( i . <( -, o~=o~ - }.,,~ 33SS3NN3.J. U g . ., i'l I . I .. ..fil . Ih'~ .[!] ! I \ I I u- o o o o .D' J o o o o " , o o o o .-.-.- ~._._._._._._.-._._._._._.- I ~I -..... f=L~~-" --- KIn___ ~~ ~~~-~~~ =~ ......__ __........_.", ____...... VZV"1d sntnD l"~~r~~. ~~~ . I I r.:: .to~,~ "!jj - I.... l! .t.:~r"^>""'" ~ ~~_(!I/JJlw ~ i.... {!r _"1:1 ... {!r "Ill ..s ________=-"~ I I lUl' tf 'il, I ~llt I' 8.r. - r _ ~-- ----- ~ 1 i t I i 'd u!lt! i lid ~~~!. ~ i l !. i!!!1 i lilt IIljjJ .1 !!I JlUl n Ifll rl' il I I 1 llll I: li!ii- flkl 1 I11I 1: lfii! fl !j!11 '" i : ~ IJ'}! i' ijl!S! nil!. Iii! i' l.tI..! 1I1i!. I...J ,~i =, : ! 1.1 ~ =I!!tt I 1 ~:I !!tl ~ Q lil ~a wi . I ! ~j ;JIUgtRiliiUlillnWJ ~ dl!Hli hiibli~l~d jlCl) ~ 8f&1 i' ., ~!~l!! jiijij p lljlll! u ;;j i in ij p!!)Dl! U U:) i ~IU I !!!!!!DI Glh! - I I Gl - I I 1.1 rr-i Q) ~l~'.1 ~ ~I;; I II P ~::> I II P !-L.. > v fI1!1ii.l\l E ~:i . I !ll' I Eal ' I Ill' I :!I...: 18 ~ il k;::::r. "!. " I'D' I >>J" 'j'B' 11- a; W 1i I _~_~. ~!,! lIil~ilhlllillJlhB ~ lljf&jlhl IIJlllIHn : 0 If i~~6M 1~1 I ~ CDI 11'0 w '.., 1--" ~ -- Vi -I -I Ij O!: 3.l!1O~ - AVM33tl,l 33SS3NNgj. i JJ I ',"\ 1 ! I I . I I I I , I I I ! Hi ---- .--.- -.-.-. .-.-.-. ..!....-,-.-.-. ._._3n~~._._. '. If .." ,.: ...... .-~....,... ",". .......... f:~~;~ -. ~~~~ ......--. --".-.... - -- -.--..- __ISO' --,- ssa6.lng&la&JD) --- ---~ ----. ---== 'W"I____ --- IBl.Im~NlddOHS VZVld snlllo HV'ltl J.NJ"oI013AJQ .urrN1"nJijd 1< U, S r--tw l'~ 1-, ! - Vi .- :iim ii Ii ~ I!! ~{ ~, U ( i ill i I 11m N~ d ~ '" <:( ]j >- ~ -l ~ ~~ $1 Q .\11 8'" ft " "1 (1) ~ 5tl~ r~. g,,, """\ Co ii'Jioll\ Ed -Ji12 a:.~J I. ~~ ~t ~ ~lB ~l II. Oi u:: ~~MI dGI -I -I OE alIIO~ - AVM331:lO 33SS3NN3J. I I t I .' -- -.-.-.-.-.--.-.-.-.- -.--. .---- J l. . t.... .~ (V j ( \ , : i~ j t' ....0 I I~ l '- G. -" w . ~ w ~ <I: J! -6 i . . t:J:l' \ I fr - \- .. :,.... ALABAMA AVE. REVISED DRIVEWAY EXHIBIT 1 8-31-01 SKETCH #5373 -;r ........... ,,""",u''';''''''_ =........ '''"''~''' .....~~;;.:-' [R!J@. ! i lJ@jy@j~ l If'[g[R!Jlf'@;l"iFDW[g ! i .~~';: ::;:>"""~'I ..~'''. .,......'" "",'I","'.." ,0>,1.., ....'..... !....." "."10' f.'....' r:;.~:. . .\ 'i\ . " i'w. .~ ;: 'Q ... .. ~ 'U ~ :0' ~~ -: "l<: ';l: ,0. '''' :kl' :~: .<. :~. '11)' ....,~.-.,. :~:; l'l<'<" ",~,:>,,,""':. ..."... ~'~:;;;";:'" -."t} :_.}"'~.r,';'" I>~~' ~ ..C.A.i i~ . iV .J:'.;F;~:., '.~" ~"'- I ,...., ,~';.;,.,.,j ..~:;,;.. "".~ :[f:t .~~,,; .~:;-::;..~~;! '';';'<'' I :.:l'>::<.:'.l';...'l'" ",;",' ~,- .,."",. ...,,"'.,. I~-"I ,-" "".....' ...:~~, :'<.' . I ,>.~-:---i i l, 7. . -.- STREET SECTIONS u.tIIo\..n;-- I{I .......-;.-..i . PARCEL TABULATION ...._.:........_.:..-.i. ~ ~ 1ft ~., ::,.-.- -.- LUGONlA AVENUE. ~ ..""... 1iIrf_ FRONT AGE ROAD LEGEND ..-..... .......'~Sl 2 ::~ :;:':: E L1 .. ,: ~ :~ :,n It t: :~ :'" :: ::n 1llI .... I ~,:; cr." . .~ , 'H TarA/, NCT .-IrCA; .1oIIeCI._ .o.IIt"CACIlnl .. '.'2 all a.'1 H _ 2. ..e a'," . ,. 2' Il_ 2. oAl M .~ . .. 2' ,... :l:! .... n Il'" H .~ >> an . .. 2~ ..... )0 ..,) ~ a.T2 - - . .~ . ,~ . <H , ....J . 'M . <>> IM-CI AC -;.- IT- o r _.._'i _......_._.J,"="'~t:. : ..-',.... ~<'f<"~ .::j:::f;'F:l.':'... VICINITY MAP _N"'" SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE ALABAMA STREET 1L'TWft:Mr 11-.-r."'" "'-.- --- 1W/DlDf;AlOI',:: IT:---...... =- -- ...---.... -.--- -.- R MA-UT1C MAL'" co.. -,--=- .....--.., -.-...-.... PROPERTY DESCRIPTION II PllImQlfflMIlDI'lTlfIIOT MfllttTllINa TfJIIMIPllGUlklWlCltQT.W_ ~UIIIf\''' 1MI1DtWIM.1TA'Jl flI STAiEMENT OF OWNERSHP IlDl!!l'l'mrl'I"l1MlT'ne~W.l.l1"IIII!PffD IHlDIWI....-IICITllATTN:OIIIID" lBarelUllNlI'M.!IlCfllAIOCIlNDTITO M,..,...-n-""". '" ... EXIllENH'l'. .. ~ .._~;~~~ii:;,'::;;;:,:;::J~"'~~ . . ......',..-- " :~~'~'f.;'~~:~~':.~::;;:::~':~ ::': ....aKPIIOZ. lUoUI'$I ~~ f"~< . , .,. Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report [FSEIR] SCH#1999101l23 - General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA AIea, and Associated WatJ:r and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project. [This document has been distributed seperately and is available for review if needed] ERRATA FSEIR SCH#1999101123 ERRATA to the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Citrus Plaza Mall Project The following corrections and/or revisions to the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) have been identified. To facilitate the incorporation of these corrections and/or revisions in the FSEIR, recommended deletions or changes to the FSEIR text are represented by SrI?;G IILltG, and additions are represented by double underscore. Corrected replacement pages, reflecting the revisions to the FSEIR identified herein. are attached as Exhibit A. Reference to paragraph (1) numbers herein are intended to assist the reader in locating the corresponding passage in the FSEIR. For example, reference to 13 indicates the third paragraph on the page (p.) cited. Paragraph numbering commences at the top of the referenced page and includes both partial paragraphs (i.e., those commencing on the previous page) and recognizes Rbulleted" items (i.e., those portions of the text which commence with either a graphic or numeric symbol) as separate paragraphs. Those errata, revisions, changes and other modifications to the FSEIR as identified herein, do not result in the introduction of: (1) any new significant environmental impacts, not previously disclosed in the FSEIR, which results either from the project or from a new or amended mitigation measure proposed for implementation; (2) a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact identified in the FSEIR; and/or (3) the introduction of a feasible alternative or mitigation measure which would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project below those levels previously indicated in the FSEIR. Additionally, these errata do not suggest that the FSEIR was either fundamentally flawed or inadequate or conclusionary in nature so as to limit public comments thereupon. As a result, the additional information presented herein neither warrants the recirculation of the FSEIR nor warrants a revision to the preliminary findings presented in the FSEIR nor necessitates substantive revisions to the information presented therein. ERRATA The following errata have been identified in the FSEIR: (1) Page 13 , 7 has been revised as follows: The environmental analyses included herein also conclude that impacts to the following environmental issues cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level after the incorporation of mitigation measures: land use (cumulative), transportation/circulation (cumulative), air quality (project and cumulative), aI'KiI noise (cumulative), and energy (cumulative). (2) Page 31 " 1, 2 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) has been revised as follows: See Mitigation Measures ~ 15 through ~ 21 found in the MMRP and as referenced above for mitigation for direct project traffic impacts to intersections and street segments. Those portions of Mitigation Measures ~ 18 and ~ 19 found in the MMRP and referenced above for mitigation that relate to improvements to the 1-10 freeway or associated ramps, as well as Mitigation Measure ~ 20 regarding the TDM program. (3) Page 160 '2 (Hydrology/Water Quality) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: Water Treatment Facilities. The Ilrgjg9;Applicant and/or facilities' operator shall initiate consultation with all fgGlgralFederal, State, and local agencies, as appropriate, and shall secure any and all permits and meet all regulations in force at the time of permit issuance so that, if required, a safe chlorine spill management system shall be provided for the water supply facilities. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures). page 21 '4; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 3 (Mitigation Measure No.6). (4) Page 161 '3 (Hydrology/Water Quality) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: 'f,f;;ttJ pr:gjegt GR~lI iRt9rg9~t, "staiR, ~R;I ';9Rd1.!l,;t sgQymylliatgQ ,,11 tite gr:aiR:;t~9 argYRQ gr tl=l.rg1.d31;;1 ^ (921 ^ iR 9 R:121RR9r tRilt "'ill RQt 21;1"9(1991',' aff9Qt 21dj;S9Rt gr gg,uJ;U:tHlSR=t prgpgrti9G, :ilt ,hn~l:p~RGtr:;tt9g go,' J!:l Apprg"9d GtgrFR dr:aiR fJla'R IR tR9 ';Llte ;1 tR9 CitrwG Phil; )?f;j9Qt. perr=RiilR9Rt draiRa:gePermanent drainage improvements will be required per the appropriate components of "C:IlJ'Rllrel:igR&i"g litllrJ'R i:lraiR PlaR ~11l ~the Engineer's Report to intercept and conduct drainage flows through or around the site in an approved manner. Interim drainage improvements such as an on-site detention basin, constructed in conformance with County adopted detention basin policies and design standards and criteria, or such other measures as agreed to by the County Public Works Department gf TraR&llllrtatillR aRGI ~IIlIlGl CIlRtrll1 may be constructed upon approval by the County as an interim measure for Phase I for a period not to exceed tl:irgg '1gan; eight years from first occupancy. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 23 '2; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 5 (Mitigation Measure No. 13). (5) Page 177 '5 (Transportation/Circulation) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: Tt:le prgj9st Ji1n~pgR9Rt tf;;}2111 ;gRtribLdte a Ilfair E:A:ana" nH;11Jir91+'19Rt 1ST gf1 I>itg traffis iJ;;1pr;g"gI:r:l9Rtt Qf tRStQ :avtgri:al jr;;Rprgugm9Rt&. t!;!s fsllswiRS tr:ams R=litig:atiQR liaRS prgp9rxtisR~t9 "f:air tR:ar;g" gSRtJ:iblaltiSR& :are rS'IMirgg fgr tf;~)9 PR:al;;e I p~gj9~t. Prior to final inspection and occupancy of the first building within each phase of the project. the project proponent shall construct the following on-site and off-site transportation improvements specified for that phase. The proposed road construction shall follow the standards of the East Valley Planning Area. The construction costs of off-site improvements shall be agreed upon between the County Public Works Department. other Responsible Agencies. and the project proponent prior to the commencement of construction of those improvements. The project proponent shall receive a credit 2 for an amount exceedin the assl ned -fair share- ercenta e and ma use this cre it to 0 set ot er re ulre air s are contnbutions. air share contributions s a I e as etermme e tra IC re ort re ared rain ssoc ates revise ugust 1995) and as approve Y ounty u IC or s epartment. Phase I . Alabama Street (1/2 width), Lugonla Avenue (1/2 width), SR-30 Frontage Road lBuckeye Drivei (Fuli widthl, - The roadways adjacent to the ~ortion of Phase I site develo ment shall be 1m roved to East Valley Planning Area standards In con unction w t t at ase 0 deve 0 ment. ro ect to rovl e u msta atlon. Phase II . Alabama Street (1/2 width), San Bemardino Avenue (1/2 width), SR-30 Frontage Road (Bucke e Drive) (Full width) - The roadways adjacent to the portion of P ase II site development s a e Improve to ast a ey annm~ rea standards in conjunction with that phase of development. Project to provide full installation. The ro'ect ro onent shall construct the followin off-site im rovements. For those Improvements were t e project proponent s responsibility IS ess than t e u I cost of those improvements, the project proponent shall be entitled to a credit for any amount exceeding the assigned percentage. Phase I . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Northbound RampslTennessee Street-_Provide dual eastbound left.turn lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. The traffic signal shall be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at San Bernardino Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway southbound ramps at the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (liF/llR611r J;)~i"ll). Proportionate -fair share- contribution: 55.7 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue and Texas Street- Install a two-phase traffic signal. Provide eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. Proportionate -fair share- contribution: 24.9 percent. . Lugonia Avenue-The southerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road shall be improved to provide a second travel lane in a total 54-foot paved roadway. Propotionate "fair share" contribution: 17.0 percent. Phase II . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Southbound Ramps-Add on a northbound approach to the frontage road to include a right-turn-only lane. Modify the signal to add a northbound right-turn phase. which overlaps the westbound left-turn phase. Flare/reconstruct the north leg to provide southbound dual left-turn lanes. Proportionate -fair share- contribution: 39.3 percent. 3 . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps/Tennessee Street Provide dual eastbound left.tum lanes and two through lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. Provide a right.tum lane. a through left.turn only lane and a left-turn only lane in the southbound direction on the north leg (SR-30 Freeway ramp). Provide dual left.turn lanes on the south leg (Tennessee Streetl. This measure may require flaring of the south leg to accommodate the additional lane. Modi the si nal to rovide a southbound ri ht.tum hase concurrent with the eastboun Ie. tum phase. he traffic signal shall be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at San Bernardino Avenue and the SR.30 southbound ramps at the SR-30 Frontage Road (Buckeye Drivel. Proportionate -fair share- contribution: 33.5 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue - The northerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road (Buckeye Drive) shall be improved to provide a second travel lane. Proportionate -fair share- contribution: To be determined. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 24 '3; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 6 (Mitigation Measure No. 17). (6) Page 177, footnote 3D, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department. r;.;r:ril' Draft Environmental Impact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, ^'e"flfRlul' 1f}f}fi. p fi September 1995, p 5.4-53 (7) Page 178 '4 (Transportation/Circulation) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: PR';U tg tit. !;gmpletiQR 9ftRi pNjt~t, tile pNj'~t PWfH?R~ ERall ~gHt1:igut, a ":€'air !;:Ral"i" ~r~l~llRt:At for tat fullg".ins gff (litt trat.Rg impw....mmt. ,. i:aR SgrR:ardiPlg ^"QRY9 :;lRg iR 1Q pr9g"'2i',' ig'Jt1:lgQ'IRg R:ar;;RF1~ ^dg "PI 9 RQrtRg9YRg 4F1fiana:a~R U~ tl:19 ~rgRt:a8g Rg:aa tg iR9'I1Jt;fg a rigl=lt ttdrR gRI': I2iR9 ~1ggif',. tAg Qi~R31 tg :agd 9. R"~Rb"tHU~ riSRt ttdrR JiaR:atQ, "'Ri~R g"grlapG tl:19 "'~H~tbg'JRd 19ft t~r-R FRiiHH~ J;1~r9'r9GgRttrtd~t tt;:tg Rgrtl:1lgg tg prs"ido ~gldtRg9YRd gy:al Isft tyrR h~R9G ,. IiJR igrRJrliitiRg ^ "SRWS aRg iR JQ Frs 9""3',' ~J9rtRg9yRg RJJ:;1~t9.'TgRRsetg9 itr:29t Pr:9"igg "\sial 9attbQYRd Igft tyr:R IJRge JRd tu'g t};,rgY3R IJRge "R iaR SgrRardiR'Q A"OR1d9 Pr:s"jgg II rigt:tt tyrR 131=19, J tRrQygR Isft tyrR QRI',' laRg JRg J Igf,t tlJrR gRI',' IJR9 iR tR9 tgwt!:l9SYRliit dirg~tigR sf tR9 RQrtR hag (SiR 30 Frgg""J~' rJr;;Rp) Pro"id9 d\sl21 Igft tyrR IJRSI;: SR tR9 t961tR 199 (T9Rrxl9Cr99 itr9st) T!:lit m9JGbH9 ~a',' rg'lLslirs flariRg sf tR9 S9Wtt<1 Igg t" asggr=Rmsg:atg tR9 :aggiti9RJIIJRS ~~gdif',' tl=le l;:igR:a1 tg ~r:g"igQ a IHH4tRbgYRg rigR! tyrR pRass 90R1::yrrgRt '''itR t!:l9 gattsgYRd Igf,t tlJrR pRatS TRS traffiS' tigRJI d;(1all bs iRtsrggRRSgt9g gr gtRgr'''jt9 sggr:diRat9g ....itR tl;;tg a;ijaSgRt trJffis GigRal at ~JR S9rRardiR9 ^"QRW9 SRg t!:l9 iR '1Q S9ytRg9YRd rSr=Rpr "fat tRS iR 3Q J;nH~u'a',' FroRt:a:39 Read {ip9RtSr ~ri"9 4 T 5aR i9rRarghH~~ ^ "9RY9 TR9 Rg~R9rly R:llf ~gag...t?" bgt'''g9R ^ 12gJ~a itrggt aR~ t!:lg fiR '1Q f;n;Rt~3g R~iHil cRall b9 impro"og to prguidg a IHU~~Rg trJtlgll~R9 = Prior to final inspection and occupancy of the first structure in each phase, the ro'ect ro onent shall de osit into an a ro riate traffic facilities fund a fee to ;; set traffic impacts of that phase. The fee shall be equal to the sum of all the following 'fair share' contributions for the improvements listed below. The fee may be reduced by any credits that have accrued from constructed road improvements. The construction costs of off-site improvements shall be agreed upon between the County Public Works Department, other Responsible Agencies, and the project ~roponent. Fair share contributions shall be as determined by the traffic report "re~ared by Crain & Associates (revised August 1995) and as approved by County Public Works Department. Phase I . Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street PI&il:ipl Restrict parking on the northbound approach and provide an exclusive right-turn lane. Proportionate 'fair share' contribution: 19.9 percent. . Orange Street and Pearl Street (1.10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps)-Provide eastbound and westbound left.turn -only lanes on Pearl Street. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 11.7 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue and California Street Contribute a 'fair share" percentage for the construction of a signal on San Bernardino Avenue at California Street. Proportionate 'fair share' contribution: .13.8 percent. . California Street and Lugonia Avenue-Install a two-phase traffic signal. Widen the north leg of California Street by 10 feet and provide left.turn lanes on the north and south legs. Proportionate 'fair shere' contribution: 1.0 percent. Phase II . Lugonia Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Buckeye Drivel Provide a westbound right-turn.only lane on Lugonia Avenue. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 58.5 percent. . Lugonia Avenue and Tennessee Street-Provide two eastbound and two westbound travel lanes in addition to the left-turn channelization gR LUllllRia ~. This will require widening along the project frontage and along the south side of Lugonia Avenue to the east of the intersection. Provide dual northbound left.turn lanes on Tennessee Street. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 27.3 percent. . Lugonia Avenue and Texas Street-Install a two-phase traffic signal. Provide two travel lanes in all directions in addition to left.turn channelization on both roadways. This will require widening of Texas Street north and south of the 5 intersection to provide suitable transitions. contribution: 11.7 percent. Proportionate "fair share" . Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street-Implement parking restrictions and provide two travel lanes in all directions in addition to left-turn channelization. Provide an exclusive right-turn lane on the northbound approach. This will require widening at some "hold out" parcels north and east of the intersection. Modify the traffic signal phasing to provide left-turn phasing for all approaches, plus an "overlap" northbound right-turn phase along with the east/west left turns. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.7 percent. . California Street and the 1-10 Freeway Westbound Ramps-Install a traffic signal with a northbound left-turn phase. Flare the ~West ~ide of the north leg of California Street and to provide a right-turn-only lane and two through lanes southbound and dual left-turn lanes northbound. This may require acquisition of some right-of-way north of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.6 percent. . California Street and the 1-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps-Install a traffic signal with a southbound left-turn phase. Widen and install an island on the 1-10 Freeway eastbound off-ramp to allow "free" right turns. Provide two northbound through lanes on California Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.7 percent. . Coulston Avenue and Alabama Street-Extend the second westbound through lane along Coulston Avenue to the east leg of the intersection and include parking restrictions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 36.9 percent. . 1-10 Freeway Westbound Ramps and Alabama Street-Provide dual northbound left-turn lanes and a southbound right-turn-only lane on Alabama Street. This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 30.5 percent. . 1-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps and Alabama Street-Provide one right- turn- only lane and one left/through/right- optional lane on the eastbound off-ramp. Provide a northbound right-turn-only lane on Alabama Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 27.9 percent. . Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street-Remove islands along Redlands Boulevard and flare along the south curb west of the intersection to provide three through lanes and a right-turn-only lane in the eastbound direction. Widen Alabama Street to provide dual northbound and southbound left-turn lanes and three travel lanes in each direction. This improvement will require additional right-of-way (or sidewalk easements) to be acquired in the northwest and southeast quadrants as well as traffic signal modifications. Some additional "hold out" right-of-way along Alabama Street may also need to be acquired to provide suitable transitions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.1 percent. 6 . Colton Avenue and Tennessee Street-Provide an eastbound right.turflaOnly lane on Colton Avenue. Provide a southbound right-turflaOnly lane on Tennessee Street. Modify the traffic signal to provide protective left.turn phases in the eastbound, southbound, and northbound directions only. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 8.5 percent. . Redlands Boulevard and Tennessee Street-Provide northbound and southbound left.turn lanes and restrict parking along Tennessee Street ~1Ildify. modify the signal to eliminate north-south opposed phasing and east.west left"turn phasing and instead provide two-phase operation. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 14.7 percent. . California Street and Redlands Boulevard-Reconstruct the south leg of California Street by providing a box culvert for the flood control channel. Flare the south leg of the intersection to provide two through lanes and left-turn channelization in both the northbound and southbound directions. Remove island to provide three through lanes in each direction on Redlands Boulevard. Modify signalization as necessary. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.4 percent. . Barton Road and Alabama Street-Modify the traffic signal to provide a southbound right-turn phase concurrent with the eastbound left"turn phase. Either alter the middle southbound lane to allow only through movements or eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 1.4 percent. . Third Street and Palm Avenue- Provide westbound left.turn channelization on Third Street. Provide dual northbound left.turn lanes on Palm Avenue. This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 7.9 percent. . Ford Street and 1-10 Eastbound Freeway Off.Ramp-lnstall a two-phase signal. Coordinate the signal timing with the adjacent 1.10 Freeway westbound ~ off-ramp new traffic signal timing. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.8 percent. . Ford Street and 1-10 Westbound Freeway On.Ramp-lnstall a two-phase signal. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 4.7 percent. . University Street and 1.10 Eastbound Freeway Off-Ramp-Install a two-phase signal. Coordinate this signal with adjacent traffic signals, as necessary and appropriate. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 8.3 percent. . Cypress Avenue and 1.10 Westbound Freeway Off-Ramp-Install a two- phase signal. Proportionate -fair share" contribution: 2.5 percent. . Orange Street and Pearl Street (1.10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps)-Provide eastbound and westbound left.turn.only lanes on Pearl Street. Proportionate -fair share" contribution: 6.3 percent. 7 . Orange Street and Colton Avenue-Install leading eastbound and westbound left. turn phasing. Provide an eastbound right.turn lane on Colton Avenue. Restrict parking and extend the second northbound travel lane on Orange Street along the north leg of the intersection. Proportionate .fair share. contribution: 1.6 percent. . Boulder Avenue/ Orange Street and Fifth Street-Provide a westbound left.turn- only lane on Fifth Street. Modify the median island on the south leg of Orange Street to provide two through lanes plus a northbound left.turn-only lane. Modify the existing signal to provide leading northbound and southbound left.turn phasing. Proportionate .fair share. contribution: 2.2 percent. . Base Line and SR.30 Freeway Northbound Ramps-Provide an eastbound right. turn-only lane. Proportionate "fair share. contribution: 4.6 percent. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 25 11; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 7 (Mitigation Measure No. 18). (8) Page 181 '10 (Transportation/Circulation) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: ~ 1-10 Freeway Improvements - The following percentages apply to local share only. Ifrequired, these fees shall be collected in conjunction with the policies of the San Bernardino Association of Governments and Caltrans. . 11...-215 to Waterman Avenue-Add two eastbound lanes. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 2.01 percent. . Waterman Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue-Add two westbound lanes. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.17 percent. . Tippecanoe Avenue to Mountain View Avenue-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 3.44 percent. . Mountain View ^"lll'l"ll to California Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.83 percent. . SR-30 Freeway to Orange Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 5.62 percent. . Orange Street to ~6th Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 5.92 percent. Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 4.79 percent. . ~ 6th Street to University Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate .fair Sh8re" contribution: 5.37 percent. Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 5.46 percent. . University Street to Cypress Avenue-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate .fair share" contribution: 2.64 percent. 8 . Cypress Avenue to Ford Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.95 percent. . Redlands Boulevard to Wabash Avenue-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.56 percent. . Wabash Avenue to Yucaipa Boulevard-Add one westbound lane ^IIII \lRS .lla~Ul\l"'R-;I laRIl Proportionate "fair share" contribution:. 3.14 percent. Add one eastbound lana. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.24 percent. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 28 '5; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 14 (Mitigation Measure No. 19). 19l Page 182 1 B (Transportation/Circulation) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: .^,t tt:ls tima gf prgj9~t 9~';ldp:;lRg~'. g~' pR2tQ, tR9 prg.jg~t pr;SpSR9Rt tRdill tYbr::Rit ;it\:lgr a prg,j9~t tpo~if.i~ tr4Rtp9rxt~tigR g9maRQ m:aR3g9m9Rt (Tt'r1) prsgrAR=l, if rg~YinHs1 b~' tl:l9 SQYt\i:l C'92~t Air QUAlit~' ~1ARAggmgRt t'ittrist (SC' ^ Q~1D). Sf a Wai)'9r ttatiR!) tR4t AS tY~R plaR it pr9t9Rtl)' rsqyjr;gg pYftYJRt t9 tR& rggYI~tigFU: gf tR2t t;ig9R;~' If r-S'1lzs1ir,gg. tR9 TD~1 prsgr:aR=l tl:tal1 iR~ltdgg. I;yt m:a~' Rst 99 lir::Ritgg tg, tRe f91ls'"'iRg Tg~1 ttr:atgsigt~ . Companies employing 100 or more persons, if required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District ISCAQMD) or other governmental agency at the time of phased occupancy, shall implement a trOlRGpllFtOltillR -;l1lR'lOlRg R'lOlROIgllR'lIlRt Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program TRIl I1rllgrOlR'lG tllr iRgi"iguOlI sits gmpIQ~'grG &~g' 'Id tis 9XFH;JRggd gRd ;Q\lrdiRst99 "~it~ stl::un [ita gAltfJh~",.gr1? The TDM program shall be reviewed and modified over the life of the project to take advantage of new opportunities, such as the expanding regional rail system. Potential measures may include: (1) a central ridesharing office under direction of a Transportation Coordinator to provide one-stop commute service; (2) personalized rideshare matching; (3) employer-operated or employee-owned vanpool service; (4) guaranteed ride home; (5) preferential parking locations "'itR;R OIRV gQGigROItllg gmFlg','99 (2iiirkirxl3 Arg~G ;lRg ~"R"9Rh~r;;tt pigk yp.'grgp 9ff 1~~H.tigR[ for carpools and vanpools; (6) on-site sale of transit passes and distribution of schedule information; (7) safe and secure bicycle storage areas; (8) coordination with Omnitrans to further enhance service to the site; (9) promotional programs, including direct involvement of upper-level employer management to show the commitment to the program; and (10) adjustable work hours to allow employees to participate in ridesharing arrangements or reduce the number of days per week each employee commutes. IR :;tggiti9R. tt;lg ~r"jggt itrglf rtxlJII rgr"g tg ~ig the TC~~ fii1rg~r:am g',' IlHs"j;liRg [t;:,gfii1~irx\g :aR;I rgr"jgg gppgrtYRitigr fgr tAg gX~~RdiR3 R9:arb',' gmpls','m9Rt cit9r, 9 tR9r9g'/ n;rdygiRg tAg R99" fgr gmfS'lg','99lii tg hHI"9 t~9 :3r9:a g~riR8 tR9 ga'/ all r9QtdsiRg tR9ir dSF9RQ(SRg9 g~ RJ"jRg :;tR ~tJtgr:Rg~i1g a"ailJl;lg . Prioritization of TDM Strategies. In order to reduce traffic impacts surrounding the Ilrlljll;t site,_ reduction of vehicle trips in general will be extremely important; however, reduction of regional impacts will require that the longest trips, which contribute most to the regional VMT and congestion, be targeted by the project TDM program. Programs which most effectively reduce longer trips - shall De emphasized ana incluae- van pool -pfograms~ compressed ",'-ork week-s, telecommuting and linkages to regional transit facilities. . Delivery Management System. The site tenants will have deliveries which emanate from throughout the region. A system of tracking vendor deliveries to various facilities within the site shall be considered. This system would allow the tenants to move deliveries outside of peak travel times, utilize local vendors and consolidate deliveries whenever possible. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-' (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 28 , 16; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 15 (Mitigation Measure No. 20). (10) Page 184 '1 (Transportation/Circulation) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows The intersections of the internal driveways and site adjacent roadways shall be signalized in accordance with the following schedule: (1) Phase I (Power Center) signalization is limited to the intersection of Alabama Street and the second project driveway north of LUQonia Avenue gllLltR Ilrl~jllllt Ilri"ll"'a~': and (2) Phase II (Regional Mall) signalization shall include the following additional intersections: Alabama Street and the fifthRlll'lR driveway north of Lugonia Avenue; SR 1-30 Frontage Road - fBuckeyespllRgllr Drive1 at the north driveway; SR JO 1Vr-IlRta!j1l R9ag (SIlIiRgllr (;)ri~'ll) at the south driveway; and San Bernardino Avenue at the main driveway. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 30 '2; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 17 (Mitigation Measure No. 21). (11) Page 207'3 (Air Quality) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: . The CIlI.IRt~'Applicant and/or fa;i1it~'facilities' operator shall initiate consultation with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and shall secure any permits as may be required by that agency, including those required for the installation and operation of ;lo&any IlrllllllgllgreQuired back-up electrical generator and such other mechanical equipment as may be required for the safe and efficient operation of the proposed facilities and such other permits as may be required by that agency to control odors associated with facilities operations. 10 Receipt of any requisite permits from the SCAQMD will effectively mitigate any related air quality impacts associated with ~the water supply facilities and wastewater treatment facilities. - Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 32 , 1; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 17 (Mitigation Measure No. 23). . (12) _ ~age_2_0~ J.2jft..ir .Q!lali!vt qf th~ FS.EI.fl_h~s. b_eel!.revise.~ a~ fo!lo~s: _ _ . Where fg~u~ibI9 aRd.l~H appli;Jbl9, tl:tg prQ'j9st PH/P9RQl::tt GRt>II' {1} Gfil9Sif',' ~gRstry"tigR mat~Hiall; "'itR R2ttJral fiRiduu: tRJt gg r:tst nJ~'lir9 sgatiR8 {g g , I;riskl; {AI '''l::1grsarchltectural coatings are to be applied, the project proponent shall specify the use of high-volume low-pressure or manual application of paints and coatings on structures; ('1) USlI Ilrll. Pre-finished, ~pre-primed IIl'lg GaRggg '''1I11'ol mlllgiR!l aRgo and/or natural products may be utilized for building trim fiiJrQduH~.tt and pr9 primgd "'aUggJrd: ~RQ {~l qHu;if',' tl::lg ~tU 91 RQR pfJllwtiRg pQu.ggr gg:atiR5j gp9rJtiU'Rt :u:t; pgu'9f "gJtQQ r:R9tal prgj9~tt/or accents. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 33 '2; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 20 (Mitigation Measure No. 28). (13) Page 209' 5 (Air Quality) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: . Where feasible. ~~ll.;lH:9niZf traffic lights shall be synchronized, subject to review and approval by County traffic engineer 1111 ~tl'tft~ impactfg 1l~' g~'fll1pHlfRt, Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures). page 33 '5; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 20 (Mitigation Measure No. 31). (14) Page 247 '4 (Fire Protection) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: . Prior to the issuance of building permits. the San Bernardino County Fire Department shall review building plans for compliance with applicable standards for construction. access routes, sprinkler systems, fire hydrants. fire flow and water main requirements. The required fire flow shall be determined by the appropriate calculations using the San Bernardino County -Guide for Determination of Fire Flow,- Water systems shall have a minimum eight (81 inch mains. six (6) inch risers and be designed to maintain a fire flow of 4.000 gallons per minute at 20 psi for a duration of 4 hours. . Prior to the issuance of each building permit. there shall be approved County fire protection services within a four to six minute response time or a fire protection services contract between the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection - County Service Area 38 and the City of Redlands Fire Deparment to provide fire protection services to the project, 11 Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 41 '2; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 27 (Mitigation Measure No. 55). (15) Page 247, footnote 82, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, r;j~ii1' Draft Environmental Impact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, ^'''''rlmbrl' ." - -1 ~Qp. f1 -~ - September 1-995, ~5.6.4-20 - - - - - - -- -- "- - - -- - b_ - -- - (16) Page 256 '5 (Law Enforcement) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: . . During construction, on-site security measures shall include; the provision of low- level security lighting. ~Additional measures may Include the provision of private security personnel 'during hours when construction activities are not being performed.; ~nd/or the securing of all machinery and related equipment; ii1RII I'll tblg ~rg"jti9R ;1 Igu. Ig"gf [~H~Yrit./ Iigl:ltiRg .:. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 42 '3; AppendiX C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 28 (Mitigation Measure No. 57). (17) Page 256, footnote 101, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, /i<i~ii1' Draft Environmental Impact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, "fl"rlr:Rllrl' 1fiQi, P ~ September 1995, p 5.6.5-23 (18) Page 257 '4 (Law Enforcement) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the liaR allrRiilrlliRll County Sheriff's Department :afXld'gr tR9 ('it',' ;1 i=!ggl:uuifc J?slis9 t>9parxt~gRt shall be (iilrg"iggdafforded the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans, so as to: (1) facilitate emergency access; (2) ensure the consideration of design strategies which facilitate public safety and police surveillance; and (3) offer design recommendations to reduce potential demands upon police services. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 43 '3; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 29 (Mitigation Measure No. 60). (19) Page 257 '6 (Law Enforcement) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: ~ Sheriff's Department Facilities. All costs incurred by the project proponent in the development of on-site policing facilities, including facility and equipment expenditures, shall constitute in-kind offsets against any corresponding fees assessed by the County 3RII'Ilr g~' IRIl C:it!,' Ilf RQglaRQ~ ~g :3 ' RllSlllutillR Nil 5111) for policing facilities. 12 Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures). page 44 11; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 29 (Mitigation Measure No. 62). (20) Page 257 17 (Law Enforcement) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: ~ Sheriff's Department Staffing. Based upon a proportional distribution of project-related impacts, as determined by the primaJ": la'" oRfOf~om9Rt ;Or'il111 prlil"i;lllfCounty Sheriff, the project proponent shall equitably participate in a funding or associated fee program to offset those agoR;',' costs associated with the provision of additional law enforcement personnel, equipment! and/or public facility directly attributable to the proposed project, In assessing the project proponent's equitable allocation, la'" ORfgn;IIA'l9Rt asop;ig;the County Sheriff shall consider-alternative sources of public revenues (e.g., increased sales tax proceeds) to which the project will contribute and which may constitute potential offsets against other public exactions. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 44, 12; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 29 (Mitigation Measure No. 63). (21) Page 271 12 (Human Health) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. A Hazard Communication Program, including information about chemical hazards and other hazardous substances and their control, shall be developed to enhance worker safety. Included with this program shall be container labeling, material safety data sheets (as required under the Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act), and training outline. The project proponent shall submit a letter to County Planning acknowledging review and approval of the Hazard Communication Plan by the appropriate agency (e.g., CAL- OSHA). Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 45 14; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 31 (Mitigation Measure No. 68). (22) Page 271 '5 (Human Health) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: 1=R9 Citrwt PI~]4 ritg rt:t:all bg pR~'Gi"all'/ jRtI;g~tgd g',' :a n:~gittgrgg gR"in~Rr=RgRt41 atS9CGQf gr gt!:lgr ql.-dalifigg prgfgQGigRal Frigr tg or g"Rg~~rgRt "'jtl;t tl:lg ;g~~gr;:UH1~9Rt ;1 aR~' :gr-:;)diR~ agti"itigQ Qrxt sits iR9~lg r1Jtpg~tgg t;:unar"dfJwt FFlatgrialt or pgtrglgYR:l prgdlzslstt, iRGlydiR:g YRdgr~rgYRg ttgraS9 tJRkc, 1;9 i,h~Rtifigd GaR Qits, fyt'tPlsr jR"Q~ti~ati\?R 2RQ,'gr r9R=1ggiati9R a;tiuitisr tRJII gg ~s~grR=lgg iR a~;'Ljrg~R.Qg "'itA QrtJblirR9g prgtgQglt Prior to the issuance of construction permits for anyon-site use which may contribute to the release of hazardous materials, the project proponent shall be required to submit a Business Emergency/Contingency Plan or a letter of exemption. Additionally, prior to occupancy, the project proponent shall be required to apply for 13 one or more of the following: a Hazardous Materials Handler Permit. a Hazardous Material Waste Generator Permit. an Aboveground Storage Tank Permit. and/or an Underground Storage Tank Permit. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures). page 46 '2; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 32 (Mitigation Measure No. 71). (23) Page 281 '2 (Aesthetics) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Perimeter landscaping, including palm trees and other screening vegetation. shall be installed around the on-site wastewater treatment facilities to provide screening and to minimize any visual impacts associated with the proposed wastewater ll~gggGGstorage llaGil'lGtank when observed from adjoining roadways. In addition. a masonry wall shall be constructed around any permanent open storage areas. including those utilized for wastewater impounds. Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures), page 47, '4; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program), page 34 (Mitigation Measure No. 75). (24) Page 281 '5 (Aesthetics) of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: . Each Final Development Plan (FOP) landscaping plan shall include the following: (1) each landscaping plan shall provide a study demonstrating that loading zones and any outside storage within the viewshed of adjacent streets and freeways will be substantially screened though the use of plant material (within three years of planting), architectural features, or by other structures; (2) in the interest of public safety, trees shall be planted not less than: (a) twenty-five feet from beginning of curb retums at intersections; (b) fifteen feet from curbs; (c) ten feet from street lights; (d) ten feet from fire hydrants; and (e) ten feet from driveways; (3) any areas to be graded shall be landscaped for wind and water erosion control and to assist in the reduction of fugitive dust; (4) project/site entry monuments as shown on the Final Development Plan; (5) show proposed landscape treatment and visual buffers; (6) landscaping as delineated on the approved Preliminary/Final Development Plans(s) shall be included on the landscape plan, including palm rows and specimen trees (24-inch box or larger); and (7) outside fumiture and other fixtures. All walls shall be decorative and incorporate features such as tree planter wells, columns, or other features. Show locations and materials proposed for use on all retaining walls. Retaining walls shall not exceed ten feet in height. All walls required by this approval shall require building permits. The landscape scheme for areas within roadway right-of-ways shall be approved by the County Public Works Department Corresponding changes made to: Table 2-1 (Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures). page 48 '1; Appendix C (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). page 34 (Mitigation Measure No. 77). 14 (25) Page 299, footnote 138, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E1R Citrus Plaza Regional Mall State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 1995~, p 5.10-12. (26) Page 299, footnote 139, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft EIR Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 1995~, p 5.10-13. (27) Page 301, footnote 141, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E1R Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 1995~, p 5.10-18. (28) Page 320, footnote 144, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft EIR Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 1995~, p. 6-17. (29) Page 320, footnote 145, of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft Environmental Impact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 1995 ~,p.6-15. - (301 Page 341 of the FSEIR has been revised as follows: Energy. The proposed project, in combination with related projects, will consume nonrenewable energy resources. This energy consumPtion will produce a cumulative impact on regional energy resources that will remain significant, even with project-specific mitigation. Because the proposed project will not increase the impacts over those previously analyzed, the analysis of this issue contained in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Proiect (State Clearinghouse No. 940820841 and the Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 87091408) is incorporated herein by reference. 15 EXHIBIT A 16 Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program FSEIR SCH#1999101123 J .. '" = = '" '" .- =:i 5 "" ..: E .- '" ~u ~ . .' " ! "'. :!. ] " ;C 'S; ;... =1:: '" .. ~ll. ~ Q r.1 ... -< Q ll. ;:J I ~ C ~ ll. C ~ ~ o ll. ~ Q ~ C Z ;! o ... .. z o :;1 z o ~ c .. ... ~ . '., .. = Q .S - OIl.. .~ ~ .. t": ... ~. .... . :J :a-5 .a:~ =. :l:: ':;;0 8- g:6:; e -< '" u ;.:. .. = Q .2 ~i3 "''': 13."C :;1~ .. " !:l B' :;1. = .S!' _. .. ~ ::2 l! .. s:: !!l '" - U .., = .. - ~ ~ II == '0 .. lo. ~ -~ ~Ci3 '"- - tl ;j. ~~ .. ~ = .. II ~ '" - '" .. r.1 '" .5 "E " - t >.'~ - '" lllc_ ~ 5 8 ",ut.? :i "... .~ -scg. o ~ CIJ : a.5 .S ~ 'i Q: .~ be " .. . c a.s ,,- .. 50"5 v.J .. u ~ :J U.-=: ui ,...._-VJc C::-;a:lO -.. fool'. =~"O.!o.. <~~ll.0' ... - o " " c; '2 :::'" 's id >. .0-'" " 8 a '" OIl.. ~ ~ E,., ;: u ~ .s 'u ~ '0' ~ --..,-&- a- "5 .0 .... 0 w Vol U ~7i~.sc"O~~~.a ~ .. c 0 C Q.,. -- _ .!f c;~::I='=U!: """.8 ~ ..c-....~~~.=,oo"O e- ~ "000 ,~ ~ ~ 0 >. c ~ B ] .s ~ _ Yo.. co.. u .. d .... ~u _CI:I'':>::JQ';:; E ~ cr.l '0'"'0 ~ U ~ ~ "CS ..c: >. tn.~ 5 ... fa = go." H-'::: ";iH-~c'i"'08'S8c8. .~ c ca ~ 0 e 0 U u cu 0 C .- 05 -;I "'::;oj U =.&J CD ... .r: CIOU') c y.. 0 = u__ Q., to) ~ U .. 2 co - 0 t/.Il-; c; = . lU "C-5_0V,lo.~.c: u= o13.::';::go ~=:;) ..w ~il.SP U~U;;O-OiLl_ =~i3 en tlOUC_CJCOCG .0= UU UC;;::00 uuu'=o~>"O t::.. u'~.~..s'" g C'lII.;.. C': co 'u ff>.u c; .. = CG.~ti ~.c.51 llJ ... "0 !'l e '0 ,~,:!: U) lC > ~ ... Q., C'lII = = u u V,I~ u.. ~ C ::I ! >. t) a :c '0' ~'c ~ ~ ~ '::I "t:I ll.o-"",.oo'''iS.";!''ll '~"B'~ ~ ~:.~:~ 5':] '55 =!:",.s.!C""...::sC"EE -... u C1Q'- Co') U 0 C" Cd c e < tE B .E ~ &.5 'ii fA ~ l+:: o-a .a~~rJe~>.g1!~w= _ Q.,OOCIQ... c..uJ! Co') Cl.o~ t:.:; ~ 8 .:. ~ ~ ~ c; ~ .!i 0-; 'u'f.l co .5.-a...."C o~ ~ 8.~ 8 ~ g "8 3 E"'..=-;;;-'-""" . >......::zu"Q>.. '0 ! c.E! =:~; c 2 ~ =::=' t;~::: e ::='.-:::'0' ~O'-CUI.lOu. tf.lUC;::"::!=,U_Q., .~ "... c oS "'8- '" " 00 - " c . t;i .- .S! =' 'i . .. . c:l..,!2 c.Q " .. . c a.s " - .. ;: 0.;: _0_ Co') .- u f ~ U.-::: en ~.- _l:n c =::5= cIlI 0 = 'U"l;I td.= <~fila::O" - "'01 o " c; '2 :::..c . 's II !:: .0-0 al~e- "'a !'l " oS", c:i. "lil ".Il c"!! ..sE:...t1~;c i>"Co')~~.s!t8~ !l~.~ 5oS:s-g "l;::; 'Q~u~'O"i ~'~.s ~ e.s 5 f3~'- ~'- ~ 8::.. 'u!! 11 u 0 >."ooS".:.a~= .c"C14=i U'" 0 "C i ~~..s &e ,..;'.; u I.lIW...U~'-"'O ;..s~~u....~... c..'-'f.Iu>uoc..8 ~~.,,'E8oS.,;-l:l~ ":1l :; .l!l .9 oS e " .9 !:: iE OIlQ.- .~ .:; oS o c - c.:; C"..c: ~ c..!!:=.!! 0"Cl Q.l u'C u-.:::: ~c.I.l"'''' ..._._ u=I.l~c.. ~ 01 &l '" .,. 's .0 e = o~,-"C<,.Qe>"o~ o.,:o=.i c= Q.l Cl')" ~ Co') 0'- bQ'Qo.9 lS .! .8 ,-:= "'0 :s2 -< '" " ".- l!l.." 8~'&==:;Cl..-U;c.. M oats ~~ -5 ~ 8.8 !O" '" i:. c; ~ 00 [;l ~ 0' '" fW1 ~ :E -< =: Cl o g: Cl ~ j ~ .!:! ll. "5 = -< ~ Cl ~ o ~ ~ Z o ~ Cl ~ I. ..... ~ "= .. c" Q Q: =.!! 5 Q..'. ceo .- c- .!:5.. "u' ~ ! Q 5 ~ z.; ';; j:Io, = 1::-- g,.. ~ =-.5 ~+ r '. . . i . =. 'C .:: .- Ollf! ~c 'C . ~. , .. -l!l - -c' ,.Q - Q,l. "'l:! c. :1;j'iS' g, g;il: e -< . c . . U' I ..= c co, ~~, .8 ir ~ .C :E .. . ;>. "'.. . : ". :; . .. .. ....,:; " .:j; :E, =" " =- i7 .f1. ~. c .S ] ~ E >.';' ~=.S! a 6 5 I' (r,lUC g ] ~ cljE >.';' ~ lO lO- a 6 5 ",uo :i ...... .~ .:;c8, lO " OIl ~ " = .... a'- .2 a 'g &:.!3 ~ :i 's ".... .... -scg. " " OIl ~ " = .... a .- .s = -g .... 12 .... 0..._ co " w .... C .3 .sa " ~ 2 58"~ en .- U CQ ~ u.~ ui tt:.- _ C/) = c==~lO -.- .- =l;l]_Q. <,"-.."'0 " .... .3 " 5 ! n ui f,j.;i'= c c:.: 0 -.- .- _u'C.. <~o ....- lO .. " s'S ~..c .- u . E " >. ..o~"<I := S:.2 '" OIl w .... - lO .. " ~] 's l:! ,.:, ..o~"<I =' a .c '" OIl w ~"<I ~~:~~ .~ ~ g't: W B.s v.J ..... 0:1 a1 lU'- Cii ~bo-S~ ~: s ,,'il..o.- =.... "" N N oo;;l'=u:t: oUns m = = "C" bI)~ fI.I e E: =- ._u c u..... - ~oCjocct)~~ g ;c..5'il.ge,<l::,s .. .~ ~ ~:i ~ 5"~ U 0 -~=~ w" 5.:g rl ]Jl,g.:; ; bl)w._ U:::I w = _ .5:i ] ~ ~~ g:: ~ ... ~ V,I l.C .. >. 0 ., H...=~t=o~-ac .~ ~ ~ bI) a.- :::I 0 u '_~ .::::l.~';;::: :i Cf,I fIJ S ccou _nlu "(3 = .... e e .... u .- - . u g.. .;;;j u e"E.. C'G ~ "<I -"! .:J':; c c..':; .. e.cV,l_oClSs ... .!l=.sa.!llO'= -= " ",'_Cj=_nlgu't "boS 4! .g 5 .~.= e :I ;~:J:~ea's~~ i= < ;.S"u l1 W'-'" .= ~ u - C en'- S Q., - ~=.9!.=t9(j.5 .s S i.i c'al ~ .~ lO e .!: 8: i: .. " r.l .!::"'C2 .s~ .... .... c c _ E:- d; 8 ;:;; .5 re,J! .5 'ii ~..c .sa" ~= ...~ F! .~ 50 ~.. Innll~ul ~ ::: o ,.:. ~ ~ ~ <; N ~~ 15~.8 g .e"5 .8~ s....ui; a~5e~ ~~ _ C'lSuO CJ.;3>oc ~w r;" ClOy .5:!:!!:t:iu ,8c:O ....5.!!lS .......c..w= =ge :;l " ~ ~]B":6 ..- ~'5 l:i] ~. .]~5U~~ - 0..c:'i! 'B.S..=collJ~~-U! .!l" ,,~~..= 5 t:_CI:l.... oS - 0:=.....-. >UClS__~ cu CtI~.5'i.ii-"Ct5C1:l';;j>l::;;";;o ;"'!! lO-==2'-0" ~lo CIJ~ ';i-~t.-t::"'~~6"5.s~ ~~ ...... co!to! -=-SClSOJJ ""l!:! "<Ic.>."..<O;lO":""5'_c..; "'Ouci<.t:J';;.!:!~u=-:w 'C1IJ.c ~ ..~.g -5 r-- ;J .! ; ~ e r:."E ~ ~ ~ 1U~'- U""" .-co.:.4 c.- U u ~. iU"O "'I:l"'O ~ u ..-"'0 8.s,,;i.o~:;= =!! u~ Cl:I ~e... .....il~u.t:o 6~VoIC1Sl::CQ'CU ",,0 w5"':; ........>.ew..".:; ~ ...U:...._._UJIC1S~.c.- .::10 ~ Po'ti t?fu e ~ ~ ] ~ ~.5 j 5 i ~ "<1"<1"5 ......0-..0.-....,=- . ~'C = '; ~ kl 0 :>0. '3 >- gg.s"O .::1 '5 ~ = ... .....c:-==carn!!Of="BW)~~ lOBe 0 lO 2:::.5 to'll"<l e",.5.=.. ~ ~ <; ~ '" ~ ~ ~ 0' en . . . . ~ .. .. .. Q ... o = '" 0 0- :::1$ "15. ~ S" "C 0 -a' ~u ~ ',. Q ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ o ;:z: '" ~ ~ o ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ z o ~ ~ ... i .!! "'. "'. 'Ill .... ~=- o Iii ''''Il-< ~ .' .. .... .. ... ... = o .s- _ -.J,,:~ -~5ki: ...~ .., '''.:1' ,:a tl ~,'il,'" ~ lU ~=--. ~ "S' :8- g:~g <,U . ~ .', -- '. ,J~-'. .....,..,cl" o',,~i .-=~.. C',:Col "'5 'Z" .~.,~.,.. ~.~ ~\~.~; " :1' .. ~, , _n.~ '. I " ,,1"'. . .a" >"~; l:l' 0" .. .. ... ::!f . -j, ~ 'ii = 0' .. .. - " , ,'~ ,_ c::: -, j ,-,~.-, e ... .... = ~'ll.i ~! i.a /l:llC;! " N " ii: ~ .. .. .. u ... '" " .. " .. 0' .. '" ~ ,!l :: Oil " roo .. .. .. .. t;- =cn .. - - .. :; .. ~";' = .. -'" =l Ii ., , U....- , 0''''0:0..... ~~~g ~. aJ ~'-5 ~ ",ClS7iI:I: :I:lijo..w Q",U::O :i .~ .. .. ... oS 0 '" 01100 - " .5 -..... .2 Q::: - ~ = =-..~ ..c - ... . .. ~ " " ~ .g ='" <0 .... '" ~ " .9 il . ",'" ~:: .ElO ..... .!:! 0 ,,- ~oS ~ II :;';~g = oooS 1ii 0'" .. '" ... 0 ... U' ~7iI&lo ~ il llo~ <-SE ,'3~.s CD ell _._ .1l.S 87i1 ~~~~]. ~ = ... H "" " '" S ......cl Cl) "'0 " ~ " 0 " u e ..= ..... !! I: u C'II en U') -=_"'Uw :J~8.a~ ... Gl') 0........ ... 00"''' e: t.5.8B~ Cii 8.~ ~ :> .~ :is .<: S .. " 5 - " ...: eO U) ~.!! .. .. 0'''' ~ ~ o o ,.:. ~ ~ ~ o aio = u.5 ::e __"'0 u , ..., ... ... N ". ".- " ;>0 s"":: = =u>. 0 "c:l"'" :,.~ '" 5 Q..'''' :c;ocu.~ O",UOQ ail! ~ g.- ::e ...... - - ~ ~ E ti::: c ~ lU >. .. 0 .. CQ c ..: 'g; ~ = Q.,'- :: lij 0 ...e: o",uoo o c; . =.... ~ :0 II ll' = c..Q E'" :l ........, = c'- = = lij o.!l ",uO :i .~ ..... ... oS 0 '" 0..00 - Zl .5 -"'0 .2 Q:= - ~ = c.. .2a .0 :i 's .. ..... .. oS 0 '" 0..00 - " 5 -a:c .9:= ::: - ~ = c.. .~ .0 1:: . .. " - 0 ~ .- ...- oS 2 0- - rg - 0 ,9 () - .. '" 0 .. .. 0 ~ ~ ~.!3 ="a <0 3] ~ . c.Bfj .S! ::g.u ~ ~ c " ." ;Q"!~ -...- g'O .. u~~ - .. 0 - ~ .. c ~.!3 - ='" <0 rgti 0'" ._ '0 aa 0< ~~ .. . ~~ '" .; 00 ... .S C ~"O ~ ~'5 li~ .= ... t! ~ .s'! 0 ';oj :::I C Q., U r.n U ~ "0 .; 00 _ _ .S o ~ CO"O ~ 7iI .51'2 a-<; '~'a.~~t!~ .g t:: Q.'Q 52'c;; r.n8.fi<~[-8 .. '0 ~:;a rg:;a .e:- .. :;a ~__c:I'E oS ,&O.c:lQ., -=..c il:I_ "'~ ._ {I.lQ.. 5<Cf.I...,; 1~~~ e ~~ ~~ '-il:IU= _~&~~B .c:I~~C~ ~~~~o ~iS:'c"'''':~ ....rn:s il:Iu ::;::I-il:I~'= = Q.,::::; il:I CQ ..s e o:a S is: e ~ r;n ~ :g ._02w-:3- . 'O!:! >-.e-8 & co_u is is.'- Q., - C rJ e Vol L,," - .- t CIS -5"0 u "'5 "'!! 5l ~.=.- ....s'O B!; ,oil.... 13 00 <'3:Sllt>o= ffiS1lij"s :3::;~E:.,~ .8 ~ ca "0 d co ~ W'Q., co Cf.I ~'C .::::: 0 ..... y. ~8dli~~~~:~'~~Q., ~Jl~'ij ~B'u,,-~.;ea~.s~l!~ "O~~o~ uca ~_=Q.,u~ -0 c~._- ._._uc._._=._oi3CG ~ il:I-"OCQQ., ~~~u~~CI.l~~~CO~~ <lOe"o~ '0 .;;; Q., u t.o u ~ .5 u at - .... .~1~"'J~.'O..UEoS= ",~,,=s -~ow~~Et-CQaucoo -soQ.,2' _~_~oo -&;>5= ~5~ ~ ~ g i i .~ =5 oS ~ e ] ~.~ ~ 1S 5 8 ~ ~ a;ca >t._~~~c..u.!:!go O>Cf.I ca ~ti;~=cS e~~i""~o...,"a.e:9ojs ~"'....., 'O~",...,,,,,, ._o"'o~ r- 0 ~ .... _ co 10 t'""" ...;:0:: '- u E: 5 > i t- ..= ca -:-g tc"O Q.O:C u t. ca..c l-o &n.~8~>~ulO~UCGrn&~Sug ~~J~~'~i~~J~it~~~~t~ 'u ..... ca r::r CI.l c.. - 0. c.. > 'il:I.~.c~IOU .eU",""il:IU::;::l .._u:.::::;u \C ~ _ CI:I.;;; .....Q r"'- _ "0 0 u.Q 000 0.."C - .Q ~ '" ~ c ~ ... .. !:I ~ 0' '" ~'i & !"lj /lie j .. 'Q 11 "g ~." ~i -..' < ca -a. ~_ .2! e_c- - c ,!!l t CJ -~!. ~ ]- ~ i: < Q ~ ~ ~ o == ll. ~ ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ o ~ o :2 ~ !::: < ~ ~ .. :: :c .; ~- " ... .. .. "'llo Xl - =='j ,- . " .. " Q .2 - .. fI ' ill: .'ijj .:~. '. ..- g .:i ('l'\ :a. ",,"ii:" c: fill ,,- .51 ::l'a' g". a "''''e'O "'""'.'c .... -< . . .. , u ~ .. '" ....- '~ .. .- . ooc't; .. .... - ~'::!E~ :2'" .t~< ___ ;c, '!i-- - "- "1.' -:3-. ,Ii. -j: 'h'. ?.J:' ~.' !;f = "Q,l" - :2i II ='. "i' 0>- .. ::h ll. ca., ~ .!D", ~ ~-} ~ .. . ... ,. = - .. = ... ..,-,.~ - .. -. .. .:: " . .. bUj li!ct - - . .. = 0 .5 g,g",~ ~ ~ g 1>: : r:>::.j?;- , .~ tr.I 5";'~ ::: 1; 0 il'.:: Q",UQQ .~ ..... .. -5 0 "'" o 8 0tI - = .5 ...."''0 .S!: := :: .... .. :0 c.. .~ .Q ,; .. ... . .5 o ~ c.o-= ~ 01 .5!'~ 1; e :::: -u "0 ':0.- ~ .. ., " =2._""'.. .0 E-'" 0._ := Q., co Q., CfJ tr.I&~5e-8 .s ] >. '3 .c '+-0 c:r 13 "'8 "'0 0 ~ ....... l:! .. .. .. il ill!! 's.s.c .~iu5 ["8 5 ~ = 19 ~ a ...~!l:go=.c.i --:!!.E.si~ -8~ . .. ...0 .c .!! i1 ~ -r.) "B8. = ~ =!!","!lrg~ilo "t) ~Q i'i CI)"O '0'-5 1.'lS... f-'I ..... = ... 0 ~.~_Cl8tl:1Q.,- ii..~j~:S~ = Q.,..5! tl 'i) - :! ~u.s:>.o.2:c..u l:!-5.-.'::-5'ii;rlo r--....~.5=E~- co...c;.- u,-,= t=BflIJG'l=:U~ 'ii 0.... =<'0" ~.s~-5.g .~= B=ll8~aeg, ~u8:o"'",,,,":O ~~]llll:.il'il .~Sol~g'i::U; O'\=t::_u.=.s.c .... .s ="cOl . U.5.u a a] 8.0 ~E"'l!! ~ u >. CJ .. co C 'c '" =- ::: 1; c.!!! Q",UQ !i 's ..... .. -5 c "'" c 8 .. - =.$ .... '" '0 .9 =::: .... .. :0 c.. .!S .c '" = .51 a o .... .. ~ .. '" ,; .. ... . .$ o ~bO"Csr _ c.$ = e .B .:... CIS "'0 .=.-~l:lt!" .s E :a'~ g,'~ ~&ft5e~ :>, .. = = ....-50-l!! -"'''-1!'O.- :0= il3'OC.,=c:s....,cOJ '=e' :>,l::l0"'2B.8 C'CIs..=u_C'CI..gu c..g Su g.-= ~ ~ ='3 u-=~fl!I~8.!:!ui ~]-a::;~-5!l;~::: ui::>S.:.t';1u"iiCi) .. g 00'- > 0.':: oS! .... ,; ..... .. -0""''''-=''' '~f!Q.tU "'=15-5= 'il8.il''ii~~.g O'2.~ ~ If oil~""- ","'0 E'O ~ 1: n, co "';i ~ ~ 5 ! ~ i '::J U .M 'u ~ 5 5 c.. ~-5 ~ go ,5.-11.-.-.-iB-:o .... C'I:I:=""OQ~U"'Q.tr.lo= u Y C'CI Q U .... U U ... 0 ~.:!"CIl:lI:;~'2-S~ ''0'= c-..c:u~.- ";I~uC'Cl .... 0 '"-5" !3il...."'.- ~ U_:g <._....o._~ti 'ii"!l'a 8s-5!'l a'il:E1l ~ ~ E e c1';.s''=~ u "" '" " ...... '" l'l" _,c .... ; u Q."t:J CI) fl!I ute..... !:! ~ =:a.hj'~!3 g.~ 8 ~ .8-'0 g.; is i-a C'CI ~'C ::lS.iil!dl:l:!1ii~81; =- Oc; . u.$.u a ~"O u u '-' ; c.Q ~ E'" .. ~GJ>.t) .. co '5 'i: '" :0- ::: Iii Q.!!! Q",UQ .~ ..... .. -50"'" o 11 .. - =.$ -"''0 .S! ::s:= - .. :0 ,. .~ ..c ..; " o .'" "'" o .... .. ~ .. '" :>, ,c .. = . .S:c:l -u "0' ~~ .5..: ?;- ] ~ .. u 1:l a. - ~ .~ .... _ ';J = 0 ... 0>.0'" "r;.l::l,c'-"'" ~.... = ff cu ~1811..:-5 u C" .;; C'CI = .a ... .e;...... = 0 i:""l~~:s<:r_! . ii ~ .:3 C'CI - ~ .~~&rli~ll ,,,,U...fl!I"AOO :::.s U C'CI ....... Q. ~ ~:>.=~-d'=~ ~ .....~ on l;j':'- ......~ 0\ 0 :>, s:: =-UQ'I _C u=-s-=csg ~:a.53 :s.~ 8,1! ......'0..01..., .... (4 u C'I:I ::s en ..... r---$=,..",cE ... =. ........,::::1 uu.!u...CIJ= ... ::I c > u ... U "'Eo~"'iioX ~ .. "", '> .,., ... Cf.I C'CI~-~ ~ll"=OIElr:>:: ~1"'~<aO''' eils'-~-5 :::~:g~E~~ ="001 u.5.- 0' 'E il ~.. "'" r:>::5~ v.r== ::: iil 21 Q",U 5 's ..... .. -5 0 "'" o .. .. - " 5 ....Iii:" .S! =::: .... w :0 ~.~ .0 '" .~ 8- .... .. ~ .. '" :>, ,c l!l c '= &vi l!l::: -Q t.S ~ c; '0 .S ~.. '0 B1!-5~ ~ .. 01 ~ ~ f5' OJ ... .. '0::: l!l F Iii "O.g ~s.!! ]~~~ .~ 2 -= ... 1i~c.s to 0 U .- ~uQca =!.!! ~ .. E- s:a.s il N .c.... "" ~ Cf.I ca ... E--rnu!:! .. .. .... :;a -5 ~ B _._ .. <<l .- ~ ..... ~ oM .. ~ ... .... 0 ~ ~ ~t~ '" 0 ~ ,..; l:! 1j .. -.....curn ~ ~ o 'i' ~ ~ ~ ~ <; .... - ~ '" i!. <; ~ '" ~ !::l ~ ",' ., 5 ~ I ~ p: e" ~ e" U ~ ...~ ~ ] :a < ~ e" ~ ~ o ::1 ~ ~ e" ~ ... = .: .: = ~~ ~"'5. c E .- = tsu ... " 1ii i:l '" -.!!l .s j .. :E ,': a .- ~ ll) g~ 0 '" Il... 5 II ,- .~ ~ , ~ is I ...'~~ c.... . il ... - , .. -s: :a....u , .. tl .: -~C'& '" !t'-S .:-= u - < ... ~':::I Q';g'. "g.';5 ..c:!5 ~'~--. -> ;0; .~ '},-'J_~ @ ~ 'O:J ~ 'iCJ=Sw\f") ._ ... 0 ; Q d , ,>- 1! ill 'ii "e II .g '--c-.:- = 5 ~ i; ~ "",'., l! g ~.~ ~ ':; j j5-:1"''''- i:" ." U = "C .!9'-" "C . :::u.-_o.g ~~~~:J-fi _::1, .-.S "' .. = 5 .:=- 1 Q'".!! g.!!'u .9. C"'~=.= ~ 1-t __ ._._ C'lI CIS lootuC)OO-_ OIUCl.l~"O.!= .- cae::: <cu =~oc U~ ~ ~u .:25 ~~s.agu :J ... ...- .. il . ---:, e g ~ .s B is oS ~Q.~tca~~5 :j:' -= 1-0 _ U'CI 0:: __ " ~ ;..c: ...;:.; .' S " !! !l -5:!! e .. '" = '" .- 1:: g;~g"il!.:f ... .. .:= .2 tI'J =-1i 00' .. .. ~Ilo< ~ = t;it " "' 0'= .. .. ~= IU :3'" .- .: - .. =M " .: ~.i t:=- =0 t: t e ~ - .. :;'" .:'" .5 ; "' " c .S:a" ~ Cod -' = CI':I o.o'Q..o . ;: " " "' al'-"'O~= U 'E ...., 0 ~ = C:,.)IG loot";:; ....., e = .....!:!.... ~,,=~,:.2: ~alU......o ~ 's ~ .. -" -50'" o " .. _ u c ...a~ .2 ::s::: d: .; .s ;: o N'- en ;: c.. 5 00._ .~...u ll) o ~=:~ en u = l;I] = tcn"C~o "OJ '" ; ~.= ~;",a:8' .; .. ;: .... .- o CD"Q i:t: "",2 ; e! ::s" '" .= " 5 ;: I:: 8 ... CO .t:> '.. 8.';; ::I c::: u Co) CI':I U .... "'Ct "O..c "0 ... U ~ B "'0 c.E .!::: 6 =8" .!:!u:d 6- "'CO"O ~u...oo " ."' -5.10 .- .. '" -... 2 ill'il ...... ... d ~ - nI .8.~ ~]lli~~~ i!] -..r;: '" 0 :a - 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ U "0 ] ~ .... ~ .!lu==g~o:SS...>...!:!- 5-5.5 e; sOi t; :fe'S 0 e.... .. ;: ;: ;: "0.;;,,,;8..=,,"'" > ~ _ u ~'~ ~ u ~ 0 o a g > ~ It) ~ ~ ~ .c ~1t)"'Oe.= "'C=~~u 5 g g g;g.s"8 = ",g:;>. , ~u~0C1ft1uyO u.s ~e"';l!lStJej;;lU.E; fii ca8; 5s'ut);Au-g.- .~,,_.5e' =-5~-5!l8 \j i;.~~.~~i&~~~l~ e _c..t::<<IeUC:Uuc;ofIJ ~ 5e~uQ..E'fJ~:::>"ii";: aI ~ ",.5 -5 e "'.t:> ~.g 0 > S :: fi"o"'O.... CIS = OQ.. 6..-8 0 i: It) - 5 ~ .9 ri ~ Co_ ..:: u-s1:::oca..-,-_ftlu (I) Ilo< 8.:a.5.5ii!lgg=~ E f'I"\ ~ Go! ... e ~ ti 'C r~ Q".~:J u= _ Co=' o'O.l:J'O u_ =- ~ rml ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:; . .. al 8 .5 u.- '" o~= ~E~t'= ~ u ~~ 0 "!:Q cl;r.l'(;; ~ :::1 .- :C;0"g.2: o",u..o s .~ ...... ... -50'" " " .. ~ u c ~;'6 ,9 = := ~ "' = Q..,~ .l:J .. ~ .; a: " "' 0 5 'g. 00 =B <iii VI . 0 "' ... 5 _li.t:>'o ~c..~a ::: OD.9 e ._5Cju~ e'o " al c .g:S~;6 "'.t:>.5 '" U ~ "OJ '" 15 -f! .5 .. e '" .; a .Il 'C .-::: ,!!~ "Be:! 0 .5 "' " " .2 QJ ,~ .t:> > - .. ~ 'i3 ;; " "' " "'" ii'" .. U '" Id -= ~ e", .2 ;:; ; ; - .. ~ "' - "" .. ~ .. ~ " C> ~ ~ '" 0 ! 0 ~, ;: .; .. '" .. - !: "' '" ~ ... '" = = '" =:: ~:~ ... ... c e .. '" tu ~ Q ~ ~ .. :=. . .~ .... ",1:: ....f ~ .. ::a:: .. .... . c. -.g "'.. IDll.~. . ";: ~ ::E ~ " o ~ " ~ o ~ ~ < " ~ ~ ::E ~ ~ " ~ :l Q.l .'. ~,=l-- :c 'tl ::Q,J, = Q,l-=' ... .'" = "6\0." :5:lte, < "'. U. ... =. CC' ~~ C ,Col- . :: !5 Q,l ....-- ::E~ ... - .... Q ..~ - 'C .. . o d 5.!l ..51 :.o:c a'; la ;> " .. E"'QQ u>."'u ~c~5 Cl :::I lS <<l .. 0:> _ "'u..... GJ .-: " E ;j " " '" ~ 00 .. = 0'- _'0 - '" .g ~ - '- '" 0 " ~ _ = E .51 g8'g ~ .." 1..0 rlU"=: en ~.= - v.:l C c;:caeao -.. ~.. ~ J: 'h: 8' = .51 ... ""'" .;! 0- '" cag. ::: ] .~ " " "'''' gj '" .. is:: ,.. ~ .. - o '0 = CO . II e. ; ~. = .51 - CO ..!f ...~ ~ = It .!l - == ... r: ~I -. ~ t/}- '"- - al ; . .c 0 .sit ~ --5 &l " .c ~ " el o P g -: '" .51 .; ~ s...~ ~ "0 .;;: ~ !!''::: '::I c CJ ..... J:! c · ~ u .;f 5 ~ ~ ~ .'" "'3 " 2 fa'e ~ oCI-v.i>acn",- -=.c0 cao_.c't -5~~.!i.~ BofOc> ::I'" ... 0 .. Q=-'5A.i "" E gen. ] 8 = cn = .c c to 8 is: <e-i5cn eS;SC "';8gtl~ - loot "" .."" .~.~ _.~ "E:C a";;: e~~i5 u >. cn (J o:lc:""E c ::s S cu .. 0:> _ ",u..... ",- ~ 0 "'s ~ :3 ~ .~ 5 ;j -t::", - " '" .!au (J ~'Oo '" ~ ;;:~ '" 0 2 .'" - '" 00 =!! <<I:i .:; .~ = .2.!:! -.c . ea._ v.I = '" " ._ c.... "E 0 2! 0'" " o ~ at) U..:< " ", ~-5'" .:; ; ",:c;j ", ~ 'Otet'a:.t:"Clo..c ";II ClSUefl.l=C~ jaela",==.;.. .:; -"'.c.... SJ,c]5"i"-lug.. "Eri'~a.5g$~~~ Ehge:g ~-;;'C;;~.8.g ._ ::I...... c1.l ... cu tls "'lij "''''l:l''il:sg ""OCJ~_J:-S.~-=o- '".c0l'= 0=_ ~ 13"";1 u a ~ e Et ~ tI.I'= ~ !!':..G,I OJ r3:5 ,,;,>u="C";I-i3-a"'= cl.::"'o'-o'Ca ==CIJ ~':;jlleo'ge'=~Jl u =: 0 e ~ .....e U e" > ... 8 I;;; tr.... ..c ... [~'gCJiU!!ZJg~ ctGllOas ..~OC._~ .~"E.!!! g-= t 5 e Cii'~ - .:. " '" !l oS .. " .!!!llo: t">.,,,o>,>,;;- ...u..!!.=<___ot:cc -'S ~ ~u'" N en ... i If,) ~ > Ceca IlO ;! "'" l;-....;"il.~.5 =;;: t:-c UI+:'-';:l_"i) u.g ~ !l'c a: ;IS"':;'" 5 ~] .if ~ ~.s ~ '0 i u ~ 8 '" ~ ~ ~ ~ <> o g .5 ~ :'U; "E .rJ c..'S: e~~i5 iU >. rI.I CJ "'c~lE ;i 5 0 E "'u~... 8'- ; ~ ;i = ~ .~ ~ U o .'" lij - - '" - " '" .2 U g d:'Oo '" ~ s: ~ '" 0 g'E, 00 - " :;:ii5 '" .:; .~ = oo!! .~ :S en .5 ~.~ "E 8. g 8 t1 ~ u..: '0 e-.~ 5-=~';;.a"O ~.;;.m~ ~ rn~~ cQ _rn cv ~.s ="0 0 cO S ~ cu 8 '5.J:: lj .c ; tf 0 t!! = e 5 u ~.. 'c l5 ~ tiS .~ c. U 00._ tS < E'''''- _ Q." 0 cu ::I '0'.= ~ - CO u::E g = o,.g 0 ~ g ~~ g,,-.ccu.E ~1' !J"g ~-= . o 0 en = 100 - _;:0 _ CO.... In "= :l ~ " "'",< " " 5 '0 .. "O...eo ccac.... UGJ' GJO c+:;ict:t C 0- tI c U c.~"C ......::: asc....uu....Q... ::I:cueou= = O..c 8 U ~ S 0._ 8 c. 8 .~ .D O"-";:l "';;;u lr! e" ".c'E '':::~oo.J:2= I Uoop::u-c P-.c;:l e l!!>!:::.:; ",,,,..-1;l.. C5.Q.,t2Q.o 0 rIu s=u E ~ a.5 u ; ~ e ~ .s :i ~ ~:o :....585--g~tl!iSS5ae; 5 5 =: e ~ ~ u oS 2i E >."'O-;j t.:::.c '" .. '0" ".c O'C " " = !:l _..ct:uc...c= ... >eocu' g .... .= 0 In 0 C C c 2' e .... u ~ ... at: C c. &..!i '.C Q. u C c.cE co.. CbQU!ol:::u=E!uE_S"O 'C.5 " .. .. '" .6 '0 1: =.- '6 = !:l ~ "CI &,..c c."C In u cu &. u u U':::l .::ouuc=el:l.c~""f:Q" r""- ::I ....-=. p:: S 0 ooQU .......e U U u -.D C. en f:-o U) U cu c.~ <<II 0.... "" ~ o ~ '" ~ ~ 8 0' <Il ) Q ~ ~ ~ " ~ "" ~ o ~ ~ < " ~ o ... ~ Z o ~ " ~ .. ., .. Cl .S .S .. 1U-a ~ e .- ., lie,) > . ,!" ""Q '. .~ ~ 8.:; ~"" .=: ..;: = e.S. -. :~.. 5' o ,1::.' 'C ,., .,' "">. ..,..'5 - :..".5 .g ll." ;l:!':s-8, <g;!t.'~. . e,) .. .. ;0.2 ..,- "05 -=.: ,-1$ "C " ....." 'j!"",>. . . .~. ., - " Q .!!l .s - ..a - 1:: .,~ il"'" ...~ u _ S7ii ~ So '" u=~ oS<" . ~ >.'" ~ t;..&J M u ; "B 't :E . ~ .~..:. &: '" ~ Of = ~.;~ Q U'-::I .;: "0 ~8 co Of Of U 1llS.( U ~ llolj-;' ::; .$.0 .c"'''' '" r~ U Of 'oJ ~ =>.e~ .~.DQ.u ,,"!1 ;r E .... !S = "'", t", .. J: c. c. Cf.I .:: u ~ u ,,; 8 l5..; Q ~ - ~-s N ~ CIS._ = :::~~t.IJatrE -'V'c.sCu g .~ .2 "0 .,g :g c....t:LlU> ~Qo~lSe .uc.co .! ~ .s .5 8 = cUOucu o ;:I - or;'- iI,J ~e c = ~'e' ~ "'0 ~ CI2 ... c.. Reo co.c: co ::2'o~=-g - ~ C'(l ceo&:: "C IlJ _ U .- U 1;1') t= VI E ~gp>...C'llc. ~c;~~.s2 _O""OGj oS .5 . .... .... 5: .. .c "" " ='U"= =u c >.~ 0.9 "0 u 'C t: - - .~ <Q8..11~E ouu>o-=Co .e t'o:; So 5 g "'E!~S!=uu "'s ,,_.=.8 " "eiill~.2' CC"Clo_"'t.J,. ;!~].g... r.n~lllScns5 ^u~c"'e -:;f:cuUlllSQ. "I:l-~e~.sa .- 6"C c.. M~ e"ii c.o u -ou>.5:;: ::::'t(r=~ a c . -ucr::t-'lC,)lllSue cu CI:I I .~ ii: ~.S! ,b.."......."'>,..c- 1ZI~..s = u c.;!! 5""-= --'" c :g.. ~ c; a:I u; '" ~ ~ .. > oS 8 ~N=f;j.::"" :( ~~ ~ ~~~r; ;a . e: ~ ::;; c-==..c tlClvtE!v.ll.l .5 S 0 -= .s ~.c oS l! OIl .sa ~ " 0.8 -.fJ CIS c.."C ~=...seE ~ e Tn ~ ~ - QJ ~ u u _;>_t)_ tJ Q !3'0' c ;:s.... ...::s .t:2 Q.bc..o a.5::: " e o ",:.c-= 1."# U g)'. .. ~ = 0 en.f3 I: a:I -5 5 c as =S~E~ =~...~.~u ~ ,UlO"C ~~5~~l ... e =.. ftI 8 c..u~uc... _>_rn-u ~ 0 e O"C Q" .~... Co';;.!! "0 eg....c..,..':::u c>..= \:l ., c ;, v Q,) '0' t; u.. .c.-=~ou~ r--- en _ u.c ca ~ ., " -= "0 0 .9 ~.~ ~ ~ t ~ a:I = ~J.5~ ~ _ Q:l .E = ~ d = f"") - CIS'" =r.fJr,n..o U:! ~ s:;; "g Z Ul ..c s c: 8 en Go! C C':l m = ., - ;, il ~ ~.;;; ;... C. I U <s=e g~;~ :Coacu :; ; j ~ = .. - t"Q = U =:I..c u e" _1:1:-; . 0 :I > 5:rJlZ"I:l< .. .c "" . ~ ~ " <;> ~ ~ ~ ~ <:; r- ;::- '" ~ ~ '" .. ~ ~, o '" Q ~ ~ . . ~ ~ " 0 Ill: Ilo " j ~ ~ ~ < " ~ ~ ~ Z 0 ~ " ~ ... .. .. .. .. ~~ = 'is. .!!e - .. "U ~ .. - = Q -a ~ .. .. .. :E . ,. .... ~ t: 8.= !j=- ~ . .. .. Q .2 - "fl ]1:: ~ '5 .... .. ~ :i ..Q - it = jj.. :ll '6' 8: g;~ g < U' ... .. = .2 'C'Cil .. '" -= c ," 'S 'C . ~~; - .. ~>.ur-: .";; ~ J~ o C.J = .. lEeg5 ,. '"' '"' 'J:) ". -= 0 >...6 c'? .. 'S .. ex: ~ " ~ tt.:l u 0 ~'6'''J:'' ::i ~ il '~ ~ ~ ~ l ~.c ~ g tf.l .= '~.2 ~ 5 .B r ".-0; 1S ~ - .. ell ..... -.... 10..... .'.~ ~,~ ~ g · 8] ~ ~ " e 'C '" .. .. !l .t . '~ Ql iJ c t; II 05 -d .. U en ::I to ~ oS.....o.9u o CCI V) ~ c.. Ii t; ::I ~ j"'S 5 u .. OJ > ~ lf~"" ~ 0 ~ ~ ..... -a a '" ~ e ;; = :J u ..8 t1 ~ = ::I ... '~ II 'B 'C2"'" :; ~ g 8 ~l r~ r: .;; - .; -< !.J.e :. cE.a~ = 10 I .. :a ..b ~ "u ... u - Gi = :I"t:I 6 t -a. !l 't! III 6 ~ 0 ; ~ :l ~ '" .. ~ Q., . !l "il .. >. QJ i> 6 .. l g 't! ~c"Oo e~5e- =~~~.l ~~1O~5 >.CI)~ ~ ~ 'i:u._-g~ .s05ee~ oil "''C.... o 10 0 0- en ..... ... > .. .8~]!.5 t--- ::t ... .....'= ! tI) 0 0 ::I CIil s.c2~S 55' S .. ,- ::2; 5 """.. U r; (J ~ -,.Q... -< -< = g '" .!! ".! OJ a .. .. ~ 5 '5i = u "C . .. ~ .. .. ,:. =uo;~." ...:l.clll:_ . ... ... .. .. .. ... Q., ~ ct: ~.!= .!. ~ ~.~ ~ >. fo::l "'C ti. =0 ~'C'c..8!101ii .. !l .. '€ iJ ;" " t]-8o~..s'.e ""..c: " " ....c: 0 C> 1:: U CIS ~ t: c.. ~ lil ,5 :g.s lil g VJ 10 g C'I:l 0 g.. c:; 'C"o"OSa-sriv co . C'lI - C ~ ;:g~i1i ~~ 8- ~ < u.~ ~ '5l ~ M cloom w 0\ r>> J.t .s u -fi 0 , f""'I > ","05;;: ll= -< E,~~:t~..2 ~ o .. .. ,- ~ .. '.c .5!,,~-g~.s ~.s "f'C""::;.!'"''C'S "co Q.,'"Oc tJi~Ejg8 = .c c - ~ c.. ~ ..u -Iooo>'-=~""_ = = Q.."2 - ::I CIS ~~g.o'~ 2"5 . ~ '" ~.B >.';; ..c .. 0 .. ~ - .. tie ~1S':; co .. 0 f?'::,! ~"'... '" t II 'g i fn . = 8 .. " .5 ~~~ ~ =.. I ....5= o . ~ ,5 ~ il "E "Cl = .. " 0 = 0.0 t'&u; =-=~ = 1: 'ii .. c " "'Z'C . ~ ~ '" "- ~ ~ ~ '" 00 "" '" ~ '" ... '" .. ~ 8 0' '" j &1 !- < Q !S I :E ;ii " o ~ " ~ o '" ~ ~ < ~ o ~. o :E ~ l= < " ~ ... Cl " " Cl 0: .- .. ~-a. ~ E .- Cl tu .. !!I ... .~ .. . :c - 'fjj~ " .. &oil: ill ~ . ,,' ..... ..::: ~.. ~ 'C . .. ..' '. .:l .!!: - "iL c'ii ~ " ".- .. :.= c =- I5:t E < 8 ... " 0-.2 "'c .0 51! ;5 .. .. "::!: .. .., :. I .. - .. Q : u'" 0 "'g~.. c .. .. ..... .."..o..,g....e! =uu3: -_M.. .. .."oS".. E >"~!:l ~eB CIS-5-;;...c 5 f:: 'E"Cf!l.o .s~oS;;,= >'" ..... ..rl.. i5._.~ 6i,,,<0, ~~~.3 i ~ ~5'~~~~~ ~ '5 0 e e l:l B ~ E .S ; J! .= .. ...-" -9~.._ El,S'E e..~ .;; co .. 4::' B f., co g"";j. 2,e-goS.!l ...-8Jl"Ill..s 5llo co'1;;;...<..!l ~..t-' II a ~l!!... ~ . u c: .g lj 1'! oS; "_ v.I lIS ,0 C "ao ".. ....."'-..:e.. -c= E-',c 0.= 6'~Q.o; t; &Goo 0 ~ .9.. >'l;l:S"',,'6 E.g,J!1i" "'R. - c <>"'8.= ~ 3 u o.a -0 ill 5 .2 V'I .. a.......OS....,~..._...l!;. - o~"O=--~c...".:;~ OWoS.M ,-- 5 = U c - U"O M ~ '0 ::l ...<. a .. Ii ." -= ... IS 6 .. .. '. ;e-=.8 E't....2.3.;.!l~,S.;~.~ . .. oS l! .. - !3"'" M"" ~:;;;6>'fPl;:;l!!a!3"c'>:~"'E ....~-go...a~8"'c a ~ ~ .. oS '" ~ ~ ~ s ~ J! e 6 ~.s ~ e 6 ['i i u.5 lIS -.;I tic u , 0 cd.= ~ en I B 1l o >.l::l t,J.. <<";' e c:! ;;~ ~; '=tI;l ..9 >. U' CIS 'i:..guc .. ... ... .il -d 1!c=.... a .. .l!! 8..13 ,,- .. Ie !: u ~ "ii'~ II) ,c J:l > _ ~ CIJ'~ . ~ I !ll C ~ .. ~t:u_.c = lIS >r._ 0 =.DuUt...:... '" ftI..loC > r ;. - u C\S .. < < ::l ~ 6 g ge-g'~ =6!'ig-p ;ll~ll~ " .. a t~~.g..u = " .e .;; '.. ~ 1 ~ [~ . .... ~ .... ~ ~ .... Q " g u ...2 .-::: ...;.~ "\:I..Q c.. > ;~~Q e >. " "-~r.= CQ c ... ...... ~ 5 0 e! "'U~!- 8'" Iii ~ ~co>. o ~ U .~.- Iii -1::", .... .. " aU" ~'CO co :;j c: jg .. a .5 'a '-0 :::s <rn '" .;; .~ " .. .9_ co:9 U'J " "",!! .. " ... a " .... '" .. o .. .. 8~< --;; .s~~ brn" 2 ~ - a .~ -=~uSS"B ec ="C~-~oll ('.)u ~:a 0 g.8~ e.~~~ -5;;Suo,ct:-o,...u ... """ I:':: c_ ocS..o..Q.8tioH:e ~g':;::;'~~~'1;!l!~ lil"'...~oec.'!l.. Q., O!3 u 0 en,&:l 6 a. ~ ~ =u ~ e 8 5 ~ gU~Ulii4)P5g.t1 "0 os. ~ ~ -5 ~ c::: ".c "0 -= C"""._ 1.0 "OUuo caQ.~u'; .u;::IuJ 6""':P.~2~Soc .=o:S~-a"bDu ~ 5: ~ ~ u ~ .5..0 CIS CJ ..0 1: e-~~j~"E ~ U:;!. c.cU';IO_t'll.c,.c.. .- c.. C; I.too+ = .~ .c t-" rn 0 c;..c,co~--=u;~ cUQ.,,S :J~.wc~ 1.::500.5':"'54.1'" B .5 8: 8-= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S e CIS .= ~ ~ u > > U 'C 2 ~ u 0 e bee i ; ~ .~ ] ~ .~ ~ .~ .~ ~ ;::' [ c; ~ '" ~ g ~, " '" I ... c Cl Cl c C'. =:: 11" 5 a.'. I:: S .- =. "U ~ Q ~ ~ I ~ [.:I o ~ [.:I ~ ~ =: a: = ~ < [.:I ~ o ~ o :;J ~ i= < [.:I i= ~ " :is '. ~ itlt: c .. ""llo itl =: . ... g c.. ell- .~~ .....!i:l ... ;>. .: . , '!!'-S .0 - Q,l" 5 l:l Cl :='6' 8.' 8:l!:: S{ < 8 :0 Cl" 'S. .2::; "CI --. c 5 ""5 !~ '., : ~ Q .!!l .!!! ] . olj .\:-,:; .51 ..... ~ - ~ u "" 'c' lr! ~ iJ :- .~ .c ~ ., ::I ~ ... ... " p., . '.5 :a "" = @" :: !:: c "" .. ~ = (J "'C :aet:8.[;' Q,l.! -'Ci :;J ~ e '" " -c:l .!:l u 8:: S ....2 . ~ IE :: -; ~iE$.G~B- "....._ lU U :s Q .~'8.e~~~ ." Co '" .~ ~ ii .~!! e:1:! -.~ -J:l e "':I c._Be.. u ~.! ~ ~:d !i fu<8 ", ... " ~ .. ... '" Ii . _ " e 's" :s! .a > ~ ~ e .!:l ~ Q.!13 I '" . _ Ii ~ "... c f CJ 0 - co Of r.~8. c .. e e 'C c.. ..: o!i Ii Ii "'..8 [; O! ;'€-~ 8. "0 '" :s = I 0\ c u -_ ~ .d fa .. -< ;'c 5 o u":: .!! oa > :s l:a]:s ~ ; ~ 5 _ g,. u CJ . '" ~ . g~~ ~ "C .!:l ~ !i ~ ~ 0 .. =~! ... " c 6 ~ .g -"'-':; II ; &. ~"C, - g ... ... ;-B~5 '" fIJ .::I ~ =--~ClJU "u-I:I. C '" :a .... " .... u . - e ~ = ! c.. 6 c Cii I rJ,g " ~ '" :l : Co..!ll 'E .E>.c o~~8 . OJ 1 g " II ~ > Ui <.. ell ~ O"U 'S -..: ~] a cE ~ rn :: U E.!::I 7i bDu~ (,,) E CQ : ] ~ ~ ~ :.8.S'E~ e" - 0 u " ~ .. Co e ;.... Q 0 " -<~.-d:p., o .!:1 : ....: IX! =~'- UM :;, c~- ... CIS .: CI) = ~!!.g.!.g t.soe= ='j; Eo'" c c l!! ~ ~ &38eae . " .!:l ~.s 'Po -;,-~ - 0 ~ 2 tr.Q cd j.!!~5 .. " '-1: :l 1! -;; 0 = 0"0 Q" CIol = .- 0 ;. " > ll:: -<..s e . .. = r::a. Uli . .-u"OfPc =OC=-lU ~s:~-se ::I ~ - :s v ....:; . c.S 0 c.. - ~ 0 "CI ~ 0"0"": ; .- ~ ; c _ cn"c..!:l.,g tSU8:l <ii]l~~'E -a ~ .s oS g .. J! S 5 Co) ~ rr-~ :J"~ ~~aj-5i . ~ g ,.:. ~ ~ !:: C> o - '" [ ... ... " ~ . ... '" (; ... '" ~ 0' '" .... ~ 0 .!:l <;> .. .... ~ " = '" ~ = " i:l .... " .- 0 ;:'"G 5'a I: = '" - " ~u S _. ;S .. .. :D ... .- ,., :g- g.lil ~Iloo ll: . =. ... '" I "::: "5 .~ a::: .. .... t "';> .. s :a-5 ." jj = ~Q'g. Q,il:; e Q.. ..C 1 Q !:l < ~ :!! ~ ~ o ll: ""' ~ ~ o ""' \;j ~ < ~ ~ o '" Z o :!! z o e ~ ~ . .. , ..,;; - .. .. 1: .C .s . E 't:l ~ "... ~ ~ ~ elI..fl 0 :;. ~ ~ g- ,. tl ~ c:: 1:i ..~ ~ CIS ti CU . ,:=.ge~ .. ~ ,,?'> u Co ~_ ~ 0 > "'" :!! en c:: < cO .. I ,,"" IS -= ~'a c :=:~~~.g ~~c.c== .~=,:Q-;;E . = G.l 0 r:: - I: >. 0 U U U to) ... .:;: ; .. < Co! -"u ell ~ ~; 'S c;;.c :.- ~~ ~.; ~~~7! . .. .. u 6 u U :!l5_;;';;] 1; '.. '" 't:l .. ~ ' ... u j:t ; 0 u ""'1;..,,0; :a =:8 OD'~r::-i 'tuE-':Iu..s~ ~iOC5';;'t:l~ ;;:;....g<l::s!l. "CI~uuo.B tl !l:!!." "~ a il.8l!e'~".g =-cQ,,<=," =~J!u _0. ~~u-s.5!al8"c t""" = = ... U -=OEClDO"CQ..U ..!.;!5"~ 8. ell "C c::: 'ii ~ 'S: u ~;~gf'oe~~ ~"Cu'2ul."J,..~N < g ~ :S ~ g = .~ ...,g-..~,;;''''l!: ''''w =Hs:': ; :l :~ ,~ lil C ~ 'S ~"'t:l is-,,.!l " ..l ! -g ~ ,;; ,S 5 8 . .. O==ClS-8 ! ca Q ~ ";: .. .5 5 t e. = en ',= 0 a."u -!~.~gfsj .s=u'agrn I ~ 5 oS .'" .!:l _ ca a._ CJ ~." tl J:s -B a: ~ .. 0 e ~ II .!l ;;:; ! .;!'".$ ~ :u=:B'u'.r=l ... :s! u ... -s "8 ..: u>_=........r:: ~oo'-o-u 't:l It - ~ .;; .t i: I: c.rn::l U .......,g:.EouiC. G.l ~._ ~ rn C t"'" i.eP~ui"C',g""': lU In a >. fa .- - '::e'S;,€~~ ct ca !"'g 0 .t:I '.c = J:I .0 0 = ~ .5 o " .. - -~ .0 ..., 01 In U ~ elI.:l " .. ~ "" .." = ~i..~.8t1)a8 . " = = ~ ii oS 8 :: e .~ 0 ~ :€ ",,,~ c --~ _r.r.I.... OuOOO...... c.. cu 1.; "'O....r=!.5 r.r.I" ..- = .. !:i " .- "" .. _I J!;.....;;::t'(; coJ!,.5! "ijo !I) i.uco ->""o.=~ cao '" co = ::I co - Q '" f.o!oc:ro~ti.J! riiouj~].ig.o. "!~eS..~=e :fu I .a ::t.."€e ~ ~ .:gC::,.!.~Qcuc.S-= _>u,:: =.t::I 00 oe'Soo r.r.Iugf'C -g""' 5'~..c8';;'~] · a ..: .~ g !. ~ -a. 5 !.,g:g..e [;... -g SoD 5.Eco~e-5~~~ -< r.r.I .S u "'0 "'0 C c:: 8 .. e ~ ;; a '0 .g .!a =c.. .-tlOQu.8~UUC'll = .e.... "'0 .. u ~ " :.;0 'll 'S: ... " ~ 'S: 13 ~ :a .5 e ~ !1i .!l e 1; ..l Q,'t:l"",,, ...5 Q" .... '" ~ <; 1<; .. iJl ~ 0' ., . J ... 10 = = 10 10 .- -=13 5=- c e .- 10 tu > ., :is .- ... !it:: 10 .. ~~ =: Q ~ I :>J i;:l " o =: I>< " ~ ~ ~ < " ~ o ... Z o :>J z o ~ " ~ - '- ~." 10 ._ "5 Js . fa.. >- - -., :l .-:c .... e 5il .. := 'is' 8. "'}o e.- "'I>< '" J~ - 1- I ~ .. Q .!!Ie- .5 :! -.. .~ :.::: Y. Ii/) . .!O .l'! --;":=: - ..- .. -4":- g ::>J,: 'f .. 10... = '" = ._ 0 u -= =:: ~ .. .., ~- ~ ~ e:: .. ., = _ 10 _ '::l 13 ::I .<l __~ -E ~ = - .. '" .:- u to) ... C tl.Q u E 61l.!l1ii.a'o il ~g-E-;'.::g l:l ~.<l =i3.!l:~ ,!t ~~~9]._"", .....0.;; E~ g..go (II = .a u u .. ~.~."Oasuc t -s .. .E a " !l.S! ~ '~ ~ .~ 11 '3 ~ ] =-_n1sc-, '.6 ~ii1~~~.s=8 ~ .;; a: 'S: ";I . '- "'u"ggelO= ;l:3-S"':.!l'€~ ;~~~~E=g~ - " ii: 8.!! -d ~ '; :tl - J:l"''' ~... .. S.; en"'::I = .... 23 Ii/) co ::l 0 c.!.. .B ~=_ -= .[ '8 ~ ~ ~ g .. ! e .g 10 10 .""f ~"'.a~~=~= _e.::u...:Je~ a~.!l'Qliij5ll\; . ... g = :;11,s' fl ~5c.~j C'lIoCO'i"i-= fol -s .". .." .....5;~6~ .cn";;-=..c it co.- "ii ':::i r.f.I ~ ~ ; s"O.!::I ...- = .:l r:.. ~ i '" g = =-;li/)a:2!~ :l: .. ,$ ..:. 1: .. .2P"O~oo .!"'coct:.J -s."Oooc il..~El~e~ . J:i .- ] -8 ~ ~ .... co ~ 'ti.... - ti - co > U t"- .. S .; ., e "0 CiS 23 Ii/) ~~ J::t .. .. -=.J!! .. . en g 'E!"'~e,~'g .g",~",.a="'E -e.o...-~ - <::: - = ~C2.!l:J:.~a g . " oS ." .. B 8 .5 ~ ~ - "C "II,) IJ.l ~ c ;s I ::I ...::: _ 0 C en ~ U.g.!::l "" ~ u ~ ~ 0 ~; .C;C,B e ., .!l l! .. = .$ 10 .<l..!! "'f ~ihoS=... <lI1t ::l ~ e 5 ] g f)O~ ~ . 't:l_ . g.. l:ol"Ot;jgO\ ::I = .. = ' C ::I 4,) ".cl \0 G.l 0 U U C""'l ...<l -" 'E .. <-., = fl ~ 10 ..~.se'::l 's-ogoo] .!!I " "';'E = 0 u ~ ~~<[8 " "" ::I C3 . "" "ij .. Iii E- E tl en ~ ] fa F! 'in I!II - t; U ~ ~ ~] 'f! ~~E~~ ~] ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,g =u il~] g.~ :; .. e ..: .g ,Q"';S:-=! ,;=~:.tQ. ;1"0..=1:8 ~ .g .~ 6 Q., ~'~"'d ~ a ~ ~ 9 = .g .. I 0 0. < II - ~ Cl '" .. .- ~ ... :;:; 'VI ... =- 8,; ~ ~. 1:1: Q r.l .. < ~ . .. Cl 0: .2 '~"5 c' . 'C II' > ~ ~ " o ~ " ~ o ~ ~ < " ~ g Z ~ ~ 1= < " 1= ~ ~'a ,.C; .....~ ~ il Cl ~?= g: '!t ~ <.,0 ,(.I . .. .....: =:. 0:.5: "C 'is .. '" ... ... C - .c,. ~ " >,' .... I . . ..... . . . i. ~ cl ,. Cl c;. .. ,- ~ . ... ... .. ..!fl. Cl. ~ .,., 0 M i:l " '.c '. oS 'E . 6 ... I:!: c " '" e g't3 8 .:"C9S ~ li~-a-, .oq; U ; " ~ "C Ia U E co = _ u ~..c :; .2:' -S -; .~ ~~6.fo~ =2~~:;~ , - s = -g.fo~".g'iJ ='Co.l:J~u " '.c":: 8.. ~ ~g8"5e8. ClI .!.CQ.O\ ':.:9 :fo ~ ti ~ . > C "'0 ~ .. ~ ~ ~ .~ '" .~ ~ I 5'" ~] r.. i.s ci. " 'E ~...=e~c ~fij~e<8 . u ~o ~_ f.!. B ~ ..!!::e~-r.I Q ~ = 0 -a ~ .d, ~ ~:t ..!. .0 11!-""'a:: '~'€~:"c".8~ _CGCIEl c~ObO 00. ,,"C "e ..!! '" 9 "._, - e e l;'-=.a ClJ"'O'.c- Co) ~d"C Iii ~ il....g s il'iooSE" t~ !!2 ~.c< ":a'c 5 ,,'" ".8_" to ...2!l '" -=:.. J:l "'-," 0 c --5" ~.c'-- "'-" IS ~. s 5 -= CJ 5 g = c;;'r;; ~ .D go) u "C "'0 C .,. '.c .~ - >. :; OJ ~1!oS c!>.. "5:;:j.,.il:!J!! E_'" ~ CCl c... co;;> "'CI. "0 (J e: 0 I:: OJ . "C::ao~ .;rnCU:cn:-e"U:c\O c"1;;".6_"Cg....."."..~.. .~ uJ!! _ eJ!"; o:3"i.t:.w g "C oo:J::,z: H =_ go- C uCf.l'a'.c ; a .g ~.s ~ ~ - ~ ~ e e lU .E tOO; Q 0"'0 1:: ~Ei 5 ~~ .~'.E "3~oS.s1g..~e'" ..g"6 ~ j g 8.& t; ~ 5 ~ ~ g:( 6...u .. .. .. !o ... .a oS ell...- .. " .~ .....,0:;...."Cl ':;-c-a i ~';;-8 B-8; ~~ 2: ~..S!"B..c _ 0 bO.... OJ .... en 0 ~ CI)!oS ell .!:::I V,l il 56 eoS e g s.-8"C"g ~ go.; 1:1: =:;; Cl..$ Cl...!l.$'VI Iii e ~ :il r . ~ g ,.:. ~ ~ ~ '" M - " t; ~ ~ g e .;;: c CJ.. o~=.e . d::<cc;-o-a: I " ~ g, s " - g -'- 0 ;a to ~~.f! 0 b'l>--=e ~'.c ll:l d 9 CIS '" ~ :i 0 e .t:I ~.1:1 (ftu.au'+:l~ rl j ... oS .$ -g a >'-Eb~~ = ~ = 'C ;a :i .& ... "." "'.c,€ -gi;s~Cl.o ClI a 0 . e c QI..!.:si~] ='io=::la::" Ii.c 0"''' . jlIo. W -"'8 < "0 CIS 8 u = =31)~'~o ~~~!l~~ Q en 0 U 0 :::I CJ 5~~ Ci.i ~ ~ ~ '" .. ~ ~ 0' '" . I ... " = = " " .- =li 5'3. ..: e .- " ~u " - .. Q .. .' s - '8 - --- -~ '" -.... lrl- " .. ...~ ~ Q i:l < ~ I :E < ~ " o 8: " ~ o ~ ~ < " i :E z o ~ " ~ -....g " .- .u'=:i ~= ~ . "i: ... ;>~ ," ~ . i: .Cl - G.l:- co i:l =. ;Jii'S'8. g;il:; e < ". u ... = Cl .2 ",,- " fl "''': .! 05 . ;> . u. :' ~ " " ~ ,IS, :\V'l 00 " ij . .., ~'. " . a":.c :I '.5 ~ 8 =' ..i" ;; ",_ .'llL~-5J .!f:. ~ ~.~ - " ;; = " .....€ , " .", . " ~ rf.I ci:" e.o u M oa .S :'5! r:: ~~~,tt~ cu,a....."B",ofIJ l: ct: H rn ~.!:1 ~J!~ 8.~~ ~ -c 8 8'.S s tl~g:-=-g~ = .... u = cf 0 il~eiil"'€ !-o" ~ A'S " o ... 1: r.n c:;l., . -g.;~,,!~c "=0= 8 !CIIC;!!e~l1 .. "" .. ~ S " ", t S:ii' ~''.;i ": '5..8ii-~...=t =.:::l 0. to) 1;; 8. .. =~_.euoa ~c'BC;!~'::I =~ w 6'.;.....5 s .;: e 'C;; u 9....5 lo"Cu"C~c ~~a-=a",8 . " = ..,. ;3o-S .,8 N >.~!';;u~rn~ 1 ,&J.c~..8~:a ~'.c ... R ~ .;;: " c -= ." ..5 ~ E g e. " ~ ., B .. en = ", a I>:i " .~ " .!!~O.s..cflil""l"iiO =. 0 ~ =.~ c u c "CCt:ioUJOO= III " " ,,;....- ".- !! ~:El,g'~~1l~~] = ~Cl# u rn = .S .c.- en << U...d ... .c "0 QO "0 .!::l _c...__Su"O=OC\l ~~~'~~g~~~ "0 - t:: oS I .Jj u] ~ =.s~~<5-ge>8 ~ 5"3 ao- o':;.g"€ tUfnUU"CW!lu=o GoIU><-;-O"QOQ. b oS .8':; rn I; 'S: lXl e r.IJ_ =U_Orl.l~ CflUCllij....~l . ]~i~i,j.9:;;iE :5 8';;: !!~"'€-g~ ~ 8 <<vel! oScut U 1>:i",1>. ".f!l""", . M ~ ~ =e u "8.:€ c ..:g oS ~ 0 v.I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .; "'O..!. co 0 i:r: ~ ~I ~i.~ ~~ "'0 e ""; u 5 1is-9.9~'€ _o'5uuo -~-"-,,, tI.:I ";I "C Cd ~ 0 .. = s:;;.!j ~ c 5l 0 " ,$ c .! to o:B 6 Ii .0 = C'I~gJ.c""i3u "" .- " -= " " !! ... .. " = :l el il "CI E o:S 0 C U Q" = c;:l. tn U ~ ~ " "oS .!! E." "C - .- "C u u - .-;~:o~.sc ~6'.ceE'o.g "';;g,,.....= "" =-= gf.!!~ ~~J::l-~jgig _ u=,=uu . u ~ en ~~ e " '" " ! .~ ~ .~ ..- < ~ c... ;; " ~~ " , ,,= - " Il- ..'" - S en " "E.s .- '" ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <; :! ~ '" ~ ..., <; ~ '" .. ~ ~ 0' .. 1 I .... ~ I 0 I 0 .. ~ "- ~ " 0: ~ l:l .... 0: " C " .~ =ll 5"S. c e ~ .- " llu ~ ] .- ---.- --- - -.- -4.--:: - ------- ----..- ---- -------- .&l .-' .~ ~. g,'" ~ ;,.... =: Q 5 ~ I ::; ~ " o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < " ~ o ~ o ::; z o 1= < " ~ - . . -~ -15 ".- j..~ . 't: u ~ '..:/ ~.= .&l-u '" ilo: :l:!....~ g, Clo e Clo " ~ !i 'e .,0...51 .. '. " 51 11 ';:' ~ fJ .!::I 4.> .!:t c! . ; 5o= ~ e e ~ I' .a::3 S u ~!'€ ::; u"" ,,- llJ c.. - ~~."'O e e c:! = 3 up.. u :'.8~;d - .c:: _" Clo ..~. '5.5 .~ ~ . c: us u r-- c;~~g .e 0 .:: - ..; 51 :l ~ec;~ - '> ~ s, " J: < 'U; 8 " i:! ,.!, oS u .. u 0 0-,.,..8- ,.,~ ...~ '" 11II ... it: . ~ 8 II' '" II u = - = .. p.. fa 0 [;0-,0 s,'" "C co ""7 'en .s "s,- O'S ; .;; C l:5 c e :A g ~ 8 = J! :.a' ir: ::u ~ c.. ca u ; =ouC.c ... .. oS Clo w ...:. .. .,s 51 .!:l "" CI:I ._ e ~ = = ir: ~:: 11II S ~ u - !1l .. " - II -= ,~'" :! b I.JH.~ '" ... - .8 " 'aE=-c. ... 11II ~:J 0 ~ =: '10 ~ ct . ---.... .!: .!! o :! " ~'€ ~ 8- II " ~ct.. . " "=7iiU 0: S, tl ;.- !l. .&l w.... -;:~..,; u .. ~-a~ =- ,,' .., ... :l ':'~'B -g - = ell -a: 0 - ~ " II w" .. .s~"e - .. '" 11 'E 51 .!:l Q ~~ c.f! [;0 ~: . .!l ~ ,.," lJl 11II .5 tIl ~ 1: 8 ~ 8 ~:: '" . .. ~ ;1~-5 2.- " ,!:l -= rn .~~ ij~~ = l?- a:I C ::i: ~ J:r 'f .,J "C ~ -= 0 5 = ca 8 c. P. 11II = ell 0 U _s;o>=:;c.. t.5.sB~ tiS l'i'~ g ~e7i g'., = .. ~ c...s ~ err'w; i'E "2c.~"E5 ;:l o.,s .. " . .!l .. " ,.,0 .. 'f: ~ 0 II Clo ~~ '" " " o ., - W ~ 7i s," .- ii ~ ~ ~ Clo -a, "1 => ' N "'" 0 .. ~! g ." ell '.c ,,_ :l .. -.&l U ~ 'S :l .s c ~ I 0 ~ l!l...u ~ e"~ E~1I l:l.!J. .= aO~ . c ,., " .. tl ~ "0 'rl u II fa,g~ ~"OtI.)..o =- 3 ~ c; _ 0 eo 0 ,.!.~:t..c - co =.5 1$ u o".E e ~ :a c ~ os: ; 8 ,,- " ~ ct1 ~ -~ '" ".c:: '" W ~' W "Clo .!:l "5 c:! ti el ct: : Go) cr:: u .B .c'C- tU r/) =]" 8 .. " ~ '.c .. " '" 0: .&l .s 0 ell 1;; en CL. ... ell U E O~~o.. . '" - .. ,5 ] '3 W " 1 " c ~ c " - -= u '" " .. - .. .. .. - '" .. .. 0: .. .. o ;:::' 0- ~ c .... '" ~ ~ ~, o '" . ) " - os Q .. '" " " '" "'= - " = Q.' .!:!e .- Q .a t u ._ ;>', ] --.!l_u '" .;;~ " .. " os ...~ ~ .=: Q ~ < ~ I ~ ~ " ~ " ~ ~ [;J ~ < " ~ ~ o ~ z o != < " != ~ '. ... 6 0= "5 "= E .- E::: tl ;>. " .'!l --5 ~ .~ = !l " 8- .- 'S' - '" . g;... e < '" to) ...= -Q .g. "Cl';j.- Q CoI,. .c c. - ._. ~ i.o' ~ ". ;>, I 4) .s c "t1 ""O~o .;: !3 "'.- -OUOCD] . '. &: E!:Ii! .!! 'E " '" 1: .<l " 'l;f<""il'" ,.-",.u:J C = U :-~.:~.! 5] U =t) "~:.' ~...:'S ~ ~j :~- U en = Ul ~:. = u ..e .!::I GJ "c::: 0 oS ~ 'i! ..... u" '" " . ~-;=1JB ". ] _ u ., .. Q:::I - en c i.8~Ilg,'f DI-I1!c::C -~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ;' ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ oj '" g ... ~.g " d!3oStl_ll~ '" .. 'E"il ~ ... . - oS II .. .. " '<! -:la~~.5- ,- . I - I '" I .... OIl" '" "" 1; DOea..C1 0 " i5 OJ VI fI.I ~ ... -:::1'- ~ - ~->< r.IJ 4.c -:s Q. Us:: .:: = 0 Ul..,g en U = 0 Ul 8 -.;I "0 I;; ii:u.s.s~a.ji "'.3,,~'6""" " ... " " .g !3 .f! .. "il '" ~ "" .8 - <;l ,,(; '.<l B 4' I _ U 1:: tIS ~ ~ .; ! j 8 .s W~ca >...E... "-:a"-a 2" ;; ~~ 'i',g 5'il O!3"[~..!l~8.. 11.8':; '-8""! "", B =: ._ 5 N = 1;; ~'..... U > Om '0 lU U .- U - e .. " ~::,"'Cu"CI .co <.."1:1"........, ... .::E tI.! :; 0 ~ " "-8...g,.8;:: .g :5! .- " 2.<l .. , '" ::I > t: = r: ..e~ ...m."" a:lg..r.lJOC::ftJ_U . U ..l [; .. _ u ...~ '" i3 8- ; 9 \0 .. e . .c.S!~ ;: ..!. 5 S ~.., Z'k ..6 =-'" 'E ~ !3 6 " .8 " "- . ~ ;'~ "'''..c '? a .. =: " .!:l fn"04! "C'> ::: ; e ! lU ~ C .s J, 'f ..1 "''' " e ... = (II e ==:"" . " .g-u .. .S .....- . en "O:EQ.'S: ~~~i5 .. '" " ~""'~t:: _ C ... '- a 5 0 f tIlU~,.. ".... " " ; " a1U Ul u eo .~ '-= " g'f: ~ C3 a B .- " &:"00 ~ is: ~ .. " 2 .= - ... iJo -B <ti:i .:; '~ So!! .: J:j . CIS._ en " .. " .- 1:::'- "E 8. g o en ~ 8~< .... " " .. .. u "'" oS'o C CO ..'_ CO ,5 'll '0 :l ~.:! ~ 5 = g..:; Ei .Ee.:;e u ~._ IU ,c - ~ .. l-'. 0 I "''' c:l lA = .52l+-o -CyO = OJ = = IV ... =: 0 E! co'a"= QiI -5 0 CO >- _ to).u .... " a g.5 = e-'ll< -Suo ~~~ .5 ~ c..15"E! IV Q. to) co ~ : OJ e ~ ~~ &:l '= S ftt = ~ "7 = -;; tU tU ... ~ en rn ~ . ... lU OJ tU ~ ~~ o:S u ~ g ,.:. ~ ~ ~ c; '" - - "'0 aN ] c - 0 ~ .= ".8 " .- ~E '" 0 "'u <, ! ~ "..c '" .. " .~ "J!! <. '" " "''Ol E 5 ~ ''2 '" " :=i5' sc: uo,fli5 "'" ll) ~ ~ ; " ........ - ~ '" ~ g '" 00 g ~ Q' '" . ~ ... .. " " .. .. .. =! " '" ~ 8 - " tu ;> . ... 'ii! Q '.. '.. :i - 'a ... .. _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ __ _ 4 _ _ _ -- - - - - -- -...;---.J!--:.-- - - - ,Q . ~ ,. .... ~- "li! "'=- ~ =: . &l 1- -< ~ . '. ... " =,.9 u-7\i '~~ E= "5 ;> :;; ~ t:I o ~ t:I ~ Cl. ~ ~ -< t:I ~ o 1- ~ Z o !: -< t:I !: 5E c. ~ ",:J' ':E .w '. it- CS ',ii= ~ 's-,8.~- g:&:; ;8 -<" t) CO "'S ..2 ",,- Q 5: .:a:: t:"c-:; :;;> I I ."" "". 1~ ,,-lil 5.t:: ..~ .' <:I " .!:! ~ . 4J' 0 CIS !:l "6 :!l 5.", :l'8.~ - ':- JIG =- 8' ..: '" !,:: '" ii .2-' ,,~ ~ 1i :~g, ,.~ "a ~ .,~=~ il--: - -=. ~ ;Joo ~ N ... '-< g .. .. " " " .....i. "oS.g , : e :3 .s c&.l :;t"= _}' ~ 0 = ~~8 :...... ,0 '0 . ~ " Ii .= ~.:! . ts .. .. ;> " " ~ 'f ..: - 8. I} g " '" ~ ~ g, "g~ -...... .,:;; o. S = g " = .- .. " - <oS.6 ., .. cu QJ 1: " ~ " " " 0 " " u l 0 Ilu ","" t;I ..."".: ...-<., . g o "" . "" " -< :a 1.-5 t: .= .::~ '" . " " os fti '" " cE.S! = .- 1:: QJ - " U " Co '" t)og, .s~~ ~ . co "QJ~ :;: a .. .....-" .5 -g.g " = = =.8:2 =_l:: " ., " :;; ~ 8 . " " . o " :s!t;I w.: < ., 1.= if! .:: " "'1;1 " c :f.S! c ,,1::" 010.0& ~ e 8- ,gQ...N .... .>0 cot,)vi ~ a .. II:;; g ..... c'''' 100,,= =..8:9 "'-'" ,,13= '" ~ 8 . ",,'" ,,~ =' V'l ~ ~ c: ~ ~ 0 .S! IlJ '= 1::: ~.E8.' tJ.c: 0 C c _ ... 4.1 C g Q.. ~ :gu.;g, <'" a", I Ol-~ -..c:"C~ II ., g .. ':::.!:: 0 5 tI.l ~.s '= .&I ~ = = '" B QJ :9 c co ll.) .!:: ... c = c ... 0 0 0 t .= '0 to) .. "'0"'" us c..< e "e . cu Dll~ C ii = . II ... " " l:!'. .. S QJ:! 0_ g.s . >0 v ""vi 8 '== lu.8 .g ~ ... - = o,g!:S ",," l:l "0 .!:: ~ S <, :! 0 tJ , "". i~~~ '=s..:-5 rn .- c:: ~ 1:: QJ .!:: :::o~~ l: g- GJ :I Clot'" g,.u ___~l"'-fti .S . ('f'\ C ;;JGJ.,.;o a.. 'f .s-50 lI'g.",Co Ii = = e ..OoCQ.c llj ~.E u ~ .. us; u '" ~ ... - Co . " " o "" "". <" ~~ " '" = .= ,,~ ", -< " B1;I "" 5....: ~.€ 5 u 0 ~ o go u - '" Co _Cl.:2j II.; . .. a'" fi5_= ...."" 0 - c .- oi! = :; Q,I.&:S .. - '" 0- en -= " " 0 j;;l ~ u . ~ 8 <:;> ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:; ~ - g o "" "" , . u'-.~ ea": c:l' :i - :s Q ~ -< ~ I ::E ~ 8 ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ < " ~ ~ o ::E ~ e:: -< " ~ ,,-,--~,-, .c ' 'ri1'~ = .. 8. If :J .' ~, I 1 " ... = .Q .S .~j e: 05 , ;> -, " I I, " :l, -':S '.. 5: ',"'al = ' :l:l '0'8. !5:t ~ -<.. u . ... = -c..$: ",,- Q-B "0:3'5 " ... ::E~' '" ". , , "". "" " -< :. > I: ! ~ ~~.;~. ~ is .= .c Q,I ~ .' '" ,. -..... -<lieu u ~ ,-,;S .= C\t I, ~ l~ ::E'.52a~8.a = t:uceu o O~-Q..~ i -, e 8 "E cU g. '.. ~ on ~ ;-co ::= ,0\ ~_t.n ~ Q,)N'S'ON .. ;.. co 3 .. .'.. - = III co = . ].52 ~.c.52 : 6] ell] oS .;:: ~ ~ '5 .., ~ ~ ~ !l 8 . i I' , . oj .3 u = co "" "" "'0 C ~ < ...- I'u ~ c::i 'C ~ en C ; -i 5 .9 t '"" I) -.. _'_ c ,.. :=I ~ 0_ ell "'O"E = CJ "0 = ltOi< 8 .- 6": I: l:l .. 8 u .. 'g .. :. ><...u.c c 0 Q. en - "".... "II:t.!:: Ql-- rl! ::I V . II = = '" Q,I co .. B ,. - = ~ <ll.g 0 .; ::I ::I '€ ...: ClI0:50= ~~~ ~~ ~~8~~ . i ~ M o ';' ~ M M ~ o " _.;--~- - '" ,. . co "" ~.5<"Q 0'] eo.5.52 < E 5 ~ .~ U u Uco _;::: tf.ll:C. Q....... "... t) 0 .. ;u.g ::I 'ca .. CI':l tJ >-. U .~ t: g ~ 0'':: ca.c -j,.,c.c. 2luB.c .- 0 (J ct~o~ .. ~ is: ~ '" 0 s'g, GO - .. <~ 00 - .. .. > ~ '; ~ a -~"" .. .. .. Q = =.. :::O~; ] ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ d:: Q.. ~ u ~ ... tl.Q -_ .;; 1= 0= S =~~~~t ~.~u~ bO~.i 8] ..ugiit-o~ :::lut::uu ern;: a~ ~ CIJ u E . "'0 e = o"E ~ .. ~ B ~ "2!'~ ~~~~~~ ~3tu~8~"~ u~.... ".:l!""~",_~,,, 01,"=.-......5 "OIu ~..c ::: '" ~'Oo u'S! .. ... !! II,) t: ca 0 u ... u ... !E ~c'-~~=~u~~_u.__~~~~o ~ ,t::" u~:;;:; Q. M I.l-o ~ "C.. .. ~ 0.': c e"O u 1: 0' ~ ~ m _ " '" <ll .. " lo: ~ gC'lll .cc"O\Jcoul.l-o ...o'""..."CC'llIt.W_M M~ 0U=U=coo~ou 0 ~_u o u .. ~ Cd ~.-.- = u 5 Q.1,j;;i -8 fI) U .w ClI _ o > >. ~ 'C s"C >. 0 o.:.e ; ~ Co '0 f ~ ~ ~ 8".<~~g~..~!.l>~~io->"'= 001-" Cd ;10 -=u;(iC'Cl"O.nCG=-l:Io"'i --tti~"C~0,",,~e~->S0'-et ~!~g~e:u~~cuiu~~~~e~ .... U '"" 0 'C u ~ oS '" t ~ ~ 9 E a.c (';'0 c.. ~ S~~i5~-~~~~~~~~~~~€'O ~;< Q ; e: 'iI S.c .. o:sa ~.!! ~"" u'; ,._", ~\J~.cu..c~o=u,"",",,_\J ~'""~U u"'""...Q,"u"._u",~",';:: "B=."~ '""0' ~Ufl)c~o ~ CdU00~ u-",<u= '(51" 'toO_ ~'BY w'=uu -~ ~o ,""fI)~c,",,~uu'""~ C'CI~> i~~~i~o.~~~s~~ca=~.so~ c.. _Cl:eUc .~C'CIo ~fI)C'CI.~_> =1l~~0"'';;E~:'S~1l:.g'''~8''''S c,""u~c.. ~,",,~..c"Ou~~._~C'CI 0_ U~~~~::;;00~'""8"'''''.~'"t)~1l '~"'uaQuo.w~ _U_OCd__~,"" 12~~~~~~~~'cu~~~s~C~~~ f::' ~ ;; ~ '" ~ lil ~ 0' '" ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ Ill: " ~ ~ " e Ill: o ~ Q Z < " ~ o ... Z o :a z o - ~ " ~ ... '" .. .. '" '" .- ='1S 5 'is. ce - '" ttJ j> S. .!!! l " := '-'.~ :g-t: - ",... "'~ ifj . Ill: ... is .,0.._ -' - J" 5 ,:.= . 'c: ... . ., j>. ..!! .'5 ..Cl -" s- ....ll .., :la 'eo 8. g;!l; eP < 8 ... .. o .S: --=='- "'... -:lEi .. .. :a,: .... - .. Q .. '" S~.srl c.oUQ.l:; e"''''e "'~~ e ... e .. 8 oS" .. .' g iiJ 0 II . ,_-oQ,J", _ 0 S >To coO.!O' .. = il.5i '.,~)!l , g ~ 5 S' .......~;; 'E! e; ~ ~ '~.' ~ ~ . u g.. 8 c t:: = : -=. .c ca u as u..w co~ .. -" .. .. II ;:''''g'5iiJ ~ ~u.c"" .c_~U In .c "CI Q., _ .e.- rn .:::- u:I ... >. .. e .. =~. "Q ucau.... =_coo u 0 Co... ..- .- .8 ca_.S::! ~ ~] ~.. .!! '" 8.5=!': ::E-a .a'5~ ~Q gee .. > " " 2'" !:l '" 5 .....iiJOSo~=...~ o '" '" .- II '" .. .. - c::.c 10 oo.~ e ... e ~.S! -~...-s ~ e >.~ e 'Eo uUc.-u=,o ",.. .= oS .. .~ <l II .5~ &g.goS tj.5!l ~ t.l _ >.~ "C . rJ !i.= ~ s.c 't ; ~ .;} ._ or;; ~= e"'S - "Cl ti.-= il'1!~iiJ,,"i:l1!llliiJ'E =-..atJs=~e.-.ll4:! ......u.cca.c:l... _ = - L'l:l .c - -tJ .c 0.-::: "-':a::ljc.8:a"'iiJ~ :a~3.8 8ciiJ5'i.!:l Q",_Ol.c",rg""'ft1 E-ct:=5U"=;.c:ic '0 a ~ "bb:E :l 1-0 = ~ 0 ..:3"!! iiJ ~~1l e'.. ."'. '" ""... .: 8'" CI) 0 ~ ctI - "'. ~ It) U ';l "," "'.Slo ",. '" ..g~".!:l'" "crg~ =. S.2-u;;!i:latJ 'Cu' tiU~"'IU"'tIO oEtn:3t1OlIIIC.'!lcoOQco..f3: l: t! .~'9. 6 ~ e 8 e:s ~ _ _ t:: _ ~ Q.._ c.._ !'J .- '" ~" . l:l ; cn.ss'E'::rn _ ...- 1-00 ~:;ri-8-8o I:: 0.-..... II,) "d !i~t~>5 ..=.~8e"'> . ~"'- fi" ._ ... ILl .. _ V,I~'O....o .c u..,,,,,.I:)-Oo- FEO';;:3-:: e1l-;l;j.~8. . _ u c::: "" Eu>-!:!!:!:;U ~ - 00'- >- ~=cenu ..u ~;~u-snti "-' E '" oS iiJ g .c _uEcc._::t: c -.--_ u-S~.s-;u~ e.-o.- >.- ...cEi3;S~ii ~ at en ==' - >- CIS 8 u C..!ld'- C fa (tJ'= ;S:"cd U CIS'- >, = u "0 "" II "'.- e "'.. ,t:;>-<~u"""- _'- l,.;.;i - 0 .. ~- en-o I.oU .(tJ>,u.- ~"OS5en:9o =~._.i:.~:3:a ~..t"...=..o ~.c",,>-t-CtJ ... ~ <:> '? ... ~ ~ ... <; o d -:s .~- ..~-- "E:E a';;: E.s:~Q u >. en c.l CQ=~lE ;j 5g e! ",tJpf-o " . to) ~ ... ~ ;u~~ ~c; >,~ <::< '" .. .. to to < " - 1ii ...,€:::::- ~!:l 0~0l0l en {; .... c >,:::S C: "O"E~.g=ca.!a ;j80ll~g:a <<IYC-cn>.--o >.cu-t.c COC'll ftI=--"C~ ~.-~.5__c: "] cu U tJ _.- .~ ... oS .!!,- iiJ ~. g.. e u..5! ~1::-.s~=c C'a oo-"C-oE:~ "'.- .... " tjen".-c-.s cu.!:!aH~ ._.c=.!:ifl) U ..::;'i-:;,,1l'g -" '" .c.- -" .. - ';:;I .c u "'::J CJ '-IIJ en 5 "'a u.5 o '" ..._ " .._ cn>'C'(GCdC- c cu.- N U cu oiiJiiJ.-"i:l>.c '.c"Occau<en Y. cu = ~= to 6 ;:; e.<:I._ "'.-.. "" - en =... !:!=u_~oC'll .5 ~ oS l:l fa ~:!! u.~-s=.g..J~ .=-'-"-- ... l;j iiJtJ< 0';; <; ... '" .. g ~ Q' '" '" 00 ~ - N ~ < ~ I :E ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 :E ~ ~ 1= . S1 ~ ... e 01 .. e 0=. ::: .. Be. c: 8 .- e tu > .. - '" Q -a ~-: .EI ~ ~_....;:.: :s ~ .;;~ 01 "" g,'" rl~ =: .. 01 c .9 - .. s. ~IC . 'C , .. >. .!i.'!l ~1l~ :ll 'is' g,. i3:=l: g < .u . : ...g e ._ "" 1i!! e" ...~ "'S';::; ... "" ,e.~ .. '" ... ',: ~~ ~ . ~ = .. ...: ... = ~ ;; -. '>- > - Co) :t .~ ::~_.~- ~ i ~ .~ . ~. , :E cr: oS -<; t=: ~::s 5 ,... ... ll!i'.. !l oS ~ ... e '. ,l1l1.~~ ~: 00:1_ 4S ("'l ... 0:1 g.. e ~ ~ u .- _.o. ~ 25 ti.tI'J..guu 011 = > > ._~, ~ ~ ~ < ~'~~-E'~ < 'S 8 ~ Uifout:oo ..~3~~~ "il'O~;; .~E-e.~~~ ,58 Q liii:j " - g -{J ~.g ..'- . V'l "E:Ea"; E~~Q IU >. V'l () ~ct:E ~ 5 c ~ "'U~... ..... '" e ... Iii ".s = ~ ~ ~ ~ .. t.:: CJ e ,- ; '" ~t:Q, ... U ::s u .9 U 1:l ~ ~~of .. i;j a: ~ ~ 0 E'g, 00 - .. <65 oS .~ 15 .. ',0 :0 C'lI .. U,I .5 jg.!:l "0 c g a: Cl.. u o rico ucr:< " 00 -".5...: ..."'.. ~ ~ > IlS Q, e ... Q, o.!:! Ii" .... e = "il ... 00 = 00';;; .S!J.!3 -8 :l Q, .. "'0 ~~ u .c.- .c VJ 8 ::;~~ -&5N .. ~ " .!:!'~ ~ .-: "'3 ..c =8'" ... co ~ >. u OlJc-g .5 is :l -e:U.... .. CD .. Q,co"" N'- "0 " :; Iii ~ ~ 8 f ~-8 e- -- c:-cu -- - .-'OJ a "" "" ~ Q,Q E en !::i U~CJ ,CQ c": Iii is:i1i ",UQ ~ .~ u ~ ~ oS 0 Q, o " CD ~ '" 5 ...Iii:" .2:= :: ... .. = Cl.. .~ .c <"l = "0.2 ... c ~ " .. Q, ~"'o :> = ... ~.9 u - a~ ;CO,,)! :;;j ... o Q ~.~:E VJ 's ,!!! c;.- .c 6-< ~ =uCJu en ... tI) c.. ,!!l 11 ]~ .sri fi.i'~ >. >. Cd c=~.a;:5 ~:5 ; ~ iil ... .; -5 8 0 ~'Ii 'OJ ll= ~. ,-~Cf.I::I~c.~_r.S ';' '0= 0'" U rI.I .w .- .... -....... "'-5 _ccoS-a>.R-g-c ~ ....eo ~ 5 ,O,.Q H i ~ is t::: 'e u . o=='..~~cS(II~~uoB ... 1;j... cO ell ~ ... (II ] ,u 0; ui _ ~ cO ~ Q.);. -5 0 8. 't2 ,~_ = ~ cO ,g _ Q, 0' '0 Ii 0 :; '= = !l .0 ~ ~ IftO!:lcCaO't2 u-==~ut =.:.c...."lSff.:l"'e "1;j .: fj _-~-'"'''O.&Ju Q.,~ U:':I :ie.s s ~ll fl1l l5-c;<.S.!l ~:::O...::o>.'=fi>'Q..=:J b~ " gUC;.c.!CD"O=...t):=~ .....os<'O- S"""-"''' " ",=u"SOjwQ,e'O"~"" .!! ~ 0 rn'" 5'1; ".s " ...;; C' :; == = rn ':: 50 'u 0 C LtooI .c ~ e ,; (II 7J =~'Eo e.s~ Vs 0 ~~ O"O.~ ._':0;;1 Q.) ce:s:c.t:u.... ~ Ii oS .~ .8 ~ c.. ,e- 0 UJ '0 (II) -; :0 e :.....~.iQ ~"O 7 g.'e coo B.a]~ = a. c~Q.)..wuuncool: ~ E 1j <Q. 6 u -.:;; .!:1 g "iU Q,,'8 '0 GJ ~ c.. ";:S '.ceXlg.,r:JuOc~Q.fdc.. :I ~ ~ ! fo II e "B 'a lj 8. = ,~ ~ ~ CI = t-'l :s 51'8 u ,!:t ! .... H UJ.~ CaO'" .. ~ 2;c(ll)=o2US::S'.c~ :.( oS :::i 8 ::E 8. ~ [ E ~ ~ -g ['s ; ~ ~ '" '" ,.:. ~ ~ ~ '" 0. _._ :S:Oj a- ""..,,, ; DoQ = '" .. b ~u = s'.5 !ii o.!!! ",UQ El .~ "... " .;;OQ, 08"" ~ ".5 ....."" .S =' == ... .. = Q.,.~ .r:J <"l c .9 0. o ... " ~ " '" o N ~... 000 "'"'" .5 c; o c.o"Q ~;:: OJ.a;....s _" '0.<> .;;; !! t! co ill co ._ 0 00 ..c CaO 'r;; "0 ~5e-~~ c C oJ ~,g -g u o:s"O.s;... '0';;.5'0:;; ".E!.!3 "'" S .cu$tUS'- - !l'S S 0 I:i Ci_ WW ~E:.s~~.s ~cu~'E .. .- 8 ... co cu ~ ,,,= ;SU>i: 1l.!i~88o ~.cuu","",~ _~.8:Jo'i c co .,,:: - u !:! ;; 8 t- .!!! ... ::: _ ~ . a u COl:l.l~t:o-S ~f':~~~ !!al~~""-5 g! !!!' co l:l"il = .. _ 0 -.. U'N U ... ':I UJ ~= "",.g.=,~ co.- 0 0 - c ~=-guo= """~'-=cc .;::. u w U u t-;, :::~.s ,'r;; < 0 _ tU ~-8e.'C).s~ ;::- '" ~ Q .... '" ~ El ~ 0' '" Q i:: -< ~ ~ .. e " " e ~i '"'is. .l:! 8 --0 tu :>: " -;c '01 .... "t: e '" t~ i:l: ;:!: ~ c o i:l: ~ C as t; o '" ~ ~ -< C ~ o ~. o ;:!: z o !=: -< c ~ '.. ~,; = ....-::: . - "5 ,~ Ie ~'5 ;> " :F .:8 - 5 ~ ~ = .~ '5' 8. g;, g -< U .. - co i:l ] - :s g ]...: .- ~ Co 1: is. U ~tI)Q ~ ....:l "- ... CQ c'- =l:l ~ e.~ ",uc :l '8 u"",,, t oSeCo e .. .. - g,B ~..... .S: ;:I:: ~ ~ = c...~ ,&:I ...; " ,9 ~ ~ ~ .. '" .. !!l 0_ ... ."..... '~_~_- U ,'.> .c. ~~..~ Q ~;.c ..- rtJ _,.:_.5L 'S:::;; :l /',':1:! t:, "'0'8 :'}~.\:, '>.':.:-.." ~ ~ 5 ,'.'" ":y. .. l:Q ..... ] ~ i ,1~ li'B _ :.8 ~"- u = ~. III .. J.,~~ ~/, t ::s: " . " III .S! ~ u -: cai, tJ S .!" :s II -: iU ... :i-~ # ~ .a B - ~ ... .. , "oS , .. oS .;" ~.. , J!E"B ..- u iiS ;"0 u u5= ~ ~ .. - e bO:= = e it; 0 e~.c t; u a . u:€ C,,) Q 'C.. == ... :::;; ... .. 2~Ciii rtJ_>< co c '.= C,) .5 U a! U) ...s..... .2~o-S ... ~ e .5 - u,&J -~t;oo ~";j ~ ~ .g ~ g e e~"'d 8.~!!C'lS o u 5 = = oS > C'lS u "'d'" s:€;lle .. ~ ~'Cll.c: .... u rtJ CJ ==c;sii < '2 g ... ~ .. .. ~1ll.8~ e 01 ' .s '" c.. ... .. ... ; c.Q e r.f.l :J ... ...... = ='C ; s.~ ",uc :l '~ ..... .. oSeCo o .. .. - g .S ~"'C .S! =::: ~ ~ = Q., .~ .Q ...; " .9 c.. o ~ .. ~ .. '" -~ c;.9 >,"0 '- ~.-= a o lO: OlQ 01 = ~ .';:1 .~ '2' '0 ,:l~ = .- B := .Q & 1'0 5 cil~~u e ~. c w U 0... ... ~ 3 ~~~~! .-=:" a: 0 oa _ caB"'c= 6~~-Be ... = ....- .!!~!:!...= CI:I';:l,t=Ou ~ ... Co... _~~9o CQU'"i'.:.::_ = )! c t) C ,9 ~,g .a ~ ~_;4Ju ~ 'c U i; U "Cll.c:oS oS g, 7il :;; ,S ...... >.c: .. ,ooS'='"5 "B..caler= ,:: ~] .. ~ e-ecai-8 e..t=! tlD en "0 ...... C _... "0'" as 0 - """ c.... > , .. 8'" .. ~~5.eg ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C> o~ .S '6 "'Cl:: to=.... "l>l - , j;;; ~ c -,,,,,, 0 Q;I c ~.- = ,~ " 'C > .. 0 ,,'- ",u..c C ,9 <l "2 ,,- ,- ~ ~ " 68 .. ~ ~ " a .g ... Co '" EoE CI:l .- U f! nu.-=: en ~.=-V)c "::01,,0 '"'.- 1;1'- ~~'h:~ - N ....0 .0 .S 'C ;g l;l ,9 E ' -".... ~ ~- li';8 tScnU ~ 0 ~ s -..... "'Q ... CJ f!~]~~~~~~~~ u~ .~ uow_.5&e~=Ud~U>"'QCJ"'ClS = ': "'Q CJ ~ I< CO 'Co.:;.;;I iJ -S CJ u .- u ' ~~~5=u...t~c~~~~6~.~g _co~-icO.;; ....;;lUOO~~~= ~.e50CJ~~ul~~>~3"'ClC~~" "'0 ::t = ..'~ S 8 e = := _ e - 5 c 8 t: .. e uooiSo......o2==ueu~~~~ .!:=5 8'- c"i g,u u ..-5.s-E ~ u:a"-i a .Q~~~ou~tg"'Cl...5"'Cl._-Sd~"'QU cS ~ _ ~ = 5 -.l!'! ... foQ ie's ~ 50 t;i 9 e rl ~=.. .,....-....~.,o"'"ll .. """ '0 "j's"! 8: cs.'; tlQ.g E'" J"i ~ ~ 0 is..:! i =gaco~~~~f!~~6~-s~i~~e =.- U'" c.- ~ ~co 0 U W'E CI:l ~ g ct;i~-sCu"'Cleo=CJ~-S-s~a",o-S ~1~=~~~~~~~~~.;~u5...~ uo~O~~it.5~gj~u~.~S~~ -SccC ~CI:lt;i~ u o~_~e~o ~i~~I~~~~~=~;"'Cl~.E8b~ .~g~=~e~B~gi~S~t~!~c 's '" 'C... ~ 0 .. .. ';: - ';: tl ! ~ - ~..!! '8 c: = u t;i - "C =ft1 !!~.8 ('f"j:::-gr;:;.- B="'Q~~~~"'Q-~o .5N~o_= o .....a ''E'"'':''''' C 8 ~ 1l ~ " .. ~ ..-5l ~ ~CJ" -ou -~...o "'Q-W ~.e_=to0o~U~_~~=~utw ~~];~tl~~:;8~~iil~~~i N"'ClW~Od~CI:l~"'Cl--~~~>~~~ r:' '" ~ <; ~ ... .. Gl ~, c '" I ... Q =( 15~: ::::~ 5"'- l:: E. ~ '-. Cl ...... "" ell ~.., ! " -:E .- ,., :g- &; ~~ =: 5 ~ I :E ~ ~ g ~ " ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ o ::;; z o ~ " !: S1 ,- =. ... ,,- .0._ --.,"_. --c. .. 5 :~~ . :> ~ :15." ...0:,- 5 5 i:l =- :='S'& 8:~ E <8 ... = Q .2 "'11 ." u ;.CI a:: , 1:1 'C;:. .... 'L "">_. ~-, " - ell Q :2'0= ~ en c...... 0 c 5 ..s~'':: =~ .g a-....~ 2-~:-S- ~ c:O ..";i::s..._co::.. 00"0 Oocn-~ '-e= .~ g ~ 8 g u ~ ~ .; ~ c ca fIJ U CI:I CJ 2) o'"C E <<I U 1;jiQ.(I) s".::tiucE "'Uc;f;l~'E ~(,.JlUt':S4J , 0 c....!:! !:::l "C ....0 "0. l< 'iG :E c. Q,J en._:..... Cl:I U - 5 i _~ u S'- .... en 0_::1 ~ ca - :w 15 lI"l 'S ~ ~ bD ~ .S: ~ :; W ;ca-flJ-;"C.5::1"5::1~ui 2'~ c...l::l s:= 0 = ~ ell c..CY en .!:! _ O_~...cn......u ~,= "0\0"0 en en Clll::lO.-"'cu ~Q Q)-uoc'" 01.0;.<::1- ,>.:l ~ 'g..g'~.g~"8 ~ "'-"B~ -= c.. il 0 -" cu C':S ca .E CI')" <..l '" .. = - > - .- 0 ,,'.- = ca .... = CJ ._ = ceo... = ;1 _ 't U 05 t).s! ~ Os U c...S2 ~ =~..cc~~C;flJs -5~.'3 go>. 0.'- >. -::I U - .' i:Q.cnu~~~o=(i rn e "C c...1ot ; t< - "0 en ~ c c;Cl:lu UcnClOQ,t; o-co_-'!i--oCU-w:::I '':: Q) ... r-- a .- c; u ... on en "0 CIS> "C - (,}..= u... c.. CJ CI:I Q) ... ca ~ "0 c..::I.- ~ lU t::: c.. > (11).... C en 0"0 :::: ;:.. .~ 5 a.~ = = a.'"C..c S':::E cs..... = -: ;; !IJ :::I'~ ~ g Q'~ ::I fII0=ot!;",,___c..ca c.., " ~ .5 '6 "2= " ::I ""- c Q:l.... . i> >.~ :5 = =~';j ::I .- la 0 -g.:: ",U"Q d .9 tl 005 '2 2 ::I 0 Q u a 6: 2 '" 0 2 .::: _0. 00 -" <r;j >.0 .c .s ... 2 l;l .9 e ....u~ il ell = a-fd5 .5l:f.:lCJ " " .:; 5 . ::I .. 13 C ...5 .- > "0 "0 "0 ]:.6 la e:g nl .2.C !!i 'i: .c v.c!;lQ.'" .t:J ~'co 4J 43 o 0 Cot ... 'C - " ... o.!o! ~ ~ 0 ",!::l " " = il == 0.0- f'"oS..::: I:n = - "'-,, .,3 .::;. _Il ,s .c nl'- - - >-. B !ig:~ e - '" f! = c; ,5 ::I nl ::I rl U ij'llila:;.a '=i:=tie. "5U"';lg..!3 ... = 0 ::1- Q nl&.U I:nf! 8 eo..~=oau v I:n <<I ca :5 Q., rl '" = ... :$tS...~...o u 9-'.....e ... .'~::a.ai'CE oo25oQ'i: M Q._ U Cd _ 000 S .S . ... '2= " ::I ""- "ell"'- . j;; ~ c ~ ~~.~ " .- ~ is -g.:: ",U"Q d .9 tl 002 = - .- '" .. = ::I 0 Q " a . it 2 '" 0 2 .::: _0. 00 _ " <~ ,.,0 .c'S ... 2 l;l .9 E! -u~ !l ell = 0.~::I 'sm8 .. .. o " .:> = e e~ 8_ 001 '= ..c 010. -all! lI!'lj u.! B~ u u s::a u 0 ... > 0< " '" . ::I - ,,01 .:;-a .::;.lI! .- il ill;:; . 0..... .!! "''''.c '35 'i(j ~u~ o~ ~~ l;l ::I eU"d c! ~.~ .~ :::l ; .- la 0 _.:: ",U~Q !i 's .. "... " .:; 0 0. 0"00 - <..l S ..la;", .9.:::l ::: .. '" ::I Q.,.~ "Q a 6: ~ '" 0 5'a 00 -!! <<ii . 0 '" >. S ...Iii.c;", oQ.!; S 00.9 E!:: -s-u.::- 's;", i:l ell = .g=S~fd5 '" .c .S '" u ... , ... la S ~ .g ~ c.Il.... .... >0 s.."iJ .5~o~ "'OC;;-~it; -::Ino ~- u '22-= 0] :!l-gl(l:5! E 8 ?j e .!:.C cO ..:: u 4.1 "0 4.1 1'1) ....!3 ca o.~.c ,,<3" '" = u:;:.... Cd >o'C~~.c oS ., ~.!:!'~ 1; e u ~ >-.-=U- >.... .ccau>-.u..c"Oo .. .c"'U-oUc...O i '" ; :S..2 ;:j Cd Cot.5 l;:; co." <..l .!l.5'" 'u::! i'a.5.!!~; ~ ~8.g ,1:]= lh:::" :oeo 'O-t;= 5l5.at)~c:!~.g~ .-,.., 2,,""'''0.''' .... .... '" - e S <..l cO 4.1 :::l 1'1) "'" u ~ g'O'.c 5 u~.c.~ 0 - ... u U > CQ: .. fI.I U ~,~ _ e ~ = == = ~ U , N c...,!:! 4.1 0 = -",.g:::~=ul;l_o ";;;l .. 0 u;'= >'aoUU =>.......>.~_geU -go~=o:.2;;-S ouuu'uo;= ~ ~'aii.:! e =-8.c ~ ~ o o "- ~ ~ ~ ;:; N N ;::' '" ~ ;:; ... '" .. !;j ~ 0' OJ ~ Q 5 ~ .. ... - ., = .. = ., Q ., .. =! .. '" .. ~ e .. ., .!I "I.> .l!! ~ - ;s . " ." 0 d . . :is . I: 5:! ...s .-;..., . en .. ... 'E.&J a's: ~- e~~iS 8.1;; ~~ &5E'-=E =: ; = lS ~ -0 o~ .. -, ",I.> E- "... c...~r " 0 la " . ":::. =- >. "5 ~ .. ~ " " ~= .- '= la 0'. 05 -1: 0. .2 a = > " ..... " "'00 " $- .. ::a 1.":='" "-5 0: .; ..ll= = """'8. .. 0 := 0 i:'::: "'il: e _ 0. '" 0 00 <( I.> - " <~ .s ....- ~, '[l ., .. c '" _. o " ... ':::c . ., .. ....= co ._ l:n C ~ " 11 .C .- s::.- ~ " "Cog >: 5 c.. u o ~ co . 1.><>:< ., 0 ]' , . c .. e " . 'tiE .. c .. " ..... "1 .. - I. " ~ I .... = . "1. - = ;;10 fiil.> .!l ... . ~ ..c.... ..- .. :.:: : ,-.9' " e t:: . - ... '" " . .. .!a .. '" .. .. - -", , ~ ~ .ila .. :!a ~ : ~ ..c :; .~ . E. ~ :> .. !! :; la ~ s . .;:: ~-Ii '6 .~.5 '" . .... .. !l. - = = "'.... ~ " o =: ~ " ~ o ~ ~ <( " ~ ~ o ~ ~ - E- <( " ~ .. ., = 5~ ~~ .. '" c e - ., ~I.> > ~. .... .. ... ~ 1;. 8.lC ~ '. =: .. = ooS ..- = 5 ~~ >. " " :l - =. .... ~." co a::i '= :!l'E'8. i5:il: e <( ..0 I.> .. = o.s: -gl .c =" 1S 'C'~ ~ "., >.' . , '; 0,- " .!l ;/. " ~- = o "::: cCl:S:; .2!' ~- . " - .. Q ... s - ;S' . . 0-'" == c C.!2 0 .- ~ "0 "0'- ~ :; la la'~ c I.> .. ..c'. .. ... 5 c ~ -' .- ~ -=5"'- ==l;l::~ ~ 0 _ ::I co "'u"'~'" .~ ~~U .,00. o .. .. - g.5 ....'" .S! =:= .. .. = c...~ .&l a zs: ~ .. 0 i: .::: _0. 00 =!! <0:; . 0 ~..." ...la....:a 0_ en 1000 -; Q., C co _ ~.2 e ~ 'g~ilcl!= .g:;~;6 "'.....5'" U .. .!is~ .... ~ = 'ca ti N' ~=- ..'" .. ~ "0 ; "C; ~ J! ... .... ~CtJ~~ ..~ t:~ S 'S: c e '::e~= 0.5 "'= B ~o ;;!::'B1l = - 0.. "0 CO ,,- = e ...;;1 .. 0 co.c CO.... t :.5 g 55="8 II !ill .. .~ 8" DD'Q ....5 t.J . . c.'C'c::i~ '~il'3151:! O'~.c I 0 E- e !! ~:E Q.::s...."O . .. 1l .. = ~.s..5B . " .. 'S Z is .. 5: .. = .. - o '" = .. il .", ~ .~ == '!:l r: " .. :: " - - ~tii .. - 'ill II .. .", E~ o ~ 5 .. . '" "0= ; ::I >. '" Cl - . ... ~ c:: ..... 0 ~.... ~'U; = .. la 6 'g.~ ",u..Q c .2 U "2 .5 u:; .. c = 0 Q" ~ a B .2 " - .. i: '" i: - o.~ u ~nU'=0 .::.- _ Ctn C =::: "iil a 0 -.- .- - U"t;l 0. ;;:lflaO:o ...0 .... .S '" ~ ~ '" .. .S e . - " ... g,Cl -c en i g ..5r1.:lU .. .s . .. 9 $ ~ ",'- il " "''' ."Q !l '" = Joe = .. .. '" ~ :' '0 ..::l " .... ." 'ia 8'~ fii,.:: !l.. .. ",- ..!! la 8 :~ . 'g 'O:::i cd ~.( .. = .. 00 c ._ Q 0 t5 .. .= ::.... .. :. c B rn 4.l .- = " ~ o ~ ... (J tl (J =.c~ <cf.D . " "5 '" 0 "'''''.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:; .. o = '" .- .. '" "0:: l;l :: ... ,,~ - .. ~ U':'ca ~='" la='" ",Bla d .2 ti "i: .5 ~ .. = 8B !! :g B.S ,,-.. " 0. 2 :.0- .. .. feu 13 :E 'ia _:::I _~"O ;;:~la ..... N ...0 .... .5 :g~ .g ~ ~ ll~ '" r;-aS oSrnU ... 1i1l 0. 0. o 0. .. .. 0." II ff :3.8 =- -;;I Ol..c .;i: - .. " .5 e ~ ",,, .- .. &.s "... 5 li .~ c i: .. 'ti5 ui 5~E1 " 0 - .... ;;:.5 -lii ~.s ~ Q.- '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:; ~ is !::I ~ 0' '" j ... " " " " ~:~ !l =-- c 5 .. Q' t:u > ..~ - .. ,'" : '.!I' .!!! -! , ~ -< ~ I ~ -< =: '" o f '" ~ "" ~ ~ -< '" ~ ~ z o ~ z o ~ '" ~ - . :! ,~, :~ ~ ',.e> 8,:0 c ~ ,"- ,~ =:.. ';;: , c'- " ~ ~!; ....C1 ".$I Dtlca ;:~,~ '.:-~1'>-_':_ -- '~ ''''~'' ' ~~':'~':j.;- ~,: !ll::" := =,8, .~ . '~il: =~ '" ~ -< ~ ~ ,,~ ~ " .U'.C ~.~ ,,'~ " c: 0 I' , "-~- g =.:.. ",,- .~,~o ~ <= ,.CIS::! .:_ a:: "~'.i: ~ .. ~> 1 .. ~, .~ ", " .. - :. ..-. ~~ .. ~ ' - ' , " 00 ".5 .- "" -e= '" :0 >, e III - . .!!" ~ ~~.~ " ,- li is 1! .~ ",u",c C .12 tl 002 .5 ~ - " :0 " C c.> u .. - " .2.12 ~8'g gj .- U .. -. ."" u U.. rn _.- - CI'J C c:: 'is C';l 0 = 'u "'C ~ ': :(!flic:8" >," "" .5 "" lrl :a .g t ~ rrll%l = 5t;jS .Emu _ " U - "'"!! Ka .5 '0 U U .os ~.. ... - ..~ " - E~ .9- = " .. ff=.. "ll .9 'C tS ; uj e "'" ~ t;u(;: a"E~ c.> " '" _ 00"" :( ,5 U ... c.> . - .g '" " U .., ~ - " 00 ".5 .- 'C "2= "," ... e lll'" . u >.~ a CQ c ~'u; " .- li "1!.<: ",u",c .; .12 tl 002 .5 en - " " " c c.> ~ lrl " " - .- c.> - .. 2 "'" 2 _0 _ Cl\l .. U CIS ~ u.~ . ~.__cnrg = .-=: -; cu 0 =:O~ ~.= :(!flic:8" >," "" ,5 'C lrl :a .g 5 ~ lllll " i"a5 .5l;'.lU ... "i ~ C) """ ~.S:! "S ~ 'ii a 0 0Q.)"O.c goO g~ .- - 0 Ciica.c~ ~ .c ~._ Q.fnt:== o~u"'C 00- "'" " c .~ e rd :~ i ~~ e: > u '" u,!!oSa Cl\l'r;; e ~ . "0 I 0 ~ ... 2g~~~ ""0 _ u ~"Il..:U ._ Cd Cj;;j U u ~5~~ti -e~u~ 00 "'"... .s's " ~c ~ C'" e > ~ t. ~.~ a] '" ~.5 u ~ ..,...e=~ ,,~ ".- .- 'C "'C:= ; ::l >. ellltl.; u >,c.- 0 lXl -~'in " .- lij is 1! ,~ ",u",c .; ,2 tl 002 " - .;:: lrl " " c c.> ~ 1@ .2.12 .. ~8'5 rn .- ft} cu rJU.S eti ~.__cnc c:: -= Cd 0 ='0 "0 ~.: :(!flijc:8" >," "" .5 'C .. - " '" .g ~ ~ ~ lXl C2 iil"liiS ~tr.lU ..: .5 0& _ .eo ~]~& ~Cl\l Y. .5U~~ :].~ -S~>.U_ftlcd ~= .- OlCcu ~ ii U:a U = .e ~;a.. u'S,-~':;jgCJ "'CIc; CI'J;a..... 0 OCI'J2 "U"O,-~'"""'''''"O ;; ;~uoo...=u.: DJ,j:a ll-5 0i"S.~.. g c::;l.,W U en ..l:f 0 Q., = CJ o~~ S ~'~-5 en.g!i .8 rJ lS u.e'~~ ~u'~ 0'- - ~.-=: "0 fn "C E ~ -:a 8",-g",._u..u .~-g-="O 0 u::c~ 6 = "'::ItJ!!CJoS"'CI (J~ ~,g~g~.eo;i~~ ~ COw=._~~wo Q.,~.- ... U 0 ~.- '3 1:: = 0 f!J = ... -= 0 ;; c:r &"" u g _ " _ _ ~ uoc~wcau!iC"CI >'~"-5u...e"e"" ~u~...g:~UuuS u C'Cl 0 c- u u ' ..c:-S-~~u ..ucurJ ~ II.., E '"" = c 1:3 a U Q.,..= -Oeuooc.,uE><'- ....~cCl.O'CI:l>.eu.~ ~ ~ m a ~ ~D 0 8 .s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o g c; ...; :c .~ fr :; c.,Q E l:I) !i u >, c.> co -= .- ,,= !ii ".~ ",ue Ei u '- 's oS 0 8.. g 8 c.o _ li ,5 .e ::I al == .; to e ~ E .2 c.> - .. 58"5 ; :l U.~ cti ~ ',0 _"'l C =::CGcdO ;; '!ii 1! ] 'g, <u..",o..O ... N " " II.., .~ " ell ~ .;: .= '5 I: u . .c .~ li :0 0_ '" " "'" 1;- l:::l.... 'fo...."'CI " II ~.- "'!ii 1;.tlu::cOS.... -5"''''"'''']'' g~~li:ae ";: "" u i:' fr.e 2c.>"'-55_= .... :( II.., CI Q., Q1 ~u;:~!s 8=U-:;;.= u = ~ t1J CI;I CJ 5~0..:.g2 'g,-<~g.li~ 's.~.5"''E.8 ...;;,oSuc,- u :a'- i>>" 0 ~e~Ol'ii" U .. ;a.. CQ 0 CI'J U U """"'1._'- ""'" ::I CI;I........ 'C_\lu'srl li li > u u.Sl tl:l)<oSenu =.=-g~'g-S ~-5o tl -'- e i>> "'...;::; o:t_;!_U' u..~-<-g8"" . c.>"" "...= ooo,,"c.>'- C""iOcd.Ql:n:t ~ ~ g '" ~ g ~ o 0' ., j .. . = Cl ... = !i is='' c e "C .0 ..I:.)' > ". 01 '1:1 .. i. .j 1:1 ~ -< 1:1 ~ I ~ ~ " o ~ " z ~ ~ ~ -< " ~ ~ ~ ~ z o e " ~ , G,) ~ ,: 3~--' '.1ii.~ ..- ~ CI .I.oi Cl"'~ ,~:-- '!:Ii.,;; ~:..... d '" <;~.:e'-.S ..::.;.;.:}.~:~ ;.~~~i' " ~,J" ~ :; . ::.~;~>1--'i '" ~L15 .....=.e.i,.e. . .e.",.e ~\'8., ....-~= o ;C:>.- .' "ct.i'~ ,i.s ~' <~;~I .. ll' .. 1a' .. ~. Cl' .g ... ... ,liP ~ i: " "'d'- cDt Q 0 .5 =' - U t.l t.l tlI~='- .~ = u 0 "= u I.,;;, u ..: .. -!3 !i ~ .. u..c'= G.l 4.l ,Qoo"'-,",S - ::1 ::5 ';:I ::::l 0 C "C.- ~ !:I :1l a " .... '::i CI2 u o-'u== ~ .!1,.~ "s.5l .e-egc..= :::I 0.. .- ~ ~u~g. cnoS~u= .... ~ 0'- ftI -!3 = 0. = " s = ~ s .~ o.9--;:g ~t)=ca"'d ~E~,ga ._., 01 g !i ~.= Go) CJ OJ c: 0 -!3ooe~"O ~.e.c..!!.a o E g e ~ -= "0 fI.I c...... 8],.; '6 il fr ; 0.0 E '" ~ u?;>u III = .- " l:l a =.~ ",uo .~ "... " -5=0. = " 00 - " e wa'o ,9:::1 := ~ .!a .E w " . 1; ~ ~ .5l - ;:0. <0 ., 00 ... .e c ~"O ~ S"t: ~ ~ '-g~i!6'. ,Q '00 &..;; ::I c G,l: CIJ VI U '"" "0 ~ " ., ,g ftI C ... '0.9 '0 =.... Co) "0:... = u"O~.... ~ 01 ,=.5i9'.,.- " ~ '" " = .!! '8 .-; .cU-e a......~uu= .c..OCcnU- g~f=o~5 ::s ~ " .e -!3 " g. ~=-5il-!3" ri~~'i~'Q! "= .. CI') "0 U a .- ., w .. S = 13~g~~..=~ "'''=e=;'''' tLt c.. ..c en.s CD = be "'8 .8 ~ _ .= u c... CJ ell "0 =.- ,,-" " J:l]:l",;c8-a cu _ 0':: u ... C OJ CJ C. rtI ... 0.... ~ 5 .. u ~ ... r-' i>\cn.cC= ....:U~:s:.-O Be> C/J rn ''::; ca QJ.- CIJ e"O 0 . ~e-e"'!!a;5S .90 Q., u "0 tI,l U '" g.~ gE~ =S.ii t"'l u CQ CJ en v.t ';;::I o e; . .e'H a '" is. " ;",0 e ~:! ~ ... ,;! _ = w fa 5.!i ",uo .'!i .~ "... " -5=0. s~~ l;a'6 ._ ::s::: ~ .; .E w !l . '" ra ~ .g ;: Q. <0 .; .. = ... .- o CD"O :t: -;'2 ; e .." '" 's " i! = ,Q .~ &. .~ 0; = u U l:f.l u ..."Cl ~ ",,~~ -5-5'0<:; ,-we!::! oJau~ = U) "0 ~ co = ::1._ . .- 0'00 CI) ~.=s=c "C fi:"" ~.g "":01"'" ~1.;j8l; vi 0.!3... .!:! Go) ~ ca :::!-!3Jl-!3e .- "0 ";:J U ~ a "0 ~.- u.. cd u CI'J = =U]5u u '.;:: 0 0 g'-=-,Q '" 1i .~ n "0 uc:!.c"'~ w = .. e-..i:'S~u ~ Q.... U ~ ;J ~ 5 S u ~"e"O-== D .Sol: . ii ::I = G,) ~~g"8; ... M o <;> ... M M ~ o (;) c; . .e.u a "'.." ; c..Q = '" ., ti >. t) = c '':;: a 5.~ ",uo .~ "... " -!3 = 0. = " 00 - g .e w..", .S! =:-= w ., = ~.~ ,.Q w !l . '" ., = ~.5l =a <0 '" N :. ... .e o 00"0 ~ ~'2 fa ~ 's II t! = ,Q'~ &..~ as5~~ ., = COe; .~ ~ .S 0"0 =' .....= = c ll~"u .e = e -5 CQye.- 5 = 8 St -ll,," C'CI r.::.... CJ .e:.::;"O a 1I.!:jl:l= . o::r = E' l:l '" S S :E >. u =,Q.~~ ~"'d 0 ::I LL. u C IIJ ...~~5 g5 ';: 'u g " " w 0.'" = U en tJ ui f::l.c-o::!"Cl "":;ja~; ....c_..."O !l"ae.a ~a~!-vi . .~ ~ :; .~ ::;t-88-5g ;:::' ~ ;;; ... '" .. iil ~ 0' .. j Q i:l < ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < ~ ;z: ;: ~ o ::a ;z: o - !:C ~ != 51 ... " = ="0 ".- : ~' 5 'is. .::E '-,-0 t't) > ->a.i '- '"-:.~ ~ ~,i:: ~~ ~' ~cy~: ';.~ .... = ".0 .- .' - '-!DII D:S .~.. ~ .- .. .. ...> c' '" ..., .!!",-."-, -=. .. .c-' ." eD CoI 8: .9 ~ ~;._g... c.. '8: Il':~ c: '" ... =. '-'0-.2 :"'CI- ~~. j~- -...... ::at . :>: .. ';; ~ :! ] .. ~ r::l_ .. ... :e .~ = f o ~ '.i_ .!1 ~- :: .;:; .. r:r. .. .. " - ... " .. - '" .. .:: .. - o c; . .5.. Co. 00 " <> ; 2,{Q E '" :l <> >-" c:I c'c !a is:~ ",UQ ui '~ .. "... " oS " e. o " "" - " 5 ..!a:" .9;s ::::: ~ .~ .E ui "" ... .5 c ~~ ~ 3';:: !a 43 - <> '" .. GJ t:: C ].~ o.~ :::I C fr U l;fJ U ..."0 ol CJ "0 ~ .. "0 cu'. !a !a '" =0 .Q .E itcng~ :E ~ <> s .; e. !a 8 .!! .;.5.e;. .- ... oS UJ := 0..-:: ~ :; ~ = ~'i l ~ s8~ii! .. ",,<> '" f:l = ~ ~ E-:;;::;lj .. " '" Btj-5~ .." ." ~.::I UJ..c ~ i:S ~ . ~ 1 ~Il ~g'8t;t; g] ..; .. CJ c.. "E GJ GJ '" e.Q E'" '" u >. U Q:l C 'C ; is.! ",UQ .~ <>... " oSoe. o " "" - g ,5 ""'00 .2 :::I::::: .. '" " c...~ .J:J ..., = .51 i5. o .. <> '" " '" .; "" ... .5 o COoc ~ '1ij.5 !a e :::~ "0 'E!l!t!;, .c. '6iJ 0 .;;; ==' c 5'- u CIJ lU ... "0 '" c ~.g~ ~ = ::I cu Q 6b J:! (j .!e .sa ..--eo,; ::~:....=... 00 e.ol ?;- <> ILl lll..c C 0 ~lUV,I::S_ t-oS.585 0"Oe~e <> c <> _ .="'.coS'- .. fI) -;;;I :I -" " 'u': "C .... lU CQ:'..!! ::I tl41i3~.c =~V,lu"O GJ ... .S .s ]<> S 5 " '" '" coO " ~i;.sii~ r-~_=_ ... ... 5 !! 0 B "" e c = ;~.s-o~ ~iff~~ ~,".!l<>~ . GJ "".2i! ~.sc2gcn .... 8 " - - .... o Ool . I: .- -e. '6 i! <> :a e.Q c'" '" ~ ~ tj crJ c.c ; 6:~ ",UQ l!i .~ "... <> oSoe. o <> "" - " 5 5 !a '0 .c ii:OS c.. .~ .c ..., .. .51 i5. o .. " '" .<> '" >0 N '" "" ... .5 o :f"O ~ ol';:: !a" .,,, 00 'E!st!;, .c'bIJ c .~ ::Icfru CIJ cu ..."C II ~ "'- :I 0 ~ ~ ~~ ::I '~.o>- 8:g . - u~ ui 1l.1il g :a .~,"811-g ;:;.~ U"'d !! .- > l: .... {I.I ~ e 'u ~ ~ I'.. <> .. ..._ _..Q g,. Q. 0 = {I.I u C U-OO.Q ~~!a'ils ~~~-58 .. .~o :g oS ~.8~.g'i ~ "" 8 ~ <> =.!j1i5~ ~Il'ii~:= .S " 0 e ;~~~8 .... '" ~ ..., ;; .... '" ~ lil ~, '" 1 .. o =". " ... =..... :: lL. 5;;' ICe 'C .. ..u ~. . !l " Cl ~ ....~ ~ ~ I ~ " o g: " ~ ~ Q Z < " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ .....-cu :is '19 ... g,i Il'~' ~".. :-~'C .~~~ j.. 'S" '." .!5r'" '. ,.ts ~ ~ .. .:5 ':is... .5":'- co II ". .... .".0 := 0 CIo .8:t: e. . < 0 u .. " 0.2. "Cl -. ,........ 5 IC lli :E ~. ~ .: .. 'j' . ... :E .'" o =:: u co'- . ClII ri3 .'~:' i 0- .. '" of .. co ii: .. " .l:: U o .. 5.5 ."Cl 'E= .." ;>, E CQ - . .!! " ..~..o l:Q = CI):3 a s -g .:= ",u..o .!i "... 'g .:;og. S ~ co ... a .5 .2 ::5 "2 cI::.!!l ~ ~ s: ~ .. 0 ~ .;:: _ 0. 00 -!! <Ci) " .9 ...... o .. '3:;:: .= e t:" . .....!e a "0_ '" " 0. .... il ;>, Ol " a .. >.S< t: 8 ... .e zj .. fr.s ~'ll il .ll ~" 0... "0 "C ..::l...... t"'" 'M::sua_St"'cncoo ~ "0 1l tl-S'i3~,g-6....5:l': Ol 51" ...O......u "Oog==.c~g co en Oc.::: ~"CI 0 U u u Col.:! CQ u ~.~ j>. IS is. la i !4 ': oS [~ :2 ~ Co'S:; ....-uc"o.. =u .!'ii-g8.~ 5'~-S'i a ~~ ~ Z dS5.c~e .c=_ c.> :;-g.Q~.!l'~.8 ~5 5 5.g.~.8 .;j _ :>.. _.-=. r:r= e ii e 'r;; "CI en cf cd~-eu'--s c..cno~u a"illt.!!!' ,,~ :l's~<:::il-S ~~e~J~~E~i~i~~ ~ =.9g.-ggue's=,-ii~CI').!i r;j .guu~u2~...~ou~gu - ...~-s~....~~o.c"~"_" ... .!!!,o;"'St-"8"d!o.gg~ug. .;. .--===0=..: U'WQ.,tlS =u.= ... e811"e!!....!e'Olig-g~-S:l ... '" ..~1t;O c:O..:ic--Cdt::O'. 1-. en UUCeoCl)'ii~ _0 _ N 's_~fi3C,).e '.:::I lOG'': co=J! = ':1 It =c..v ..lU-eCJ.:.tCO.S!..C!c;~V,) it < !g ,5 1. ~ g ';; ~ ~ ~ g :..~ '~.g.!! ~ . E-E t'Q: >a-.:i s:;~f.iiO-='="S.B. ct .:: ~ 0 '!i 0 is ~ II 8 ~ S. 1I's Ii' 8.~ ~ 0 O'iS . 5.- - :.c .u c.. ... It'' "",Q E>a!3 "- .S< !Xl " ... a s.~ ",uo ...Ii o .. u,,:E -S .9 "il o co (,) -""; ~~c.. 'C ~ u l'o....-s - " .. .95 au u o .'::.; =~c ... < ftl 0 !l ....- a:I "C C'I:I.... ~as:8 -S 0 '!i~ SIc; 5" E . . e";>, ...ul:Cc Bee :::I = tlO Cd 0 ~a:I~U ~ ~ "" "C ';l ;:I u- - " uoSCDalO~ -""_ " :l ~ " .., ~ ,- "" .. .. .. ECt;'u c.. c''= ::I .J::I .... .. " " e.., <3 :Eeo"1l'" _tUu_oS 8 ... ~.-=: CIS._ "" QQ ~ .::! ~ CIS <<I = "0 l'o.a.So-88 U ~bO...; oSS:.J.5o"O "5"'- ... O' "'d.~ ~ 0 ... ~ ..c ~ (J S!!mu=~ .-cou-5 cuu.$-5o,,' "t:I-"C~ - ... ~... ,,~ o Cl:I Cl:I Q U ~""e-;" . ~ c 0 r.f.I cuu-;;--g= uu=S::::"m.g -Sga~"il.g.!! oc.~C'lI~>-:::I :E'-o~:="Cu c c. u ... .- . c.. It (J ~~';'o- .~5-::::'~5 ~ ~8i~.!8 o .5 "OU'; 1; .l:l = "l'- " ... 5 ." ~... !Xl " .. = " 0. .. 0 " ",uo .!i 'g "... " -soo. o " .. .... g.5 ....."" .S! :::1= ... .. " Q.,.~ .&J - .~ ~ ~~.~ ui -"'" ... <. c !!'O~.= ~as:8 >. "" ....a o .. ca .~ - - .':: :::I e ~ ...."" " ;>, "'.... .. .~ .. ..c.gu.,Mu " ~ -"'.-.... df_-.;I:::I~ U"il ~ ij ~ ~ ~..... e ~-'::5!! !3CC'_~ 'g~-8=fn 0'- ~ u c....c.- ~ Q.. e.~.! ~ 00 c.- "C e_~"Ou ;g .Ii ~ a ~ ..s e :::I C 0 ... o.uo.s lrl ou Yo .. -s " " .- CJ ..-5og-; ;~o=~ :::I Cl:I - -._ ~ ..c >a ... .~ c.oc !::l S -= Sf fn U fn ~ C ~ e.~"9.._ 'C c..- :;; CtJ &lc~f&.~ . > oc 0 "0 ~-8~~i linl ~ ~ ~ M M ~ '" .... N ~ ~ .., <5 ~ ... .. lil ~ 0' ., I ... co." ".co e.:: =;.!t- fI c.-. ]~ ...U Q ~ -< ~ I ~ ~ " o ~ ~ " ~ o ~ [;l ~ -< " ~ ~ ~ Z o - ~ " ~ " - ... . .- >" J!l.- g,; . rill. ~ ..... cf c ~S. ~"lr: . 1::-. 'C . 'G"l.- .... ~.,::" ' ..'5. ~_...._~5:: 511g. == 0' cat; 8:, e' co -< UC ....- = C..S! "C.- co ll.. "C- ' ~..~':: ~... ... ~,.' ..' .. ~. -I = .S! - co. ... .. .'~ .!! " ,l:l .-a :;:: .;51 ,- '. '-, ~- .~ = <.> 0 .. .- g.:i c.J:'5l " l: -5:6 .... .5 ~ e 50 " " g~ 8 " "''''' g '> ._ 0 "' "" ::l "" uo..: ,,- II 8 ~. =::E e U ... "t:l tI.l C !! cu ... ... C'lI U) ~ j:I., 3t c G.l = bO C t'I:I ';.s""t> t:.~j! co c )II( ';:I .... 0.. u ... OJ! ~'O~~ o c; . c ._ ~ 'Ollll' ;: c..Q e'" "' QJ ~u = c'i:: ; 5.! ",UQ .~ "... " -5 0 "" O " DO - <.> 5 ""lii=o .~ ~::: ",,", ::l ~.~ .c .. :;j .; c: " "' 0 2 .= - "" 00 - " :;;:~ ~ o ...1:: o .!l - .. s.~'"O>.~ .= "" lii."';;; =0 U;:.., I-oUlC'O_ .g o..!;i 0. cu tnt;-~~~ .!l ;;; li o "" "" .. :;j c: "' oS o QJ cu ~ ="B ~~S 1!~ ::I ~OUUl.c Ul=U;C~ .!!2 cu u ~ ~ c u5':;co::l -Sg.CUo.o o---EeU -~Ul~o.CU "'c.J~o_.c .9'"0 ... u - "'_~o.u>. Cl..QJ0 E'O'.c ",:~l;::: 5."E :> s: ('\l ~ cu.:: W,,'g.2-55o O-S.c~ 6~ r-;-...a"'Ocucn <J2_caUlC !;f.lr,p'Jc;=Cuc U.t:.c ~Eo >.E~oc~'~ "QkooccuoJ: "QuQ"I'-"Q"'c cu c.. C "0 0. ",,>,o;oec.E oStJQ.,e-'-= "," 0 "" .- u~~u~~c; ~Bu~'i3_-S -CJcu~c-c . C '~Vl !! S 0 ClO"'''''''-Ur.r'JS'''' "It 0 c.. 0 '"0. :::I o c; ..: :€j'~ e- ta c..Q e'" "' u >'(j CQ C .;: ; 5.~ ",UQ ... ci. o .. " ,,::E oS .9 Cj 0-<'> -~; ~ 6 c.. .:;: i:l " ""...~ .. :;j s: ~ "' 0 oS 'Eo 00 - " :;;:~ ~ 'Q :: u'"O'$ u ~ '"0 en lii '::l lii " t'g'enu > ... '" e C>,uu 8 ~ ~ ~ ... " >,0.0 .~ ~ >, == s e ::l 0 " _2iu:U] ~ r; U >, ... '"=""w.;ioJ:2:W e Cf.t = u ",,~3~=:E u ~ >. ~.9 ... ..e! <<10- lU .,,,,,~:::.Il~ "':~c.!.~"Ou I .... C :::I.~ Cf.t > :::I I c.. ~ c... ~e"zt.~~ o ... cooS co (J ... >,.:;: 0.5 " ," l:l" <""".c,,," VJ>.~gE!! U ~.!! "' ".5 >.=8-0 Q.ftl ui ... 8 "' la " e.!:i "'_:3 0-5"'.,. ~'iil""s>,la::: '5-5;:O~=~.!! r,,:l all.gll:4 "' !! 5 e .S !:l - ~ <O!;&!c~.!! .g.!ila.!li!l~;g ~l5."",~8:3~ aiCtJ U.5::: . o"E.=J Q.. ~ecf8 c.::: u >. . rnl%lg~!e ::I: lii 0 "W o ",U::I: 0 'iil "" Iii "'0.... .~ = 0 ""0 S'- " - <.> "" i:l lii o ""::l 'C ~ Cf.t Cot _.~ ~ lii . 0...-= 6 E <.> " 0"" '" " .2 C. o "" ~ " '" .. .... o " " S e - " '::l " .. t: co ~ . .o"'liilii ~~S-a. - " " ';so .. ~ .. .!:i :: 'il ~ ~ ::l '<:i ::l .\: .. .. o!: = - . " "":'.~ oS i ... ... ,,&i:g]~.s~ ~o""::I:""=~" or--->.ca:'=Ci~"'O _<Ic:_~Q=..e ... ::s C 0 ~ en OIZlOG.JO"'~_ .:;: U U ~.El """:;;: Cot woc"T:Ic-5 vi 5.5 .~ ~ ~ ~..c u.-"O>E:::-u '--a="-'" :5ee{:Q!:C~U..9 .- llJ ~ C tJ U ~c..uo;r;::S> ~..o~ =CIl e]-8 c~;.!2~u~u CU,_,.AW aQ.c c.-=.u';: >,"0 u_ l:I::cu;:;:i:.2.gac; ~~=joooI=Cf.t=..c ~'+Oi.s_"OClS-;;en r--'O._c(,)==~ ~cSts~.!2C:=:E <C;u5~-.;l.~o:: ~ 5'~ e-l'~~..s :/<'>""0 00- ,..5& rle~5 ~ ~ 0 -5.1l " .- " 0;;;>_""= . (J U "'" In lU CIS o8"::c">'-"~ lI"l ._ CI] VJ -.;l _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <0 00 N ~ ~ <0 ~ '" ~ !::l ~, C '" I ... .. r:l " .. .. .- =!- -5 Q.c JC E 'i:= ,..u i> .. - co, &:l -a o. - .;S" Q ~ ~ I ::e -< =: " o ~ " ~ i: ~ ~ -< " ~ ~ o ::e ~ != < " ~ .. ::E T om .... t~ =: ..;; ~C1 e .2 "'~ -a oil"e ~... ,i>, .. :.'5.' - -'= ~-~-Il1l . ~0CS'& "".... E," ""~ .. < U. " ..~ .~;:; ."C.--J. ;.. 5:' :3-'~- Clot;:; . ::e~ .-'- ...": o. a .8 .. .. ~ -509 - .!~ ,,?:~ ';: ,- co t: i;{j i ::e.:' g] g~ .... e ... CJ c.. .- ~ c.. :. 3:" .::. u ';;" ~" =~ ; ~ ';J -~ u co . .sc;~ Cij.....OO .. " "B~u; - 111 .. ~g,=' 5 .f!l ~ .. '" .. as 0 u I u.5;:: ..: O'~.l::> "" ~E.t~ l:I:: u ~ . ..=c-s~ ~;iSl1ffi Q",u:t:Q oJ " ..; " .. 'S -a. :!fE o 8 '" " .S 8- ~ ~ '" .... .. " " Ii .. 5.5 0 -c;"E .5 1-0 0 .. 8. " ::E 0 ~ ... "" U en 0 c.o ~ t:o 1:.... 6.:: -s"g0 o'='i:i uato';~>.~.c =='0 > I-o..::::.::~ =ccnlUErn"O C"oi:d"'Qa=oc " '00 c " ... " '" .. "'Ouoi:l:lt-C"U_ -< "'.. '" " -5 .... . """. -" " In U 5 U) ';I .. cd .!:! oS =:"co.S: ..] = :.:>.Cl:IEgg:;- --.ce.-u .c- g < <<IE 00"B 'i: 5 ul tz."Bs CO::::r;;s'w c.l:;.8 ~.5'6 Oi_ ~ &rn = S -;; 6 ~ ~ ~ .t:t~ R'-.!!.c ::cotii ca 'ESt=....-C'o"'C o;co ..000- u't: w 0 en U C ~ U ... Clot Eo- vi' c:c.2 ""... ~'3 OCl _"0 CJ>'::S"_ 1- "~o""''''il,,''~ 't;j ~ ... U C t::..c ~ 3:11E='o'; "'-:1 u"o '=-0&',,=. - c.oU CD ~ .2 a< U"O :;:'" r~~t~~ ~i~! .u~t::...co-gu~- ;;; 8"o8..s"iu;-5;:s U 8c :sf: ; s E u .." ~ e-.S.9 c S.!!l ; is.3 .~ ",UQ.Q fi 'il 1IJ ,-. 4J -soe. S " .. g .S ~..'" .9:= := ~ .. " !:l. .~ .c a i:: ~ ~ .S! Ba DO - " <~ '0 c ...!le - :! u .;l 3: .. .s]~g ~~e"S.. ... " o.g "0 C 0 .!lfQ"lis.g'5'iJ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ H.S 2 at-:52'""--8=ut;; -c500cc....8rJc ._~co=uo >,,0 ~ ..!l.!l.g..s.s ~!!~ e."'" ...-c caJ::>o_o:lu"'w .=.=s:t~:S"'~c ""r::8!l""''''0 1j-5'g ll..s~;;g co=-.tca~ct::Q :a-8~~~S~U -= "::::I ~ OJ :!:= "0 co co "9. "0 co c........ c'..: t: {;"E's'OE.s " .. c =a1Ss"O s~co 0.=....1;;8-.05 ~ w OJ 0 ~ ~'-'... o"'O.-:::sCl}.c::t5:::1": ~"","c::ic""'il .i ij 1 f ~ 11 ~'[ e=~CD_aC~~U e.l!- SNo_.= e 5-5 u u.!:!.... ~ tJ !i! c.. co "'"' ~ ~~.g'2E.~arJ~ a';.s'5'~::::l"O 1:;; = ~El;.&~8~;;-a .... ~ .... ~ ~ .... <5 g= ..... e '" ~ ; " cU be;: 1.0 >" c::: 0 ~ -= '5 't; ::::I = .- ; 0 _'~ ",ue.Q .... Jl ~ OJ "'"' go -S 0 ~ s ~ 8.": .s ::::I -S ~ Q:.~tE~ a CC2 .. 0 2 'C _ e. DO -.!l <Ci5 0- N g ",- '0 ;~ "" C ...51 :::I 05'" '"Si U ',;:;.... ~ t::luuuc. ... ::::I >0 e ~~'@~8 " .9 Jl t.i OJ _ .g-SuR U-~COO_ ... o.c::._ .... "l:l OJ U c.. t) co g ~u==8- " !a ,,'@.. e i~&.cuEe "0..... 0 u rn I.i-i ~u"i3~-5.!1 :!!-S~i:a= -!;S"'..3:3: .;:J ... -= - ; "0"'= '" u._ CCI t::: _:: .cau"oc..o .~ - l5 a tlO~ o.ri-_.5o s>'-ilcat;c 0''= .coo 11 il .. e... CCI:s!i.cs5 O " 0 > _o~cu._ ... l:lO tJ 0"0 "0 uc;e."" "E~ c..E =.s o>.Bc..~ucn d~g""=Q= -... ~ CJ e t:: ."O-e'O'~e-g ~ a t:: ~ ~ c...!! .... ~ <5 .... '" .. g ~, o '" I ... .- ... ~. .... =:= .,.= C)"'- =:! 5 =-~.. ce - Q "0!3 ~~,!!! j Q ~ Q ~ I ::E ~ " o g: ~ o g. r.l ll'i ~ < " ~ o ~ o ::E :z o ~ " ~ ... :;; 'iii~ is :; "'~ ~ ... ., Q .S ..- =5 !c . ,'c. : -c.l' . ;:... ~- G.l -= ::;;..; 'ij ;5 l:l ., '~~="E'_& :'t~.e <8 ~/---= Q '0- "C ..,Q; ~. Q',c,#--;, :.5\ cu - '-~- ::E' '..~ .;:"..' -1 ;:'c.l' :::E.. .";," .!l --.- CII:; :!'~ .~-( = .S! i - e g. .. .. r:;; = = ;au..; ; .!:: = e"" .. .. ,.,~ j;;Q = iij ;j s fr ",~Q ci ,9 U 002 = - 'C a ::s = Q <..> .. .; - = a .9 <..> - 2 ... _0 [(l ~ ~ .!!:! c:E ='u <If ,.,= .0 .13 '0 ~ - = .. .2 e -u~ II CQ = ~a5 ~~u .5 i '6' ~ ! 3 " r: .. .. " - " " .. ~ .!:: oS ... = - u c U 4) :0 = oS 5 <<1'- ~ ~tl~E 2 ~ _ - .. ~ en .- 1) c;:: s::= = ~CJ.-.= "ii CQ~ ~ '_=-.S ... l""I ... U.;;l !:l='c;;-c 0"0 3: II) !:l.t"O u > .. u _ 0 u > Cl'J e -g~;e.. -cI~"Cu'= = ;j .0 ::: .... -... .c...-.,\l:l c ~!:l'- Co) o ftl CIlf i.t 9 "i E ~ l5 rtJ U ~ en ij :5! 2f.sUD~ >",:E8'< -= = ; ::s e ... = .. .. ~CQQ :l .~ ".... " .;; = ... = .. OIl - <..> 5 -;j'c .2 = == .. ~ ::s ~.~ .c ~ s:~ ~ = 2 .= - ... 00 -8 <0; .; .... ;j c_ 01'" ",OIl 's ,g .0 ::: " ::s '" .0 ~ .. ;j ]".. .S; tn "'O~~ ..cSt'lS .s ~ ~ ~!d .~ l:~ .5 '~E .a ..._ 4l c:: "0 ~ _ ..... !9>U<WUu"'ooooS,. '~":O ~s;--" "li:~- ....~..-...e -'00 :;.~ ....~ >.u efoUM 8..d "::: U ::I .c ,CQ ._'_ c::: - en -:i3 cr ~ U co <=:io ail: g g ;j~,~~~'c:a . 0>,UCJ fn-;;...=_eDen .-_...ca:l:::.._Oca-OIooo u=o ..o~=_..cUo::l ~ =~ cr=,g~ U en,=o ~ -"'=50 _C'CI~Cl'J_..- oU '.:3~uCJ'5E\O'V~ -0 Ut;:...cu u-c.....""" ~c"S..5 ..l.;:-;;OU.!:SOo .-:.a t:IQ~ fi]'CIl >'cn ~ = "-"S;"';j Q.>.cn 00 -... 8 ~-=...;_.- "01?0o'-"" cuc-- . E= Iooo't:l g.~;:!a;.- cu e l(')CU=O>'CU~"":>!!Iooo::S V')=.c~.c...caU~=t:::"O .... ~ <:> <:> "- ~ ~ .... <:> " ;j.i:: "'''" _0= 0.5 ~ >. 'E .... " .. t;! " e '" = " " uCQQ .; 'g cu '- =:i .;;='" = .. OQ - <..> 5 ..;j'c .S ::s= .. ~ " c.....~ .c ~ c: ~ ~ = E .& 00 -8 <0; o M e .... t:::i . _t'I;I~ 11.)1?0o .c'E ~-St:: ....0= -= ~ cu cu S ~ lU 0 5 ~ .;.;I CJ - .- en - .= E " '==~u8.gu 1?0o t:.gC"B'>=Bt= ~ ._ u 0 ... ca 0 ... u tl]t"ia~~agp~ c; 4.000 ... =M CI') as c - t'I;I -8 uc05cu.- t:s..::~<~ .;;.;: ~ ~ .. ~ ..:;>- 0 Q., y .... .~ 8 (i.Q .~ :: u'>~t'I;Itn5 ..... t:::.- ,., = CO~ClSec.:3"': .5=..,s"t;!ll ~.S! 0:':; r~ e-.s .- _ cu CQ _ Q ... ..s II E ~ I ... ..co':::'~c~~ ~~CU';;J.sit';;J U 4J rg 5 U CI') S ....-&"..'0 o r.= en ~ 0 ;j n U......U_Iooo_U C)::;' 1?0o U ~ "0'> a3~~~~t = 0 ::s C)._ _ CI') ~u.5eu..oc .- e - "CI C .s] ~ s ; .~.~ c'- u U::s ss.~8t'~e ... =..-._ ~ ';:I c.. .S! cO 3 E: ~ "0 U It.8~~~a~ '" ~ <:> .... '" ~ ~ ~, o '" ... = '= .2i :!i .tr"S. c e. 'C = ...u ... . Q ~ ~ I ~ ~ 25 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ 1= < ~ ~ .,!! .. ..s~' ''=ll. '~>': .' Q,J~- ~.- ';;';a.;,-- ,,- ..' 8.1il' r!=-' =.'" ..' OJ Q " .5 "'Ou...J ~ ii: ~ ~ ~:; ; 6 fr ",UQ = e cO e .e .5 .. .. 2 ~ oS " _ .w cc::cn...... ~ ~~] ;E 8 'cd ) ..... g'.: 0,.__1 ~"5: . -', '. E. '." '. "l;:l ... ... ':3 :::0..",;':,,5. ... ij'" . .; ~ '6"8. .!i:!te <=. .U ..... J:I ~.. .= :0;' .....~.;. O~CJ' "'"'$ 1$; 'tr-' ~.... "'::!. - ~',' ':~~ i - '" ;g .. 5" " " .- t:tS.- OQ.N i-u.~ . ....o="';g .!! ; ~ < l'l.S ~ ;;>-"Oca- ~;S~;s:8' .... ~ ~ .sa ... .!!~ ]..c: .. .. J3~ ".', -S !l !l .; .- , "<:: ,- " u:;r."C'=u""~ ..c: ,,"" -'"' .. _w....""-"8 ucaU1 '-.;I ~.cu~-s"O:>.Cf'l <::"",->,;..c:,8 "'0", ;a _.C1 -Il 41....-(">01 = - >U-=-"B<<I;.ca e"'~-B=<::-l3o..c: c. ,,"'.->,.... c.. .;;""~.c8:tlO .. _" ~ "CI is. g ...5 .. .;.;; Ull u "....;..""".. " e u CQ: .Cl c.. "=cu.CI-a U_Ull ">-55-S..- 2 .. ..', ._.... ..c !3 _c...c"'-c-wJ: ;g ~ .. 6 ij " II '" 8 wE'" a .~~ ~ "0 ca:::- 0 '" CQ: U CO~..._CJUc... .S.c"Cu.c"O-tt: ~ g~g.~l! 5~ ~I;;;UCt-o_t--e COO'!:: 0 ~ . u . -&itI.eNC!~C .. "~~ c.!l .8:l'Bs:;; -5 Q. ;='~..c: ;; ... S' I c.,... c.. ..c~cn ~ u~u on..c:.5.. = Q..c: Q ~-;- ~.~, ..10-. -GoJ-, .~'. -:.~-':-' _. .. ,.!II .~. = ' .5 !t3 '" w w .. ....c: "", ~~ Cl " ; 6 ",U .~ ...... " -soc. sll" " .5 w,,'" .S! :=:= .. .. " j:l., .!! .c - ;g "'.. o g 2 '-oS';:: - Q..N CWU S o o_i;iiooi !alt<CG.~ "<~"'~'C. ~N"';S:O .. ....'~ c 5 'C ]'E ~ '~5" . .g ;g e ; tl)82c.. .. N .. s: .. " .. - o '" " .. go)~" ....: ~ g ~ 5 go) ~u..ca i ..C'CI....~bQlo-o'''' ... w d QJ :::3 e :s U'C Q.. c:r' ~H"5!:::3 bOG,) _w:l_"'QI"'!"'Q 'C-<l_'''''' = QJ d QJ U as il ~.... a~ ~ go)-~iou .!l0~ew~0l.5 .~ "~ co - go) -. 1,-" U - 8c:;~coE .. c ='c.!:!_ ~ .~ u B .~ Ci '.o.-Eu.=,- u;> Cf.I t.) 0 2e..!j.... _ Q., S ell = C a fJ.=.2:.9'C 8oS.......t>= ~ c.:::s u bQ-8~'Q=~ .5.E! ,,;g ~ ~" . 0 8"" c co.... ... .....s.~ " " --;> - . "iii .c 0 ~ "'Q r;:;-;~~~; ~ = .. e .. ::: oS = iirl ~ ..l - " .. .C' .. =- .. .!! :: 'u .. r.. .. .. " ~ " " .. ii ~C' = .. ..=- .. - fil o~ .5.- '" w w .. ....c e'" ..~ Cl " ; 6 ",U - .. w tl: " ... >, -s 0 " o II ; . - C Q".- .. .. = C .!2 i g 5 6:.!!l0Q. - .. '" " ,," o 0 2 'a~'afJ u O"'CIo=~~ !iat<as.e ;;;S~]f8- ; ~ "C. .... 0.. Ci c u =.e ~ = ." ... ,- = t:: ... ... 0 .c cu B ~ Jlg.1Jlg, e ." -B<S "8'ij;.c:: = "'CI -,.-:= cu o :a " il ~ e -~J;:'5'''''U "Bg]~!~ :5!'B~u,="E ~ti.::li3c:u s...~ .soa 8 ~ ""'-lii,8- ,&J s,!! u ~ = ... ~ tl ~ ; .. 0 ....c" .;;~ ri'os< Cf.I'C ~_u~.e-g. .E 5 C 'i:';:: U ~';~~~~o go) = u = Cf.I uo.~~!ltl .-:=U =''''c fI) ~"iU , u ..; i:,,~Cl)ceU c.:!' .S c 4.1:2 - N,,",,'" > ~ 8.....e 0 'S e >_u'-uB'" ;E ~ .~.~ ~ .. .~ ..'e'" " ] e ~i=;r=~~ .... ~ o o '" ~ ~ .... c 0"': "... :a 'C .. .. e<l5 .. >, Cl;; ; 6 ",u :l .~ ...... .. -Soc." u 00'- S ".5 5 ..;",,,, .S il := '" C:.!!.sa .. ~ s: ~ .. 0 5a 00 =B <ri5 - '" >,0 ..c: .5 ..'" " :a .g e y.! ~ ~;6 .s~CJ ~ o .g .5 c; .c:: .... .... ..c: " > fI)._ .. ..c: .'- ~ ~ ~- .a c .,s..-=: :J.g :l :; ... g :~ ~ .~,~ ;# :s B :s S 'C u..c..!l fI) c Q., J< !!;ocu .~:s 8 M "..c: ; .. 0__ en C'! ~ 8 o ~ e " .! e 5!~ g,~...$ cuii"ia ~=-'> 'i: ._ _ fI) .s :; .. !! 'i: c-8st =:= - 'U 'Cj"'CI ~.s c:! ; .... ~ c .... .., ~ 0' OIl , ... ~ " " ~ 0= =~ 5 ... I: 8 - ~ llu ;> .- Q ~ I ~ ~ " o f " ~ ~ ~ ~ < " ~ o ~ ~ z o ~ < " ~ ""~ - :c -. .- ;a.... l!lt: &.~ .(l .....~ ".= '0.2 .'~~.' ~ ~".. 'i _. _i>~,:,. D "" o ..!:! ..:1 .c ...;."5 5.l:l ". >= ,.C/ &. is:ll::8. <8 ....J:l Q .2 .'CI 'ir.: Q CoI," .s '51' .. ... ~.~ ] "_". ~. G,,). ..... .~ . "''' ,- 0 ',_. - .. .~ .~. .. _. .. Q ii ~. =a .!:! il'5 ~:E . .~ .. .;';:j.; ..... '_!:! ~ Vol QJ ~ ~ "9.c :aS~ = "C ~..... ~;"'O~~"'O ~:lac;~!;j . c "] z:.e.., .-'" e ;:: g,..;;I =~.,_ CoO ~ .s ;~ .~ ~ OIlg ~.~ ~ .. .8.. &8. .. ;gH-8"Ci~ ::3 u ca 0 CQ .J:J ~ = .... -g 01 a.13'~ .. ==-'-=u .. ct).~~ (g oS; .5~-g "">..!! ....a..>.,ce: "(. ~ ~ rn ~ "B ~ 05 .!! i!!';::."." o"E""S!! .... CJ U C ....- -.- ;:s ... u CQ "'ii~lS:u= J3>rnCCl"QO g:ci :.a .c "1l "", E ..z:. l:Q " a g ",u .~ ..... .. -50"" o " 00 - 2! .S ...."0 .S ::I:::: .. .. " Q.. .~ ,Q - .. '" f5 S ~ .... t:Q"'.... .5 8<"'1 8U .~ 0 "'0 =l;f.lc ... ; t < m.O ~~~]~8 .; ... !;j 0_ 01"" _ 00 .~ c e:;:; ,Q:= " " '" ,0 .c .01 01 .c .- ucuco ~"Cc -" 05 .S .. a 8 ';I "0.... u 0 . "0..::: ~ .... a; c.. E3 ::10000 'a'E,ctl8!;j8 E~CClSg-= ~CC1&:>-.cn:a13 u ::I g c; e; ... ~.c "'c !:J^.!p ::3 S .__ ..... Cf.I en "OOI"~"'UQJ~ "'.c g"Ooo :I U) l=i....;::._ ui .D_ouc&,cucu 'Q5u'!:!g "g.g 8 e-g.~.=-g e e: 5~~~~cae~ =Cl.;l~"C~ou rn QJ U .... U U CJ rnC'-_cnc.;;; u.- '-cn~~=="'o ..'-....8u" -Sl+ooQOu:'=c.oc g'5-:';.s~'fi .....= .::::" t"ll u c.."O ::2 oCll=O!::u...rn 'i:>'fCl.l"'3~"'O Cl."o.;~='5lii '''oc.;_'u_1: Ou ""-N.."," \0 0 c._~_-a o 00 c .5 .- "0 'E'" .. " >. el:Q'iSc c.l ~t;;;, 0 l:Q .. ~'C;; c ._ a g -g .~ ",U",Q :l .~ . u ~ lU C ..soc.~.g S g .SO'~ ~ ""t'd"C"afIJ .2 :=:="'0 c .. .. " c 8 Q.. .~ ,c Cd ... .. .. " E .13 u - .. 58'5 .. .-... en u.-:::: ui ~.= -'" c c=cu~o ='u"'O ~.= :<ll':ait8' >.0 ,0 .S "0 ~ :. .2 E >. -e t) .. ""~ 3 .. .. 0 .scnU ..... ... 1:'1 u :1 0 0 .53 ~ :; ~ u' So""c=5e; ~ ''''00-60- _ fIJ_'flCClO~~ ~ 01 -g 2 .. ~"O .. OUSCd..~...'O.t:l U.D.... ..flJQ:io>_ c.o=;jco=(U_tUU .5j!! c.S 8:'-g~~ ~enC~ucat'd~en "OUl.Euen'-en u "5"'O~OIl"O,g ]i ~ .... 0 oS u .5 ; - :i .. .. .. e... ...S _Ii.. ""o'!:!C OJ e g ,,05 E '0 0 ...- o s.C'lSenU '"'St: Coco ,c....O..;_ =c'O~0-5~c u'~ u 0 - .!! e en ~ :g 0 fIJ U ~.c u u t:: tl==lr!"'=>E'.- t'd.E:::-_t&[]= uu-N>u ..ou u oS .. - C ~ Ul > "0 " iloo.....;:,uc "B rA - = .!:! ~.- t.: Cd ..... = =.- C';! _ Ul...... en ou.a'--coC';l~ ~.= e bO a.~ ~ J:.~ I;'"" tUu:= 0 C';:;:; c'"' ,",- ""uSuB '8.8'-ac.-C';!.cClS :Qo."ali"8.~~e g::: :.a 'C :.1l E'" ...z:. c:l 3 a 0 "'u 01 u .. .5 -5 "" "" " u,-u""u .;;og..ee 0~8-gg- o ..- c; ~ '2 !;j ~ ~ ~ ~ti: 6: c s:: ~ . it;! .. ~ 2 .= -"" 00 -8 :<;n >'"0 := a 11 u ... '0 cUl"2 '"' _ "'0 C'lS t;uUJ~C ~c.u_'" 's.2i:lil&l" ,0 ~ &~ a g J5~~'O~u 13!! ~co C';;; ~'8 :s r .... en'- U C 5.;l 0 .S ~ e OJ "" S 0 ~ ~... CI) ....'- .E 8 5 g.~:>.. _eU~d :< 15']'5 g .'U -aU ~ ij ~.5 OJ :E"O=~-S :::: u g.5 ~ ~-S~u,c "" 00- il -=.5.5.E VJ u-="'OU;VJ cu.aco~ ,:, C (oJ en .. o.S U '" C'lS C. _ UJ C.OrA"aU QU~u.c~ -.... en en -.":: .. l:lO '- l:l '" ".5 l,j,.,i'0' ~ ~ "'0 'C ... ';;...io a = . u C. tIC.... 0 fIJ ~ U C -g io.!!! .,g]&~:3 N~o~og \O,cc.uu~ ... 8 "" ~ ~ ... ;:; o:ci .S .- "0 .. .. .. ..-" E'" ~t3 a g "'u .. 05 ..... -5 0 001 - > ~ e ;fed ~ s::~ .. 0 2 .= Go -8 :<;n N '" .; .. <I:! ..... 00 00" ,g e c ~.. '" " g..5 il] ~.!! l:Qi!! . oil'g E'O '" .. oi'i... - ~ c c g.g .. " ..,0 fr'B Q .~ .."0 bOl ._ c t.sa .c- '" c; rri e \Q r:- '" ~ ;:; ... '" ~ g ~ 0' '" ~ .. .. - = ca " 1:1' g.s ='1S ca- .. '" c E 3 .- = tl:.> >. - 'S .. 1:1 5 ~ I ~ " o =: llo " ~ ~ ~ < " ~ ~ ~ :z 5 " i Q,l'. ,- :3 ,'- ;.0,,- ir:!;: = ca. "'.. ",-.. G.l 'eI ~ =: -~ . o ~:;;- I . . .'i .. :.... = ....s o .g. g.~ c: 'CD'!' to) lS u ;~ !2; 8 ~ j .~ ~.; .. lii ~ ~ \~iS:~iS: ~ - ---s-- .c..- cu~- 5 il " == 'is' 8- g:, ~ <. 1:.>. . .~c.. !:l,. "Q c:. .... '=., '=.5 I. ~!2; ::E~/ . .i: E .. 9 ':;. ~ ~ - .!! .. ,-~&."O ..,&:I ~tJu -, o.!! u:! 1-0;::1 '0' ca .......!ue= .,g=~'- ~ ..:,:'_ ~ g oS o:e ... en ~ ~ '5 .. - il '" oS fl 13 il ~ e oS - '::;'lCd.-U~'6'=CJ 8. _ t::...Stc..~...=;.::.c , .. ...... 0 - - ..... 0 - " .. - ~=-- _....- Q,J U bIJ.,!:! u ~ uCJ &'';.-5 . 2,o5.5.!! e.!::o5..... '" <;;; r:l ..,~ ' ..: -g g 8"C eG -S 0 -;;- = .S! .-.i.... ~.a ::l i3 .~.~ a;l "'~ 8 tl ~-.,gca~'i3:ar1.5!t:: ~= . " 5 5 u ~ ~ ~;::I E" - =' "'. '" ~... = ... 5l '" ... '=.~..8......s.5i.. .c= _. CIIc:.ctU -'- ia KCJ.&:I .. -.p,r; g .~ ~ i ~ .; .!! .~ : i e ~.I:.>'Eo5.e e-il~ e~", t .s a.~:6~'5'.-M fn;..5 w'O"O..g.cu"O O.c c.. >.,;:.ll::.. c Clo .. ... !! !l <;;; - ;:,. &> &> 0..... .. il '" .. .. :l e .. .. ':. '" s 9 = w "'... ~ !! :!l'~ =" 'c '" .- c c = c " ... .= .. .~ g.e.e ~ is'l:l 0.5 8": " uf!rn_...oU.. _ llII _ taQ';:.t:'Cl..c..-' u E .~]ee&jle]:f~~ ::I ."Cff.lQ"Q..u..Q.,rn_...O = . . . .. II is: '" .. ... - u ... c .. - .. ~ E llo ~ :: '0 .. """ ! ~~ '" II oS '= .=, . .. = g.5 I:.> .- '" 0'"2= ~"&i~. = e >.~ 5 ..~ crn';j CI) ;::I .- ::r: lii c -a .~ 0",1:.>..0 :i ....... .~ 05=8- s 8 tIC ... lii.s .S! ::s"'g ... '" ... Q.. .~ 00 - ~ o . ..= ~ CloN 0", !! a "< ~N = '- ,,; ~.5 olli",'E - c " ~ ~.e e . 'S.5Y.&l~ &> al c.. lii !3 ~ ~.5 tn8 '" t: -8~ &'oil '" 'ii J! e -w ; C'CI c;:l.. C U ~ C 1;$ oS t C'CI :I ~ ~ ~ 9 ;l ~~;;>-....'- ~ .... "CI .!:! 0 ::l U ca ~ l!8~~:: t--=.......cu .. - .. a . 0 bi -S = rJ-'-,-u ._="'0> .-::= >r. u u 'E 5l lii ~ .. d:"B~~-=..: ....-c=.....5!! = co C"O rn CIS 2:!~.=~..M!it g..iio:=", u.Qul:lCJ~ c:-....c4!c r7GuO - .....c_usrfJ !:! rn 'W; U 'elI '- ell!:! coS';; C ~';;;oil8~ ..,: ~ 5.!:: E ~ \OS_"Crn.... Innl ~ ~ !Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ;; - . .. Q:lO :::e u.5 , 0' 'E !! [;l ~ "ij;::r: . ":~ ~ I .~ tI) 5":'~ ::r: lii 0 fr,~ 0",1:.>00 .~ Jl 'e 8- o 11 .. - c.5 .....'" .S ='::: ... '" '" '" .!!l &> - .. c o . .:;: CQ "'''' 0", s ; "< ~N ..., ..., . 0 ,-~~:g ~ -a r:l :a .... CD.S e _..0 -S-..~ 's:" il Q:l c .g:;~;lS '" &> .5 '" I:.> :;ail..'e ......gOSbO c._ -:l.5 00-'-=0 ,s 1$ ~ lli -g:8..c1 m='faJ:! =.o"OC'CI u 00.... rn ~~B-5 .. .. ... rl"O.S cS .:: .5 '0 en :.= .. U c 'u~:s.g tf 'C ; ~ _.!!.cl;: ~ e.8'g S rn:; ~ :J S..c:l rn ui ... "CI Cl':I ...... c; ... a .".- w u....... !! .5 a !!" C'CI..c:.. CJ ~!l~<I!e '; CJ ~ H :gsseo5 ~ '" ~ c ~ '" ~ Gl ~ 0' '" I ... 10 = = 10 10'- =! .OO "" r!:! = 'CC> ~U '" - oo Q ;.l!l -.1.,: "] Q r.l ... < ~ I ~ ~ c o I:l: Q. C ~ o ~ ~ < c ~ ~ o ~ z ~ < c ~ c......~~; Q ... . J"'5 , . ;.:'8 :;;:; .'.'-:.-'- " oJ!!' _. :-0;;-='::- . .g -1i~-,8'~'_,: """ ,.0" =.Q-'Q",. . il:it.= <.;-0 ..;9.. . .. :.~- : c_-- _,-' .- .... ~d:' 0.10 --=-~ - 0:;-, ,Cc is ~~E 1(..... .~,.; c'i ",: 41:~ 't .:..~. .!!, Cl~ e .21 ~ i. .~ .-. := '-'~-' .~ ro. ~ = - " = ... - .. .. ..: = ... ~\ . .. I'll 90.9 U. '0 O''E= ,..=.... ,.. c I'll - . AJ j;;i 1IJ = .. u >.~ 0 .. = i5 tor.)"iiii tI:I ::s .- :: ; 0 1l .2: O",U..O !i "'" .~ ;so!So g ~ be ... ;.9 .9: ::s "i ... .. ... c...~ bQ .., = .2 Q. o ... " ~ " '" o ~ U; ~.5i oa..~ c; i5.. 6 e .~ .91~ ~ ~]CI)i6 '" ...9", U ..... ... 0 CI) "0 Q.l U u "CI 4.l~ " -c:; D.O VJ._ Vol ~ E .. ~ 10 ~::s-ij:3Q.-S ~ 0 ... ... Q e c; I:! ~ C'll = ~U~B~~ uSe.='"-o'" F:~~~~~ ri 0 c::s ii.-=: :s; '_"'O~-;.!l :3~;ld~ alf!S-5~"O I<. ...- e " .. cucouCG u.o!:!~..s~ = - "..... - .t:I C; ... "0 .S = C'll..cl U U fI) = ~ GIlI.= c.o U ... ... .!l 'l' l;i'= 0 ....- =.c::= "'0 B CQ C ~ 'u 1:! ell ~ s::.- r:! ~ ~._c'O 1:I !:!;!!t.5,.. fd"ct:tfeocri :> = C ~ "CI 111.!! ?UiiBeiJ:E .0 e " gj g .!:l'u 1,Qc..=~fIJ~:! rml ; '" 0 ~.5 u'Ei- CI~r:: ~ t S I:l:I'llU -; > e ""I'll 0 ti' CJ .: oOC'll . -~>.!l 6 ~ e e 'C .... g; !So Q....ccac .., = .2 8- ... " ~ " '" .. " ~!i .~ C'll u"CI .s I'll~~;-; ~~~'~it = ClSclfCll 0 ... 5~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ]. d..J C lIJ U Q.,rn ." ._ = .c ~... _ " ;"CI 000 "CI- .......= , a "~'00'O:;;" a~J3; ~'.3 ? oS ua-a... ~ u_ ~"B.;:.s~wa_"Q'E'E'= ~ ~ca to- &,~....~ ::!'a.; &,ll:ll,g'Eii .;;; ,,-'" -< .~ .. ",,'r.: 0" 0 Q .~~~i s~ !1:5.g ~ S]~l! '" " ... ::I = """ l::" = "" =..c~~~~~~,Q:ac....<<I9 CJ-ts.- Uu_~ Qu' ~] "''13'';:; ~;S].5i~ lBog c".5icl;iii~.....f! !So5" "S:'Oll::dli ....~Q. >.1l 0 >B ~ !i ~ " '0 .: .~ !; .: E ~ ~O' ~ ~ ~j g .s .s ~ .s ~ t ~~ 8 ~-g.~CJ~g~~g~ ~.fi.s ftI_C'lSO,e. co._ co"ao.~ ~"-'O "''ij'':''ll ~i''O-=~'O~ -cu2::1=::I"O UCOt"""'"'3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g ~ .~.. ~.~ ~ 51 cGUi-!:!~co_ -;:;:: wa... .uc::;fd.~cc C'-U'CZQ" ~~8~~~88J38~F~li' ~ 8 '9 ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ii ,,~ = g.!: !:l .. ._1<. d l;I)"E >,::C 0 .. CG - '.';; '" E C -.... - ;I Q" > -"OJl.- OI'llUQO -; .9 = 1<..... ,,0... ;S=or;- 0.2,,; . - tl ~ "".-~ ... u C'4 ;I .g ~~ g 1.1 "-_._OQ. -"CIrr'i .. c = 5 C'4 0 .= <<:rS'= 8''''8' '0 t ; t t;;<~ ~",rX .... M ::I 0 .2 ~.9 ~ ca -wa ~ o CJ CI'J.... 0 -; '8.=" -; :::"CI;I~.gt~::: 's l;i ~ ;, ~ I'll ~'s ... .g!:loe..;o.c~ CI:l:r:U~.5Cf.lUa~ .. .... J3 ;s,fj o -5>-tnuc:: wa '-J1~.5::1 C CU~alco;::o ::!Fi".c'O..S=U J:I c; rill U rn 0 t"".l .....wa:::::;"oca.o..." CQ~C'I:I;I'-::I ~ 2 raiJu ~VJ.59 ~ Eo-- Q. ..c ..:.s ~ g.cG U ... ... ~ 0 Ci.... &...- !!Stll:l' -a-C'lS ~.~.~ 8~~~~'~ ~'a..c ... CI.I cu::I: ....c ~3~'ut~una ==:3......;s<:; wa e ] -a ~ cu ... bO..c ;8..; ~'~-8.5" C '0 2l tl 8 c 5'~ fl ~~.=~;~1l~21 ~:c @t;e..c'a'g Q ... o.c - 0" Cd ... "'<'"'9ag"auc_ ..... ..;:: ... Q CJ 2 en C;l;Q ~ "B co U).= .u ~.~.5.g g.~~~ e ~=-g"'"ii...:3c .'CZu~>~HcSu ~ ~.5..c ~ ts.i3 ~ ~ ~ a. ~ c; ~ '" ~ ~ g '" ",' en 5 ~ I ~ ~ c o ~ c ~ ~I ~ i i c I ~ ~ !: < c - i .. o. .... "'Ol Q = ",. '" .- ~!. fI- Cc" 5 e . Q .!!l ll",. .S ;>" :j J! ..... .- ~ l!l;:: '" ... ""~. 'fl . ,l:!: Ol" o. '" C) ._". -. .. 5. .~ CO "[:; '~r ,;> '... II .':5..... 5. 5 il Ol. == "S' 8.; . 8:!t e .< '" "'. C1:"" bQ c: ~ .S~: .5 .9 - "CI -,- ct) '- ca >. U "j 5~;" ] 1 ~ '2 ~ .J! 1$ ...,~': :l =r: .. ~ e iiI l5.. >. ";:SCl.t-.'::" 8.!! e ~ e th e g i>.- ~ > c.. ~ 0 0 Q. U . < ;j ~ ~:::::u,t g.:: ... !l B :::J = .Si - gj," .- ~ ~ '" " ..~ -5", 'CB .. .!! > - ee 0.0. ~g. ." .. fa-5 ~~ '> fa ~o: ~" .- '" ~.~ . .!!.~< ~"::C Oe"-l .!leo ~o..J 00'" < "'" '" .~ ~ ~ c:=~ "'. aro c; ",.5 ... o"Ee"'::; ~ '" u: l;j . ..: tl "'::c is "1%1 c I'"en l:I:I = ao- ::c fa 0 ...~ O",UQQ .~ ..... " -500. o 1:l 00 - ".5 -"'." .9 ~:: - ~ ::I =- .~ .c --o~ ~ lij " o 0 "= cC"= ""'" 0. 0.,,0 tat ca<::t ~",rl! " 00 '" _ '5 $'.5 02,0'0 U)"E _ .. c ca c;'c"'Ocnoe .::a tt ; ~.= lU ~ E" ",'- il = " .o'..lij~o."" =' C _ '"' (I.ls '" 0 "-l LI c.-c. I;f.l U "'- :;;"l.l< .. .c..!! "Os: :>.-d~.S - "" 1'l 5c;cd1::>.- s'Se!:]~ ca" ';i]:.o.e ~ ~e2tt13.!! E- Ul fU - E..c ~ :=. 9J ~ j:l ~ "'.;:; ij E''';: co ... "C I: Q., Q. ~~eB=~ i-=~cn"B.:; :>.,,0"''''- ;>- " u lij :l ~ "2:-g-ou8 cU'iiCli~U; .....u'O"..c 5'Ecu'!="E " " E " '" Q ::l-C""'O,J::U ell u Il) U Cf.l U u .cu~ca ... = eO .c "il S "'<""..;.. '"" .. cd - 0 Bui-oU"Oil as <<J U en = :> ." - = '" ;>-.- 0'- l!l .~~i'~c. O\,~ t,J ... 's..!e \O_.c 0 ft.l"C a:i'g ~ U .- ... 0'''''''''' ~ ; ii: l;j . 0:: ~ "'::c is _=..... I,";; '" =....... ::c lij is go.~ Q",UOQ ..-lij so~>. ~ a 0 u o ." .. lij . ..... u 0 Q.,.-::: - .. la " " .9 5;-:= ~ c d:.s.;o~ -." . ",,,'" " '" " o Q .- =l'- aN c.. 0.,,0 ~ a t 1'l<~ ~",rl! " 00 Q 'in >t C '- 0 .c:a o ~"O .. UJ ;: ca''''"OUJ15e == ~ lij 00." .. >. 'e.s~'iil=c: .g~~e~lijiS ",..o..".S",U .. .! - C €"ca .. - ~ .s 15: 8. '" '" '" ~.a;; ... '-.. ~.- ~ - ~ <wa::s::s ~:2 e ~ '" - :1- ~ ~,8o - - "'.. 0. lij -;;.5 c:!l~ !!.= '" tl '" - t'lS.a s e = ~ t<:a .!! wi 9 ~.!! 0 ~.'" 00 := ~ . ~ 00 ~tL.'cn o 1'l .5 "" .".."" - - :gu:; l;j . ... >.:I: g ~ _ 1._ - =..;.~ lij is go.~ ",UQQ ..... " oS o.g o 0 U . ~ "'lij 2.:l - - ~ o '" .... Ei C ~.ra 8 8. a is: ~ ~ 0 5'a iJo -!l <en " :l Q '2 '- ~~eo...tG5 o ~S::O-Sc. SUJC>.'iloo '~erJ~u=~,~ c: ... R'= u.ra '-U-C"O= ~ ~ e .bl.Is.c.- l:7" CI)=.~._ate " - r;j - ... " "S' .. =- .. N .. ii: '" " .. - u ... '" ...0 ~og~ ~uuu"""Oo w=.ccosCi~"O '~E ..::;. .-.-; 'Qjlllllc"':SN ....cOC.O"ClS uu:u>;~::r:: ~-5 ii>':;;,8< .!3 9 S ~ 5 - .. ~oQ,,~...!""!c;= 2- -= 0 l:'.-.c';: .ci:.u"Ow;;>, ~'i:c.~~=g gdii~ t!~ CJ o. UJ . 0 ,-uO'UJcc.u o~~~.sao-s u ~ .- a'" eo... t,)eu~eQ.o fa",-5=..tl.. "u",-~...:.!lo- 1:1').... _ u c' .!l ~ "'.-=... _ e u;;>'.c=oc.... -su.!!..o...uo Q~ea;;!-5!! :.!! fI) so!! ~ 0 0.... = t'lS U ... 'i:~o'B...~cS Q... g"E:.!: 0 ~ ."'afflij~- ;::lij.c_i:i:o", .... ~ o 9 .... ~ ~ .... <> on '" ;:' ... ~ .., <> .... -c .. Gl ~ 0' '" I .. .. = = .. 0:= =.!! - 5 =- c E .- .. "u ~ ~ < ~ ... :is; ,.::. 't;;.:;'" = t:, O'"OS- .,~~ .l:l:: ..= o~ 00 co '= ... .! 5, ... . .. '" :> ::i: ~ 8 l:l:: ~ C ~ ~ fil ~ < c ~ ~ o ::i: z o E= < c E= 51 .. ~ -,' -- = ~ "'i! J:t .- :!;.~ i , g:'il:; a <8 :'0 : ~~~_, . .-c ,.,;~_ ."0 u.;. C . .;.c !oS ~.-- 4J "C ~..li ..... '.:.M ~ ..... ....' ... ... 1Il!:.>_;:-: > S .<<-, C'lI .Q .;,.." .c 0 ... 1;j Q ,,!!{ .S! ~. ',' ... = ...: ~ ~ .~ .. 01 ~ .::: .... '5 E-< '\'!! ..:~ Cii IS,) C'Cl '.'~ gf'E-< '-:~_ rn ~ U iJiil ::;f- l::I .. '0 ~ ::c to E .g-" ~ ~ e .... ..: c ~ 'i.';:.Q<ll ._ t: "0 ~. ~ ~:5 ....." ; :a e ... ; A'" ..e :I:-'O ,.. lS; 1!~..: ... ....- !! 1:! e .. ... ... ~o... o ... ~...~ ; ~~N ~ c"".. . '0 t >,::r::: s c QJ c ..:. '0 Cd ~ Cl,,";: u:l ;0..._ U ~UQQ ~ .~ ... .. ... oS 0 ... o ... 00 - u 5 ...;'0 .S :::l::: ... .. ::l Cl.. .~ .c ~ li:~ ., 0 s'E, 00 =B <Ci'i .. '0'3:"'3 = 5-i.o c .S< a...g'Oi!! u_i35'-~a~ Q.uecn1JBe~ g j'~ ~ ~.~ 'S: ~ U... t<l <.5!:! Ii:a co C _ c_ ~ =u .5~= 0 ~~~Su~u < "0-= ~ u~~ "0 eoti "0 ~...~t.os~ ~UrnC'ClO .~"C~=oo~=.Q ~rnrno _=~~ -- >.t:: ..!::::; U = a 0 >.t:: ..... ~ co u ... t;: ca .. CI.I ca Rl ftl 0:::1 c.Q=~awo.ea-~.c'l-c~~>...oi.~s~>e~~i . cC'ClU.Q Sucu>"O u._~C'lIOCl.luuOCI.IO_ ... ~lu~~~tc~~OEBag25:~e~~~~~~J~8d a "''''0<Cl..8C'Cl g...Cl..oB"'u"02>.et~...~~~~~ E u u .-...._~"O ..... >._ U U oS ~~ .s "0 e 1 ~ "8 oS 5. '? o1',g .. a ~ oS =.~ ~ .=.!! 'Q.. c.. =1~E~~:~.i~8~~g1BI~~~~~oSi~1e~ .5 .0'=0.9.e'O ~-6<,g o'o=~ .;; coS'" ~'" 0.9~ 0= 8 E... ~E~~ 00 ~__~~~~IC~0~'~.~~,~~~~ .;; "'e 5l ....~=... 01 rl.g l:!.0l 5l ..... >0 g '-5 j!.g '" !:! >=.S< ~.!! li.s :1! 0V~ ~U~ ~~vo . ~0~ ~-~ ~~ ~~~~'~~~~~~~~~i~i~~5.~!i;~~~~~ ., ~e!!e~"=o ~_ ~o~~_Q...=~'" =... u~~~ ~ -'~u~~~~~oo~,~Suucu~u~_ g - "0 ~ ~ "0 ii >.~ u :::s "0 U ca - >'''0 S c.g t;.- ~ '0 CJ ":I ~'35!!1...~.,0l_&li2=~~icg80~~::l;;~~ ~c~~~~>6;=0a~~frC~~u>.5.~~=~~u .~~~~~'?~'O_0.S~~U02=~u-e~8-00E~ u~oc c~e==~O=~~"OBU~~ ~ ou~o ~o.~o.5ou ~-~~o a.~o~~~E~"O~~~'~"O ... ~ 0"0 U _ aU.. i: 0':; _ Cl.._ 0 C _ U .4,::l ._ g. ; g';u~~':;~~~~~u~oi~~n~~E~50"O.Su~ .... ="5 = u"O-.;I.E:".i:S; &"B coO ~c.. ""0 &u -c; U ="O"'::e S~...S~;co=Ol~~u...S~...~l~!!'O"'~::l~S!!Ol ... u0c ~ ~~u0~ =~._cac...~~O_OQ c..~~~o~'5~t~"O~~~':;<~=S'O~~~..."'~H~SE ca'- ou-u.:;U::I. 8"0 rnOu"O'~ -C"O~ ~fri,ga~l~t~ri~;6i&~~;,gtI18i8 ~ ~ o o "- ~ ~ ~ o ... oS .9 ... 0 ~ ~ li: ., S 0 '" :( .... = .S< ... = :a w 0 0 U ;: ... ;l ~ ., ; 'E. ;: ~ l5' 'il > ... '0 13 ... 'g ., ;:::' :a "" ] ~ ~ is ~ :a '" "" e ~ 0 ~ ....; .... 0' '" ~ .!l ... .. " -< ... o = E! Q.'. =~ 5 "So' 1::5 .- 0 tu ;;. . , .. - co Q' - . ',!!l .21 .~. 5 ~ I ::;J ~ ~ o == llo ~ ~ ~ ~ -< ~ ~ o ... - z o ::;J z o i= -< sa ~ j' '. . .. .. 21', ~ .-;.... .- . ! ''t.- ~ ='?;t . Q ClI .::;1 ~ 0 c ~~. -g ~";.S! Q,I'" - C r;r.l II) ==;56-g:e; ,', l:Q U .. 0 .... ;.... d 'c_c..$! ":~Ic ~>: ? !i 'E ... " o ... 8 .. ii .5 ~'i .~ to ,',-,-. -.:I' Q,l :-d ~ ~ --,:~G.l"- en co l:I..=~ .. ~ .6':'&":~_ .g .:~g:;5 O,.!l [- ,:,: ti5 -. __.t:l o Slf ~.. . .c I~r tlJ 1i 'C - ~ ::;J> -5 ,'. .~ :. o ~ -.';; 0 U t ^~> OJ -5 ~ _ _+, -.-i: a .... &. _'!.:'"'f:,' ~ ~ CD ;~,-::: U ~ Cl fI) t.) '': _ ,_- 5 ~.~ ~-5 " ~.- ...... ..~' u ~ 0 I " !!l.... .. ". ".!l.2 >" g l! 1;1 .;::;J..!!l:a g . > ,'E!il3"'] ~ ~.- '._ .. 8 .. ~ ,.' ~. "s u.fi ~ '-~.J 0.8 CD~ '.c= ~:;:El-€a ,it.cd.c::t.- I':.':, u :: il ~ . . " 5 ~ ~ -5 -.'''c' -5.A..... . = v, 0" .ii j: oil ~ I;l ~ II .' .s~ e..!l ... '. -=0<'5 -.,' 9< 0.. Cl. a .. ll:; !rl .. - u ... .. II - l:I .C' ~ .~ j$j ~ ~ ~~ E'" - - If! l:I "0' :s~ 0= ,g~ a = e u .. . = " ~ ~'!3'~ ::s a'- ii 0_,2: ",Uc.O OJ .5 " II. _ .. ,,0... -SClC~ o .g 8 ii -' -: ~ ; ~'E .g ~~ ~ ~ Cl.. _._ 0 Cr..c - w " o . .= g::l ...... 0"" Bfa ~;S 'c;.. OJ .5 ..go 'il ~ . .gi] "'- ... .SO ~ .~ ~ ~ jj ;.5 ~ ~ '"' B'S 'C coo ~.- e III e w 0 t t c 9 CI.o tIQ u-Bo-oe.s 50 " ii ....5 "t ]; QO~ ~ ... =.5 -" .. tt.I =' = ";I e .;li 0 ll'- Q.) l::: ~ .... at ~ ;€e...~il"" .__Uu(iu ~ Eo:; :'S .- i:: r:CDr;;~~~ c =.5 1-0 Cf.I.J:J u'- c.. cd 0 ,,].8S.'!l" =- _ CJ U ~g"ii(jC'S..c ....-....- ~ ~ t ?!1n.:3' ~ !!'-s~C;H C'Se-._~= ~ ,,1;1 >,.!!l ~ o is '"a> as riB ~ai~ 00: ,g ~ a = eU"'; ~ ~.5.2 _ " ~ w = .~ ii 0 .2: ",uZ;:O OJ .5 " II.... .. ..0... .sc:;o~ o.g .. ii . - u g 0...... w &.. = a .S! In =' g c ct.sJeoce .... = .2 8- w .. ~ '" 'c;.. _ .5 .. ... .. .. 'il ~ . ......~ =ii- "'- ... I] ~ .~ - := .- ... r: .. !; - ~ ~ o!: .!l ~ 1 ~:; '''- .... 5 DO U ""'" IIJ U ....~ .~-=-g:;;~ ~~.!lIl-5~~a =....cn.....;:~~tit .e cu = ~ ~ ~ 2 = cu ..-50..""00&~ c..cou"Cs=V,lOU .-g-5';:.!!j! e -:i n ~ "C 0 ~ ~ = ~ '.;:z In c:; Ci. ~ ~ C'S U ~ ::1l6S:l-l!!ci~.s ~l:law.'!lS.2c." u..e"C.1!~~:a8.s C"""'l u._ Cl.co"O ...... ....;;'(l"-..,,s 5 ...", ..'" s " .. = as~.s~~::-~~ ~]!~'~~~e~ ...():;:CO....;30~asDO ~.s.c ~; ~'i:1.5 ~ . fI) _ as Q .;:::: 010 cuCQ....~~\oou::s ='&.~~'e"C t&DEi~ ~as'CG5t'-~.=a' = ~ ~ _ ~.s Q.5 0 ~ g . "C ~ = e go.O u ~ c.. ~! ~ ilS ~"i! ;.5 .... ~ ~ .... ~ ~ .... .., 0= ,g ~ :a = eU...; " >,'" 0 = _.::!.- 9 ~.!!l ~8z;:a OJ w ii =0... .- = Q ?:- II. 0 - s.", 8 ii - ~ ii g. .2 ., ii! 8 ==.s.~o .... " .2 Q. o w .. ~ .. '" .... '" ..... o = a'~ '8" . .g1] "'- ... ... ~ .!!w ~ w:~ e 2 u V,I C'l:I -cu~bb' ~ 13:: cu u {g c 8 = ... c ~~g'='~ -~-5il" . "'0 ~ '= .9 rJ c:I e u ._ :::I cu ~ - :Eo=o';;; .- ... Cd t...!.. ~r"C~'S II. >.!l ii... =].5:sa " u as C'lI CJ CG E .. e-.5 ,J:! ~oS.cuCf'l <':: . = -5 " <;::1i1!1:!oe u ti In._ .- _ en e c ~ C'lI =.- J.l: ~ e '!il'~" =.g.o :is ~ '3:l S'= .. ~ w ir e oS ~ ~ as c.. 8 !. ;::- '" 1!. Q .... '" .. ~ ~ 0' ., \nl\ I .. - ... Q .. Cl c J:l 0'- ~_i'~. 5 ...- =,c -=: '.b:u'~~ '...., - s_ .!!! - .s .... Q 5 ~ I ~ " o ~ " ~ o ll. ~ ~ " ~ o ... Z o :;J ~ !: -< " E :;J .. -:E . .- ;....' '!!l- -'-' Cl lii- ;~ll. - ':=: ......c::l_ :-=-.9 , - _~.. 5 .c' "",' -',;1:, '"ll '."~'?~'i:~ { i ..,' .l!l - ,--c .&J......'QI- .. il.c -,al 'is' & "Q,J.o C =.;.. =' . -< U ...:. ....' ~ ; =..... - -= 'GI" e 'CoI,: :i !EH Q,l ....., :;J" . : ....~ ., .. ... .. -, s:: l!l ... - 0 I ... .. .. , . il ::E' .~ -c ~ ,S - ! .. ,~ - - ;:; ~j '" &: ~ .. - - '" 1il ; .. ... - tl il .. .!: 'is' c ~ ... 0- ... ,," ._Y ~ .!.. .- ~ - - ..c "'0 ... .&J.... C aD :. ~ ~" .- .- CUCQc:::R~ E:€~'-:' c2 a.5 .~ ~ .= ~ Sf; ~ ~ ::3 s.. =' ... Q.,; "'0 Sf; ;jo.3.~ogj!~~,", ",u""ou","'".o .. '- .. -5 0 .!E o ca ~ - > .. ""' e {n r1.i .g Q,1l ;j ""go,!!... - ~ .... " ,,~ o 0 2 "a. ai 'a. u''":: u ONO ..", "0 =rn~ ti;t<~o ';1 ~ "'0 ~.= :?;;S~;g:8- '-.. o " "a .. =~ .".. . c ~ ~ ,Q'O;j ~;j- '" - Q, :; ca _ co ~ .... '- 1l,Q = o..-~'O 01 ~ ~ 55",,0 ~.."'~ Cu _=5~u> ~ ~ .S ~ '. ~ en u_ v.J~> ~ f4 .! t: 1i' ti":S "B >. oS ti e ~ ;Q 1 ~ 5."d e e ~ ~ u .5 _ ; ~~~~~~O~O=_ ~oc~o~"O"a-~"'-cau '0 ~ - ~ ~ -!3 >- -. .0 .. - .~- " '" ,Q c " ,. .. 0 = ",Q ... ~"'O_Sf;~._~ .--De~Oeu~ ca~~~..c=~v.J~ _j~~~~~B~e..c..o=i~~5~~Q.,~9..crn=c~S _ ';:J;:o.~ 1j;ic!!....j;,cuo-Os:::;....ctlO.........u ,o!i:>c.- ~~tlOU~ca~cu..~-~~u~~~cV'Jcu.. ~..v.Ju_ou C-5-S~'-u~ c--- ~~O-.- . w~~e ~!~.sii~~~j~!~.~~~;)i]~I~~~~~] ~e~~=eJii~:5fe~u&~~jo~~~~~~~ -"o~''''- uus:;-couu.s~c_ t<l.CU~~_~u "".. ....;j 01 '- '" - 0 ~ . > l;l .- = 0 0 ....... 0 .. _5euw_~o~.5~e!u~g~~u~~~u~~=~~ e.~~~~~a~_~-~o~~c~~e~~~~o~=~~ e~~~;~~~~w~;-~~~-~~~sO~~e]~~ go Q "'0 ;; U u:E .!:! d e c ... ; ~ ~ 0"0 CO U ctI . I "0 e- _ ~ w .= ..$ ~:~..!~~~Ja~~~;j=-a~~~l;l~lil8-~i.i.. >~ ~ UctlU~U ~=~ow~~Q'O-v5 ._~O~ u~ctI'~~.s ~ ~g~~='-ctloctl ~w~. t~~~ Q~~i;~~cJ~~~;lg~a~1-~~~~-c=..5~~ ~=> ~~5 u!~-~~u~;....~-~~ . ctI'2 .s~5ei~g~a~~~tQ~~eo-~~5a~~~.5~~ ~. Q., ::z ~ _... 0 (,) l;:; u; ~ ~ :: "5i \0 ~ 5 = OJ': u i ~ ::: u .c--"Ofo'J Cl.VJibOee~U';;lo _co .="'OctI~rn ...... ~~~;~1~~~~~~~t.5e6~.~~II~t.g~~~ ccn~ti~(,}~.5__~~~~~~~~flJo",o~g~~~ '====."'2 ......_"..~=~..u'O~ "..,,-- ~--0'Ou.._........."..=-~~5=~..-0,...~ r-- Cl.CI.I'II ~ en ;:;"'fIJ~~~~"CI_ ctI uQ.,.oc.... <<1_.0 ~_ ;;>-.c.o bjl!.j SUi ~ 8 '" "- ~ ~ ~ '" co '" ;::- <>0 ~ ;; ~ '" - iil ~, " '" J Q ~ Q ~ I ::!1 ~ c o f c ~ ~ Q Z < C ~ o ~ z o ~ c E= i .. .CO 01 01 CO CO .- .:1S '5 =. 5 E Ot.8- ~ "8 co Q. :f j - .~:-~ --. .--" ...' '-.~ i!l- .. ::a ~~ ,~ .' 01 -0-;.2 , 'c,"1j , . '!.: ':::,' :5,"- ,,- --=:'~f .. ''._..:1 :a ~'--iL. .. il 01 ~ '6' g, g:~ ~ < u, -,'..,: , ~ ~ .... =:0' = ~s:::.: . 'g..1j~ .! $'~ '~-tS7"- .-,,~:, ;...- ,..- u .;; >> .c .. '0 U > co ~ - {-- Q. c',..; ~ -. .. .8 J. 2, ~..; c;J ... oS Ii '-"." .. E c__ - -' U) 'E .-----gor ~ co '.". ;1'-. ;J c. ... , !l! __".:.!p_--'9 ~ ';a :a Xl 5>ti: .!O ~ ; ~~ .. c.> -i--~ ~:.= I"';, 'i.g ~ ,~~. e c.. "'?;> ... " :EiS ;JU "J u o c.> .S a '0> ;'0 E < ...; ~~l5 a 0 _.:: <nu",Q ., .~ .!a Ii) ~ ....0 .;; 0 It ~ u .- S u oo"S. is a ,g li'!i .t: = =I ... = c..!a bO ~ -a. - .., g 1$ e .. r:rr-.- 0<>-", B-u.~ . -ao=l:I);g t~liS<~.9 = ~ "'CI ~- ~;:SJla6:8 u .~.~ '0 > ;'0 E < ...; u >.. ~ c ...... -....- -- " s ., a is.!i!:iS <nu",Q .; .S - c.> ..e '2 jg .. 0 Q c.> ~ ~ a.s l;l<>-e J:l0 _ ., .- u e rJU.-=:= rn ~'::l_rn= =:::'ilcoo = '0 -0 ~-= _cac_c. <1<...",0 >> >> J, .c .c >> >> ~ u u '" ~ '0 ~ ~ ~. l;I1 ~.c ril ~._.3 ~ ~ "CI'. C "CI'. 0 0 -1::- -'t:t:i';; U u.!!a .S! u...- ii:u:t I<.u:t:t ~ IS is ...0... "0 C 'C 0 .. :~ .. .! c:: c. c:: N .S " '0 ~ .. .- 0 il 0 "i oS e .... 6: Ol'- .- ..1::>>1:: ~ _ u ~ "' .,.ou&. "'0 ~ ., 6"~}1 .. .. ~ ~- ~ .. "' .. >"1a[icu ft u .c >>oS ., ''5 C) "0 .a e " .5~ E,~ '= "0 ... u; =: ~ " " !!~=r.t:: = fn,.Q _ - 0 .. c.> 0_ .. " .,] !loa .. ..._.~ ~ 0 - CIS .. -g ~ t ... ... ~ 5 ~ en.~ .. o ~ u -~ ~ &.] ~ 's e u==-c. '" ,8lio.. t':ij2ooU ., ~ C.5 . :a c;:l.. Cl. rtJ '!ii .!! ~.g.~"i.~ "c._ee!'c :: .c '"" tIJ '"" en Ci.. ~.~ ~ ~ 8- ~ 'il rng_co_ C;caS'-c~Ci.. .. ~.~ ~ ~ H CD ~ c: CI.. l:<o Co)..c: '~"",,,'~ .lj .~ u i "' " .. t '"" e 0 e .. t ii.sc..8Cl. .. .;; " '0 0 1;; "0.. "; ~ .. .. 'O]ilail :a'tl5::l'~8li .. ~ " fii il .. J!.si~i ~~E~-5B- .. .. .. - c;:l..~:3 ell .. ., II < j tu ~ ::= g oS en t:: "'Ei S .. .: e . 0 u oS u o u !l - .~ e -= '" tJ > '.= " ~ ~oS g oS 5-8da';cS u ... '" .... ! '" .. .. - .. ~ .. .. CO ~ il -i. .. c; i .... ~ Q 9 .... ~ ~ .... ;; 8 g c- .- " 1! > ,,'= E -< .." ~ ~.~.~ !l :a'- a 0 _.:: tIlu",Q ~ u... .~ .;;olt sHoo ~ a .S .9 =,-g .. ., ~ c. .S!a QO .., C B .9 ~ Oa~ . - .. ~:( g ;J .- u -g a ",..0 ... .., >> ... >> .. ~ . .. ~ ~'ii'o '0 0 'Uc ii:Oii o u_ ~-co rn ..s-a .,;:: ~.5 "0 :-"__ -5 "'C - .!:l co c.. t1 .0 C t::: '0 ..C] 00 =,.- ..i'lJ!_.~~il.!l ~'_";I-rn -00 .::I~ ]!u,ei'-'- ~ ooCl':lCCIlC.c _uj.5...,-~=. .s~.g,~~u"Oc ,",,~~'ig'Eii.g ooCQ.=ur.J-cl.... '.-::i:t:>uci'}C'llIu"CI =-~:c~~oo~ .g.S e!.~ ~a~..= "'0 ...."... .2!'o8"""-,8,; .-=ofil::~Ei~_- ::E:=,..CQl4=ocn""""'l..!:! c. 0" .- CQ .. ec~il ~-5 e "CI 0 Co) :; ~o co 0 .=gE'7~:Eu~ .ccau.ca ;.... ",8~~"~"~ .5 >> ~ ~ ~._ oS 1i" ~~Ol.,;c.> zEo""s.!! :J c.> li e.. il-.s dnucuo>.un ooc::.g~.g.o'Cc:: - .... '" ~ ;; .... '" ~ 0' '" I .. " = = " ":::: :.!t !l ,,," ICE -.:...0 .:p Q ~ ~ I ~ ~ t.:l o ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ < C ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ C ~ - --'101 .::; '.- .- ... ~ .~ ~;. .=: ,.= ....,0.. " .- ..-;; Cl ... ""'85 ).~)~ ~,,: " ,S' il..;;.5 ,ca,ll= u.", " = c-=.. "" Jo E c..~ O' "CI ~ <<J U _. c.s-a= . :,c E II Ii ~ ~ "e: U... > ~.... '_ .~ .. u '= .;: 1:) ,!I'll'" "'.. '" ,,[lI~oE==Q ''''::'''c!!~= ::E ~ J:l " ... 1U =' ;: iiI r; 1l .;; .2.s~ ~G.l ~"an;~l; -.r:J' ~ c -d' ~ fg ::0- l=O -;; C 1IJ .- :\l.g.;;Q.o:5! '. "ll..." ",_ !! ... r.t.:I -= C c ._" 10 ~ ~ CI':I ~ Y 1'1.1 10.5 ... 00'- 'iSg~.5F:]' " "... fj ~cn f! = 1;.'0:3 00 Ii a ue.~-g=cr.I .c CD.S: Cd fA ~ !! u"'~ oS t""l "..c:: t '0 o < "ii .. _.5 cO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:E ".'ll e u cu:;:! U '.c"'J. "Ot.J-~ c.u~==~ o oS': ::I "S. ~ .... ... u = u ;: e uu.-=ooS"CIU 1; "0 rt.I ',;:1 < "'0::5 =.!:I g..::! .. !3 ,,~ " Q.!!! 10 Ce6.3=~.,':l .~ .a u u ~ >. 1'1.1 -;eo.!3-cn.c= =u.sc..=;u ",." N " ~ -;; c:.~ c:i."CI = u .5 "'f: .. = ".;; u'> u ~. -s Cw 5 II ,,'C < " 10 :.u u-g~~ ~'~g c. U l.'IlI - l:l l""! c: C ... u 0.::1. = U > .- 8.. )( ~ lL~.8 ~.- g 0Cl en ~ CIS 0 c.. c. " .10 ~ .5 .. ... :> -... e < 00 d lU >. c c CQ 'is 'a .;; ::I ;'- r; 10 _ ,:: C/JUQ.Q !i " .. '~ ';;10& s8CIJ ~ tii.5 .9 ::I "2 ~ " ~ /:l. .~ bQ u .., " .S 8- ~ !! .. ~ ,., ".0 .gCD. o .5 - " ~.!!l ::2SbO " .- 10 ",,,- 10 g .S U"CQ .!-=ClI c cu s tii'.~ 10 .",_u fa OO{l2.~ ,'': cu CI:l rn.5u-5-ge>'2 ;@ Q. uc-EfJC;:c.=_ ....08 -S~o5'2C1:lJ;!~=g~-58 ~"-';ll "~8 .c~ o a.:::l u oe"C.s "0 '': ___ >...VJ I,.;, "U'c .a~c~=cu.c~ is ~Q... " ~ l::: &'-10 8';;.~ tl .___ .c.:::lC::_",--_"""VJeo -wCll CI O~""""""'Io'-'" :Ocu:::ciO=y"OClICQr.;;;;>- ._oC C'_CO U4loC_CJc - VJ u._t)..c u CJ.c VJ 0'- 0 ~ ~~ u 2 : oS..! 0 r3 'C "8 CJ r,j e il 2 1;; .S:! l!l "':;; :E &'c ~ 8 ,,:o>1i.i=.-:==fJca> fJ .=: cay C10>VJ.cU'-C1C.~u ;; ~ ~ 8 CJ 'E 5 9 ; ~ .g :;'1: ~ ~.8"O 00-5:'os ~'Q oo~ c ~ u = _ ~.5 _ ~ CO 0 00.5.::1 u 0 U Q...~= ..." "''''" ~ "'...- '" >", "-6-5 ~'=.!/'- g "'".... "VJ~ .~u':=~'88C1:l.9:5! =s8'ii-g=en"iiiCu.;;'E~ <VJCII~'i~ """u:=S.gcaoca ~'- U~S~-S _:r:8c; ~o ~ ~ ~ ;j'ti;2! ~]~B:E ell e ""::: 10 .- 2 1;; ca .. 00 .- '" tI.)~~-u~_trn~==~..c .."'.."-ll....." 10 0_';; N<" =<c :;;.9 C = ~ H~ t;.9'; 00 ca ._.cu:::lcaC';leo.c~ ~ g '" ~ ~ ~ 0; " g.~ .- .. ... :> ~... ~ < ClQ c .... >. c 0 ~ -'-.- = ~.iIl ; 6 _.:: ",UQ.Q ,; " .. .~ ';;08- .9 ~ 0.0 ~ ;.5 .9 = "i ~ '" ~ c.. .5!i CO u .., " .S C. o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ... ".0 .g CO . u.s - " ~.!!! "" 10 00 d'a .sa 10 g.S U"CQ - ]~~ cE .~ eo cc..t:lc o 8..2.9 ".::;: 0 CJ- ca U'- g .~ ~ ii =: .~ u > ~ ::E.o~Q _10" ...;~oco -~ en ~.6 j:rC--... Q eo en = Q~~"O "'108-= <<Iou ~ : l;i~ ~ = CO 0 """ ~ r; " ~ ~Q :.: e:C2 . 10 '" ",.5 ~" ="Eca< = C':S CO CO '" E C - ~ ,,'''' ; =~5rn .. ; :> " C'I.:ltl1~-S "'10 C'f'i ~ >. r;! CO .. .0 ." ~ '" ~ .., 0; !;; .. ~ ~I on I Q e ~ I ~ CI o f CI ~ \2 ~ ~ < CI ~ ~ o ::E z o != < CI ~ 'll c c '" 0'. :::1$ 5"6. c 8- - 0 "u ~ ., - .. Q ~ ] .-11--":.. . :a --.':, .. .... l! ~ - = .. '" '" .- J.. '5 . ..c:- 'C .,. < .>~- ".l!l J:l '7= -._:.c ..... _,Go) ,= II " ,,,.~ 0..:. :="0' _ =.,', ....1<'8 c..5iIo4,= < .u , " .. '" '" .. -=- '" 5 !!S " .. ::E~ t ." :e g .. j ..'a -'~ !l '0 ~'ii ill! ,_5 ],;;;~g 0'= uS Q.c.D.c... .-en ell u"" S'-Vole uwUc..:e.sUoCQ,QC :=.!:!-= u ~.-= "oS u CO ~ .s; ."= U .&J m = ~ >--.."" 0 .::: tG 5'~ ag~ 8~~s~!o~ u ~ = '" co::::; ';l .... U "0 - .: . u u c 5 cr; '"' Vol as cu >,- 5 oS as.S~-5.a'> ~ c.t:~. 'CiS .~ bG.B ! SO"g :6 8 --: B ~ ~ -5 '8 .13 -;; u.....c ,0 u ~ ~ oS r..- il 0 II !:!-5.g ll.5-5'~il g.lIl ~ :e e '" "d C = g""" CJ ... c: .-::: 5 . c~ ;~.2:;'c e ~.:~ ~"'O.f!",~u_uQ.,cu._ '~'=CI':ICU ::sC>uo.,>.c coCJ"~~~UOOIC:r: ~ ,g e.g ca co ~ "0 .... ;; ~= en dS .9 ~ =" c ~ 8 ; :s -0 '= g..~ ""'.CJC 0(1:1 -'0- to) .~ C'CI 8 >'"= ~ u i"= .... :s s u .... ,=CJU1"ICUoca v.t .. .... !:! .e e c '" ~ 8 ~ c il ~ ...D..... .... '+-0 .... .! 0 .... ._ "'- -... CI.l'_ =' U--""'l.....=._~-" '''''oJ c= C~aJ,J:lCJ--.;;;I -5!:!:tl8-d.c""!.!=e .c u 0"0 f U co en 0.0'= ... u W :;'S =.... c::! is ~.s.:; 19 Q.E en 0 t3 c::l 8. 0 - '"' 0.... 8 u .~ 5e.58=?a':;~:E~ -F>"C "'''B floc Q1;l ~ " " - "'... 'E" ".c C/l'" gg ;:J~ "'gb ",- ,..]= ~g = " " '" og - U-u- "", .s~ :€s ~ " ,,,is. tE .!l ~ " " .<>- =a .... -5~ =0<;. '" . '~:;a :il~ 8:~ ~.s ~"S '. ., is. a 86 = S 1l..c .. ~ .." '2 :€ g~ 'S '" ~ ::O;l:l g... '.c 8 .. '" """ :.s = ~s = " zr8 .~~ ,,- eo:! .." = " ;a";; u ::::t::: 0 " '" ; .c .. '. "0 bO"'E. fa';;; e .."", .5:g ~ "'E, E; '" " = "'''' '-'='~ "'.. '" u-5t:: '" 'C ; a u "'.c > .. .. - .~.~~ ors.... - ..." .....-5 "''' " 'C,;:. "" c..t-2 ~ ~ 1;: ~ ~ ~ ~ o .... - ~ '" ~ ~ J ;; ~ '" .. ~ ~, o '" Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations FSEIR SCH#199910l123 [NOTE: This may be changed as it is still under review by counsel at time of publication] [DRAFT] CANDIDATE FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN. SPECIFIC PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS FOR THE IVDA AREA AND ASSOCIATED WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN FOR UNSERVED IVDA AREAS AND REVISIONS TO THE CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PROJECT STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 1999101123 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1 1.1 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations ...................1 1.2 Document Format ......................................................................................2 1.3 Custodian and Location of Records ...........................................................3 2. PROJECT SUMMARY .........................................................................................3 2.1 Project Location .........................................................................................3 2.2 Project Description .....................................................................................4 2.3 Discretionary Actions .................................................................................6 2.4 Statement of Objectives .............................................................................6 3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION............................7 4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES DETERMINED NOT TO BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT ...........................................................................8 5. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH ARE DETERMINED NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT OR WHICH CAN BE AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE..........9 5.1 Land Use....................................................................................................9 5.2 Earth Resources ......................................................................................13 5.3 HydrologylWater Quality ..........................................................................18 5.4 Transportation/Circulation ............... ........ ...... ........ ................ ....... .... ....... .28 5.5 Air Quality.................. ................... ....... ..... ....... ..................................... ....41 5.6 Noise ......................... ......... ........................ .................................... ...... ....42 5.7 Public Services and Utilities - Water Supply............................................46 5.8 Public Services and Utilities - Sanitary Sewers........................................49 5.9 Public Services and Utilities - Solid Waste...............................................51 5.10 Public Services and Utilities - Fire Protection...........................................55 5.11 Public Services and Utilities - Law Enforcement ......................................59 5.12 Human Health ..........................................................................................62 5.13 Aesthetics...................................................... ...........................................69 5.14 Cultural Resources................................................................................... 73 5.15 Socioeconomics ....................................................................................... 75 5.16 Biological Resources.. .................................................................. ............ 78 6. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR THAT CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SiGNIFiCANCE................................................................................82 Findings/Overriding Considerations Page i 6.1 Land Use - Cumulative.............................................................................82 6.2 Transportation/Circulation - Cumulative ...................................................83 6.3 Air Quality.................. ......... ....... ......... .......... .................... ........................84 6.4 Energy - Cumulative.................................................................................90 6.5 Noise - Cumulative.......................................:...........................................91 7. FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCEMENT IMPACTS.........................92 8. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES .......................................................92 8.1 EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. .... .............. ..... ............. ......... ........ ...... ............. ... ...... ..........93 8.2 Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan......................................................93 8.3 Citrus Plaza Project..................................................................................94 9. FINDINGS REGARDING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ..11............................................-.........................................................97 10. OTHER FINDINGS .............................................................................................97 11. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.......................................98 Findings/Overriding Considerations Page;; 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations The California Environmental Quality Act (CECA) and the State CECA Guidelines, and the County of San Bernardino CEQA Guidelines promulgated thereunder, require that the environmental impacts of a project be examined before a project is approved. Specifically, regarding findings, CECA Guidelines Section 15091 provides: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects on the environment. 2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can or should be, adopted by that other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. (b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The finding in subsection (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. (d) When making the findings required in subsection (a)( 1). the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. Regarding a Statement of Overriding Considerations, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 provides: (a) CECA requires the decisionmaker to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 1 project. If the benefits of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered" acceptable" . (b) Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. This statement may be necessary if the agency also makes a finding under Section 15091 (a)(2) or (a)(3). (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. Having received, reviewed and considered the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project, SCH No. 1999101123 (FSEIR), as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Findings) are hereby adopted by the County of San Bernardino (County) in its capacity as the CEOA Lead Agency. These Findings set forth the environmental basis for current and subsequent discretionary actions to be undertaken by the County and responsible agencies for the implementation of a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan to serve unincorporated Area A of the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Plan Area and the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall site and for implementation of related revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall (Citrus Plaza) project. These actions, together with proposed General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code amendments (Plan Amendments) for unincorporated IVDA Areas, are collectively referred to herein as the Project. 1.2 Document Format These Findings have been organized into the following sections: (1) Section 1 provides an introduction to these Findings. (2) Section 2 provides a summary of the Project and overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of the Project, and a statement of the Project's objectives. (3) Section 3 provides a summary of previous environmental reviews related to the Project area that took place prior to the environmental review done specifically for the Project, and a summary of public participation in the environmental review for the Project. (4) Section 4 sets forth findings regarding those environmental impacts which were determined during the notice of preparation period either not to be relevant to the Project or which were determined to clearly not manifest at levels which were deemed to be significant for consideration at the Project-specific leve\. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 2 (5) Section 5 sets forth findings regarding significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the FSEIR which the County has determined are either not significant or can feasibly be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through the imposition of mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project. (6) Section 6 sets forth findings regarding those significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the FSEIR which will or which may result from the Project and which the County has determined cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. (7) Section 7 sets forth findings regarding growth inducement impacts. (8) Section 8 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the proposed Project. (9) Section 9 contains findings' regarding the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) adopted for the Project (10) Section 10 consists of other relevant findings adopted by the County with respect to the Project. ( 11 ) Section 11 consists of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which sets forth the County's reasons for finding that specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations associated with the Project outweigh the Project's potential unavoidable environmental effects, 1.3 Custodian and Location of Records The documents and other materials which constitute the administrative record for the County's actions related to the Project are located at the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department, 385 North Arrowhead Drive, 3" Floor, San Bernardino, California 92415. The Land Use Services Department is the custodian of the administrative record for the Project. 2. PROJECT SUMMARY 2.1 Project Location The Project site is located within the unincorporated portion of the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan Area (IVDA Area), which includes eleven areas (Areas A through K) and is located between the cities of San Bernardino, Loma Linda, Highland and Redlands. With the exception of Areas A and I, all of these areas are adequately served by water and sewer infrastructure. Area A consists of approximately 969 acres, while Area I consists of approximately 82 acres. Area A is generally bounded by the SR-90 freeway to the east, Lugonia Avenue to the south, California Street to the west and Palmetto Avenue and the Santa Ana River to the north. Area A is also sometimes referred to as the "Donut Hole." Area I is located west of Bryn Mawr Avenue and is generally bounded by San Bernardino Avenue to the south, Mountain View Avenue to the west and the Santa Ana River on the north. In December 2000. after the close of the public comment period on the Draft SEIR, Area I was annexed to the City of Redlands. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 3 Accordingly, Area I is no longer subject to the land use jurisdiction of the County and has therefore been removed from the proposed Project. The Citrus Plaza project is an approximately 125-acre, master-planned, multi-phased, mixed-use/retail commercial center located within the southeasterly portion of IVDA Area A. Regional access to the Citrus Plaza site is provided via the area's freeway network and arterial highway system, which includes the SR-30 Freeway, the 1-10 Freeway. Local access is available via Lugonia Avenue to the south, San Bernardino Avenue to the north and Alabama Street to the west. Figure 1-1 of the FSEIR depicts the proposed Project area and surrounding incorporated cities. Because Area I has been removed from the Project, the total area for the Project, including the proposed Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and the Citrus Plaza project, is approximately 969 acres. 2.2 Project Description The Project consists of the following components: (1) repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) as it pertains to the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County; (2) General Plan and Development Code amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the IVDA Area which incorporate relevant provisions from the EVCSP; (3) a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for unserved or underserved portions of unincorporated IVDA Area A; (4) revisions to the Citrus Plaza project; and (5) a development agreement between the County and the developer of the Citrus Plaza Project, Redlands Joint Venture', LLC. The FSEIR serves as a program EIR for the repeal of the EVCSP and General Plan and Development Code amendments, and a project EIR for the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and the Citrus Plaza project. The repeal of the EVCSP and General Plan and Development Code amendments are required to implement the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and, in turn, the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan is required to implement the proposed revisions to the Citrus Plaza project. 2.2.1 Specific Plan Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments The Specific Plan repeal and General Plan and Development Code amendments were initiated by the County to develop land use, water and wastewater policies to facilitate revitalization of the unincorporated territory in the IVDA Area. The intent of the proposed actions is to make it clear that the policies of San Bernardino County allow for provision of public services by agencies other than the City of Redlands in unincorporated IVDA Areas. Rather than proposing extensive plan amendments, the Project proposes to repeal the EVCSP as it applies to unincorporated areas. The Project retains relevant provisions of the EVCSP by adding the land use plan, community design guidelines and development standards from the EVCSP to the County General Plan and Development Code. The proposed amendments apply to IVDA Areas A and H, as depicted on Figure 1 - 1 of the FSEIR. A summary of the policies and regulations affected by the proposed actions is presented in Table 3-1 of the FSEIR. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 4 I 2.2.2 Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan The Water and Wastewater' Facilities Plan aspect of the Project is a plan that designates County Service Area 70 EV-1 (CSA 70 EV-1) to be the water and sewer provider for the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area that are currently unserved, i.e., Area A, and includes the installation of water lines, water reservoirs and sewer lines to serve the area. The Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan may also include the future construction of water and/or wastewater treatment facilities. Most of the proposed utility infrastructure (except the reservoirs and any treatment facilities) would be located underground and within existing roadway and utility rights-of-way. The Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan allows water and sewer services to be provided via a variety of different options. However, the Plan expresses a preference that such services be provided as follows: CSA 70 EV-l will supply all services to Area A by purchasing water supply and sewer capacity from the City of Redlands. However, if a definitive agreement with the City of Redlands is not approved by both the City of Redlands and CSA 70 EV-l by November 1, 2001, then CSA 70 EV-1 shall provide water supply via local wells within Area A (Water Option 1) and shall purchase sewer capacity from the City of San Bernardino (Sewer Option 1). The environmental impacts of the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan are analyzed in: (a) the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza project, which evaluated City of Redlands' provision of services and was incorporated by reference into the FSEIR, and (b) the FSEIR, which evaluated a number of water and sewer options (referred to in the FSEIR as the Infrastructure Facilities). most of which have been included in the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan (Water Options 1, 2A, 28, 3A, 38, 3C, 4A, 48, 5A, 58, 6A, 68, and Sewer Options 1, 2A, 28 and 3). 2.2.3 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall The proposed Citrus Plaza Regional Mall is an approximately 125-acre, master-planned commercial project located within the unincorporated IVDA Area A. The proposed mixed- use regional center will include restaurants and entertainment uses in addition to traditional retail uses. At full buildout, the Citrus Plaza project is planned to include approximately 1.85 million square feet, constructed in a number of phases. The potential environmental effects of the Citrus Plaza project were first assessed in a Draft and Final EIR (SCH No. 94082084) prepared by the County in 1995. Within that document, infrastructure services (i.e., sewer and water) to support the Citrus Plaza project were to be provided by the City of Redlands. Following certification of the 1995 Final EIR in January 1996, attempts by the project applicant, Redlands Joint Venture, to implement this aspect of the Citrus Plaza project failed. In response, the County prepared and in November 1996 certified a Supplemental EIR wherein the infrastructure needs of the Citrus Plaza project were to be met via on-site facilities operated by CSA 70 EV-1. 8ased on the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR, the County approved a Concept Plan and Preliminary Development Plan for the entire site, a Final Development Plan for Phase I (approximately 49 acres), and a commercial parcel map for the Citrus Plaza project site. Following the certification of the Supplemental EIR by the County, changes to the Citrus Plaza project approvals based upon the 1996 Supplement were set aside by the Courts. However, the Citrus Plaza project approvals based on the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR remain in effect. As approved in January 1996, the Citrus Plaza project is required to obtain water and sewer services from the City of Redlands. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 5 The primary revision proposed for the Citrus Plaza project as part of this Project is to allow water and sewer services to be provided by an alternative method, according to the proposed Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for the unincorporated IVDA Area. Minor revisions to the site plan are also included in the Citrus Plaza project, however, no changes are proposed that would substantially affect the types of uses, the total square footage, or points of ingress and egress to the site. A new development agreement will also be considered with the Citrus Plaza project as currently proposed. 2.3 Discretionary Actions Project implementation may include, but is not limited to, the following discretionary actions by the County and Responsible Agencies having jurisdiction by law over the Project site and/or resources contained thereon: (1) Repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) as it pertains to the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County; (2) Approval of General Plan and Development Code amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the IVDA Redevelopment Project Area which incorporate respective provisions from the EVCSP; (3) Approval of a Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Area A of the IVDA Area; (4) Approval of revisions to the Citrus Plaza project, including Tentative Map Conditions of Approval, a Preliminary Development Plan and Final Development Plan; and (5) Approval of a new development agreement between the County and Redlands Joint Venture, LLC for the project. 2.4 Statement of Objectives A number of Project-specific objectives have been formulated for the Project. These objectives include, but are not limited to, the following: IVDA Area: (1) To identify a variety of service options which meet the water and sewer demands for development within the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area that are either unserved or underserved. (2) To allow water and sewer service to be supplied to these unincorporated areas by the County of San Bernardino or another agency. (3) Repeal the County's portion of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to eliminate cumbersome water and sewer service provisions that effectively preclude the provision of these services to the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area, while retaining valued land use and design standards and community design guidelines. Citrus Plaza Project: To provide a greater degree of flexibility in the design of the Citrus Plaza project so as to better respond to changes in market conditions during build out of the project. AndingslOveniding Considerations Page 6 3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION On September 6, 1989, the County of San Bernardino adopted the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP). This action established the EVCSP as the regulatory planning document for the unincorporated portions of San Bernardino County that are within the boundaries of the Specific Plan. A Draft and Final EIR (SCH No. 94082084) was prepared by the County in September and December 1995, respectively, evaluating the potential environmental effects of the Citrus Plaza project. The Citrus Plaza project, at that time, relied on certain infrastructure (i.e., sewer and water) services to be provided by the City of Redlands. In January 1996, the Final EIR was certified and the Citrus Plaza project was approved by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. In the January 1996 approval, the County approved a Concept Plan and Preliminary Development Plan for the entire Citrus Plaza site, a Final Development Plan for Phase I (approximately 49 acres), and a commercial parcel map. After the County approved the Citrus Plaza project, the applicant, Redlands Joint Venture, was unable to obtain service agreements from the City of Redlands. In response, the County in September 1996 prepared a Supplemental EIR (SCH No. 94082084) wherein the infrastructure needs of the Citrus Plaza project were met via on-site facilities. The County certified the Supplemental EIR in November 1996. Following the certification of the Supplemental EIR by the County, revisions to the Citrus Plaza project approvals made based on the November 1996 Supplement were set aside by the Court in 1997 on the ground, among other things, that the EVCSP required that water and sewer services be provided by the City of Redlands. However, the January 1996 approvals based on the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR were not effected by this Court ruling and remain valid. In response to the Court decision invalidating the November 1996 approvals, the County is proposing changes to its planning documents with regard to the regulation of development within the unincorporated areas within the EVCSP. The County determined that these changes, as well as the proposed revisions to the Citrus Plaza project, were required to be evaluated in an EIR. On October 18, 1999, the San Bernardino County Planning Division prepared and disseminated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 1999101123), which was designed to encourage agency and public comment on the environmental issues and the alternatives to be analyzed in the Subsequent EIR. All agen::ies, entities, groups and individuals who submitted comments on the previously prepared environmental documentation and related technical studies for the Citrus Plaza project were again provided formal notice and encouraged to submit comments for inclusion in the Subsequent EIR. On August 29, 2000, the Draft Subsequent EIR was circulated for a publiC review, as required under CEOA Guidelines Sections 15105 and 15087. During this review period, interested agencies, organizations and members of the public were invited to submit written comments on the Draft Subsequent EIR. The 45-day public review of the Draft Subsequent EIR concluded on October 12, 2000. All written comments received by the County during the public review period, including several comment letters received after the close of the public review period, were assembled and included in the FSEIR. Written responses to these comments which raised FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 7 issues regarding the Project and its potential environmental effects were incorporated therein. The FSEIR was published in June 2001 and was made available to commenting agencies, individuals, and the general public. The FSEIR for the Project consists of the following documents: (1) Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project, SCH No. 1999101123 (June 2001), which includes updated information regarding the Technical Appendices included as Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR dated August 2000, and (2) Volume II - Technical Appendices -Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project, SCH No.1 9991 01123 (August 2000). The County Planning Commission considered certification of the FSEIR and approval of the Project at a noticed public hearing on September 20, 2001. Following the Planning Commission's review, the Planning Commission formulated its recommendations on the Project and its accompanying CEQA documentation and forwarded those recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. Those recommendations included, but were not limited to, approval of the Project, as modified to include specific mitigation measures and conditions of approval, certification of the FSEIR, adoption of the MMRP, and adoption of these Findings. The County Board of Supervisors held a noticed public hearing to consider certification of the FSEIR and approval of the Project on October 23, 2001. At that hearing, the Board considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the information presented in the FSEIR and the record for the Project, and the public comments and testimony received at the hearing. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES DETERMINED NOT TO BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT Based on the Project's Initial Study and responses to the Project's NOP, the following environmental issues were determined by the County to be either inapplicable to the Project based upon the nature of the Project and/or the absence of any potential impact related to that issue or because the issue was potentially impacted to a degree that could clearly be seen to be less than significant and, therefore, not warranting further consideration in the FSEIR. No substantial evidence has been presented to or identified by the County which would modify or otherwise alter the County's less-than-significant determination for each of the following environmental issues: (1) natural resources/mineral resources; (2) public services - schools and libraries; (3) utilities - electric, gas and communication services; and (41 recreation. See FSEIR ~ 2.3, incorporated herein by reference. Accordingly, the FSEIR does not analyze potential impacts of the Project as to these environmental issues. Findings/Oveniding Considerations Page 8 5. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH ARE DETERMINED NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT OR WHICH CAN BE AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE The County finds, based upon the threshold criteria for significance presented in the FSEIR, that the following environmental effects of the Project will not manifest at levels which have been determined by the County to be significant or, if significant, feasible mitigation measures identified in the FSEIR and adopted by the County as conditions of Project approval will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those effects to a less-than- significant level. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the FSEIR, no substantial evidence has been submitted to or identified by the County which indicates that the following impacts would, in fact, occur at levels which would necessitate a determination of significance herein. Environmental effects related to the repeal of the EVCSP and General Plan, and Development Code amendments in the following areas were found to be insignificant: Land Use, Earth Resources, Hydrology/Water Quality, Transportation/Circulation, Air Quality, Noise, Public Services and Utilities, Human Health, Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, Socioeconomics, and Biological Resources. Environmental effects related to the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and the Citrus Plaza project in the following areas were found to be either insignificant or could be mitigated to a level of insignificance: Land Use (except cumulative loss of agricultural lands), Earth Resources, Hydrology/Water Quality, Transportation/Circulation (except cumulative regional freeway impacts), Noise (except cumulative impacts), Public Services and Utilities, Human Health, Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, Socioeconomics, and Biological Resources. 5.1 Land Use EVCSP Repeal, General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.1.1 Environmental Impact: The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments could conflict with applicable adopted policies of the County or other relevant agencies. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Land Use are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The County initiated a General Plan amendment to develop land use, water and wastewater policies to encourage economic development and the provision of these services to unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area, in particular Area A. In addition, other minor revisions to clarify the County and cities roles for land use planning within the Sphere of Influence (501) areas and updates to land use districts are proposed. The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as it applies to Areas A and H and make it clear that the policies of San Bernardino County allow for the provision of publiC services by agencies other than the City of Redlands in the unincorporated IVDA Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 9 Areas. This is necessary because following adoption of the EVCSP, the City of Redlands has not subsequently implemented those master plan improvements located in the area of the approved Citrus Plaza project as identified in the EVCSP. Rather, the City has adopted policies, including Measure U, which inhibit or preclude the provision of public services to projects consistent with the EVCSP which are located outside of the City of Redlands' corporate boundaries unless the site has been annexed to the City. In addition, Area A is no longer within the City of Redlands' 501. Therefore, the proposed amendments are needed to allow such services to be provided to these unincorporated areas within the IVDA Area. (b) The proposed action also includes amendments to the County General Plan with corresponding changes to the San Bernardino County Development Code. No changes are proposed for the development standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as applicable to the unincorporated IVDA Areas A and H. Accordingly, limited agricultural activities within IVDA Area A will be maintained as an interim land use pending ultimate development of this area. (c) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would simply allow the County to approve development in unincorporated County IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to IVDA Area A consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed Plan Amendments would not result in a change in land use, substantive increase or change in the geographical area subject to the proposed Plan Amendments, or substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable within Area A and easements along the proposed pipeline routes. Therefore, the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would not result in any impacts to land use beyond those levels which have been previously disclosed in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan EIR or the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, and are thus less than significant. (d) The proposed actions are consistent with adopted General Plan policies, including, but not limited to: (1) Policy/Action WW-5 because, although community sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, provision for establishment of a Community Service District or County Service Area is allowed for areas, such as IVDA Area A, where such a service district does not exist and because the proposed amendments would incorporate all relevant elements of the EVCSP into the County General Plan and Development Code; (2) Policy/Action LU-9 because, in certain situations, the County may determine that it is not appropriate for development to conform to city development policies and standards and here, the County has determined that the County's regional goals and policies for planning and development in the IVDA Area require special attention and that the provision of services for the IVDA Area from public or private sources other than 501 cities is necessary because the City of Redlands has been unwilling or unable to provide such services. In addition, IVDA Area A is no longer within the City of Redlands' 501; and (3) Policy/Action LU-10 because the proposed Project would incorporate all relevant elements and land use designations of the EVCSP into the County General Plan and Development Code (including land use and zoning maps) thus ensuring that land use conflicts between the County and other agencies that have jurisdictional control over lands located within the County will be minimized, and permitting cooperation with adjacent municipalities and other regional agencies to address regional problems such FindingS/OverridIng Considerations Page 10 Areas. This is necessary because following adoption of the EVCSP, the City of Redlands has not subsequently implemented those master plan improvements located in the area of the approved Citrus Plaza project as identified in the EVCSP. Rather, the City has adopted policies, including Measure U, which inhibit or preclude the provision of public services to projects consistent with the EVCSP which are located outside of the City of Redlands' corporate boundaries unless the site has been annexed to the City. In addition, Area A is no longer within the City of Redlands' 501. Therefore, the proposed amendments are needed to allow such services to be provided to these unincorporated areas within the IVDA Area. (b) The proposed action also includes amendments to the County General Plan with corresponding changes to the San Bernardino County Development Code. No changes are proposed for the development standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as applicable to the unincorporated IVDA Areas A and H. Accordingly, limited agricultural activities within IVDA Area A will be maintained as an interim land use pending ultimate development of this area. (e) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would simply allow the County to approve development in unincorporated County IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to IVDA Area A consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed Plan Amendments would not result in a change in land use, substantive increase or change in the geographical area subject to the proposed Plan Amendments, or substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable within Area A and easements along the proposed pipeline routes. Therefore, the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would not result in any impacts to land use beyond those levels which have been previously disclosed in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan EIR or the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, and are thus less than significant. (d) The proposed actions are consistent with adopted General Plan policies, including, but not limited to: (1) Policy/Action WW-5 because, although community sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, provision for establishment of a Community Service District or County Service Area is allowed for areas, such as IVDA Area A, where such a service district does not exist and because the proposed amendments would incorporate all relevant elements of the EVCSP into the County General Plan and Development Code; (2) Policy/Action LU-9 because, in certain situations, the County may determine that it is not appropriate for development to conform to city development policies and standards and here, the County has determined that the County's regional goals and policies for planning and development in the IVDA Area require special attention and that the provision of services for the IVDA Area from public or private sources other than 501 cities is necessary because the City of Redlands has been unwilling or unable to provide such services. In addition, IVDA Area A is no longer within the City of Redlands' 501; and (3) Policy/Action LU-10 because the proposed Project would incorporate all relevant elements and land use designations of the EVCSP into the County General Plan and Development Code (including land use and zoning maps) thus ensuring that land use conflicts between the County and other agencies that have jurisdictional control over lands located within the County will be minimized, and permitting cooperation with adjacent municipalities and other regional agencies to address regional problems such FindingS/OverridIng Considerations Page 10 as traffic congestion, air pollution, water quality, waste management and job/housing imbalance. (e) The proposed actions are also consistent with SCAG RCPG policies. See FSEIR Table 5.1-2. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 5.1 and 11 at letter #5. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 5.1.2 Environmental Impact: The construction and operation of water supply and wastewater treatment facilities will introduce a new land use and, therefore, have the potential to create land use conflicts with adjacent areas. Potential air quality, noise, human health and aesthetics impacts are addressed under corresponding topical sections in these Findings. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to land Use are anticipated as a result of the proposed Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Six options for the provision of water service and two options for the provIsion of sewer service to Area A have been identified in the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. These options replace the connection to the City of Redlands system described in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and the on-site (Citrus Plaza) system proposed in the Citrus Plaza Supplemental EIR. The proposed water supply facilities would be built incrementally as development occurs in Area A. (b) Specific performance requirements for all land uses and structures within the East Valley Corridor planning area provided by the EVCSP have been incorporated by the Project into the County's General Plan and Development Code, therefore, potential land use conflicts caused by the water and sewer facilities affecting other off-site areas will be avoided. In addition, based on the distance of the proposed water supply facilities from other off-site uses and screening by both a perimeter wall and intervening structures, the water supply facilities would not result in the creation of land use conflicts with any off-site uses. Finally, since neither the proposed water delivery or sewer systems would result in an increase in the amount of square footage of commercial development presently authorized on the approved Citrus Plaza Project site and since the proposed improvements are clearly authorized under the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, no new land use impacts not previously discussed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR would result from the implementation of the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. ( c) The operation of both the water and wastewater facilities will necessitate the on-site storage of hazardous wastes. However, since residential development is neither authorized within the Regional Commercial District nor allowable in adjoining areas, no significant impacts would be expected to occur. FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 11 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.1; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.1. Citrus Plaza Project 5.1.3 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts from development of the Citrus Plaza could result from conversion of agricultural land to urban uses and inconsistency with applicable public policies. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Land Use are anticipated as a result of the proposed Citrus Plaza Mall project. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan designated the Citrus Plaza project site for a non-agricultural land use (regional commercial center). Although the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR indicated that there would be a significant adverse impact due to the loss of agricultural land, this would no longer occur since the Citrus Plaza site is no longer used for agricultural purposes due to the death and subsequent removal of citrus trees previously located on-site. In the context of existing uses, the current agricultural operations in Area A (i.e., citrus groves and truck gardening to the west and north) will not be directly impacted by the proposed Citrus Plaza project. The continuing operation of those uses is consistent with the planning policy to maintain agriculture as an interim land use. Therefore, the Citrus Plaza project would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to loss of agricultural resources. (b) As a result of the EVCSP planning process, the project site was formally designated for Regional Commercial use. Development of a regional commercial use on the Citrus Plaza project site would therefore be consistent with the land use policies and development standards outlined in both the EVCSP and the General Plans of the County of San Bernardino and the City of Redlands. The project site designated land uses are also consistent with the South Coast Air Ouality Management Plan. The floor area ratio (FAR) for the project is well within the limits permitted by the regional mall designation established by the EVCSP. Further, although a number of project specific design standards for the project as proposed differ from the standards contained in the EVCSP, the County's adopted Planned Development process provides a formal procedure for the consideration of such design variations. Accordingly, the proposed Citrus Plaza project conforms with the existing public policies applicable to the project site. (c) The January 1996 approvals for the Citrus Plaza project remain in effect, but the proposed project includes revisions to allow water and sewer services to be provided to the site by alternative methods from the City of Redlands, and to make minor revisions to the approved Preliminary and Final Development Plans for the project, and to adopt a new development agreement. Citrus Plaza remains a two phase development with Phase I still proposed as a Power Center located within the southerly portion of the project site. Phase II is still proposed to be a regional mall located north of the Power Center. At this time, two development scenarios are under consideration as a means of providing a degree of flexibility in the implementation of the Citrus Plaza project. FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 12 Furthermore, within each of the two scenarios a portion of the Phase I site is reconfigured with an alternate design. The revised Phase II project includes approximately 500,000 square feet, of development, while the project at buildout contains approximately 1.85 million square feet of development. The site acreage and amount of development proposed as part of the revised Phase I project would be equal to or iess than what was approved by the County in January 1996. Should Phase I utilize a smaller portion of the Citrus Plaza site, and/or a lesser amount of development, then Phase II would be expanded to the maximum site acreage and square footage previously approved by the County. In addition, the revised Phase I project would include the same or fewer number of drive-thru facilities, gas stations and a single theater in relation to that set forth in the Final Development Plan approved by the County in January, 1996. While minor revisions to the on-site circulation system are proposed, overall site access (i.e., driveway locations from perimeter streets) remains the same in both scenarios and substantially conforms to that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Because all potential land use impacts were adequately analyzed in the previously certified 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and the proposed changes to the Citrus Plaza project are minor, potential land use impacts are less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.1; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.1. 5.2 Earth Resources EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.2.1 Environmental Impact: The Project area is located in the highly seismic southern California region, within the influence of several fault systems that are considered active or potentially active. Therefore, the Project area is subject to earthquake-related impacts such as seismic ground-shaking, fault rupture and liquefaction. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Earth Resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would repeal the EVCSP, modify existing County General Plan policies, and make associated changes to the County Development Code to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A. The proposed amendments increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to this area. However, the amendments do not affect County General Plan standards related to policies for development occurring within areas containing geologic hazards. Because the proposed Plan Amendments do not affect policies related to earthquakes and earth resources, no significant effects related to earth resources are anticipated from implementation of the proposed Plan Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 13 r' Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.2. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Proiect 5.2.2 Environmental Impact: EarthQuakes. The Project area is located in the highly seismic southern California region within the influence of several fault systems that are considered active or potentially active, including the San Jacinto and San Andreas Fault systems. These active and potentially active earthquake faults are capable of producing potentially damaging seismic ground shaking in the Project area, fault rupture, liquefaction, subsidence and seiches. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Of the 30 active faults mapped within 100 kilometers (approximately 62 miles) of the Project area, 8 faults could impact the Project area and contribute to future seismicity in the area. Four of these 8 faults would generate the strongest seismic ground-shaking within the Project area during a major earthQuake, in consideration of their proximity to the Project area and a potential maximum credible earthquake event. However, there are no known active faults within IVDA Area A. (b) Both an unnamed fault and the Loma Linda fault cross the Project area westerly of Mountain View Avenue. trending in a northwesterly to southeasterly direction. Some of the proposed sewer and water pipelines could be within the fault rupture areas of these faults. Any sewer or water pipelines located within fault rupture areas will be designed. engineered and operated so that the pipelines will be able to withstand strong seismic ground shaking as a result of major earthquake. With additional engineering protection, as needed, no significant impacts are anticipated. In relation to ground rupture and unstable geologic units. no known faults, identified as either active or potentially active by the State Department of Mines and Geology, are present on the Citrus Plaza site. (c) Because of the potential for displacement along faults not classified as active, the County reserves the right to reQuire site-specific geotechnical analysis and mitigation for development located contiguous to potentially active faults, if deemed necessary by the County Geologist. In areas determined by the County Geologist to be subject to significant seismic shaking, all structures and facilities will be designed and constructed to withstand ground shaking forces of a minor earthQuake without damage. of a moderate earthquake without structural damage, and of a major earthquake without collapse. Critical, essential and high occupancy structures shall be designed and constructed to remain standing and functional following a major earthquake and shall be so engineered as to withstand maximum probable ground motion accelerations. (d) Seismically induced subsidence is a generally level, vertically downward movement caused by a lessening in soil water pressure, caused by fault- Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 14 produced shifts in the ground water. In addition to destabilizing a structure's foundation, subsidence can also result in sufficient reductions in elevation to cause the structure to be flooded by an adjacent body of water. Due to the anticipated depth to groundwater, estimated at 120 feet below ground surface, no significant impacts to the proposed Project from seismically induced subsidence are anticipated. ( e) Liquefaction is defined as the transitory transformation of sandy water-saturated alluvium with properties of a solid into a state possessing properties of a liquid as a result of earthquake shaking. The Project area is generally underlain by loose to dense silty sands and sands. The lack of groundwater present in the upper 50 feet of soil indicates that the soils beneath the Project area will have a low susceptibility to liquefaction. Groundwater levels are estimated to be deeper than 120 feet below the ground surface. Based upon the depth of groundwater and the Project area's low susceptibility to liquefaction potential, liquefaction impacts will not be significant for the majority of the water and sewer ,pipeline routes. However, the presence of locally occurring groundwater or perched groundwater cannot be ruled out, and may present a possibility for a localized occurrence of liquefaction at varying depths below the surface. (f) Liquefaction potential would be greater for those water pipeline options that would cross the Santa Ana River (e.g., Water Options 2B, 3A and 3C). Seismically induced liquefaction could occur due to intense ground-shaking in the saturated loose sediments of the Santa Ana River. Pipelines traversing liquefiable soils can result in pipeline failures, especially where the pipe goes from non-liquefiable to liquefiable soils. Without proper engineering features and controls, liquefaction could result in a significant environmental impact. This impact would affect only those infrastructure improvements that are not on the Citrus Plaza site. Mitigation has been adopted to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. (g) The only pipeline alignments susceptible to liquefaction are along San Bernardino Avenue west of California and those crossing the Santa Ana River to the north. Damage to buried pipelines from liquefaction is not expected to be as significant as to above ground structures. The pipelines, trenching and bedding will be designed specifically for the soil conditions encountered. There are a variety of construction methods available, such as those recommended by the Ductile Iron Pipe Association and the National Clay Pipe Institute, to ensure that the pipelines will be constructed so as to deal with any liquefaction hazards. Therefore, no significant impacts from liquefaction are anticipated. (h) Seiches are water surges (waves) within an enclosed body of water such as a lake or reservoir generated primarily by earthquakes. Seiching in reservoirs can occur when seismic shaking gives rise to a standing wave in the water, which strongly vibrates the structure. Tank failure could result in the sudden release of the reservoir's contents, causing localized flooding immediately downstream. Geotechnical hazards to the integrity of reservoirs are controlled through proper structural engineering of the reservoir to enable it to withstand expected seismic forces, thereby minimizing potential damage and associated hazards. With the implementation of design engineering and control features, no significant seiche-related impacts for Project reservoirs are anticipated. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 15 (i) The San Bernardino County General Plan includes policies for development occurring within areas containing geologic hazards which allow the risks from geologic hazards to be successfullY' mitigated through a combination of engineering, construction, land use and development standards. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.2 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No.1: A project-specific geotechnical study shall be performed by a registered engineering geologist. If this geotechnical study concludes that unsafe or unstable geologic features exist within the project area that will result in problematic construction and operation of the proposed project, the geologist will recommend specific engineering design features to reduce any impacts to a level of insignificance. Upon completion of that subsequent investigation, a general review of the project plans and specifications shall be conducted before they are finalized to verify that all geotechnical recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented during design. Mitigation Measure No.2: A geology report, prepared by a registered geologist, shall be filed with and approved by the Director of Building and Safety for the Citrus Plaza project and Special Districts for the infrastructure facilities. A deposit to cover the costs of the review shall be submitted with the report. An additional deposit may be required, or a refund issued, when the costs do not match the deposit. The review costs shall be paid in full prior to recordation of the final map. Mitigation Measure No.3 (Infrastructure Facilities not on Citrus Plaza Site): A registered engineering geologist will investigate areas within the project area that are potentially subject to liquefaction. Design studies may include borings and penetration tests in liquefiable areas along with a risk assessment of the design ground motion, if necessary . Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.2. 5.2.3 Environmental Impact: Soils. Shrinking and swelling of soils has the potential to damage building foundations, roads and other structures. In addition, the construction of the pipeline trenches will require shallow excavations in certain types of soil with unfavorable properties which can result in the need for major soil reclamation, special designs or intensive soil infrastructure. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The soils of IVDA Area A area are generally classified as Hanford Series sandy loam. This nearly level soil is on valley floors and toe slopes of Findings/Oyeniding Considerations Page 16 alluvial fans. Also included are small areas of Greenfield sandy loam and small scattered patches of soils that are loamy sand below depths of 40 inches. Runoff is slow and the hazard of erosion is slight if the soil is left unprotected. This soil is used for irrigated crops such as citrus and vegetable crops small grains and pasture. (b) The Citrus Plaza site is underlain by Quarternary alluvium. The alluvium deposits typically consist of unconsolidated layers of sands and silts. Beneath the upper layer of organic materials, native alluvium composed of sand, silty sand and gravelly sand was encountered. The total depth of the alluvium is estimated to be at least 50 feet. (c) Although problematic soil conditions are not anticipated for construction occurring in Hanford sandy loam soils, shallow excavations that require digging or trenching to a depth of less than 5 feet for water and sewer pipelines could be severe within certain soils found in the project area. Without proper engineering features and controls, this could result in a significant environmental impact. However, with the implementation of the engineering features described in FSEIR Sections 5.2.3.2.7 and 5.2.3.2.8, no significant impacts resulting from problematic soil conditions are anticipated. (d) Shrink-swell potential (e.g., expansive soils) is the relative change in volume to be expected of soil material with changes in moisture content, that is, the extent to which the soil shrinks as it dries out or swells when it gets wet. The extent of shrinking and swelling is influenced by the amount and kind of clay in the soil. Shrinking and swelling of soils has the potential to damage building foundations, roads and other structures. Soils in the project area have low shrink-swell potential and therefore no significant impacts are anticipated. (e) The construction of the pipeline trenches will result in the exc~vation of soil. This soil would be stockpiled in proximity of the trench for the period of time that the pipeline is being installed. This stockpiled soil is potentially subject to erosion. Without proper controls in the form of best management practices (BMPs), adverse erosion and water quality impacts may occur. Mitigation in the form of a menu of BMPs is recommended to address these potential impacts. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.2 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: MItigation Measure No. 4 (Infrastructure Facilities not on Citrus Plaza Sitel: The following BMPs, or their environmental equivalent, shall be incorporated as appropriate: . Earth dikes. Earth dikes are temporary berms or ridges of compacted soil that channel water to a desired location. . Drainage swales. A drainage swale is a channel lined with riprap, asphalt, concrete or other materials. They are installed to convey runoff without causing erosion. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 17 . Hay bales. Hay bales with filter fabric can be installed around any storm drain inlets that may be affected by construction, to prevent clogging by sediment. This includes storm drains in roadways that receive sediment from mud that is tracked onto pavement. . Sediment traps. Sediment traps can be installed in drainage pathways, at storm drain inlets or other discharge points from disturbed areas. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.2. Cumuletive Impacts 5.2.4 Environmental Impact: The Project, in conjunction with the Related Projects identified in FSEIR Section 4, has the potential to have cumulative impacts related to Earth Resources. . Finding: No significant cumulative adverse impacts with regard to Earth Resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) All Related Projects, as identified in Section 4 of the FSEIR, will experience a similar level of potential seismic effects as those forecasted for the proposed Project given the level of seismic activity throughout Southern California. These potential impacts are reduced to acceptable levels via compliance with all local building codes. Other earth resource impacts for projects within the EVCSP area will be mitigated to less than significant levels via compliance with the mitigation measures set forth for each specific project. Furthermore, general compliance with local codes relative to potential earth resource impacts will reduce such impacts to a less than significant level. Accordingly, cumulative impacts related to earth resources would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 4, 5.2. 5.3 Hydrology/Water Quality EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.3.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could result if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to physical changes that impact surface hydrology from flood hazards (e.g., with resulting potential impacts to existing regional storm water facilities), erosion and sedimentation, dewatering, scour, seiche and water quality. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Hydrology/Water Quality are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. FindingS/Oveniding Considerations Page 18 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A. The proposed Plan Amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed Plan Amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects would be subject to CEQA review when they are proposed, potential impacts regarding hydrology/water quality would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to hydrology/water quality are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed Plan Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.3. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.3.2 Environmental Impact: Groundwater Quality. Water Options 1 and 2 rely on the water wells located in the northeastern portion of IVDA Area A. Therefore, pollutants such as nitrate (N03" TCE and perchlorate in the general vicinity could be encountered in concentrations that exceed State drinking water standards. Operation of water treatment facilities could also result in spills. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (al.) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) N03 has historically been encountered in existing wells within the Project area, in concentrations that exceed State drinking water standards, due to long- term fertilization of citrus agriculture. However, nitrate concentrations are higher in the upper part of the aquifer, and the nitrate level can be minimized by extracting water at deeper depths. Adverse impacts can therefore be avoided. (b) Available data indicates that TCE and perchlorate contamination does not occur in the vicinity of the proposed water well sites. It is estimated that the TCE and perchlorate plumes are located more than 1,500 feet west and 3,000 feet south from the closest proposed Project wells. It is estimated that both the TCE and perchlorate plumes will pass by the closest proposed Project wells in the year 2009. When these plumes pass moving westward, the longitudinal, or east-west centerline of the plumes will be approximately 2 miles south of the closest Project well. If the IVDA provides water to the Donut Hole, it can construct additional wells and provide Findings/Oveniding Considerations Page 19 additional treatment, if required. In addition, proposed water-supply pumping will not induce the migration of the TCE or perchlorate contaminants into the wells because the horizontal limit of the capture zone for the wells, within the lower aquifer west of the proposed wells approximately 1,300 feet north and south of the proposed wells, does not extend into the TCE or perchlorate plumes and the vertical limit of the capture zone for the wells, which extends from the base of the lower aquifer to 450 feet below the ground surface, does not extend upward into the intervals contaminated with TCE or perchlorate and no contamination occurs in the lower aquifer, within which the proposed water supply wells would be perforated. Accordingly, the extraction of an estimated 1.973 million gallons per day from Project groundwater wells would not result in significant movement of the contaminant plume. Finally, regarding the City of Redlands wastewater percolation ponds, the recharge water would remain in the upper aquifer in the vicinity of the proposed Project wells under Water Option 1, and potentially wastewater-contaminated groundwater would not be captured by the wells because the vertical limit of the capture zone for the proposed wells does not include the upper or even the middle aquifers where such contamination would occur. Consequently, the proposed water-supply pumping will not capture the wastewater percolate. No significant impacts to groundwater quality are anticipated as a result of Water Options 1 and 2. (c) The proposed water treatment facility would employ a dual pass carbon treatment with 100 percent redundancy and include a disinfection station. Granular activated carbon (GAC) will remove contaminants via adsorption as water is passed through carbon filters. When the removal efficiency drops, the GAC is removed and replaced. The spent GAC is reactivated off-site by commercial GAC vendors. The finish water will be disinfected in accordance with California Department of Health Services requirements and a water quality monitoring system shall be installed. With established operating protocols to ensure that water quality continues to meet California Department of Health Services standards and with all requisite systems in place, no significant impacts to groundwater quality are anticipated. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.3 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No.5 (Water Options 1 and 2): Water Treatment Facilities. A water quality monitoring system shall be installed along with established operating protocols to ensure that water quality continues to meet California Department of Health Services standards. Mitigation Measure No.6 (Water Options 1 and 2): Water Treatment Facilities. The Applicant and/or facilities' operator shall initiate consultation with all Federal, State, and local agencies, as appropriate, and shall secure any and all permits and meet all regulations in force at the time of permit issuance so that, if required, a safe chlorine spill management system shall be provided for the water supply facilities. Mitigation Measure No.7 (Water Options 1 and 2): Water Treatment Facilities. If required for treatment, the proposed chlorine spill system shall be designed in accordance with the regulatory obligations of all applicable governing agencies and shall be FindingS/Oveniding Considerations Page 20 capable of processing the worst-case accident and shall be capable of operation with the primary power supply out of service. 5.3.3 Environmental Impact: Groundwater Drawdown. Water wells associated with Water Options 1 and 2 could result in drawdown of the water table in the project area. Other water options which rely on water supplied by other areas could result in drawdown in those areas. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Water wells located in the northeastern portion of IVDA Area A would deliver an average supply of 1.973 MGD, or 1,400 gpm. The wells would be about 1,000 feet in depth. The groundwater table in the vicinity of the proposed wells is more than 100 feet below the land surface, and the wells will be perforated over the interval from about 800 to 1,000 feet below the land surface, or 700 to 900 feet below the water table. The selected siting of the two groundwater production wells will have no significant impact upon the production of adjacent wells. Only one of the proposed wells will operate at any given time. By alternating operational drawdown, impacts from the resulting cone of depression will be minimal. The volume of groundwater being extracted is small relative to the overall size of the groundwater basin. No significant impacts associated with groundwater drawdown are anticipated. (b) Water Options 3 through 6 utilize facilities which are wholly or partially served by the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). There is currently excess capacity of as much as 60,000 acre-feet/year of groundwater in a number of existing wells in the Bunker Hill Groundwater Basin Pressure Zone, which would service the Project area. Construction of new groundwater wells has been identified by SBVMWD as part of that agency's water resource management strategy. Therefore, impacts on groundwater drawdown associated with Water Options 3 through 6 would be less than significant. (c) The Citrus Plaza project would substantially reduce the historical non-potable water use from local wells currently located on the Citrus Plaza project site from 731,808 gallons per day to 151,897 gallons per day. Therefore, no significant impacts to these wells are anticipated. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.3. 5.3.4 Environmental Impact: Surface Water Quality. Sewer Option 3 involves the construction and operation of a wastewater treatment plant along California Street north of San Bernardino Avenue. Effluent from wastewater treatment could result Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 21 in impacts to the beneficial uses of the Santa Ana River, if proper "engineering controls are not implemented. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The conveyance of wastewater under all options, with the exception of Sewer Option 3, would result in less-than-significant water quality impacts because the wastewater would be conveyed to facilities which can accommodate the wastewater flows generated by Citrus Plaza within their established capacities and these facilities are equipped with systems which preclude adverse water quality impacts. (b) The proposed wastewater treatment plant that is part of Sewer Option 3 would be permitted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, and will require a Waste Discharge Permit and NPDES Permit. In order to meet all discharge requirements, the wastewater treatment facility would include primary, secondary, and advanced tertiary treatment, as well as demineralization, in order to lower salinity to the level required for discharge to the Santa Ana River or for reclaimed water use (i.e., on-site irrigation). The wastewater treatment facility will produce reclaimed water that is adequately disinfected, oxidized, coagulated, clarified, and filtered as required for stream discharge. The wastewater treatment facility will also be designed and built with any required redundancy. Brine and sludge produced during the treatment process will be stored and disposed of at an appropriate disposal facility. (c) The proposed wastewater treatment facility will not result in the degradation of any of the beneficial uses of the Santa Ana River since the water would receive tertiary treatment and meet all of the water quality requirements imposed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. (d) Mitigation measures to address the potential for an accidental release of untreated or partially treated effluent at the wastewater treatment facility are included in Section 5.12, Human Health, within these Findings. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.3 and 5.8 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No.9 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. If required by the RWQCB through the permit process, blending of reclaimed water with lower TDS water will be required to reduce the salinity, boron, and chloride concentrations in those waters used for on-site irrigation. Alternatively, landscape plants selected for the approved Citrus Plaza project shall be selected based upon their tolerance to those constituents. Findlngs/Oveniding Considerations Page 22 Mitigation Measure No. 10 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The project proponent and/or facilities' operator shall obtain any and all permits and associated approvals as may be required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) and such other agencies with jurisdiction by law over the site and the resources located thereupon prior to the construction and operation of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment facilities. Such permits shall include, but may not be limited to, waste discharge requirements and water reclamation requirements. Mitigation Measure No. 11 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The water quality of treated effluent shall satisfy the water quality objectives contained in the Water Quality Control Plan - Santa Ana River Basin (1995). as established by the Regional Water Quality Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB), or subsequently imposed upon the project by the RWQCB by the permit process. Mitigation Measure No. 12 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The wastewater treatment facilities shall be constructed and operated in accordance with California Department of Health Services wastewater reclamation regulations regarding treatment process, water quality, treatment reliability, and emergency response requirements to ensure that the wastewater treatment facilities avoid the creation of undue health risks. Additional mitigation measures which address accidental releases of untreated or partially treated effluent are included in Section 5.12, Human Health, of these Findings and are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 5.3, 5.8. 5.3.5 Environmental Impact: Surface Water Runoff, Stormwater, Flooding and Scour. By introducing impervious surfaces into the Project area, the Project will adversely impact the ability of surface waters to permeate into the areawide groundwater basin and increase the quantity of storm waters discharged from the Project area thereby imposing additional demands upon areawide drainage facilities and potentially impacting existing water quality within regional surface water and groundwater resources. Grubbing and associated grading activities will eliminate ground cover within the Project area and thereby increase susceptibility to surface erosion. In addition, the construction of paved surfaces which are traveled by motorized vehu:les (e.g., parking area, driveways, etc.) may potentially impact the quality of existing surface waters through the introduction and conveyance of particulate and other pollutants deposited upon those surface roadways. Reservoir failure resulting in sudden release of the reservoir's contents could cause localized flooding immediately downstream. The installation of underground pipelines may result in impacts on the Santa Ana River channel due to scour or other modification of the watercourse. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 201 81(a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 23 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Potential impacts from the construction of paved surfaces which are traveled by motorized vehicles would be reduced to a level of insignificance as the Project proponent will be required to implant BMPs in order to obtain permits for the control of storm water discharge as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region and San Bernardino County. (b) On-site surface flows, which presently follow natural drainage patterns influenced by site topography, will be redirected along Project area streets and through on-site and/or off-site drainage conduits. In this fashion, on-site drainage will be controlled and directed to designated on-site storm drain conduits which will safely convey storm waters to outlets. The County of San Bernardino Department of Transportation and Flood Control has identified capacity constraints in the Mission Zanja Channel. To the extent practicable, the proposed project will be engineered and designed so that minimal Project-generated surface flows will drain into this channel. It is anticipated that the majority of Project flows will eventually drain into the Santa Ana River channel. The County's Comprehensive Storm Drain Plan No.4 indicates that storm drainage discharged from the Citrus Plaza site should be conveyed northerly along Alabama Street to a point of discharge into the Santa Ana River. The connection to an outfall at the Santa Ana River may involve the construction of a concrete headwall and possibly an energy-dissipation structure. (c) The implementation of traditional engineering erosion control methods and best management practices (e.g., proper grading techniques, appropriate sloping of the construction site, sand bagging, drainage swales, etc.), which constitute standard conditions of grading permit approval, will effectively control fugitive dust and sediment transport during all construction operations and will control the discharge of sediment into the area's storm drain system. Additionally, the Project proponent will be required to obtain applicable NPDES permits for storm water discharges and non-storm water discharges generated by construction and post-construction development, as may be required by San Bernardino County and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, for the discharge of urban pollutants. (d) The Project area is not located in either the floodplain of the San Timoteo Creek or the Mission Zanja 'Channel. On-site surface flows, which presently follow natural drainage patterns influenced by site topography, will be redirected along Project area streets and through on-site and/or off-site drainage conduits. In this fashion, on-site drainage will be controlled and directed to designated on-site storm drain conduits which will safely convey storm waters to outlets which have the capacity to handle such drainage. It is anticipated that the majority of project flows will eventually drain into the Santa Ana River channel. The connection to an outfall at the Santa Ana River may involve the construction of a concrete headwall and possibly an energy-dissipation structure. After design and engineering improvements, no significant flooding impacts are anticipated. Flooding could be a concern if buildings or structures associated with the on-site water treatment facilities (Water Options 1, 2A, or 2B) or buildings or structures associated with the on-site wastewater treatment facilities (Sewer Option 3) were located within the boundary of the 100-year floodplain of the Santa Ana River. Final site selection for on-site buildings and structures associated with these facilities will incorporate the most current Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 24 data obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMAt, National Flood Insurance Program to ensure that no buildings or structures associated with the on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities are located within the 1 DO-year floodplain. (e) Storm drain improvements identified as part of the Phase I (Power Center) development will involve the collection and conveyance of storm waters from the area of that development to an interim detention basin to be constructed on a 16 ::I: acre area located in the northwesterly portion of the Phase II (Regional Mall) site. This detention basin will decrease peak flows generated from the Citrus Plaza site, eliminate existing flooding conditions at the intersection of Alabama Street and San Bernardino Avenue, and alleviate existing flooding conditions downstream along San Bernardino Avenue. After design and engineering improvements, no significant flooding impacts or impacts to surface water quality are anticipated. (f) Because the anticipated depth to groundwater in the Project area is estimated to be at least 120 feet below ground surface, only very limited dewatering during construction would occur if atypical conditions were to be encountered during the installation of subsurface pipelines. Should such conditions occur, temporary dewatering is not expected to involve substantial quantities of water and would be disposed of in accordance with NPDES discharge permit conditions. Therefore, no significant impacts from dewatering are anticipated. (g) The reservoirs will be constructed in accordance with applicable Uniform Building Codes and American Water Works Standards for Welded Steel Structures. Also, seismic design standards based on regional geology will be incorporated. Therefore, the possibility of reservoir rupture and flooding is considered small and no significant impacts from seiches are anticipated. (h) Regarding water quality resulting from storm water runoff, under the requirements of NPDES, the County would be required to obtain a General Construction Storm Water Permit, which contains the following three major requirements: (1) eliminate non-storm water discharges; (2) develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); and (3) develop and implement a Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the General Permit. The SWPPP typically consists of all Best Management Practices (BMPs) which will be implemented to reduce or eliminate the discharge of pollutants to storm water which is the most important requirement and the key to source controls. Once pollutants have been generated, pollution control BMPs must be employed to prevent the existing pOllution from coming into contact with waters of the State. BMPs to be employed for the proposed Project during construction include the use of proper grading techniques, appropriate sloping of the construction site, sand bagging, drainage swales, and regular watering of disturbed areas. With the implementation of Project BMPs during construction, no significant impacts to surface water quality would occur. (i) implemented to further surface water runoff. In addition, the mitigation measures set forth below will be reduce the less-than significant potential impacts of increased Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 25 Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.3 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 8 (Water Options 2B, 3A and 3C): Underground pipeline improvements shall be installed at sufficient depth to avoid scour or modification of the Santa Ana River channel. Disruptions to the ground surface shall be restored to approximate pre-existing conditions. Mitigation Measure No. 13 (InfrastNcture Facilities and Citrus Plaza): Permanent drainage improvements will be required per the appropriate components of the Engineer's Report to intercept and conduct drainage flows through or around the site in an approved manner. Interim drainage improvements such as an on-site detention basin, constructed in conformance with County adopted detention basin policies and design standards and criteria, or such other measures as agreed to by the County Public Works Department may be constructed upon approval by the County as an interim measure for Phase I for a period not to exceed eight years from first occupancy. Mitigation Measure No. 14 (CitNs Plazal: Grease traps shall be installed and maintained at all restaurant and food services facilities. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.3. Cumulative Impacts 5.3.6 Environmental Impact: The Project, in conjunction with the Related Projects identified in FSEIR Section 4, has the potential to have cumulative impacts related to Hydrology/Water Quality. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) No significant impacts from flooding, erosion, sedimentation, dewatering, seiches, or impacts associated with scour are expected as a result of the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis, and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed Project would not result. (b) The conveyance of wastewater under all options, except Sewer Option 3, would result in less-than-significant water quality impacts. Mitigation measures to address the potential for a release at the wastewater treatment facility under Sewer Option 3 are included in Section 5.12, Human Health, within these Findings. With incorporation of these mitigation measures, impacts to water quality would be reduced to less-than-significant levels and the proposed Project would not contribute to cumulative water quality impacts. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 26 .a:. (c) Impacts on groundwater drawdown associated with all Water Options would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis, and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed Project would not result. (d) After design and engineering improvements, no significant flooding impacts or impacts to surface water quality are anticipated as a result of development of Citrus Plaza. No significant impacts to groundwater are anticipated. Therefore, the proposed Project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis, and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed Project would not result. (e) State and local regulations governing water quality are in place to reduce potential impacts of the Project to acceptable levels. Mitigation measures have been included to ensure that water quality continues to meet California Department of Health Services standards. Compliance with these regulations will reduce the potential for impacts related to potential discharge into surface water or changes in water quality to levels of insignificance and avoid cumulative water quality impacts. (f) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to hydrology/water quality would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FsEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Sections 5.3 and 5.8 of the FsEIR, which are incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 5 through 14 set forth above and mitigation measures which address accidental releases of untreated or partially treated effluent set forth below in Section 5.12 (Human Health) of these Findings are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FsEIR ~ ~ 4, 5.3, 5.8. 5.4 Transportation/Circulation EVCsP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.4.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCsP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to physical changes that impact traffic circulation at key intersections and roadways, or increase congestion on the regional 1-10 Freeway system. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Transportation/Circulation are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCsP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Findings/Oveniding Considerations Page 27 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA Area consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects of a sufficient size to adversely affect the transportation system would be subject to CECA review and would be required to be analyzed pursuant to SANBAG's CMP requirements, potential impacts regarding transportation/circulation systems would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to transportation/ circulation are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.4. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Proiect 5.4.2 Environmental Impact: Short-term impacts to the transportation/ circulation system will be caused by construction of the infrastructure facilities and Citrus Plaza. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the. Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 150g1(a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Implementation of all infrastructure options would occur either subsurface or on a development site within IVDA Area A and would last only during the construction period. As such, no long-term impacts would occur and potential impacts on the area's circulation system would be less than significant. (b) The demolition and subsequent removal of existing improvements now located along the proposed pipeline routes and construction of future pipelines and the water and wastewater treatment facilities under Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 could result in impacts to the roadways in the immediate vicinity of the particular construction site including temporary lane closures and limitations on access to private property. To assure that any such temporary impacts are minimized, access to and through the pipeline construction zones, as well as the water and wastewater Findings/Ovaniding Considerations Page 28 treatment facilities under Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3, would be maintained at all times for both vehicles and pedestrians during the construction period. In addition, haul routes would be identified in advance. As a result, the potential impacts associated with the construction of any infrastructure option would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.4 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 15 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): A haul route shall be designated prior to commencement of construction activities. The haul route shall avoid travel by any sensitive receptors such as residences, schools, hospitals, etc. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.4. Citrus Plaza Project 5.4.3 Environmental Impact: Arterial Improvements. Impacts would occur upon each of the key intersections and street segments analyzed and regional freeway system (1-10 Freeway) will experience congestion. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEaA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The approved traffic analysis from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, dated August 1995, analyzed project and cumulative traffic impacts through the year 2010. Buildout for the revised Citrus Plaza project is projected to occur by the year 2010, the buildout year for which traffic impacts were previously analyzed. Two separate analyses were performed as part of the Traffic Validation Study to review the change in traffic conditions in light of current growth patterns. The actual traffic growth patterns have been well below the predicted growth levels. Further, the total traffic volumes at every study intersection are well below the cumulative traffic volumes analyzed and mitigated in the 1995 traffic analysis. All intersections currently operate at the same or a better LOS than was accounted for in the 1995 Traffic Analysis for "Without Project" conditions. Because traffic growth has been slower than was anticipated in the 1995 Traffic Analysis, it is reasonable to assume the total traffic growth occurring by the year 2010 will be well below the forecast in the 1995 Traffic Analysis. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate, and even somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative traffic volumes and impacts. (b) Land use growth from related projects in the Cities of Redlands, San Bernardino, Highland and Loma Linda was also updated for comparison to the related projects included in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. This comparison of the related projects land use growth shows that the current land use growth trend is well Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 29 below the land use growth trend assumed in the 1995 Traffic Analysis model. Thus. future traffic projections are more than adequate to accommodate the currently proposed related projects and the use of the 1995 Traffic Analysis to evaluate the traffic impacts of the revised project is very conservative. (c) No changes have been made to the Citrus Plaza project which would change the traffic generation or alter access patterns to and from the site. Since the project has not changed. the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate forecast of project traffic impacts. Thus. project impacts are adequately addressed by the 1995 Traffic Analysis as presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Implementation of the revised project will not result in new or substantially greater impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.4 of the FSEIR. which is incorporated herein by reference. the fOllowing mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 16: The street improvements are designed to both reduce project-related traffic impacts to less-than-significant levels and to ensure that sufficient roadway capacity exists to accommodate all anticipated area growth. As such, some of the improvements listed below may be installed by others. especially for those locations which are relatively remote from the project site. Should any of the improvements be implemented by others. no additional mitigation measures would be required by the Citrus Plaza project at the subject locations. Mitigation Measure No. 17 (Citrus Plaza - Phase Il: Prior to final inspection and occupancy of the first building within each phase of the project. the project proponent shall construct the following on-site and off-site transportation improvements specified for that phase. The proposed road construction shall follow the standards of the East Valley Planning Area. The construction costs of off-site improvements shall be agreed upon between the County Public Works Department. other Responsible Agencies. and the project proponent prior to the commencement of construction of those improvements. The project proponent shall receive a credit for any amount exceeding the assigned "fair share" percentage and may use this credit to offset other required "fair share" contributions. Fair share contributions shall be as determined by the traffic report prepared by Crain & Associates (revised August 1995) and as approved by County Public Works Department. Phase I . Alabama Street (112 width), Lugonia Avenue (1/2 width). SR- 30 Frontage Road (Buckeye Drive) (Full width), - The roadways adjacent to the portion of Phase I site development shall be improved to East Valley Planning Area standards in conjunction with that phase of development. Project to provide full installation. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 30 Phase II . Alabama Street (1/2 width), San Bernardino Avenue (1/2 width), SR-30 Frontage Road (Buckeye Drivel (Full width) - The roadways adjacent to the portion of Phase II site development shall be improved to East Valley Planning Area standards in conjunction with that phase of development. Project to provide full installation. The project proponent shall construct the following off-site improvements. For those improvements where the project proponent's responsibility is less than the full cost of those improvements, the project proponent shall be entitled to a credit for any amount exceeding the assigned percentage. Phase I . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps/Tennessee Street-Provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. The traffic signal shall be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at San Bernardino Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway southbound ramps at the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road. Proportionate Rfair share" contribution: 55.7 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue and Texas Street-Install a two-phase traffic signal. Provide eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 24.9 percent. . Lugonia Avenue-The southerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road shall be improved to provide a second travel lane in a total 64-foot paved roadway. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 17.0 percent. Phase II . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Southbound Ramps-Add on a northbound approach to the frontage road to include a right-turn-only lane. Modify the signal to add a northbound right-turn phase, which overlaps the westbound left-turn phase. Flare/reconstruct the north leg to provide southbound dual left-turn lanes. Proportionate Rfair share" contribution: 39.3 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps/Tennessee Street- Provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes and two through lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. Provide a right-turn lane, a through left-turn only lane and a Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 31 left-turn only lane in the southbound direction on the north leg (SR-30 Freeway ramp). Provide dual left-turn lanes on the south leg (Tennessee Street). This measure may require flaring of the south leg to accommodate the additional lane. Modify the signal to provide a southbound right-turn phase concurrent with the eastbound left- turn phase. The traffic signal shall be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at San Bernardino Avenue and the SR-30 southbound ramps at the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Buckeye Drivel. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 33.5 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue-The northerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road (Buckeye Drivel shall be improved to provide a second travel lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: To be determined. Mitigation Measure No. 18 (Citrus Plaza - Project Buildout): Prior to final inspection and occupancy of the first structure in each phase, the project proponent shall deposit into an appropriate traffic facilities fund a fee to offset traffic impacts of that phase. The fee shall be equal to the sum of all the following "fair share" contributions for the improvements listed below. The fee may be reduced by any credits that have accrued from constructed road improvements. The construction costs of off-site improvements shall be agreed upon between the County Public Works Department, other Responsible Agencies, and the project proponent. Fair share contributions shall be as determined by the traffic report prepared by Crain & Associates (revised August 1995) and as approved by County Public Works Department. Phase I . Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street-Restrict parking on the northbound approach and provide an exclusive right-turn lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 19.9 percent. . Orange Street and Pearl Street (1-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps)-Provide eastbound and westbound left-turn only lanes on Pearl Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 11.7 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue and California Street-Contribute a "fair share" percentage for the construction of a signal on San Bernardino Avenue at California Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 13.8 percent. . California Street and Lugonia Avenue -Install a two-phase traffic signal. Widen the north leg of the California Street by 10 feet and provide left-turn lanes on the north and south legs. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 1.0 percent. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 32 Phase II . Lugonia Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Buckeye Drive) Provide a westbound right-turn-only lane on Lugonia Avenue. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 58.5 percent. . Lugonia Avenue and Tennessee Street-Provide two eastbound and two westbound travel lanes in addition to the left-turn channelization. This will require widening along the project frontage and along the south side of Lugonia Avenue to the east of the intersection. Provide dual northbound left-turn lanes on Tennessee Street. Proporitonate "fair share" contribution: 27.3 percent. . Lugonia Avenue and Texas Street-Install a two-phase traffic signal. Provide two travel lanes in all directions in addition to left-turn channelization on both roadways. This will require widening of Texas Street north and south of the intersection to provide suitable transitions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 11.7 percent. . Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street-Implement parking restrictions and provide two travel lanes in all directions in addition to left-turn channelization. Provide an exclusive right- turn lane on the northbound approach. This will require widening at some "hold out" parcels north and east of the intersection. Modify the traffic signal phasing to provide left- turn phasing for all approaches. plus an "overlap" northbound right-turn phase along with the east/west left turns. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.7 percent. . California Street and the 1-10 Freeway Westbound Ramps- Install a traffic signal with a northbound left-turn phase. Flare the West Side of the north leg of California Street and provide a right-turn-only lane and two through lanes southbound and dual left-turn lanes northbound. This may require acquisition of some right-of-way north of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.6 percent. . California Street and the 1-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps- Install a traffic signal with a southbound left-turn phase. Widen and install an island on the 1-10 Freeway eastbound off- ramp to allow "free" right turns. Provide two northbound through lanes on California Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.7 percent. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 33 . Coulston Avenue and Alabama Street-Extend the second westbound through lane along Coulston Avenue to the east leg of the intersection and include parking restrictions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 36.9 percent. . 1-'0 Freeway Westbound Ramps and Alabama Street-Provide dual northbound left-turn lanes and a southbound right-turn- only lane on Alabama Street. This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 30.5 percent. . 1-'0 Freeway Eastbound Ramps and Alabama Street-Provide one right-turn-only lane and one left/through/right-optional lane on the eastbound off-ramp. Provide a northbound right-turn- only lane on Alabama Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 27.9 percent. . Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street-Remove islands along Redlands Boulevard and flare along the south curb west of the intersection to provide three through lanes and a right- turn-only lane in the eastbound direction. Widen Alabama' Street to provide dual northbound and southbound left-turn lanes and three travel lanes in each direction. This improvement will require additional right-of-way (or sidewalk easements) to be acquired in the northwest and southeast quadrants as well as traffic signal modifications. Some additional "hold out" right-of-way along Alabama Street may also need to be acquired to provide suitable transitions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.' percent. . Colton Avenue and Tennessee Street-Provide an eastbound right-turn-only lane on Colton Avenue. Provide a southbound right-turn-only lane on Tennessee Street. Modify the traffic signal to provide protective left-turn phases in the eastbound, southbound, and northbound directions only. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 8.5 percent . Redlands Boulevard and Tennessee Street-Provide northbound and southbound left-turn lanes and restrict parking along Tennessee Street, modify the signal to eliminate north-south opposed phasing and east-west left-turn phasing and instead provide two-phase operation. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: , 4.7 percent. . California Street and Redlands Boulevard-Reconstruct the south leg of California Street by providing a box culvert for the flood control channel. Flare the south leg of the intersection to provide two through lanes and left.turn channelization in both FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 34 the northbound and southbound directions. Remove island to provide three through lanes in each direction on Redlands Boulevard. Modify signalization as necessary. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.4 percent. . Barton Road and Alabama Street-Modify the traffic signal to provide a southbound right-turn phase concurrent with the eastbound left-turn phase. Either alter the middle southbound lane to allow only through movements or eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 1.4 percent. . Third Street and Palm Avenue-Provide westbound left-turn channelization on Third Street. Provide dual northbound left- turn lanes on Palm Avenue. This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 7.9 percent. . Ford Street and 1-10 Eastbound Freeway Off-Ramp-Install a two-phase signal. Coordinate the signal timing with the adjacent 1-10 Freeway westbound off-ramp new traffic signal timing. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 6.8 percent. . Ford Street and 1-10 Westbound Freeway On-Ramp-Install a two-phase signal. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 4.7 percent. . University Street and 1-10 Eastbound Freeway Off-Ramp- Install a two-phase signal. Coordinate this signal with adjacent traffic signals, as necessary and appropriate. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 8.3 percent. . Cypress Avenue and 1-10 Westbound Freeway Off-Ramp- Install a two-phase signal. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 2.5 percent. . Orange Street and Pearl Street (1-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps) - Provide eastbound and westbound left-turn-only lanes on Pearl Street. Proportionate 'fair share" contribution: 6.3 percent. . Orange Street and Colton Avenue-Install leading eastbound and westbound left-turn phasing. Provide an eastbound right- turn lane on Colton Avenue. Restrict parking and extend the second northbound travel lane on Orange Street along the north leg of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 1.6 percent. Findings/Overriding ConsideraUons Page 35 . Boulder Avenue/Orange Street and Fifth Street-Provide a westbound left-turn-only lane on Fifth Street. Modify the median island on the south leg of Orange Street to provide two through lanes plus a northbound left-turn-only lane. Modify the existing signal to provide leading northbound and southbound left-turn phasing. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.2 percent. . Base Line and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps-Provide an eastbound right-turn-only lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 4.6 percent. Mitigation Measure No. 19 (Citrus Plaza): 1-10 Freeway Improvements _ The following percentages apply to local share only. If required, these fees shall be collected in conjunction with the policies of the San Bernardino Association of Governments and Caltrans. . 1-215 to Waterman Avenue-Add two eastbound lanes. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.01 percent. . Waterman Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue-Add two westbound lanes. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.17 percent. . Tippecanoe Avenue to Mountain View Avenue-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.44 percent. . Mountain View to California Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.83 percent. . SR-30 Freeway to Orange Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.62 percent. . Orange Street to 6th Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.92 percent. Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 4.79 percent. . 6th Street to University Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.37 percent. Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.46 percent. . University Street to Cypress Avenue-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.64 percent. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 36 . Cypress Avenue to Ford Street-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.95 percent. . Red lands Boulevard to Wabash Avenue-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.56 percent. . Wabash Avenue to Yucaipa Boulevard-Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.14 percent. Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.24 percent. Mitigation Measure No. 20 (Citrus Plaza): . Companies employing 100 or more persons, if required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) or other governmental agency at the time of phased occupancy, shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TOM) program. The TOM program shall be reviewed and modified over the life of the project to take advantage of new opportunities, such as the expanding regional rail system. Potential measures may include: (1) a central ridesharing office under direction of a Transportation Coordinator to provide one-stop commute service; (2) personalized rideshare matching; (3) employer-operated or employee-owned vanpool service; (4) guaranteed ride home; (5) preferential parking locations for carpools and vanpools; (6) on-site sale of transit passes and distribution of schedule information; (7) safe and secure bicycle storage areas; (8) coordination with Omnitrans to further enhance service to the site; (9) promotional programs, including direct involvement of upper-level employer management to show the commitment to the program; and (10) adjustable work hours to allow employees to participate in ridesharing arrangements or reduce the number of days per week each employee commutes. . Prioritization of TOM Strategies. In order to reduce traffic impacts surrounding the site, reduction of vehicle trips in general will be extremely important; however, reduction of regional impacts will require that the longest trips. which contribute most to the regional VMT and congestion, be targeted by the project TOM program. Programs which most effectively reduce longer trips shall be emphasized and include van pool programs, compressed work weeks. telecommuting and linkages to regional transit facilities. . Delivery Management System. The site tenants will have deliveries which emanate from throughout the region. A system of tracking vendor deliveries to various facilities within the site shall be considered. This system would allow the tenants to move Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 37 deliveries outside of peak travel times, utilize local vendors and consolidate deliveries whenever possible. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.4; Traffic Validation Study; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Study (August 1995); 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.4. 5.4.4 Environmental Impact: Conditions on certain public streets adjacent to the Citrus Plaza internal roadways will be adverse and site access could be impacted. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below' a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The approved traffic analysis from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, dated August 1995, analyzed project and cumulative traffic impacts through the year 2010. Buildout for the revised project is projected to occur by the year 2010, the build out year for which traffic impacts were previously analyzed. Two separate analyses were performed as part of the Traffic Validation Study to review the change in traffic conditions in light of current growth patterns. The actual traffic growth patterns have been well below the predicted growth levels. Further, the total traffic volumes at every study intersection are well below the cumulative traffic volumes analyzed and mitigated in the 1995 traffic analysis. all intersections currently operate at the same or a better LOS than was accounted for in the 1995 Traffic Analysis for .Without Project" conditions. Because traffic growth has been slower than was anticipated in the 1995 Traffic Analysis. it is reasonable to assume the total traffic growth occurring by the year 2010 will be well below the forecast in the 1995 Traffic Analysis. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate. and even somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative traffic volumes and impacts. (b) Land use growth from related projects in the Cities of Redlands, San Bernardino. Highland and Loma Linda was also updated for comparison to the related projects included in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. This comparison of the related projects land use growth shows that the current land use growth trend is well below the land use growth trend assumed in the 1995 Traffic Analysis model. Thus, future traffic projections are more than adequate to accommodate the currently proposed related projects and the use of the 1995 Traffic Analysis to evaluate the traffic impacts of the revised project is very conservative. (c) No changes have been made to the project which would change the traffic generation or alter access patterns to and from the site. Since the project has not changed, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate forecast of project traffic impacts. Thus, project impacts are adequately addressed by the 1995 Traffic Analysis as presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Therefore, implementation of the revised project will not result in new or substantially greater impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 38 (d) The project TDM program will reduce traffic volumes at the site driveways. This, in turn, will substantially improve conditions at the intersections of the internal roadways with the adjacent public streets. The mitigation set forth below will alleviate any adverse conditions that remain at the major driveways on Alabama Street, the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Spenser Drive), and on San Bernardino Avenue. With implementation of the project TDM program and mitigation at these five intersections, all driveways are anticipated to operate below their capacity. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in section 5.4 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 21 (Citrus Plazal: The intersections of the internal driveways and site adjacent roadways shall be signalized in accordance with the following schedule: (1) Phase I (Power Center) signalization is limited to the intersection of Alabama Street and the second project driveway north of Lugonia Avenue and (2) Phase II (Regional Mall) signalization shall include the following additional intersections: Alabama Street and the fifth driveway north of Lugonia Avenue; 1-30 Frontage Road - Buckeye Drive at the north driveway; at the south driveway; and San Bernardino Avenue at the main driveway. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.4; Traffic Validation Study; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Study (August 1995); 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.4. 5.4.5 Environmental Impact: Because Phase II parking facilities have not yet been designed. there could be adverse impacts if sufficient parking to meet then prevailing County parking demand rates when Phase II receives design approval is not provided. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in. or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 15091 (al.) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The approved traffic analysis from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. dated August 1995. analyzed. project and cumulative traffic impacts through the year 2010. Buildout for the revised project is projected to occur by the year 2010, the buildout year for which traffic impacts were previously analyzed. Two separate analyses were performed as part of the Traffic Validation Study to review the change in traffic conditions in light of current growth patterns. The actual traffic growth patterns have been well below the predicted growth levels. Further, the total traffic volumes at every study intersection are well below the cumulative traffic volumes analyzed and mitigated in the 1995 traffic analysis. all intersections currently operate at the same or a better LOS than was accounted for in the 1995 Traffic Analysis for "Without Project" conditions. Because traffic growth has been slower than was anticipated in the 1995 Traffic Analysis. it is reasonable to assume the total traffic growth occurring by the year 2010 will be well below the forecast in the 1995 Traffic Analysis. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 39 an adequate, and even somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative traffic volumes and impacts. (b) Land use growth from related projects in the Cities of Redlands. San Bernardino, Highland and Loma Linda was also updated for comparison to the related projects included in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. This comparison of the related projects land use growth shows that the current land use growth trend is well below the land use growth trend assumed in the 1995 Traffic Analysis model. Thus, future traffic projections are more than adequate to accommodate the currently proposed related projects and the use of the 1995 Traffic Analysis to evaluate the traffic impacts of the revised project is very conservative. (c) No changes have been made to the project which would change the traffic generation or alter access patterns to and from the site. Since the project has not changed, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate forecast of project traffic impacts. Thus, project impacts are adequately addressed by the 1995 Traffic Analysis as presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Therefore, implementation of the revised project will not result in new or substantially greater impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. (d) The Phase I (Power Center) site parking facilities will be designed to meet or exceed actual demand. so no adverse impacts are anticipated. The mitigation measure described below will ensure that Phase II parking facilities will be designed to meet the prevailing County multi-tenant shopping center parking demand rates when Phase II receives its design approval. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.4 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference. the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 22 (Citrus Plaza): Phase II parking facilities should be designed to meet the prevailing County multi-tenant shopping center parking demand rates when Phase II receives design approval. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.4; Traffic Validation Study; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Study (August 1995); 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.4. Cumulative Impacts 5.4.6 Environmental Impact: impacts wouid occur upon each of the key intersections and street segments analyzed as a result of cumulative traffic. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in. or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181{a) and State CEnA Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) FindlngsfOverriding Considerations Page 40 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above, traffic growth has been slower than was anticipated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Analysis and conditions at all individual intersections have remained within the range of volumes and LOS values forecast for those intersections. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis is an adequate, if somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative traffic volumes and impacts. (b) The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bernardino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. This 1 995 list of related projects was updated as part of the Final EIR to reflect 2000 conditions. The 1995 list included more cumulative growth and thus provided a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. Thus, no cumulative impacts would occur with regard to cumulative impacts to the local street system. However, with the adopted mitigation measures, such impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.4 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure Nos. 15 through 21, set forth fully above, related to direct project traffic impacts to intersections and street segments are incorporated herein by reference. Referenca: FSEIR B 4, 5.4; Traffic Validation Study; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Study (August 1995); 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.4. 5.5 Air Quality EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.5.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to physical changes that cause air quality impacts due to construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Air Quality are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed Plan Amendments allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA Area consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed Plan Amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed Plan Amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 41 is individual development projects. such as the Citrus Plaza project. which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because all development projects which have the potential to effect air quality would be subject to CEQA review and other applicable air quality regulations, potential impacts regarding air quality would be appropriately addressed. Therefore. no environmental impacts related to air quality are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed Plan Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.5. 5.6 Noise EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.6.1 Environmental linpact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to increased noise impacts during construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Noise are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development. height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects would be subject to CEQA review and other applicable regulations and ordinances when they are proposed. potential impacts regarding noise would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to noise are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.6. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.6.2 Environmental Impact: Potential noise impacts could occur during the construction/installation of the proposed infrastructure facilities and during the operation of the proposed on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities (Water options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3). Construction and operation of the Citrus Plaza project will also result in noise Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 42 impacts. While construction noise levels vary greatly depending on the equipment used, noise produced by an assemblage of heavy equipment ranges up to about 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the equipment source. Any sensitive exterior receptors located within 446 feet of the construction effort could be subject to noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or greater during an 8 hour work day. Both the water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities will include a number of mechanized noise sources, including pumps, compressors, and comminutors, which may produce significant noise levels. Operation of the Citrus Plaza project would incrementally increase ambient noise along existing roadways. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Under current policies, developers are required to depict on any appropriate development application review, any potential noise sources known at the time of submission and mitigation measures that insure these noise sources meet County Noise Ordinance Standards. In addition, for construction that will occur adjacent to any developed/occupied noise sensitive land uses, the developer shall submit a construction related noise mitigation plan to the County for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. With the inclusion of such noise reduction measures, and the temporary, short-term nature of the potential construction noise impacts attributable to the construction of the alternative infrastructure options and the Citrus Plaza project, potential construction impacts are concluded to be less than significant. (b) . No operational noise impacts are anticipated with the implementation of water and sewer options, other than Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3, as the facilities under such options would be subterranean and would not result in noise levels which would be audible at locations above the surface. (c) Primary sources of ambient noise within the Project area include truck and automobile noise along the 1-10 Freeway, SR-30 Freeway, San Bernardino Avenue, Lugonia Avenue. Alabama Street as well as other major, arterial, and collector streets. In addition, ambient noise in the Project area includes airplane overflights associated with the San Bernardino International Airport and Redlands Municipal Airport, and noise from trains on the BNSF Railroad. A noise survey conducted as part of the County of San Bernardino General Plan Update identified major arterials and highways which generate noise levels in excess of 65 dBA. Noise levels at residential locations adjacent to Interstate 10 range from 70 to 75 dBA. This noise level is greater than is considered acceptable. At residential locations adjacent to State Highway 30, noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA. (d) Construction of the Citrus Plaza project could result in noise impacts to sensitive land uses located near the site, including the Calvary Chapel and the Redlands Daycare Center, located south of Lugonia Avenue on Indiana Court. Construction noise controls and mitigation measures will be implemented so as to reduce construction noise to a less than significant level. Operation of the Citrus Plaza project would Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 43 incrementally increase ambient noise along existing roadways, but these incremental increases in noise levels would be less than significant. (e) The greatest noise levels associated with construction activities are generated by large earth-moving equipment. Based upon equipment noise estimates, the distance to the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour is estimated to be approximately 446 feet for an a-hour construction day. Any sensitive exterior receptors located within 446 feet of the construction effort, including the Cavalry Chapel and associated school which are located near the intersection of Alabama Street and San Bernardino Avenue, could therefore be subject to noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or greater. These exterior noise levels have been substantially mitigated through reasonable application of the best available noise reduction technology. (f) The majority of all equipment associated with the operation of the water treatment facilities will be housed within an enclosed structure and/or sound attenuated. Noise levels shall be maintained at or below County standards, established by the San Bernardino County General Plan and San Bernardino County Development Code. As a result, no significant noise-related impacts are anticipated from the ongoing operation of the proposed water treatment facilities. (g) Of the various noise sources present during operation of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities, the noise sources that have the greatest potential to be audible are the pumps involved with the movement of liquids. As proposed, the headworks and associated equipment will be constructed within an enclosed building and/or sound attenuated, which will provide acoustical shielding and reduce the potential conveyance of sound energy. In addition, noise levels shall be maintained at or below County standards, established by the San Bernardino County General Plan and San Bernardino County Development Code. As a result, no significarit noise-related impacts are anticipated from the operation of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities. (h) With the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures, the development of the infrastructure facilities will not result in the generation of significant construction related impacts and no operational noise impacts would be expected. Localized noise generated by the construction and operation of Citrus Plaza will be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the recommended mitigation measures. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.6 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 33 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): All construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., except in emergency situations, and not permitted on Sundays. Mitigation Measure No. 34 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): All construction equipment shall utilize properly working mufflers and the engines shall be equipped with shrouds. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 44 Mitigation Measure No. 35 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): All construction equipment shall be in proper working order and kept in a proper state of tune to reduce backfires. Mitigation Measure No. 36 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): Parking/fueling, and servicing operations for all heavy equipment and on-site vehicles shall be at a minimum of 450 feet from the property boundaries of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycare Center. Mitigation Measure No. 37 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): If heavy equipment is to be operated within 450 feet of the property boundaries of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycare Center for three or more days consecutively, except in response to emergency conditions, the project proponent shall notify the administrator of Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycare Center at least five days prior to the commencement of this construction and shall specify the expected duration of near-site construction activities. The mitigation measures identified above which are applicable to the Citrus Plaza Site would also reduce potential noise impacts of the above referenced locations. Mitigation Measure No. 38 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): For water and sewer pipeline construction that may occur within San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street and Almond Avenue, within 450 feet of the property boundary of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School, a noise mitigation plan shall be prepared that will depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the project through the use of such methods as temporary noise attenuation fencing, preferential location of equipment and the use of current technology and noise suppression equipment. Mitigation Measure No. 39 (All Water Options): Water Treatment Facilities. Mechanical equipment, including pumps, blowers, fans, electric and alternatively powered motors, generators, and compressors, shall be housed within an enclosed structure where necessary to meet those County noise standards in force at the time of the facilities' construction, including any subsequent modifications thereto. Mitigation Measure No. 40 (All Water Options): Water Treatment Facilities. The design of the water supply facilities and the specifications for the equipment to be installed therein shall include noise control measures to ensure that County noise standards are not exceeded by equipment operations. Mitigation Measure No. 41 (All Water Options): Water Treatment Facilities. Final engineering designs shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant and specific noise control recommendations shall be provided to ensure compliance with County noise standards. Mitigation Measure No. 42 (Sewer Option 3 Only): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Mechanical equipment, including comminutors, pumps, and compressors, shall be housed within an enclosed structure where necessary to satisfy County noise standards. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 45 Mitigation Measure No. 43 (Sewer Option 3 Only): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The design of the wastewater trec:."ent facilities and the specifications for the equipment to be installed therein shall incl. 'noise control measures to ensure that County noise standards are not exceeded by equi: .int operations. Mitigation Measure No. 44 (Sewer Option 3 Only): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Final engineering designs shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant and specific noise control recommendations shall be provided to ensure compliance with County noise standards. Mitigation Measure No. 45 (Citrus Plaza Only): A noise mitigation plan shall be prepared for any Citrus Plaza construction-related activities occurring within 450 feet of the property boundary of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycare Center. The noise mitigation plan will depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the project through the use of such methods as temporary noise attenuation fencing, preferential location of equipment and the use of current technology and noise suppression equipment. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.6. 5.7 Public Services and Utilities - Water Supply EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.7.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to substantial additional demands on water supply services and utilities during construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Public Services and Utilities - Water Supply are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects would be subject to CEOA review when they are proposed, potential impacts regarding water supply services and utilities would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts FindingslOverriding Considerations Page 46 related to water supply services and utilities are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.1. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.7.2 Environmental Impact: The Project would result in an increase in water consumption in IVDA Area A. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into. the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed Water Options provide for the delivery of water services to IVDA Area A. The proposed water lines would be constructed entirely underground within existing roadway and utility right-of-ways. The proposed water lines are conveyance systems that do not consume water unto themselves. As such, the proposed water options would not impact the amount of water consumption in IVDA Area A. (b) Implementation of the Water Options and the Citrus Plaza project, however, would result in an increase of the daily on-site water consumption by 86,170 gallons of potable water and a decrease of daily demands by 579,911 gallons of non-potable water (used for agricultural purposes). (c) The previously proposed water delivery system was concluded to be capable of meeting maximum daily demands and fire flow requirements simultaneously. Since the revised Citrus Plaza project would not vary in the types or amount of on-site uses, the on-site daily water demand for the revised project would not vary from the previous analysis and the proposed water supply facilities would be able to accommodate water demand at buildout of the Citrus Plaza project. Although no significant impacts to water supplies or facilities would occur, mitigation measures have been adopted to further ensure that impacts are below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 46 (Water Option 1 and Citrus Plaza): Prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map, the project proponent shall enter into an agreement with the County of San Bernardino addressing the continuing use and/or management of the existing on-site groundwater well(s). If weiHs) are not used or dedicated they would be properly abandoned in accordance with State and County regulations. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 47 Mitigation Measure No. 47 (Water Option 1 and Citrus Plaza): Prior to issuance of building permits for each development phase. the project proponent shall submit a hydraulic study to the County which identifies the proposed water production and distribution facilities and design specifications of fire flow system. The report shall present conclusions concerning the capacity of existing water lines to provide adequate distribution for the proposed project. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.1; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.6.1. Cumulative Impacts 5.7.3 Environmental Impact: Implementation of the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan would provide water supplies to areas that currently have limited water supplies. Finding: No significant adverse cumulative impacts with regard Public Services and Utilities - Water Supply are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) According to the Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options Report. the proposed water distribution and treatment facilities are designed in a manner that would accommodate future growth in these areas. As such. implementation of the infrastructure facilities component of the project would provide improved water supply services to areas that currently have limited or no services. Area A including Citrus Plaza. Therefore. the proposed Project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed Project would not result. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 4. 5.7.1. 5.8 Public Services and Utilities . Sanitary Sewers EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.8.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to substantial additional demands on sanitary sewer services and utilities during construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Public Utilities . Sanitary Sewers are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 48 of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A, including sanitary sewer services and utilities where none currently exist, consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects would be subject to CEM review when they are proposed, potential impacts regarding sanitary sewer services and utilities would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to sanitary sewer services and utilities are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.2. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.8.2 Environmental Impact: Operation of the Citrus Plaza project would result in sewage generation. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEM Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) Facts In Support of Finding: (a) Implementation of the proposed Project would provide public sanitary sewer services to Area A, which currently has limited or no sanitary sewer services. The proposed sewer lines would be constructed entirely underground within existing roadway and utility right-of-ways. The proposed sewer lines are conveyance systems that do not generate sewage unto themselves. As such, the proposed sewer options would not impact the sewer system. (b) The analysis presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR concluded that project development would generate approximately 86,730 gallons of wastewater per day (gpd) (55,680 gpd in Phase I and 31,050 gpd in Phase Ill. which represented a less-than-significant impact. Since the revised Citrus Plaza project would not vary in the types or amounts of on-site uses, the on-site daily sewage generation for the revised project would not vary from the previous analysis. The proposed wastewater facilities would be able to accommodate sewage generation at buildout of the Citrus Plaza project, therefore, no significant impacts to sewage facilities would occur. (c) Development of the proposed Citrus Plaza project would not have an adverse effect on the City of Redlands' sewer line that crosses the Citrus Plaza site. Under no circumstances would buildings on the Citrus Plaza site be constructed FindingsfOverrtding Considerations Page 49 above the subject sewer line. Development activities above the subject sewer line would be limited to parking and landscaping areas. Given this commitment there would not be any impediments to access the subject sewer line in the event of the need for future maintenance. (d) Although no significant impacts related to sewer services or facilities would occur, mitigation measures have been adopted to further ensure that impacts are below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 48 (Citrus Plaza): If required by CSA-70 EV- 1, prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the Phase I development, the project proponent shall submit a flow test to the County of San Bernardino. If additional improvements are determined to be necessary, the project proponent shall install any improvements required by the County, based upon that information. Mitigation Measure No. 49 (Citrus Plaza): As required by CSA-70 EV-1, the project proponent shall convey any required access and utility easements and associated rights-of-way to the County of San Bernardino and such other public agency as may be determined by the permitting jurisdiction, for the construction and maintenance of sewer lines and associated facilities. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.2; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.6.2. Cumulative Impacts 5.8.3 Environmental Impact: Implementation of the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan would provide sanitary sewer service to areas that currently do not have such service. Finding: No significant adverse cumulative impacts with regard Public Services and Utilities - Sanitary Sewers are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) According to the Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options Report, the proposed wastewater distribution and treatment facilities are designed in a manner that would accommodate future growth in these areas. As such, implementation of the infrastructure facilities component of the Project would provide improved sewer services to areas that currently have limited or no sewer services, Area A including the Citrus Plaza site. Therefore, the proposed Project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed Project would not result. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR B 4, 5.7.2. findings/Overriding Considerations Page 50 5.9 Public Services and Utilities - Solid Waste EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.9.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to substantial additional demands on solid waste facilities resulting from the generation of solid waste or sewage sludge during construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Public Utilities and Services - Solid Waste are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A, where none currently exist, consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects would be subject to CEQA review when they are proposed, potential impacts regarding solid waste services and utilities would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to solid waste services and utilities are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.3. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 5.9.2 Environmental Impact: Construction debris will be generated by the construction of Water Options 3 through 6 and Sewer Option 1. Operation of wastewater treatment facilities as part of Sewer Option 3 would result in the generation of sewage sludge. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have. been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 51 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Potential solid waste impacts associated with the installation of subsurface pipelines would be limited to those resulting from construction. All construction debris will be disposed of at local landfills. The potential quantity of solid waste would be of a relatively limited nature and would occur on a one-time basis. As such, potential impacts associated with Water Options 3 through 7 and Sewer Options 1 and 2 would be less than significant. (b) Operational impacts would be limited to Sewer Option 3, which includes the proposed wastewater treatment facility. No operational impacts are anticipated with the options using subsurface pipelines as this type of construction does not generate solid waste on an on-going basis following the completion of construction. Sewer Option 3 would produce sewage sludge, a by-product of the wastewater treatment process. According to the California Department of Health Services Guidelines, municipal sewage sludge is not a hazardous waste and may be disposed of in a Class /II landfill. In addition, sewage sludge can be disposed of through permitted land application. Based upon the current availability of disposal options for the sewage sludge that would be generated by the operation of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment facilities, no solid waste impacts from this facility are anticipated. (c) Although the RWQCB does not have any specific requirements regarding a sludge management plan, a mitigation measure that includes a sludge management program for the disposal of all sludge produced by the wastewater treatment facilities has been included as part of the Project. AU on-site sludge generated by the wastewater treatment facilities will be maintained in enclosed containers prior to off-site disposal. No outdoor open-air drying or storage of sludge would occur. (d) All water supply options include disinfection and could include, if necessary, a TCE removal facility. The disinfection with liquid chlorine will not generate any solid waste. Although TCE treatment with GAC will generate waste carbon, all carbon will be recycled and handled in the same manner as it is handled by the City of San Bernardino. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 50 (Sewer Option 31: Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Prior to the commencement of facilities' operations, CSA-70 EV-l, in cooperation with the San Bernardino County Public Health Department, Division of Environmental Health Services and the County of San Bernardino Solid Waste Systems Division, a sludge management program for the disposal of all sludge produced by the wastewater treatment facilities shall be developed. All sludge generated at the wastewater treatment facilities shall be disposed of at a site(s) approved and permitted to accept sewage sludge. Mitigation Measure No. 51 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Adequate operating records, as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 52 Board, Santa Ana Region and other permitting agencies, will be maintained and available for inspection by regulatory agencies. Those records shall include, but not be limited to, the quantity of sludge expOrted, sold, or distributed, the destination of the sludge, the type of treatment (if any) and labeling used, and all required analysis. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.3. Citrus Plaza Project 5.9.3 Environmental Impact: The proposed Citrus Plaza project will generate solid waste during construction through the removal of vegetation and potential remaining building debris during construction. In addition, non-compatible soils and oversized materials within the soils may be removed and disposed of during grading operations. Operation of the Citrus Plaza project would result in solid waste generation. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Since the revised Citrus Plaza project would not vary in the types or amounts of on-site uses, daily solid waste generation for the revised project would not vary from the previous analysis. The San Timoteo Solid Waste Disposal Site would serve Citrus Plaza as it has sufficient capacity (indeed. greater than earlier reported because it has since expanded) and a new. closure date of 2016. (b) Construction debris wastes are highly recyclable due to their relatively homogeneous nature (easy to separate) and because of their economic value. As a result, construction debris wastes are commonly recycled by building contractors. A.B. 939 requires cities and counties within the State of California to divert 50 percent of all solid wastes that would ordinarily be disposed at solid waste landfills. The Project proponent would minimize the amount of construction debris waste and recycle as much concrete, wood. metals, drywall and cardboard as possible from the waste generated by Citrus Plaza project construction, in order to help the County meet its A.B. 939 goals. In addition, it should be noted that currently there are no structures on-site and the site has been cleared. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 52 (Citrus Plaza): The project proponent shall submit a solid waste management plan addressing: (1) the implementation of available technologies to reduce and recycle solid waste both during construction and after completion of the project; (2) design standards for access to. location and construction of trash container enclosures in order to facilitate implementation of automated refuse Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 53 collection; and (3) proposed actions to divert and/or recycle inert wastes generated during the demolition and construction phase of the project. Mitigation Measure No. 53 (Citrus Plaza): In order to accomplish established source reduction and recycling objectives, prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for each development phase, the project proponent shall submit a source reduction, recycling and composting plan which services to promote the diversion of solid wastes from local landfills. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.3; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.6.3. Cumulative Impacts 5.9.4 Environmental Impact: Implementation of the proposed Project would generate solid waste. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above, with adopted mitigation measures, the proposed Project would not result in solid waste-related impacts. (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to solid waste generation would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a .condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 50 through 53 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR B 4, 5.7.3; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.6.3. 5.10 Public Services and Utilities - Fire Protection EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.10.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to substantial additional demands upon existing fire protection services, which could result in Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 54 an increased demand upon existing facilities. equipment and staffing during construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Public Utilities - Fire Protection are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because the proposed actions would not result in any change in population, fire protection service area, or emergency response times, State or local fire protection standards or regulations would not be impacted. In addition, because all future development projects which have the potential to effect fire protection services would be subject to fees and tax revenues, potential impacts to fire protection services and utilities would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to fire protection services and utilities are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.4. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.10.2 Environmental Impact: The construction of the pipelines would potentially result in a significant impact by creating a potential fire hazard by stockpiling flammable materials. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed pipelines would be entirely located underground, within existing utility right-of-ways, and would not require fire protection services following buildout. However, there is a potential for existing on-site vegetation to be removed and stockpiled adjacent to the proposed alignment for an extended period of time; thus, resulting in a potential fire hazard due to the flammable nature of such materials. By Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 55 ensuring that potentially flammable material will be removed in a timely manner during construction, the mitigation measure set forth below would reduce this potential impact to below a level of significance: (b) The proposed water and wastewater facilities would be served by the local water system proposed in Area A. The water availability for fire flow for Area A would be 4,000 gallons per minute (GPM) over a period of four hours. All applicable requirements have been reviewed and it has been determined that 4,000 GPM and four hours of storage are more than sufficient for the Project. Therefore, the required fire flow would be met upon buildout of the revised Citrus Plaza project and no significant impact would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 54 (Infrastructure Facilities Options): All vegetation and other potentially flammable materials that may be removed during construction of the pipelines, water and wastewater facilities will be removed by the facility operator in a timely manner in order to avoid stockpiling. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.4. 5.10.3 Environmental Impact: Operation of the Citrus Plaza project would result in the need for fire services, resulting in an increased demand upon existing facilities, equipment and services. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEaA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The water system improvements that are included in the proposed Project will result in adequate water resources to meet the County's fire flow requirements for development of both Phases I & II of the Citrus Plaza project. (b) The San Bernardino County Fire Department has confirmed that the proposed mitigation measures will adequately mitigate the potential impacts of the Project with respect to fire emergency services. The initial fire response for the project site will be provided by San Bernardino County Fire Department Stations 9 and 23. In addition, service agreements and/or contracts are available with adjacent jurisdictions for the appropriate additional fire and medical emergency response that may be required. American Medical Response (AMR), which has a contractual relationship with the County of San Bernardino for the purpose of providing emergency medical response services to various areas of the County, has the capacity to provide emergency medical services to the Donut Hole within required response times. FindingS/Oveniding Considerations Page 56 (c) Tax revenues that will accrue to the Fire Department upon construction of Phase I of the Citrus Plaza project, as well as tax revenues that will result from the eventual build out of the Donut Hole, will be adequate to pay for service to the Project, assuming future development within the Donut Hole pays appropriate, proportionate fees for additional costs incurred in serving this area. The Project is conditioned to pay appropriate proportionate fees. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysiS presented in Section 5.6 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 55 (Citrus Plaza): Prior to the issuance of building permits. the San Bernardino County Fire Department shall review building plans for compliance with applicable standards for construction, access routes, sprinkler systems, fire hydrants, fire flow and water main requirements. The required fire flow shall be determined by the appropriate calculations using the San Bernardino County uGuide for Determination of Fire Flow." Water systems shall have a minimum eight (8) inch mains, six (6) inch risers and be designed to maintain a fire flow of 4,000 gallons per minute at 20 psi for a duration of 4 hours. Prior to the issuance of each building permit. there shall be approved County fire protection services within a four to six minute response time or a fire protection services contract between the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection - County Service Area 38 and the City of Redlands Fire Deparment to provide fire protection services to the project. Mitigation Measure No. 56 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B, Sewer Option 3 and Citrus Plaza): Prior to framing construction, approved fire hydrants and fire hydrant pavement markers shall be installed. Fire hydrants shall be six-inch diameter with a minimum of one (1) four-inch and two (2) two-and-one-half (2 y.) inch connection as specified by the Fire Department. The design of the fire hydrant and the fire hydrant pavement marker shall be approved by the Fire Department. All fire hydrant spacing shall be 300 feet. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.4. Cumulative Impacts 5.10.4 Environmental Impact: Implementation of the proposed Project would convert the Citrus Plaza site from an existing land use which imposes only limited demands upon municipal services to a regional commercial center which has the potential to place considerably greater demands upon areawide fire protection facilities, agency personnel and equipment requirements. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) Findings/OVerriding Considerations Page 57 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Mitigation measures have been included which reduce cumulative demands on areawide fire protection facilities or identified equipment requirements to a level of insignificance. Further, the water system improvements that are included in the proposed Project will result in adequate water resources to meet the County's fire flow requirements for development of both Phases I & II of the Citrus Plaza project. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which would ensure compliance with all applicable code and ordinance requirements and minimize the potential impact to fire protective services to a level of insignificance. With the incorporation of the mitigation measures Citrus Plaza project related impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance. Thus, the proposed Project would not substantively contribute to impacts related to fire protective services and cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would not result. (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to fire protection services would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 54 through 56 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR B 4, 5.7.4; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.6.4. 5.11 Public Services and Utilities - Law Enforcement EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.11.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to substantial additional demands upon existing law enforcement services, which could result in an increased demand upon existing facilities, equipment and staffing during construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Public Utilities - Law Enforcement are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 58 of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because future development projects would be subject to CEQA review and other applicable local codes and ordinances, potential impacts regarding law enforcement services and utilities would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to law enforcement services and utilities are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.5. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.11.2 Environmental Impact: Construction and operation of the Citrus Plaza project and water and wastewater treatment facilities would result in the need for police services, resulting in an increased demand upon existing facilities, equipment and services. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091(a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Construction of the infrastructure facilities, under all sewer and water options, may affect local traffic conditions. This could result in the increased need for police services. Following construction of the proposed pipelines, the demand for law enforcement services will be negligible. However, the proposed Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 may require additional security measures to prevent such crimes as graffiti and vandalism, although such impacts do not rise to a level of significance. Since the Project site will remain within unincorporated San Bernardino County jurisdiction, the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department would be responsible for law enforcement services. (b) The only difference between the impacts described in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and the revised project is the retention of the project site within unincorporated San Bernardino County jurisdiction. However, the City of Redlands would continue to provide backup law enforcement services to the Citrus Plaza site. Furthermore, additional California Department of Highway Patrol services would be required upon buildout of the Citrus Plaza development. All impacts associated with the development of Citrus Plaza that were previously identified are still applicable to the revised project. With imposition of the mitigation measures set forth below, law FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 59 enforcement impacts of the development of the Citrus Plaza project will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 57 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B, Sewer Option 3 and Citrus Plaza): During construction, on-site security measures shall include the provision of low-level security lighting. Additional measures may include the provision of private security personnel during hours when construction activities are not being performed and/or the securing of all machinery and related equipment. Mitigation Measure No. 58 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B, Sewer Option 3 and Citrus Plaza): Private on-site security shall be provided to augment police department efforts directed toward limiting criminal occurrences, assisting in traffic control and minimizing unauthorized access to the project. site. The level of on-site security shall be consistent with the stated requirements of the primary law enforcement service provider. Mitigation Measure No. 59 (Citrus Plaza Only): During operation, on- site security features shall include: (1) commercial building orientation which facilitates visual surveillance opportunities (e.g., video) and territorial influences; (2) exterior security lighting for both parking and building areas; (3) well-designed vehicular and visual access to the fronts and backs of all structures; and (4) an adequately sized and appropriately positioned police facility or facilities, as determined by the primary service provider, to facilitate on-site interviews, prisoner processing and release. Mitigation Measure No. 60 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B, Sewer Option 3 and Citrus Plaza): Prior to the issuance of building permits, the County Sheriff's Department shall be afforded the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans, so as to: (1) facilitate emergency access; (2) ensure the consideration of design strategies which facilitate public safety and police surveillance; and (3) offer design recommendations to reduce potential demands upon police services. Mitigation Measure No. 61 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): To reduce accident potential during construction operations, the following measures shall be implemented: (1) use of proper informational signage and lighting; (2) use of barriers, fencing, and/or appropriate coverage to isolate those construction areas potentially susceptible to commercial traffic; (3) use of warning signs, pavement markings and/or flagmen when traffic volumes warrant; and (4) avoid storage of materials and equipment within the street travel way. Mitigation Measure No. 62 (Citrus Plaza Only): Sheriff's Department Facilities. All costs incurred by the project proponent in the development of on-site policing facilities, including facility and equipment expenditures, shall constitute in-kind offsets against any corresponding fees assessed by the County for policing facilities. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 60 Mitigation Measure No. 63 (Citrus Plaza Only): Sheriff's Department Staffing. Based upon a proportional distribution of project-related impacts, as determined by the County Sheriff, the project proponent shall equitably participate in a funding or associated fee program to offset those costs associated with the provision of additional law enforcement personnel, equipment, and/or public facility directly attributable to the proposed project. In assessing the project proponent's equitable allocation, the County Sheriff shall recognize alternative sources of public revenues (e.g., increased sales tax proceeds) which the project will contribute and which constitutes offsets against other public exactions. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.7.5; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.6.5. Cumulative Impacts 5.11.3 Environmental Impact: Implementation of the proposed Project would convert the Citrus Plaza site from an existing land use which imposes only limited demands upon municipal services to a regional commercial center which has the potential to place considerably greater demands upon areawide law enforcement facilities, agency personnel and equipment requirements. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Mitigation measures have been included which reduce cumulative demands on areawide law enforcement facilities or identified equipment requirements to a level of insignificance. On-site security features and an on-site security office would be provided as part of the Citrus Plaza development. In addition, the Project includes design features that would alleviate potential vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at the Citrus Plaza site. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which would ensure compliance with all applicable code and ordinance requirements and minimize the potential impact to law enforcement services to a level of insignificance. With the incorporation of the mitigation measures, Citrus Plaza-related impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance and would not substantively contribute to law enforcement services-related impacts. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would not result. (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to law enforcement would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 61 Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 57 through 63 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR B 4, 5.7.5; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.6.6. 5.12 Human Health EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.12.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to adverse impacts to human health resulting from accidental releases of hazardous materials or the existence of potentially hazardous materials at the Project site. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Human Health are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA area consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because all development projects which have the potential to effect human health would be subject to CEOA review and other applicable local codes and ordinances, potential impacts regarding human health would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to human health are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.8. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 5.12.2 Environmental Impact: Operation of the water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities would necessitate the use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials, which could result in adverse impacts if there were an unplanned release. FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 62 Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities would involve the transportation, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials in association with daily operations. The water treatment facility will require the use of chlorine as a water additive (i.e., chlorine is used as a disinfectant) and sulfur dioxide as a dechlorinate (or remove chlorine) to eliminate effluent toxicity. Polymer and alum may also be used as coagulants to assist in the removal of solids. Disinfection for the wastewater treatment facilities may further involve the use of a chlorination or an ultraviolet light system. Two substances typically used to disinfect water (sodium hypochlorite and aqua ammonia) also have the potential to produce human health impacts in the unlikely event of an unplanned release. (b) The use and transport of sodium hypochlorite for disinfection applications at water and wastewater facilities and swimming pools is widespread and the safety record is excellent. Aqua ammonia is corrosive to copper, aluminum, and galvanized surfaces, but is neither explosive nor flammable. The use of chlorine has a long safe history in the waterworks industry. Standard loading, transport, handling and storage protocols have been developed by the Chlorine Institute to maximize safety. (c) The use of secondary containment for the storage tanks, as mandated by existing environmental regulations, will minimize the likelihood of any unplanned release of either sodium hypochloride or aqua ammonia. As required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), employee training on the presence of potential hazards, safe handling, and emergency procedures applicable to sodium hypochloride and aqua ammonia will also be required. Even with the implementation of engineering features and operational controls, the potential for the accidental release of chlorine, sodium hypochloride, aqua ammonia, sulfur dioxide, polymer and alum, as well as other hazardous materials used in the daily operation of the water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities, could occur. Therefore, additional mitigation measures have been incorporated, as set forth below, to ensure that no adverse impacts would occur. (d) All water supply options include disinfection and could include, if necessary, a TCE removal facility. Disinfection with liquid chlorine will not generate any solid waste. Although TCE treatment with GAC will generate waste carbon, all carbon will be recycled and handled in the same manner as it is handled by the City of San Bernardino. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 64 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B): Water Treatment Facilities. The water storage tank site shall be graded so as to encourage the Findings/Oveniding Considerations Page 63 short-term on-site retention of any discharged water and direct the controlled release of that water to areawide storm drain facilities in the eventuality of an unplanned release of stored water. Mitigation Measure No. No. 65 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B): Water Treatment Facilities. The handling of all on-site hazardous materials, including, but not limited to, chlorine, shall be handled in accordance with the manufacturers' specifications for the safe handling of these materials. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.8. 5.12.3 Environmental Impact: Wastewater is a public health issue when it contains pathogenic organisms. In the event of an accidental release or upset event, untreated or partially treated effluent from a wastewater treatment facility could be released and constitute a potential health risk. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. {Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As proposed, all treated wastewater will be first discharged to the on-site storage reservoir. Treated effluent within that storage facility is to be used for on-site landscape irrigation. Discharge to surface waters will only occur during those periods when water supply exceeds on-site irrigation demands. As a result, in the event of an unplanned discharge of untreated (or inadequately treated) effluent, those waters would be transported to the storage tank. Wastewater in that tank could then be recycled back through the plant for additional treatment. Only in the event that the storage facility was full or that a break occurred within the wastewater conveyance system would discharge of untreated effluent occur to the storm drain system. (b) All facilities will comply with applicable codes. With such compliance, reasonable assurance exists that no untreated or inadequately treated wastewater will be discharged from the treatment facilities which could pose a health and safety risk to either on-site or off-site receptors. (c) The wastewater treatment facilities will be designed to minImiZe the effects of emergency conditions. In the event of a power failure, an emergency generator will provide sufficient short-term power to allow continued operation of the treatment facilities. Emergency power would be provided to all necessary pumps and mechanical equipment. Should a major pump or mechanical piece of equipment fail, a standby unit will be available and would be automatically activated. All mechanical equipment will be supplied with coupling guards, belt guards, and other safety devices. Even with the implementation of engineering features and operational controls, the potential for the accidental release of wastewater from the wastewater treatment facility would exist. Therefore, the mitigation measures set forth below have been incorporated to ensure that no significant adverse impacts would occur. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 64 (d) The Project area is in close proximity to the San Bernardino International Airport and Redlands Municipal Airport. With the incorporation of proper design features (e.g.. height restrictions for water and wastewater treatment buildings, reservoirs, tanks, etc.), no significant impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.7 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 66 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The wastewater process basins site shall be graded so as to encourage the short-term on-site retention and controlled release of wastewater discharged from that reservoir to areawide storm drain facilities in the eventuality of an unplanned release of treated or untreated wastewater from those facilities. Mitigation Measure No. 67 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) shall be designed and constructed and operated in accordance with a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB). The WWTP shall be designed and constructed such that any wastewater spill shall be contained within the site of the facility and returned to the WWTP. The WWTP shall be designed and constructed such that any rainfall runoff off of treatment facilities shall be captured and processed in the WWTP. The WWTP owner and operator shall have an accidental discharge preventive and contingency plan approved by the RWQCB and in place at all times. Mitigation Measure No. 68 (Water Options 1, 2A and 28, and Sewer Option 3): Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. A Hazard Communication Program, including information about chemical hazards and other hazardous substances and their control, shall be developed to enhance worker safety. Included with this program shall be container labeling, material safety data sheets (as required under the Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act), and training outline. The project proponent shall submit a letter to County Planning acknowledging review and approval of the Hazard Communication Plan by the appropriate agency (e.g., CAL-OSHAl. Mitigation Measure No. 69 (Water Options 1, 2A and 28, and Sewer Option 3): Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. All chemicals and hazardous materials shall be stored in a bermed and covered area where any leaks or spills can be contained and stormwater diverted. All spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. Mitigation Measure No. 70 (Water Options 1, 2A and 28. and Sewer Option 3): Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities All drains shall be labeled with appropriate signage to discourage improper material disposal. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.8. Findings/Overriding Considenations Page 65 Citrus Plaza Project 5.12.4 Environmental Impact: Potentially hazardous materials may currently exist on the Citrus Plaza site. Relocation of power poles will be required. These poles may include associated electrical transformers containing PCBs. , Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20 181(a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Historically, the Citrus Plaza project site was used for agricultural operations. Subsurface soil sampling and analysis done for the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR concluded that agricu'iturally related contaminants were not present in levels that exceed the threshold criteria. However, mitigation has been included for this potential environmental impact to ensure no adverse impacts. (b) Existing records do not indicate the presence of any underground storage tanks within the project site; however, mitigation has been included to reduce this potential environmental impact, to a level of insignificance. (c) Two wells, one located along Alabama Street and one on Lugonia Avenue were noted as a source of irrigation water and leaking lubricants. Although there appeared to be insignificant levels of contamination, mitigation has been included to reduce this potential environmental impact to a level of insignificance. (d) Empty smudge pots and empty plastic drums containing residual pesticides may exist on the project site. Mitigation measures have been included to reduce potential environmental impacts from these sources to a level of insignificance. (e) Five Southern California Edison (SCE) pole-mounted transformers are located along the Alabama Street frontage which will require relocation as part of project development. Relocations of power poles shall be undertaken by SCE and shall occur in accordance with SCE's governing rules and regulations. No polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBl contamination associated with electrical transformers is anticipated. However, mitigation has been included to ensure that any potential environmental impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance. (f) Implementation of the revised Citrus Plaza project will. not result in new or substantially worse impacts than those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.8 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 66 Mitigation Measure No. 71 (Citrus Plaza): Prior to the issuance of construction permits for anyon-site use which may contribute to the release of hazardous materials. the project proponent shall be required to submit a Business Emergencyl Contingency Plan or a letter of exemption. Additionally, prior to occupancy, the project proponent shall be required to apply for one or more of the following: a Hazardous Materials Handler Permit. a Hazardous Material Waste Generator Permit, an Aboveground Storage Tank Permit, andlor an Underground Storage Tank Permit. Mitigation Measure No. 72 (Citrus Plaza): Prior to the issuance of building permits: (1) A Phase I environmental assessment, undertaken by a registered environmental assessor or other qualified professional contracted by the project proponent, shall be conducted in direct proximity to 9949 Alabama Street and the on-site water wells for the purpose of ensuring that excavated materials do not contain potentially hazardous substances which may require either subsequent analysis andlor disposal in a landfill other than a Class 1\1 facility; (2) After removal of the smudge pots, an inspection shall be conducted by a registered environmental assessor or other qualified professional contracted by the project proponent to ascertain both the full extent of any on- site soil staining and the need for separate removal and lor remediation; (3) Any plastic drums located on-site which have been identified as potentially containing pesticides or pesticide residues, and any other tanks, drums or associated storage containers subsequently identified on-site and potentially containing hazardous materials andlor petroleum products or residues therefrom, shall be inspected by a registered environmental assessor or other qualified professional prior to their removal from the project site. If subsequently identified, all material collection, disposal and remediation activities shall be conducted in accordance with applicable federal, State and local requirements, including compliance with the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Mitigation Measure No. 73 (Citrus Plaza): Grading and associated development plans adjacent to the Southern California Edison (SCE) easement along Alabama Street shall be coordinated with SCE for the purpose of scheduling the relocation of existing power poles along that right-of-way. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.8; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.7. Cumulative Impacts 5.12.5 Environmental Impact: Construction and implementation of the proposed Project could result in cumulative impacts related to human health. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in. or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The potential impacts of the proposed Project discussed above will be reduced to insignificant levels with the mitigation measures set forth above. Therefore, the proposed Project will not contribute to cumulative impacts related to human health. AndingslOverriding Considerations Page 67 (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to human health would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.8 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 64 through 73 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR B 4, 5.8; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.7. 5.13 Aesthetics EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.13.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to impacts on aesthetics or views resulting from construction or operation of the proposed Project. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Aesthetics are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA area consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves, or a substantive change in the policies or guidelines applicable within Area A. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because all development projects which have the potential to cause aesthetic impacts would be subject to CEOA review and other applicable local codes and ordinances when they are proposed, potential impacts regarding aesthetics would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to aesthetics are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 68 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.9. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 5.13.2 Environmental Impact: Potential aesthetic impacts could occur should the infrastructure options which include the on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities (Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3) be implemented. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CECA Guidelines ~ 15091{a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) No long-term aesthetic impacts would occur with those infrastructure facility options which only include subsurface pipelines, as these facilities would not be visible once the construction of these facilities are complete. However, short-term aesthetic impacts could occur during the actual construction of these facilities. Since these impacts would cease upon the completion of construction, potential aesthetic impacts are concluded to be less than significant. (b) The 25-foot height of the proposed water supply facilities storage tank is consistent with both the approved height of allowable on-site uses and the authorized height of other adjoining land uses as established under the EVCSP. In addition, the projected maximum diameter of the water storage tank would not be out-of-scale with the size of the other land uses which will be constructed on or adjacent to the Citrus Plaza site. Other project design features, including fencing and landscape improvements, would add additional screening to the proposed facilities. As a result, the potential aesthetic impacts associated with the water supply facilities would be less than significant. (c) The proposed wastewater treatment facilities would replace the previously approved MPad Building. along Alabama Street and be smaller in height than that building and other adjoining land uses. Further, the potential visual impacts generated by the proposed open in-ground reservoir wOLlld be less than those associated with an above-ground tank. Therefore, potential aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.9 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 74 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B): Water Treatment Facilities. Perimeter landscaping, including palm trees and other screening vegetation, shall be installed around the on-site water supply facilities to provide screening and to minimize any visual impacts associated with the proposed water storage tank when observed from adjoining roadways. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 69 Mitigation Measure No. 75 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Perimeter landscaping, including palm trees and other screening vegetation, shall be installed around the on-site wastewater treatment facilities to provide screening and to minimize any visual impacts associated with the proposed wastewater storage tank when observed from adjoining roadways. In addition, a masonry wall shall be constructed around any permanent open storage areas, including those utilized for wastewater impounds. Mitigation Measure No. 76 (Sewer Option 3): Wastewater Treatment Facilities. If constructed of a metallic material, the above-ground wastewater process basin shall be painted an earth tone or similar color to minimize the incidence of reflective glare as perceptible from on-site and off-site locations. Reference: FSEIR 9 5.9. Citrus Plaza Proiect 5.13.3 Environmental Impact: Project implementation would result in the replacement of the existing agricultural setting with urban development. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.9 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Urban development is consistent with the planned land uses for the area under both the County General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. (b) The 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, incorporated by reference into the FSEIR, concluded that aesthetic impacts could be effectively mitigated to a level deemed to be less than significant through project adherence to the approved architectural and design standards and landscape guidelines for the project site. Further, the County through its Development Plan process, has established a mechanism to review and approve project specific signage. The project design revisions which are proposed would not result in a change in land use, substantive increase in the geographical area of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable to aesthetic resources within the Citrus Plaza site. Accordingly, implementation of the revised Citrus Plaza project will not result in a significant impact on the aesthetic environment. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.9 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 77: Each Final Development Plan (FOP) landscaping plan shall include the following: (1) each landscaping plan shall provide a study demonstrating that loading zones and any outside storage within the viewshed of adjacent streets and freeways will be substan~ially screened though the use of plant Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 70 material (within three years of planting). architectural features, or by other structures; (2) in the interest of public safety, trees shall be planted not less than: (a) twenty-five feet from beginning of curb returns at intersections; (b) fifteen feet from curbs; (c) ten feet from street lights; (d) ten feet from fire hydrants; and (e) ten feet from driveways; (3) any areas to be graded shall be landscaped for wind and water erosion control and to assist in the reduction of fugitive dust; (4) project/site entry monuments as shown on the Final Development Plan; (5) show proposed landscape treatment and visual buffers; (6) landscaping as delineated on the approved Preliminary/Final Development Plan(s) shall be included on the landscape plan, including palm rows and specimen trees (24-inch box or larger); and (7) outside furniture and other fixtures. All walls shall be decorative and incorporate features such as tree planter wells, columns, or other features. Show locations and materials proposed for use on all retaining walls. Retaining walls shall not exceed ten feet in height. All walls required by this approval shall require building permits. The landscape scheme for areas within roadway right-of-ways shall be approved by the County Public Works Department. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.9; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.8. Cumulative Impacts 5.13.4 Environmental Impact: Construction and implementation of the proposed Project could result in cumulative aesthetics impacts. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts In Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above, the proposed Project as mitigated will not have any significant impacts with respect to aesthetic impacts and, therefore, will not contribute to cumulative impacts related to aesthetic impacts. (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to aesthetics would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.9 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 74 through 77 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 4, 5.9; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ ~ 4, 5.8. findings/Overriding Considerations Page 71 5.14 Cultural Resources EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.14.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to physical changes that impact historic or archaeological resources which may exist at the proposed Project site. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Cultural Resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA area consisTent with redevelopmer' ~()als for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial ir. ',e or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of dev.. .."ent components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to trae physical environment unto themselves, or a substantive change in the policies or G'lidelines applicable within Area A. It is individual development projects, such as the CitrL1s Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because all development projects which have the potential to effect cultural resources would be subject to CEQA review and other applicable regulations and guidelines governing cultural resources, potential impacts regarding cultural resources would be appropriately addressed. Therefore. no environmental impacts related to cultural resources are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.10. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.i4.2 Environmeniai Impact: Constiuction of the proposed infrastructure facilities and Citrus Plaza project would require excavation along the proposed pipeline routes and site excavation to accommodate proposed improvements. Such activities could result in potential destruction or disturbance of unlisted prehistoric or historic archeological properties. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091{a).) Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 72 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Disturbance within the completed IVDA Area is extensive due to the past and current urban development and agricultural use of the area. A site-specific investigation completed for IVDA Area A and easements along the proposed pipeline routes detenmined that no properties listed on the national register of historic places, properties listed as California historic landmarks, properties listed as California points of historical interest, cultural landscapes, ethnic resources, or prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded, However, the potential for prehistoric archaeological resources along the terrace of the Santa Ana River is considered to be moderate and the potential for historic resources, historic archaeological resources, and cultural landscapes is considered to be high. Therefore, mitigation measure have been included to ensure that there will be no significant impacts. (b) Disturbance within the Citrus Plaza Project site is extensive due to the past and current residential development and agricultural use of the area. A site- specific investigation conducted for the Citrus Plaza site concluded that no historic or prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded on the Citrus Plaza site and no prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded within a one-mile radius of the project site. Construction of the revised Citrus Plaza project would require the same level of site disturbance as that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. As the analysis in that document concluded that project impacts on cultural resources would be less-than- significant with the inclusion of the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts of the revised Citrus Plaza project are similarly concluded to be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.10 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 78 (Water Options 1, 2A and 2B, Sewer Option 3 and Citrus Plaza): A field survey shall be conducted by a qualified professional for historic resources for any portion of the proposed project site not previously surveyed prior to the issuance of a grading permit for that portion of the proposed project site. Mitigation Measure No. 79 (Infrastructure Facilities and Citrus Plaza): If any historic or prehistoric resources are encountered during any phase of construction, grading or development, the project proponent shall contact the County Museum and temporarily halt grading/demolition until such time as those resources are evaluated for significance and appropriate mitigation measures are formulated. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.10; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.9. Cumulative Impacts 5.14.3 Environmental Impact: Construction of the proposed Project could result in cumulative impacts to cultural resources. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 73 significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. {Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above, the proposed Project will not have any significant impacts with respect to cultural resources with adopted mitigation and, therefore, will not contribute to cumulative impacts related to such impacts. (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to cultural resources would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.10 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the followin9 mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 78 and 79 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR ~~ 4, 5.10; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.9. 5.15 Socioeconomics EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.15.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to physical changes that negatively impact the existing jobs/housing imbalance within the County. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Socioeconomics are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA area consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves, or a substantive change in the findings/Overriding Considerations Page 74 policies or guidelines applicable within Area A. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. Because all future development projects which have the potential to negatively effect socioeconomics would be subject to CEOA review and other applicable regulations and guidelines, potential impacts regarding socioeconomics would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to socioeconomics are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.11. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Project 5.15.2 Environmental Impact: Implementation of the Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 and the Citrus Plaza project will result in the addition of full-time employment opportunities, which could result in socioeconomic impacts. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard Socioeconomics are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Implementation of Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 will only result in the addition of two full-time employment opportunities, and would therefore not create a significant impact. (b) As indicated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, the Citrus Plaza project, at build out, would result in the generation of approximately 2,728 jobs, not including construction employment or other off-site indirect employment opportunities (e.g., trucking, manufacturing). Employees already residing in the area surrounding the project site would fill the majority of the new jobs, although a small number of new employees would relocate to the area generating new households in the project vicinity. Since the County is currently considered a housing-rich and job-poor area, the Citrus Plaza project would further the regional objective towards a jobs/housing ratio of 1 .2: 1. (c) Development of the revised Citrus Plaza Project would not vary in the types or amounts of on-site uses as that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and the conclusions of the commercial competition discussion in the previous analysis would not change with the implementation of the revised project. As the analysis in that document concluded that the Citrus Plaza Project's socioeconomic impacts would be less than significant, the potential impacts of the revised Citrus Plaza Project are similarly concluded to be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.11; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EtR ~ 5.10. Cumulative Impacts findings/Overriding Considerations Page 75 5.15.3 Environmental Impact: The addition of full-time employment opportunities and provision of a new shopping center as a result of the proposed Project could result in socioeconomic impacts. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard Socioeconomics are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above, the proposed Project will not have any significant socioeconomic impacts related to additional employment opportunities and, therefore, will not contribute to cumulative impacts related to this issue. (b) The Citrus Plaza project will not reduce the number of shoppers patronizing other shopping centers in the area because or significantly affect the feasibility of Inland Center Mall/Carousel Mall because the Citrus Plaza project has a different primary market area. Accordingly, no significant socio-economic impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed mall project and its contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis. (c) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to socioeconomics would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 4, 5.11; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ ~ 4, 5.10. 5.16 Biological Resources EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments 5.16.1 Environmental Impact: Potential adverse impacts could occur if the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments lead to physical changes that impact sensitive wildlife and plant species which may exist at the Project site. Finding: No significant adverse impacts with regard to Biological Resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Facts in Support of Finding: (a) The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments allow the County to increase the options for the provision Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 76 ,- of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A, consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or chan"ge in the geographical area of proposed development, height or bulk of development components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as the Citrus Plaza project, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. The proposed actions incorporate all relevant provisions previously set forth in the EVCSP, therefore, there would be no substantive change in the regulatory environment as a result of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and :Development Code Amendments. In addition, because future development projects would be subject to CEQA review when they are proposed. potential impacts regarding biological resources would be appropriately addressed at that time. Therefore, no environmental impacts related to biological resources are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is necessary. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.12. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan and Citrus Plaza Proiect 5.16.2 Environmental Impact: The proposed Project could result in biological impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species due to construction of facilities on land which has previously been undisturbed. Finding: The County hereby' finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181(a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Three of the four sewer options would be implemented via the installation of pipelines within existing right-of-ways (i.e., roadways and/or concrete flood control channels) and thus no impact to biological resources would occur. Sewer Option 3 includes the development of a local wastewater treatment plant in an undeveloped area, in the northwestern corner of IVDA Area A, where potential impacts to biological resources could occur. All water options include the designation of a zone within a currently undeveloped area for the location of future reservoirs, a pump station and a water treatment plant within the northeastern corner of IVDA Area A. As this area is currently undeveloped, potential impacts on biological resources may occur. In addition, Water Option No.1 may include improvements on currently undeveloped land and as such, may have a potential impact on biological resources. While Water Options 2A and 28 include the use of wens that are located on a disturbed site, an associated pipeline would cross City Creek, north of the Santa Ana River and west of Highway 30. In addition, Water Option 3C is proposed to cross the Santa Ana River, at the northern terminus of California Street (i.e., not within an existing right-of-way). As such, these options could affect the potential biological resources present within this portion of the Santa Ana River. All other Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 77 aspects of all of the proposed water options would occur via pipelines installed within existing right-of-ways (i.e., roadways and/or concrete flood control channels) and thus no impact to biological resources would occur. (b) To minimize potential biological impacts associated with the crossing of the Santa Ana River associated with Water Option 3C, the pipeline installation will occur via microtunnelling under the Santa Ana River and setting the construction sites on both sides of the river in ruderal habitat above the riprap. With regard to Water Options 2A and 2B, the pipeline installation will occur either via placement on the existing roadway bridge in proximity to the well site or via microtunnelling. Using these approaches to construction, disturbance to the surface of the wash will not be necessary, thereby avoiding direct impacts to any sensitive species and/or their habitat areas. (c) Several sensitive wildlife species have at least a moderate potential to occur on the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan site including San Diego horned lizard, Belding's orange-throated whiptail, San Bernardino ring-necked snake, sharp- shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, horned lark, Bell's sage sparrow, loggerhead shrike, western mastiff bat, Los Angeles pocket mouse, San Diego black-tailed jack rabbit, San Diego desert wood rat, and gray fox. None of these species are protected by federal or state listings as threatened or endangered, therefore, loss of individuals would not threaten their regional populations. Accordingly, removal of a limited area of their habitat does not represent a significant impact to regional populations of these species. (d) During the course of field surveys in the study area, many active bird nests were observed including those of raptors. Breeding typically occurs from March through June. Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. A mitigation measure has been included for this potentially significant environmental impact. (e) The Santa Ana River wooly-star, a federally endangered species, occurs in the alluvial fan scrub within the Santa Ana drainage. There will be no significant impacts to this species based upon Project design features and mitigation measures which include microtunnelling under the habitat within the drainage and setting the construction sites on both sides of the river in ruderal habitat above the riprap. In the absence of disturbance to the alluvial fan scrub, no significant direct impacts would occur. Potential effects related to construction activities, such as unauthorized travel between construction sites on either side of the river either by foot or vehicle, would be a significant environmental impact. A mitigation measure has been included to ensure that this impact is reduced to a level of insignificance. (f) The San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat, a federally endangered species, can be found in alluvial fan scrubs in the study area. There will be no significant impacts to this species based upon design features and mitigation measures which include microtunnelling under the habitat within the drainage and setting the construction sites on both sides of the river in ruderal habitat above the riprap. The potential effects of construction activities such as unauthorized travel across the wash between construction sites on either side of the river by foot or by vehicle and night time construction lighting or high intensity security lighting which could 'spillover" into adjacent wash habitat used by the species, thereby causing detrimental changes to its nocturnal behavioral patterns, or Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 78 increasing the rate of predation on this species, would be a significant environmental impact. A mitigation measure has been included to ensure that this impact is reduced to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.' 2 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 80 (Sewer Option 3 and all Water Options): Nesting birds. Mitigation for the taking of active nests may be accomplished in two ways. First, prior to the commencement of tree removal during the nesting season (March-July). all suitable habitat shall be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist. If any active nests are detected, the area shall be flagged and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. In addition, a biologist shall be present onsite to monitor the tree removal and grading to insure that nests are not detected during the initial survey. Second, as an alternative, tree removal and grading could be delayed until after the breeding season. This would insure that no active nests would be disturbed. Mitigation Measure No. 81 (Sewer Option 3 and all Water Options): Pipeline installation under Water Option No. 3C shall occur via microtunnelling under the Santa Ana River and setting the construction sites in ruderal habitat above the riprap. Pipeline installation under Water Options 2A and 2B shall occur by the placement of the pipeline on the nearby existing roadway bridge in proximity of the well site or via microtunnelling. Mitigation Measure No. 82 (Water Option 3CI: Santa Ana Wooly- star. Mitigation for the Santa Ana Wooly-star shall be accomplished by preventing any type of access (foot or vehicle traffic) into the Santa Ana River wash during construction. To ensure this, it is recommended that the construction be monitored by a biologist. Monitoring activities shall include a pre-construction meeting to ensure the construction contractor fully understands restrictions to be placed upon construction areas and the staking of areas to be avoided, if necessary. Monitoring activities shall continue throughout the construction period for the water line across the wash and entail periodic visits by the biological monitor to verify the construction contractor's compliance with habitat avoidance practices. Mitigation Measure No. 83 (Water Option 3C): San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. Mitigation for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat shall be accomplished by preventing any type of access (foot or vehicle traffic) into the Santa Ana River wash during construction. To ensure this. it is recommended that the construction be monitored by a biologist. Monitoring activities shall include a pre-construction meeting to ensure the construction contractor fully understands restrictions to be placed upon construction areas and the staking of areas to be avoided, if necessary. Monitoring shall continue throughout the construction period for the water line across the wash and entail periodic visits by the biological monitor to verify the construction contractor's compliance with habitat avoidance practices. In addition, night construction or high-powered security lighting shall not be permitted to spill over into the wash, so as not to disturb this species while it is foraging. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 79 Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.12. Cumulative Impacts 5.16.3 Environmental Impact: Given the widely recognized potential for biological resources within the Santa Ana River area, any development within proximity of the Santa Ana River has the potential to cause cumulative impacts to biological resources. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment to below a level of significance. (Public Resources Code ~ 20181 (a) and State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a).) Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above, the proposed Project will not have any significant impacts on biological recourses with adopted mitigation measures and, therefore, will not contribute to cumulative impacts related to this issue. (b) Similar to the proposed Project, each of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to biological resources would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and utilized in the FSEIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts and concluded there would be no cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed Project would result. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.10 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measures 80 through 83 set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 4, 5.12; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 4. 6. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR THAT CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The County finds, based upon the threshold criteria for significance presented in the FSEIR, that the following environmental effects of the Project will be significant and cannot be avoided or substantially lessened through mitigation to a level of insignificance. Nevertheless, as explained in the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Section 11 below, these effects are considered to be acceptable when balanced against the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project. Environmental effects in the following areas were found to be significant: Land Use (cumulative), Transportation/Circulation (cumulative related to 1-10 freeway), Air Quality, Energy (cumulative) and Noise (cumulative). Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 80 6.1 Land Use . Cumulative 6.1.1 Environmental Impact: Cumulative adverse land use impacts related to the loss of agricultural land would result from area wide development activities. Finding: The County hereby finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic. legal. social, technological. or other considerations. make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless. these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project. as set forth below in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21 081(a)(3) and CEOA Guidelines! 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Both Project development and cumulative development activities anticipated in the East Valley Corridor area will result in the conversion of existing agricultural lands to non-farm related uses. thereby diminishing the regional inventory of lands devoted to agricultural productivity. Therefore, the cumulative effects attributable to all area wide development activities on the loss of agricultural land would be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation measures are available. Reference: FSEIR B 4, 5.1; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4. 5.1. 6.2 Transportation/Circulation . Cumulative 6.2.1 Environmental Impact: Impacts would occur upon the regional freeway system (1-10 Freeway) as a result of cumulative traffic. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into. the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However. despite such measures, the impacts will still be above a level of significance. Therefore, the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic. legal. soc:ial, technological. or other considerations. make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project. as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3). CEOA Guidelines ! 15091 (a)(3)). Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 81 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) As discussed above in Section 5.4 of these findings, traffic growth has been slower than was anticipated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Analysis and conditions at all individual intersections have remained within the range of volumes and LOS values forecast for those intersections. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis is an adequate, if somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative traffic volumes and impacts. (b) The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bernardino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. This 1995 list of related projects was updated as part of the Final EIR to reflect 2000 conditions. The 1995 list included more cumulative growth and thus provided a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. Thus, no cumulative impacts would occur with regard to cumulative impacts to the local street system. (c) However, the already congested conditions on the 1-10 Freeway will worsen both without and with the proposed Project. Accordingly, cumulative traffic impacts upon the 1-10 freeway will remain significant, even with identified mitigation measures. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.4 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Those portions of Mitigation Measure Nos. 18 and 19 for mitigation that relates to improvements to the 1-10 Freeway or associated ramps, and Mitigation Measure No. 20 regarding the TOM program set forth fully above are incorporated herein by reference. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 4, 5.4; Traffic Validation Study; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Traffic Study (August 1995); 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR B 4, 5.4. 6.3 Air Quality Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 6.3.1 Environmental Impact: Construction and Operations. If multiple pipeline segments were under construction simultaneously and/or occurred concurrently with the construction of the water treatment facilities in the northeast portion of Area A (all Water Options), the wastewater treatment facility located in the northwest portion of Area A (Sewer Option 3), or Citrus Plaza, the total combined NO. emissions would exceed the SCAQMO's established thresholds and a significant construction air quality impact would occur. Impacts could also occur as a result of odors produced during operation of the proposed water treatment facility. Other air quality emissions from the operation of all Water Options and Sewer Option 3 will be less than significant. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However, despite such measures, Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 82 the impacts will still be above a level of significance. Therefore, the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3). CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Construction and installation of subsurface pipelines will result in emission of CO, ROC, PM,o, SO" and NO" which, in most instances, would be less than significant. However, should these emissions occur concurrently with the construction of the water treatment facilities in the northeast portion of Area A (all Water Options), the wastewater treatment facility located in the northwest portion of Area A (Sewer Option 3), Citrus Plaza or if multiple trenches were under construction at the same time, the total combined NO, emissions would exceed the SCAQMO's established thresholds and a significant construction air quality impact would occur. Mitigation measures for such impact have been required, however, impacts will remain significant despite such mitigation measures. (b) Total construction emiSSions associated with the proposed water and wastewater treatment facilities (all Water Options and Sewer Option 3). which could occur concurrently with pipeline construction, would be less than the prescribed SCAQMO thresholds for all of the criteria pollutants analyzed, except for NO,. As such, emissions associated with the construction of the water and wastewater treatment facilities in Area A are considered to be less than significant relative to CO, ROC, PM,o, and SO" while emissions of NO. would be significant. Should pipeline and treatment facility construction occur concurrently, emissions of CO, ROG, PM,o, and SO" would be less than significant, while emissions of NOx would be significant. (c) The operation of Sewer Option 3 and all Water Options would also generate air emissions from various sources including emissions from employee travel and energy consumption. 80th facilities would be constructed and operated in accordance with SCAQMO permits, rules and regulations, therefore, emissions from regulated sources would be reduced to acceptable levels. Estimated emissions associated with facility operations, including energy consumption, are less than the SCAQMO's thresholds and are thus considered to be less than significant. (d) Odors are not anticipated to occur with the operation of the water treatment facility. The operation of the proposed wastewater treatment facility may, from time to time, result in the off-site migration of odors. With proper design and maintenance, the routine development of odors will be reduced or eliminated. Because of the proximity of the proposed treatment plant to areas open to the public, strict odor control mitigation measures will be required. With such measures, impacts related to odor will be reduced to a level of insignificance. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 83 Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.5 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 23 (All Water Options and Sewer Option 3): The Applicant and/or facilities' operator shall initiate consultation with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and shall secure any permits as may be required by that agency, including those required for the installation and operation of any required back-up electrical generator and such other mechanical equipment as may be required for the safe and efficient operation of the proposed facilities and such other permits as may be required by that agency to control odors associated with facilities operations. Receipt of any requisite permits from the SCAQMD will effectively mitigate any related air quality impacts associated with the water supply facilities and wastewater treatment facilities. Mitigation Measure No. 24 (Sewer Option 3): The wastewater treatment facilities shall be designed utilizing a "best available control technology" (BACT) odor control system to ensure the minimization of off-site odor transport. These measures may include, but are not limited to, consist of covering some of the treatment units such as the headworks, the primary clarifiers, and sludge thickeners. Gases trapped underneath the covered areas will then be collected and treated. Mitigation Measure No. 25 (Sewer Option 3): All treatment operations (including sludge storage) associated with the wastewater treatment facilities will be enclosed and vented to system of activated carbon or other such media as approved by the SCAQMD. Mitigation Measure No. 26 (Sewer Option 3): If required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board through the permit process, the wastewater pumping and activated carbon-treatment (or other media) systems shall have back-up or redundant systems to avoid downtime in the event of equipment failure. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.5. Citrus Plaza Project 6.3.2 Environmental Impact: Construction. Phase I and II of the Citrus Plaza project would result in significant construction-related air quality impacts due to NOx and PM,o emissions that exceed significance thresholds during Phase I construction; ROC, NOx and PM,o emissions that exceed significance thresholds during Phase II construction; and CO, ROC, NOx and PM,o emissions if Phases I and II are constructed concurrently. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However, despite such measures, the impacts will still be above a level of significance. Therefore. the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 84 overriding benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts In Support of Finding: (a) A full quantification of all construction emission sources was included within the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, which is incorporated herein by reference. The only change to the Citrus Plaza project is the potential inclusion of a water treatment facility within the Phase I area, which would only be constructed should insufficient water pressure be available to meet the fire flow requirements of the Citrus Plaza project. The emissions attributable to the construction of this facility would not increase the peak construction emissions of the Citrus Plaza project. All other aspects of the Citrus Plaza project construction are unchanged from that previously analyzed. (b) For -all construction-related sources, except those associated with construction worker travel and haul trips, no changes have occurred with regard to emission factors. Therefore, the analyses presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR remain technically valid. Emissions associated with construction worker travel and haul trips have been recalculated to reflect current emission factors. Even with the mitigation measures noted below, construction-related emissions are anticipated to exceed establis~ed SCAQMD thresholds for NOx and PM,o during construction of Phase I and ROC, NOx, and PM,o emissions during construction of Phase II. Therefore, such impacts are considered to be significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.5 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 27 (Infrastructure and Facilities and Citrus Plaza): To minimize the amount of fugitive dust generated during construction operations, the following actions shall be undertaken by the project proponent and shall be included as notes on the grading plan: (1) enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed piles (I.e., gravel, sand, dirt) with 5 percent or greater silt content; (2) water spraying or other methods shall be used during grading operations to control fugitive dust, (3) aU trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of CVC Section 23114; (4) sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend sweepers with reclaimed water); (5) apply water three times daily, or non-toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces; and (6) traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to be reduced to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less. Mitigation Measure No. 28 (Citrus Plaza): Where architectural coatings are to be applied, the project proponent shall specify the use of high-volume low- pressure or manual application of paints and coatings on structures. Pre-finished, pre- primed and/or natural products may be utilized for building trim and/or accents. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 85 Mitigation Measure No. 29 (Citrus Plaza): Specify the use of concrete, asphaltic cement, or emulsified asphalt. Avoid cut-back asphalt wherever feasible. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.5; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.5. 6.3.3 Environmental Impact: Operation. Phase I and II of the Citrus Plaza project would also result in significant air quality impacts related to emissions generated by stationary and mobile sources. Operational emissions attributable to Phase I and Phase II are anticipated to exceed established SCAQMD thresholds for CO, ROC, and NOx. In addition, concurrent Phase I operational emissions and Phase II construction emissions would result in significant impacts with regard to CO, ROC, NOx, and PM,o. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However, despite such measures, the impacts will still be above a level of significance. Therefore, the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: (a) A full quantification of operational emiSSion sources was included within the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, which is incorporated herein by reference. As the project has remained unchanged (except for minor differences in proposed square footage) from that previously analyzed, the only differences in the emissions forecast would result from changes in emission factors. For the identified stationary sources, no changes have occurred with regard to emission factors. Therefore, the analyses presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR remain technically valid. Emissions associated with mobile sources have been recalculated to reflect current emission factors. No other modifications to these analyses are required as there have been no other changes to the assumptions incorporated into these analyses. (b) Operational Phase I and Phase II emissions are anticipated to exceed established SCAQMD thresholds for CO, ROC and NOx. In addition, air emissions associated with Phase I operations will occur simultaneously with Phase II construction- related emissions. These combined activities would result in significant impacts with regard to CO, ROC, NOx. and PM,o. Despite application of the mitigation measures set forth below, such impacts will remain significant. However, if the project is not constructed, patrons living near the project site would need to travel further distances to similar types of facilities to obtain the goods and services that would be available at the project site. These longer travel distances would create emissions unto themselves which would only be worsened by the additional congestion that this type of travel would create. Thus, the significance of these impacts should be viewed in this broader context. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 86 (c) Project operations will not result in any local carbon monoxide (i.e., CO hotspots) impacts and the Citrus Plaza project will be consistent with applicable regional plans. While the emission factors for CO have increased, the magnitude of the increase is not sufficient to alter the conclusion in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR that the project would have a less than significant impact on local CO concentrations. Regional plans have also been updated since the preparation of the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. However, they too have not changed in a manner that would alter the analysis or the conclusions presented in that EIR. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.5 of the FSEIR. which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval: Mitigation Measure No. 30 (Citrus Plaza): In those locations specified by the permitting agency, the project proponent shall: (1) construct on-site or off-site bus turnouts, passenger benches or shelters; (2) construct on-site bicycle and motorcycle facility improvements and include bicycle and motorcycle parking facilities, such as designated parking areas, bicycle lockers and racks; and (3) construct on-site pedestrian improvements, as required by the County of San Bernardino, such as sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. Mitigation Measure No. 31 (Citrus Plaza): Where feasible, traffic lights shall be synchronized, subject to review and approval by County traffic engineer. Mitigation Measure No. 32 (Citrus Plaza): To minimize energy consumption, where feasible, the project proponent shall: (1) provide shade trees to reduce building heating and cooling needs; and (2) use energy-efficient and automated controls for air conditioners. Reference: FSEIR ~ 5.5; 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ~ 5.5. Cumulative Impacts 6.3.4 Environmental Impact: Based on the SCAQMD's significance threshold, the Project will have a significant cumulative air quality impact. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However, despite such measures, the impacts will still be above a level of si9nificance. Therefore, the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 87 Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Based on' the SCAOMD's significance threshold, a project would have a significant cumulative air quality impact if the rate of growth in vehicle miles traveled exceeds the project's rate of growth in employment when compared to the regional average assumptions upon which the SCAOMD's AOMP are based. Cumulative air quality impacts for the project were evaluated in the context of San Bernardino County as a whole. The rate of growth in vehicle miles traveled for both Phase I and II is greater than the corresponding rate of growth in employment. Therefore, the Project would have a significant cumulative impact on air quality. Mitigation Measures: There are no feasible mitigation measures in addition to those applicable to project-specific impacts, which are set forth above and incorporated by reference herein. Reference: FSEIR ~~ 4, 5.5. 6.4 Energy - Cumulative 6.4.1 Environmental Impact: The proposed Project, in combination with related projects, will consume nonrenewable energy resources and result in a cumulative impact on regional energy resources. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However, despite such measures, the impacts will still be above a level of significance. Therefore, the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Energy impacts were analyzed in the Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, incorporated by reference into the FSEIR. Although the Project will not increase the energy use over that previously analyzed, such impacts are still considered significant. (b) Both SCE and Southern California Gas Company were contacted in the preparation of the FSEIR and the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and provided the opportunity to submit comments. The two utilities stated that electric and natural gas services and supplies are generally available in accordance with policies and rules on file with the PUC and that gas service could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 88 (c) In order to reduce the amount of energy consumed by operation of the Citrus Plaza, project, where feasible, the project proponent will be required to provide shade trees to reduce building heating and cooling needs, and use energy- efficient and automated controls for air conditioners. Although these measures will reduce the project's energy use, cumulative impacts from the proposed Project when combined with related projects would remain significant. Mitigation Measures: Based upon the analysis presented in Section 5.5 of the FSEIR, which is incorporated herein by reference, the following mitigation measures have been identified and made a condition of Project approval. Mitigation Measure No. 32, set forth fully above in Section 6.3 is incorporated hereby in reference. Reference: FSEIR ~ ~ 2.4, 5.5, 11 (letter #12); 1995 Citrus Plaza Final ElR ~ 2.2. 6.5 Noise - Cumulative 6.5.1 Environmental Impact: The Project will have significant cumulative noise impacts. Finding: The County hereby finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects on the environment. However, despite such measures, the impacts will still be above a level of significance. Therefore, the County further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures which might avoid or reduce these effects because specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. Nevertheless, these unavoidable significant effects are considered acceptable when balanced against the overriding benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEnA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Although neither the construction or operation of the infrastructure facilities or Citrus Plaza will result in the generation of significant noise impacts after mitigation, together they will incrementally contribute to increased noise levels within the Project area. Similar to the proposed Project, noise from the construction and operation of the Related Projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any project related noise would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code requirements and any recommended mitigation measures. Nevertheless, cumulative noise impacts on the overall environment from these incremental increases in ambient noise levels can likely not be mitigated below a level deemed to be significant. Mitigation Measures: There are no feasible mitigation measures in addition to those applicable to project-specific impacts, which are set forth above in Section 5.6 and are incorporated by reference herein. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 89 Reference: FSEIR 99 4, 5.6. 7. FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH IND.UCEMENT IMPACTS The proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Area A utilizing sewer and water service from providers other than the City of Redlands. The proposed actions would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area subject to these cha,nges, general development standards such as those relating to the height or bulk of future development, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Area A. As such, the potential growth inducing impacts of the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments are limited to those relating to increasing the options for the provision of water and wastewater se,rvices. Increasing the options for the delivery of water and wastewater services has the potential to be growth inducing as development would be able to utilize the excess capacity available from a number of service providers rather than be iimited to the capacity constraints of a single service provider. However, this impact is concluded to be less than significant because even though potential constraints on growth are eased via the broadening of available options, development will ultimately be constrained by the collective capacity of the service systems. Implementation of the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan would provide needed water and sewer services to IVDA Area A. The Plan would not provide water supply or sewer services to Area A beyond the projected demands of the Area as estimated by the Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options Report as well as within the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (June 1990). Further consultation with County agencies have confirmed that since the water supply and wastewater treatment facilities are designed and sized only to accommodate the demands imposed by development within IVDA Area A, including the Citrus Plaza project site, the potential growth inducing effects of the proposed facilities would not extend beyond IVDA Area A. Therefore, the implementation of any of the proposed water supply and sewer services options would not directly result in growth inducing impacts. The revised Citrus Plaza project would result in the same number of job opportunities, households, and students in the project vicinity as the Citrus Plaza project approved in January 1996. Therefore, the development of the Citrus Plaza site would not result in additional growth inducing impacts beyond those addressed in the previous analyses, including the EIR prepared for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, incorporated by reference into the FSEIR. Neither of those EIRs concluded that there would be significant growth inducement impacts. 8. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES Alternatives to each of the three elements of the proposed Project were considered and described in the FSEIR. The alternatives presented therein constitute and reasonable range of alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice among the options available to the County and/or the Project proponent. Based upon the Project's administrative record, the County makes the following findings concerning the alternatives to the proposed Project. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 90 -.,"'--. 8.1 EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments - - - --- ------ - - -- -------- Description: The nature of the propo-sedEVCSP-RepearanoGeneraTPlan-ancf - Development Code Amendments (i.e., increasing the options allowed for providing water and sewer infrastructure facilities to unincorporated IVDA area A) are such that a standard analysis of alternatives would not be applicable because the provision of infrastructure facilities to the identified areas could only occur under the current regulatory environment or the broadening of possibilities as reflected in the proposed actions. As such, the only feasible alternative to the proposed EVCSP Repeal and General Plan and Development Code Amendments is the continuation of current regulatory practices which is consistent with the CEQA Guidelines definition of the No Project alternative. Under the No Project alternative, no change in policies would occur and as such, water and sewer service would continue to be provided under existing conditions. Finding: The County finds that specific economic, legal, social. technological, or other considerations, make the No Project Alternative infeasible. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: Under the No Project Alternative, there would be no significant adverse impacts on the environment because water and sewer service would continue to be provided under existing conditions. Under existing conditions, no services can be provided because the City of Redlands, the agency charged with providing water and sewer services to IVDA Area A under the current plans, is precluded from providing such services because of its Measure U. Therefore. the No Project Alternative fails to meet all of the project's basic objectives. Furthermore, as implementation of the proposed Plan Amendments do not result in any significant impacts. the No Project Alternative also does not create any advantage from an environmental perspective as it would not substantially lessen a significant effect of the project. Reference: FSEIR ~ 7. 8.2 Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 8.2.1 Water Option 7 Description: The analysis of infrastructure facilities presented in Section 5.0 of the FSEIR included a total of 14 options for the delivery of water service and four options for the delivery of sewer service. In addition to these options, the certified 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR fully analyzed the environmental effects of the Citrus Plaza project receiving water and sewer service from the City of Redlands. CEQA requires that alternatives be analyzed at a level of detail that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. The analysis provided in Section 5.0 of the FSEIR satisfies all CEQA requirements with regard to an alternatives analysis since it evaluates 14 water options and four sewer options at an equal level of detail, far exceeding the level of detail ordinarily provided in a CEQA alternatives analysis. Furthermore, the 18 water and sewer options analyzed in the FSEIR were developed as a result of an engineering study that looked at an even greater number of alternatives and concluded that the options included in the FSEIR represented a reasonable range of alternatives for the delivery of water and sewer service. All of the water and sewer options discussed in the FSEIR have been included in the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan except Water Option 7, which entails connection to the City of Riverside sewer system. FindingS/Overriding Considerations Page 91 Finding: The County finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make Water Option 7 infeasible at this time. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: Each of the water and sewer options presented in the FSEIR is technically feasible. However, in preparing the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan, the County determined that Water Option 7 would be more difficult to implement than the other options at this time. There have been no specific discussions with the City of Riverside, therefore, it is unclear whether it would agree to serve Area A and implementation of this option may take longer than the other options. . Accordingly, the County has determined not to include this option in the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan at this time. Reference: FSEIR B 3, 5, 7. 8.2.2 No Project Alternative Description: Other than the 18 water and sewer options discussed fully in the FSEIR, the only other alternative is the No Project Alternative. Under the No Project Alternative, the provision of water and sewer service would continue to be required to be provided by the City of Redlands, which due to Measure U, among other things, is unable to provide such services, resulting in the area remaining unserved. Finding: The County finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make the No Project Alternative infeasible. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEOA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: Under the No Project Alternative, there would be no significant adverse impacts on the environment because water and sewer service would continue to be provided under existing conditions. Under existing conditions, no services can be provided because the City of Redlands, the agency charged with providing water and sewer services to IVDA Area A under the current plans, is precluded from providing such services because of its Measure U. Therefore, the No Project Alternative fails to meet all of the project's basic objectives. Furthermore, as implementation of the proposed infrastructure options, with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures, does not result in any significant impacts, the No Project Alternative also does not create any advantage from an environmental perspective as it would not substantially lessen a significant effect of the project. Reference: FSEIR ~ 7. 8.3 Citrus Plaza Project 8.3.1 Prior Analysis. Several alternatives for the Citrus Plaza project were analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and the Citrus Plaza Supplemental EIR. Some of these previously considered alternatives are no longer being considered including the following: Retention of Existing Parcel Configuration; Reduced-Intensity Development; Revised Phasing Plan; and Alternative Sites. All of these alternatives, except the Water Supply Delivery Option and Wastewater Supply Delivery Option, are rejected because they Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 92 are considered infeasible. The Water Supply Delivery option and Wastewater Supply Delivery option are included as part of the current Project (e.g., Sewer Options 2A and 28 and Water Supply Options 4A, SA, 6A and 7A). Therefore, these options are not evaluated again separately as alternatives to the revised Citrus Plaza project. 8.3.2 No Project Alternative Description: Under this alternative, the Citrus Plaza project would not be developed and the project area is assumed to be retained in its existing conditions with agriculture, vacant land, a few residences, a church school and a monastery. Finding: The County finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make the No Project Alternative infeasible. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts In Support of Finding: The No Project Alternative would not result in any significant environmental impacts except cumulative noise impacts. Therefore, its impacts would be less than the proposed project. However, the No Project Alternative fails to meet all of the project's basic objectives. Reference: FSEIR ~ 7. 8.3.3 Development of an Alternative Land Use - Corporate Headquarters/ Office Development Description: Under this alternative, the Plan Amendments and Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan would still occur; however, instead of developing a regional shopping mall on the Citrus Plaza site, a corporate headquarters/office development would be developed. A total of 2,268.605 square feet of office-related use would be developed on the 125:1: acre site under this altemative. This density represents an increase in square footage of approximately 23 percent over the proposed Citrus Plaza project. Since it appears unlikely that a single corporate headquarters would encompass the entire 125:1: acre site. it is more reasonable to assume that the Citrus Plaza project area would be master planned for office uses. This action would necessitate consolidation of all existing lot boundaries and resubdivision to create numerous developable parcels. Site clearance and development would occur as a single event and properties would be randomly marketed within the overall Citrus Plaza project site. Full buildout would occur within the time frame anticipated for the proposed Citrus Plaza project. Finding: The County finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Alternative infeasible. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3). CEQA Guidelines ~ 15091(a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: Environmental impacts of this alternative in all areas except Land Use, Transportation/Circulation and Growth Inducement would be similar in significance to the impacts of the proposed Citrus Plaza project. This alternative would have a lesser impact than the proposed project with respect to land use consistency. However, impacts to the local transportation/circulation system would be Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 93 greater under this alternative due primarily to increased worker commuting trips. In addition. this alternative would result in greater impacts related to growth inducement because professional positions are often highly skilled, specialized. and well-compensated. requiring a degree of education and proficiency which may not be readily available with the local labor pool, thus potentially requiring the in-migration of white collar professionals from outside the Citrus Plaza project area. Because the environmental impacts of this alternative are greater than for the proposed project. it does not create any advantage from an environmental perspective. Reference: FSEIR ~ 7. 8.3.4 Development of an Alternative Land Use - Stadium/Amphitheater Description: Under this alternative, the Plan Amendments and Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan would still occur; however, instead of developing a regional shopping mall on the Citrus Plaza site, a stadium/amphitheater would be developed. This alternative assumes a larger single-sport stadium with seating capacity of approximately 45,000 seats on the Citrus Plaza site. Although no design plans presently exist, the Stadium/Amphitheater Altemative would consist of two major design elements. The first, the stadium itself, would be constructed in the center of the Citrus Plaza project site and require an area of approximately 20 acres. Surrounding the facility, the remainder of the site would be allocated to parking and internal access. Since no formal parking standards now exist for this land use, it is assumed that one parking space would be required for every three to four fixed seats, with additional parking set aside for employees. Assuming a 45,000 seat capacity, approximately 11,250 to 15,000 parking spaces would be required to accommodate the proposed use. Finding: The County finds that specific economic, legal. social. technological, or other considerations. make the Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative infeasible. (Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(3), CEM Guidelines ~ 15091 (a)(3)). Facts in Support of Finding: Environmental impacts of this alternative in all areas except Air Quality, Noise and Aesthetics would be similar in significance to the impacts of the proposed Citrus Plaza project. This alternative would have a lesser impact than the proposed project with respect to air quality because air emissions would occur less frequently, only when there are sporting events and/or concerts. However. this alternative would result in greater nighttime noise impacts to sensitive uses than the proposed Citrus Plaza project. due to noise generation from the sporting events and/or concerts held at night in the outdoor stadium. The introduction of night lighting. which has the potential to result in excessive glare or light spillage onto adjacent land uses and roadways, would result in greater aesthetic impacts than the proposed project. even assuming effective mitigation. Therefore, environmental impacts of this alternative are greater than for the proposed project and it does not create any advantage from an environmental perspective. Reference: FSEIR ~ 7. FindingslOverrlding Considerations Page 94 9. FINDINGS REGARDING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires that when making the findings required by Section 21081 (a) of the Public Resources Code, the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval, in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The County hereby finds that: . A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRPI has been prepared for the Project, and the mitigation measures therein are made a condition of Project approval. The MMRP is incorporated herein by reference and is considered part of the record of proceedings for the proposed Project. . The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation; the County will serve as the MMRP Coordinator. . The MMRP, as adopted by the County for the Project, meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. 10. OTHER FINDINGS The County hereby finds as follows: . The County is the "Lead Agency" for the proposed Project evaluated in the FSEIR. The County finds that the Draft SEIR and the FSEIR were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The County has independently reviewed and analyzed the Draft SEIR and FSEIR for the proposed Project. The Draft SEIR which was circulated for public review and the FSEIR reflect the independent judgment of the County . . In determining whether the proposed Project has a significant impact on the environment, arid in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21 081 of the Public Resources Code, the County has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2; . The impacts of the proposed Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the FSEIR; . The FSEIR provides objective information to assist the decision-makers and the public at large in their consideration of the environmental consequences of the proposed Project. . The public review period provided all interested jurisdictions. agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments regarding the Draft SEIR and the proposed Project. The County evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft SEIR. In accordance with CEQA, the County prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The FSEIR provides adequate, good faith and reasoned AndingsJOverriding Considerations Page 95 responses to these comments. The County has reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information regarding environmental impacts to the Draft SEIR requiring recirculation. . Textual refinements and errata to the FSEIR were compiled and presented to the decision-makers for review and consideration in the Errata. These textual refinements arose for a variety of reasons. However, none of the textual refinements make substantive changes to the FSEIR or add significant new information regarding environmental impacts requiring recirculation. . The General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code amendments were adopted to make it clear that the policies of San Bernardino County allow for provision of water and wastewater services to unincorporated IVDA Area A by agencies other than the City of Redlands. The proposed Plan Amendments do not reconsider or revise the policies of the EVCSP except as to the provision of water and sewer services for unincorporated IVDA Area A. All other aspects of the EVSCP are being retained and made a part of the County's General Plan and Development Code by the proposed Plan Amendments. Therefore, it would not have been appropriate for the FSEIR to consider alternatives to the land use designations and densities contained in the EVCSP. . The County is certifying the FSEIR for, and is approving and adopting findings for, the entirety of the actions described in these Findings. There may be a variety of actions undertaken by other State and/or local agencies (who might be referred to as "responsible agencies" under CEQA). Because the County is the lead agency for the proposed Project, the FSEIR is intended to be the basis for compliance with CEQA for each of the possible discretionary actions by other State and/or local agencies to carry out the Project. 11. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 (b) and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the County has balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the proposed Project and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts: land Use (cumulative loss of existing agricultural resources); Transportation/Circulation (regional cumulative impacts on the 1-10 Freeway); Air Quality; Noise (cumulative impacts) and Energy (cumulative impacts). The County also has examined alternatives to the proposed Project, none of which both meet the Project objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed Project. The County, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed Project, has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified above may be considered "acceptable" due to the following specific considerations which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project. Each of the separate benefits of the proposed Project, as stated herein, is determined to be, unto itself and independent of the other Project benefits, a basis for overriding all unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in these Findings. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 96 (1) Provide Clarity Regarding Provision Of Services To The Donut Hole A variety of events over the past several years have substantially delayed the provision of water and sewer service to unincorporated Area A of the IVDA Area (the Donut Hole) and lead to a situation where it is unclear how this area is to be provided with water and sewer services in the future. Initially, under the EVCSP, the City of Redlands was to provide such services. However, attempts in the 1990's by landowners to obtain such services from the City failed. Then the City of Redlands adopted Measure U, which precludes it from providing such services unless the area is annexed to the City. Since that time, IVDA Area A has been removed from the City of Redlands' sphere of influence. Thus, without the Project, the ability of any agency or entity to provide water and sewer services to this unincorporated area would remain in question. The Project will provide much needed clarity that the policies of the County permit agencies, other than the City of Redlands, to provide water and sewer services to IVDA Area A, and that there are a variety of options for providing such services. (2) Enhanced Public Improvements The proposed Project would ensure that adequate and reliable water supply and wastewater management facilities are provided for current and future development in the unincorporated IVDA Areas where no such facilities currently exist. Implementation of the proposed Project would facilitate the development of that backbone infrastructure system which has been designed to accommodate the areawide development in the IVDA Area. The proposed Project would coordinate the phasing of new development in the area with installation of public improvements in such a way as to allow for orderly site development. (3) Master Planning and Quality Development The proposed Project would result in the development of approximately 1.85 million square feet of retail-oriented land uses. The provision of these uses within the IVDA Area would both further the land use policies for the area and respond, in part, to existing and future market demands for commercial development. The proposed Project would promote and facilitate high-quality commercial, industrial and residential development within the IVDA Area by introducing regional retail commercial uses that would satisfy an existing latent demand and future anticipated demand for a high-quality regional retail center in the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. By accommodating these demands for additional specialty commercial use, the proposed Project would result in a reduction in the number of total vahicle miles driven by consumers patronizing more remote commercial centers. The proposed Project would provide convenient shopping services to the surrounding communities of Redlands, San Bernardino, Loma Linda, Yucaipa and Highland, which would reduce the need for residents of these communities to travel outside the local shopping area and provide positive economic benefit to the surrounding communities. The proposed Project would establish design themes to unify the area and provide recognizable community character. FindlngslOverTiding Considerations Page g7 (4) Increased Employment Opportunities The proposed Project would maximize generation of local employment opportunities in a region which has a significant imbalance of housing versus employment opportunities. The proposed Project would create an estimated 2,728 new job opportunities which would promote the attainment of the County's job/housing balance objectives, respond to the Countywide need to expand the area's employment base, and promote the attainment of regional air quality objectives. In addition, the proposed Project would generate a substantial number of construction jobs within a variety of trades during the development of the proposed Project, and would generate other off-site indirect. employment opportunities, e.g., trucking or manufacturing. Such jobs will provide needed employment opportunities, both on-site and off-site, and would promote growth, personal income and economic revitalization within the County. Employees already residing in the area surrounding the proposed Project site would fill the majority of the new job opportunities generated by the construction and operation of the Project, thereby expanding the local employment base. (5) Revitalization The proposed Project would convert underutilized property to a high quality use which would be compatible with the surrounding area and would provide high quality attractive development that would, in turn, increase the value of surrounding property and generally enhance the regional atmosphere. The proposed Project would enhance property values in a section of the region that has been underutilized for years, attracting new investment and increasing demand for a wide variety of commercial uses including retail, restaurant, entertainment and small businesses. The proposed Project would attract and retain businesses within the region which would contribute to the area's image and reputation. This would encourage future business development and, thus, provide new opportunities for the community. (6) Increased Tax Revenues The proposed Project would increase the tax base through build out of industrial and commercial operations in the Project area. At Project build out, the proposed Project is estimated to provide a net fiscal benefit to the County of $4.18 million annually. In the event of Project conveyance after development, the estimated property transfer tax generated would be approximately $269,610 in public revenues. Increased tax revenues would be available to help promote further redevelopment of the IVDA Area. The total value of these tax revenues is expected to increase annually thereafter. The proposed Project will contribute to increased business activity and sales tax proceeds. Annual business sales resulting from the proposed Project are expected to increase substantially as a result of the proposed Project. FindingslOverriding Considerations Page 98 (7) Furtherance of Redevelopment Project Goals The IVDA Redevelopment Project was formed due to blighted conditions in the area. By providing viable options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area which will encourage development and by allowing development of the Citrus Plaza project in Area A to proceed, the proposed Project will further the redevelopment goals of the IVDA Area and lead to the elimination of blight. (8) Freeway and Arterial Roadway Improvements The Project proponent would contribute a "fair share" requirement for a variety of off.site traffic improvements which would allow for additional improvements to the already congested 1-'0 Freeway and arterial roadways that serve the proposed Project area. As a result, the proposed Project would provide a comprehensive. functional and efficient circulation system of sufficient capacity to accommodate projected traffic demands at all phases of development. consistent with regional master transportation plans. These roadways are integral to the regional transportation improvement plans and provide a valuable public benefit. The proposed Project would maximize local employment opportunities and the provision of services and shopping facilities within the Corridor through appropriate land use designations, resulting in decreased commuter trips and reduced traffic demands on the County's freeways and roadways. Findings/Overriding Considerations Page 99 . . r 1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT . SECOND CYCLE 2001 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS RESOLUTION NO. ; \ On motion by Supervisor ' seconded by Supervisor and carried, the Board adopts the following resolution: WHEREAS, Section 65358 of the California Government Code requires that any mandatory element of the General Plan shall be amended no more than four (4) times during any calendar year; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendments contained in this resolution constitute the second amendment to the San Bernardino County General Plan during 2001; and WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors have conducted legally noticed public hearings during which the projects comprising the Second Cycle were considered and testimony received; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has made the findings necessary to adopt the General Plan Amendments as set forth in Section 1 of this Resolution; WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors notes that a previously adopted resolution amending the General Plan, Resolution No. 99-175, Second Cycle 1999, adopted on July 27, 1999 has been the subject of judicial challenge seeking the invalidation and repeal of a portion or section of that Resolution and associated General Plan changes. The Second Cycle 1999 changes are separate from, independent of, and unrelated to, the changes set forth in this Second Cycle 2001 Resolution and General Plan Amendments. It is the intent of the Board of SuperviSOrs that the changes made by this Resolution, Second Cycle 2001 General Plan Amendments, be severable and independent from any other General Plan changes, including the changes made by the Second Cycle 1999 Resolution, and that the Second Cycle 2001 General Plan Amendments shall be unaffected by any judicial decision, invalidation. or court- mandated repeal or other change of the Second Cycle 1999 Resolution and General Plan changes. The Second Cycle 1999 Resolution and the Second Cycle 2001 Resolution made their own changes to the subsection entitled "Land Use Planning in the Sphere of Influence ("SOl") Areas, Goals 0-60 and 0-61, and General Plan Policies LU-9 and LU-10. This main text of this Resolution sets forth the text of the General Plan as it now reads, after being amended by both the Second Cycle 1999 Resolution and the Second Cycle 2001 Resolution. Attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution is the text of those sections as they would read if the Second Cycle 1999 Resolution and General Plan changes were invalidated and repealed, and the Second Cycle 2001 Resolution and General Plan Amendments were to remain in effect; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors hereby amends the San Bernardino County General Plan as follows: 1 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 '. LAND USE SERVICES - EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 OLUD MAP FH-31A SECTION 1. The General Plan Official Land Use District Maps are amended as shown on the attached map marked .OLUD MAP FH-31A" from EC/SP (East Valley Corridor/Specific Plan) to EC/PD (East Valley Corridor/Planned Development), EC/IR (East Valley Corridor/Regional Industrial) and EC/CG (East Valley Corridor/General Commercial) on approximately 1009 acres located within an area bounded by the Santa Ana River to the north, the State Highway 3011-210 Freeway to the east, Lugonia Avenue to the south, and Califomia Street to the west; Redlands area. This map is also amended from various to various in the East Loma Linda Planning Area on approximately 1073 acres located within an area bounded by the Redlands City limits to the north, east and south, and the Loma Linda City limits to the west; Loma Linda area. FINDINGS: General Plan Amendment 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is in the best interest of the public, because it will facilitate provision of public services and economic development in the IVDA Redevelopment Area. 2. The proposed land use district change is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and will provide a reasonable and logical extension of the existing and evolving land use pattem in the surrounding area. Also it brings forward and updates the land use policies of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and incorporates them into a new East Valley Planning Area. 3. The proposed land use district change does not conflict with proVISions of the Development Code, or any applicable specific plan, because it establishes a new planning area and continues the same or similar land use designations as those currently established in the area; 4. The potential environmental effects of the proposed General Plan Amendments have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and it was determined that the proposed amendments will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed General Plan Amendment, in spite of its impacts on the environment. 2 200112 GPA/E273.97 , , LAND USE SERVICES - EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 OLUD MAP FH-31A " , i -[ " . ! I .---; ---:-.--!---...; h, I '~. ----{ iElJRL.-10 4 , !""--- ii 3 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT SECTION 2. The General Plan Text is amended as shown in Sections 3 through 17 of this resolution; Countywide. FINDINGS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS: 1. The proposed General Plan Text Amendment was evaluated in an EIR. 2. The proposed General Plan Text Amendment is in the public interest, there will be a community benefit and other existing and permitted uses will not be compromised. SECTION 3. The subsection entitled "SPECIFIC PLANS" in Section I, Subsection F2 (Relationship to Other Documents) of the San Bemardino County General Plan is amended, to read: SPECIFIC PLANS Specific Plans are unique sub-area plans that may be adopted by the County. They are a regulatory tool used to implement the General Plan. They include special financial, environmental, and developmental procedures. Each Specific Plan is a stand-alone regulatory document. Specific Plans have been prepared for the Agua Mansa and Kaiser Commerce Center areas. SECTION 4. The subsection entitled "INCORPORATED CITIES. in Section I, Subsection F7 (Coordination of Land Use Decisions) of the San Bernardino County General Plan is amended, to read: /NCORPORA TED CITIES It is the policy of the County that the incorporated cities and the County should: . Coordinate land use planning. Coordination of land use planning means the sharing of information and opinions and providing an opportunity to comment on development proposals submitted to the County or incorporated cities. Coordination does not mean the provision of a veto power over the land use decisions of the agency with the authority to make them, nor does coordination require agreement between an incorporated city and the County when land use decisions are ultimately made. In the event of a disagreement between an incorporated city and the County, the incorporated cities shall have the final authority within their boundaries, and the County shall have the final authority within the unincorporated areas of the County. 4 GPA/E273-97 I. 2001/2 '; LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT . Make available to each other, for review and comment, proposed change in their general plan, zoning, and land use applications that may affect property adjacent to their boundaries. . Share population, housing and land use statistics and resource capacity data. . Share information on proposed public works recommended for planning, initiation or construction during the ensuing fiscal year that affect, with other areas or expansions, water, sewer and other infrastructure capability for future urban expansion, etc., in accordance with the provisions of the capital improvement program. SECTION 5. Goal C-12 and second paragraph after Goal C-12 in Section II, Subsection C2 (Cultural/ Paleontologic) of the San Bernardino County General Plan are amended, to read: C-12 Ensure that management objectives for cultural resources avoid or minimize potential conflicts with traditional native American beliefs and concems. Short of conducting detailed field inventories for all areas under jurisdiction of the County, the most predictable, consistent and economic means of ensuring that important cultural resources are not inadvertently destroyed by development is to map areas of known or expected sensitivity during the preparation of regional plans. Such sensitivity maps, termed Cultural Resource Overlays, not only identify speCific areas in need of further study at the project level, they also identify those areas determined not to need any further consideration with respect to cultural resources. These maps are prepared based on recorded data on file at the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino County Museum. Currently, six Planning Areas in the County have had Cultural Resource Overlays prepared. These are: Barstow, Bear Valley, East Valley Corridor, Phelan, Twentynine Palms, and West Valley Foothills. The other Planning Areas shown on the Land Use map have not had Cultural Resource Overlays prepared. SECTION 6. Policies WA-1, WA-3, WA-5 and WA-9 in Section II, Subsection C4 (Water) of the San Bernardino County General Plan are amended, to read: WA.1 Because Federal, State, regional and local responsible water authorities are jointly responsible for developing, implementing and continuing to manage basin-wide water management plans for the continuous provision of potable water supplies, the following shall be implemented: 5 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT a. Except as otherwise provided herein, recognize the jurisdiction and authority of all agencies providing water service within the County with consideration given to the County's diverse geographic regions. b. Coordinate with all agencies providing water service and protection to achieve effective local and regional planning to: i) Promote cooperation and sharing of information. ii) Provide mutual assistance in regional projects. Hi) Keep members informed of projects and activities. c. Upon request by the local responsible authority, and pursuant to State law, assist in the development and implementation of regional water resource management plans incorporating individual district plans that will: i) Identify needs for recharge of overdrafted groundwater basins and proceed with plans for development and management. ii) Prioritize critical areas of basins in overdraft, sole source basins, or quality degradation problems. iii) Maintain or enhance natural water recharge characteristics. Iv) Create recharge areas for overdrafted basins offsetting increased consumption attributable to new development. v) Cooperate with state water contract agencies in the purchase and distribution of State Water Project water. vi) Share information on supply and demand for water and projected service levels and capacities that can be utilized in Infrastructure Assessment modeis. d. Permit County Service Areas (CSA's), Community Service Districts (CSD's) or other pUblic agencies to provide water service to the IVDA Area, . which is designated for development in the General Plan, when no other responsible authority will provide water service on a timely and feasible basis, as determined by the Board of Supervisors in its sole discretion. 6 200112 GPA/E273-97 . I LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDElEAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 , ~ I TEXT WA-3 Because the development approval process may be dependent upon the location and size of water distribution facilities and the timing of their use, the responsible authority and the County shall: a. Consider the effect of development proposals and whether or not they should indude the phased construction of water production and distribution systems. Hydrologic studies may be required as appropriate. b. The.County DEHS will continue to show that adequate and reliable water supply is verified in conformance with responsibilities assigned by State law and the Cooperative Operating Agreement between County DEHS and State Department of Health. c. Utilize the Cooperative Operating Agreement between the State Department of Health and the County DEHS to monitor and provide information to the responsible authorities on a continual basis, compile annual reports on the capacity and condition of distribution systems, and develop contingency plans for water resource management. d. Develop a systematic, ongoing assessment of regional and local water supply needs and capabilities to serve planned land uses as defined in the General Plan. e. Coordinate with the State Department of Health, Public Water Supply Branch (San Bernardino), and obtain the annual reports of large public water systems Countywide as they become available. f. Monitor future development to ensure that sufficient local water supply or alternative imported water supplies can be provided. g. Cooperate with Special Districts (Board-govemed and self-govemed), independent water agencies and the cities, as applicable to a particular development, to assist in the planning and construction of new water supply and distribution facilities on the basis of the cities' and County's adopted growth forecasts. 'I ~ " " h. Cooperate to provide the consistency of water supply and distribution facilities with the Capital Improvement Programs of the County and other public agencies pursuant to Government Code Section 65403. WA.5 Because long term local or regional area-wide commitments to water supply and distribution services are necessary for the orderly development of urban areas, the County shall: 7 2001/2 GPAIE273.97 I" LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDElEAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT a. Encourage new development to locate in those areas already served or capable of being served by an existing approved domestic water supply system, with priority given to those areas suitable for infill development. b. Include water supply and distribution facilities as one of the required services in the Improvement Level (IL) system which is part of the General Plan and as designated on the Infrastructure Overlay Maps. c. In the IVDA Area, permit the use of CSA's, CSD's or other water service providers. ~ , WA.9 Because water supply and distribution systems must ensure water for both existing and future development, utilize water resources in accordance with agreed management programs, and correct the depletion of the County's groundwater resources, the County and responsible authOrity will cooperate to ensure adequate and reliable water resources and: a. Assist in the development of additional conveyance facilities and use of groundwater basins to store surplus surface or imported water. b. Assist local distribution systems to interconnect with regional and other local systems where feasible, to assist in maximizing use of local ground and surface water during droughts and emergencies. c. Except in the IVDA Area, develop guidelines discouraging the creation of new, small, private water systems where an existing large water system can more reliably serve the public interest, as determined by the Board of Supervisors in their sole discretion. . ~ d. Assist in the development of altemative water systems in areas experiencing difficulty in obtaining timely or economical water service from existing potential suppliers, or water quality or quantity problems. e. Discourage new wells pumping one (1) acre-foot or less per year, other than those used for domestic purposes or those drilled by responsible authorities. 8 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT SECTION 7. The eighth paragraph and Policies WW-3, WW-5, WW-6, WW-9 and WW-10 of Section II, Subsection D1 (Wastewater Systems) of the San Bernardino County General Plan are amended, to read: The location of public treatment facilities in both incorporated and unincorporated areas are shown on the General Plan Infrastructure Overlay maps, which are further discussed in Section II-D-6, Land Use/Growth Management. The County's public sewage treatment facilities, including those located in and serving incorporated city areas, are listed below. The listing includes proposed and current treatment facilities as of July 1989, and is not meant to prohibit construction of additional sewage treatment facilities as the County deems necessary, without further amendment of this General Plan. WW-3 Because there are areas in the County where it is unlikely that community sewerage systems will be installed, Wastewater Treatment Plants (WTPs) may be approved by the appropriate RWQCB, the local wastewater/sewering authority (if any) and the County DEHS subject to the following: a. The proposed project site must be located in an area approved by the local wastewater/ sewering authority providing service to the project, DEHS and the appropriate RWQCB. b. WTP operators in charge of operation and maintenance shall be State certified. c. In the IVDA Area, WTPs are permitted under all circumstances where such plants are approved and operated by any applicable County Service Area. Installation, maintenance and operation must meet DEHS, Office of Building and Safety, local wastewaterlsewering authority and RWQCB standards. WW.5 Except as otherwise provided herein, because community sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, connection to the community sewerage system shall be required for any proposed development or subdivision of land within a sewer or sanitation district. In areas where sewers are required by the appropriate RWQCB and a sewer or sanitation district does not exist, a district and appropriate assessments shall be established. Exceptions may be approved subject to review and approval by the County DEHS, the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board and the wastewater agenc,. (for Wastewater Treatment Plants, individual onsite and multiple owner septic systems, holding tanks and experimental systems). 9 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 '. LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT WW.fj Except in the IVDA Area, because the development approval process may be dependent upon the location and size of wastewater facilities and the timing of their use, the County shall: a. Cooperate with the local wastewater/sewering authority to consider the effect of development proposals and whether or not they should include the phased construction of wastewater treatment facilities. b. Actively work with wastewater agencies to ensure planned capacity increases in locations where sewage facilities are approaching capacity. c. Monitor and provide information to the local wastewaterlsewering authorities on a continual basis, compile annual reports on the capacity and condition of wastewater collection and treatment systems and develop contingency plans for sewage management. d. Develop a systematic ongoing assessment of regional and local wastewater facility needs and capabilities to serve planned land uses as defined in the General Plan. e. Cooperate with local wastewater/sewering authorities to monitor future development to ensure that development will proceed only when sufficient capacity or approved alternative wastewater treatment systems can be provided. f. Cooperate with Special Districts (Board-govemed, independent wastewater agencies) and the cities, as applicable to a particular development, to assist in the planning and construction of sewage collection and treatment facilities on the basis of the County's adopted growth forecast. g. Cooperate to provide the consistency of wastewater facilities with the Capital Improvement Programs of the County and other public agencies pursuant to Government Code Section 65403. WW-9 Because long-term local or regional area-wide commitments to wastewater collection and treatment services are necessary for the orderly development of urban areas, the County shall: a. Include wastewater collection and treatment facilities as one of the required services in the Improvement Level (IL) system which is part of the General Plan and as designated on the Infrastructure Overlay Maps. 10 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT b. Support the local wastewaterlsewering authority in implementing wastewater collection and treatment facilities when and where required by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board and County DEHS. c. In the IVDA Area. permit the construction of a new WTP or connection to existing and/or proposed wastewater collection and treatment facilities rather than connection to nearby city wastewater collection and treatment facilities. WW-10 Because cooperation with the appropriate RWQCBs and local wastewaterl sewering authorities is necessary to implement their requirements for new development utilizing subsurface disposal systems, the County shall act in accordance with Memorandums of Understanding with the appropriate regional or local authorities. However, in the IVDA Area, the County will not do so because of the need to encourage timely development, eliminate blight, promote retention and addition of employment opportunities and achieve County's regional goals for planning and development in this unincorporated redevelopment area and surrounding areas. SECTION 8. The second and third paragraphs of subsection labeled Issues/Sub-Issues of Section II, Subsection D6 (Land Usel Growth Management) are amended, to read: , ; . I . On April 4, 1988, the County established a Growth Management Task Force (GMTF) and charged it to develop a growth management plan (including implementation strategies) for the County. The short as well as long term actions that were considered by the Growth Management Task Force underscore optimum utilization of the County's natural and man-made resources. Some of the strategies considered by the GMTF and since that time include: 1. Directing growth to existing urban areas where needed services can readily be provided. 2. Discouraging extension of existing facilities or development of new ones in a leap- frog fashion, except where such facilities cannot be provided in a timely or feasible manner, as determined by the board of Supervisors in its sole discretion. 3. Ensuring that new development proceeds at a pace commensurate with the provision of services. 4. Encouraging annexation of lands within the sphere of influence of incorporated citiesltowns, except in the IVDA Area because such annexation may not be consistent with overall regional planning decisions of the County, other cities and agencies. 11 200112 GPAIE273.97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDEIEAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT 5. Encouraging infilling of existing urban areas. Policies directed at these strategies have been developed and incorporated into this section. SECTION 9. The first and second paragraphs of subsection labeled "i. Official Land Use Districts' of Section II, Subsection D6-a (Land Use/Growth Management-Location, Distribution and Intensity of Land Uses) are amended, to read: The nineteen (19) land use districts previously used in the Community Plan areas and the twenty (20) zone districts applied in other unincorporated portions of the County have been consolidated in this General Plan into the following seventeen (17) Official Land Use Districts: . Resource Conservation (RC) . Agriculture (AG) . Rural Living (RL) . Single Residential (RS) . Multiple Residential (RM) . Office Commercial (CO) . Neighborhood Commercial (CN) . Rural Commercial (CR) . Highway Commercial (CH) . General Commercial (CG) . Service Commercial (CS) . Community Industrial (I C) . Regional Industrial (IR) . Institutional (IN) . Planned Development (PD) . Floodway (FW) . Specific Plan (SP) These seventeen Official Land Use Districts are applied only to privately owned lands in the County and not to the lands controlled by other jurisdictions. Lands that are controlled by other jurisdictions, including lands controlled by Federal and State agencies as well as incorporated cities are mapped to identify the public agencies that control them. Because the resolution of the digitized maps is forty (40) acres, some privately owned lands (generally less than forty (40) acres in area) may be coded as publicly controlled land in error. Such privately owned lands shall be assigned the Resource Conservation (RC) District or the least intensive Land Use District adjacent to them until an evaluation is conducted to determine the most appropriate land use designation for such lands. 12 GPA/E273-97 2001/2 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDElEAST VALLEY CORRIDORlEAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT SECTION 10. The first and second paragraphs of subsection labeled "Land Use Planning in the Sphere of Influence (501) Areas' in Section II, Subsection 06-b-iii (Land Use/Growth Management- Growth Management-Intergovernmental Coordination) are amended, to read: The incorporated cities are often critical of the land use decisions made by the County in the sphere of influence areas. The cities' major concems are that: 1. Some of the land uses proposed by the County for the 501 areas are not compatible with, and .are not logical extensions of the adjacent land uses within the cities' boundaries. 2. County development standards are perceived as relatively lax, depreciating the quality of the permitted development and adversely impacting the neighborhoods. including adjacent areas within the cities. 3. The review procedures employed by the County do not include urban design and architectural design considerations which are used by many cities. Section 65300 of the Califomia Government Code places a dual mandate on both cities and counties relating to land use planning within spheres of influence. For certain portions of the County. the land use policies adopted for the 501 areas are designed to generally encourage annexations or incorporations. In another portion of the County. specifically the IVOA Area. the County has a policy of neutrality as to annexation or incorporation, and they are neither encouraged nor discouraged. The County possesses final authority to regulate land use within all unincorporated areas, including those areas located in the cities' spheres of influence. However, in order to ensure orderly quality development with adequate public services (police. fire. etc.) the County will seek input from a city on the subject of any land use entitlement applied for within the city's sphere of influence prior to approving any such application. SECTION 11. Goals 0-60 and 0-61 and Policies LU-9 and LU-10 in Section II. Subsection 06-b-iii (Land Use/Growth Management-Growth Management-Intergovernmental Coordination) are amended and Goal 0-62 is added, to read: Goals 13 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDElEAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT 0.60 Encourage cities to annex urban unincorporated areas within designated city spheres of influence and generally support annexations/incorporations of urban designated lands, except in the IVDA Area where these lands are desired to be maintained under County jurisdiction to further the goals and policies of the County. 0-61 Generally, the Board of SupeNisors has determined that all of the cities in the County have engaged in a cooperative planning effort consistent with regional goals of the County for development and planning in unincorporated areas and surrounding areas, and as a result it is appropriate for the County to develop a policy which encourages implementation of compatible development standards and public facilities/infrastructure for those lands located within the sphere of influence (501) of all cities. In the IVDA Area, however, in order to promote and encourage timely development consistent with the goals of the County and other agencies for development and planning, it is appropriate for the County to develop a set of standards and facilities that allow for development independent of the 501 cities if necessary, and for the County to maintain a policy of neutrality as to annexation of lands within the IVDA Area. 0.62 Develop policies that promote and encourage timely development in the IVDA Area in order to eliminate blight, promote the retention of existing and the creation of additional employment opportunities, and further the reuse and redevelopment of the former Norton Air Force Base and other properties, including those within 501 areas, in close proximity thereto. PolicieslActions LU.9 Because State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility after annexation to manage lands within their adopted spheres of influence, the County has a responsibility to coordinate its land use policies with the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursue plans, policies and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standards have been agreed to and jointly adopted. The County has ultimate authority for all land use decisions for potential development within all unincorporated areas of the County, including those unincorporated areas which are placed in a city's sphere of influence by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The County will refer development applications to affected cities for comment, and may require development to conform to city development policies and standards whenever appropriate, as determined based on the goals and policies of the County General Plan. In certain situations, the County may determine that it is not appropriate for development to conform to city development policies and standards. For example, the County has determined that the County's regional goals and policies for planning and development in the Inland Valley Development Agency ("IVDA") Area require special attention and that the County should consider making land use decisions which may differ from SOl cities' plans for the same area, where this is appropriate. Accordingly, the County may chose to plan for the provision of urban services for the IVDA Area 14 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT from public or private sources other than the SOl cities, such as a County Service Area or mutual water company. In addition, the following policies and standards that encourage annexation and the use of city standards within city spheres of influence will be considered: a. Adopt joint regulations/plans with cities when mutually acceptable, through the adoption of overlay districts, specific plans, zoning regulations and standards, infrastructure support plans and other appropriate mechanisms. b. Require service connections for projects that are less than one mile away from sewer availability. Exceptions (for waste water treatment plants, individual on-site and multiple owner septic systems, holding tanks, and experimental systems) may be approved by the County, the appropriate regional water quality control board, and the wastewater agency (if the project site is in its jurisdiction and sewer service is available, as defined in the UPC). Service connections under this policy may be provided by connections to a municipal sewer system, the sewer system of another regional agency, or a sewer system to be operated by a County Service District. c. Support city annexation/incorporation of urban designated lands, in general. Consider the merits of individual proposalS based on community interest, the city's ability and commitment to develop and provide services, and consistency with the goals and policies ofthe County General Plan. d. Consider implementation of growth control limits adopted by cities as they apply to spheres, unless such limits conflict with the goals and policies of the County General Plan. e. Consider Joint Power Agreements (JPAs) with cities to allow for city or County development fees to be collected and distributed accordingly. f. Consider the nature and intensity of development in adjoining incorporated areas and review the City's pre-zoning, General Plan designations and infrastructure plans when establishing Improvement Levels and land use designations within a sphere of influence. . g. Designate Sphere of Influence areas as Planning Areas in the General Plan and utilize special city standards in these areas to the extent they are consistent with the County General Plan and Development Code. 15 200112 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT LU.10 Because the County wants to minimize land use conflicts between the County and other agencies that have jurisdictional control over lands located within the County, and because the County wants to cooperate and coordinate with adjacent municipalities and other regional agencies to address regional problems such as traffic congestion, air pollution, water quality, waste management and job/housing imbalance, the following policies/actions shall be implemented: a. Review the master plans and/or general plans of affected agencies and consider the provisions of those plans in the implementation of the County General Plan. The County may consider and choose not to include city general plan policies for SOl areas that are within unincorporated areas within the IVDA, where necessary. to be consistent with the County and other agency plans for regional planning and development in the IVDA Area. b. Solicit comments from the military and other Federal and State agencies that control land in the County on projects which are proposed near their facilities, as described in sub-policy (d) below. c. Develop a procedure to assure that the County, the incorporated cities, and the various special districts refer major planning and land use proposals to all affected jurisdictions for review, comment and recommendation. d. Establish a "Review Area" around each state, military, or other Federal jurisdiction. and review development proposals or proposed General Plan amendments and revisions within the established Review Area with the appropriate agency. e. Work with State and Federal land management agencies to eliminate conflicts between public and private lands by reducing the checkerboard pattern of public/private ownership. f. Work with State and Federal land management agencies to ensure that large blocks of public land are not further subdivided or classified as Government Small Tracts, and to ensure that disposal of public lands shall be based on definite proposals for development consistent with the County General Plan. g. Work with State and Federal land management agencies to facilitate public/private land exchange to eliminate the need to cross public lands to reach privately owned lands. Such land, when exchanged or otherwise acquired from the State or Federal govemment, shall be automatically designated as a "Resource Conservation" (RC) Land Use District. However, if such land appears on a FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map or on a County Flood Hazard Map as being subject to severe flooding, it shall be automatically designated as a "Floodway" (FW) Land Use District. A General Plan Amendment is not required 16 GPA/E273.97 2001/2 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT unless the land is proposed to be changed to a land use designation other than RC or FW. h. Work with State and Federal land management agencies in the designation and protection of wildemess and restricted natural areas in the approval and management of recreation events and sites. i. Work with Indian tribes and State and Federal agencies in the development of plans for land within their jurisdictions. j. Permit development adjacent to prisons and similar detention facilities only when compatible with the security needs of the facility and public safety is assured, and: i) Work closely with State and local officials responsible for administering these facilities when considering land use proposals on adjacent lands. iI) Discourage high-density residential uses on adjacent or nearby parcels. k. Work with the cities within San Bernardino County to reach consensus on regional planning and growth management issues utilizing joint forums and/or regional agencies such as SANBAG, as appropriate. I. Continue working toward a consensus on regional planning and growth management issues with surrounding counties through SANBAG, SCAG, MDAQMD and SCAQMD. m. Continue to work on specific projects to improve traffic flow, such as the Foothill Freeway (State Highway 30/1-210) extension project. SECTION 12. The first paragraph in Section II, Subsection D6-b-iv (Land Use/Growth Management-Growth Management-Infilling) is amended and Goal 0-62 is renumbered to 0-63, to read: Infilling can be a means of protecting and enhancing older neighborhoods. It is also a way of maximizing the utilization of existing infrastructure facilities and of saving energy; the assumptions being that urban services are readily available in infill areas and in addition, these areas are in close proximity to places of employment. Infilling is an effective method of preserving land, water and other natural and man-made resources. Goal 17 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT D-63 Adopt an incentive program to encourage projects which will infil/ existing urbanized areas. SECTION 13. The four paragraphs in Section III, Subsection B2 (Regional/Sub-Regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans-East Valley Sub-Region) are amended, to read: EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (EV) (RSA 29) The East Valley (EV) sub-region which extends from the community of Bloomington on the West to Yucaipa on the East (see Map III-K), is currently experiencing tremendous growth pressures. One of the major constraints to future development in this sub-region is inadequate infrastructure facilities. Most of the communities are old and the existing infrastructure facilities which were sized for lower density development may become overburdened if the current growth trend in this sub-region continues. The East Valley sub-region contains eight incorporated cities: Colton, Grand Terrace, Loma Linda, Highland, Redlands, Rialto, San Bernardino and Yucaipa. Also, detailed plans were prepared and adopted for the following communities: Agua Mansa Specific Plan, Bloomington, East Loma LindalWest Redlands and Oak Glen. The spheres of influence of each of the incorporated cities, and areas within each of the unincorporated communities mentioned above are considered individual planning areas. Listed below are prefixes for each of the planning areas. These 'prefixes shall be applied in the applicable planning areas on the official General Plan maps. Planning Areas " 'Prefix Planning Areas',", . ' - ' Prefix " " ' , Bloomington BL Loma Linda sphere LL Colton sphere CL Oak Glen OG Grand Terrace sphere GT Redlands sphere RD E. Loma Linda EL Rialto sphere RT East Redlands ER San Bemardino sphere SB East Valley Corridor EC Yucaipa YU Highland sphere HD Other areas in the East Valley not within EV any of the planning areas listed above Maps III-L through III-Y represent the planning areas in the East Valley region. Following are profiles of each of the planning areas in the East Valley. 18 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT SECTION 14. The East Loma LindalWest Redlands Planning Area in Section III, Subsection 82 (Regional/Sub-Regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans-East Valley Sub-Region) is amended, to read: Figure 111-18 Summary of East Lama Linda Planning Area General Location: East Valley (RSA 29) Specific Location: See Map III-U ACREAGE . BUILD-OUT.POTENTIAL ..1 I : . LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Resources Conservation RC Agriculture AG Rural Living RL Single Residential RS Multiple Residential RM Office Commercial CO Neighborhood Commercial CN General Commercial CG Service Commercial CS Community Industrial IC Regional Industrial IR Planned Development PD Institutional IN Floodway FW 631 946 36 83 8 6 Acreages in each land use district and the build-out potential of each district shall subsequently be computed. This data will be used to determine the absorption capacity of the area, and the amounts of services and facilities needed to support the population of the area. 19 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT , HOIITON AI" P'ORCE lASE , , I .. ,,'- I " " J ,,- S NIBERHARDIHO .' .. . I I .- : .' ~ ~, S"--"\ .' . . :: ~ . , ~. ~ " " " " .. . 0 ... "IIIU.1I0"10 " . i i . . . .. .. I' " . . 10 IIlCD"'.....ot -I \EDLANDS : LaMA LINDA ,- . ~ ....,. .. L "1" : II II .. .. ~ I : ."1II.0tl " os II : ". II r--- . TIS T2S I . . . . R4W 3W '-' . I I .. oo L._. SAN BERNARDINO' COUNTY GENEIlAL PLAN East Lorna Unda Planning Area HORTH MAP m.u ~. ......1 .2.3...1 ~~~ -SCA~- 'W ~ ~ 20 1--- 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT East Loma Linda Policies/Actions Natural Resources Open Space/Recreation/Scenic . The Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) trees are of historical and scenic value to the community and should be preserved. Man.made Resources Land Use/Growth Management . Permit residential development where services are readily available. Limit residential development along Interstate 10 and the State Highway 3011-210. Limit residential development in high hazard areas. . Small neighborhood convenience commercial centers should be developed along major access routes compatible with the policies of adjacent cities. . Restrict neighborhood centers to a minimum of one mile of each other or another commercial area. . All new development shall have the necessary service commitments or altemative method of providing such services prior to approval. . Actively, pursue all available funding for sidewalk improvements including County Capital Improvement Programs. State and Federal grant funds such as Community Development Block Grants for public improvements. 21 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDORlEAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT SECTION 15. The East Valley Corridor Planning Area in Section III, Subsection 82 (Regional/Sub-Regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans-East Valley Sub-Region) is added, to read: Figure 11I-19 Summary of East Valley Co"idor Planning Area General Location: East Valley (RSA 29) Specific Location: See Map III-V ACREAGE. BUILD-OUT POTENTIAL . ,I I' LAND USE~DESIGNATIONS Resources Conservation RC Agriculture AG Rural Living RL Single Residential RS Multiple Residential RM Office Commercial CO Neighborhood Commercial CN Rural Commercial CR Highway Commercial CH General Commercial CG 176 Service Commercial CS Community Industrial IC Regional Industrial IR 271 Planned Development PO 562 Institutional IN Floodway FW Specific Plan SP Acreages in each land use district and the build-out potential of each district shall subsequently be computed. This data will be used to determine the absorption capacity of the area, and the amounts of services and facilities needed to support the population of the area; 22 ~ 2001/2 '.. I GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT I jJ I.LJ~n-TD' "OU~ y r1]DDDQ' lUDDD =\ . ~ ; g i; D~:: :~II i .. CJ: ~...:~ ..,,,..... ~ I Sf ~ 1:.. ~ .....~ . : 0 . = u.'C .1 .-'-'--- ------.; >: .'0 % I . . J w' - : '. t: z >.J . u !:SL w..". ,., () 0 ... ,J ) f.--l loa,", I \ i . . . ~ . . < ...\,.......... D. ~ ...... =: ~ . . ~ . t , l. . , :. . \ l~ . ,~ ..'". - 01 ,,~ %' ,/ Lt. cq r o a::: I I <~ " > Z "OIlT""l TIt'- ... a: . .. -\lI tic> % < '" SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN East Valley Corridor Planning Area > . HORTH'~ MAP II!N ~ FEn' 000' I%od ~~~ ~ .7-lf.~: 23 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT East Valley CorrIdor Goals The intent of the East Valley Corridor Planning Area is to promote and facilitate aesthetically pleasing job and revenue producing development that responds to physical, environmental, and economic opportunities and constraints. EC-1 Promote and facilitate high-quality commercial, industrial and residential development within the Corridor area. EC.2 Simplify and streamline the development review process while maintaining consistency with the General Plan. EC-3 Provide for extension of public services in a logical and functional manner to minimize impacts on service purveyors while maximizing areas that can accommodate development in a timely manner. EC-4 Design a comprehensive, functional and efficient circulation system of sufficient capacity to accommodate projected traffic demands at all phases of development, which is consistent with regional master transportation plans. EC-5 Adopt energy-efficient transportation strategies to implement State and County goals for reduced energy consumption and improved air quality. EC-6 Promote high quality development by protecting and enhancing existing amenities in the area, creating an identifiable community character, and adopting development standards and gUidelines to ensure aesthetically pleasing design and maximum land use compatibility. EC-7 Create parks and open space areas which will meet the community's recreation needs in a meaningful way, and create areas which will enhance and add value to the community as a whole. East Valley Corridor Policies/Actions Land Use/Growth Management EC/LU-1 Maximize generation of employment opportunities in a region which has a significant imbalance of housing versus employment opportunities. a. Create compatible, cohesive enclaves where industry can locate and operate without the encroachment of other non-compatible urban uses. b. Attract a wide range of employment opportunities through promotion of the East Valley Corridor by various marketing strategies. 24 2001/2 GPA/E273.~7 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT c. Create a land use plan that is responsive to market demands by developing the Planned Development district. EC/LU.2 Facilitate location in the project area of a wide range of commercial uses to serve the region, local industry, and residential neighborhoods. a. Allow the regional commercial uses at the intersection of Interstate 10 and Route 30. b. Provide for and recognize existing general commercial uses along Alabama Street. c. Provide for a variety of commercial uses within the Planned Development district. EC/LU.3 Support a limited amount of residential land use within the planning area. a. Recognize existing residential land uses and support their logical extension where services are available. b. Limit residential uses adjacent to freeways and within the 65 CNEL noise areas. c. Adopt design standards to protect residential uses from adjacent incompatible uses. EC/LU-4 Preserve existing viable agricultural activities as long as feasible while the area transitions to more intensive uses. a. In Planned Developments. encourage phasing of projects to preserve agricultural uses as long as possible. b. Permit continuation of agriculture in all land use districts as an interim use. EC/LU.5 Coordinate with responsible agencies and jurisdictions to ensure responsible development within the Planning Area. a. Facilitate growth in the industrial sector consistent with the SCAG82 directive to balance the provision of jobs and housing in the Inland Empire region and to provide employment for a wide range of individuals and income groups. 25 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT b. Consistent with the regional Air Quality Management Plan, adopt performance standards to protect and improve air quality to attain State and Federal standards. c. Protect regional groundwater resources in conformance with the 208 Waste Treatment Management Plan. Community Services and Facilities EC/CS.1 Complement the land use planning with comprehensive plans and programs for utilities and public facilities. a. Conduct planning and engineering of backbone facilities for water distribution and sewerage systems. b. Coordinate the phasing of new development with installation of public improvements in such a way as to allow for orderly site development and minimize cost. c. Facilitate the coordination of local agencies and service purveyors to implement the land use plan and phasing plan. EC/CS-2 Develop financing techniques to provide for extension of infrastructure facilities in the project area. a. Prepare an infrastructure financing plan to assess financing needs and alternatives. b. Identify funding methods which will facilitate the participation of all levels of government in providing funding for the required infrastructure. EC/CS-2 Develop opportunities for community-oriented services within the plan area. a. Permit child care facilities in any district subject to a Conditional Use Permit. Provide incentives for day care facilities within employment centers. Small family day care homes are exempt from these provisions. b. Provide for a variety of cultural and recreational uses to serve all age groups. Transportation ECITC.1 Provide safe and convenient access and circulation to all development. 26 GPA/E273.97 2001/2 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT a. Require all new development to meet mandatory standards for alignments, access control, rights-of-way, cross-sections, intersections, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, cul-de-sacs, driveway widths and grades, right-of-way dedications and improvements, and handicap requirements. b. Provide sufficient highway and intersection capacities to maintain a minimum Level of Service "C". EcrrC-2 Design a system of major arterials to accommodate traffic volumes associated with projected land uses and densities throughout the Planning Area. a. Adopt a circulation plan with a system of arterial roadways. including secondary highways, major highways and six-lane arterials. b. Develop road standards for designated arterials. EcrrC-3 Protect the designed capacity of all arterials in the Planning Area. a. Through the design review process, require shared driveways where possible on highways and arterials. b. Prohibit direct driveway access from individual residences onto highways and arterials. ECrrC-4 Design a circulation system consistent with regional transportation planning. Coordinate with local, regional and state agencies to ensure that the circulation plan is compatible with and contributes to the effectiveness of the regional transportation system. EcrrC-5 Designate land uses so as to reduce the number and length of vehicle trips. a. Maximize local employment opportunities and the provision of services and shopping facilities through appropriate land use designations, to decrease commuter trips. b. Establish land use designations on the land use map for a range of residential densities in proximity to employment and commercial centers. EcrrC-6 Provide opportunities for alternative travel modes to supplement the private automobile. a. Require bus turn-outs and shelters in accordance with recommendations of public transit agencies. 27 200112 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDORlEAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT b. Cooperate with regional transportation efforts to identify and implement traffic management programs such as ride sharing and staggered work hours. c. Develop a comprehensive, convenient pedestrian circulation system linking private developments and public sidewalks. d. Design a trail system linking to regional trail systems for pedestrian. bicycle and equestrian use. Community Design EC/CD.1 Establish development standards to implement East Valley Corridor goals and policies. a. Adopt mandatory development standards and require that all projects meet minimum requirements in order to be consistent with this plan. b. Establish incentives to encourage development that more fully implements the goals and policies ofthe Planning Area. EC/CD.2 Establish design themes to unify the Planning Area and provide a recognizable community character within the area. a. Design streetscapes and intersections which are consistent throughout the Planning Area with regard to setbacks. plant materials. sidewalk and parkway treatment, and use of medians. b. Provide identifiable entryways into the area along the freeway system and major arterials. c. Preserve existing Mexican fan palm rows and extend palm row plantings along selected major arterials north of Interstate 10. EC/CD.3 Create a visually aesthetic appearance for the area from the freeways as well as from within the Planning Area. a. Require that negative views such as loading. service and refuse areas be screened from public view. b. Encourage use of ground-mounted equipment where possible. and require screening of roof-top equipment through use of wells, parapet walls and other architectural means. 28 2001/2 GPA/E273.97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT c. Adopt minimum landscaping requirements for parking areas and yard areas adjacent to public rights-of-way. d. Establish incentives to encourage provIsion of visual amenities such as artwork, fountains, plazas, and increased landscaping. e. Preserve open space along specified scenic corridors by requiring increased setbacks for development. f. Through the development review process, ensure preservation of scenic vistas at various points throughout the area by discouraging continuous building facades along street and freeway frontages. g. Preserve positive views of unique historical or architectural features such as Edwards Mansion, the County Museum, and the Asistencia Mission. h. Adopt standards for lighting, fencing and signs to enhance overall community design. EC/CD-4 Encourage effective use of landscaping. a. Require use of recommended drought-tolerant plant species and automatic irrigation systems for landscaped areas to conserve water. b. Require use of landscape materials and designs which facilitate solar access and provide shade at appropriate seasons and times of day. c. Require prompt revegetation on newly graded areas to control erosion. d. Develop mandatory standards relative to tree type, size and spacing for streets, center medians, parkways, parking lots and trails. EC/CD.5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent land use types. Adopt standards to establish adequate buffers between industrial/commercial and adjacent residential uses through use of landscaping, grading, setbacks and/or walls. Open Space/Recreation/Scenic EC/OS.1 Enhance the beauty of the East Valley Corridor and the overall quality of life for users and residents ofthe area. a. Provide identifiable entryways into the area along the freeway system and major arterials. 29 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA L1NDA/S3 TEXT b. Create significant landscaped open space areas at the entry and exit points of the area. c. Identify significant arterials which should be enhanced through medians and/or landscaped parkways, and identify planting guidelines. d. Through the development review process, preserve view corridors to the Mexican Fan Palm rows, scenic streets and intersections, scenic focal points, and the surrounding mountains. e. Improve the landscaping of and views to and from both freeways. EC/OS.2 Plan for the development of additional recreational facilities within the Planning Area. a. Establish a linear park along the Santa Ana River bluff. b. Designate locations for trails throughout the Planning Area as linkages between open space areas, as well as along the Santa Ana River. c. Wherever possible, utilize existing public lands for parks, recreation and open space in order to minimize costs. d. Encourage the provision of recreational facilities by private developers on specific projects through use of a floor area ratio bonus incentive. SECTION 16. The text and table in Section III, Subsection E (RegionaVSub-Regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans-Specific Plans) are amended and Map III-BBB is added, to read: E. SPECIFIC PLANS Specific plans are prepared from time to time to provide systematic implementation of the general plan for distinct areas within the County or to provide special comprehensive planning studies for these areas. SpecifiC plans establish their own unique regulations relative to land use, permitted uses, and development standards throughout the areas within each plan's boundaries. Listed below are prefixes for each of the specific plan areas in the County. These prefixes shall be applied to the applicable area on the official General Plan maps: 30 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/S3 TEXT .' " " .: '. . . - . '. ...:. ," . Specific PlanAi"eas - " Prefix. Specificfl.~~n~r~~~-J';; Prefix; Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor AM Kaiser Commerce Center KC 31 2001/2 GPA/E273-97 LAND USE SERVICES - COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 ~b;' "''fl'~'~~~~ "L:::: ...b~,. . .....~f~~ ~Jf~~-- ...."'..~. .., . ::?..,,!.~...... i;'..:;;..;.~<U";z.:~,..':!h-, r-::':'ti'.~....~~:1(.,;~ ~ ~ .~.,:..:.",,,,,~..~ ,.__..9t..'-:!:';;>;:~~ 1\~~f~~;~~,~#~~;., .. ~ ,....,..-,.:t5""'~""~~ii! ~1i.~~:W~i~I-~ ~;l."l'\i~~ - . ;l;........:.\'o(,o.~,~;t:.:t:..:"~ ...;...r-G;..-lo~ i!t~~~" ~;-:-".lI."':"'~.'I':,.'i~-~;;r..r:31':;' . ~~f"":":".'~""';~t:"~.~"""'-l':' ." (-. c.. ~. I~:::~?~~;~~~~!~~ ...,....,..: .... (-. c.. ~. GHl'AlIO M.LS '~AY. ~~t~t'f.'~~'t1 .AN SAH BERHARDIHD CDUHTY GtHERA~ P~AH Kaiser Commerce Center Specific Plan HORTH MAP II~BBB 32 TEXT ,- .' ~ Legend "=" ~ Specific Plan Area II ~ ij' " II r.: ~l l! " ~ ~ w 5! ~ ~ !!l => " ~o, tI ICAI.I- III"r. 500' 1,0000 GPAlE273-97 2001/2 LAND USE SERVICES _ COUNTYWIDE/EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR/EAST LOMA LINDA/53 TEXT SECTION 17. The following glossary items in Section IV (Glossary) are amended or added, to read: Community Sewerage System - A sewer system operated by a Responsible Authority. Inland Valley Development Agency ("IVDA") - A joint powers authority formed in 1990 pursuant to Health & Safety Code 933320.5 for the purpose of planning for the redevelopment of the Inland Valley Development Area, which includes the Norton Air Force Base and other areas, and to consider conversion of the Base into a civilian aviation facility. IVDA Area _ Those unincorporated areas of the County that are located within the IVDA redevelopment plan area. Public Water Supply System - The source facilities and distribution system used to provide water to the public for human consumption and which has two (2) or more service connections or regularly serves an average of at least twenty-fIVe (25) individuals daily, at least sixty (60) days per year. Responsible Authority _ Special districts, water agencies, cities, County service areas, or private water purveyors overlying the property with jurisdiction to deliver water through a public water supply system, or to act as a sewering entity for developed property or properties. SARI Line _ Santa Ana Regional Interceptor, which provides a means of intercepting and transporting high salt water and non-reclaimable wastewater to the Pacific Ocean. Sewer/Sewerage System - A system for collection, transportation and treatment of wastewater (may include wastewater treatment plants). Sewering Entity/Wastewater Agency - Any public agency which operates sewage collection and treatment facilities. Wastewater Treatment Plant - A wastewater treatment plant, including package wastewater treatment plants, which is installed to provide wastewater treatment for small communities, developments, mobilehome parks, shopping centers, industrial/commercial developments and other similar uses. Water Purveyor _ A domestic water supplier (also called Responsible Authority), which may include a Special District or County Service Area) serving developed property with a public water supply system. 33 SECTION 18. . The General Plan Land Use District Amendments adopted by this resolution shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California, by the following vote: AYES: SUPERVISORS: NOES: SUPERVISORS: ABSENT: SUPERVISORS: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California, hereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the record of the action taken by said Board of Supervisors, by vote of the members present, as the same appears in the Official Minutes of said Board at its meeting of J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California Deputy 34 Development Code Amendment " ORDINANCE ~n AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RePEALING THE EAST VALLEY cnRRIDoR SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CODE SUBSECTION 86.0105 (a)(2) RELATIVE TO PLANNING AREA DESIGNATIONS, CHAPTER 3 OF DIVISION 6 RELATIVE TO THE EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS, AND SUB. SECTION 86.1005(b) RELATIVE TO SPECIFIC PLANS. The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bemardino. State of Califomia, ordains as follows: SECTION 1. The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bemardino finds that: (a) Properly noticed public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bemardino, State of Califomia, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of Califomia and the County Code of the County of San Bemardino. (b) The potential environmental effects of the proposed repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) and amendments to the Development Code have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR). The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR. (c) The repeal of the EVCSP and amendments to the Development Code are in the public interest, there will be a community benefit and other existing and permitted uses will not be compromised. (d) The repeal of the EVCSP and amendments to the Development Code are consistent with the policies and provisions of the County General Plan. SECTION 2. The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan is repealed. SECTION 3. Subsection 86.0105(a)(2) of the San Bemardino County Code is amended, to read: 86.0105 Designations. (a) (2) EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA29) Bloomington Colton sphere East Redlands EV BL CL ER RCC:JS # 08/22/01 1 East Lorna Linda East Valley Corridor Grand Terrace sphere Highland sphere Lorna Linda sphere e. b.gr:Aill,.iR~ilf'.'IQtt Rgr.llilRr.lE Oak Glen Redlands sphere Rialto sphere San Bernardino sphere Yucaipa ~ EL EC GT HD LL bR OG RD RT SB YU SECTION 4. Chapter 3 of Division 6 of Title 8 of the San Bernardino County Code is amended, to read: Articles: 1 2 3 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CHAPTER 3 EAST V ALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) Reserved. Bloomington Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. East Loma Linda Planning Area. East Valley Corridor Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. Reserved. Oak Glen Planning Area. Redlands Sphere Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. Yucaipa Planning Area. Article 1. Reserved RCC:JS # 08/22101 2 " Article 2. Bloomington Plan !ling Area Section: 86.030205 Single Residential (BURS) District. 86.030205 Single Residential (BURS) District. Single Residential Devlopment Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Heiaht (fl.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. fl.) 7.200 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 40% " 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in fl.) comer lot 70/100 minimun 22 Front Yard Setback (fl.) See (1) below average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (fl.) 20 I street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) collector or wider 25 Article 3. Reserved Article 4. Reserved RCC:JS # 08/22/01 3 < Article 5. East Lorna Linda Planning Area Section: < 86.030505 Single Residential (EURS) District. 86.030505 Single Residential (EURS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Heioht (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 6,000 lot size Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) O. 19,999 sq.ft. 50% 20,000 up to 1 acre 20% 1 acre or more 10% ~ 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 lot size Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) < 20,000 60/60 20.000 or more 150 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) averaoe 25 one side 20 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 15120 street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 Article 6. East Valley Corridor Planning Area Section: 86.030605 86.030610 86.030615 86.030620 86.030625 86.030630 General Provisions. General Commercial (EC/CG). Regional Industrial (ECIIR). Planned Development (EC/PD). Circulation Design Guidelines Site Design Standards and Guidelines 86.030605 General Provisions. The land use regulations of this code are modified as follows for the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. RCC:JS # 08122/01 4 '. 86.030610 General Commercial (EC/CG). .. (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the General Commercial and Regional Commercial Districts of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7, 1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and structures and appurtenances thereof. (2) IR 2rdgr tg 9R~U~9 ~sr:RpIi2R~g ':'itR tAg axist+l. !1s21r: ;tRg psli~ig~ gf tRiil Iiast \Iii1l1g~' ~gr~iggr ~pgsifis P'laR, tRIl The following uses shall be subject to a Conditional Use Permit gr ~itg ~ppl'G':iill. (At the discretion of the reviewing agency, review requirement may be met by Planning Commission review.) (A) Professional Services Physicians, surgeons, chiropractors, osteopathic physicians, dentists, oral surgeons, orthodontists, Attorneys and legal services Medical and dental laboratories Engineering, architectural and planning Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping Counseling (marriage and family) Prescription pharmacy and optical services (B) Business Services Advertisement, business and management Consulting Detective and protective services Stenographic, secretarial, clerical and mailing Collection agencies Blueprinting and photocopy Employment agencies (C) Financial Services Insurance carriers, agents, brokers Real estate developers and builders (office only) Title abstracting Real estate agents and brokers RCC:JS # 08/22101 5 Commodity services Holding and investment serVices Banks, savings and loans, and credit unions (D) Retail sale of goods: Groceries Meat, fish, seafood Bakeries Food caterers and delicatessens Liquor stores Drug stores and pharmacies Convenience markets Apparel Fur goods Newspapers and magazines Hardware Five and ten variety stores Confectioneries and ice cream Cosmetics and accessories Florist Auto parts (new retail) Gift shop Hobby and yarn shops Furniture and home furnishings Paint, vamish, lacquer Draperies, curtains, upholstery Interior decorating supplies Wall and floor coverings Appliances Dishes, china, glassware, metalware Lawn and garden equipment and supplies Home improvement centers Dry goods and notions Department and general merchandise stores Plumbing and heating equipment and supplies Swimming pools and spas Commercial nursery, retail Radio, TV, stereo Computers and accessories Jewelry, precious metals, coin and stamp dealers Records, tapes, videotapes Stationary and art supplies Office supplies and equipment Shoes Books (general, not adult-oriented) Toys, sport and athletic goods RCC:JS # 08122101 6 .. Photographic equipment and supplies Automobiles, motorcycles and other motor vehicles Boats Auto and motorcycle parts and accessories (new) Bicycles and parts Secondhand merchandise and thrift shops Antiques Pets Art galleries, print and frame shops (E) Provision of services to individuals and businesses: Laundering and dry-cleaning outlets Self-service laundries Beauty salons and barber shops Apparel repair, alterations and tailoring Shoe repair Suntan parlors Photographic studios and processors Small appliance repair Radio, IV and stereo repair Watch, clock and jewelry repair Fumiture repair and reupholstery Bicycle repair Locksmith Teen Center Eating establishments (including service of alcoholic beverages) Personal storage facilities (mini-warehouses) Funeral parlors and mortuaries Vocational and trade schools Auto service stations and repair centers Pet grooming Veterinarians and animal hospitals Telephone exchanges Taxidermy Car washes Commercial repair garages for motor vehicles and equipment (including body and paint work) (F) Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational Facilities: Motion picture theaters Live theaters (legitimate) Meeting halls (lodge and union) Arcades, pool halls, discotheques Nightclubs RCC:JS # 08/22/01 7 RCC:JS # 08122/01 Recreation centers Gymnasiums, health and athletic clubs, figure salons Skating rinks (indoor) Drive-in theaters Bowling alley and miniature golf (G) Transient Lodgings Hotels Motels (H) Miscellaneous Services Private adoption agencies Libraries and reading rooms Welfare and charitable services Civic, social and fratemal associations Business associations Professional membership organizations Museums and galleries Community theaters (I) Repair and servicing of any article which is permitted to be sold in this District. (J) Other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing, is prg"iggQ iR agGti9R Ii'.':i 01 :ili. (K) Uses listed in Chapter 4 of Division 4 of this Title in accordance with the prOVisions of that chapterSgstillR i'.':i.Q110. (c) Regional Commercial Subarea: The area bounded by San Bernardino Avenue on the north, the Route 30 freeway on the east, Lugonia Avenue on the south and Alabama Street on the west shall be designated for regional commercial uses. Prior to any development within this area, a Planned Development application shall be submitted with each phase subject to final approval prior to issuance of permits. Permitted uses are as follows: (1 ) Uses permitted and as regulated in Subsection 86.030605(b) above. (2) (3) Corporation headquarter offices (home or regional offices) Hotel complexes 8 (4) Conference and convention centers (5) Stadiums and amphitheaters (6) Entertainment centers (7) Regional mall (8) Other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. (d) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on tl:lll llffGsti"g &Iiiltll gf tl:lilii ipgsifl; J;lliilRSeptember 6, 1989 shall adhere to the iilp~liliiiil9lg ~IiIBuliiltigRlii gf tl:lg Bg"llR:liRB juriliis;listigRprovisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1) Manufacturing and Industrial (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) RCC:JS # 08122101 Warehousing (except for mini-warehouses and storage of merchandise or products for retail sale on the premises) Residential other than hotels and motels Used car sales not in connection with new car sales Recycling facilities and salvage yards Truck terminals Recreational vehicle parks Impound and auto storage yard, automobile dismantling yard Tire retreading Billboards 9 (e) Development Standards " 86.030610 (EC/CG) GENERAL COMMERCIAL (EC/CG) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) See (2) below map suffIx Minimum Lot Size (acres) will modify See (1) below Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage\ See (1) below Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to deoth ratio) See (1) below Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) See (1) below Front Yard Setback (ft.) See (3) below 25 Side Yard SetbackS (ft.) See (3) below 0 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (3) below 0 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (3) below 25 Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. areanot areal See Section 86.030630(h)( 1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) (1) All lots shall have adequate width, depth and area to accommodate all required parking, setbacks, landscaping, loading, trash enclosures, and access requirements. (2) No maximum building height is established. Height limits shall be detenmined in accordance with Part 77 of the FAA regulations. Also refer to Floor Area Ratio provisions in Section 86.030630(h)(1). (3) Minimum building setbacks shall be as follows: (^) ,"~GRt ~'arQ liltrililt sill II YliirQ (A) Side and rear yards :;15 fllilt :;15 filiilt None except where adjoining residential district. (B) Where district abuts a street designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscaping requirements. (C) Where district abuts a residential district or residential portion of a Planned Development, see Section 86.030630(e)(3) for setback and landscape buffer requirements. RCC:JS # 08/22101 10 i L 'cc:JS '2210 1 (4) For requirements on landscaping, :walls, access, parking, loading, trash enclosures, lighting and storage, the provisions of Section 86.030630 shall'apply. (5) The provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply to signs. In addition, the maximum area of any sign facing a residential district shall be 75 feet. (6) All accessways to a public street shall be located not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the intersection of any street lines, and shall be designed in a manner conducive to safe ingress and egress. Where practical. exits shall be located on a minor street. Frequency of accessways shall be at intervals of not less than one hundred (100) feet. (7) Standards for automobile service stations: (A) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. (A) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20.000) square feet. (8) Minimum lot width and depth shall be one hundred twenty (120) feet. (C) Site must abut and have access to a secondary highway or larger roadway. (D) No more than half of the corners at anyone intersection shall be occupied by service stations. (E) Parking Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. No outdoor parking or storage of wrecked. dismantled. or inoperative vehicles permitted. Parked vehicles shall be limited to those directly associated with the business or awaiting service. No parking permitted in the comer cut-off area. Parking areas shall be screened as required under landscaping section of Section 86.030635. (F) Landscaping 11 (I) Except for driveway openings there shall be a landscaped planter area not less than five (5) feet in width extending along the entire street frontage. (II) A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the remaining lot area shall be landscaped with not less than 50 percent of said landscaping provided along the interior property lines. (III) All planter areas shall be enclosed by six (6) inch high concrete curbs. (IV) A detailed landscaping plan indicating types and distribution of plantings shall be provided with the application. (G) Walls A three (3) foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along all interior property lines. Said wall shall be increased in height to not less than five (5) feet nor more than six (6) feet when the site is adjacent to a school, church, park, club, hospital, residential zone or use. The Planning Commission may require additional walls as determined necessary for proper development of the site. (H) Rest Room All rest room entrances shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and street rights-of-way by some form of decorative wall or similar device. (I) Customer pump areas shall be roofed. The roofs over the pump areas shall connect to the station or station roof forming one continuous roofed structure. Ridges and eaves may, under some conditions, be at different levels. (J) Trash Storage All trash, refuse and used merchandise shall be stored in an area enclosed by solid walls or fences. Said area shall be located in the rear portion of the lot. (K) Utilities All utilities on the site for direct service to the business shall be installed underground. RCC:JS # 08/22101 12 :,. (L) Lighting All lighting elements on the exterior and interior of the structure shall be shielded from horizontal view except for sign lights or those especially designed for illumination of the parking lot. (M) Equipment Rentals The outside storage of rental trailers, and similar equipment, may be permitted provided they are completely screened from public view and the use is specifically authorized in the Conditional Use Permit. Additional lot area over the required minimum in the amount of 200 square feet per rental unit shall be provided. (8) Standards for drive-through restaurants and services: (A) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. (B) Minimum lot width and depth dimensions shall be one hundred twenty (120) feet. (C) Site must abut and have access to a secondary highway or larger roadway. (D) Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. (E) Landscaping (I) Except for driveway openings there shall be a landscaped planter area not less than ten (10) feet in width extending along the entire street frontage and not less than (5) feet in width along all interior property lines. (II) A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the total site shall be landscaped. (III) Landscaping guidelines and requirements of Section 86.030635 shall apply. (F) Walls RCC:JS # 08/22101 13 A three (3) foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along all interior property lines. The Planning Commission may require higher walls as determined necessary for proper development of the site and protection of adjacent property owners. (G) Frequency of Drive-Through Restaurants Due to the high traffic generation characteristics of drive- through restaurant facilities such uses shall not be located closer than 300 feet from each other. (H) Screening Drive-through aisles shall be completely screened from the view of public rights-of-way to a height equal to or greater than that of standard vehicular headlights. Screening shall be by use of walls, earth berms, landscaping or a combination thereof. (I) A traffic study prepared by a qualified traffic engineer shall be submitted with the application. 86.030615 Regional Industrial (ECIIR). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the Regional Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7, 1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and all necessary structures and appurtenances thereof. (2) IR grssr tg 9R~Ldr9 ~9R=lpli~R~g U1itR tRQ Qxigm, gS21t: dRS pgli~igt gf tR9 Eiilct "r.l1l9~' C'ill:riggr Spgsifls PliilR, tRg The following uses shall be subject to a Conditional Use Permit gr Sits '\pprg\'iill. (At the discretion of the reviewing agency, review requirement may be met by Planning Commission review.) (A) R9SSr.lr:;!::l iilR9 g9'.'9IspRl9Rt WS9S p9R+littgg iR tl:19 C9RlR=l9r:;isIIRgwctr:iiill Cistr:iGt, sc lists; iR i9StillR 15).'J.Q010 ~Research and Development RCC:JS # 08/22/01 14 1'- Research laboratories, product development facilities, and testing laboratories and facilities, including: Biochemical Chemical Metallurgical Pharmaceutical X-ray Film and photographic Medical and dental Electrical Optical Mechanical. (B) ~.4ar::1l1faGturir::1!l USgS pg):r::1:littgg ir::1 tl:1g ('s~~srsial lr::1gllGtrial Qi&triGt, at: Ii&tgg ir::1 igGtisr::1 Iii") QQ10 ())Manufacturing and Industrial Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing the following products: Apparel, drapery, upholstery, millinery, and related cloth and clothing items Fumiture and fixtures, including office fumiture, store fixtures, blinds and shades, fumiture, shelving Paper products, including envelopes, bags, wallpaper, containers, pressed and molded pulp goods Publishing, including newspapers, business forms, typesetting, photoengraving, bookbinding, printing Chemicals, including pharmaceutical, botanical, soaps and detergents, chemical fertilizer, perfumes and cosmetics, candles and wax Fabricated plastic products Stone, clay and glass products, including plate glass, mirrors, dishes and earthenware, pottery, porcelain and china, fixtures and supplies, cut stone Fabricated metal products, including heating and air conditioning equipment, communication equipment, electrical equipment, plumbing fixtures, radio and TV equipment, appliances, wiring, cutlery and hand tools, fasteners, and similar equipment and supplies Professional and scientific goods, including measuring instruments, clocks and watches, optical goods, surgical and medical instruments, photographic equipment, engineering, scientific and research instruments, computers, orthopedic, prosthetic and RCC:JS # 08/22/01 15 .- surgical appliances, ophthalmic goods, and similar equipment and supplies Miscellaneous manufactured goods, including jewelry, lapidary, precious metals, toys, sporting goods, umbrellas, brushes, novelties, notions, silverware, pictures and frames, musical instruments, tobacco products, artist supplies and similar goods. (C) Additional manufacturing and industrial uses, as follows: Prefabricated wooden buildings, veneer and plywood, and containers Fabricated rubber products Plastic, synthetic rubber and synthetic fibers Paints, vamishes, lacquers, enamels and allied products excluding boiling processes) Industrial chemicals Pesticides and agricultural chemicals Wholesale trade of durable and non-durable goods to commercial, industrial and professional business uses, including motor vehicles, sporting goods, electrical appliances, hardware, machinery and equipment for industry, construction, professional and service establishments Warehouse and distribution centers (0) Supportive service and commercial uses: Heavy equipment repair Welding and metal repair Electrical/electronic repair Restaurants operated for employees on the premises Child-care centers operated for employees on the premises Open space and recreation areas for employee use Business and research offices related to administration and operation of the permitted industrial uses Equipment rental Parcel delivery Automobile service stations One (1) dwelling unit on the same parcel of land as a permitted use needing continual supervision, to be occupied exclusively by a superintendent or a caretaker and his family Commercial sales and service incidental to a principal permitted use Truck rental and leasing Motor freight terminals RCC:JS # 08/22101 16 Truck terminals, storage, parking and repair Personal storage facilities (mini-warehouse) (E) Other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing, aG prgQig9g iR iglltigR ."i QU5. (c) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on tR9 9ff9sti'.'9 gats gf tRic ipll~ifl~ PlaR September 6, 1989 shall adhere to tl:lll appliQa~19 rgil1.llati'ilRG Ilf tRIl ilg'.'llrRiRil jlJRGgistigRthe provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1) Residential other than caretakers quarters. (2) Retail commercial or office uses as primary uses. (3) Animal and poultry raising, slaughter or packing. (4) Auto wrecking, junk yards, salvage yards or recycling centers. (5) Wholesale trade of commodities which may be incompatible with other uses permitted in this District, including but not limited to fuel, scrap, ammunition, petroleum products or hazardous chemicals. (6) Fur and hide curing or tanning. (e) Development Standards T~; ~llvglgPFRIlRt fJtaRglilrQG gf tR9 ~gmFR9n;iaIIRg1.lGtrial DiGt~il:t (illGti9R IE I Q:1Q) GRail appl~' tg all pJ:Qpllr:t>; iR tRll Rggi9RallRglolGtRal DiGtrist RCC:JS # 08122/01 17 86.030615 (ECIIR) REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL (EC/IR) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 50 map suffix 20,000 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) will modify See (1) below Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 50% Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) N/A Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) 100/150 Front Yard Setback (ft.) 25 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (2) below 0 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (2) below 0 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 25 See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR. fl. areallot area) 86.030630(h)(1) Minimum District Size (acres) (1 ) ell (J) (4) (~2) RCC:JS # 08/22101 Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. The requirement shall not be construed to prevent condominium- type developments which have smaller lot sizes as long as they have a mandatory owners association, and the land area under the jurisdiction of the association meets the minimum lot size requirements. ~1jRj~lJm l'la~Ggl "'j'iltl:1 &1:1 all gg 9Ri I:1UR'il~i'il (100) fQgt, 3R'il miRimym par~gl deptl:1 tRail b9 QRQ I:IYRdrsd f.ift~,' (1~Q) f99t a\lildiR~S aR'il I:tr:ul:turgs I: 1:1 all l:1a"9 a 1:19j~l:1t R9t ~~lilat9r tl:1aR ~ft>/ (IiQ) fQgt. let Ar92 cS'.'9rA!J9 b~' bYildiRQr: Sf ~tR.dstYr9r: ~Riilll Rst 9X~ggGt f;ift~' (;Q~/.!.) psrs9Rt gf tl:lg tst211st 2FSiil. Minimum building setback lines shall be as follows: (A) ~J:QRt ~'iilj:Q :lli fgtlt itrggt \:i'ilg ~'iilj:Q ~Ii fQgt Interior side yard None required except adjacent to Rear yard residential district. 18 ". (8) Where district abuts a street designated as a Special Landscaped Street in SeCtion 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscape requirements. (C) Where district abuts a residential district or residential portion of a Planned Development, see Section 86.030630(e)(3) for setback and landscape buffer requirements. (e3) For requirements on parking, landscaping, walls and fences, loading, lighting, storage and other design standards, the provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply. (~) All lots shall have a minimum of sixty (60) feet of access on a dedicated and improved street. (i5) The provisions Section 86.030630 shall apply to signs. In addition, the maximum area of any sign facing a residential zone shall be seventy-five (75) square feet. (Q6) Any structure originally designed as a residence, or as an accessory to a residence, shall not be used for any commercial or industrial purpose. (~7) A commercial or industrial building shall not be constructed or established on the same lot together with an existing residential building. (~) All buildings erected, constructed or established, shall be entirely new and complete structures designed for commercial or industrial purposes only. (~) All uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building except as follows: (A) (B) (C) RCC:JS # 08/22/01 Off-street parking and loading areas. Automobile service stations - all merchandise must be displayed within the building or under canopy cover. The open storage of materials, products, and equipment when such storage is enclosed by a fence. wall, buildings or other means adequate to conceal such storage from view from adjoining property or the public street. However, this requirement shall not apply to the display of products or equipment offered for sale or rental, providing said display is maintained in a neat and orderly manner. 19 (~10) New buildings or structures having exterior walls of sheet metal shall not be located closer than one hundred and fifty (150) feet from the property line along any freeway, major or secondary highway, or closer than one hundred (100) feet from the property line along any other dedicated street, except that said buildings or structures may be located closer to the street if any of the following conditions prevail: (A) The sheet metal comprises less than twenty-five (25%) percent of the exterior wall area of said building or structures, or (B) The sheet metal consists of panels with stainless steel, baked enamel or similar finish, or (C) Said building or structure is concealed from view from the public street by walls, fences, landscaping, or other buildings or structures. 86.030620 Planned Development (EC/PD). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the Special Development District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7, 1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) The following uses are permitted as interim uses and do not require submittal of a Planned Development application: (A) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and all necessary structures and appurtenances thereof. (B) Single family dwelling units on parcels of twenty (20) acres or more. (2) The following uses are permitted subject to approval of a Planned Development application: (A) Uses permitted within the East Valley Corridor General Commercial ;r C;A:lA:lllrsiaIIRQlliltrial District. RCC:JS # 08122/01 20 (B) Uses permitted within the East Valley Corridor Regional Industrial District as listed in' Section 86.030615(b)(2)(A) and (B). (C) Retail sales of items having long-term utility, to individuals and businesses: Automobile, new and used Automobile equipment Agricultural supplies and equipment Bicycle, boat and motorcycle Building material and hardware Camper and mobile home Electrical apparatus and equipment Fumiture, appliances and carpeting Garden and farm supplies Interior decorating supplies Machinery, equipment and supplies Nurseries (no outdoor display of merchandise other than plants) Plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration equipment and supplies Office equipment Paint Pet and pet supply Radio, television and electronic equipment (D) Provision of services to individuals and businesses: Ambulance services Animal hospitals Auto rental Auto services, including repair of brakes. glass, mufflers and body work, provided no open service bays are visible from the public right-of-way Bus terminals and similar transit facilities Business and research offices related to the administration and operation of the permitted industrial uses Cleaning and dyeing plants, laundries, linen and towel service Equipment rental Furniture upholstery Ice manufacture, cold storage and frozen food lockers Mail order houses Motels and hotels Off-street parking Parcel delivery Pest control RCC:JS # 08/22101 21 Printing, lithographing, publishing Public scales : Public utility offices and service yards Radio and television broadcasting studios Repair of any item permitted to be sold in this district Restaurants, cafes, cafeterias, drive-in restaurants Restaurants operated for employees on the premises Retreading of tires Sign painting Trade union halls Van and storage, including mini-warehouse facilities (E) Recreation and EntertainMent Bowling lanes, skating rinks, sports arenas Cocktail lounges and bars Drive-in theaters (F) Transportation, Communication and Utility Facilities: Airports and associated uses Electrical, gas, water and sewage transmission facilities Radio and television stations and towers Microwave communication towers and facilities (G) Public Services: Hospitals, sanitariums, convalescent and rest homes Govemment protective functions and postal services Public works maintenance and storage yards Executive, legislative and judicial functions and offices (H) Educational Services: Day Care Centers (public or private), primary, middlefjunior high, and high schools Universities, colleges, junior colleges, and professional schools Vocational, trade, and special training schools (I) Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational Facilities: Museums and art galleries Planetariums, aquariums, botanical gardens and zoos Historical and monument sites Convention facilities Parks, playgrounds, athletic fields RCC:JS # 08122/01 22 , RCC:JS # 08/22/01 Recreation and community centers Golf courses .. Arboretums, rose gardens, botanical gardens (J) Flood control structures (K) Hiking, bicycle, and equestrian paths and trails (L) One (1) dwelling unit on the same parcel of land as a permitted use needing continual supervision, to be occupied exclusively by a caretaker and his family. (M) Other Uses Business. technical, trade or professional schools Clubs, lodges and similar organizations Government buildings Warehouses and distribution centers Wholesale trade of most consumer items, including motor vehicles, drugs, dry goods, apparel, groceries. building materials and paper products. (N) Other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. (&ii) IJ,;:st pgr~ittgGif u:itRiR tRia ^.gR=liRh~tr~ti"9 PrsfGtBisRal Ci~tri~t (~) W~9r ra9r;~ittgd 'ritRiR tR9 Pylalis IRt:titytiQRal Oittritt. (b.') VSIlS pllm:littlls "'itl:liR tl:lll OpllR Spasll b.'ist~i~. (3) Where determined to be appropriate by the reviewing agency, a special buffer area shall be established adjacent to existing single family residential homes which abut the lIplilsial Planned Development District, in order to ensure a logical transition of uses. The following uses will be permitted within this buffer area: (A) All uses permitted within 1I1lGtillR il/:il111 g itllR'lS a aRQ ~Subsections (1) and (2) above. (B) Uses permitted within the Countywide Single Residential District. (c) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses Ii.tlls iR 1I1ll.ltigR E)'VJQ11i (b) tl:l~lilu91:1 ~s prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in 23 existence on t~1l IltfGsti"1l datil gf t~is ipllsifls P'laRSeptember 6, 1989 shall adhere to the Gpplisalllll r;G!;IoIIGthilRS Ilf t~1l !j\1"Ilr:RiR!j jlolrisdistillRprovisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) RCC:JS # 08/22101 Any outdoor manufacturing or processing operation Breweries, distilleries, wineries Contractors storage yards Feed and grain yards Food processing, canning or packing Animal and poultry raising, slaughter or packing Stables and riding academie"s Auto wrecking, junk yards, salvage yards, recycling centers Wholesale trade of commodities which may be incompatible with other uses permitted in this district, including but not limited to agricultural products, lumber, concrete block, fuel, scrap, ammunition, and hazardous chemicals Truck terminals Recreational vehicle parks Kennels and catteries Manufacture of paint, oil, shellac, turpentine or varnish Paper or pulp manufacture Leather tanning and finishing Billboards 24 .' RCC:JS # 08122/01 (d) Development Standards 86.030620 (EC/PD) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (EC/PD) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS For Interim Uses listed in Subsection 86.030620 (b)(1) Maximum Structure Height (ft) 35 map suffix Minimum Lot Size (acres) will modify 20 Maximum Lot CoveraCle (building coverage) N/A i ~ 10 acres Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres N/A Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) N/A Front Yard Setback (ft,) See (1) below 25 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft,) 20 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft,) See (1) below 25 See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. areallot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) N/A (1) I7sr iRt9Rt:R 1.d~9f: At Ii~tgg iR isstisR i'fJ 111 Q (8)1 dsvslgpt:R9Rt tt;Rd;arQ~ ara 2[: ~lIg'''h: (^) ~1iRiml:dm 1st hiz9 &R211 be VUSRV,,' (2Q) :3~rg[ (Ei) (C') ~1axiR=lwR=l ;wilQiRS l:I;i8l:1t &1:10111 ;; tl:liJ:!:,' ~"g (ili) fggt ~ 1iRiR=lwR=l ;wilQiR8 &gtba;;k;' {I) I"rgRt Yar:Q itrggt Gid; ~'a~d iidg aRd rQar yar:Q& Ali HlQt 211 Hl9t AO flil €It (1) {II) Where front or side street is designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscaping requirements. (2) Development standards for Planned Development projects shall be based upon the approved development plan or use permit and conditions of approval attached to the plan by the reviewing agency. All Planned Developments shall adhere to the Community Design standards as outlined in Section 86.030630, and to the requirements for PD approval contained in Article 2 of Chapter 3 of 25 86.030625 (a) ~(a) RCC:JS # 08122/01 ~(b) ~(c) Division 3 of this Title. Where the SC-PD District is located adjacent to existing single family residential' uses, special attention shall be paid to the development compatibility standards set forth in Section 86.030630(e). Circulation Design Guidelines A critical element of the apll~ifls J;llaR East Valley Corridor Planning Area is the provision of an efficient and comprehensive circulation plan. In order for development to occur in an orderly and systematic manner, access into the study area must be improved and the circulation system within the study area must be adequate to accommodate traffic volumes generated by the project. The intent of the planning area, in terms of circulation, is to provide an effective circulation system, establish a streetscape design that will enhance the character of the East Valley, and maintain consistency with current and future transportation planning efforts at the state, regional and local levels. While most transportation in and around the study area is by private automobile, special consideration has been given to public transit, pedestrian access, and recreational trails. Figure EC-1 illustrates the backbone circulation system proposed for the East Valley Corridor. TAll sirsulatisR llJ'lltllR'l ill aQsptgg all a pllr:tillR "f tAll GIlRllml PISRIi "f tl:i'il CSt.lRt'/ IIf iSR EillR'larQiRg, tl:i'il Ci~' sf b.SR'la b.iRda, SRQ tAil Cit>; sf RIlQlaRQG 26 ~~...'t1 'rI,~~,"I~'., i .. "v ~}, _ .. - .; \"tt- ,'~ . . . ~:~, ;. .\- .....: .\ . ~""- L ~~.-<.-..- "' "'0 '. .J i . Z ~~~~r.. ~..I: 10 :', " ~; .;!. ;......... v.I: :............. I, ~ '0' .. ';'!-.. . ri ,: '.. i", '.. ,: :i/...I'.."'v'-...~~...J. _~\:i ..... ;" :-:.u;i=-":. ".,"'. au: _ laSSI '." .". .. ~ '. \'. . ..~.:f\ .\ i '.' , '" \ ~.,. 1 io.~... .......... - ~1~..YI'ft" +' Ill... 1 0 ::;~!. .1 !. Ii " !'-'- ; .' ...........__. "..... 0" I ~ . t, . I . ~ '.;. .,~,\ ~ ~ -_...........~ ~. I'" ..~..~y.am : !. - :. '1 ~ ,~ ~. 1-' '. {I-........., .. i g /\'\\-111.: i~ : ~_.~~...:~-r..I..iU..I!I~ .. .....t:.. ': t. . I . : ~;:. ~...~c.n ~..,..~ : ]: ;\.~ .~~ II i. JC' . .', _., I. I . . ..,-:...... ' .. . .. ...~..M.~S ~ ~l I .;~ ~ ..... ;.' Il~~" 't~.., .) '" ,".. J.-! .. ....... _" c:! .. 'OJ .. ~l":'. "Of:, '...... . . ..,~ .~ , ;.?~ ~.,. ,.~ . --.: :.~. .::,,: -;.. I ~i, ~:... j:O.... ........1.. ':' ,.. I;,' ''I..r. ;.:; .' .'1 "':-,., I" ... ,11.1:', ,'1_ .:l .. . =r;'l ~~. ~~ .:::.;...~. '~,.:, ~,.., ,....~.T'.-;: ~""...,~.\ .' ~ ....:...a~'\...".. '~"""'-'" "," \- . . ", ':' &I) . .~~:.:_~:.~.:.-:.;: I : i.l '. .~.'I" ...\ .I--:~"'''''''~ ", ," . .~.: ,...:. ":' ;.:..... I.~. .......; ~ - I : '.:." "-""""!' ~ >. ..,'?i '::i:: :/ .::.-= . l : \ 'l .:.J.I-!.~~~~.~~,,>>..! .....: ' :: ~ .... .. .. . ~ ~ ,. .. ~ .; RCC:JS # 06/22101 , . ""...Nil,' .; II ., l...... -:-" '. .... ... l.r. i ~ I .....,~\;)i'..~. .....' '~m:;. ~..~; "< ~.:~.:b;.... , :..LiL":-'3 . ~tl: . ......:. ~8:~'~i .' -i~ ,. _.11 'i'~ '. ar. ....1.. .' ",,~~.;.: .'~:~~! . '. I~.I a,;" ~. , .,' g ... I l~;S' "...... I .. '>>'j" QI \\ j. E.......: .:/ .:<.... i . -, .''';',. ',I' ,'h.. -.LS ~l' . .-:!..:; -. -;:i~r,:; .":(1).... .,. ~(."":1 1M( -.., :!:E=I "')'''-'' . .. ...-i~ .... . .. I . - ....yU =1 ~ , U III III a:: =' Cl ii: z < oJ '" U 11; Uz \II < '" oJ Ill", a::z 00 Cl_ -t- a:: < a::... O=' Uu ...a:: \11- ...u ... < > t- III < \II ;: c ;: , - . c .. . , c 0 . , . .. . . '" 0 . " ;: . 0 .. . i c '" .. , " '" ,: i " . i . . ,: . 0 ,: . . . .; .. " . '" ~ . z " ~ " c i .; ~ ~ .. .; : ,: .. c .. . c . 0: ~ .. . -< ~ '" Cl . : ~ .; .. z ... .. :z: c :l C -< 5! ~ 0 i< . ~ :z: :: .. UI :z: .. 0: C .. .. 0: 0 UI .. 0: i c 0: C .. C C Cl <> ~ a: .. z UI z UI 0 .. 0 ... c UI .. .. <> ... ... .. c c UI .. .. .. II II .. <> .. , .. . I I . . . .. I .. . I a . , . . I , z .. , . . , .. . I ~ I .. . . .. . .. .. . I ... . ...... ,,' !- I. r. :.{n 27 (e) Circulation Plan (1) The major traffic routes through the study area are Interstate 10 (the San Bemardino Freeway) and State Route 30 (the Tennessee Freeway). The il/Ilsifis J;!laREast Valley Corridor Planning Area provides for a network of six lane major arterial and four lane major and secondary highways in conjunction with collector streets to be constructed or improved within the area. This proposed circulation system will provide additional regional access to the area as well as build a backbone system for the proposed development. (2) The following roadways shall be designated as major arterials: California Street from Palmetto Avenue to aaJ:tGR RGagAlmond Avenue . Alabama Street from the Santa Ana River to lial'lgR RgadLugonia Avenue Rggl:aRst agylg"~rg ftQm tR9 "~&l~tgm pl:aR bSYR9AT',,' ts J?:ark ^"QRY9 San Bernardino Avenue from ~~gIolRtaiR '.'ill\\' ,^"IlRIoIIlCalifornia Street to TIl){;iIS itrllstRoute 30. (3) The following roadways shall be designated as major highways: Palmetto Avenue from Califomia Street to Alabama Street Lugonia Avenue from ~1g\lRtaiR "ilil'\' ,^"IlRIoIIlNew Jersey Street to tRlillilastlilr:R I/laR ar61a glillolRgaryRoute 30. Ii ar:l9R Rgag frgr:R ~alifQrRia itrlillilt tg KaRSiilG itr61llt ~19YRtAiR "igu, .^"9RY9 UQt:R RgglARgc a2wI9"a~ tg iAR igrR:ar;diRs ^"9RW9 .^.Rggrrs:9R itregt frsFR RgdlaRgt agylg'.~:ar=d tQ I 10 (4) The following roadways shall be designated as secondary highways: Nevada Street from San Bernardino Avenue to aaJ:t'OlR ~Lugonia Avenue T9X:at ~tr9~t fr9j:R I?ralmgttg ^"QRY9 tQ r;:9ytR9rR plAR Ar;Q:a g9lolRdiilP" P:aIFR9ttS ^"9RY9 ffgm b.US9Ri:a fJ'QRY9 to C':alif.gmi:a itrggt (5) The following roadways shall be designated as collectors: RCC:JS # 08/22/01 28 RCC:JS # 08122101 QIi"; ^"gr:lUg fram <>alimmia itrggt t2 .^lrabamra Strggt Pioneer Avenue from ^Iagamti California Street to TgXJi liItrlilliltRoute 30 Collector connecting Palmetto Avenue and San Bemardino Avenue, west of Nevada Street Collector connecting Palmetto Avenue and San Bemardino Avenue, east of Nevada Street Park ^':IiIR\oI1iI frgm CiillifgFRilllttrgst tg RIiI;laR\;!c igulg"iilJ:Q Citru& P"IiIRI.lS frgFR ClllifGJ:Ri:a lttrlillilt tg KIlR&IlG lttrggt (6) In instances where roadways are designated on the Circulation Plan where no road currently exists, the location and design standards, including the grade and alignment, will be determined by the reviewing authority at the time of submittal of design plans for the individual project. (f) Road Standards (1) Standards and specifications for transportation facilities and all work within the road rights-of-way shall conform to the County's Standards and Specifications Manual unless specifically modified herein. Typical sections of roads within the planning area are shown in Figures EC-2 through EC-6. (2) Right-of-way shall be required as shown on the lt~ssifiQ ~Planning Area Circulation map except in the following instances: (A) On California Street between Palmetto Avenue and Almond Avenue, the existing fan palm row shall be placed in a 22- foot landscaped median. To accommodate this rnedian, the road right-of-way shall be 126 feet instead of 120 feet on this stretch. (B) On Palmetto Avenue between California Street and the existing alignment of Nevada Street, the existing double row of fan palms will be placed in a 34-foot landscaped median. To accommodate this rnedian, the road right-of-way shall be 106 feet instead of 104 feet on this stretch. (3) In order to accommodate medians and parkways landscaped with fan palm rows, sidewalks shall be placed outside of the right-of-way on the following streets. In these instances, the reviewing agency shall be granted a sidewalk easement for maintenance. RIiI;IIlR\;!G igl.lllil"llrQ San Bernardino Avenue 29 Alabama Street Palmetto Avenue between Califomia Street and Nevada Street (4) Access control standa~:5 shall be as follows: (A) (8) (C) (0) RCC:JS # 08/22101 No direct driveway access from individual residences shall be permitted onto major arterials, major highways or secondary highways. Intersections shall be placed a minimum of 400 feet centerline to centerline from freeway on and off ramps. Offset intersections shall be a minimum of 300 feet centerline to centerline. Access shall be controlled on major arterials and major highways to minimize curb cuts and facilitate the flow of traffic. Any new development or subdivision of land adjacent to these roadways shall be required to dedicate vehicular access rights, except where access points are shown on an approved Site Plan. Shared access and parking, and use of side streets for access, shall be required whenever possible. (E) All development proposals shall be designed so as to provide for a free flow of vehicles in and out of the site as well as for easy access to the various activity areas within each site. (F) Placement of access points into each site shall minimize interference with the off-site circulation system. (G) Where medians are located in the street fronting the site, driveways should be provided where median breaks occur. (H) Adequate provisions shall be made for emergency vehicle access, with a minimum of two (2) points of ingress and egress provided to each site. 30 '- R/W R/W 120' 60' 60' e' ~Z' ~2' e' 10' IZ' IZ' 10' 0' 0' 10' IZ' IZ' 10' .. .. .. MIN, MIN. .. .. .. z z z z z z 0 0 Ci , ~ ~ Ci ., .. .. .. L...- _20'. :.... _20'. . . '. ' '. ,". ". ... . ,".. ," ".- ." , .. " . '-- CURB a GUTTER CURB- SIOEWALK- (SEE-STD. IDS) TYPICAL SECTIO N WITH RAISED MEDIAN R/W '- R/W , IZO' CMIN.I 60' 60' , , e' ~z' ..' .' 10' IZ' IZ' 12' 6' 6' 12' l12' 12' 10' t;: .. .. .. .... !o .. .. z z z z z z Ci 6 0 Ci , Ci ~ Ci 6 .. .. .. .. ., .., .., L...- _20/. _20/. .. .. " .. " .. . , .. ., . , .. . . .' .... . _ '-- CURB a GUTTER SIOEWALK- (SEE STD. IDS) TYPICAL SECTION WITH CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE NOTES: I. STRUCTURAl. SECTION OF ROAOWAY SHALL BE OETERMIHED FROM SOILS TESTS AND SO INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. 2. DRAINAGE FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIOED TO DEWATER RAISED MEDIAN AREAS. S. 10' SHOULDER AREAS MAY BE DESIGNATEO AS A BIKE LANE AND EMERGENCY PARKING ONLY. FIGURE EC.2 RCC:JS # 08122101 MAJOR ARTERIAL. 31 : R/W t R/W Ill0"MItI.1 '2' ,,' 12' 40' .0' 12' , 10' 12' 10' .' 0' '0' IZ' 10' .. lE MIN. MIN. .. !< z z <; <; , II ~ .. ., -2 ClIo - - -20'0 ..... ", " . ..... . L CURB " . ',. L SIDEWALK - CURB a GUTTER (SEE STD.I09l TYPICAL SECTION WITH RAISED MEDIAN R/W .. R/W , 104' 'Z' '0' IZ' 00' .0' IZ' 10' IZ' IZ' 6' 6' 12' '121 '10. .. .. .. .. !t !< z z z ~ <; <; <; , - <; i:j .. ., .. .. -Z '/. -20/0 L CURB a G~~TER .. . . SIOEWALKJ . (SEE STD. 109 J TYPICAL SECTION . . WITH CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE NOTES: I. STRUCTURAL SECTION OF ROAOWAY SHALL BE DETERMINEO FROM SOILS TESTS AHD SO INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. 2. DRAINAGE FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED TD DEWATER RAISED MEDIAN AREAS. S.IO' SHOULDER AREAS . lIAY BE DESIGNATED AS A BIKE LANE AND EMERGENCY PARKING ONLY. FIGURE EC-3 MAJOR HIGHWAY RCC:JS # 08/22101 32 RCC:JS # 08122101 ~fiI t I. 88 ~/w ~~' ~~' 12' 3Z' 3Z' IZ' " IZ' IZ' 12' IZ' " , I .. z ~ .. .. Z Z ~ Z. 5i . .. ... ~ ~ ""I~-' ... SEE NO'lt: I CURB a GUTTER SIDEWAL.K (SEE STD. 109) TYPICAL SECTION NOTES: I. STRUCTURAL. SECTION OF ROADWAY SHAL.L. BE DETERMINED FROIlI SOIL.S TESTS AND SO INDICATED 'ON CONSTRUCTION PL.ANS. 2. B' SHOUL.DER AREAS MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A BIKE L.ANE AND EMERGEN- CY PARKING ONL.Y. FIGURE EC-4 .SECON D'ARY HIGHWAY 33 RCC:JS # 08/22101 R/W I I II' I 4' IO.!' SLOPE 'A- J ~. LA , k 33' t I l 22' II' 33' R/W I ~ I IO.!!' SLOPE 4' \ '1~": " 12' II' I' .... % lS ... SIOEWAU<- " ~ 8 o .. _,,2.00/. -2.0 Ye- SEE /lOTES CURD II GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION LEVEL AlJ'ERNATE SIDEWALK 1I~ SHONN ON PI.AN) II' l l ,,' .... % o ... LEYEL ~ 8 k _ 3.00/. 2.00/.- .... % i:l o TYPICAL SECTION TILT A 8 C D Boo CURB LEYEL 0.00' 0.3&' 0.14' 0,)'" TILT 0.7&' I.OZ' 0.69' o.S6' 6" CURB LEVEL 0.00' 0.1" (O.DS~ 0.19' ( I INDICATES ABOYE TILT 0.76' 0.85' 0.52' 0.19' LEVEL LINE NOTE L STRUCTURAL SECTION OF RDAOWAT SNALL at DETERMINED FROM SOILS TESTS AND SO INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. 1. MINIMUM DESIGN PAYING THICKNESS SHALl. 8E 02.rf ASPHAlJ' CONCRrrE. S. COHSTRUCnON OUTSIDE R/W WILL REOUIRE SLoOPE EASEMENTS, FIGURE EC.S COLLECTOR STREET 34 RCC:JS # 08/22101 R!W I I 12' 10'!' SCOPE . 114-11' L'" . ,'. 1. t I 60' so' IB' IB' 12:.5' :\.5' S~' 12.5' so' r I .... z y~B .... z I rC !:il /-D !L. _ .::r _ .c!:.E"~E _2.00/0 12' - . 1"1 ......: ALTERNATE (IF SKOWN ON PLAN) NOTE L STRUCTURAL SECTION OF ROADWAY SHALL DE DETERMINED FROM SOILS TESTS AND SO INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTION PCANS. 2. IoIINIMUhI DESIGN PAVING 1>lICKNESS SHALL BE 0.20' ASPKAlJ" CONCRETE. S. CONSTRUCTION WlSIDE R/W WILL REOUIRE SCOPE EASEMENTS 04, WKEN PREPARING SUBGRADE FOR PAVING, CENTERCINE CROWN ON THE i..!:VEL SECTION" SHALL BE RELOCATED EITHER LEFT OR RIGHT O~O' TO MATCH CROWN BREAI< .. PAYING MACKIHE. CURD II GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION - LEVEL 12.5' t '"'' h\~', 1/,,". 2.0%_ _ 3.00/. TYPI CAL SECTION TII..T' A n C D a" CURB LEVEL 0.00' O.3S' 0.2Z' 0.33' TICT O.4~' 0.66' O~Cl 0.33' 6" CURB LEVa 0,00 0.16' O.O~. OJ6' TILT 0.44' 0.4" 0.33', 0.16' FIGURE EC~ LocAL STREET 35 (5) Intersection design shall conform to the following standards: (A) Intersections less than 80 degrees shall not be permitted without special approval from the reviewing agency. The 90- degree angle is preferable. (B) If offset streets are to be continuous, they shall be curved to approach the intersection so as to effect a right-angle alignment. (C) At intersections where additional traffic lanes are indicated by traffic analysis, provision shall be made for requiring additional right-of-way and curb width within 300 feet of the intersection. (6) The following streets shall have landscaped center medians: Palmetto Avenue California Street, from Barton Road to Palmetto Avenue RgdllilRdG Iilllt.llg"i4J:Q, f;1lR:! ClillifllHlia itr:agt t9 ~Ig'" YIlR< itr:agt Iillill:tQR RQlild, WR:! Tgr:r:asiRil IilQ!.Ilg"aJ:Q tll KlilRGlilG itrQgt (7) No parking, except for emergency parking, shall be allowed on any street which has four or more lanes, (includes major arterials, major highways, and secondary highways). (8) Cul-de-sac standards shall be as follows: (A) Cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum paved radius of 40 feet. (B) Length of cul-de-sac shall not exceed 600 feet. (9) Private streets shall be constructed in accordance with approved Planned Development Standards. (g) Special Landscaped Streets The dominant design element for the East Valley Corridor Planning Area will consist of unified streetscape themes to be established throughout the planning area, incorporating consistency of setbacks, street planting, berming, walls and sidewalks. In order to establish this consistency, major arterials within the planning area have been designated as Special Landscaped Streets, with specific design guidelines developed for each one. A key element of the streetscape design, providing a dramatic and recognizable image for the area, will be a continuation of the existing grid RCC:JS # 08/22/01 36 pattern of Washingtonia Robusta palrns (Mexican fan palrns), both north and south of Interstate 10. Understory ''plantings of canopy type street trees, shrubs and groundcover will provide shade, color and a more human scale to the streetscape. The landscape design and plant palette for each major street is intended to be consistent throughout the planning area. Properties which abut any of the streets listed below rnust landscape the area adjacent to the roadway as provided in Subsections 86.030625(g)(1) through (5). The only improvements which rnay encroach into this landscaped area are driveway entrances, sidewalks, planters, fences or walls not to exceed three and a half (3-1/2) feet in height. Parking areas adjacent to roadways are subject to the landscape requirements of Section 86.030630(i). Specific design and/or plant materials may be modified at the discretion of the approving agency when there is a conflict with the location of public utilities. Development applications requesting a deviation from specific design standards or plant materials shall clearly identify what conflict exists with public utilities, what specific standards apply, and how the conflict will be resolved. The approving agency may modify adopted design or plant material requirements when a demonstrated conflict with public utilities exists that cannot be resolved without deviating from adopted standards. Special Landscaped Streets within the East Valley Corridor area include the following: San Bernardino Avenue Alabama Street California Street Palmetto Avenue, between California and Alabama Streets Lugonia Avenue (1) SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE San Bernardino Avenue is designated as a major arterial and is a major east-west thoroughfare connecting the cities of Redlands and San Bernardino. The predominant designated land use adjacent to this street is ilplllsialPlanned Development, with some RIlSillRal ;jRr;! General Commercial adjacent to the Tennessee freeway. Most of the area around San Bernardino Avenue is presently undeveloped, with orange groves and field crops the major uses in this area. The intent of the landscape guidelines for San Bernardino Avenue is to extend the palm row landscape element, enhance the identity of the East Valley Corridor on a rnajor roadway, and create an aesthetic RCC:JS # 08/22101 37 buffer between the street and planned commercial and industrial uses. : Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet. Sidewalk Six (6') foot straight sidewalk, eight (8') feet from back of curb. Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees New planting of single row of Washingtonia robusta on each side of roadway between curb and sidewalk, planted forty (40') feet on center. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted in landscaped setback area on regular spacing, in triangular pattern with palm rows. Salvage and relocate existing mature palms as roadway is widened. (2) ALABAMA STREET Alabama Street, which parallels the Tennessee freeway to the west, is designated as a major arterial. Alabama connects Redlands to the community of Highland, and serves as the only arterial access into this portion of the planning area from the north. The existing crossing of Alabama over the Santa Ana River Wash is a causeway which is subject to inundation and washing out. The Circulation Plan calls for construction of a bridge at this location, to make this crossing all-weather. Land use designations along Alabama include a wide mix of uses from north to south, including Commercial, Industrial, and Planned Development, ~1",ltilill61 R61Gill61Rtial, aRIl !>.lll;1iRistrati"611 Prsf9€:si61Ral. The portion of Alabama &61wtl:l north of Lugonia is Ah~gAd~' dg)'glgpn~d u'itR 2 "3Rgt" gf sgmmgr~i21 LcItQt "'RiI; tR9 ." t . R61I'lI:lSI;1 IilOr:tiOR is agricultural., so Tl:ls Ils"sIOIil61G 1il61l'liOR is RCC:JS # 08/22/01 38 Fa1:tiall~' laRgSSaFQg '."itl:1 strlillilt tflillilS (!lIilRQfall)' FaiR:! ':;rililtiQs) aRg W4 iuilgiRS GQtb;sl~s alrgag~' gstablisl:1gg iR tl:1lil g9':9!IilFQg F9J::tiIilR arQ rQlati':IilI~' RaFrSV', wl:1i1s the opportunity to create a wider, more spacious landscaped area exists north of Interstate 10. The intent of the landscape guidelines for Alabama Street is to create a unified appearance along the street throughout the planning area despite varying land uses, while recognizing existing development and building on established landscape treatment. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet south of 1-10, 30 feet north of 1-10. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks behind palm planting area. Groundplane Berms or other screening required where parking areas are visible from right-of-way. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf or groundcover. Street Trees Single row of Washingtonia robusta, planted forty (40') feet on center; understory of Platanus acerifolia, regularly spaced in triangular pattern with palms. (3) CALIFORNIA STREET California Street is designated as a major arterial and provides a major gateway into the planning area from Interstate 10, both to the north and the south. North of 1-10, the predominant land use designation is iFlilsialPlanned Development and the area is undeveloped above Lugonia. South of 1-10, Multiple Residential is the only land use designation. adjacent to California Street iRQIIoI;1il R:!loIltiFIQ faR:!i1~' rlilsiglilr:ttialaR; ;QFRFRlilr;ia!, aR; pgJ::tiQRS Qf tl:1lil arg. RCC:JS # 08122/01 39 iilrlil alrsag~' gS'}QISFSg. The landscape guidelines for Califomia Street emphasize the importance of this roadway in establishing the identity of the East Valley Corridor, due to its high visibility from the freeway, anticipated traffic volume, planned link to a regional trail system, and central location. Because of these factors, a wide landscaped median and parkways are planned for the portion of Califomia north of 1-10, where no existing development will be affected. South of 1-10, the median will be reduced in size and the trail system will be routed onto Citrus Avenue. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30* feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 30* feet. * Where trail system is not adjacent to roadway, setbacks may be a minimum of 25 feet but must average 30 feet. Sidewalks Six (5') foot sidewalks adjacent to curb. Bike Trail Class I bike path on east side of Califomia Street between Palmetto Avenue and. RsglSRgs Iilsuls"srQLugonia Avenue (per Section 85.030525(m). Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Berms encouraged on parkways. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees New planting of single row of Washingtonia robusta on each side of roadway adjacent to curb. planted forty (40') feet on center. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted in landscaped setback area on regular spacing, in triangular pattem with palm rows. RCC:JS # 08122101 40 Median North of Interstate 10. phase median into roadway north of Lugonia Avenue. Between Almond Avenue and Palmetto Avenue, retain existing row of Washingtonia robusta in median. Use occasional understory groupings of crape myrtle. Use river rock in median noses. (4) PALMETTO AVENUE, between California and Alabama Streets Palmetto Avenue is designated as a major highway between California Street and Alabama Street. It will serve to carry traffic between those two major arterials, and to provide access to the adjacent land designated for Regional Industrial and lIF/IIsialPlanned Development. Two existing rows of Washingtonia robusta, planted approximately 22 feet apart, extend along Palmetto between Califomia Street and Nevada Street. It is the intent of the landscape guidelines to maintain consistency with the design concepts for Califomia Street, and to preserve and extend the existing palm rows on Palmetto Avenue. Setbacks Building Setback line (from property line) 30. feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 30. feet. .Where trail system is not adjacent to roadway. setbacks may be a minimum of 25 feet but must average 30 feet. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks adjacent to curb. Bike Trail Class I bike path on north side of Palmetto Avenue (per section 86.030625(m). Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Groundcover within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees RCC:JS # 08/22101 41 Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted thirty (30') feet on center. " Median Between Califomia Street and (existing) Nevada Street, place double palm row in 34-foot median. Between Nevada Street and Alabama Street, plant new row of Washingtonia Robusta palm trees thirty (30') feet on center in triangular pattem with camphor trees on parkways. Use occasional understory groupings of crape myrtle. Use river rock in median noses. (5) LUGONIA AVENUE Lugonia Avenue is designated as a major highway and parallels Interstate 10 to the north. Land use designations adjacent to Lugonia include General Commercial and. ~~gsi:ilIPlanned Development :ilR9 R'ilgisR:il1 CSJ;lJ;lg~Gi:;lI. An existing landscape element developed on Lugonia is the citrus grove adjacent to Edwards Mansion, a primary focal point on this street. The intent of the landscape guidelines on Lugonia Avenue is to create a spacious, uncluttered "greenbelt" appearance conducive to business park development. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet. Sidewalks Meandering sidewalk, six (6') foot width, minimum of three (3') feet from back of curb, per Section 86.030625(1)(1) and (3). Groundplane Berms or other screening required where parking areas are visible from right-of-way. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees RCC:JS # 08/22101 42 1- RCC:JS # 08122/01 (h) Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) and Liquidambar styriciflua planted with random spacing or in grove effect, to provide varied streetscape with view windows, at the equivalent of one tree per thirty (30') linear feet of frontage. Special Landscape Requirements for Other Streets (1) In addition to existing palm rows along Special Landscaped Streets as outlined in Section 86.030625(g), the following streets within the planning area have rows of Washingtonia robusta and Washingtonia filifera located adjacent to the roadway: OIMl-Pioneer Avenue Almond Avenue Citrus Avenue Nevada Street (2) These trees shall be preserved or relocated in accordance with the guidelines contained in Section 86.030630(m) IIf tl:l9 iP9"ifl" I?lllll'I. Relocated trees shall be used to enhance or extend palm rows designated on Special Landscaped Streets or to enhance Special Landscaped Intersections. (I) Setbacks at Intersections (1) As part of the streetscape design component of the lilP9"ifll;: ~Planning Area, intersections shall be designed to provide a unified character throughout the planning area. Intersections shall be classified as follows: (A) Primary intersections: Alabama Street and Palmetto Avenue Alabama Street and Lugonia Avenue Calimr:Ria itrggt aRS lU!lSRi:a ^"ORYO (b) Secondary intersections: San Bernardino Avenue and Nevada Street San Bernardino Avenue at Tennessee Freeway (State Route 30) (2) Building setbacks from intersections shall be defined by a line in a horizontal plane, taken at a forty-five (45) degree angle, connecting the property lines. On primary intersections, this line shall be drawn 50 feet from the intersection of the property lines or prolongation of such lines; on secondary intersections, 35 feet. 43 RIGHT-OF-WAY 1, RCC:JS # 08/22101 PRIMARY INTERSECTION RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' SECONDARY INTERSECTION RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' 35' . RIGHT-OF-WAY 35' Figure EC.7 SETBACKS AT SPECIAL LANDSCAPED INTERSECTIONS 44 ~ (3) A clear sight area shall be established at all intersections of public or private streets within the planning area. This area shall be defined by a line in a horizontal plane, taken at a forty-five (45) degree angle, connecting two points twenty-five (25) feet from the intersection of property lines or the prolongation of such lines. The maximum height of visual barriers, including but not limited to signs, vegetation, fences and walls, shall not exceed thirty-six (36) inches above the top of the curb or forty-four (44) inches above the surface of the street. RIGHT.OF.WAY --+ RIGHT-OF.WAY 25' Figure EC-S SETBACK FOR CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE G) Planting and Design Concepts for Special Landscaped Intersections (1 ) The design of enhanced comer treatments at key intersections will vary between primary and secondary classifications, but will be developed to retain a similar character which will further establish a sense of continuity throughout the planning area. The design of these comer treatments shall include a combination of masonry walls, ballards, enriched paving, and plant materials which will coordinate with the proposed streetscape planting, yet create a specific focal element. (2) The dominant plant materials or Special Landscaped Intersection shall be Washingtonia Robusta Palms along with a flowering accent tree to provide human scale and color; shrub or groundcover planting and/or flowering groundcover. RCC:JS # 08122/01 45 (3) RCC:JS # 08/22101 Conceptual drawings of how Primary and Secondary Intersections might be constructed are shown' on Figures EC-9 and EC-10 respectively. The actual configuration of each designated intersection may differ slightly to provide for integration into the adjacent site design; provided, however, that the primary plant and building materials and design concepts as contained in this Section are adhered to in the intersection design, 46 .. PRIMARY INTERSECTION .......II~............. _ol;~- ==-=. ......... ----- .............~~ PLAN V1~ SECTION! EI.EV AlION Figure EC.9 RCC:JS # 08/22101 47 t SECONOARYINTERSECTION -~_.I. ,. ~,- 1'1.......-""_ IL.'....lrl..,..."...~ .....~........ ,..aaloo ....... N--........... P\.AN YEW SECllONl El.EV A TION Figure EC.10 RCC:JS # 08/22/01 48 .0 RCC:JS # 08/22/01 (k) Landscape Concepts for Freeways (1) Planting guidelines along the freeways shall be consistent with other landscape guidelines established for the ipll~ifls ~Planning Area in order to enhance the continuity of landscape design and improve freeway views from both on and off the roadway. (2) Required setbacks adjacent to freeways shall be established as follows: (A) A minimum 25 feet of landscaped area shall be established adjacent to all freeway rights-of-way. (6) Within. the ipllsialPlanned Development District, this landscaped area may be reduced to 15 feet in width if approved by the reviewing agency under the following conditions: (I) The freeway is elevated, with steep slopes adjacent to the right-of-way. (II) An additional 10 feet of landscaping shall be provided on-site so as to be visible from the freeway. . (III) A 25 foot building setback shall be maintained; parking may be permitted if enhanced with canopy- type trees. (C) All buildings shall be setback an average of fifty (50) feet from all Caltrans property lines, unless the reviewing authority finds that such a setback would severely constrain the reasonable use of a parcel due to its configuration or location. (3) The plant palette for freeway landscaping shall include the following: (A) Trees Washingtonia Robusta, 10 foot trunk @ 40 feet on center. (6) Shrubs (all 1 gallon minimum @ 8 feet on center) Dodonaea Viscosa Leptospermum Scoparium 49 (4) (5) RCC:JS # 08122101 Nerium Oleander Photinia Fraseri Tecomaria Capensis Raphiolepis Indica Pyracantha Species (C) Groundcover Hedera Helix Lantana Species Within the Caltrans right-of-way, upgraded landscaping installed by property owners shall be coordinated with Caltrans. A 30 foot setback shall be maintained between the edge of the travel lane and any tree planting. The property owner shall bond for maintenance of the plant materials as required by Caltrans. Conceptual renderings of freeway planting guidelines are shown in Figure EC-11. 50 1- w\.lt#!"~ o.I_~ 1 ~'51 . I t 11~ ~\1 l..--,",",," '10 fM'1\I,..1" ""lIT' 'I1lo"f'l\<.we. u..-=>~ ~ ~ ~<<.~'l':!1 ~ .AI1l>l~r1'f "'f'0. f"/"'" -""f'!""''' 1'l~~~f\.I'f. FREEWAY EDGE SECTION 1l>oII1~"'_ &"''0:<. ....~~- :;-.~ IIPC ~ ....:_.....~- _.-I....._roj ....., ....... ........-.1- ......--->. ~;;r~~"='- -. ... _.:t:= b.tl- rl~. . .-... ........ """'""..p........... FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAN VIEW Figure EC.11 RCC:JS # 08122101 51 (I) Pedestrian Circulation and Open Space (1) Sidewalks shall be required on all public streets within the planning area. Sidewalks shall be constructed of concrete, with a minimum clear width of five (5) feet. Any sidewalk constructed adjacent to curb shall be a minimum of six (6) feet wide. Any sidewalk constructed within two and one half (21/2) feet of back of curb shall join to back of curb. Sidewalk shall be three (3) feet away from curb face except at curb returns and bus stops. (2) Additional sidewalks may be required during the design review stage of development processing. The following design standards shall apply in the determination of sidewalk locations: (A) The sidewalk system shall provide for a safe, continuous pedestrian circulation and access system to all parts of the development. Pedestrian access shall be provided from public streets and parking lots to building entries, and walkways provided on-site shall connect with those off-site. (B) The sidewalk system shall connect to pedestrian trails through the open-space areas. (3) The following standards shall apply to meandering sidewalks: (A) Radii for curved sidewalk shall be between 200 and 600 feet. (B) All radii shall be staggered. (4) (5) (6) RCC:JS # 08/22/01 (C) Maximum sidewalk grade shall not exceed 8.33% regardless of street grade. Curb cuts for handicapped access shall be provided on all roadways as required by State law. Bus turnouts and bus shelters may be required during the design- review stage of development processing. These facilities shall be designed to maximize security features and shall be located in proximity to both traffic signals and pedestrian crosswalks, so as to provide for ease of ingress for buses and ease of access for pedestrians. Bus stops shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet in length. Building configuration and placement shall provide for pedestrian courtyards, plazas, or open spaces between and/or adjacent to buildings. 52 .' RCC:JS # 08122/01 (7) The design of pedestrian plazas or courtyards shall provide shaded seating areas with attractive landscaping and should include water features, public art, kiosks, and covered walkways. (8) Benches, light standards, trash receptacles, and other street fumiture shall be provided in an attractive and comfortable setting and shall be designed to enhance the appearance and function of a site and open space areas. (m) Trails System (1) There is an opportunity in the East Valley Corridor to establish a trail system which will link up with regional trail systems to provide for both an energy efficient altemative to the automobile, and for recreational use within the planning area. (2) Figure EC-12 illustrates the trail system proposed for the planning area. The proposed facilities include: (A) Commuter bikeways which are parallel to major roads and provide the most direct route for the work trip. (B) Recreational pedestrian paths and bikeways which mayor may not be adjacent to a roadway, are generally located in open space or landscaped areas and serve to provide the local pedestrian and bicycle circulation network. (3) There shall be two classes of bikeways in the East Valley Corridor: (A) Class I Bikeway (Bike Paths) - are facilities with exclusive rights-of-way, separated from other vehicular rights-of-way, with cross flows by motorists minimized, serving the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. 53 ~ ~ ......:;j Q., c...:, - :w.... :- c...:, ~ Q." Cr.l :s w I- en >- en ~. = e:: < C> :: c...:, e:: C> '='l - >- ~ ......:;j ......:;j ~ =- e- Cr.l ~ ~ RCC:JS # 08/22101 .... .. .-:-. - - - /~ ~ --" I c - - - .. :. c 0: .. C .. .. o .. o 0: II. .. ::! c 0: .. C .. .. o II. o 0: .. 0: o " z ;:: on ;:( .. o .. .. z :; : ..:.. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - :! I .. - ... . ::lii . rot :... !.. ;0. : ~1r1l~1 '. , - - . . : .. .- ... 1 I c I ... ..,. . .- I' ~I II <;1 54 ..~.. .. . ~ \ 'l~ ~ \ . . .c c - . . - . :: - . .. Z--..- '0. B';: . .. . .... .:.. 'a . .- >0 t: :::f .. 0 -- . . = I . - . . . I . . ~ U'D .. .. -=:!! ... - E . :. c '; II-E .- .... . Do _.~ . . . . . . ...- .:I~ '; . D --- ..-. E : E :1;.. . c . . . ~~- ~;~ Ii:!- I Q r-. ;R ~ "- . -~. .":.1' .... ~~. ~ - \~~L . I ! ~ * I I .,. n 'l - . . . u - c . c . E .. . . . . o.-! . . . . . ~ E ..... ii ~ .. ... ~ ... . . ;: - . . . . . ..... - . : .. ... .c ..= . . . ... I . '0 :; ..c - . .c ..... - c . . ... . . .. _.5 .c .. . :; . E I - - . . !! u .~~= - ..., : -~ N - o w w a: :::l o i:i: -:. ..... . . . . ~ , ~ '1'" f- I' 'f/ IN~ O:llflY)- . . . . -..:..- . .. . . . ... :ii - . . . u ... . . c !! . - . . ... . .. c . ;: - . . " .. . I - - - I (B) Class II Bikeway (Bike Paths) - are bicycle lanes for preferential use by bicycles established within the paved area of highways and designated by specific lines of demarcation between the areas reserved for bicycles and lanes to be occupied by motor vehicles. (4) The following standards shall apply to Class I Bikeways: (A) Bicycle paths shall be two-way routes. (B) The minimum paved width for a two-way bike path shall be 8 feet. A minimum 2-foot wide graded area shall be provided adjacent to the pavement. (See Figure ~EC-13) (C) A minimum 2-foot horizontal clearance to obstructions shall be prOVided adjacent to the pavement. (D) The vertical clearance to obstructions across the clear width of the path shall be a minimum of 8 feet. (E) Bike paths closer than 5 feet from the edge of a highway shall include a physical divider such as fencing, berms, trees or shrubbery to prevent bicyclists from encroaching onto the highway. (5) The following standards shall apply to Class II Bikeways: (A) Bike lanes shall be one-way facilities. (B) Where required, bike lanes shall occupy the emergency parking lane along major arterials, major highways and secondary highways, with widths of 8 to 10 feet. Painted demarcation lines shall define, the bicycle lane, with appropriate freestanding and pavement signs. (See street cross-sections under transportation standards.) (6) Bikeways shall be constructed in accordance with the Califomia Highway Design Manual, Bikeway Planning and Design. (7) Drainage inlet grates, manhole covers, driveways, etc., on bikeways should be designed and installed in a manner that provides an adequate surface for bicyclists. RCC:JS # 08/22101 55 TWO-WAY BIKE PATH ON SEPARATED RIGHT-OF-WAY r f;\. r-;-.,.~ ''':-':' ~ . .. ;, eo ... ......'-::;'::. ~''i'':'.,",,-- ~ "(":-., . .......: r "C." :..,':l .",":.,~: T~j ~'T.\ / ) '( e'(Minl -~h " , --- ~. . .j ':2'('Mi~.I' \,'/, :, ':', ." '~i '~i~,'~id;h . :,~ '.. :',' . ,'.l"2'Ulli~:l:' h.':,'<" . ' :', . . " Graded, Paved " " .' Graded . . , . . . . '.. ..:.... '.. .' .'. .... . .. TYPICAL CROSS SECTION BIKE PATH ALONG HIGHWAY . _ . ., .~~i~hwov "g..f ,~;m"IYi ~2' Graded ArealMinL\ I . \ e'(MinJ, \ -" ,,2%_ I_I 5' (Min.l I. Bike Path Two-Way: e' Minimum Widlh Figure EC.13 RCC:JS # 08122101 56 , (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) Uniform signs, markings. and traffic control devices are mandatory and shall conform to the requirements of State law. Pedestrian and bicycle pathways which are not associated with roadways shall be located to take advantage of attractive natural drainage areas whenever possible; landscaping and lighting shall be provided to create an attractive environment in the area of pedestrian and bike pathways to encourage their use. All bike and pedestrian pathways shall have adequate lighting and signing to provide for the safety of the users. At-grade trail crossings shall be provided for at signalized intersections wherever possible. Bike storage facilities shall be provided in commercial and mixed use areas. (n) Parks and Open Space The specific demand on location of parks and open space can not be determined until the land uses established within the ip9~iJIPlanned Development District have been determined. Implementation of park and open space provision. construction and maintenance shall be determined by the County sf SiR ismirlliRs. tRs <'i~' gf RgllliRdG SRg tRIl Cit:: gf I..gma b.iRgs through implementation of ordinances and procedures sgg~tllll b~' IlSSR S!lSR~Y. 86.030630 Site Design Standards and Guidelines. (a) Parking Requirements (1) Adequate parking requirements and standards shall be provided on-site for each use within the Planning Area in accordance with the requirements contained in Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. (2) Parking structures shall be permitted within the plan area; exterior design shall be architecturally compatible with main building. Parking structure should merge with or extend from main building rather than be an isolated structure. Autos should be screened to a height of 3'6" to 4' on each level, and the space remaining above the screening element, up to the ceiling of the next floor, shall remain open and unobstructed. Facades should be multi-textured or have other architectural relief. (b) Loading Areas RCC:JS # 08/22101 57 (1) All hospitals, institutions, hotels, commercial and industrial uses shall provide' loading spaces not less than ten (10) feet in width, twenty (20) feet in length and fourteen (14) feet in height as follows: Square Feet of Building Space (Gross Floor Area) Loading Spaces Required Commercial Buildings 3,000 - 15,000 15,001 - 45,000 45,001 - 75,000 75,001 - 105,000 105,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Industrial Buildings 3,500 - 40,000 40,001 - 80,OJO 80,001 - 120,000 120,001 - 160,000 160,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Hospitals and Instituitions 3,000 . 20,000 20,001 . 50,000 50,001 - 80,000 80,001 - 110,000 110,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Hotels and Office Buildings 3,000 . 50,000 50,001. 100,000 100,001 - and over 1 2 3 (2) All loading facilities and maneuvering areas shall be located on-site with the use. (3) Sites shall be designed so that parking areas are separate from loading areas. (4) Adequate space shall be provided for stacking of vehicles waiting to load or unload, out of the public right-of-way and parking areas. (5) Backing of trucks from public right-of-way onto site for loading shall be allowed only at the ends of cul-de-sac streets. RCC:JS # 08122/01 58 RCC:JS # 08/22/01 (6) No loading facilities shall be located at the front of the structure; loading facilities shall be permitted' only in the rear and interior side yard areas. (7) Aisle width to loading docks shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet width exclusive of truck parking area. (8) Loading facilities shall be adequately screened from the public view by use of walling, landscaping or building design. (9) Minimum aisle width adjacent to loading areas shall be sixteen (16) feet one way and twenty-six (26) feet for two way. (10) On structures within view of freeways, loading areas should be oriented away from publiC view from the freeway and from oncoming'traffic along freeways. For example, structures located on the &1I11tR west side of IRtllFi:tatll 10Route 30 should have loading areas located on the ~south side of the building. (11) Loading area shall be designed as an integral part of the building's architecture. (12) Concrete pads shall be required at all loading bays. (c) Site Lighting (1) Lighting shall be required on all new development for the purpose of providing illumination to ensure public safety and security. Lighting fixtures shall be functional, coordinated and visually attractive. Lighting shall be required at the following locations: (2) (A) Pedestrian walkways and plazas. (B) Building entries, driveway entries and parking (C) Hazardous locations, such as changes of grade and stairways, shall be well-lit with lower-level supplemental lighting or additional overhead units. Lights shall be placed so as not to cause glare or excessive light spillage on neighboring sites. (3) All parking lot and driveway lighting shall provide uniform illumination at a minimum level of 0.5 foot candle. (4) All light fixtures are to be concealed source fixtures except for pedestrian-oriented accent lights. 59 (5) Security lighting fixtures are not to'project above the fences or roof line of the building and are to be shielded. The shields shall be painted to match the surface to which they are attached. Security lighting fixtures are not to be substituted for parking lot or walkway lighting fixtures and are restricted to lighting only loading and storage locations, or other similar service areas. (6) Exterior wall-mounted floodlights are expressly prohibited except for security lighting in areas as noted above. (7) All illuminated signs are to be internally illuminated. (8) Lighting of building faces is permitted. (9) The design of all lighting fixtures and their structural support shall be architecturally compatible"with the surrounding buildings. (10) Walkway lighting fixtures shall have an overall height not to exceed twelve (12) feet. (11) Parking lot fixtures shall have an overall height not to exceed thirty (30) feet or the height of adjacent buildings, whichever is less. (12) When walkway lighting is provided primarily by low fixtures, there shall be sufficient peripheral lighting to illuminate the immediate surroundings to ensure public safety. Shatter-proof coverings are recommended on low-level fixtures. (d) Site Utilities (1 ) Utility easements shall be required as needed through the development review process. (2) All existing and new utilities of 12KV or less within the project and along adjacent major arterials shall be installed underground. Where possible, all overhead lines greater than 12KV shall be placed along the rear property line, away from arterial highways. (3) All ground-mounted utility appurtenances, including but not limited to telephone pedestals, utility meters, irrigation system back-flow preventors, and transformers, shall be located behind the building setback line where possible, and shall be adequately screened through the use or combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and landscape materials. RCC:JS # 08122/01 60 I I I, :. RCC:JS # 08/22/01 (e) Compatibility Standards (1) Where a a~ssial Planned Development area abuts a residential district, an orderly transition of uses and building types should be established as follows: (A) There should not be a drastic and abrupt building scale change; the transition from residential to more intensive building types should be gradual, in order to prevent massive structures from dominating and intruding upon neighborhoods. Smaller buildings should be located near the residential area, with the largest buildings farther away. (B) Land uses should transition gradually from residential to more intensive uses. In placing uses within these transitional areas, consideration should be given to traffic generation, truck traffic, hours of operation, noise, light and glare, and other characteristics which might impact adjacent residential neighborhoods. (~) i~s~ial QSRtigsr:atisR 'Hill bg Qi'.(~H~l ts ttxtg I't:ar;:u=lod !;'g"slg~R'lsRt IiR"slg~g imR'lglliatgl~' 'VSllt gf tl:tg gxigtiRS IIiIRStl:t gf KargR itrggt 1l9t>"ggR b.wSIiIRia ^':gRWS aRIl SaR agrRaJ:diRs t'''SRWS iR pr;o"idiRg klr LsIt9t 2Rd gYilgiRQ b,,'pgt ggR:1~atilllg "'itl:t tl:tg gxistiRS siRgls familr ~gGillgRtial r;jg"glg~mgRt tg tl:t9 gast. PlaRRgll r;jg"slgpmgr:tt iR tl:tig a~Ga ma~' iRslwr;jg all IlggG p9m::tittgll witl:1iR tl:tg S!;llliGt~igt gl{Sg~t fGlr tRQh9 ytSS u'itRiR tR9 C,;m(:Rsr:siral IRgYttRal Qil;:tri~t eRg ';;Hil1~' airs iR~lw;g s:iRgls br::RiI~' rStidsRtial Whet tg 9Rhl.U'O R:tAxir::RYr::R sgmp:atibilit~' '.vitA 2 miRimwm diBRlptisR tg tRo gxilltiRil ~QGillgRtial RsiSl:tllgi=Rg9l1, (2) Every use of land or building shall operate in conformity with the following performance standards: (A) Vibrations: Every use shall be so operated that maximum ground vibration generated is not perceptible without instruments at any point in the boundary of the district in which the use is located. (B) Noise: Every use shall be so operated that the maximum volume of sound or noise generated does not exceed sixty- five (65) decibels from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and forty-five (45) decibels from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. in areas which abut residential land uses. Measurement of maximum sound or noise volume can be taken at any point on the lot line of the lot on which the use is located. 61 (C) Odor: Every use shall be s'o operated that no offensive or objectionable odor is perceptible at any point on the boundary of the district in which the use is located. (D) Smoke: Every use shall be so operated that no smoke from any source shall be emitted of a greater density described in No. 2 on the Ringelmann Chart as published by the United States Bureau of Mines. (E) Toxic Gases: Every use shall be so operated that there is no emission of toxic, noxious or corrosive fumes of gases. (F) Emissions: Every use shall be so operated that there is no emission of dirt, dust, fly ash, and other forms of particulate matter. (G) Radiation: Every use shall be so operated that there is no dangerous amount of radioactive emissions. (H) Glare and Heat: Any operation producing intense glare or heat shall be conducted in a manner as to effectively screen the glare from view at any point on the lot line of the lot in which the use is located and to dissipate the heat so that it is not perceptible without instruments at any point on the lot line ofthe lot on which the use is located. (I) Hazardous Materials: Every use shall be consistent with the provisions of the San Bemardino County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. (~) 'ft{!;tsrg t>lgigRbgmgg;l C"gr:RR=lgr~iAI or .~.&fmiRittr;:ati"g' PrgfgtrioR21 gittr:i~tr gr \sit;, abLdt r9tigSRti:a1 di19tFidt or rSrigSRtial pSrxtiQRt gf PI;lRRS;I OS";lgPI'RSRtt, tstsaskt aR;I slIff;riRe tR811 SS sst;lslisRS;l 8S ~lIg'l's: (^) ^ djas9Rt tg r9tiggRtial p:3~91' (I) ~Ig g\,lil;liRg pJ;Qpg;:;;1 ~r RsigRSIlr:RIlIl;! (;;gmI'RS~Gi;l1 gr prgfsssillR81 11m,,; \,IS; GRail 99 (;;IlRStfY"tg;! Isss tRaR ~~' (10) ~st frlll'R aR~' ;l;ljlliRiRg prgps~' rS(;;gl'Rl'RsR;!S;! fgr r8si;!sRti;l1 laR;! IIts iR tAg ips(;;iflQ. I?laR sr I?I;lRRg;! g8':;lgpI'R8Rt. (II) ^ QgRtiRWQ1.It uiGu:31 tSrg9J;1 ;f ~ miRimYr:R uJidtR ;f tSR (10) ~8t SR;lIl gg l'RaiRtaiRs;! aQja"8Rt tll all iRt8RIlr RCC:JS # 08122/01 62 Il~GIlIlJ:t~' IiRllt "'l:1isl:l agwt rll;igllRtial Illt& \lsr9llRiRg m:a~' bs (iH,suidgd g~;FRgaRC sf fGR6:9t. d9,sr:ati"g m:aCQRrr u':allt, b9r:mC, ~l:taR8gQ iR glgu:atisR, 2Rd'gr pI:aRt m:atgR:alc 'MR9F9 (:IzsfSR E:~rggRiRB Rat bSSR Il.g.:iglid IlR tl:1ll rll&ililllRtial tililll IIf tl:1ll Ilr:gllll~' liRIi, tRit rsqlzsfirgmgRt miS~' ;; ~9dlzsf~gd Sf tHai";; br tR9 ~9"i9WiR8 ;g9R~Y. (i) ^.9j:a~9Rt ts rgt:idgRti21 ctrsgt" iwilgiR8t tl:1all gll at Illa.t fQJ:ty (4Q) fgllt fr,Qm tRIl wltiF;latg ~igl:1t gf '^,a~' IiRIl alllR8 aR~' &trllllt agwttiRg a rlltigllRtial arlla, 'Nitl:l tl:1ll IlXSlllltillR tl:1at &trwQtllrll; IIf 19;& tl:1aR WJIlRt~' (20) fgst iR I:1lligl:1t ma~' IlRSrgasl:1 iRtll tl:1li rS'lIJir:g1il tlltl1agk a~Qa RQ msna tR2R fift9SR (15) fast aRg m;~' ~g'.'gr RS mgrg tR3R fi~: (;Q) IlIl~GIlRt IIf tl:1ll rll'lUirlllil c9tt;r;agk arlla. (43) Where General Commercial or Industrial uses or districts abut residential districts or residential portions of Planned Developments, setbacks and buffering shall be established as follows: (A) Adjacent to residential parcel: No building proposed for commerciallindustrial use shall be constructed less than forty (40) feet from any adjoining property recommended for residential land use in or contiguous to the allllsifis PlaRPlanning Area or Planned Development. (B) Adjacent to residential street: Buildings shall be at least forty (40) feet from the ultimate right-of-way line along any street abutting a residential area, with the exception that structures of less than twenty (20) feet in height may encroach into the required setback area no more than fifteen (15) feet and may cover no more than fifty (50) percent of the required setback area. No building shall be constructed to a height greater than its distance from any adjoining property recommended for residential land use ~in or contiguous to the illll&ifi; ~Planning Area or Planned Development, unless the reviewing agency finds that approval of a waiver of this requirement will not adversely affect adjacent property. In no case shall industrial or commercial structures be so tall as to block natural sunlight from adjacent residential yards. (C) RCC:JS # 08/22101 63 (0) A landscaped area not less than thirty-five (35) feet in width shall be provided between a commercial or industrial structure- and a residential district. Within this landscaped area a continuous ':isual screen of a minimum width of ten (10) feet shall be maintained adjacent to all interior property lines which abut residential lots. Screening may be provided by means of fences, decorative masonry walls, berms, changes in elevation, and/or plant materials. Where such screening has been provided on the residential side of the property line, this requirement may be reduced or waived by the reviewing agency. (5) '^.'R9rg i~isRS9 RgI;:9~1r~R P:ar,k YG9t ASYt rSrigSRtiAI gihtR~tr:1 Gstba>:k" aRd bl.lffg~iR3 "Rall bssctabliliRsd ali tGlIg''JIii: (^) ^~j2lS9Rt ts rstidsRti:a1 pArsel' ~Ig bl.lildiRg FlrgFlSlii9d fsr bl.lliiiRsliilii'iRdu"tJ:ial tHiS "Rall bs (OSR"tr1.lliitsd 19ce tRaR flft~. (50) tGst f.rgl'1'l aR~' adjgiRiRs FlrsFl9~' rSliisl'1'll'1'lsRdsd tGr ~gcidsRtiallaRd 1.Iliig (i) .^9jAs9Rt t9 rstigSRtiAI ttr;g9t: i1.lildiR:!l. eRall PS at Isa.t flft'; (5Q) fsst f.rgl'1'l tRS 1.IItil'1'lats rigRt sf Ul:a~' liRa AIsR9 aR~' :ab1JttiRi a ratigSRti:al :araa. (C) ~Is PllildiR9 gr .tr:ui:turs tRail sX;9sd t>NSRt~' fj"s (45) Mist iR RsigRt, al: I'1'lsaliillrsd fl';Q1'1'l tQFl gf suJ:!.?, Ig;atsd "JitRiR SRS RWRdrsd (150) tGst sf a ~gliiil:lsRtiall~' dssi8RatQd arsa. gr tl:1iJ:t:,' fl"1i (~5) tGst iR Rsi91:1t if Ig;atsd I'1'lgrg tRaR SRg RIdRdrsd aRd fI~: (150) tGst bwt ISIl" lAaR tRrsli R1.IRdrgd (~OO) tGst f.rSI'1'l a rgcillsRtiall~' dSIli9Ratsd 4rsa. (Q) .^ laRGitS2p9g 2r92 Rst )9tl;: fRiaR tl:liro,,' t:i"g ('15) fQgt iR '\'idtl:t t~2" b9 prg'.~iggd ~9t'''99R :aR~' ttRd~loU9 iaR&f A rGatidgRti:a1 di~trist. '^'ittxliR tAit 'iiSlR&h;;s:apgg aJ:Q:a ill sSRtiRYQLslt "it1.J:a1 tSrggR sf :a miRimwm "'idtR gf taR (1Q) fast CR:;III ;g r::RraiRt~iR9d adj46:SRt ts 211 iRtsr:isr P~li1sr:t'./ liR9[ 'H~id::t abwt r9~idgRtiAl 12t~ ~6:r99RiRg ma~' gO FH'S"idg;l b~' mg:3Rt gf fORget, gss:grLlti'.'s FR2tQRT'j' "':aU&;1 bSr;;Rt, tR2Rg9g iR 9IS"2tigR, 2Rdtgr plaRt r::R2tsR2It. 'A'RSr:g El.ltR t~rggRiRg RLI&: bliSR pFIl"idgQ SR tR61 FIll:idsRtial Gids IIf tRII Flr:QFlSRy IiRS, tRi1~ n~qYirgR=l9Rt ma~' be r;gdytsg or \\'2i'.'sd b~' tR9 rg"js,a:iRg ASSR~~'. (M) Outdoor storage areas, loading areas or refuse collection facilities shall be located no less than sixty (60) feet from any adjoining property zoned or used for residential land uses. Any materials RCC:JS # 08/22/01 64 ~ I I I RCC:JS # 08/22101 stored adjacent to residential areas shall be totally screened by the wall or landscape screen provided.' (i5) Additional landscaping, block walls, or increased setbacks may be required through the development review process to ensure land use compatibility. (~) An acoustical analysis shall be required for new single or multiple family residential development proposed adjacent to freeways, highways, arterials, rail lines, and under flight paths. The analysis shall indicate the existing and proposed CNEL's (Community Noise Equivalency Levels) on the site, and the method(s) by which the noise is to be controlled or reduced to no more than 65 dB within the exterior living space, and 45 dB within the interior living space of the project. (f) Refuse Areas (1) All waste materials shall be stored in an enclosed area and shall be accessible to service vehicles. Wastes which might cause fumes or dust, or which constitute a fire hazard, or which may be edible by, or otherwise be attractive to, rodents or insects shall be stored only in closed containers in required enclosures. (2) A six (6) foot high masonry wall shall be constructed around all refuse collection areas. Trash enclosures shall have solid wood or metal doors. (3) Refuse collection areas shall not be constructed between the frontage street and the building line, or adjacent to or visible from freeways. (g) Screening, Fences and Walls (1 ) All loading areas, mechanical equipment, outside storage, refuse areas, or other uses as determined by the reviewing agency shall be screened if located within seventy (70) feet of a front property line. (2) Any fence or wall that is constructed on a lot that contains an on- site slope shall be constructed at the top ofthe uphill side of such a slope. No fence or wall and no landscaping which obstructs visibility shall be permitted within the comer cut-off areas defined in Section 86.03063(i). (3) 65 RCC:JS # 08122101 (4) (5) (6) (7) A six (6) foot high fence or wall shall be constructed along the perimeter of all areas considered :by the reviewing agency to be dangerous to public health and safety. A six (6) foot high solid fence or wall shall be constructed around all open storage areas. Open fences not to exceed four (4) feet in height shall be permitted within a required front yard area. For purposes of this section an open fence shall mean those types that are composed of wire mesh or wrought iron capable of admitting at least 90 percent of light. Solid fences and walls not to exceed six (6) feet in height shall be permitted a!9ng side and rear property lines except that no solid fence or wall exceeding three (3) feet in height shall be located within any required front yard area. Open fences as defined in f'Jariileriillll:1 (9) gf tl:1ii: GIH:tililRsubsection (5) above that are over six (6) feet in height may be located in the rear half of the lot subject to a finding by the reviewing agency that such a fence will not constitute a nuisance to abutting property owners. Such fences up to sixteen (16) feet in height located within the buildable rear yard area of a lot and not less than ten (10) feet from any property line are exempt from the requirement. (8) All required screening from public view within the Industrial and Commercial Land Use designations or such uses within a Planned Development, such as storage spaces, loading docks, and equipment, shall be architecturally integrated with the surrounding building design through the use of concrete, masonry, or other similar materials. Solid walls within the buildable lot area shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet from the highest finished grade. If the height of the wall is not sufficient, appropriate landscaping shall be required to screen the required areas from the freeway. (9) Fencing up to a height of six (6) feet may be permitted within any streetside setback area when there is a demonstrated need for security as determined by the reviewing agency. All security fences which are within the streetside setback shall be constructed of wrought iron or similar materials with respect to quality and durability, shall transmit 90% light, and shall not obstruct views of landscaping. No cr in link or barbed wire is allowed. Security fencing shall not ceate a sight distance problem for motorists entering or exiting tne site. (h) Architectural Guidelines (1 ) Floor Area Ratios provide unique design flexibility in determining whether a low building covering most of a lot is beneficial or 66 whether a taller building covering a small portion of the lot is appropriate. Maximum Floor Area' Ratios (FAR) for any use within the Sl'lg;ifl~ PlaRPlanning Area area shall be established as follows: (NOTE: Floor Area Ratio is determined by dividing total gross leasable area in square feet by total lot area in square feet. For example, a 20,000 square foot building on a 40,000 square foot lot yields a Floor Area Ratio of .5). (A) Office buildings: .6 of the total lot area. (B) Retail/Commercial buildings: .25 of the total lot area. (C) Regional mall: .4 of the total lot area. (0) Industrial buildings: .8 of the total lot area. (2) Floor Area Ratio Bonuses The maximum floor area ratio may be increased as shown below. The total bonus shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the permitted FAR. For example, an office building with a permitted FAR of .6 may be increased in floor area to a maximum FAR of .9 if several of the following amenities are provided. The permitted FAR bonus shall be determined by the reviewing jurisdiction, based upon its determination of the significance of amenities provided on the site. (A) Buildings providing structured parking: Bonus not to exceed twenty (20%) percent FAR. (B) Buildings providing amenity areas such as pedestrian arcades or plazas with significant visual features: Bonus not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the permitted FAR. Any amenity area for which a bonus is granted must comply with the following criteria: (I) The area must be in addition to that necessary to meet landscaping, park and setback requirements. (II) Minimum size: The area must contain a minimum of 4,000 square feet. (III) Location: All amenity areas must be adjacent to, and approximately level with, a public street. The difference in grade between the amenity area and the street shall not be more than three (3) feet although this requirement is not intended to prevent; mounding or terracing of landscaping within the amenity area. RCC:JS # 08/22/01 67 (IV) Visibility: The interior of the amenity area shall be visible from the street for security purposes. (V) Seating: One linear foot of bench or seating shall be provided for every 40 square foot of amenity area. Seating may be in the form of ledges. (VI) Sunlight pattems: The amenity area shall be able to receive direct sunlight on at least 30% of the surface area from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. between the spring and fall equinox. (VII) Design and landscaping: At least one major element, such as artwork or water, shall be included in the amenity area. The dominant landscape elements shall be trees and turf. The amount of impervious surface should not exceed 40% of the amenity area unless unique design considerations are offered. Where artwork is used, minimum cost of public art shall be one (1 %) percent of the overall cost of the project as stated on the building permit. (C) Additional landscaping, lakes, golf course or other open space amenities: Bonus not to exceed twenty (20) percent of the permitted FAR. (D) Transportation management plan, including car and van pooling, flexible work scheduling, etc.: Bonus not to exceed fifteen (15) percent ofthe permitted FAR. (E) Supportive uses within office and industrial buildings which provide services to employees, such as cafeterias, lounges, recreational areas, or child care facilit!2s, may be determined to be exempt from maximum floor area ratio requirements. Determination of whether a proposed use qualifies for this exemption shall be made by the reviewing agency. This exemption may be granted only if the property owner enters into an agreement with the agency ensuring that such area remains in the exempt use. (3) The following gUidelines shall apply to site design: (A) Developments should be designed to maximize any existing views of mountain ranges, open space, palm rows, or other view amenities. RCC:JS # 08/22101 68 (B) Building placement should vary to include both parallel and skewed angles to the street plane in order to provide diversity and discourage continuous building facades along street frontage. (4) The following guidelines shall apply to building design: (A) Building construction and design shall be used to create a structure with equally attractive sides of high quality, rather than placing all emphasis on the front elevation of the structure. Architectural facade treatments will be required on all portions of the building(s) exposed to public views. Extra treatment may be given to the street frontages as long as the basic facade treatments are carried around the structure. (B) Any accessory buildings and enclosures, whether attached to or detached from the main building, shall be of similar compatible design and materials as the main building. (C) Large, continuous surface treatments of a single material shall be minimized. Changes in texture, relief or materials, and use of decorative features such as planters, varied roof lines, decorative windows and accent panel treatment should be encouraged. (D) Pre-engineered metal buildings with corrugated exteriors are prohibited and other predominantly painted metal facade treatments are strongly discouraged. (5) Multiple Residential Site Design Guidelines (A) (B) (C) (D) RCC:JS # 08122101 Buildings shall be designed in discrete units, not in one massive structure, with a non-linear facade along the street frontage. Sloping roofs of varying heights are encouraged. Site design shall include covered, internal parking areas, internal courtyards, and multiple entry points. Design elements shall include providing extensive open space and landscape buffering between buildings; variation in building elevations and configurations between buildings and variations in building heights; use of different building materials or combinations of different materials; and contrasting color schemes between projects. 69 (E) Recreational facilities shall be located and/or designed so as not to create nuisance to 'surrounding units or to impact adjacent properties. Sufficient setbacks, landscaping and berming between recreation facilities and surrounding units shall be provided to minimize noise and visual conflicts. (F) Roofing materials shall be concrete, tile or other imitation shake material. (6) Rooftop Treatment (A) Buildings shall be designed so that the architecture of the building adequately screens rooftop equipment from taller surrounding structures as well as residential uses by use of rooftop wells, parapet walls, or other means. Where possible, ground-mounted equipment shall be used in lieu of roof-mounted equipment. (B) All roof mounted equipment, including but not limited to ducts, fans and vents, must be painted to match the roof color. (C) Rooftop solar collectors, skylights and other potentially reflective elements shall be designed and installed so as to prevent glare and obstruction of views from surrounding uses and structures. If equipment projects above building mass, it shall be screened with an enclosure which is compatible with the building design. (0) Rooftop radio, TV and microwave antennae and towers are prohibited unless approved by the Planning Commission. (E) Where large, flat rooftops are located near taller surrounding structures, they shall be designed and landscaped to be visually attractive. The use of colored gravel (earthtones, arranged in pattems) and/or planter boxes is encouraged for this purpose. (i) Landscaping Guidelines Landscaping is of primary importance to the establishment of the design character of the East Valley Corridor. The landscape guidelines are intended to promote the establishment of compatible and continuous landscape development to enhance and unify the East Valley Corridor. Specifically, the guidelines are intended to enhance and preserve the existing site character, to minimize the adverse visual and environmental impacts of large buildings and paved areas, to promote the conservation RCC:JS # 08122101 70 of water, and to provide micro-climate control for energy conservation where possible. ' (1 ) (2) (3) RCC:JS # 08/22/01 The Landscape Plan required for submission by the applicant should exhibit a design concept. Plant materials should be used in a logical, orderly manner, helping to define spaces and complement adjacent architecture. Landscape designs should be coordinated between the areas of a development. However, all areas within a project need not be identical. Different landscape themes may be utilized in larger developments to distinguish spaces from one another, yet these themes should be consistent with a unifying concept which establishes a cohesive design throughout the project. In addition to the selection and distribution of plant materials, landscape plans should incorporate various site furnishings and features. Lighting, seating, paving, fountains, etc., should be considered integral components of the landscape plan and therefore included in the overall landscape concept. (4) The scale and character of the landscape materials to be selected should be appropriate to the site and/or architecture. Large-scale buildings or projects require large-scale landscaping treatments. Existing landscaping elements, such as mature trees, should be incorporated into landscape plans. Specimen trees or groupings of existing trees can provide a new development with immediate character. They should be viewed as design determinants. (5) (6) Landscaping incorporated into the building design through trellises, arbors, planters, atriums, etc., is encouraged and can often enhance the quality of a building. The plant palette should be relatively limited and applied in groupings of similar species rather than a few plants of many different species planted together. The use of water conserving plantings, such as California natives and drought tolerant trees, shrubs and turfs is encouraged. A list of suggested drought resistant plant materials is included in Table EC-3. Live plant materials should be used in all landscaped areas. The use of gravel, colored rock, bark and other similar materials are not acceptable as a sole ground cover material. (These materials may be used, however, in place of paving materials in functional activity areas such as patios or rear entry walks, or as groundcover for up to twenty percent (20%) of the total landscaped area). (7) (8) 71 (9) New plant materials should be sJpplied in a variety of container sizes: for shrubs - five gallon sizes, and for trees - fifteen gallon containers, are preferred. The use of larger specimen trees is encouraged. (10) Irrigation is required for all landscaped areas. Automatic systems are required. Plants should be watered and maintained on a regular basis. Irrigation systems should be designed so as not to overspray walks, buildings. fences, etc. The use of water conserving systems such as drip irrigation or moisture sensors for shrubs and tree planting is encouraged. (11) Landscape installation, in accordance with the approved plan. must occur prior to building occupancy. Where a development occurs in phases, all landscaping for each phase must be installed prior to occupancy of that phase. Gl Outdoor Sales All uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building, except as follows: (1) Off-street parking and loading areas; (2) Automobile service station; (3) New and used auto sales; (4) Plants and vegetation associated with nurseries; (5) Open storage of materials and products and equipment when such storage is enclosed by a fence; wall, building or other means adequate to conceal such storage from view from adjoining property or the public street; (6) Restaurant - Outdoor dining area (k) Landscape Requirements for Parking Area (1 ) The following standards shall apply to parking areas adjacent to roadways or exposed to publiC view from freeways. roadways or adjacent parcels: RCC:JS # 08/22101 72 RCC:JS # 08122101 (A) Landscaped berms, or a combination of berms, landscaping and/or wall treatments of .sufficient height to substantially screen parking areas, shall be provided between parking area and right-of-way. (8) All double row parking spaces shall be separated by a five (5) foot wide planter or by planter boxes. Planters shall be enclosed by a six (6) inch continuous poured in place concrete curb. (C) Trees with a trunk height of not less than six (6) feet shall be installed in the planters at each end of an aisle, at three (3) space intervals throughout the lot, and at twenty (20) foot intervals along the periphery of the lot. Within parking lot areas, trees may be clustered in groups to achieve a more natural setting provided the total number meets the previous planting requirements. (D) At least fifty percent (50%) of the trees shall be an evergreen variety and shall be evenly distributed throughout the lot. (E) Planter areas shall also contain ground cover and/or flowering shrubs. Drought tolerant planting is encouraged. (F) Where automobile bumpers overhang landscaped planters, two (2) feet of clear area unobstructed by trees or shrubs shall be provided for overhang. (G) In large parking lots, parking areas shall be broken up into sections containing no more than 200 vehicles, with landscaped buffer areas at least eight (8) feet in width established between sections. (H) A landscaped island shall be provided for every twenty (20) parking spaces. (2) (I) Landscaped islands, planters and peripheral landscaping together shall total at least seven (7) percent of the total parking lot area. Where parking areas are located adjacent to residential districts, they shall be separated therefrom by a decorative solid masonry wall six (6) feet in height, provided said wall shall not exceed three (3) feet in height where it is in the front yard area of an abutting residential use or district. 73 (3) Where parking areas are completely screened from public view by building placement or a combination of walling and landscaped buffers, landscaping requirements within the parking lot may be reduced at the discretion of the reviewing agency. (4) Pedestrian walkways shall be provided within parking lots to destination points. (5) When a unified landscape plan is proposed for a project site in excess of ten (10) acres, that complies with the requirements of Section 86.030630(1) the project site may be exempt from the requirements of Section 86.030630(e)(1) at the discretion of the reviewing agency. (I) Other Site Landscaping Provisions (1) A minimum portion of the site shall be landscaped. No landscaped area having a width of less than five (5') feet shall be considered in the minimum landscaping requirement. This minimum landscaping requirement will be established as follows: Industrial uses 15% Commercial uses 20% ~gi9RS9 Rg~g4~SI:l Park Qi~trir;:t I IteE: 2Q~/! Residential uses 35% (2) In addition to required landscaping, landscaping may be provided in lieu of ten (10%) percent of the total number of parking spaces required, provided the landscaping is arranged such that parking may be installed at a later date if such a demand arises. and further provided, that the owner agrees to provide such parking at the request of the reviewing agency. (3) Variation of landscape coverage may be permitted for individual parcels within planned developments when the development as a whole meets the required coverage and the plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the ipssifls PlaRPlanning Area. (4) The goals and policies of the ipssifis PlaRPlanning Area provide for the creation of significant landscaped open space areas at the entry and exit points of the East Valley Corridor. The following requirements are intended to meet these objectives: (A) Special open space edge treatments shall be provided along lRtgrtt2ts 1 Q 'fr,Qm ~1Q\sIRt3iR '.'isu, .^"9RW9 tg C2lifQmi~ l;trsgt. aRg alllRS State Route 30 from the Santa Ana River to San Bemardino Avenue. RCC:JS # 08/22/01 74 RCC:JS # 08/22101 (B) The open space edge.. treatments shall incorporate landscaping and associated design elements for areas visible from the freeway. These elements may include open lawn areas, canopy trees within parking areas, lakes, fountains, open stages and amphitheaters, art in pUblic places, citrus groves, and similar open space areas. (C) A building setback of 100-feet shall be maintained from the freeway right-of-way line within these special open space edge treatment areas, unless the reviewing authority finds that such a setback would severely constrain the reasonable use of a parcel due to its configuration or location, in which case alternative open space treatments may be determined appropriate. (0) In creating this open space edge treatment, credit may be given towards, the minimum percent of landscaping required within the development, as speCified in (s) IIf tl:lie aic;tiQR subsection (1) above. (5) The landscaped area requirement may be reduced by a maximum of five (5) percentage points where public art is to be displayed in a setting which enhances pedestrian spaces and building architecture. Minimum cost of public art shall be one (1%) percent of the overall cost of the project as stated on the building permit. (m) Planting Guidelines (1) Parkways (A) General Provisions (I) Existing parkways in the public right-of-way should be preserved and maintained. In areas where they are absent, a parkway (six to eight feet) should be established adjacent to the street curb. (II) In addition to required street trees, all parkways should be planted with a low growing turf grass or ground cover which shall be maintained regularly so as not to impede pedestrian movement across it. (III) Existing mature street trees in the parkways should be protected and maintained. 75 (8) Street Trees (I) Required street trees on Special Landscaped Streets are to be consistent throughout the planning area. Existing parkway trees, other than the designated street tree, should be replaced over time with the designated street tree. For landscape concepts and required planting materials, on Special Landscaped Streets, see Section 86.030625(g). (II) Required street trees shall exhibit longevity, cleanliness, disease and insect resistance, and adaptability to local soils and climate. Suggested street trees are listed in Table EC-1. (III) Street trees shall be planted not less than: - 25 feet back of beginning of curb returns at intersections. - 10 feetfrom lamp standards. 10 feet from fire hydrants. 10 feet from meters. - 10 feet from underground utilities. (IV) Street trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1" trunk diameter measured 12" above the base and minimum container size of fifteen (15) gallon. Palm trees shall have a minimum brown trunk height of ten (10) feet. (V) Street trees in residential areas shall be planted as follows: (i) Lot/unit on cul-de-sac - 1 tree per street frontage. (ii) Interior lot/unit - 2 trees per street frontage. (Hi) Comer lot/unit - 1 tree per 30 feet of street frontage or portion thereof. (VI) In commercial and industrial areas, street trees shall be planted at the equivalent of one (1) tree per thirty (30') feet of frontage. (C) Palm Tree Planting and Maintenance Guidelines RCC:JS # 08/22101 76 " The following guidelines are provided to assist in new planting and transplanting of large palm trees in the planning area, including Washingtonia robusta (Mexican fan palm) and Washingtonia tilifera (Califomia fan palm). (I) Care should be taken in excavating, planting, or working near existing utilities or irrigation systems. Developer should check existing utility drawings and as-built plans for existing utility and irrigation locations. (II) New palms to be planted in the area should be grown under climatic conditions similar to the East Valley Corridor area. All palms selected for planting should be inspected for health, vigor, and overall form. (III) Planting of palms should not begin until May 1 nor after October 1. (IV) Defronding and Tying: (i) In preparing palm trees for relocation, all dead fronds should be removed and the entire trunk skinned clean to the height of the green fronds. Care should be taken to prevent injury to the trunk of the tree. Green fronds below a horizontal position shall be neatly cut off, leaving a 4" stub. (Ii) All remaining fronds above horizontal should be lifted up and tied together in two locations around the crown in an upright position. Due caution should be taken not to bind or injure the crown. A lightweight cotton rope or cord, not less than 1/4" diameter, should be used in tying up the fronds; wire should not be used. After tying, the tips of the fronds should be 'hedged-off' above the crown approximately 1/4 to 112 of the frond length. Defronding and tying work should be completed prior to digging the rootball. (V) Digging the Rootball: (i) When digging out the rootball, no excavation should be done closer than 24" to the trunk at ground level and the excavation should extend RCC:JS # 08/22101 77 below the major root system to a minimum depth of six (6') feet. The bottom of the rootball should be cut off square and perpendicular to the trunk below the major root system. Under no conditions should the contractor cut down the size of the rootball in width or depth. (ii) Care should be taken not to free-fall, drag, roll or abuse the tree or put a strain on the crown at any time. A protective device should be used around the trunk of the tree while lifting and relocating so as not to scar or skin the trunk in any way. This device should consist of either a rubber or leather sling made out of timbers sufficiently sized to withstand the cable/choker pressure. At no time should trees be balled out and laid on the ground with rootball left exposed to direct sunlight and air. The rootball should be kept moist and shaded at all times. (iii) Palms should not be stockpiled for replanting. (VI) Planting of Palms (i) (ii) . (iii) (iv) RCC:JS # 08/22101 Excavation for planting should include the stripping and stacking of all acceptable topsoil encountered within the areas to be excavated for the tree holes. All excavated holes should have vertical sides with roughened surfaces and should be of a size that is twice the diameter and 24" minimum to 4' maximum deeper in the ground than they originally stood. Center palm in pit or trench; align with existing palms. Set palm plumb and hold rigidly in position until soil has been tamped firmly around ball or roots. (v) Palms should be backfilled with equal parts of specified backfill and native soil thoroughly mixed together. 78 (vi) Root growth stimulant should be applied when the backfilling :is between half to' two-thirds up the rootball. Application rate should be one (1) quart for trees less than thirty (30) feet in height, two (2) quarts for trees thirty (30) feet and larger in height. Stimulant should be poured full strength equally distributed around the rootball, and water jetted into the backfill. (VII) Palm Backfill Soil The import planting soil can consist of either fine sand or loamy sand textured soil and silt clay content of this soil shall not exceed 20% by weight with a minimum 95% passing the 2.0 millimeter sieve. The sodium absorption ratio (SAR) should not exceed 6 and the electrical conductivity (ECe) of the saturation extract of this soil should exceed 3.0 milliosmol per centimeter at 25 centigrade. The boron content of this soil should be no greater then 1 PPM as measured on the saturation extract. (VIII) Fertilizer (i) Root Growth Stimulant: Stimulant should be Vitamin B-1 as manufactured by Cal-Iiquid, Cooke, Chican, Ortho, or equivalent. (Ii) Fertilizer should not be used at time of planting. After 4 months, use a light application of 20-10-5 approximately 1/2 lb. nitrogen per tree cultivated into the soil. (IX) Tree irrigation should be monitored by use of irrometers, installed according to manufacturer's specifications, with two irrometers per tree. (X) Following planting work, all remaining excavation shall be backfilled and compacted. Burying of debris in holes should not be permitted. Excess soil and debris from the relocation work should be disposed of. Plant materials disturbed by excavating, planting, or replanting should be replaced. (XI) Maintenance should include weekly water management to include soil probing and observation of soil moisture sensing devices and palm tree RCC:JS # 08/22101 79 RCC:JS # 08122/01 pruning. Pruning should be done with reciprocal saws (chain saws should not be allowed). Saw blades should be sterilized between each tree with 50% household bleach and 50% water for ten minutes. Pruning should be done to maintain a neat appearance. (2) Site Landscaping (A) Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to structures, either singly or in grove effect, at the equivalent of one (1) tree per thirty (30) linear feet of building area. (B) Site landscaping should be used to define entrances and walkways, to screen parking and loading areas, for micro- climate control, and to enhance views of the site from inside building. (C) Wall expanses should be protected from graffiti by adjacent plantings of shrubs or vines. (D) Suggested accent trees providing seasonal variation and color are listed in Table EC-2. (E) Seasonal plantings of colorful flowers are encouraged to accent entrances and walkways. (3) All landscaped areas shall be served by a total coverage, automated irrigation system. Where appropriate, drip irrigation shall be encouraged. (4) Graded areas proposed for development in a later phase shall be planted with annual grasses and shall be maintained in a weed-free condition until development occurs, if said phase will not begin construction within six (6) months of completion of previous phase. (n) Landscape Maintenance (1 ) Property owners are responsible for the installation and maintenance for landscaping on their on-site landscaped area and the contiguous planted right-of-way, except where landscaping in the public right-of-way is maintained by a Landscape Maintenance District. (2) Any damage to the landscaping and irrigation systems shall be corrected within thirty (30) days from date of damage. 80 (3) (4) (5) (6) RCC:JS # 08122/01 Any replacement landscaping within the street setback must be replaced with plant materials that"are equal to the size, form and species of the adjacent existing plant materials. All trees and plant material, when established, shall be trimmed so that they shall not encroach upon the sidewalk or street so as to impede or interfere with vehicle or pedestrian traffic, or obstruct the illumination from any streetlight to the street or sidewalk. In residential tracts, the developer shall guarantee street trees for a minimum of one year after acceptance of the tract and until 80% of the units are occupied. Maintenance of all trees shall become the responsibility of the homeowner upon occupancy. All plantings shall be maintained in healthy growing condition. Fertilization, cultivation and pruning are to be carried out on a regular basis. (7) Dead or dying plants shall be removed and replaced as quickly as possible (30 days maximum except where seasonal conditions prohibit). (8) All plantings are to be irrigated as often as necessary to maintain healthy growing conditions. (9) Irrigation systems are to be kept in proper working condition. Adjustment, repair and cleaning are to be done on a regular basis. (10) Tree guys, stakes, etc., shall be adjusted on a regular basis to maintain neat appearance and to prevent damage to trees. 81 TABLE EC.1 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPiel,"le PLP.WPLANNING AREA LIST OF RECOMMENDED STREET TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Albizia julibrissin Cinnamomum camphora Cupaniopsis anacardioides Eucalyptus sideroxylon Jacaranda acutifolia Koelreuteria bipinnata Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar styraciflua "Palo Alto" Liquidambar styraciflua "Burgundy" Liriodendron tulipifera Magnolia grandiflora "Majestic Beauty" Melaleuca quinquenervia Pinus canariensis Pinus halepensis Pistacia chinensis Platanus acerifolia Prunus cerasifera "Atropropurea" Schinus terebinthifolius Washingtonia filifera Washingtonia robusta Silk Tree Camphor Tree Carrot Wood Tree Red Iron Bark Jacaranda Chinese Flame Tree Crape Myrtle Sweet Gum Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Southern Magnolia Cajeput Tree Canary Island Pine Aleppo Pine Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree Purple Leaf Plum Brazilian Pepper California Fan Palm Mexican Fan Palm NOTE: Additional trees may be used subject to approval. RCC:JS # 08/22/01 82 i I. I TABLE EC.2 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PIJ'.MPLANNING AREA BOTANICAL NAME LIST OF RECOMMENDED ACCENT TREES COMMON NAME A1bizia julibrissin Alnus rhombifolia Arecastrum romanzoffianum Brachychiton acerifolius Brachychiton populneus Cupaniopsis anacardioides Eucalyptus citriodora Eucalyptus nicholii Eucalyptus polyanthemos Eucalyptus rudis Eucalyptus sideroxylon Ficus nitida Geijera parviflora Jacaranda mimosifolia Koelreuteria bipinnata Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Orange Tree Pinus canariensis Pinus eldarica Pinus halepensis Pinus roxburghii Pistaccia chinensis Platanus acerifolia Podocarpus gracilior Prunus cerasifera Schinus terebinthifolius Tristania conferta Silk Tree White Alder Queen Palm Flame Tree Deodar Cedar Carrot Wood Tree Lemon-Scented Gum Peppermint Gum Silver Dollar Gum Desert Gum Red Ironbark Indian Laurel Fig Australian Willow Jacaranda Chinese Flame Tree Crape Myrtle Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Canary Island Pine Mondell Pine Aleppo Pine Roxburg Pine Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree Fern Pine Purple Leaf Plum Brazilian Pepper Brisbane Box NOTE: Additional trees may be used subject to approval. RCC:JS # O~01 83 TABLE EC.3 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PI..A~IPLANNING AREA SUGGESTED DROUGHT.RESISTANT PLANT MATERIALS LIST FOR LANDSCAPED AREAS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FOLIAGE PLANTS Agapanthus Arbutus unedo Centaurea gymnocarpa Dodonaea viscosa Elaeagnus lIex species Leptospermum scoparium Ligustrum "Texanum" Photinia fraseri Pittosporum Raphiolepis indica Rhamnus alaternus Rhus ovata Viburnum species Xylosma congestum Strawberry Tree Dusty Miller Hopseed Bush Italian Buckthorn Sugar Bush FLOWERING PLANTS Callistemon citrinus Cassia artemisioides Cistus Coreopsis verticillata Fremontodendron Lantana Lavandula Nerium oleander Plumbago auriculata Lemon Bottlebrush Feathery Cassia Rockrose Flannel Bush Lavender Oleander Cape Plumbago VINES Bougainvillea Campsis Solanum jasminoides Tecomaria capensis Trumpet Creeper Potato Vine Cape Honeysuckle RCC:JS # 08/22/01 84 BOTANICAL NAME GROUND COVERS TABLE EC.3 (Continued) COMMON NAME Coyote Bush Wild Lilac Baccharis pilularis Ceanothus Cotoneaster Gazania Grevillea Hypericum calycinum Rosmarinus officinalis Santolina chamaecyparissus Creeping S1. Johnswort Rosemary Lavender Cotton (0) Site Grading (1) Effective site grading can be utilized to enhance the architecture, screen parking and loading areas and help provide for privacy or adjoining areas. (2) (3) (4) RCC:JS # 08122/01 (A) Earth berms adjacent to pUblic rights-of-way shall be constructed to a smooth, rounded, continuous natural contour, with slope not to exceed 3:1. Construction of berms shall not interfere with normal drainage of water anywhere on the site. (B) Industrial or commercial sites located adjacent to residential areas should not be at a higher grade than residential uses. All sites shall drain adequately to off-site collectors without interfering with adjacent properties. All site grading shall be designed to provide positive drainage without leaving standby water. No cut or fill slopes of any type shall be steeper than 3:1, with smooth vertical transitions. Where space limitations demand, terracing with approved retaining walls shall be utilized. Where retaining walls are required, they shall be of a material compatible with the building architecture. (5) Berms. channels, swales, etc., shall be graded in such a way as to be an integral part of the grading and paved surface designed with smooth vertical transitions between changes in slope. 85 (6) Adequate diking of outdoor storage areas shall be provided where any chemicals or other substances' used or kept on site present any potential risks downstream from the site. (7) All site grading shall be designed to meet the following standards: Planting areas 2% Maximum Slope 3:1 (33%) Minimum Slope Parking lot pavement (1% with P.C.C. flow lines) 2% 4% Driveways, access drives 2% (.6% with P.C.C. flow lines) 2% 6% Pedestrian plazas 1% 2% Pedestrian walkways 1% 8% (p) Construction Phase Requirements (1) In order to minimize soil erosion by water and wind, practical combinations of the following procedures shall be used: (A) The permanent landscaping shall be installed within 60 days after substantial completion of the structural improvements on a lot. (8) Erosion control measures shall be required for imported fill subject to erosion, on construction projects over six months duration. (2) The developer is responsible for ascertaining the location of underground utilities and for protecting them during construction. (3) All construction storage and equipment yards shall be located on the site in a manner to minimjze their impact on adjacent properties and pUblic streets. (4) Construction sites shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All trash shall be kept in enclosed containers and removed frequently. RCC:JS # 08122101 86 (5) Construction access shall be coordinated with and approved by the reviewing authority. Special care shall be taken to protect existing pavements and landscaping from damage. Dirt and mud shall be removed promptly from adjacent streets and sidewalks. (6) At the end of the construction period, by phase, the developer shall submit to the reviewing authority reproducible copies of record drawings (as-built) showing the actual locations of all underground utilities and irrigation systems. (q) Maintenance (1) All owners or occupants of property shall maintain all buildings, drives, parking lots, or other structures located upon said property in good and sufficient repair and shall keep such premises painted, windows glazed, paving swept and otherwise maintain the property in an aesthetically pleasing manner. (2) Any structure, driveway or parking lot surface which is damaged by the elements, vehicles, fire or any other cause shall be repaired as promptly as the extent of damage will permit. (3) Grounds shall be maintained in a safe, clean and neat condition free of rubbish and weeds. Roads and pavements shall be kept true to line and grade in good repair. Drainage ditches shall be kept clean of any obstacles. (r) Signs (1) The provisions of RgiilhilFlgg iigFl Cggg Chapter 7 of Division 7 of this Title shall apply to development within the ipl:lgrg gf iFlfhlSRll1l sf tl:lll (,it~' gf RgglaRgs. TI:IIl prll'JisililRS sf tl:lg b.llma L.iRga iigFl Ilgllg &l:1all llppl~' tlil 1l1l"slllFmllRt \"itl:1iFl tl:l9 sFl:Illrll Ilf iRflLlIlRllg gf tl:19 Cit~' gf L.gma l..iFlllaPlanning Area. (2) Developments subject to an approved Planned Development may specify the sign standards for that development of any modifications to adopted sign standards within the Planned Development text. Article 7. Reserved Article 8. Reserved Article 9. Reserved RCC:JS # O~ZU01 87 Article 10. Oak Glen Planning Area Section: 86.031005 Single Residential (OG/RS) District. 86.031005 Single Residential (OG/RS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (fl.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (acres) map suffix will modify 2.5 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 20% I ~ 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) <: 10 acres 1:3 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in fl.) 200/200 Front Yard Setback (fl.) 30 Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) 20 Rear Yard Setbacks (fl.) 20 Street Side Setbacks (fl.) 30 ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR OAK GLEN PARK SUBDIVSION Front Yard Setback (fl.) 15 Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (fl.) 15 Street Side Setbacks (ft.) 15 RCC:JS # 08122/01 88 ,. Article 11. Redlands Sphere Planning Area .. Section: 86.031105 General Provisions. 86,031105 General Provisions. In accordance with California Government Code (9 66474.4[b]), the Board of Supervisors has made the finding that parcels smaller than ten (10) acres in size within Agricultural Preserves and designated RL (Rural Living) in the Redlands Sphere Planning Area can sustain agricultural uses permitted under Land Conservation Contracts, provided the Planning Agency makes the following additional findings prior to the approval any proposed subdivision: (a) The subdivision is compatible with and would not adversely effect the existing agricultural uses or support services within the preserve. (b) The subdivision will not serve to encourage land uses which will conflict with commercial agricultural uses. (c) The proposed subdivision has no lots less than five (5) acres in area unless such lots are within a planned development or are for "well lot" purposes. The average lot size of all lots within a planned development subdivision is not less than five (5) acres. Article 12. Reserved Article 13. Reserved RCC:JS # 08122101 89 Article 14. Yucaipa Planning Area : Section: 86.031405 86.031410 Single Residential (YU/RS) District. Multiple Residential (YU/RM) District. 86.031405 Single Residential (YUIRS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure He/oht (fl.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. fl.) map suffix will modify 6,000 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 50% ~ 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in fl.) comer lot 70/100 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (fl.) average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (fl.) 20 I street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) collector or wider 25 RCC:JS # 08122/01 90 86.031410 Multiple Residential (YU/RM) District .' Multiple Residential (RM) District Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 I single un~ per lot 6,000 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 2 units or more per lot 10,000 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 55% ~ 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) comer lot 70/100 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) averatle 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 I street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 SECTION 5. Subsection 86.1005(b) of the San Bernardino County Code is amended, to read: 86.1005 Designations. (b) The following symbols appear as a prefix on the official land use maps to identify the various specific plan areas: Specific Plan Area Agua Mansa iatt "~lIg~' ~gr:r;idgr (11Q) Kaiser Commerce Center Symbol AM lie' KC SECTION 6. The Board of Supervisors hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase. or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. If for any reason any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid or unconstitutional, then all other provisions hereof shall remain valid and enforceable. RCC:JS # 08/22/01 91 SECTION 7. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. FRED AGUIAR, Chairman Boarj of Supervisors SIGNED AND CERTIFIED TH.. A CC?Y OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD J. RENEE: BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) )ss. ) I, J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California, hereby certify that at a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of said County and State, held on the day of 2001 at which meeting were present Supervisors: and the Clerk, the foregoing ordinance was passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Board of Supervisors this day of 2001. J. RENEE: BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bemardino, State of Califomia Deputy RCC:JS # 08122/01 92 REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS . ( OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ((leoh-a) . AND RECORD OF ACTION - (esa0. ~j Ordinance No. 3834 Planning-2'" Cycle 2001 GPAs October 3D, 2001 FROM: MICHAEL E. HAYS, Director Land Use Services Department/Current Planning Division SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH AN EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA, TO REPEAL AND REPLACE THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AND TO AMEND WATER, WASTEWATER, AND LAND USE POLICIES. REVISE THE APPROVED CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FIRST PHASE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742, WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. APPLICANT: REDLANDS VENTURE; FILE/INDEX: PD/95-0005-07/M273-971 PDCI PDF/ TPM14742/RM2; WEST REDLANDS/S3 RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing regarding the following proposed actions: 1) Environmental Impact Report ('EIR") a) CERTIFY the Final Subsequent EIR [SEIR] with Errata; b) ADOPT the Findings of Fact and Findings Supporting a Statement of Overriding Consideration; and c) ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 2) General Plan Amendment a) ADOPT the Resolution amending the County General Plan included in the Second Cycle 2001 General Plan Amendments to amend Official Land Use District Map and text; b) READ title only of proposed Ordinance amending the County General Plan Official Land Use Maps; and c) WAIVE reading of the entire text and ADOPT; 3) Development Code Amendment a) READ title only of the proposed ordinance to amend Title B of the San Bernardino County Code to incorporate the regulations and development standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan applicable to the East Valley Corridor Planning Area and to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; b) WAIVE reading of the entire text; and c) CONTINUE the ordinance to amend Title B to Tuesday, October 30,2001, at 10:00 a.m. for adoption. ..ON OCTOBER 30, 2001 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADOPTS ORDINANCE NO. 3834, the same as is set forth in Ordinance Book 68, and is entitled: cc: LUSD-Hays Planning-Squire Planning-McGuckian/Rahhal ED/PSG Admin. Transportation Surveyor Bldg. & Safety Co. Counsel-Hinesley/Cochran CAO-Bogart Applicant Representative File Rev 07/97 Page 1 of 5 MOVE -s BY ITEM 056 CITRUS PLAZA - GPNDCNPDP/FDP/PARCEL MAP/DNFSEIR OCTOBER 23, 2001 PAGE 2 OF 4 "AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REPEALING THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CODE SUBSECTION 86.0105(a)(2) RELATIVE TO PLANNING AREA DESIGNA TIONS, CHAPTER 3 OF D1V1SION 6 RELA TIVE TO THE EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS, AND SUB.SECTION 86.1005(b) RELA TIVE TO SPECIFIC PLANS." 4) Development Aareement a) READ title only of the proposed ordinance to approve a Development Agreement; and b) WAIVE reading of the entire text and; c) CONTINUE the ordinance to approve a Development Agreement to Tuesday, October 30, 2001, at 10:00 a.m. for adoption. 5) Revisions to the approved proiect a) APPROVE a revision to an approved Preliminary Development Plan, subject to Conditions of Approval to establish a regional mall with 1.85 million square feet of retail area to be constructed in two major phases, including the use of Rule 20 A funds to underground utilities; b) APPROVE a revision to an approved Final Development Plan for Phase I, subject to Conditions of Approval for a portion of the regional mall with 500,000 square feet of retail area, and c) APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 14742, subject to Conditions of Approval for 50 commercial parcels on 128 ~ acres; 6) ADOPT the Findings for all related actions; 7) FILE a Notice of Determination; and 8) APPROVE the Water and Wastewater Facility Plan for the IVDA Areas "A" and "I" ("WWF Plan"), acting both as the Board of Supervisors and as the goveming body of County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1 (CSA70 EV-1). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On September 20,2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and unanimously recommended approval of the entire proposal. The proposed project establishes 1) the legal framework upon which the provision of water and waste water facilities can be delivered to this unincorporated area; 2) creates a Planning Area within the County General Plan and Development Code that is fully under the jurisdictional control of the Board of Supervisors; and 3) updates the land use application approvals for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall and associated Development Agreement. The Board of Supervisors approved the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall on January 9, 1996. Subsequent to that action the Board approved a revision to the project on November 19, 1996, to allow the provision of water and wastewater from sources other than the City of Redlands. The City of Redlands then brought a successful legal action against this approval and obtained a court order that rescinded the revision approval. This action left the January 9, 1996, approval in effect as the only valid approval. Following this legal action, the developer pursued various options, including further negotiations with Redlands. CITRUS PLAZA - GPAlDCAlPDP/FDP/PARCEL MAP/DAlFSEIR OCTOBER 23,2001 PAGE 3 OF 4 Also, the State of California recently passed a law that allows water and wastewater facilities to be provided to an unincorporated area from outside sources through lines that pass through an incorporated city to an unincorporated area. In addition, the property owners within the unincorporated island, known as the "Donut Hole" have successfully petitioned the Local Area Formation Commission [LAFCO] to remove the subject area from the City of Redlands Sphere Of Influence. On January 12, 1999, the Board of Supervisors initiated a General Plan Amendment to revise County Water, Wastewater, and Land Use Policies as necessary to promote extension of infrastructure and economic development within unincorporated portions of the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Area (IVDA Area). This project resulted in the proposed General Plan text amendments and the development of the WWF Plan. The plan assigns responsibility for retail provision of water and waster water service in the area to CSA 70 EV-1 and identifies the following service alternatives: . Water Service Alternatives: Water may be obtained by connection to the IVDA system at San Bernardino International Airport, by connection to the water distribution systems of the Cities of San Bernardino, Riverside or Redlands, or by development of local wells. . Sewer Services Alternatives: Sewage treatment may be obtained by connection to the sewage treatment plant or either the City of San Bernardino or City of Redlands, by connection to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) Line for ultimate treatment by the Orange County Sanitation District, or by construction of a local wastewater treatment plant facility. . Currently, the County and the City of Redlands are considering an agreement concerning service provision in this area, whereby the City of Redlands could wholesale water and sewage treatment capacity to CSA 70 EV-1, which will then act as the retail water and sewer service purveyor for this area. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was prepared on the impact of the project changes. The Final SEIR identified five environmental issues which cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, even with the proposed mitigation measures. These are land use, transportation-circulation, air quality (project and cumulative impacts), noise and energy. According to the 1995 Fiscal Impact Analysis, the County's net annual benefit from the project would be approximately $4.18 million from sales and property taxes. In summary, the proposed project will first establish an East Valley Planning Area in the General Plan and Development Code to repiace the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan that is proposed to be repealed. The project modifies other General Plan land use policies and establishes a Water and Wastewater Facility Plan for the provision of water and waste water services for a portion of the unincorporated section of the Inland Valley Development Agency [IVDA] area. This proposal will also revise and update the existing project approvals to conform to the new planning area and add flexibility in the approvals to allow the developer to select alternative commercial layouts in anticipation of fluctuations in market demands. These actions include a commercial parcel map, preliminary and final development plans, and a development agreement that extends the project approvals 15 years to the year 2016. CITRUS PL.AZA. GPAlDCAlPDP/FDPIPARCEL MAPIDAlFSEIR OCTOBER 23, 2001 PAGE 4 OF 4 On August 20, 2001, the Development Review Committee (DRC) unanimously recommended approval of the proposed project, subject to the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures outlined in the Final SEIR. The Conditions of Approval include by reference the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program [MMRP]. One hundred forty (140) Planning Commission Hearing Notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. Staff received only one response, which requested a continuance until a pending lawsuit was resolved. There was no negative public testimony at the September 20, 2001, Planning Commission Hearing. County Counsel stated that the results of the pending legal action should not affect the ability of the Planning Commission to make a recommendation on the merits of the proposed project. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project proposals. REVIEW BY OTHERS: This item has been reviewed by Chief Deputy County Counsel, Rex Hinesley on October 15, 2001; and by the County Administrative Office, Geoffrey Bogart, Administrative Analyst on October 15, 2001. This item was heard by the Planning Commission on September 20, 2001. FINANCIAL IMPACT: item. There are no financial impacts associated with the approval of this SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT(S): 3rd PRESENTER: Randy Scott, Advance Planning Division Chief, 387-4147 ORDINANCE NO. 3834 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA REPEALING THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CODE SUBSECTION 86.0105 (a)(2) RELATIVE TO PLANNING AREA DESIGNATIONS, CHAPTER 3 OF DIVISION 6 RELATIVE TO THE EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS, AND SUB- SECTION 86.1005(b) RELATIVE TO SPECIFIC PLANS. The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bemardino, State of California, ordains as follows: SECTION 1. The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino finds that: (a) Properly noticed public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of California and the County Code of the County of San Bemardino. (b) The potential environmental effects of the proposed repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) and amendments to the Development Code have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR). The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR. (c) The repeal ofthe EVCSP and amendments to the Development Code are in the public interest, there will be a community benefit and other existing and permitted uses will not be compromised. (d) The repeal of the EVCSP and amendments to the Development Code are consistent with the policies and provisions of the County General Plan. SECTION 2. The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, as adopted and amended by Ordinances 3351 and 3636, is repealed. SECTION 3. Subsection 86.0105(a)(2) of the San Bemardino County Code is amended, to read: 86.0105 Designations. (a) (2) EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA29) Bloomington Colton sphere EV BL CL RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14101 1 East Redlands East LQma Linda East Valley Corridor Grand Terrace sphere Highland sphere Lorna Linda sphere Oak Glen Redlands sphere Rialto sphere San Bernardino sphere Yucaipa ER EL EC GT HD LL OG RD RT 5B YU SECTION 4. Chapter 3 of Division 6 of Title 8 of the San Bernardino County Code is amended, to read: Articles: 1 2 3 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CHAPTER 3 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) Reserved. Bloomington Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. East Lorna Linda Planning Area. East Valley Corridor Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. Reserved. Oak Glen Planning Area. Redlands Sphere Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. Yucaipa Planning Area. Article 1. Reserved. RAH:JS #187160.01 ~~ 2 Article 2. Bloomington Planning Area. Section: 86.030205 Single Residential (BURS) District. 86.030205 Single Residential (BURS) District. Single Residential Devlopment Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 7.200 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 40% 2: 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) corner lot 70/100 minimun 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) See (1) below average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 T street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 Article 3. Reserved. Article 4. Reserved. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 3 Article 5. East Lorna Linda Planning Area. Section: 86.030505 Single Residential (EURS) District. 86.030505 Single Residential (EURS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 6,000 lot size Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 0- 19,999 sq.ft. 50% 20,000 up to 1 acre 20% More than 1 acre 10% ? 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 lot size Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) < 20,000 60/60 20,000 or more 150 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) average 25 one side 20 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 15/20 street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 Article 6. East Valley Corridor Planning Area. Section: 86.030605 86.030610 86.030615 86.030620 86.030625 86.030630 General Provisions. General Commercial (EC/CG). Regional Industrial (EC/IR). Planned Development (EC/PD). Circulation Design Guidelines Site Design Standards and Guidelines 86.030605 General Provisions. The land use regulations of this code are modified as follows for the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 4 86.030610 General Commercial (EC/CG). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the General Commercial and Regional Commercial Districts of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7,1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and structures and appurtenances thereof. (2) The following uses shall be subject to a Conditional Use Permit. (At the discretion of the reviewing agency, review requirement may be met by Planning Commission review.) (A) Professional Services Physicians, surgeons, chiropractors, osteopathic physicians, dentists, oral surgeons, orthodontists, Attorneys and legal services Medical and dental laboratories Engineering, architectural and planning Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping Counseling (marriage and family) Prescription pharmacy and optical services (B) Business Services Advertisement, business and management Consulting Detective and protective services Stenographic, secretarial, clerical and mailing Collection agencies Blueprinting and photocopy Employment agencies (C) Financial Services Insurance carriers, agents, brokers Real estate developers and builders (office only) Title abstracting Real estate agents and brokers Commodity services Holding and investment services RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 5 Banks, savings and loans, and credit unions (D) Retail sale of goods: Groceries Meat, fish, seafood Bakeries Food caterers and delicatessens Liquor stores Drug stores and pharmacies Convenience markets Apparel Fur goods Newspapers and magazines Hardware Five and ten variety stores Confectioneries and ice cream Cosmetics and accessories Florist Auto parts (new retail) Gift shop Hobby and yam shops Fumiture and home fumishings Paint, varnish, lacquer Draperies, curtains, upholstery Interior decorating supplies Wall and floor coverings Appliances Dishes, china. glassware, metalware Lawn and garden equipment and supplies Home improvement centers Dry goods and notions Department and general merchandise stores Plumbing and heating equipment and supplies Swimming pools and spas Commercial nursery, retail Radio, TV, stereo Computers and accessories Jewelry, precious metals. coin and stamp dealers Records, tapes, videotapes Stationary and art supplies Office supplies and equipment Shoes Books (general, not adult-oriented) Toys, sport and athletic goods Photographic equipment and supplies Automobiles, motorcycles and other motor vehicles RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14101 6 Boats Auto and motorcycle parts and accessories (new) Bicycles and parts Secondhand merchandise and thrift shops Antiques Pets Art galleries, print and frame shops (E) Provision of services to individuals and businesses: Laundering and dry-cleaning outlets Self-service laundries Beauty salons and barber shops Apparel repair, alterations and tailoring Shoe repair Suntan parlors Photographic studios and processors Small appliance repair Radio, TV and stereo repair Watch, clock and jewelry repair Furniture repair and reupholstery Bicycle repair Locksmith Teen Center Eating establishments (including service of alcoholic beverages) Personal storage facilities (mini-warehouses) Funeral parlors and mortuaries Vocational and trade schools Auto service stations and repair centers Pet grooming Veterinarians and animal hospitals Telephone exchanges Taxidermy Car washes Commercial repair garages for motor vehicles and equipment (including body and paint work) (F) Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational Facilities: Motion picture theaters Live theaters (legitimate) Meeting halls (lodge and union) Arcades, pool halls, discotheques Nightclubs Recreation centers Gymnasiums, health and athletic clubs, figure salons RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 7 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114101 Skating rinks (indoor) Qrive-in theaters Bowling alley and miniature golf (G) Transient Lodgings Hotels Motels (H) Miscellaneous Services Private adoption agencies Libraries and reading rooms Welfare and charitable services Civic, social and fraternal associations Business associations Professional membership organizations Museums and galleries Community theaters (I) Repair and servicing of any article which is permitted to be sold in this District. (J) Other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. (K) Uses listed in Chapter 4 of Division 4 of this Title in accordance with the provisions of that chapter. (c) Regional Commercial Subarea: The area bounded by San Bernardino Avenue on the north, the Route 30 freeway on the east, Lugonia Avenue on the south and Alabama Street on the west shall be designated for regional commercial uses. Prior to any development within this area, a Planned Development application shall be submitted with each phase subject to final approval prior to issuance of permits. Permitted uses are as follows: (1 ) Uses permitted and as regulated in Subsection 86.030610(b) above. (2) (3) (4) (5) Corporation headquarter offices (home or regional offices) Hotel complexes Conference and convention centers Stadiums and amphitheaters 8 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (6) Entertainment centers (7) Regional mall (8) Other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the Planning Commission at a publiC hearing. (d) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on September 6, 1989 shall adhere to the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Manufacturing and Industrial Warehousing (except for mini-warehouses and storage of merchandise or products for retail sale on the premises) Residential other than hotels and motels Used car sales not in connection with new car sales Recycling facilities and salvage yards Truck terminals Recreational vehicle parks Impound and auto storage yard, automobile dismantling yard Tire retreading Billboards 9 (e) Development Standards 86.030610 (EC/CG) GENERAL COMMERCIAL (EC/CG) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS . Maximum Structure Height (fl.) See (2) below map suffix Minimum Lot Size (acres) will modify See (1) below Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) See (1) below Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) See (1) beiow Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in fl.) See (1) below Front Yard Setback (fl.) See (3) below 25 Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) See (3) below 0 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (3) below 0 Street Side Yard Setbacks (fl.) See (3) below 25 See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. areanot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) (1) All lots shall have adequate width, depth and area to accommodate all required parking, setbacks, landscaping, loading, trash enclosures, and access requirements. (2) No maximum building height is established. Height limits shall be determined in accordance with Part 77 of the FAA regulations. Also refer to Floor Area Ratio provisions in Section 86.030630(h)(1). (3) Minimum building setbacks shall be as follows: (A) Interior side and rear yards: None except where adjoining residential district. (B) Where district abuts a street designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(9), see Section 86.030625(9) for setback and landscaping requirements. (C) Where district abuts a residential district or residential portion of a Planned Development, see Section 86.030630(e)(3) for setback and landscape buffer requirements. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 10 (4) For requirements on landscaping, walls, access, parking, loading, trash enclosures, lighting and storage, the provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply. (5) The provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply to signs. In addition, the maximum area of any sign facing a residential district shall be 75 feet. (6) All accessways to a public street shall be located not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the intersection of any street lines, and shall be designed in a manner conducive to safe ingress and egress. Where practical, exits shall be located on a minor street. Frequency of accessways shall be at intervals of not less than one hundred (100) feet. (7) Standards for automobile service stations: (A) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. (A) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. (8) Minimum lot width and depth shall be one hundred twenty (120) feet. (C) Site must abut and have access to a secondary highway or larger roadway. (D) No more than half of the corners at anyone intersection shall be occupied by service stations. (E) Parking Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. No outdoor parking or storage of wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles permitted. Parked vehicles shall be limited to those directly associated with the business or awaiting service. No parking permitted in the comer cut-off area. Parking areas shall be screened as required under Subsection 86.030630(k). (F) Landscaping RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 11 (I) Except for driveway openings there shall be a landscaped planter area not less than five (5) feet in width extending along the entire street frontage. (II) A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the remaining lot area shall be landscaped with not less than 50 percent of said landscaping provided along the interior property lines. (III) All planter areas shall be enclosed by six (6) inch high concrete curbs. (IV) A detailed landscaping plan indicating types and distribution of plantings shall be provided with the application. (G) Walls A three (3) foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along all interior property lines. Said wall shall be increased in height to not less than five (5) feet nor more than six (6) feet when the site is adjacent to a school, church. park, club, hospital, residential zone or use. The Planning Commission may require additional walls as determined necessary for proper development of the site. (H) Rest Room All rest room entrances shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and street rights-of-way by some form of decorative wall or similar device. (I) Customer pump areas shall be roofed. The roofs over the pump areas shall connect to the station or station roof forming one continuous roofed structure. Ridges and eaves may, under some conditions, be at different levels. (J) Trash Storage All trash, refuse and used merchandise shall be stored in an area enclosed by solid walls or fences. Said area shall be located in the rear portion of the lot. (K) Utilities All utilities on the site for direct service to the business shall be installed underground. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 12 (L) Lighting All lighting elements on the exterior and interior of the structure shall be shielded from horizontal view except for sign lights or those especially designed for illumination of the parking lot. (M) Equipment Rentals The outside storage of rental trailers, and similar equipment, may be permitted provided they are completely screened from public view and the use is specifically authorized in the Conditional Use Permit. Additional lot area over the required minimum in the amount of 200 square feet per rental unit shall be provided. (8) Standards for drive-through restaurants and services: (A) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. (8) Minimum lot width and depth dimensions shall be one hundred twenty (120) feet. (C) Site must abut and have access to a secondary highway or larger roadway. (D) Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. (E) Landscaping (I) Except for driveway openings there shall be a landscaped planter area not less than ten (10) feet in . width extending along the entire street frontage and not less than (5) feet in width along all interior property lines. (II) A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the total site shall be landscaped. (III) Landscaping guidelines and requirements of Section 86.030630 shall apply. (F) Walls RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 13 A three (3) foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along all interior property lines. The Planning Commission may require higher walls as determined necessary for proper development of the site and protection of adjacent property owners. (G) Frequency of Drive-Through Restaurants Due to me hlgt11rnffic generation chC;lradt:lri~lics-uh:hivt:l- through restaurant facilities such uses shall not be located closer than 300 feet from each other. (H) Screening Drive-through aisles shall be completely screened from the view of public rights-of-way to a height equal to or greater than that of standard vehicular headlights. Screening shall be by use of walls, earth berms, landscaping or a combination thereof. (I) A traffic study prepared by a qualified traffic engineer shall be submitted with the application. 86.030615 Regional Industrial (EC/IR). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the Regional Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7,1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and all necessary structures and appurtenances thereof. (2) The following uses shall be subject to a Conditional Use Permit. (At the discretion of the reviewing agency, review requirement may be met by Planning Commission review.) (A) Research and Development Research laboratories, product development facilities, and testing laboratories and facilities, including: Biochemical Chemical RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 14 Metallurgical Pharmaceutical X-ray Film and photographic Medical and dental Electrical Optical Mechanical. (8) Manufacturing and Industrial Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing the following products: Apparel, drapery, upholstery, millinery, and related cloth and clothing items Furniture and fixtures, including office furniture, store fixtures, blinds and shades, furniture, shelving Paper products, including envelopes, bags, wallpaper, containers, pressed and molded pulp goods Publishing, including newspapers, business forms, typesetting, photoengraving, bookbinding, printing Chemicals, including pharmaceutical, botanical, soaps and detergents, chemical fertilizer, perfumes and cosmetics, candles and wax Fabricated plastic products Stone, clay and glass products, including plate glass, mirrors, dishes and earthenware, pottery, porcelain and china, fixtures and supplies, cut stone Fabricated metal products, including heating and air conditioning equipment, communication equipment, electrical equipment, plumbing fixtures, radio and TV equipment, appliances, wiring, cutlery and hand tools, fasteners, and similar equipment and supplies Professional and scientific goods, including measuring instruments, clocks and watches, optical goods, surgical and medical instruments, photographic equipment, engineering, scientific and research instruments, computers, orthopedic, prosthetic and surgical appliances, ophthalmic goods, and similar equipment and supplies Miscellaneous manufactured goods, including jewelry, lapidary, precious metals, toys, sporting goods, umbrellas, brushes, novelties, notions, silverware, pictures and frames, musical instruments, tobacco products, artist supplies and similar goods. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 15 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (c) (C) Additional manufacturing and industrial uses, as follows: Prefabricated wooden buildings, veneer and plywood, and containers Fabricated rubber products Plastic, synthetic rubber and synthetic fibers Paints, varnishes, lacquers, enamels and allied products excluding boiling processes) Industrial clielfticals- - - -- - - Pesticides and agricultural chemicals Wholesale trade of durable and non-durable goods to commercial, industrial and professional business uses, including motor vehicles, sporting goods, electrical appliances, hardware, machinery and equipment for industry, construction, professional and service establishments Warehouse and distribution centers (0) Supportive service and commercial uses: Heavy equipment repair Welding and metal repair Electrical/electronic repair Restaurants operated for employees on the premises Child-care centers operated for employees on the premises Open space and recreation areas for employee use Business and research offices related to administration and operation of the permitted industrial uses Equipment rental Parcel delivery Automobile service stations One (1) dwelling unit on the same parcel of land as a permitted use needing continual supervision, to be occupied exclusively by a superintendent or a caretaker and his family Commercial sales and service incidental to a principal permitted use Truck rental and leasing Motor freight terminals Truck terminals, storage, parking and repair Personal storage facilities (mini-warehouse) (E) Other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. Prohibited Uses 16 Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on September 6, 1989 shall adhere to the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1) Residential other than caretakers quarters. (2) Retail commercial or office uses as primary uses. (3) Animal and poultry raising, slaughter or packing. (4) Auto wrecking, junk yards, salvage yards or recycling centers. (5) Wholesale trade of commodities which may be incompatible with other uses permitted in this District, including but not limited to fuel, scrap, ammunition, petroleum products or hazardous chemicals. (6) Fur and hide curing or tanning. (d) Development Standards 86.030615 (EC/lR) REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL (EC/lR) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 50 map suffix 20,000 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) will modify See (1) below Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 50% Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) N/A Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) 100/150 Front Yard Setback (ft.) 25 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (2) below 0 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (2) below 0 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 25 See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. area/lot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) (1 ) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. The requirement shall not be construed to prevent condominium- type developments which have smaller lot sizes as long as they have a mandatory owners association, and the land area under the RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 17 jurisdiction of the association meets the minimum lot size requirements. (2) Minimum building setback lines shall be as follows: (A) Interior side and rear yards: None required except adjacent to residential district. (8) Where district abuts a street designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscape requirements. (C) Where district abuts a residential district or residential portion of a Planned Development, see Section 86.030630(e)(3) for setback and landscape buffer requirements. (3) For requirements on parking, landscaping, walls and fences, loading, lighting, storage and other design standards, the provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply. (4) All lots shall have a minimum of sixty (60) feet of access on a dedicated and improved street. (5) The provisions Section 86.030630 shall apply to signs. In addition, the maximum area of any sign facing a residential zone shall be seventy-five (75) square feet. (6) Any structure originally designed as a residence, or as an accessory to a residence, shall not be used for any commercial or industrial purpose. (7) A commercial or industrial building shall not be constructed or established on the same lot together with an existing residential building. (8) All buildings erected, constructed or established, shall be entirely new and complete structures designed for commercial or industrial purposes only. (9) All uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building except as follows: Off-street parking and loading areas. (A) (8) Automobile service stations - all merchandise must be displayed within the building or under canopy cover. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 18 IH (C) The open storage of materials, products, and equipment when such storage is enclosed by a fence, wall, buildings or other means adequate to conceal such storage from view from adjoining property or the public street. However, this requirement shall not apply to the display of products or equipment offered for sale or rental, providing said display is maintained in a neat and orderly manner. (10) New buildings or structures having exterior walls of sheet metal shall not be located closer than one hundred and fifty (150) feet from the property line along any freeway, major or secondary highway, or closer than one hundred (100) feet from the property line along any other dedicated street, except that said buildings or structures may be located closer to the street if any of the following conditions prevail: (A) The sheet metal comprises less than twenty-five (25%) percent of the exterior wall area of said building or structures, or (8) The sheet metal consists of panels with stainless steel, baked enamel or similar finish, or (C) Said building or structure is concealed from view from the public street by walls, fences, landscaping, or other buildings or structures. 86.030620 Planned Development (EC/PD). RAH:JS #167160.01 09/14/01 (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the Special Development District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7, 1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) The following uses are permitted as interim uses and do not require submittal of a Planned Development application: (A) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and all necessary structures and appurtenances thereof. (8) Single family dwelling units on parcels of twenty (20) acres or more. 19 (2) The following uses are permitted subject to approval of a Planned Development application: (A) Uses permitted within the East Valley Corridor General Commercial District. (B) Uses permitted within the East Valley Corridor Regional Industrial District as listed in Section 86.030615(b)(2)(A) and (B). eC) Retail sales of items having long-term utility, to individuals and businesses: Automobile, new and used Automobile equipment Agricultural supplies and equipment Bicycle, boat and motorcycle Building material and hardware Camper and mobile home Electrical apparatus and equipment Furniture, appliances and carpeting Garden and farm supplies Interior decorating supplies Machinery, equipment and supplies Nurseries (no outdoor display of merchandise other than plants) Plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration equipment and supplies Office equipment Paint Pet and pet supply Radio, television and electronic equipment (D) Provision of services to individuals and businesses: Ambulance services Animal hospitals Auto rental Auto services, including repair of brakes, glass, mufflers and body work, provided no open service bays are visible from the public right-of-way Bus terminals and similar transit facilities Business and research offices related to the administration and operation of the permitted industrial uses Cleaning and dyeing plants, laundries, linen and towel service Equipment rental Furniture upholstery RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 20 Ice manufacture, cold storage and frozen food lockers Mail order houses Motels and hotels Off-street parking Parcel delivery Pest control Printing, lithographing, publishing Public scales Public utility offices and service yards Radio and television broadcasting studios Repair of any item permitted to be sold in this district Restaurants, cafes, cafeterias, drive-in restaurants Restaurants operated for employees on the premises Retreading of tires Sign painting Trade union halls Van and storage, including mini-warehouse facilities (E) Recreation and Entertainment Bowling lanes, skating rinks, sports arenas Cocktail lounges and bars Drive-in theaters (F) Transportation, Communication and Utility Facilities: Airports and associated uses Electrical, gas, water and sewage transmission facilities Radio and television stations and towers Microwave communication towers and facilities (G) Public Services: Hospitals, sanitariums, convalescent and rest homes Govemment protective functions and postal services Public works maintenance and storage yards Executive, legislative and judicial functions and offices (H) Educational Services: Day Care Centers (public or private), primary, middle/junior high, and high schools Universities, colleges, junior colleges, and professional schools Vocational, trade, and special training schools (I) Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational Facilities: RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 21 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 Museums and art galleries Planetariums, aquariums, botanical gardens and zoos Historical and monument sites Convention facilities Parks, playgrounds, athletic fields Recreation and community centers Golf courses Arboretums, rose gardens, botanical gardens (J) Flood control structures (K) Hiking, bicycle. and equestrian paths and trails (L) One (1) dwelling unit on the same parcel of land as a permitted use needing continual supervision, to be occupied exclusively by a caretaker and his family. (M) Other Uses Business, technical, trade or professional schools Clubs, lodges and similar organizations Government buildings Warehouses and distribution centers Wholesale trade of most consumer items, including motor vehicles, drugs, dry goods. apparel, groceries, building materials and paper products. (N) Other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. (3) Where determined to be appropriate by the reviewing agency, a special buffer area shall be established adjacent to existing single family residential homes which abut the Planned Development District, in order to ensure a logical transition of uses. The following uses will be permitted within this buffer area: (A) All uses permitted within Subsections (1) and (2) above. (B) Uses permitted within the Countywide Single Residential District. (c) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on September 6, 1989 shall adhere to the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. 22 (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 Any outdoor manufacturing or processing operation Breweries, distilleries, wineries Contractors storage yards Feed and grain yards Food processing, canning or packing Animal and poultry raising, slaughter or packing Stables and riding academies Auto wrecking, junk yards, salvage yards, recycling centers Wholesale trade of commodities which may be incompatible with other uses permitted in this district, including but not limited to agricultural products, lumber. concrete block, fuel, scrap, ammunition, and hazardous chemicals Truck terminals Recreational vehicle parks Kennels and catteries Manufacture of paint, oil, shellac, turpentine or varnish Paper or pulp manufacture Leather tanning and finishing Billboards 23 (d) Development Standards 86.030620 (EC/PD) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (EC/PD) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS For Interim Uses listed in Subsection 86.030620 (b)(1) Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 map suffix Minimum Lot Size (acres) will modify 20 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) N/A I ,,10 acres Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres N/A Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) N/A Front Yard Setback (ft.) See (1) below 25 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (1) below 25 See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. areaflot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) N/A (1) Where front or side street is designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscaping requirements. (2) Development standards for Planned Development projects shall be based upon the approved development plan or use permit and conditions of approval attached to the plan by the reviewing agency. All Planned Developments shall adhere to the Community Design standards as outlined in Section 86.030630, and to the requirements for PO approval contained in Article 2 of Chapter 3 of Division 3 of this Title. Where the PO District is located adjacent to existing single family residential uses, special attention shall be paid to the development compatibility standards set forth in Section 86.030630( e). 86.030625 Circulation Design Guidelines (a) A critical element of the East Valley Corridor Planning Area is the provision of an efficient and comprehensive circulation plan. In order for development to occur in an orderly and systematic manner, access into the study area must be improved and the circulation system within the RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 24 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (b) study area must be adequate to accommodate traffic volumes generated by the project. The intent of the planning area, in terms of circulation, is to provide an effective circulation system. establish a streetscape design that will enhance the character of the East Valley, and maintain consistency with current and future transportation planning efforts at the state. regional and local levels. (c) While most transportation in and around the study area is by private automobile, special consideration has been given to public transit, pedestrian access, and recreational trails. (d) Figure EC-1 illustrates the backbone circulation system proposed for the East Valley Corridor. 25 .:. ~ ~"'J1J.5'Q~~\J it _..1.:/ .I . .~. ..... = .' ., ~S 00-' ..' ,.,-:.. ')!h; H ~.p.O .:-:.~~ ! i~1 I.....; ./. I _ ...,,~ '''''",ll=''~~' ., \'. ~." . I ~I'!?':"" "EM+' 1.... , .",:, ":=: : ... ;-^t1.."t\..~_rv..~:t. =' .. .:>;-t .'., \:-~--:-, . \. ....... r ~.' ~',-~ .~~~ ;0'" .-, _ '. . a . ~ v...; rJ'\,~ i If .~~.~. f\; I. ~ .'_ : cr' . ~. ~ \ I ...:...J. '.: ~ .;,; ~ . ......- ./.... .Ii :: L ',~ . -; \ ~'. .,U;;:: ,'" ;-:;--.:" .;.!- .,...~s ... ~t . 'ill;,_ ..... ~;F=:r~:~ .oJ' . ~I-......J :, ....' I , .....'v-...: ~.,..,; ,v../ .......IV: I. . .... . ;..... .. )..:'~:L:.t- <.:..t-::":.~ ~ U.' . oo-t. : :::r.:: '.r :.::.~ ../ . \ .~ -J I_!..~~~,._...,>>i ;,." -.-,\ ....: : . .: .' , .... . . . . ,'J ''::'r~;'r:i::~ '::-:'r~j::. _.:~:~ ,. -. . .,. ~ ~ ~_..-' :~::il "')'-.:-. . ... .....~ .... I I I - ..ilJ.Y..LS ::1 ., ., 'O~~ ..3.1~l:l It-YMiI .."".. 33SS3 J.L .. :~ "'.. .:. ,.........-'l...:f\ .: i I '_' , .. \ ~O,. I i!'.... ......... _. - :r:; vi.' vffl , Ii - I :;;p_. '. +' . Ii f:' !-.' 2 ~. :'; --~-:-"" ....-.-..' . t- o" ; . ,--_, '" '. ..... ..-~ ;.:...-..........~ ~. I'" ..~~".~ ; \. - : :I , .! ~ "1; i", \!-.~i...lI , · Zl /'\~\-1'':'''..: ill! '.O'~....:~.._-!". ."!........... ..~~ . .,.:.r'.~. 11 ;.~ ..... . ... .. ;.:" -.....-.......--.....,..............,........(1 : . J\' ;....\.~~ J, :. J7~ - . : ...._;-.":'-'~~. .' ... . .... .; .~. .!.IM..,,'!K ~-\ ..;-~u I V'~ ~ .~'n ';t' Il~ ~ N v.' Iii t..;,l . ]" ..... l~"''' dJ -' ro' "'!' .. :. -:.. ,..,~ . -" .. - " ';:a: ~""\"':)( . ~~. ""ll' tt'l;.. .~~... - ".,....".. ":. .<10':" [.II...r. ..I.Ul I' ';1 ....... .., .'. I ... \~'J.:~' I ...._ .~ .. . : ~'il \ ~ . ~:.~.:::.;~..... .:...:. ..,.~.,~ " ....,IT.-;~O,.: ':-...c:.... .~..\ ..... '11:1, ........."'r..'\u(J." "....,-;, '. '. ~ '! " ~..." en . ~.~..:,I:.:...S~~::ll : ;:1 \0- ...:.,. '.\ .1==.......... ,. \ "J .... ':30NvOlld : '1 ....:: ,(;'?~ d~ t.~ a: >- - t ~ a: ... " Z :I 0 m ... '" >- a: ... ... ~ z '" ... III -' a: .. .. . ~ . . . Ci . . z . . III 0 '" . 0 III . -' . RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14101 ..' ~ .- .' 1 .' ..;~:~ di.'. '.- C . l. !'.j"p''''o '.', ;..........0.;..., uJ ...." ~ . .y:'; 5 ~:~~;Z' i- 1;:~'~" .~~i~::..~~ I:J.ffi ~"~,..: /t"YN31' ",;"..,. ;~ .' .. "1\'" -.. ..'~. ,: ! ,.' ,. "'lj'" 0' :~): ~\. ;~:':~'\~~i :' ~;;~!~ t, .,';' ~\ /..... 26 ~ o t.l Ul Ul a: ::> Cl ii: z .. .... .. t.l !!: t.lz Ill.. ...... 0).. O:z 00 Q o:t- 0::5 0::> t.lO >0: Ill- ....0 .... .. > t- O) .. Ul ;: ~ ;: ~ ;: . ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ , ~ , ~ 0 ~ x 0 0 0 ~ , c x ~ 0 x ~ C 0 ~ " c . " . ~ ,; 0 L " . z . 0 ~ ,; . ~ ,; , z ~ ~ z ~ ~ >- 0 ~ ... 0 :: ~ ~ oJ >- X ... ... !! a: ~ z III :z: >- I- a: '" a: ... ;;: ... " a: a: z 0 0 0 ., ., u ... ... III :Ii :Ii III . , ~ I . ~ . I I ~ . I ~ I ~ I I . ;: ~ ~ , L o , ~ x o C " L . . ,; z ~ ~ , " a: o I- U '" -' -' o u I \ \ \ , I (e) Circulation Plan (1) The major traffic routes through the study area are Interstate 10 (the San Bernardino Freeway) and State Route 30 (the Tennessee Freeway). The East Valley Corridor Planning Area provides for a network of six lane major arterial and four lane major and secondary highways in conjunction with collector streets to be constructed or improved within the area. This proposed circulation system will provide additional regional access to the area as well as build a backbone system for the proposed development. (2) The following roadways shall be designated as major arterials: California Street from Palmetto Avenue to Almond Avenue Alabama Street from the Santa Ana River to Lugonia Avenue San Bernardino Avenue from California Street to Route 30. (3) The following roadways shall be designated as major highways: Palmetto Avenue from California Street to Alabama Street Lugonia Avenue from New Jersey Street to Route 30. (4) The following roadways shall be designated as secondary highways: Nevada Street from San Bernardino Avenue to Lugonia Avenue (5) The following roadways shall be designated as collectors: Pioneer Avenue from California Street to Route 30 Collector connecting Palmetto Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue, west of Nevada Street Collector connecting Palmetto Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue, east of Nevada Street (6) In instances where roadways are designated on the Circulation Plan where no road currently exists, the location and design standards, including the grade and alignment, will be determined by the reviewing authority at the time of submittal of design plans for the individual project. (f) Road Standards (1 ) Standards and specifications for transportation facilities and all work within the road rights-of-way shall conform to the County's RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 27 Standards and Specifications Manual unless specifically modified herein. Typical sections of roads within the planning area are shown in Figures EC-2 through EC-6. (2) Right-of-way shall be required as shown on the Planning Area Circulation map except in the following instances: (A) On Califomia Street between Palmetto Avenue and Almond Avenue. the existing fan palm row shall be placed in a 22- foot landscaped median. To accommodate this median. the road right-of-way shall be 126 feet instead of 120 feet on this stretch. (6) On Palmetto Avenue between California Street and the existing alignment of Nevada Street, the existing double row of fan palms will be placed in a 34-foot landscaped median. To accommodate this median, the road right-of-way shall be 106 feet instead of 104 feet on this stretch. (3) In order to accommodate medians and parkways landscaped with fan palm rows, sidewalks shall be placed outside of the right-of-way on the following streets. In these instances, the reviewing agency shall be granted a sidewalk easement for maintenance. San Bernardino Avenue Alabama Street Palmetto Avenue between California Street and Nevada Street (4) Access control standards shall be as follows: (A) (B) (C) (0) RAH:JS #187160.01 09114101 No direct driveway access from individual residences shall be permitted onto major arterials, major highways or secondary highways. Intersections shall be placed a minimum of 400 feet centerline to centerline from freeway on and off ramps. Offset intersections shall be a minimum of 300 feet centerline to centerline. Access shall be controlled on major arterials and major highways to minimize curb cuts and facilitate the flow of traffic. Any new development or subdivision of land adjacent to these roadways shall be required to dedicate vehicular access rights, except where access points are shown on an approved Site Plan. Shared access and parking, and use of side streets for access, shall be required whenever possible. 28 (E) (F) (G) RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 All development proposals shall be designed so as to provide for a free flow of vehicles in and out of the site as well as for easy access to the various activity areas within each site. Placement of access points into each site shall minimize interference with the off-site circulation system. Where medians are located in the street fronting the site, driveways should be provided where median breaks occur. (H) Adequate provisions shall be made for emergency vehicle access, with a minimum of two (2) points of ingress and egress provided to each site. 29 . 't. R/W R/W IlO' . 60' 60' 8' 0 5Z' 52' 8' 10' IZ' IZ' I.' .' .' I.' IZ' 12' 10' l- I- I- MIN. MIN. l- I- I- % Z % % % % 0 0 0 , 0 ij 0 ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ _20/. -20/0 '.' . " . ". . " ," ..... .. ,..' " .,."... . .. " L- CURB a GUTTER CURB- SIDEWALK (SEE-STD. 109) TYPICAL SECTION WITH RAISED MEDIAN R/W 't. R/W , IZO' (MIN.) 60' 60' S' 5Z' 5" 0' 10' IZ' IZ' IZ' 6' 6' IZ' :121 12' 10' l- I- l- I- I- lz l- I- Z Z Z Z Z % % 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ., ~ ., ., L-- _20/. -20/. . .. .. "" .. .. .. . . .. .. . . .. . . ..' . . . . . . - CURB a GUTTER SIDEWALK- (SEE STD. 109 J TYPICAL SECTION WITH CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE NOTES: I. STRUCTURAL SECTION OF ROADWAY SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM SOILS TESTS AND SO INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. Z. DRAINAGE FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED TO DEWATER RAISED MEDIAN AREAS. 3.ID' SHOULDER AREAS MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A BIKE LANE AND EMERGENCY PARKING ONLY. FIGURE EC.2 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114101 MAJOR ARTERIAL 30 ~ R!W R!W 100'IMIII.I 5Z' 5" IZ' 00' 40' IZ' 10' IZ' 10' .' 0' 10' IZ' 10' I- Iz MIN. MIN. l- I- % % % 0 0 , 0 0 ~ ~ 1- ~ ~ -20/0 -20/0 ..'........ . ,',," . "LcURB .. " . '.. L SIDEWALK -CURB a GUTTER (SEE STD. 109 ) : i TYPICAL SECTION WITH RAISED MEDIAN R!W ~ R!W , 104' 5Z' 5Z' IZ' .0' 40' IZ' 10' IZ' IZ' 6' 6' IZ' '(2' '10' l- I- l- I- Iz I- Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 , 0 0 il ~ ~ , \ ~ ~ -Z% ..2O/" L CURB a '~UTTER .. . SIDEWALKJ (SEE STD. 109) TYPICAL SECTION WITH CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE NOTES: I. STRUCTURAL SECTION OF ROADWAY SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM SOILS TESTS AND SO INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTlOII PLANS. Z. DRAINAGE FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED TO DEWATER RAISED MEDIAN AREAS. 3,10' SHOULDER AREAS MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A BIKE LANE AND EMERGENCY PARKING DilLY. FIGURE EC.3 MAJOR HIGHWAY RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 31 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 RfW ... I. 88 44' 32' 12' 12' 12' 12' e' ... ... ... z 0 z z ~ 0 6 ~ 20/0 1 SEE NOTE I SIDEWALK (SEE STD. 109) R/YI 44' 12' '32' 8' 12' ... ... ~ ~ ...,~..., CURB a GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION NOTES: I. STRUCTURAL. SECTION OF ROADWAY SHAL.L. BE DETERMINED FROM SOILS TESTS AND SO INDICATED 'ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. 2. B' SHOULDER AREAS MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A BIKE L.ANE AND EMERGEN- CY PARKING ONLY. FIGURE EC-4 .SECON DARY HIGHWAY 32 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114101 R!W I \ 11' I 4' IO.!!' SLOPE 14" I ~l LA G 33' t I ~i' 22' 1\' 33' R/W I ---~ \ IO.~' SLOPE .' \ Y;': I' I zz' II' II' II' ~~ LEVEL UNE o B C .., II' . . . . .... SIDEWALK- 6' ~ o .. -z,O SEE NOTES 0- __2.00/0 CURD 0. GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION LEVEL ALTERNATE SIDEWALK (I~ SHOIIN CN PLAN) II' It II' .l I- Z o .., LEVEL ~ B j/C , I- Z il _ 3.00/0 2.00/0 TYPICAL SECTION TILT A B C 0 aU CURB LEVEL 0.00' 0.36' 0.141 o~," TILT 0.7&' I.OZ' 0.69' 0.361 6" CURB LEVEL 0.00' 0.19' (O.C3~ 0.19' ( ) INDICATES ABCVE TILT 0.76' 0.85' O.~z' C.IS' LEVEL LINE NOTE L STRUCTURAL SECTICN OF RCACWAY SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM SCILS TESTS AND so. INDICATED CN CCNSTRUCTICN PLANS, Z. MINIMUM DESIGN PAVING THICXNESS SHALL BE 0..20 ASPI1AI.T CONCRETE. 3. CCNSTRUCTICN OUTSIDE R!W WILL REQUIRE SLOPE EASEMENTS. FIGURE EC-S COLLECTOR STREET 33 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 T I t I 60' 30' 12' IB' IB' 113.5' rz.~' ~.5' ~5' ... z y_8 ... z 6 -0 ..Y J-LEVEL LINE SL.OPE A 1/0"1' ~~ iLC .:.. .', _ 002.00/0 CURO (I GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION LEVEL t L .. "'" [:~~ [/:., _ ~.oO/o 2.0% TYPI CAL SECTION TILT' A D C 0 en CURe LEVEL 0.00' 0.33' O.Zz' 0.33' TILT O.4ol!1' 0.66' O.~O'\ 0.33' 6n CURB LEVEL 0.00 0.16' 0.05' 0.16' TILT 0.44' 0.49' 0.33' 0.15 30' T I 12' 12.5' 10.5' S~?,P~ ':'=1 .. ~ ....~ SIOEWI,LK I 6' I ~..,jJ ...~ I ALTERt/ATE SIDEWAU< (IF SHOWN ON PLI,N) NOTE I. STRUCTURAL SECTION OF ROl,OWAY SHALL (IE OETERMINEO FROM SOILS TESTS AND so INDICATED ON CONSTRUCTION F!LANS. 2. MINIMUM DESIGN PAYING THICKNESS SHALL BE 0.2.0' ASPHALT CONCRETE. 3, CONSTRUCTION MSIOE R/W WILL REQUIRE SLOPE EI,SEMENTS " WHEN PREPARING SUBGRAOE FOR PAVING, CENTERLINE CROWN 0" THE "LEVEL stCTION" SHI,LL BE RElOet,TEO EITH;;:R LEFT OR RlCHr O.~O' ro MI,TCH CROWN BREAK IN PAVING MACHINE. FIGURE EC,6 LocAL STREET 34 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (5) Intersection design shall conform to the following standards: (A) Intersections less than 80 degrees shall not be permitted without special approval from the reviewing agency. The 90- degree angle is preferable. (B) If offset streets are to be continuous, they shall be curved to approach the intersection so as to effect a right-angle alignment. (C) At intersections where additional traffic lanes are indicated by traffic analysis, provision shall be made for requiring additional right-of-way and curb width within 300 feet of the intersection. (6) The following streets shall have landscaped center medians: Palmetto Avenue California Street, from Barton Road to Palmetto Avenue (7) No parking, except for emergency parking, shall be allowed on any street which has four or more lanes, (includes major arterials, major highways, and secondary highways). (8) Cul-de-sac standards shall be as follows: (A) Cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum paved radius of 40 feet. (B) Length of cul-de-sac shall not exceed 600 feet. (9) Private streets shall be constructed in accordance with approved Planned Development Standards. (g) Special Landscaped Streets The dominant design element for the East Valley Corridor Planning Area will consist of unified streetscape themes to be established throughout the planning area, incorporating consistency of setbacks, street planting, berming, walls and sidewalks. In order to establish this consistency, major arterials within the planning area have been designated as Special Landscaped Streets, with specific design guidelines developed for each one. A key element of the streetscape design, providing a dramatic and recognizable image for the area, will be a continuation of the existing grid pattern of Washingtonia Robusta palms (Mexican fan palms), both north and south of Interstate 10. Understory plantings of canopy type street 35 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 trees, shrubs and groundcover will provide shade, color and a more human scale to the streetscape. The landscape design and plant palette . for each major street is intended to be consistent throughout the planning area. Properties which abut any of the streets listed below must landscape the area adjacent to the roadway as provided in Subsections 86.030625(g)(1) through (5). The only improvements which may encroach into this landscaped area are driveway entrances, sidewalks, planters, fences or walls not to exceed three and a half (3-1/2) feet in height. Parking areas adjacent to roadways are subject to the landscape requirements of Section 86.030630(i). Specific design and/or plant materials may be modified at the discretion of the approving agency when there is a conflict with the location of public utilities. Development applications requesting a deviation from specific design standards or plant materials shall clearly identify what conflict exists with public utilities, what specific standards apply, and how the conflict will be resolved. The approving agency may modify adopted design or plant material requirements when a demonstrated conflict with public utilities exists that cannot be resolved without deviating from adopted standards. Special Landscaped Streets within the East Valley Corridor area include the following: San Bernardino Avenue Alabama Street Califomia Street Palmetto Avenue, between California and Alabama Streets Lugonia Avenue (1) SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE San Bemardino Avenue is designated as a major arterial and is a major east-west thoroughfare connecting the cities of Redlands and San Bernardino. The predominant designated land use adjacent to this street is Planned Development, with some General Commercial adjacent to the Tennessee freeway. Most of the area around San Bernardino Avenue is presently undeveloped, with orange groves and field crops the major uses in this area. The intent of the landscape guidelines for San Bernardino Avenue is to extend the palm row landscape element, enhance the identity of the East Valley Corridor on a major roadway, and create an aesthetic buffer between the street and planned commercial and industrial uses. Setbacks 36 Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet. Sidewalk Six (6') foot straight sidewalk, eight (8') feet from back of curb. Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees New planting of single row of Washingtonia robusta on each side of roadway between curb and sidewalk, planted forty (40') feet on center. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted in landscaped setback area on regular spacing, in triangular pattern with palm rows. Salvage and relocate existing mature palms as roadway is widened. (2) ALABAMA STREET Alabama Street, which parallels the Tennessee freeway to the west, is designated as a major arterial. Alabama connects Redlands to the community of Highland, and serves as the only arterial access into this portion of the planning area from the north. The existing crossing of Alabama over the Santa Ana River Wash is a causeway which is subject to inundation and washing out. The Circulation Plan calls for construction of a bridge at this location, to make this crossing all-weather. Land use designations along Alabama include a wide mix of uses from north to south, including Commercial, Industrial, and Planned Development. The portion of Alabama north of Lugonia is agricultural, so the opportunity to create a wider, more spacious landscaped area exists north of Interstate 10. The intent of the landscape guidelines for Alabama Street is to create a unified appearance along the street throughout the planning area despite varying land uses, while recognizing existing development and building on established landscape treatment. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 37 i-U- Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet south of 1-10, 30 feet north of 1-10. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks behind palm planting area. Groundplane Berms or other screening required where parking areas are visible from right-of-way. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf or ground cover. Street Trees Single row of Washingtonia robusta, planted forty (40') feet on center; understory of Platanus acerifolia, regularly spaced in triangular pattern with.palms. (3) CALIFORNIA STREET California Street is designated as a major arterial and provides a major gateway into the planning area from Interstate 10, both to the north and the south. North of 1-10, the predominant land use designation is Planned Development and the area is undeveloped above Lugonia. South of 1-10, Multiple Residential is the only land use designation adjacent to California Street. The landscape guidelines for California Street emphasize the importance of this roadway in establishing the identity of the East Valley Corridor, due to its high visibility from the freeway, anticipated traffic volume, planned link to a regional trail system, and central location. Because of these factors, a wide landscaped median and parkways are planned for the portion of California north of 1-10, where no existing development will be affected. South of 1-10, the median will be reduced in size and the trail system will be routed onto Citrus Avenue. Setbacks RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 38 Building setback line (from property line) 30. feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 30. feet. . Where trail system is not adjacent to roadway, setbacks may be a minimum of 25 feet but must average 30 feet. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks adjacent to curb. Bike Trail Class I bike path on east side of California Street between Palmetto Avenue and Lugonia Avenue (per Section 86.030625(m). Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Berms encouraged on parkways. Groundcover Within Public RiQht-of-Way Turf Street Trees New planting of single row of Washingtonia robusta on each side of roadway adjacent to curb, planted forty (40') feet on center. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted in landscaped setback area on regular spacing, in triangular pattern with palm rows. Median North of Interstate 10, phase median into roadway north of Lugonia Avenue. Between Almond Avenue and Palmetto Avenue, retain existing row of Washingtonia robusta in median. Use occasional understory groupings of crape myrtle. Use river rock in median noses. (4) PALMETTO AVENUE, between California and Alabama Streets Palmetto Avenue is designated as a major highway between California Street and Alabama Street. It will serve to carry traffic between those two major arterials, and to provide access to the adjacent land designated for Regional Industrial and Planned Development. Two existing rows of Washingtonia robusta, planted RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 39 approximately 22 feet apart, extend along Palmetto between Califomia Street and Nevada Street. It is the intent of the landscape guidelines to maintain consistency with the design concepts for California Street, and to preserve and extend the existing palm rows on Palmetto Avenue. Setbacks Building Setback line (from property line) 30' feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 30' feet. 'Where trail system is not adjacent to roadway, setbacks may be a minimum of 25 feet but must average 30 feet. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks adjacent to curb. Bike Trail Class I bike path on north side of Palmetto Avenue (per section 86.030625(m). Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Groundcover within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted thirty (30') feet on center. Median Between California Street and (existing) Nevada Street, place double palm row in 34-foot median. Between Nevada Street and Alabama Street, plant new row of Washingtonia Robusta palm trees thirty (30') feet on center in triangular pattern with camphor trees on parkways. Use occasional understory groupings of crape myrtle. Use river rock in median noses. (5) LUGONIA AVENUE Lugonia Avenue is designated as a major highway and parallels Interstate 10 to the north. Land use designations adjacent to RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 40 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 Lugonia include General Commercial and Planned Development. An existing landscape element developed on Lugonia is the citrus grove adjacent to Edwards Mansion, a primary focal point on this street. The intent of the landscape guidelines on Lugonia Avenue is to create a spacious, uncluttered "greenbelt" appearance conducive to business park development. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet. Sidewalks Meandering sidewalk, six (6') foot width, minimum of three (3') feet from back of curb, per Section 86.030625(1)(1) and (3). Groundplane Berms or other screening required where parking areas are visible from right-of-way. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) and Liquidambar styriciflua planted with random spacing or in grove effect, to provide varied streetscape with view windows, at the equivalent of one tree per thirty (30') linear feet of frontage. (h) Special Landscape Requirements for Other Streets (1) In addition to existing palm rows along Special Landscaped Streets as outlined in Section 86.030625(g), the following streets within the planning area have rows of Washingtonia robusta and Washingtonia filifera located adjacent to the roadway: Pioneer Avenue Almond Avenue Citrus Avenue Nevada Street (2) These trees shall be preserved or relocated in accordance with the guidelines contained in Section 86.030630(m). Relocated trees 41 shall be used to enhance or extend palm rows designated on Special Landscaped Streets or to enhance Special Landscaped Intersections. . (i) Setbacks at Intersections (1) As part of the streets cape design component of the Planning Area, intersections shall be designed to provide a unified character throughout the planning area. Intersections shall be classified as follows: (A) Primary intersections: Alabama Street and Palmetto Avenue Alabama Street and Lugonia Avenue (b) Secondary intersections: San Bernardino Avenue and Nevada Street San Bernardino Avenue at Tennessee Freeway (State Route 30) (2) Building setbacks from intersections shall be defined by a line in a horizontal plane. taken at a forty-five (45) degree angle. connecting the property lines. On primary intersections, this line shall be drawn 50 feet from the intersection of the property lines or prolongation of such lines; on secondary intersections. 35 feet. (See Figure EC-?) RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 42 RIGHT-OF-WAY ~ RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 PRIMARY INTERSECTION RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' SECONDARY INTERSECTION 45' RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' 35' RIGHT-OF-WAY 35' Figure EC.7 SETBACKS AT SPECIAL LANDSCAPED INTERSECTIONS 43 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (3) A clear sight area shall be established at all intersections of public or private streets within the planning area. This area shall be defined by a line in a horizontal plane, taken at a forty-five (45) degree angle, connecting two points twenty-five (25) feet from the intersection of property lines or the prolongation of such lines. (See Figure EC-8.) The maximum height of visual barriers, including but not limited to signs, vegetation, fences and walls, shall not exceed thirty-six (36) inches above the top of the curb or forty-four (44) inches above the surface of the street. RIGHT-OF-WAY -+ RIGHT-OF-WAY 25' Figure EC-S SETBACK FOR CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE G) Planting and Design Concepts for Special Landscaped Intersections (1 ) The design of enhanced comer treatments at key intersections will vary between primary and secondary classifications, but will be developed to retain a similar character which will further establish a sense of continuity throughout the planning area. The design of these comer treatments shall include a combination of masonry walls, ballards, enriched paving, and plant materials which will coordinate with the proposed streetscape planting, yet create a specific focal element. (2) The dominant plant materials or Special Landscaped Intersection shall be Washingtonia Robusta Palms along with a flowering accent tree to provide human scale and color; shrub or groundcover planting and/or flowering groundcover. 44 (3) RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 Conceptual drawings of how Primary and Secondary Intersections might be constructed are shown on Figures EC-9 and EC-10 respectively. The actual configuration of each designated intersection may differ slightly to provide for integration into the adjacent site design; provided, however, that the primary plant and building materials and design concepts as contained in this Section are adhered to in the intersection design. 45 PRIMARY INTERSECTION. ~~. ....... . _oJc,~- ~."Ioo..__ ~q~~L- ...... PLAN VIEW :t' '~~ SECilONI ElEV AllON Figure EC.9 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 46 SECONDARYINTERSECnON e.I~-~1. .,a. ~,- ........, ....-.It; tll~~. RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 1"I",t'"~' MlCaIr~ IL~,...lrl~~9Ute:. ..... ..-.,. \oW.l.. PLAN YEW , SECTION! a..evAnON Figure EC-10 47 (k) Landscape Concepts for Freeways . (1) Planting guidelines along the freeways shall be consistent with other landscape guidelines established for the Planning Area in order to enhance the continuity of landscape design and improve freeway views from both on and off the roadway. (2) Required setbacks adjacent to freeways shall be established as follows: (A) A minimum 25 feet of landscaped area shall be established adjacent to all freeway rights-of-way. (8) Within the Planned Development District, this landscaped area may be reduced to 15 feet in width if approved by the reviewing agency under the following conditions: (I) The freeway is elevated, with steep slopes adjacent to the right-of-way. (II) An additional 10 feet of landscaping shall be provided on-site so as to be visible from the freeway. (III) A 25 foot building setback shall be maintained; parking may be permitted if enhanced with canopy- type trees. (C) All buildings shall be setback an average of fifty (50) feet from all Caltrans property lines, unless the reviewing authority finds that such a setback would severely constrain the reasonable use of a parcel due to its configuration or location. (3) The plant palette for freeway landscaping shall include the following: (A) Trees Washingtonia Robusta, 10 foot trunk @ 40 feet on center. (8) Shrubs (all 1 gallon minimum @ 8 feet on center) Dodonaea Viscosa Leptospermum Scoparium Nerium Oleander Photinia Fraseri Tecomaria Capensis RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14101 48 Raphiolepis Indica Pyracantha Species (C) Groundcover Hedera Helix Lantana Species ----- --Pfi-Wftnln rneCa\transiignt:m~way. upgraaea1anoscaping1nsta11ed1ly---- - property owners shall be coordinated with Caltrans. A 30 foot setback shall be maintained between the edge of the travel lane and any tree planting. The property owner shall bond for maintenance of the plant materials as required by Caltrans. (5) Conceptual renderings of freeway planting guidelines are shown in Figure EC-11. RAH:JS #167160.01 09/14/01 49 _\.l~~"'!' ItJ~q:.. 1 I f ilk ~\t I~ FREEWAY EDGE SECTION :tLS1 ~ l"""""-'1P'<'-p".,trl "1Dl'....nI_...""IIr. ......"R<-IMlE. llf'."."....,o~.lc,~ ~""Il:r.DI'.""i.", ~ cAfr1~~r<<~. !"I'''' -~..." ~ '>'ld.l~"'d\..lHl'1\.l-f. ..,..~......!.........-... "" _ ..,.".....0 ~ '" fI'Or!!:.-rf...,.... Loltn4,:.oom~ I.Il'-rr\1.. ..~ -.-.. ..... ellllJb~ CfN'L-t.r.....~. IJ .6 ~fII!1'I.,...,...k'M- -.~......--.... ./WO_. ........-1.. '""'""~.~ FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAN VIEW Figure EC.11 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 50 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (I) Pedestrian Circulation and Open Space (1) Sidewalks shall be required on all public streets within the planning area. Sidewalks shall be constructed of concrete, with a minimum clear width of five (5) feet. Any sidewalk constructed adjacent to curb shall be a minimum of six (6) feet wide. Any sidewalk constructed within two and one half (2 1/2) feet of back of curb shall join to back of curb. Sidewalk shall be three (3) feet away from curb face except at curb returns and bus stops. -- _n - -- - - -- - -- - -- -- - (2) Additional sidewalks may be required during the design review stage of development processing. The following design standards shall apply in the determination of sidewalk locations: (A) The sidewalk system shall provide for a safe, continuous pedestrian circulation and access system to all parts of the development. Pedestrian access shall be provided from public streets and parking lots to building entries, and walkways provided on-site shall connect with those off-site. (B) The sidewalk system shall connect to pedestrian trails through the open-space areas. (3) The following standards shall apply to meandering sidewalks: (A) Radii for curved sidewalk shall be between 200 and 600 feet. (B) All radii shall be staggered. (C) Maximum sidewalk grade shall not exceed 8.33% regardless of street grade. (4) Curb cuts for handicapped access shall be provided on all roadways as required by State law. (5) Bus turnouts and bus shelters may be required during the design- review stage of development processing. These facilities shall be designed to maximize security features and shall be located in proximity to both traffic signals and pedestrian crosswalks, so as to provide for ease of ingress for buses and ease of access for pedestrians. Bus stops shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet in length. (6) Building configuration and placement shall provide for pedestrian courtyards, plazas, or open spaces between and/or adjacent to buildings. 51 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (7) The design of pedestrian plazas or courtyards shall provide shaded seating areas with attractive landscaping and should include water features. public art, kiosks. and covered walkways. (8) Benches, light standards, trash receptacles, and other street furniture shall be provided in an attractive and comfortable setting and shall be designed to enhance the appearance and function of a site and open space areas. (m) Trails System (1) There is an opportunity in the East Valley Corridor to establish a trail system which will link up with regional trail systems to provide for both an energy efficient alternative to the automobile. and for recreational use within the planning area. (2) Figure EC-12 illustrates the trail system proposed for the planning area. The proposed facilities include: (A) Commuter bikeways which are parallel to major roads and provide the most direct route for the work trip. (8) Recreational pedestrian paths and bikeways which mayor may not be adjacent to a roadway, are generally located in open space or landscaped areas and serve to provide the local pedestrian and bicycle circulation network. (3) There shall be two classes of bikeways in the East Valley Corridor: (A) Class I Bikeway (Bike Paths) - are facilities with exclusive rights-of-way, separated from other vehicular rights-of-way, with cross flows by motorists minimized, serving the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. 52 .... ..:-. " f L - J ..~.. N ~ r: I .. ~ 0 - ~ III - , -0/ ~ III - , a: I , ::l , , 0 , u: ..:. ...- A;/fp , " -- , , , , , , , I ^ , , , I~ , , :z:; ! " ,IF, ; ~~ ~ - -t"iK -.;:j I , 0.. \ /l{ .. r- c u j I ~ "",\11 , -., < ~ - : c.-. , - 0 I III Ht::. ,- , '-., I -I . Ii ~ ft~ , .u. I U . .~ ,.; I ~ ~ :... I 0.. :"" j I ~\ -::i c/:l ,l>. It.:1. ~~ ~J 't' I-- I' - ::E , , , , ~ w J. II. llN~ 0:11[1" ~ , l- . C , . .. . , = III - '" C " , C ..:.. > - . ~ .. .. l:::l --, ---- -- ---- ~- E . III - --- -~-- a;: I' ~ .. -., - .. .. - :! . " . 0.-= c::' , . - ~I II .... ~ a < 'C . a ~ ~ a: In ~ ... 1..0. a ::! - .... .. .. ~ E = I- 0( V :.. i ' . '" ..... .;. U a: ~ Iii< I.:.. "a . ;; c .. t- ..: .. ..y ,.. .. J ,.. . '1/ .. >- J: .. . " ',' , .. a " .. .. :>- "' W ~ J ;: c :a In " .. 0 . , .. .-;: - ~ - .. ~ ~ .. a a .. .. .. -.;:j 0 , I ~ . C .. .. a: ~ u 'a ..... ~ .. 'I .. -. - .. U -.;:j a: _ .. H : 0. ~ ..- ... - V> 0 ,,-E "'" C M;t. ~ "", u- ..- .. :::- " .. .. C .. J 0( z -; U E J" C a: t- =:a , .. ~ ~ E-. t- V> a. _.~ - ~ ~ 'x a .. .. " .. a.. ,'" .. c/:l "' "' .. ~ .. " ~l ~ .. .. '" .. - V> 0 ....~ ..... .. 0 t- ~~ ~~ .. ::a.!! - C ~ .. 4j .0 ~ .. c 0 '" - .. ~ " .. .. a: z ..-a . .. :E :; ~ - e : E ~ C .. ..- .. I a- ",,, .. u u" .. ~ . ..:.. .. C .. a , , , .. . .. .. E .. , , , , I , '-- , ~ '- - - - , - - , llfi .. .. - .. .. ~ ~ U U RAH:JS #187160.01 . 09/14/01 53 (B) Class II Bikeway (Bike Paths) - are bicycle lanes for preferential use by bicycles established within the paved area of highways and designated by specific lines of demarcation between the areas reserved for bicycles and lanes to be occupied by motor vehicles. (4) The following standards shall apply to Class I Bikeways: (A) Bicycle paths shall be two-way routes. (B) The minimum paved width for a two-way bike path shall be 8 feet. A minimum 2-foot wide graded area shall be provided adjacent to the pavement. (See Figure EC-13) (C) A minimum 2-foot horizontal clearance to obstructions shall be provided adjacent to the pavement. (D) The vertical clearance to obstructions across the clear width of the path shall be a minimum of 8 feet. (E) Bike paths closer than 5 feet from the edge of a highway shall include a physical divider such as fencing, berms, trees or shrubbery to prevent bicyclists from encroaching onto the highway. (5) The following standards shall apply to Class II Bikeways: (A) Bike lanes shall be one-way facilities. (B) Where required, bike lanes shall occupy the emergency parking lane along major arterials, major highways and secondary highways, with widths of 8 to 10 feet. Painted demarcation lines shall define the bicycle lane, with appropriate freestanding and pavement signs. (See street cross-sections under transportation standards.) (6) Bikeways shall be constructed in accordance with the California Highway Design Manual, Bikeway Planning and Design. (7) Drainage inlet grates, manhole covers, driveways, etc., on bikeways should be designed and installed in a manner that provides an adequate surface for bicyclists. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 54 TWO-WAY BIKE PATH ON SEPARATED RIGHT-OF-WAY J(~ ..~' '?-:(:- . r'": \:,r~ ' >'j; }S;i 1f'~'..+.: T~ ~ T.\ "';'" " 8 (Min) ,',,:,:; I ...of;:'.., ',:., , ... :&fi.~1~i;;!~if~~~1\ff~;\\ . ..~ ::: -,-L:..) \ ,... >;;M;"~;d;h .: .... . . \ i~;;" \.-,: . . . . '. Graded . ....... Paved .' .' ". '. Graded .... . " . . " . .:.... '... .' ..', . TYPICAL CROSS SECTION BIKE PATH ALONG HIGHWAY ., ., .. , ,H,iahwoy E"'" ,';;m" ,.:1\ 2% - - . ., ., ,. , 5' (Min.l . L Bil<.e Palh \ , Two-WaY'. 8 Minimum Width Figure EC-13 RAH:JS #187160,01 09/14/01 55 (8) Uniform signs, markings, and traffic control devices are mandatory and shall conform to the requirements of State law. (9) Pedestrian and bicycle pathways which are not associated with roadways shall be located to take advantage of attractive natural drainage areas whenever possible; landscaping and lighting shall be provided to create an attractive environment in the area of pedestrian and bike pathways to encourage their use. (10) All bike and pedestrian pathways shall have adequate lighting and signing to provide for the safety of the users. (11) At-grade trail crossings shall be provided for at signalized intersections wherever possible. (12) Bike storage facilities shall be provided in commercial and mixed use areas. (n) Parks and Open Space The specific demand on location of parks and open space can not be determined until the land uses established within the Planned Development District have been determined. Implementation of park and open space provision, construction and maintenance shall be determined by the County through implementation of ordinances and procedures. 86.030630 Site Design Standards and Guidelines. (a) Parking Requirements (1) Adequate parking requirements and standards shall be provided on-site for each use within the Planning Area in accordance with the requirements contained in Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. (2) Parking structures shall be permitted within the plan area; exterior design shall be architecturally compatible with main building. Parking structure should merge with or extend from main building rather than be an isolated structure. Autos should be screened to a height of 3'6" to 4' on each level, and the space remaining above the screening element, up to the ceiling of the next floor, shall remain open and unobstructed. Facades should be multi-textured or have other architectural relief. (b) Loading Areas RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 56 (1) All hospitals, institutions, hotels, commercial and industrial uses shall provide loading spaces not less than ten (10) feet in width, twenty (20) feet in length and fourteen (14) feet in height as follows: Square Feet of Building Space (Gross Floor Area) Loading Spaces Required Commercial Buildings 3,000 - 15,000 15,001 - 45,000 45,001 - 75,000 75,001 - 105,000 105,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Industrial Buildings 3,500 - 40,000 40,001 - 80,000 80,001 - 120,000 120,001 - 160,000 160,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Hospitals and Instituitions 3,000 - 20,000 20,001 - 50,000 50,001 - 80,000 80,001 - 110,000 110,001- and over 1 2 3 4 5 Hotels and Office Buildings 3,000 - 50,000 50,001 - 100,000 100,001 - and over 1 2 3 (2) All loading facilities and maneuvering areas shall be located on-site with the use. (3) Sites shall be designed so that parking areas are separate from loading areas. (4) Adequate space shall be provided for stacking of vehicles waiting to load or unload, out of the public right-of-way and parking areas. (5) Backing of trucks from public right-of-way onto site for loading shall be allowed only at the ends of cul-de-sac streets. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 57 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 (6) No loading facilities shall be located at the front of the structure; loading facilities shall be permitted only in the rear and interior side yard areas. (7) Aisle width to loading docks shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet width exclusive of truck parking area. (8) Loading facilities shall be adequately screened from the public view by use of walling, landscaping or building design. (9) Minimum aisle width adjacent to loading areas shall be sixteen (16) feet one way and twenty-six (26) feet for two way. (10) On structures within view of freeways, loading areas should be oriented away from public view from the freeway and from oncoming traffic along freeways. For example, structures located on the west side of Route 30 should have loading areas located on the south side of the building. (11) Loading area shall be designed as an integral part of the building's architecture. (12) Concrete pads shall be required at all loading bays. (c) Site Lighting (1) Lighting shall be required on all new development for the purpose of providing illumination to ensure public safety and security. Lighting fixtures shall be functional, coordinated and visually attractive. Lighting shall be required at the following locations: (A) Pedestrian walkways and plazas. (B) Building entries, driveway entries and parking (C) Hazardous locations, such as changes of grade and stairways, shall be well-lit with lower-level supplemental lighting or additional overhead units. (2) Lights shall be placed so as not to cause glare or excessive light spillage on neighboring sites. (3) All parking lot and driveway lighting shall provide uniform illumination at a minimum level of 0.5 foot candle. (4) All light fixtures are to be concealed source fixtures except for pedestrian-oriented accent lights. 58 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (5) Security lighting fixtures are not to project above the fences or roof line of the building and are to be shielded. The shields shall be painted to match the surface to which they are attached. Security lighting fixtures are not to be substituted for parking lot or walkway lighting fixtures and are restricted to lighting only loading and storage locations, or other similar service areas. (6) Exterior wall-mounted floodlights are expressly prohibited except for security lighting in areas as noted above. (7) All illuminated signs are to be internally illuminated. (8) Lighting of building faces is permitted. (9) The design of all lighting fixtures and their structural support shall be architecturally compatible with the surrounding buildings. (10) Walkway lighting fixtures shall have an overall height not to exceed twelve (12) feet. (11) Parking lot fixtures shall have an overall height not to exceed thirty (30) feet or the height of adjacent buildings, whichever is less. (12) When walkway lighting is provided primarily by low fixtures, there shall be sufficient peripheral lighting to illuminate the immediate surroundings to ensure public safety. Shatter-proof coverings are recommended on low-level fixtures. (d) Site Utilities (1 ) Utility easements shall be required as needed through the development review process. (2) All existing and new utilities of 12KV or less within the project and along adjacent major arterials shall be installed underground. Where possible, all overhead lines greater than 12KV shall be placed along the rear property line, away from arterial highways. (3) All ground-mounted utility appurtenances, including but not limited to telephone pedestals, utility meters. irrigation system back-flow preventors, and transformers, shall be located behind the building setback line where possible, and shall be adequately screened through the use or combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and landscape materials. 59 (e) Compatibility Standards , (1) Where a Planned Development area abuts a residential district, an orderly transition of uses and building types should be established as follows: (A) There should not be a drastic and abrupt building scale change; the transition from residential to more intensive building types should be gradual, in order to prevent massive structures from dominating and intruding upon neighborhoods. Smaller buildings should be located near the residential area, with the largest buildings farther away. (B) Land uses should transition gradually from residential to more intensive uses. In placing uses within these transitional areas, consideration should be given to traffic generation, truck traffic, hours of operation, noise, light and glare, and other characteristics which might impact adjacent residential neighborhoods. (2) Every use of land or building shall operate in conformity with the following performance standards: (A) (B) (C) RAH:JS #187160,01 09/14/01 Vibrations: Every use shall be so operated that maximum ground vibration generated is not perceptible without instruments at any point in the boundary of the district in which the use is located. Noise: Every use shall be so operated that the maximum volume of sound or noise generated does not exceed sixty- five (65) decibels from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and forty-five (45) decibels from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. in areas which abut residential land uses. Measurement of maximum sound or noise volume can be taken at any point on the lot line of the lot on which the use is located. Odor: Every use shall be so operated that no offensive or objectionable odor is perceptible at any point on the boundary of the district in which the use is located. (D) Smoke: Every use shall be so operated that no smoke from any source shall be emitted of a greater density described in No. 2 on the Ringelmann Chart as published by the United States Bureau of Mines. (E) Toxic Gases: Every use shall be so operated that there is no emission of toxic, noxious or corrosive fumes of gases. 60 (F) Emissions: Every use shall be so operated that there is no emission of dirt, dust, fly ash, and other forms of particulate matter. (G) Radiation: Every use shall be so operated that there is no dangerous amount of radioactive emissions. (H) Glare and Heat: Any operation producing intense glare or heat shall be conducted in a manner as to effectively screen the glare from view at any point on the lot line of the lot in which the use is located and to dissipate the heat so that it is not perceptible without instruments at any point on the lot line of the lot on which the use is located. (I) Hazardous Materials: Every use shall be consistent with the provisions of the San Bernardino County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. (3) Where General Commercial or Industrial uses or districts abut residential districts or residential portions of Planned Developments, setbacks and buffering shall be established as follows: (A) Adjacent to residential parcel: No building proposed for commercial/industrial use shall be constructed less than forty (40) feet from any adjoining property recommended for residential land use in or contiguous to the Planning Area or Planned Development. (B) Adjacent to residential street: Buildings shall be at least forty (40) feet from the ultimate right-of-way line along any street abutting a residential area, with the exception that structures of less than twenty (20) feet in height may encroach into the required setback area no more than fifteen (15) feet and may cover no more than fifty (50) percent of the required setback area. (C) No building shall be constructed to a height greater than its distance from any adjoining property recommended for residential land use in or contiguous to the Planning Area or Planned Development, unless the reviewing agency finds that approval of a waiver of this requirement will not adversely affect adjacent property. In no case shall industrial RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 61 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 or commercial structures be so tall as to block natural s!Jnlight from adjacent residential yards. (0) A landscaped area not less than thirty-five (35) feet in width shall be provided between a commercial or industrial structure and a residential district. Within this landscaped area a continuous visual screen of a minimum width of ten (10) feet shall be maintained adjacent to all interior property lines which abut residential lots. Screening may be provided by means of fences, decorative masonry walls, berms, changes in elevation, and/or plant materials. Where such screening has been provided on the residential side of the property line, this requirement may be reduced or waived by the reviewing agency. (4) Outdoor storage areas, loading areas or refuse collection facilities shall be located no less than sixty (60) feet from any adjoining property zoned or used for residential land uses. Any materials stored adjacent to residential areas shall be totally screened by the wall or landscape screen provided. (5) Additional landscaping, block walls, or increased setbacks may be required through the development review process to ensure land use compatibility. (6) An acoustical analysis shall be required for new single or multiple family residential development proposed adjacent to freeways, highways, arterials, rail lines, and under flight paths. The analysis shall indicate the existing and proposed CNEL's (Community Noise Equivalency Levels) on the site, and the method(s) by which the noise is to be controlled or reduced to no more than 65 dB within the exterior living space, and 45 dB within the interior living space of the project. (f) Refuse Areas (1 ) All waste materials shall be stored in an enclosed area and shall be accessible to service vehicles. Wastes which might cause fumes or dust, or which constitute a fire hazard, or which may be edible by, or otherwise be attractive to, rodents or insects shall be stored only in closed containers in required enclosures. (2) A six (6) foot high masonry wall shall be constructed around all refuse collection areas. Trash enclosures shall have solid wood or metal doors. 62 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 (3) Refuse collection areas shall not be constructed between the frontage street and the building line, or adjacent to or visible from freeways. (g) Screening, Fences and Walls (1 ) (2) (3) (4) All loading areas, mechanical equipment, outside storage, refuse areas, or other uses as determined by the reviewing agency shall be screened if located within seventy (70) feet of a front property line. Any fence or wall that is constructed on a lot that contains an on- site slope shall be constructed at the top of the uphill side of such a slope. No fence or wall and no landscaping which obstructs visibility shall be permitted within the corner cut-off areas defined in Section 86.03063(i). A six (6) foot high fence or wall shall be constructed along the perimeter of all areas considered by the reviewing agency to be dangerous to public health and safety. A six (6) foot high solid fence or wall shall be constructed around all open storage areas. (5) Open fences not to exceed four (4) feet in height shall be permitted within a required front yard area. For purposes of this section an open fence shall mean those types that are composed of wire mesh or wrought iron capable of admitting at least 90 percent of light. (6) Solid fences and walls not to exceed six (6) feet in height shall be permitted along side and rear property lines except that no solid fence or wall exceeding three (3) feet in height shall be located within any required front yard area. (7) Open fences as defined in subsection (5) above that are over six (6) feet in height may be located in the rear half of the lot subject to a finding by the reviewing agency that such a fence will not constitute a nuisance to abutting property owners. Such fences up to sixteen (16) feet in height located within the buildable rear yard area of a lot and not less than ten (10) feet from any property line are exempt from the requirement. (8) All required screening from public view within the Industrial and Commercial Land Use designations or such uses within a Planned Development, such as storage spaces, loading docks, and equipment, shall be architecturally integrated with the surrounding building design through the use of concrete, masonry, or other 63 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 similar materials. Solid walls within the buildable lot area shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet from the highest finished grade. If the height of the wall is not sufficient, appropriate landscaping shall be required to screen the required areas from the freeway. (9) Fencing up to a height of six (6) feet may be permitted within any streetside setback area when there is a demonstrated need for security as determined by the reviewing agency. All security fences which are within the streetside setback shall be constructed of wrought iron or similar materials with respect to quality and durability, shall transmit 90% light, and shall not obstruct views of landscaping. No chain link or barbed wire is allowed. Security fencing shall not create a sight distance problem for motorists entering or exiting the site. (h) Architectural Guidelines (1) Floor Area Ratios provide unique design flexibility in determining whether a low building covering most of a lot is beneficial or whether a taller building covering a small portion of the lot is appropriate. Maximum Floor Area Ratios (FAR) for any use within the Planning Area area shall be established as follows: (NOTE: Floor Area Ratio is determined by dividing total gross leasable area in square feet by total lot area in square feet. For example, a 20,000 square foot building on a 40,000 square foot lot yields a Floor Area Ratio of .5). (A) Office buildings: .6 of the total lot area. (B) Retail/Commercial buildings: .25 of the total lot area. (C) Regional mall: .4 of the total lot area. (0) Industrial buildings: .8 of the total lot area. (2) Floor Area Ratio Bonuses The maximum floor area ratio may be increased as shown below. The total bonus shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the permitted FAR. For example, an office building with a permitted FAR of .6 may be increased in floor area to a maximum FAR of .9 if several of the following amenities are provided. The permitted FAR bonus shall be determined by the reviewing jurisdiction, based upon its determination of the significance of amenities provided on the site. (A) Buildings providing structured parking: Bonus not to exceed twenty (20%) percent FAR. 64 I I i (B) Buildings providing amenity areas such as pedestrian arcades or plazas with significant visual features: Bonus not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the permitted FAR. Any amenity area for which a bonus is granted must comply with the following criteria: (I) The area must be in addition to that necessary to meet landscaping, park and setback requirements. (II) Minimum size: The area must contain a minimum of 4,000 square feet. (III) Location: All amenity areas must be adjacent to, and approximately level with, a public street. The difference in grade between the amenity area and the street shall not be more than three (3) feet although this requirement is not intended to prevent; mounding or terracing of landscaping within the amenity area. (IV) Visibility: The interior of the amenity area shall be visible from the street for security purposes. (V) Seating: One linear foot of bench or seating shall be provided for every 40 square foot of amenity area. Seating may be in the form of ledges. (VI) Sunlight patterns: The amenity area shall be able to receive direct sunlight on at least 30% of the surface area from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. between the spring and fall equinox. (VII) Design and landscaping: At least one major element, such as artwork or water, shall be included in the amenity area. The dominant landscape elements shall be trees and turf. The amount of impervious surface should not exceed 40% of the amenity area unless unique design considerations are offered. Where artwork is used, minimum cost of public art shall be one (1%) percent of the overall cost of the project as stated on the building permit. (C) Additional landscaping, lakes, golf course or other open space amenities: Bonus not to exceed twenty (20) percent of the permitted FAR. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 65 (D) Transportation management plan, including car and van pooling, flexible work scheduling, etc.: Bonus not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the permitted FAR. (E) Supportive uses within office and industrial buildings which provide services to employees, such as cafeterias, lounges, recreational areas, or child care facilities, may be determined to be exempt from maximum floor area ratio requirements. Determination of whether a proposed use qualifies for this exemption shall be made by the reviewing agency. This exemption may be granted only if the property owner enters into an agreement with the agency ensuring that such area remains in the exempt use. (3) The following guidelines shall apply to site design: (A) Developments should be designed to maximize any existing views of mountain ranges, open space, palm rows, or other view amenities. (B) Building placement should vary to include both parallel and skewed angles to the street plane in order to provide diversity and discourage continuous building facades along street frontage. (4) The following guidelines shall apply to building design: (A) (B) (C) RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 Building construction and design shall be used to create a structure with equally attractive sides of high quality, rather than placing all emphasis on the front elevation of the structure. Architectural facade treatments will be required on all portions of the building(s) exposed to pUblic views. Extra treatment may be given to the street frontages as long as the basic facade treatments are carried around the structure. Any accessory buildings and enclosures, whether attached to or detached from the main building, shall be of similar compatible design and materials as the main building. Large, continuous surface treatments of a single material shall be minimized. Changes in texture, relief or materials, and use of decorative features such as planters, varied roof lines, decorative windows and accent panel treatment should be encouraged. 66 (D) Pre-engineered metal buildings with corrugated exteriors are prohibited and other predominantly painted metal facade treatments are strongly discouraged. (5) Multiple Residential Site Design Guidelines (A) Buildings shall be designed in discrete units, not in one massive structure, with a non-linear facade along the street frontage. (B) Sloping roofs of varying heights are encouraged. (C) Site design shall include covered, internal parking areas, internal courtyards, and multiple entry points. (D) Design elements shall include providing extensive open space and landscape buffering between buildings; variation in building elevations and configurations between buildings and variations in building heights; use of different building materials or combinations of different materials; and contrasting color schemes between projects. (E) Recreational facilities shall be located and/or designed so as not to create nuisance to surrounding units or to impact adjacent properties. Sufficient setbacks, landscaping and berming between recreation facilities and surrounding units shall be provided to minimize noise and visual conflicts. (F) Roofing materials shall be concrete, tile or other imitation shake material. (6) Rooftop Treatment (A) Buildings shall be designed so that the architecture of the building adequately screens rooftop equipment from taller surrounding structures as well as residential uses by use of rooftop wells, parapet walls, or other means. Where possible, ground-mounted equipment shall be used in lieu of roof-mounted equipment. (B) All roof mounted equipment, including but not limited to ducts, fans and vents, must be painted to match the roof color. (C) Rooftop solar collectors, skylights and other potentially reflective elements shall be designed and installed so as to prevent glare and obstruction of views from surrounding RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 67 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114101 uses and structures. If equipment projects above building mass, it shall be screened with an enclosure which is compatible with the building design. (D) Rooftop radio, TV and microwave antennae and towers are prohibited unless approved by the Planning Commission. (E) Where large, flat rooftops are located near taller surrounding structures, they shall be designed and landscaped to be visually attractive. The use of colored gravel (earthtones, arranged in pattems) and/or planter boxes is encouraged for this purpose. (i) Landscaping Guidelines Landscaping is of primary importance to the establishment of the design character of the East Valley Corridor. The landscape guidelines are intended to promote the establishment of compatible and continuous landscape development to enhance and unify the East Valley Corridor. Specifically, the guidelines are intended to enhance and preserve the existing site character, to minimize the adverse visual and environmental impacts of large buildings and paved areas, to promote the conservation of water, and to provide micro-climate control for energy conservation where possible. (1 ) The Landscape Plan required for submission by the applicant should exhibit a design concept. Plant materials should be used in a logical, orderly manner, helping to define spaces and complement adjacent architecture. (2) Landscape designs should be coordinated between the areas of a development. However, all areas within a project need not be identical. Different landscape themes may be utilized in larger developments to distinguish spaces from one another, yet these themes should be consistent with a unifying concept which establishes a cohesive design throughout the project. (3) In addition to the selection and distribution of plant materials, landscape plans should incorporate various site furnishings and features. Lighting, seating, paving, fountains, etc., should be considered integral components of the landscape plan and therefore included in the overall landscape concept. (4) The scale and character of the landscape materials to be selected should be appropriate to the site and/or architecture. Large-scale buildings or projects require large-scale landscaping treatments. 68 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (5) Existing landscaping elements, such as mature trees, should be incorporated into landscape plans. Specimen trees or groupings of existing trees can provide a new development with immediate character. They should be viewed as design determinants. (6) Landscaping incorporated into the building design through trellises, arbors, planters, atriums, etc., is encouraged and can often enhance the quality of a building. (7) The plant palette should be relatively limited and applied in groupings of similar species rather than a few plants of many different species planted together. The use of water conserving plantings, such as California natives and drought tolerant trees, shrubs and turfs is encouraged. A list of suggested drought resistant plant materials is included in Table EC-3. (8) Live plant materials should be used in all landscaped areas. The use of gravel, colored rock, bark and other similar materials are not acceptable as a sole ground cover material. (These materials may be used, however, in place of paving materials in functional activity areas such as patios or rear entry walks, or as ground cover for up to twenty percent (20%) of the total landscaped area). (9) New plant materials should be supplied in a variety of container sizes: for shrubs - five gallon sizes, and for trees - fifteen gallon containers, are preferred. The use of larger specimen trees is encouraged. (10) Irrigation is required for all landscaped areas. Automatic systems are required. Plants should be watered and maintained on a regular basis. Irrigation systems should be designed so as not to overspray walks, buildings, fences, etc. The use of water conserving systems such as drip irrigation or moisture sensors for shrubs and tree planting is encouraged. (11) Landscape installation, in accordance with the approved plan, must occur prior to building occupancy. Where a development occurs in phases, ail landscaping fOi each phase must be installed prior to occupancy of that phase. 0) Outdoor Sales All uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building, except as follows: (1 ) Off-street parking and loading areas; 69 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (2) Automobile service station; (3) New and used auto sales; (4) Plants and vegetation associated with nurseries; (5) Open storage of materials and products and equipment when such storage is enclosed by a fence; wall, building or other means adequate to conceal such storage from view from adjoining property or the public street; (6) Restaurant - Outdoor dining area (k) Landscape Requirements for Parking Area (1) The following standards shall apply to parking areas adjacent to roadways or exposed to public view from freeways, roadways or adjacent parcels: (A) Landscaped berms, or a combination of berms, landscaping and/or wall treatments of sufficient height to substantially screen parking areas, shall be provided between parking area and right-of-way. (8) All double row parking spaces shall be separated by a five (5) foot wide planter or by planter boxes. Planters shall be enclosed by a six (6) inch continuous poured in place concrete curb. (C) Trees with a trunk height of not less than six (6) feet shall be installed in the planters at each end of an aisle, at three (3) space intervals throughout the lot, and at twenty (20) foot intervals along the periphery of the lot. Within parking lot areas, trees may be clustered in groups to achieve a more natural setting provided the total number meets the previous planting requirements. (D) At least fifty percent (50%) of the trees shaH be an evergreen variety and shall be evenly distributed throughout the lot. (E) Planter areas shall also contain ground cover and/or flowering shrubs. Drought tolerant planting is encouraged. (F) Where automobile bumpers overhang landscaped planters, two (2) feet of clear area unobstructed by trees or shrubs shall be provided for overhang. 70 (G) In large parking lots, parking areas shall be broken up into sections containing no more than 200 vehicles, with landscaped buffer areas at least eight (8) feet in width established between sections. (H) A landscaped island shall be provided for every twenty (20) parking spaces. (I) Landscaped islands, planters and peripheral landscaping together shall total at least seven (7) percent of the total parking lot area. (2) Where parking areas are located adjacent to residential districts, they shall be separated therefrom by a decorative solid masonry wall six (6) feet in height, provided said wall shall not exceed three (3) feet in height where it is in the front yard area of an abutting residential use or district. (3) Where parking areas are completely screened from public view by building placement or a combination of walling and landscaped buffers, landscaping requirements within the parking lot may be reduced at the discretion of the reviewing agency. (4) Pedestrian walkways shall be provided within parking lots to destination points. (5) When a unified landscape plan is proposed for a project site in excess of ten (10) acres, that complies with the requirements of Section 86.030630(1) the project site may be exempt from the requirements of Section 86.030630(e)(1) at the discretion of the reviewing agency. (I) Other Site Landscaping Provisions (1) A minimum portion of the site shall be landscaped. No landscaped area having a width of less than five (5') feet shall be considered in the minimum landscaping requirement. This minimum landscaping requirement wili be established as foliows: Industrial uses Commercial uses Residential uses 15% 20% 35% (2) In addition to required landscaping, landscaping may be provided in lieu of ten (10%) percent of the total number of parking spaces required, provided the landscaping is arranged such that parking may be installed at a later date if such a demand arises, and further RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 71 RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 provided, that the owner agrees to provide such parking at the request ofthe reviewing agency. (3) Variation of landscape coverage may be permitted for individual parcels within planned developments when the development as a whole meets the required coverage and the plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Planning Area. (4) The goals and policies of the Planning Area provide for the creation of significant landscaped open space areas at the entry and exit points of the East Valley Corridor. The following requirements are intended to meet these objectives: (A) Special open space edge treatments shall be provided along State Route 30 from the Santa Ana River to San Bernardino Avenue. (B) The open space edge treatments shall incorporate landscaping and associated design elements for areas visible from the freeway. These elements may include open lawn areas, canopy trees within parking areas, lakes, fountains, open stages and amphitheaters, art in public places, citrus groves, and similar open space areas. (C) A building setback of 10Q-feet shall be maintained from the freeway right-of-way line within these special open space edge treatment areas, unless the reviewing authority finds that such a setback would severely constrain the reasonable use of a parcel due to its configuration or location, in which case altemative open space treatments may be determined appropriate. (0) In creating this open space edge treatment, credit may be given towards, the minimum percent of landscaping required within the development, as specified in subsection (1) above. (5) The landscaped area requirement may be reduced by a maximum of five (5) percentage points where public art is to be displayed in a setting which enhances pedestrian spaces and building architecture. Minimum cost of public art shall be one (1 %) percent of the overall cost of the project as stated on the building permit. (m) Planting Guidelines (1) Parkways (A) General Provisions 72 (I) Existing parkways in the public right-of-way should be preserved and maintained. In areas where they are absent, a parkway (six to eight feet) should be established adjacent to the street curb. (II) In addition to required street trees, all parkways should be planted with a low growing turf grass or ground cover which shall be maintained regularly so as not to impede pedestrian movement across it. (III) Existing mature street trees in the parkways should be protected and maintained. (B) Street Trees (I) Required street trees on Special Landscaped Streets are to be consistent throughout the planning area. Existing parkway trees, other than the designated street tree, should be replaced over time with the designated street tree. For landscape concepts and required planting materials, on Special Landscaped Streets, see Section 86.030625(g). (11) Required street trees shall exhibit longevity, cleanliness, disease and insect resistance, and adaptability to local soils and climate. Suggested street trees are listed in Table EC-1. (III) Street trees shall be planted not less than: - 25 feet back of beginning of curb retums at intersections. 10 feet from lamp standards. 10 feet from fire hydrants. 10 feet from meters. 10 feet from undeigiound utilities. (IV) Street trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1" trunk diameter measured 12" above the base and minimum container size of fifteen (15) gallon. Palm trees shall have a minimum brown trunk height of ten (10) feet. (V) Street trees in residential areas shall be planted as follows: RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 73 (i) Lot/unit on cul-de-sac -- 1 tree per street frontage. (ii) Interior lot/unit -- 2 trees per street frontage. (iii) Comer lot/unit - 1 tree per 30 feet of street frontage or portion thereof. (VI) In commercial and industrial areas, street trees shall be planted at the equivalent of one (1) tree per thirty (30') feet of frontage. (C) Palm Tree Planting and Maintenance Guidelines The following guidelines are provided to assist in new planting and transplanting of large palm trees in the planning area, including Washingtonia robusta (Mexican fan palm) and Washingtonia filifera (California fan palm). (I) Care should be taken in excavating, planting, or working near existing utilities or irrigation systems. Developer should check existing utility drawings and as-built plans for existing utility and irrigation locations. (II) New palms to be planted in the area should be grown under climatic conditions similar to the East Valley Corridor area. All palms selected for planting should be inspected for health, vigor, and overall form. (III) Planting of palms should not begin until May 1 nor after October 1. (IV) Defronding and Tying: (i) In preparing palm trees for relocation, all dead fronds should be removed and the entire trunk skinned clean to the height of the green frends. Care should be taken to prevent injury to the trunk of the tree. Green fronds below a horizontal position shall be neatly cut off, leaving a 4" stub. (i1) All remaining fronds above horizontal should be lifted up and tied together in two locations around the crown in an upright position. Due caution should be taken not to bind or injure RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 74 I the crown. A lightweight cotton rope or cord, not less than 1/4" diameter, should be used in tying up the fronds; wire should not be used. After tying, the tips of the fronds should be 'hedged-off' above the crown approximately 1/4 to 1/2 of the frond length. Defronding and tying work should be completed prior to digging the rootball. (V) Digging the Rootball: (I) When digging out the rootball, no excavation should be done closer than 24" to the trunk at ground level and the excavation should extend below the major root system to a minimum depth of six (6) feet. The bottom of the rootball should be cut off square and perpendicular to the trunk below the major root system. Under no conditions should the contractor cut down the size of the rootball in width or depth. (ii) Care should be taken not to free-fall, drag, roll or abuse the tree or put a strain on the crown at any time. A protective device should be used around the trunk of the tree while lifting and relocating so as not to scar or skin the trunk in any way. This device should consist of either a rubber or leather sling made out of timbers sufficiently sized to withstand the cable/choker pressure. At no time should trees be balled out and laid on the ground with rootball left exposed to direct sunlight and air. The rootball should be kept moist and shaded at all times. (iii) Palms should not be stockpiled for replanting. (VI) Planting of Palms (I) Excavation for planting should include the stripping and stacking of all acceptable topsoil encountered within the areas to be excavated for the tree holes. (ii) All excavated holes should have vertical sides with roughened surfaces and should be of a size that is twice the diameter and 24" RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 75 minimum to 4' maximum deeper in the ground than they originally stood. (Hi) Center palm in pit or trench; align with existing palms. (iv) Set palm plumb and hold rigidly in position until soil has been tamped firmly around ball or roots. (v) Palms should be backfilled with equal parts of specified backfill and native soil thoroughly mixed together. (vi) Root growth stimulant should be applied when the backfilling is between half to two-thirds up the rootball. Application rate should be one (1) quart for trees less than thirty (30) feet in height, two (2) quarts for trees thirty (30) feet and larger in height. Stimulant should be poured full strength equally distributed around the rootball, and water jetted into the backfill. (VII) Palm Backfill Soil The import planting soil can consist of either fine sand or loamy sand textured soil and silt clay content of this soil shall not exceed 20% by weight with a minimum 95% passing the 2.0 millimeter sieve. The sodium absorption ratio (SAR) should not exceed 6 and the electrical conductivity (ECe) of the saturation extract of this soil should exceed 3.0 milliosmol per centimeter at 25 centigrade. The boron content of this soil should be no greater then 1 PPM as measured on the saturation extract. (VIII) Fertilizer (i) Root Growth Stimulant: Stimulant should be Vitamin B-1 as manufactured by Cal-Iiquid, Cooke, Chican, Ortho, or equivalent. (iI) Fertilizer should not be used at time of planting. After 4 months, use a light application of 20-10-5 approximately 1/2 lb. nitrogen per tree cultivated into the soil. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 76 (IX) Tree irrigation should be monitored by use of irrometers, installed according to manufacturer's specifications, with two irrometers per tree. (X) Following planting work, all remaining excavation shall be backfilled and compacted. Burying of debris in holes should not be permitted. Excess soil and debris from the relocation work should be disposed of. Plant materials disturbed by excavating, planting, or replanting should be replaced. . (XI) Maintenance should include weekly water management to include soil probing and observation of soil moisture sensing devices and palm tree pruning. Pruning should be done with reciprocal saws (chain saws should not be allowed). Saw blades should be sterilized between each tree with 50% household bleach and 50% water for ten minutes. Pruning should be done to maintain a neat appearance. (2) Site Landscaping RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (A) Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to structures, either singly or in grove effect, at the equivalent of one (1) tree per thirty (30) linear feet of building area. (B) Site landscaping should be used to define entrances and walkways, to screen parking and loading areas, for micro- climate control, and to enhance views of the site from inside building. (C) Wall expanses should be protected from graffiti by adjacent plantings of shrubs or vines. (0) Suggested accent trees providing seasonal variation and color are listed in Table EC-2. (E) Seasonal plantings of colorful flowers are encouraged to accent entrances and walkways. (3) All landscaped areas shall be served by a total coverage, automated irrigation system. Where appropriate, drip irrigation shall be encouraged. (4) Graded areas proposed for development in a later phase shall be planted with annual grasses and shall be maintained in a weed-free 77 1- condition until development occurs, it said phase will not begin construction withifl six (6) months ot completion ot previous phase. (n) Landscape Maintenance (1 ) (2) (3) (4) RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 Property owners are responsible tor the installation and maintenance tor landscaping on their on-site landscaped area and the contiguous planted right-ot-way, except where landscaping in the public right-ot-way is maintained by a Landscape Maintenance District. Any damage to the landscaping and irrigation systems shall be corrected within thirty (30) days trom date ot damage. Any replacement landscaping within the street setback must be replaced with plant materials that are equal to the size, torm and species ot the adjacent existing plant materials. All trees and plant material, when established. shall be trimmed so that they shall not encroach upon the sidewalk or street so as to impede or interfere with vehicle or pedestrian traffic, or obstruct the illumination trom any streetlight to the street or sidewalk. (5) In residential tracts, the developer shall guarantee street trees tor a minimum ot one year after acceptance ot the tract and until 80% ot the units are occupied. Maintenance ot all trees shall become the responsibility ot the homeowner upon occupancy. (6) All plantings shall be maintained in healthy growing condition. Fertilization, cultivation and pruning are to be carried out on a regular basis. (7) Dead or dying plants shall be removed and replaced as quickly as possible (30 days maximum except where seasonal conditions prohibit). (8) All plantings are to be irrigated as often as necessary to maintain healthy growing conditions. (9) Irrigation systems are to be kept in proper working condition. Adjustment, repair and cleaning are to be done on a regular basis. (10) Tree guys, stakes, etc., shall be adjusted on a regular basis to maintain neat appearance and to prevent damage to trees. 78 TABLE EC-1 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA LIST OF RECOMMENDED STREET TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Albizia julibrissin Cinnamomum camphora Cupaniopsis anacardioides Eucalyptus sideroxylon Jacaranda acutifolia Koelreuteria bipinnata Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar styraciflua "Palo Alto" Liquidambar styraciflua "Burgundy" Liriodendron tulipifera Magnolia grandiflora "Majestic Beauty" Melaleuca quinquenervia Pinus canariensis Pinus halepensis Pistacia chinensis Platanus acerifolia Prunus cerasifera "Atropropurea" Schinus terebinthifolius Washingtonia filifera Washingtonia robusta Silk Tree Camphor Tree Carrot Wood Tree Red Iron Bark Jacaranda Chinese Flame Tree Crape Myrtle Sweet Gum Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Southern Magnolia Cajeput Tree Canary Island Pine Aleppo Pine Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree Purple Leaf Plum Brazilian Pepper California Fan Palm Mexican Fan Palm NOTE: Additional trees may be used subject to approval. RAH:JS #'87160.01 09/14/01 79 I TABLE EC-2 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA LIST OF RECOMMENDED ACCENT TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Albizia julibrissin Alnus rhombifolia Arecastrum romanzoffianum Brachychiton acerifolius Brachychiton populneus Cupaniopsis anacardioides Eucalyptus citriodora Eucalyptus nicholii Eucalyptus polyanthemos Eucalyptus rudis Eucalyptus sideroxylon Ficus nitida Geijera parviflora Jacaranda mimosifolia Koelreuteria bipinnata Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Orange Tree Pinus canariensis Pinus eldarica Pinus halepensis Pinus roxburghii Pistaccia chinensis Platanus acerifolia Podocarpus gracilior Prunus cerasifera Schinus terebinthifolius Tristania conferta Silk Tree White Alder Queen Palm Flame Tree Deodar Cedar Carrot Wood Tree Lemon-Scented Gum Peppermint Gum Silver Dollar Gum Desert Gum Red Ironbark Indian Laurel Fig Australian Willow Jacaranda Chinese Flame Tree Crape Myrtle Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Canary Island Pine Mondell Pine Aleppo Pine Roxburg Pine Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree Fern Pine Purple Leaf Plum Brazilian Pepper Brisbane Box NOTE: Additional trees may be used subject to approval. RAH:JS #187160.01 _~ W TABLE EC-3 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA SUGGESTED DROUGHT-RESISTANT PLANT MATERIALS LIST FOR LANDSCAPED AREAS BOTANICAL NAME FOLIAGE PLANTS COMMON NAME Agapanthus Arbutus unedo Centaurea gymnocarpa Dodonaea viscosa Elaeagnus lIex species Leptospermum scoparium Ligustrum "Texanum" Photinia fraseri Pittosporum Raphiolepis indica Rhamnus alaternus Rhus ovata Viburnum species Xylosma congestum Strawberry Tree Dusty Miller Hopseed Bush Italian Buckthorn Sugar Bush FLOWERING PLANTS Callistemon citrinus Cassia artemisioides Cistus Coreopsis verticillata Fremontodendron Lantana Lavandula Nerium oleander Plumbago auriculata Lemon Bottlebrush Feathery Cassia Rockrose Flannel Bush Lavender Oleander Cape Plumbago VINES Bougainvillea Campsis Solanum jasminoides Tecomaria capensis Trumpet Creeper Potato Vine Cape Honeysuckle RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 81 BOTANICAL NAME GROUND COVERS TABLE EC-3 (Continued) COMMON NAME Coyote Bush Wild Lilac Baccharis pilularis Ceanothus Cotoneaster Gazania Grevillea Hypericum calycinum Rosmarinus officinalis Santolina chamaecyparissus Creeping St. Johnswort Rosemary Lavender Cotton (0) Site Grading (1) Effective site grading can be utilized to enhance the architecture, screen parking and loading areas and help provide for privacy or adjoining areas. (2) (3) (4) RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (A) Earth berms adjacent to public rights-of-way shall be constructed to a smooth, rounded, continuous natural contour, with slope not to exceed 3:1. Construction of berms shall not interfere with normal drainage of water anywhere on the site. (B) Industrial or commercial sites located adjacent to residential areas should not be at a higher grade than residential uses. All sites shall drain adequately to off-site collectors without interfering with adjacent properties. All site grading shall be designed to provide positive drainage without leaving standby water. No cut or fill slopes of any type shall be steeper than 3: 1, with smooth vertical transitions. Where space limitations demand, terracing with approved retaining walls shall be utilized. Where retaining walls are required, they shall be of a material compatible with the building architecture. (5) Berms, channels, swales, etc., shall be graded in such a way as to be an integral part of the grading and paved surface designed with smooth vertical transitions between changes in slope. 82 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 (6) Adequate diking of outdoor storage areas shall be provided where any chemicals or other substances used or kept on site present any potential risks downstream from the site. (7) All site grading shall be designed to meet the following standards: Minimum Slope Maximum Slope Planting areas 2% 3:1 (33%) Parking lot pavement (1% with P.C.C. flow lines) 2% 4% Driveways, access drives 2% (.6% with P.C.C. flow lines) 2% 6% Pedestrian plazas 1% 2% Pedestrian walkways 1% 8% (p) Construction Phase Requirements (1) In order to minimize soil erosion by water and wind, practical combinations of the following procedures shall be used: (A) The permanent landscaping shall be installed within 60 days after substantial completion of the structural improvements on a lot. (B) Erosion control measures shall be required for imported fill subject to erosion, on construction projects over six months duration. (2) The developer is responsible for ascertaining the location of underground utilities and for protecting them during construction. (3) All construction storage and equipment yards shall be located on the site in a manner to minimize their impact on adjacent properties and public streets. (4) Construction sites shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All trash shall be kept in enclosed containers and removed frequently. (5) Construction access shall be coordinated with and approved by the reviewing authority. Special care shall be taken to protect existing 83 pavements and landscaping from damage. Dirt and mud shall be removed promptly from adjacent streets and sidewalks. (6) At the end of the construction period, by phase, the developer shall submit to the reviewing authority, reproducible copies of record drawings (as-built) showing the actual locations of all underground utilities and irrigation systems. (q) Maintenance (1) All owners or occupants of property shall maintain all buildings, drives, parking lots, or other structures located upon said property in good and sufficient repair and shall keep such premises painted, windows glazed, paving swept and otherwise maintain the property in an aesthetically pleasing manner. (2) Any structure. driveway or parking lot surface which is damaged by the elements, vehicles, fire or any other cause shall be repaired as promptly as the extent of damage will permit. (3) Grounds shall be maintained in a safe, clean and neat condition free of rubbish and weeds. Roads and pavements shall be kept true to 1ine and grade in good repair. Drainage ditches shall be kept clean of any obstacles. (r) Signs (1) The provisions of Chapter 7 of Division 7 of this Title shall apply to development within the Planning Area. (2) Developments subject to an approved Planned Development may specify the sign standards for that development of any modifications to adopted sign standards within the Planned Development text. Article 7. Reserved. Article 8. Reserved. Article 9. Reserved. RAH:JS #187160.01 ~~ M Article 10. Oak Glen Planning Area. Section: 86.031005 Single Residential (OG/RS) District. 86.031005 Single Residential (OG/RS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (acres) map suffix will modify 2.5 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 20% I ~ 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) 200/200 Front Yard Setback (ft.) 30 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 Street Side Setbacks (ft.) 30 ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR OAK GLEN PARK SUBDlVSION Front Yard Setback (ft.) 15 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 15 Street Side Setbacks (ft.) 15 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 85 Article 11. Redlands Sphere Planning Area. Section: 86.031105 General Provisions. 86.031105 General Provisions. In accordance with California Government Code [9 66474.4(b)], the Board of Supervisors has made the finding that parcels smaller than ten (10) acres in size within Agricultural Preserves and designated RL (Rural Living) in the Redlands Sphere Planning Area can sustain agricultural uses permitted under Land Conservation Contracts, provided the Planning Agency makes the following additional findings prior to the approval any proposed subdivision: (a) The subdivision is compatible with and would not adversely effect the existing agricultural uses or support services within the preserve. (b) The subdivision will not serve to encourage land uses which will conflict with commercial agricultural uses. (c) The proposed subdivision has no lots less than five (5) acres in area unless such lots are within a planned development or are for "well lot" purposes. The average lot size of all lots within a planned development subdivision is not less than five (5) acres. Article 12. Reserved. Article 13. Reserved. RAH:JS #187160.01 ~~ M Article 14. Yucaipa Planning Area. Section: 86.031405 86.031410 Single Residential (YU/RS) District. Multiple Residential (YU/RM) District. 86.031405 Single Residential (YU/RS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) map suffix will modify 6,000 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 50% ~ 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) corner lot 70/100 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 I street type: locai 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 87 . 86.031410 Multiple Residential (YU/RM) District. Multiple Residential (RM) District Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 I single unit per lot 6,000 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 2 units or more per lot 10,000 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 55% " 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) corner lot 70/100 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 T street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 SECTION 5. Subsection 86.1005(b) of the San Bemardino County Code is amended, to read: 86.1005 Designations. (b) The following symbols appear as a prefix on the official land use maps to identify the various specific plan areas: Specific Plan Area Agua Mansa Kaiser Commerce Center Symbol AM KC SECTION 6. The Board of Supervisors hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. If for any reason any portion of this ordinance is declared Invalid or unconstitutional, then all other provisions hereof shall remain valid and enforceable. RAH:JS #187160.01 09/14/01 88 , SECTION 7. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. ~ ~..;.~ FRED AGUIAR, Chairman Board of Supervisors SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COpy OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD ) )ss. OUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California, hereby certify that at a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of said County and State, held on the 30th day of October 2001 at which meeting were present Supervisors: Bill Postmus, Jon D. Mikels, Dennis Hansberger, Jerry Eaves, Fred Aguiar and the Clerk, the foregoing ordinance was passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Postmus, Mikels, Hansberger, Eaves, Aguiar NOES: None ABSENT: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal ofthe Board of Supervisors this 30th day of October 2001. Approved as to Form Alan K. Marks, County Counsel Sy~~ Dep. ."'. . ",%,C -4; ,~ Date: t:l /'7'~ J. RENEE B Clerk of th of San Be :;:;> ,,-. -~ RAH:JS #187160.01 09114/01 89 AH 185493.02 0/25/01 3:26 PM 1 2 3 4 5 6 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65864 ET SEQ., APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE REVISED CITRUS PLAZA PROJECT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE, LLC. 7 The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California, 8 ordains as follows: 9 10 SECTION 1. The findings set forth in the REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND 11 12 RECORD OF ACTION, adopted by this Board of Supervisors on October 23, 2001, and 13 attached hereto as Exhibit "A", concerning that certain Development Agreement For The 14 Revised Citrus Plaza Project Between the County of San Bernardino and Redlands Joint 15 Venture, LLC, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and which is adopted by this 16 ordinance, are hereby adopted by the Board as its findings on this matter. 17 18 SECTION 2. That certain Development Agreement for the Revised Citrus 19 Plaza Project Between the County of San Bernardino and Redlands Joint Venture, LLC, 20 which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B", is hereby approved by the Board pursuant to 21 California Government Code section 65864 et seq. 22 23 SECTION 3. The Recitals set forth in the Development Agreement are hereby 24 adopted by the Board as further findings of the Board of Supervisors for this matter. 25 26 SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from the date of adoption. 27 28 Page 1 AH 185493.02 0/25/01 3:26 PM 1 2 3 FRED AGUIAR, Chairman Board of Supervisors SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY 4 OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD 5 J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the 6 Board of Supervisors 7 8 9 10 Deputy 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. ) 12 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 13 I, J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of 14 San Bernardino, State of California, hereby certify that at a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of said County and State, held on the __ day of , 2001, at 15 which meeting were present Supervisors: 16 and the Clerk, the foregoing ordinance was passed and adopted by the following vote, to 17 wit: 18 19 AYES: SUPERVISORS: 20 NOES: SUPERVISORS: 21 ABSENT: SUPERVISORS: 22 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official 23 seal of the Board of Supervisors this ___ day of ______, 2001. 24 25 26 27 28 J. RENEE BASTIAN, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino, State of California Deputy Page 2 WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN FOR UNSERVED IVDA AREAS WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN FOR IVDA AREAS "A" AND "I" Background In January of 2000, the County Board of Supervisors initiated a General Plan Amendment to develop land use, water and wastewater policies to assist inthe revitalization of the unincorporated areas of the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Project Area (the ItIVDA Arealt). The intent of the proposed amendments were to give the option to the Board of Supervisors to consider and adopt new policies which would allow for the provision of public services by entities other than the City of Redlands in the unincorporated area that fall within the previously adopted East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Specific language amending the General Plan has been developed by County staff that would accomplish that objective. As part of this planning process for this unincorporated area of the County, County staff determined that it would be appropriate for the Board of Supervisors to consider various options for the provision of water supplies and wastewater collection to areas which did not already have access to such services. The unincorporated portion of the IVDA Area includes eleven areas (Areas A through K) and is located between the Cities of San Bernardino, Lorna Unda, Highland and Redlands. All of these areas are adequately served by water and sewer. infrastructure with the exception of Areas A through I, which are the focus of the County's planning effort for this Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. Since the start of the County's planning process in January of 2000, the City of Redlands has annexed Area "1." As a result, the County has ended its planning for services for this area, and anticipates that the City of Redlands will provide services to Area 1. As part of the County's planning process, the County prepared a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments to the IVDA Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project, State Clearinghouse No. 1999101123, and printed in June 2001. Among other things, this EIR and its technical appendices described and examined all of the various potential options for providing sewer and water service to IVDA Areas A and 1. It is anticipated that this Final Subsequent EIR will be reviewed and certified by the Board of Supervisors as part of their consideration and possible adoption of this Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan, at the same time the Board considers the amendments to the General Plan, the repeal of the Specific Plan, and the amendments to the Development Code necessary to provide legal authority for and implement the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. The purpose of this plan is to embody and describe the Board of Supervisors decision regarding the provision of public facilities to IVDA Areas A and I, both for future planning purposes and as guidance to the staff of County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1 ("CSA 70 EV-1"). Soecific Terms Of Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 1. Water and sewer service for IVDA Area I should be provided by the City of Redlands, which has annexed the area. CSA 70 EV-1 should not provide service to this area unless requested to by the City of Redlands. 2. CSA 70 EV-1 should provide water and sewer service to the IVDA Area A, sometimes referred to as the "Donut Hole" area. The provision of water and sewer service to Area A is crucial to the economic development of this area. Development of IVDA Area A is a key goal of the Redevelopment Plan adopted by the IVDA. Development of IVDA Area A has been frustrated by the absence of available sewer and water services. 3. In all cases, CSA 70 EV-1 should be the "service provider" and should construct, own and maintain the pipes and facilities which deliver water to individual landowners, and remove sewage from individual properties. Various options for providing this sewer and water service are set forth in the June 2001 Final Subsequent EIR. Details of how each option would be constructed are set forth in that EIR and its technical appendices, and are not repeated in this Plan but are incorporated by reference herein. 4. The option of having the City of Redlands prOVide water or sewer service to landowners in IVDA Area A is rejected. Among other things, the provision of such services by the City to landowners would appear to violate the City's own Measure U. However, CSA 70 EV-1 is not precluded from purchasing wholesale water supplies or sewage treatment capacity from the City of Redlands to supply the needs of CSA 70 EV-1. 5. CSA 70 EV-1 is authorized to obtain water storage and production equipment and water supplies and sewage treatment facilities and capacity for Area A from a range of potential options described in this Plan. 2 6. As a first priority, CSA 70 EV.l should purchase water supplies, and sewage treatment capacity from the City of Redlands for a 20 year or longer period, if by November 1, 2001, the following two conditions are met: (1) the City of Redlands has signed or signs a binding contract to sell water and sell sewage treatment capacity to CSA 70 EV-l, at prices and at terms acceptable to the staff of CSA 70 EV-l, after consultation with landowners who would be provided service by CSA 70-EV-l, and (2) the Local Agency Formation Commission has approved such sale of water and sewage treatment capacity from the City of Redlands to CSA 70 EV-1, or County Counsel provides a legal opinion to CSA 70 EV-l that such LAFCO approval is unnecessary for CSA 70 EV-l to enter into or implement such contract. If both conditions (1) and (2) are not met by that November 1, 2001, then CSA 70 EV-l shall proceed to obtain water supplies and sewage treatment capacity as set forth below, and CSA 70 EV-l shall not purchase water supplies or sewage treatment capacity from the City of Redlands. 7. Assuming CSA 70 EV-l does not acquire water supplies or sewage treatment capacity from the City of Redlands under the terms and by the deadline set forth in Section 6 above, then as a second priority CSA 70 EV-l shall proceed to build water well and storage facilities in IVDA Area A, and proceed with a contract with the City of San Bernardino for the purchase of sewage treatment capacity, for a period of 20 years or longer. 8. If CSA 70 EV-l staff determine that it is infeasible to pursue the water supply option described in Section 7 above, CSA 70 EV-l should seek to obtain water from the IVDA or the City of San Bernardino. 9. If CSA 70 EV-l staff determine that it is infeasible to complete a purchase of sewer treatment capacity from the City of San Bernardino, then CSA 70 EV-l staff should go forward with construction of its own sewage treatment facilities in Area A or consider the use of the SARI line for sewage disposal. 10. At this time, the purchase of water from the City of Riverside has not been discussed with the City, and CSA 70 EV-l should not pursue this option without approval from the Board of Supervisors based on a demonstration that the City of Riverside is willing to enter into an agreement to supply water to CSA 70-EV-1. 3 PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOP:MENT PLANS TEXT and MAPS [These documents are distributed seperately and are available for review if needed] [The maps are distributed seperately and are available for review if needed, a copy of each is in the displays] TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL And PARCEL MAP [The map is distributed seperately and is available for review ifneeded, a copy is in the displays] , CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL - MAJESTIC REALTY CO. PAGE 1 of7 CONDrnONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-OO071E273-97/TPM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742 CONDmONS of APPROVAL ON-GOING PROCEDURAL OR OPERATIONAL CONDIIIONS OF APPROVAL LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - CurrentP1anning Division (909) 387-4131 1. Project Description: Tentative Parcel Map 14742 is a commercial parcel map that re-subdivides existing parcels into 39 numbered commercial parcels and 11 lettered parcels for common driveways and reciprocal parking areas within a commercial center. The site includes approximately 128 gross acres and 120 net acres. The project site is located in an area bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Highway 30, Lugonia Avenue and Alabama Street in the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. Included are current Assessor Parcel Numbers 0292-081-01, 02, 03, 04, 06, 07, 08, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19.23,26,27,28, 29 & 32. 2. The site has a proposed Preliminary Development Plan and Final Development Plan for Phase I that are concurrent filings with this Tentative Parcel Map. All lots shall adhere to the design standards set forth in the Planned Development text and the adopted Preliminary and Final Development Plan maps. The roads around the perimeter of the project shall be dedicated, but will not be required to be paved with this approval. Each road segment shall be required to be paved, prior to the first occupancy in each respective phase. . 3. Additional fees may be required prior to issuance of development permits and shall be paid as specified in adopted fee ordinances. 4. This Conditional Approval shall become null and void unless all conditions have been complied with and recordation of the final map authorized by such approval has taken place within thirty-six (36) months after the date of approval of project. Extensions oftirne not to exceed five (5) years may be granted, not to exceed the maximums allowed by State law and the associated Developer Agreement. A written request must be submitted with the appropriate fee prior to the date of expiration. s. The applicant/owner shall ascertain and comply with requirements of all Federal, State, County and Local Agencies as are applicable to the project/site area. These include, but are not limited to: STATE: Regional Water Quality Control Board and Caltrans, COUNTY: Code Enforcement (weed abatement) Environmental Health Services (water/sewer, food, noise and vectors), Fire Warden, Fire-Hazardous Materials, Planning, Public Works, Flood Control District, Special Districts [CSA 70-EV-l] and Buil'ding and Safety. 6. The applicant shall agree to defend at their sole expense any action brought against the County, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval in compliance with San Bernardino County Ordinance #2684. The applicant shall reimburse the County, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fees which the County, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The Co\lllty may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligation under this condition. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] * = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgatioll Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES listed inltalics & brackets as [Mitigation Measure #] CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL-MAJESTIC REALTY co. PAGE 2 of7 CONDmONS OF APPROY AL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUO/95-00071E273.97ffPM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 7. All new utility lines shall be placed underground and the developer will work cooperatively with the County and Southern California Edison (SCE) to underground all existing lines around the perimeter of the site both on and off the site. The developer shall either incorporate the existing distnbution lines into the electrical power distribution system for the regional mall or make financial arrangements with SCE to have the existing distnbution lines placed underground. The transmission lines are the responsibility of the County and SCE to underground. 8. The landscaped areas shall be maintained by the developer, the property manager for the complex and/or the collective owners of the parcels being created by this map. -, LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - Building and Safety Division (909) 387-4225 9. A preliminary soils report shall be filed with and approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of grading or building permits. A fee to cover the costs of the review shall be submitted with the report. 10. Grading plans shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval prior to gradinglland disturbance. 11. When earthwork quantities exceed 5,000 cubic yards, a geology report, prepared by a licensed geologist, shall be filed with and approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of building or grading permits. A deposit to cover the costs of the review shall be submitted with the report. An additional deposit may be required or a refund issued when the costs do not match the deposit. The review costs shall be paid in full prior to issuance of building or grading permits. 12. An erosion and sediment control plan and permit shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Official prior to any land disturbance. 13. Prior to issuance of building permits, erosion control devices must be installed at all perimeter openings and slopes. No sediment is to leave the job site. 14. Any building, sign, or structure to be constructed or located on site will require professionally prepared plans approved by County Building and Safety. 15. An NPDES permit. Notice of Intent (NO!) is required prior to issuance of a grading/construction permit. PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT- Environmental Health Services (DEHS) 387-4666 16. Noise level shall be maintained at or below County Standards, established by the General Plan and Development Code Section 87.0905(b). For information, call DEHS at (909) 387-4677. COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT (909) 876-3919 17. This minor subdivision project area is protected by the County Fire Department. Prior to any construction occurring on any parcel, the applicant shall contact the fire department for verification of current fire protection requirements. All new construction shall comply with the existing Uniform Fire Code requirements and all applicable codes, ordinances or standards of the fire department. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] * = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MmGATION MEASURES listed inltaZies & brackets as [Mitigation Measure #] CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL - MAJESTIC REALTY CO. PAGE 3 of7 CONDmONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-0007!E273-97/TPM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL MAP THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE COMPLETED LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - Current Planning Division (909) 3874131 18. A Planning Review application ("Condition Compliance Check Parcel Map") and fee shall be filed with the County Planning at the time the Final Parcel Map is submitted to the County Surveyor for map checking. This is required in order to verify completion of conditions of approval established for the parcel map. 19. A Composite Development Plan (COP), complying with Section 83.040415 of the County Development Code, shall be filed with and approved by the County Surveyor. 20. The Composite Development Plan (COP) shall contain all the notes as required by these conditions and other County AgencieslDepar1ments. This includes any Mitigation Measures contained in any additional reports or Biological Assessments for PM 14742, which are normally applied at such time as development/construction occurs. The COP shall also delineate any building envelopes and/or setbacks. 21. The developer shall submit and receive approval from County Planning regarding the fina1 selection of the approved Final Development Plan alternative that will be constructed. The approved Tentative Parcel Map shall be modified, if necessary, to conform to the selected alternative plan prior to recordation. PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT- Environmental Health Services (DEHS) 3874666 22. The water purveyor shall be the CSA 70 EV -I via wholesale purchase from City of Redlands or one of the agencies/methods identified in Section 3.3.2.2, Water, of the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall (2001) and the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. [EI] 23. Applicant shall procure a verification letter from the water agency with jurisdiction. This letter shall state whether or not water connection and service can be made available to the project by the water agency. This letter shall reference File Index Number and Assessor's Parcel Number. 24. Method of sewage disposal shall be the CSA 70, EV -I via wholesale purchase of sewer capacity from City of Redlands or from one of the agencies/methods identified in Section 3.3.2.1, Sewer Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall (2001) and the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. [E2] 25. Applicant shall procure a verification letter from the sewering agency with jurisdiction. This letter shall state whether or not sewer connection and service can be made available to the project by the sewering agency. The letter shall reference File/Index Number and Assessor's Parcel Number 26. Sewage disposal shall be DEHS and Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board approved. Submit evidence of service to Building & Safety at time of plot plan review. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] · = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES listed in Italics & brackets as {Mitigation Measure #] # CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MAIL - MAJESTIC REALTY CO. PAGE 4 of? CONDmONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-0007/E273-97/rPM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Red1ands, California! S3 27. Submit verification of LAFCO approval to DEHS for any project that requires water or sewer connection outside a purveyor's jurisdiction. For information, contact LAFCO at (909) 387-5866 28. The following are the steps that must be completed to meet the requirements for installation and/or finance of the on-siteloff-site water system and/or sewer system. . Where the water and/or sewer system is to be insta1led prior to recordation, submit a signed statement to DEHS from the approved utility of jurisdiction confinning the improvement has been installed and accepted. . Where bond is to be posted in lieu of installation of the improvement, the developer shall submit evidence of financial arrangements agreeable to the water purveyor and/or sewering entity to DEHS for review and approval. 29. Submit preliminary acoustica~ information, demonstrating that the proposed project maintains noise levels at or below San Bernardino County Noise Standard(s), San Bernardino Development Code Section 87.0905(b). The purpose is to evaluate potential future on-site and/or adjacent off-site noise sources. If the preliminary information report cannot demonstrate compliance to noise standards. a project specific acoustical analysis shall be required. Submit information /analysis to the Department of Environmental Health Services (DEHS) for review and approval. For information and acoustical checklist, contact DEH&at (909) 387-4677. 30. Evidence shall be provided that all wells are: (I) Properly destroyed under permit from the County_OR (2) Constructed to-DEHS standards, properly sealed and certified to the County as inactivated OR (3) Constructed to DEHS standards and meet the quality standards for the proposed use of the water (industrial and/or domestic) Evidence sha11 be submitted to DEHSfWater Section for approval. Contact DEHSfWater Section for more information at (909) 387-4666. COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT Hazardous Materials (909) 387-5372 31. Applicant shall be required, if applicable, to apply for one or more of the following: a Hazardous Materials Handler Permit, a Hazardous Waste Generator Permit, and/or anAboveground Storage Tank Permit and/or Underground Storage Tank Permit. For information, call County Fire DepartmentIHazardous Materials Division- Field Services at (909) 387-3080. 32. Operator shall submit a Business Emergency/Contingency Plan for emergency release or threatened release of hazardous materials and wastes or a letter of exemption. Contact County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division! Emergency Response and Enforcement Section at (909) 387-4631. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] · = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation MeasllTe ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES listed inltalics & brackets as {Mitigation Measure #] CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL. MAJESTIC REALTY CO. PAGE 5 of7 CONDmONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-00071E273-97!I'PM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 200 I West Redlands, California! S3 COUN1Y FIRE DEPARTMENT (909) 876-3919 33. The San Bernardino County Fire Department shall review building plans for compliance with applicable standards- for construction, access routes, sprinkler systems, fire hydrants, fire flow and water main requirements. The required fire flow shall be determined by the appropriate calculations using the San Bernardino County "Guide for Determination of Fire Flow." Water systems shall have a minimum eight (8) inch mains, six (6) inch risers and be designed to maintain a fire flow of 4,000 gallons per minute at 20 psi for a duration of 4 hours.. MMF#55 34. The developer shall furnish the fire department with two copies of the water system improvement plan for approval. Water systems shall be operational and approved by the fire department prior to any framing construction occurring. 35. Private road maintenance, including but not limited to grading and snow removalshall be provided Written documentation shall be submitted to the fire department having jurisdiction. Private access roads shall provide an all weather surface with a minimum paving width of twenty (20) feet. PUBUC WORKS- Land Development - Roads (760) 243-8183 36. Roads within this development shall not be entered into the County Maintained Road System. 37. Road sections bordering the tract shall be designed and constructed to Valley Road Standards of San Bernardino County and to the policies and requirements of the County Public Works Department and in accordance with the circulation element of the County's General Plan. This includes Lugonia Avenue, Alabama Street, San Bernardino Avenue and Buckeye Drive. 38. Final plans and profiles shall indicate the location of any existing utility facility, which would affect construction. 39. A thorough evaluation of the structural road section, to include parkway improvements, from a qualified materials engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department. 40. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated along Alabama Street, Lugonia Avenue, San Bernardino Avenue and Buckeye Drive, except at approved access points. 41. Right-of-way and improvements (including off-site) to transition traffic and drainage flows from proposed to existing, shall be required as necessary. 42. As required by CSA 70, EV-I, the project proponent shall convey any required access and utility easements and associated rights-of-way to the appropriate agency as deemed necessary by that agency, for the construction and maintenance of sewer lines and associated facilities. [Mitigation Measure No. 17J MMF #49 STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] · = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES listed inlta/ics & brackets as [Mitigation Measure #J .- CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL - MAJESTIC REALTY CO. PAGE 6 of7 CONDmONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-OOO7/E273-97/I'PM 14742 Board of Supervisors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 43. Existing County roads, which will require reconstruction shall remain open for traffic at all, times, with adequate detours, during actual construction. A cash deposit shall be made to cover the cost of grading and paving prior to issuance of road encroachment permit Upon completion of the road and drainage improvement to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, the cash deposit may be refunded. 44. All road names shall be coordinated with the County Public Works Department, Traffic Division. 45. An encroachment permit, or authorized clearance, shall be obtained from the County Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit by County Building and Safety. 46. An encroachment permit shall be required from the Stale Department of Transportation [CAL1RANS] prior to any construction within their right-of-way. 47. Existing utility poles shall be shown on the improvement plans 48. Street type entrance(s) shall be provided to the entrance(s) of this development. SPECIAL DISTRICTS - COUN1Y SERVICE AREA 70, IMPROVEMENT ZONE EV-I (909) 387-5967 49. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, the project proponent shall enter into an agreement with the County of San Bernardino, addressing the continuing use and/or management of the existing on-site groundwater welle s). If well(s) are not used or dedicated they will be properly abandoned in accordance with Stale and County Regulations. [Mitigation Measure No. 14] MMF #46 50. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and ifhe or she should fail to do so, the developer shall at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as County acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by developer of all costs incurred by County to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by County prior to commencement of the appraisal. 51. Emergency access roads shall be designed to provide legal vehicular access to the County Maintained Road System to standards acceptable to the County Public Works Department and County Fire Warden. This will entail design and construction of channel crossings for IOO-year Q with bu1king. These shall be shown on the Final Map and confIrmation of maintenance arrangements satisfactory to the County shall be provided before approval of the Final Map. 52. Trees, irrigation systems, and landscaping required to be installed on public right-of-way within this tract area shall be maintained by other than the County Public Works Department, and shall be as specifted in County Public Works standards for tree planting. Maintenance procedures acceptable to Public Works Department shall be instituted prior to recordation. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in [brackets] * = modiftcation NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES listed inltalics & brackets as [Mitigation Measure #] CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MAlL. MAJESTIC REALlY CO. PAGE 7 of? CONDmONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Parcel Map No. 14742 PUD/95-00071E273-97/IPM 14742 Board ofSupcMsors Hearing October 23, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 PUBUC WORKS - Land Development -Drainage (760) 243-8183 53. Adequate provisions shall be made to intercept and conduct the offsite lributaIy drainage flows around or through the site in a manner, which will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties. PUBLIC WORKS -Surveyor (909) 387-2304 54. A Parcel Map is required with all appropriate easements to be dedicated (or offered for dedication in the case of drainage easements) in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the San Bernardino County Development Code and the Department of Public Works Standards. 55. Subdivider shall present evidence that he has lried to obtain a non-interference letter from any utility company that may have rights of easement within the property boundaries 56. Easements of record not shown on the tentative map shall be relinquished or relocated. Lots affected by proposed easements or easements of record, which cannot be relinquished or relocated, shall be redesigned. STANDARD CONDITONS listed by agency number in (brackets] · = modification NON -STANDARD listed with bold number MMF = FSEIR 2001 Mitgation Measure ENVIRONMENTAL MmGATION MEASURES listed inltalics & brackets as [Mitigation Measure #] PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT ITEM *3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 PUBLIC HEARING COMMUNITY: APPLICANT: FILE/INDEX: PROPOSAL: REP('S): STAFF: Redlands / S-3 Redlands Joint Venture, LLC RMC/95-0005/E273-97/0l/0292-081-01 A) Repeal East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as it pertains to the unincorporated area. B) General Plan Amendment to revise water, waste water and land use policies for the IVDA Area and establish the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. C) Development Code Amendment to incorporate provisions of the EVCSP as development and design standards of the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. D) Revisions to an approved Preliminary and first phase Final Development Plan to revise conditions and site plan for an approved regional mall of approx. 1.85 million sq. ft. retail area, including 5 alternative Final Development Plan options, with alternative sources of water and waste water service and allowing electronic message sign of a 5-second message interval. E) TPM 14742 to create 50 lots on 128 acres. F) Development Agreement to extend approval time frames. G) Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) that analyzes A-F above as well as a water and wastewater facilities plan for the IVDA Area. Bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, Lugonia Avenue and State Highway 30-(1-210) LSA Associates (Lloyd Zola) J. Patrick McGuckian LOCATION: J. Patrick McGuckian, Planner III, and Terri Rahhal, Planner III, presented the staff report, which is on file with the Land Use Services Department, Current Planning and Advance Planning Divisions. Mr. McGuckian referenced interoffice memo dated September 20, 2001, regarding revisions to the Conditions of Approval for both the Tentative Parcel Map 14742 and the Revised Preliminary and Final Development Plan. Mr. McGuckian further relayed the changes to the Commission. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Brown and Mr. McGuckian regarding any public money being used for the project. Mr. McGuckian replied that one of the issues that remained was requiring participation where possible with Rule 28 funds to underground distribution and transmission lines, which still remains a Condition of Approval. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Torkar and Mr. McGuckian regarding Phase I and Phase II Level of Service. Commissioner Torkar stated that in the subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Section 6, Page 4, Fair Share for Phase II was not noted. Mr. McGuckian replied that in the Conditions of Approval, Conditions 159 and 160 relate to Phase I and Phase II. Commissioner Torkar and Mr. McGuckian also discussed the -8- DRAFT ITEM #3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 temporary storm drain/detention basin, $50,000 bond posted for maintenance, and the permanent storm drains for Phase I and Phase II. Mr. McGuckian replied that the storm drain would have to be installed within eight years for Phase II. PUBLIC TESTIMONY The !ollowinlZ 'Deo'Dle testified on the 'Dro'Dosa1: . John Hunter, Applicant, Majestic Realty & Representatives . James Munson (Did not Speak) . Bemard Miller (Did not Speak) . Peter Brierty, San Bemardino County Fire Marshall . Mike Fox, Department of Public Works, Water Resources Division Chief Mr. John Hunter, Majestic Realty and representing Redlands Joint Venture, stated that they concur with the documents of this project. He presented the project to the Commission including the preliminary development plan, stating that. the purpose was to identify the primary ingress and egress points, identify the general building locations, as well as to illustrate where the parking and overall co=on areas are located. He further discussed Phase I and Phase II of the project, locations, site plans, and final development plans. Chair Kwappenberg referred to James Munson's speaker slip, which read that he wanted to clarify what would happen to his property under approval of this project. Mr. McGuckian responded that Mr. Munson owns a one-acre piece of property on the north side of the project on the south side of San Bemardino Avenue. Mr. McGuckian further stated that there was a specific Condition of Approval addressing this situation requiring the applicant to either acquire the property or buffer around it. He said several of the designs showed that property being excluded from the tentative parcel map. Chair Kwappenberg referred to Mr. Bemard Miller's speaker slip with an attached note. Chair Kwappenberg read the note, which stated he was in favor the project. Rex Hinesley, Chief Deputy County Counsel, addressed a letter that was received by the Planning Commission on the date of September 19, 2001 from Gary A. Negin, Ph.D. Mr. Hinesley wanted to verify that this letter was acknowledged into the Record of Minutes. Chair Kwappenberg discussed the concems/issues of Dr. Negin with the Commission. Chair Kwappenberg brought up another issue that Dr. Negin had mentioned in his letter regarding the Sheriff and Fire. She further added that her understanding was that there were interagency agreements. Mr. McGuckian referred to the last page of the EIR, where it references the interagency agreements for Police and Fire Services. He further added in terms of the Sheriff/Police issues, he had responses in 1995 and 1996, and had recent contact with the Sheriff to continue the same services. -9- DRAFT ITEM #3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 Peter Brierty, Fire Marshall for the County of San Bemardino, responded regarding the Fire Protection Services, adding that there are mutual aid agreements with the Cities of Redlands, Loma Linda, and San Bemardino, with all the different fire agencies, and there is appropriate apparatus which is in the possession of Redlands, Loma Linda, and San Bemardino to manage these types of facilities. Mr. Brierty stated that the subject facility would be served by Redlands and Loma Linda stations. Commissioner Torkar referred to Dr. Negin's letter's reference to the February agreement that was being challenged in court. Commissioner Torkar's concem was approval of this project without any resolution to the legal issue. Mr. Hinesley, Chief Deputy County Counsel, responded that the actions taken today and potentially by the Board of Supervisors, are valid regardless of the outcome of the decision by the court and the challenge of the Redland's Association. Commissioner Torkar's concem was if this project were approved, and then the court overtums it, what is the obligation to the County. Mr. Hinesley replied that the County is not liable, and it would not overtum the decision of the Planning Commission, it would only be overtuming the settlement agreement. Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Ms. Terri Rahhal regarding the Lockheed plumes under the site. Ms. Rahhal responded that an analysis was prepared specifically with reference to that plume, and the potential effect of storing water at different locations within the "Donut Hole", which is located in the appendix of the Environmental Impact Report (ErR). Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Ms. Terri Rahhal regarding interim measures for the runoff during construction. Ms. Rahhal replied that there are mitigation measures, standard protections. Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. McGuckian regarding the detention basin, sedimentation control measures, grading plan review, and the eight-year time frame before the storm drain is installed. Chair Kwappenberg co=ented that she would like to see that changed to five years. Mr. Mike Fox, Public Works Department, Water Resources Division Chief, responded that the eight years was by the request of the applicant so they could better manage a cash flow to construct the storm drain. The Public Works Department feels confident that the temporary detention basin should function for that period of time, but would not object to five years. Chair Kwappenberg co=ented on Alabama Street, and reco=ended a median on Alabama Street. Mr. McGuckian believed that there would be a median installed in the ultimate design of Alabama Street. Chair Kwappenberg had concerns with the parallel parking at the Plaza versus the diagonal parking. She feels that the diagonal parking seemed to be safer. Mr. McGuckian replied that one of the advantages of diagonal parking versus a 90-degree angle would be the width. He added that the Planning Division required 9xl9 parking spaces with normal -10- DRAFT ITEM #3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 double line striping, which is the County standard, and would be an 18-inch gap between cars. Commissioner Torkar co=ented further on Dr. Negin's letter regarding the plan for the area.. Mr. McGuckian replied to Commissioner Torkar's co=ent and gave the project description and planning of the area. Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. McGuckian regarding the Conditions of Approval. Chair Kwappenberg referred to Page 2, preliminary and final development plan. Chair Kwappenberg requested the detention basin be replaced in five years. Chair Kwappenberg referred to Page 3, No.5, and reco=ended the Planning Division's reco=endation. Mr. McGuckian replied that the applicant is in concurrence with the Conditions of Approval. Mr. McGuckian co=ented that a condition was added where they require adherence to the weed abatement ordinance. Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. McGuckian regarding a SUP for landscape maintenance. Mr. McGuckian replied that they did add a surety requirement, which is at a $50,000 bond level to insure survivability and maintenance. Chair Kwappenberg asked about the status of the intersection of San Bernardino Avenue and Alabama Street relating to storm season. Mike Fox, Water Resources Division Chief, responded that it is surface drainage at this time. Generally, everything would drain towards the river, the north. Terri Rahhal clarified the question of piece meal development in the letter from Dr. Negin. Ms. Rahhal co=ented if the whole area that they have to plan is left unincorporated, they now have planning area standards and a facilities plan for the entire "Donut Hole". On the issue of infrastructure phasing, the lead agency for implementing the facilities plan will be the County Special Districts Department. The Special Districts Department is in charge of ensuring that facilities are sized to serve the "Donut Hole" and not only just one site. Mr. John Hunter, Applicant, responded to the request for a five-year storm drain implementation. He stated the reason for the eight years is that there is a tremendous amount of infrastructure that is going to need to be built around the 120 acres on the back of only 500 sq. ft. of retail, and getting Phase II underway is paramount in terms of allocating necessary financial reserves to build that storm sewer facility. Mr. Hunter stated they would like to keep the eight-year period. Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. Hunter regarding the size of the detention basin. Commissioner Brown co=ented on the theater. Mr. McGuckian replied there might be a theater, but it is not for sure. Mr. Hunter did add that they would like to implement a theater for the project. -11- DRAFT ITEM #3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 Chair Kwappenberg asked about the terms of the developer agreement: 15 years is standard. Mr. Hinesley replied that the code does not provide any specific limitation on the term. There is one reference that 15 years is a reasonable standard. The only requirement is that there has to be a term within the development agreement. Chair Kwappenberg asked about the transfer of ownership. Mr. Hinesley did not believe there would be any assurances that the development would go forward if ownership were transferred. Mr. Hinesley stated the guarantee would be if this project/area is economically viable or it is not. Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. Hinesley discussed the developer agreement. Mr. Hinesley stated that the purpose of the developer agreement is to give the developer the assurances that whatever standards are agreed to would be the ones that are applied. He further added it would be the same for the moratorium, once the applicant had committed themselves, and they have the money to move forward, they would have the assurances that they would be able to move forward and not have to look at complying with other issues that occur after the fact. Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. Hinesley discussed the fee schedules. Chair Kwappenberg relayed that the applicant would be locked into the current fee schedule. Mr. Hinesley concurred with that. Discussion ensued between Chair Kwappenberg and Mr. Hinesley regarding the sewer/water and fee structure of the City of Redlands. Mr. Hinesley replied that the service provider would be County Service Area 70 Improvement Zone EVl. He further added where EVl obtains their supplies and services is still up for negotiation and they are working with the City of Redlands, but it would be controlled by and provided through CSA 70 EVl. There being no one else in the audience to speak on this item, Chair Kwappenberg closed the public testimony. DISCUSSION Commissioner Brown co=ented on theaters, and the fact that they are being overbuilt. She further co=ented that what she sees happening in bringing in this project is that it might create pressure on already existing malls and run them out of business. She feels we are oversaturating our co=unity with mega-malls. She further added that this comment does not reflect that she would not support a motion that is going to be made today on this project. Commissioner Ferguson motioned to approve the project with revisions. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. -12- DRAFT ITEM #3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 Commissioner Torkar co=ented on the set fee for this project. Rex Hinesley replied that there is a limited on Phase I to a period of three years after the agreement, and on Phase II for five years from the effective date of the agreement. COMMISSION ACTION RECOMMEND that the Board of Supervisors: 1. CERTIFY the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) with Errata; 2. ADOPT the Findings of Fact and Findings Supporting a Statement of Overriding Consideration; 3. ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 4. ADOPT the Resolution and Ordinance amending the County General Plan included in the Second Cycle 2001 General Plan Amendments to amend Official Land Use District Map FH-3lA and the water, wastewater and land use policies applicable to the IVDA Area, to create the East Valley Corridor and East Loma Linda Planning Areas and to incorporate policies of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan applicable to the East Valley Corridor Planning Area; 5. ADOPT the proposed ordinance to amend Title 8 of the San Bemardino County Code to establish the East Valley Corridor Planning Area, to incorporate the regulations and development standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan applicable to the East Valley Corridor Planning Area and to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; 6. ADOPT an ordinance to establish a Developer Agreement; 7. APPROVE a revision to an approved Preliminary Development Plan, subject to conditions to establish a regional mall with 1.85 million square feet of retail area to be constructed in two major phases and several subphases, including a temporary detention basin, the grading of a maximum of 300,000 cubic yards, a maximum of four (4) drive-through facilities, and the construction of new water lines, road segments, storm drains and sewage lines. The undergrounding of all above-ground utilities along both sides of San Bemardino Avenue, Alabama Street, and Lugonia Avenue shall be done in coordination with the County of San Bemardino and Southem California Edison, using public utility Rule 20 A funds. 8. APPROVE a revision to an approved Final Development Plan for Phase I (power center) - Area A, subject to Conditions of Approval, as revised per the September 20, 2001 interoffice memo, and as further modified during the Planning Commission hearing of September 20, 2001, for a portion of the regional mall witb. 500,000 thousand square feet of retail area, with no more than two (2) drive-through facilities, including a temporary detention basin, the grading of a maximum of 100,000 cubic yards and the construction of new water lines, road segments, storm drains and sewage lines; and under-grounding all above-ground utilities along both sides of Alabama and Lugonia; 9. APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 14742, subject to conditions for co=ercial purposes to establish 50 co=ercial parcels, including 11 lettered parcels for co=on area parking and access purposes and 39 numbered co=ercial parcels on 128 :!: acres; -13- , - DRAFT ITEM #3 P.C. MEETING: 09/20/01 10. ADOPT the Findings for all related actions as contained in the staff report or within the related documents; 11. FILE a Notice of Determination; and 12. APPROVE the Water and Waste Water Facility Plan, acting as the Board of Directors for County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV -1. MOTION: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: FERGUSON SECOND: BROWN Brown, Ferguson, Kwappenberg, Torkar None Laning None -14- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT l,'- INCLUDES: APPLICANT'S REQUESTED REVISIONS to CONDmONS OF APPROVAL For Preliminary & First Phase Final Development Plans and Tentative Parcel Map 14741 . RECENT CORRESPONDENCE e PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT Ii HEARING DATE: September 20, 2001 AGENDA ITEM NO:3 Proiect Description APPLICANT: REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE LLC PROPOSAL: 1) REPEAL EAST V ALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AS IT PERTAINS TO TIlE UNINCORPORATED AREA. 2) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REVISE WATER. WASTE WATER AND LAND USE POUClES FOR TIlE lVDA AREA AND ESTABUSH TIlE EAST VALLEY CORRlDOR PLANNING AREA. 3) DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE PROVISIONS OF THE EVCSP AS DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS OF TIlE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA. 4) REVISIONS TO AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY AND FIRST PHASE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO REVISE TEXT, CONDmONS AND SITE PLAN FOR AN APPROVED REGIONAL MALL OF APPROX. 1.85 MILLION SQ. FT. RETAIL AREA, INCLUDING 5 ALTERNATIVE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OPTIONS, WITH ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF WATER AND WASTE WATER SERVICE AND ALLOWING ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SIGN WITH A 5-SECOND MESSAGE INTERVAL. S) TPM 14742 TO CREATE 50 LOTS ON 128 ACRES. 6) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO EXTEND APPROVAL TIME FRAMES. 7) FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (pSEIR) THAT ANALYZES ITEMS 1-6 ABOVE AS WELL AS A WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILmES PLAN FOR TIlE lVDA AREA. LOCATION: BOUNDED BY SAN BERNARDINO AVE., ALABAMA ST., LUGONlAAVE. &:STATEHWY 30 (I-210) COMMUNITY: REDLANDSI S-3 JCS: 09434CFl Vicinity Map SEE REVERSE SIDE 140 Beari.g Notices Se.t 00: 9/8101 Report Prepared By: 1. P. McCuckian and Terri Rahhal Planning Commission Field Trip: 9/13101. Commissioners Kwappenberg Ind Ferguson SITE DESCRIPTION Project Site Sizelac.): 128: ac. POP -129: gross ac [120.5 net ac.] and FOP =.50: net ac. Terral.: Graded relatively Ilat Vegetatio.: Vacant Exlsti.g La.d Use: Yacant Ge.er'lll Pia. La.d Use District: EClSP (Specific Plan) Overlay Dlstrlct(s): IL-I SURROUNDING LAND DESCRIPTION AREA EXISTING LAND USE omCIAL LAND USE DISTRICT . n. North Agriculture and Street Sweeping Contractor yard EClSP (Specific Plan) n.-1 East Freeway State Roule 30 CITY OF REDLANDS nla South Yacant, Commercial and Industrial CITY OF REDLANDS nla West Yacant, Commercial and Church with School EClSP (Specific Plan) 1L-1 City Sphere of !nllue.ce MAC/CAP: Water Service: Septic/Sewer Service: AGENCY None CSA70 EY-I [Thru City of Redlands or other] CSA 70 EY-! [Thru City of Redlands or other] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend APPROVAL to the Board of Supervisors COMMENT Per Facilities Plan Per Facilities Plan OLIVE AVE PIONEER AVE SAN BERNARDINO AVE ALMOND AVE WlUGONIAAVE 10 COLTON AVE N . 1000 +000 , PUT II PROJECT LOCATION PARK AVE SOURCE: THOMASBROS, MAPS, JUNE 19,1U9, R:\MAJ13ll\Grapbi~.cdr(9111101) 30 R~DU:;; Os BLVD ~.yJ)<oJ1..\' 10 -l ~ en en -l Citrus PllJ,{ll Rtgional MaU Projeet Site ~; I" CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -RedlaJ:Ids Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 3 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-081-0I/PM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 SUMMARY OF ACTIONS: The subject project is procedurally complex and involves multiple interlinked actions and documents. The current proposal is the result of almost six years of intense negotiations, legal challenges and processing the proposed actions being considered at this hearing. The Board of Supervisors approved the original Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project on January 9, 1996 and it remains a valid land use approval. The proposed actions modify the original approval and can be categorized into three (3) groups of actions: . Environmental- A Final Subsequent EIR [FSEIR] and related actions (Findings, Statement of Overriding Consideration, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program [MMRP] and Errata. This document incorporates the 1996 EIR and mitigation measures originally required. . IVDA Facilities Plan and the East Valley Planning Area-Establishes an East Valley Planning Area in the General Plan and Development Code to replace the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan that is proposed to be repealed. Modifies other General Plan land use policies and establishes a water and waste water facility plan for the provision of water and waste water services in the unincorporated portion of the Inland Valley Development Agency [IVDA] area. . Citrus Plaza Regional Mall - Revises and updates the existing approval to conform to the proposed planning area and includes added flexibility in the approvals to allow the developer to select alternative commercial layouts in anticipation of fluctuations in market demands. These actions include a commercial parcel map, preliminary and final development plans and a developer agreement. A current developer agreement adopted 5/4/99, extends approvals to 2014. The new developer agreement would extend approvalsl5 years to the year 2016. The presentation of this report will follow this three-part organization. Terri Rahhal, Advance Planning Division Senior Planner will address the first two categories, while the project specific elements will be addressed by Pat McGuckian of the Current Planning Division. GENERAL BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors approved the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall on January 9, 1996. Subsequent to that action the Board approved a revision to the project on November 19, 1996 to allow the provision of water and wastewater from sources other than the City of Red lands. The City of Red lands then brought a successful legal action against this revision approval and obtained a court order that rescinded the 11/19/96 revision approval. This action left the 1/9/96 approval in effect as a valid approval. Following this action the developer pursued various options, including further negotiations with Redlands. Later in response to this project, the State of California passed a law that created an opportunity to provide water and wastewater facilities from sources other than the affected city through boundaries of an incorporated city to an unincorporated island. Then the owners of the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall site, accompanied by the remaining property owners within the unincorporated island, known as the "Doughnut Hole" successfully petitioned the Local Area Formation Commission [LAFCO] to remove the subject area from the City of Redlands sphere of influence. The proposed project establishes I) the legal framework upon which the provision of water and waste water facilities can be delivered to this unincorporated island; 2) creates an independent Planning Area within the County General Plan and Development Code that is fully under the jurisdictional control of the Board of Supervisors and 3) refreshes and updates the land use application approvals for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall and associated Developer Agreement. CI'IRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -RedJands VeDture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 4 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-081-01/PM 14742- Planning Cllmmission Hearing September 20,2001 West Redlands, California! S3 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DETERMINATION A Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR.) has been prepared to analyze the effects of all the actions proposed in this report. The SEIR. incorporates by reference prior environmental documentation related to the proposed actions, including the original EIR. prepared for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project, which was certified by the Board of Supervisors on January 9, 1996. The Draft SEIR. was circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 29,2000 to October 12, 2000. The Final SEIR. is comprised of Volume I of the Draft SEIR, as revised, revised appendices to the Draft SEIR, comments on the Draft SEIR. with responses, and correspondence received during preparation of the Final SEIR. Based on the Initial S: ,d Notice of Preparation circulated prior to preparing the Subsequent Environmental Impact k .otential impacts were determined to be less than significant on the following six areas of env. "ltal concern: mineral resoW'Ces, schools and libraries, electric, gas and communication services, 1;;. ,creation. The SEIR. concludes that impacts to the following nine environmental issues can be rcduced to less than significant levels upon implementation of the mitigation measures proposed in the SEIR: earth resources, hydrology/water quality, public services and utilities, hun1lln health, aesthetics, cultural resources, socioeconomics, biological resources and growth inducement According to the FSEIR., impacts on the following four environmental issues cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, even with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures: land use (cumulative impacts), transportation-circulation air quality (project and cumulative impacts), and noise ( cumulative impacts). The original EIR. also included cumulative impacts to solid waste, energy and growth inducing impacts. Change in circumstances have reduced the original land use impacts to the conversion of agricultural lands, as the original project grading removed these lands from agricultural production. The impact to solid waste has been reduced due to the expansion of the San Timoteo Canyon landfill capacity, which has a current capacity of 1,000 tons per day and is currently only using 402 tons. [FSEIR p. 230-231] Adverse energy and growth inducing impacts of the project are acknowledge, but are found now to be less than significant. There are gains in job-housing balance and school impacts are legally mitigated through State mandated school fees. [FSEIR. p321] EAST VALLEY PLANNING AREA aDd IVDA FACJLITIES PLAN IVDA AREA FACILITIES PLAN On January 12, 1999, the Board of Supervisors initiated a General Plan Amendment to revise County Water, Wastewater, and Land Use Policies as necessary to promote extension of infrastructure and economic development within unincorporated portions of the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Area (IVDA Area). The unincorporated area commonly known as the "Doughnut Hole", where Citrus Plaza project site is located, is part of the IVDA Area. Exhibit #1 displays several unincorporated IVDA sub-areas. The "Doughnut Hole" is labeled Area "A." Development of the Citrus Plaza site has been impeded by the developer's inability to obtain water and sewer services for Area "A" from the City of Red lands. In keeping with the Board's direction, the proponent of the Citrus Plaza project sponsored preparation of a Water and Sewer Facilities Plan for the IVDA Area. The first step was to assess water and sewer service needs throughout the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area. The needs assessment (Appendix G of the Draft Subsequent EIR. referenced below) found only two of the unincorporated IVDA sub-areas to be un-served or under-served: Area "A" ("Doughnut Hole") and Area "r', the site of the Mountain View Power Plant. Area 'T' has since annexed to the City of Redlands and will now be served by the City. Therefore, the ''Doughnut Hole" is the subject of the IVDA Area Facilities Plan. - CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -RedJands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 5 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/00943410292-081-01/PM 14742 - Planning Commission Hearing September 20,2001 West Redlands, California! S3 The IVDA Area Facilities Plan identifies County Service Area (CSA) 70 as the water and sewer service purveyor for the ''Doughnut Hole". CSA 70 will be responsible for delivering water to and collecting wastewater from local users in the "Doughnut Hole" through Improvement Zone EV -1. Several options are presented in the Facilities Plan as alternative sources of water supply and potential sewage treatment plant connections for CSA 70 to obtain for this purpose. The fol1owing is a summary of the options: . Water Service Alternatives: Water may be obtained by connection to the IVDA system at San Bernardino International Airport, by connection to the water distnbution systems of the City of San Bernardino or City of Riverside, or by developinent oflocal wells. The preferred/most feasible option at this time is the development ofwel1s within the "Doughnut Hole". . Sewer Services Alternatives: Sewage treatment may be obtained by connection to the City of San Bernardino sewage treatment plant, by connection to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) Line for ultimate treatment by the Orange County Sanitation District, or by construction of a local wastewater treatment plant facility. The preferred/most feasible option at this time is connection to the City of San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plant No.2. A ful1 description and environmental analysis of each service alternative is presented in the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report SCH #1999101123. Implementation of one or more of the service alternatives will require separate discretionary action(s) by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and the governing body(ies) of the service purveyor(s). The actions proposed in this report would establish the policy framework needed to expedite provision of public services within the unincorporated portion of the IVDA Area, primarily Area "K', and the ''Doughnut Hole". REPEAL OF THE EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIDC PLAN The East Val1ey Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) is a significant obstacle to planning for water and sewer service to be provided within the "Doughnut Hole" by any entity other than the City of Redlands. One of the basic tenets of the EVCSP is that the cities of Red lands and Lorna Linda shal1 provide water and sewer services throughout the specific plan study area, including the unincorporated areas. This premise is the foundation of the EVCSP Infrastructure Plan, which is referenced and cited throughout the specific plan document. The inconsistency of any alternative service plan for the ''Doughnut Hole" with the provisions of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan was central to the successful legal chal1enge of the November 1996 Citrus Plaza project revisions. The court's decision in that case made it clear that any subsequent alternative service proposal would require either a comprehensive revision of the East Val1ey Corridor Specific Plan, or its repeal. Rather than undertake a major revision and update of a 10+ year-old specific plan document original1y prepared and adopted jointly with the cities of Redlands and Loma Linda, staff proposes to repeal the East Val1ey Corridor Specific Plan as it applies to the unincorporated area. Only two unincorporated islands remain in the EVCSP area: the "Doughnut Hole" and approximately 100 acres in the sphere of influence of the City ofLoma Linda (Area "H" on Exhibit #1). In order to preserve compatibility between these islands and the surrounding cities of Redlands and Lorna Linda, staff proposes to incorporate relevant provisions of the EVCSP in the County General Plan and Development Code, as described below. The proposed repeal of the EVCSP, supported by concurrent amendments to the General Plan and Development Code, will maintain current land use regulations and development standards, while al10wing implementation of the new IVDA Area Water and Sewer Facilities Plan. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -RedlaDds Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 6 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-08I-OIIPM 14742- Plamring Commission Hearing September 20,2001 West Redlands, California! S3 NOTE: At the time of preparation of this staff repo~ the County Board of SupeIVisors and the Redlands City Council are considering an agreement concerning the "Doughnut Hole" (IVDA Area "A"). Among other things, the agreement may provide that the City of Redlands could wholesale water and sewage treatment capacity to County CSA 70 EV -I, which would then act as the retail water and sewer service purveyor for this area. Staff recoIIUIlends that the actions proposed in this report be implemented, regardless of the outcome of current negotiations between the City and County. Although the initial impetus for recoIIUIlending repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan was the impasse over the provision of city services to the Doughnut Hole, the agreement under consideration would not resolve the development-constraining conflicts with the specific plan. The proposed intermediary role of CSA 70 as the direct service provider in the Doughnut Hole area is not recognized as an option in the specific plan. Should the pending City/County agreement be executed, the actions recommended in this report will implement the original spirit and intent (though not with the letter) of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Therefore, the specific plan should be repealed whether or not an agreement with the City of Redlands is accepted and approved. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT There are three (3) components of the proposed General Plan Amendment, itemized below. One is a text amendment necessary to support the proposed IVDA Area Facilities Plan. The other two are amendments required to reorganize General Plan Plamring Areas and replace/preserve several EVCSP policies that should still apply to the unincorporated area upon repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment revises the text of several water, wastewater and land use policies that encourage/require cooperation with cities in plamring for urban services and connecting new development in the unincorporated area to existing regional water systems and sewage treatment facilities. The proposed amendments either exempt the IVDA Area from these policies, or specify new policies to facilitate provision of services in the IVDA Area. The complete text of the General Plan Amendment is an attachment to this staff report, and is also included as Appendix D of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment would Create a new East Valley Corridor (EC) Planning Area, comprised of IVDA Area "A", also known as the "Donut Hole". It would also re-name the existing East Loma Linda - West RedJands (LR) Planning Area the East Loma Linda (EL) Plamring Area. The City ofRedlands has annexed all of its sphere of influence away from the existing planning area. The remainder of the Planning Area, including IVDA Area "H", is in the sphere ofinfJuence of the City of Lorna Linda. The proposed amendment would incorporate the numerous land use and development policies of the EVCSP that would still be applicable to the "Donut Hole" in the policies of the new East Valley Corridor (EC) Plamring Area. 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would also amend Official Land Use District Map FH-3lA to change the land use district designations within the East Valley Corridor Planning Area from EClSP (East Valley Corridor/Specific Plan) to EC/PD (East Valley CorridorlPlanned Development), ECIIR (East Valley CorridorlRegional Industrial) and EClCG (East Valley Corridor/General COIIUIlercial) . It also amends the prefix to all land use districts within the East Lorna Linda Plamring Area from LR (East Lorna LindalWest Redlands) to EL (East Loma Linda). CITRUS PLAZAREGIONALMALL-Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 7 STAFF REPORT - RMC/E273-97/009434/0292-081-01IPM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT The Development Code contains special development standards as may apply to each Planning Area established by the General Plan. The proposed Development Code Amendment would repeal the East VaUey Corridor Specific Plan and incorporate the development standards and regulations from the specific plan that would apply to the "Donut Hole" in the East Valley Corridor (Be) Planning Area. The intended result is continued land use compatibility and seamless transitions through city and county territories throughout the East Valley Corridor. Although it is currently within the EVCSP area, IVDA Area "H", in the sphere of influence of the City of Loma Linda, is not proposed to be part of the East VaUey Corridor (Be) Planning Area. One reason for this is that the site happens to be located in the existing East Loma Linda - West Redlands Planning Area, as well as the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. EVCSP land use designation for the site is RM-3000, which is almost identical to the standard County land use designation 3M-RM. It is logical to convert the land use designation to 3M-RM and to leave the site in the existing planning area, proposed to be re- named East Loma Linda (EL). Finally, there is no apparent controversy or doubt about the City of Loma Linda providing services to this site. Therefore, elaborate provisions to ensure development and provision of infrastructure under County jurisdiction are unnecessary. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL LOCATION The Citrus Plaza Regional MaU site is hounded by Lugonia Avenue on the South, Alabama Street on the West, San Bernardino Avenue on the North, and State Route 30 Freeway on the East. The City of Redlands incorporated boundary abuts the site on the south and on the east. The project site is within the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County and while it is adjacent to the City of Redlands it is not within the Redlands sphere of influence. The property is vacant undeveloped land, which has been graded into rough commercial pads based upon the original 1996 approval. Surrounding properties to the north and east are agricultural. On the west is a church and church school, while south of the site are commercial and industrial land uses. AREA The project site includes 17 parcels owned by the applicant comprising 128.2 gross acres or 119.7 net acres. Also the 129! acres Preliminary Development Plan includes two parcels that are not owned by the applicant. These are a 50 x 50 well site that is mostly in the planned right-of-way of Alabama Street and an .84-acre parcel on the south side of San Bernardino Avenue, owned by Dr. Munson. Both parcels are in Phase II and the applicant is attempting to acquire these before filing the Final Development Plan for Phase II. If the property is not acquired, the Phase II FDP is required to be modified to buffer and design around these properties. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP The proposed Tentative Parcel Map 14742 will resubdivide the 17 parcels into 39 numbered and 11 lettered parcels and is required to conform to the final selected design of the regional mall. The developer has requested approval of 5 alternative internal site designs that all have the same external design in terms of peripheral interfaces with the surrounding roadways and infrastructure. The applicant will be required to dedicate approximately 4.7 acres in right-of-way. All parcels will have access to a maintained roadway or access to a lettered parcel reserved for common/reciprocal parking and access within the mall site. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MAIL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 8 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-081-OI/PM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Red1ands, California! S3 PRELIMINARY AND FIRST PHASE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS The proposed regional mall has 1.85 million sq .ft. of retail area combining elements of commercial, office, entertainment and restaurant uses to be constructed in two major phases and several subphases. PHASE I is a power center on approximately 50 acres and Phase II is a two-story regional mall on the remaining 76 acres. The perimeter pads in both Phase I and II will be developed independently of the two centers. Both phases, including the perimeter pads, are integrated into a single commercial center. The regional mall has a unified theme ofMediteminean-style architecture with tile roofs, archways, stone columns and extensive landscaping. Approximately twenty percent (20%) of the site Will be landscaped and eighty percent (80%) will be covered with impervious surfaces (e.g. buildings, walks. driveways and parking lots). Also included in the project design are: I) a temporary detention basin to be replaced with a permanent storm drain within 8 years of the first building in Phase I being occupied; 2) a maximum of four drive-through facilities; 3) a contribution to art-in- public-places; 4) the construction of new water lines, road segments, stonn drains and sewage lines; 5) the grading of a maximum of 300,000 cubic yards, and undergrounding all above-ground utilities along both sides of San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, and Lugonia Avenue. Phase I will provide 2,751 parking spaces, where 2,437 are required. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITIEE The Development Review Committee [ORe] recommended approval of this project on August 20, 2001, subject to the Conditions of Approval and the mitigation measures outlined in the Final Subsequent Environmental hnpact Report [FSEIR]. The Conditions of Approval include by reference the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program [MMRP]. The proposed mitigation measures include: drainage and road improvements, soil erosion and sediment control measures, fugitive dust prevention, landscaping, and fair share contributions to offsite infrastructure development No members of the public attended the DRC proceedings. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT A new development agreement is proposed by Redlands Joint Venture, LLC to extend the land use approval period to a maximum of 15 years from the date of the revised project approval. A previous agreement adopted by the Board of Supervisors on May 4,1999 extended was the original January 1996 Citrus Plaza project approval to June 2014. The agreement also locked in 1999 County permit and development fees for the term of the agreement The current proposed agreement would extend these agreements and apply to Tentative Parcel Map 14742, the revised Preliminary and Final Development Plans and all subsequent Final Development plans for future phases, peripheral pads and other subareas. ANALYSIS: The project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Each phase is required to construct all the necessary supporting infrastructure for that phase. Also site improvements have been conditioned to coincide with construction phases rather than with recordation of the Tentative Parcel Map 14742. Each phase will require a separate Final Development Plan [FOP]. Each proposed FDP will be required to be consistent with the Preliminary Development Plan [PDP] text and maps, the Conditions of Approval, the EIR mitigations measures, the East Valley Corridor Planning Area, Development Code and the County General Plan. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 9 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/oo9434/0292-081-01/PM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 Each FDP reviews a specific construction proposal With supporting data/reports and will be required to constrUCt all the related supporting infrastructure, prior to occupancy. Legal and physical access to the site, both primary and emergency is provided by Alabama Street, Lugonia and San Bernardino Avenues and Buckeye Drive, as well as by State Highway 30. The roadways are State, County or City maintained roads. All proposed road segments are logical extensions and connections to the existing road system. Approximately 42 intersections or road segments are assigned a proportionate impact by this project The total pro-rata "fair share" contribution required from this project was estimated at $3 million in 1996. The project has been conditioned to construct some improvements completely and these will be credited against the total of the EIR.-required proportionaie contributions. This will mitigate the transportation impacts. Drainage impacts of the project can be mitigated during Phase I by the installation of a temporary detention basin. The detention basin will be allowed to remain for no more than eight years following occupancy of the first building in Phase 1. It will be replaced with a storm drain to be built in Alabama Street. It will adhere to the county's detention basin policy, be maintained by the developer and will be landscaped to become an integral part of the enhanced landscaping. The developer will be required to post and replenish a revolving surety of approximately $50,000.00 for basin inspection and maintenance. The site is relatively flat sloping east to west at two percent or less. There are deep well-drained sands and gravels with no unique soil or seismic problems. The area is subject to regional seismic forces from the San Jacinto and San Andreas faults. There are no known impacts to biological resources, as the site has been used for agricultural production for a long time. In order to protect and enhance aesthetic view sheds, the project has been conditioned to screen roof top mechanical equipment and to make a significant landscaping contribution to the Route 30 viewshed. The project will plant several east/west linear rows of tall palms to enhance the tradition of palm rows of in this West Redlands area. Also the perimeter of the project will be heavily landscaped with special treatment at street intersections and facility entrances. In the original approval concerns were expressed regarding potential noise attenuation and effect on adjacent church school, the need for a 25 mph school zone, and the need for a mass transit stop on each side of the facility. These requirements have been included in the Conditions of Approval. According to the 1995 Fiscal Impact Analysis the County's net annual benefit would be approximately $4.18 million from property taxes and sales taxes. In reviewing the project staff had concerns regarding the phasing of the project The first phase "power center" does not by itself ensure the construction of the full regional center envisioned by the Preliininary Development Plan. The development of the Phase II "Regional Mall" does, but this second phase development is fully dependent upon this developer and local economic conditions to bring it to fruition. The County and Southem California Edison are making a commitment to underground the aboveground utilities (both transmission and distribution lines) on the streets surrounding the site with approximately $4.2 million in Public Utility Commission Rule 20 A funds. The developer is responsible for assisting by undergrounding all on-site and where possible adjacent distribution lines in the projects' electrical distribution system. The applicant has been conditioned to provide storm drain plans prior to occupancy of the first building in Phase I and to construct the storm drain within eight years of the first occupancy. Conditions have been included requiring bike racks, a pedestrian circulation study, a mass transit facility, on-site childcare, preferred parking for car-poolers and a charging station for electric cars. These are required as air quality enhancements. A contribution to "art in public places" is also required. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Red1ands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 10 STAFF REPORT. RMCIE273-97/oo9434/0292-081-01/PM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 SUMMARY: The project will provide regional shopping opportwrities to the surrounding communities of Redlands, San Bernardino, Lama Linda, Yucaipa and Highland. The establislunent of the East Valley Planning Area and the Water and Wastewater Facility Plan creates a uniform regulatory framework upon which future development in this area can predictably depend upon to guide future development proposals. There are four areas of significant adverse impacts from this project (land use, circulation/traffic, air quality, and noise) that will not be mitigated below a level of significance. The effects of these must be judged in terms of the overall benefits of the project Approval of the project will . provide a quality commercial complex that will generate jobs and provide needed service and goods and establish guidelines for future develop. FINDINGS: SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #1999101123 1. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report has been presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, the County Board of Supervisors, and that the decision-making body has reviewed and considered the information contained therein prior to acting on the project. 3. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the Lead Agency. FINDINGS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is in the best interest of the public, because it will facilitate provision of public services and economic development in the IVDA Redevelopment Area. 2. The proposed land use district change is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and will provide a reasonable and logical extension of the existing and evolving land use pattern in the surrounding area. Also it brings forward and updates the land use policies of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and incorporates them into a new East Valley Planning Area. 3. The proposed land use district change does not conflict with provisions of the Development Code, or any applicable specific plan, because it establishes a new planning area and continues the same or similar land use designations as those currently established in the area; 4. The potential environmental effects of the proposed General Plan Amendments have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed amendments will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed General Plan Amendment, in spite of its impacts on the environment. ::r~ CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 11 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-08I-OI/PM 14742- Planning Conunission Hearing September 20,2001 West Redlands, California! S3 FINDINGS: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT !. The proposed Development Code amendment, which includes the repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) is consistent with the General Plan and is in the best interest of the public, because it will facilitate provision of public services and economic development in the IVDA Redevelopment Area. 2. The potential environmental effects of the proposed Development Code Amendments have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed amendments will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed Development Code Amendment, in spite of its impacts on the environment. FINDINGS: PRELIMINARY and FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN for First Phase 1. The proposed Planned Development Preliminary and Final Development Plans together with the provisions for its design and improvement are consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. The first phase Final Development Plan is consistent with the Preliminary Development plan and text. The project is consistent with countywide goals as it provides a reasonable "quality of life," promotes an attractive, healthy and safe . living, working and recreational environment; while being fiscally sound; sensitive to land, water and air resources. It has adequate infrastructure and services; protects historic and natural resources and promotes waste stream reduction. The project specifically implements the following General Plan goals and policies: . GOALS: The project promotes high quality regional commercial development, protects regional groundwater, minimizes soil erosion; protects and enhances positive view sheds and community identity. . POLICIES: Attracts a wide range of employment opportunities; contributes to the development of comprehensive storm drain system; implements design standards to ensure positive views of the planning area; provides safe and convenient access and circulation; develops a comprehensive and convenient pedestrian circulation system; incorporates energy efficient transportation strategies/alternatives into the design; recharges local water basins, private roads are maintained, provides off street parking, protects and expands right- of-ways; provides fire emergency access, provides adequate utilities, services and other infrastructure; and enhances/adds scenic elements to streets including long palm rows 2. The potential environmental effects of the proposed project have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed project will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands VeDtare [Majestic Realty] PAGE 12 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-08I-01/PM 14742- Plaming Commission Hearing September 20, 200 1 West Redlands, Califomia! S3 Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed project, in spite of its impacts on the environment 3. The physical characteristics of the site have been adequately assessed and the site for the proposed development is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses and all yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls, and fences, parking areas and other required features, because the design standards in the Preliminary Development Plan text are consistent with the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. 4. The site for the proposed development has adequate access from, Lugonia Avenue on the South, Alabama Street on the West, San Bernardino Avenue on the North, and State Route 30 Freeway and Buckeye Road on the East The development plan and the Conditions of Approval require the installation of onsite and off site improvements that address the limitations of the existing streets and highways. S. Adequate public services and facilities are required to be provided by the Conditions of Approval. This project will not cause a reduction of public services to properties in the vicinity, nor will it be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare. An on site law enforcement facility will be provide to enhance security and response times to this facility. 6. The proposed development, as conditioned, will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding property and will be compatible with the planned and existing land uses in the surrounding area because the Conditions of Approval will ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses and that the necessary services and improvements will be provided. 7. The improvements required by the Conditions of Approval and the manner of development adequately address all natural and man-made hazards associated with this project because any serious drainage, fire, circulation, and slope concerns have been considered in the Conditions of Approval. 8. The proposed development provides for a more efficient use of the land and provides for an excellence of design greater than that, which would be achieved with conventional development standards because there is substantial attention to architectural controls and enhanced landscaping. FINDINGS: TEr..ATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements is consistent with the General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Plaming Area because it complies with the adopted design standards and provides the appropriate public services. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development because all physical constraints of the site have been recognized and mitigated, including access, circulation and drainage. 3. The potential environmental effects of the proposed project have been analyzed in a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 1999101123) (FSEIR), which was certified by the Board of Supervisors, and which determined that the proposed project will have a significant adverse cumulative effect on the environment. However, when the mitigation measures contained in the ',': CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 13 STAFF REPORT - RMC/E273-97/009434/0292-08l-01IPM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 Conditions of Approval and in the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program are applied, a majority of the identified impacts will be reduced below a level of significance. The Board of Supervisors adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the FSEIR in which they found that there are overriding community considerations that warrant the approval of this proposed project, in spite of its impacts on the environment. 4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, because the Conditions of Approval for this map and the related preliminary development plan require compliance with County health and safety standards. 5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, because the Conditions of Approval require all conflicts to be resolved prior to recordation. 6. The design of the subdivision proVides to the extent feasible, passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities, because of the predominate north/south orientation of the major buildings and use of skylights where. practical. 7. The proposed subdivision, its design, density and type of development and improvements conform to the regulations of the Development Code and the regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law, because all affected agencies were notified and their concerns are addressed by the Conditions of Approval, which also comply with County Code regulations. 8. The proposed subdivision is not a land project. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty] PAGE 14 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-081-01IPM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors that the following actions be taken: 1. CERTIFY the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report FSEIR] with Errata; 2. ADOPT the Findings of Fact and Findings Supporting a Statement of Overriding Consideration; 3. ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 4. ADOPT the Resolution and Ordinance amending the County General Plan included in the Second Cycle 2001 General Plan Amendments to amend Official Land Use District Map FH-3IA and the water, wastewater and land use policies applicable to the IVDA Area, to create the East Valley Conidor and East Loma Linda Planning Areas and to incorporate policies of the East Valley Conidor Specific Plan applicable to the East Valley Conidor Planning Area; 5. ADOPT the proposed ordinance to amend Title 8 of the San Bernardino County Code to establish the East Valley Conidor Planning Area, to incorporate the regulations and development standards of the East Valley Conidor Specific Plan applicable to the East Valley Conidor Planning Area and to repeal the East Valley Conidor Specific Plan; 6. ADOPT an ordinance to establish a Developer Agreement; 7. APPROVE a revision to an approved Preliminary Development Plan, subject to conditions to establish a regional mall with 1.85 million square feet of retail area to be constructed in two major phases and several subphases, including a temporary detention basin, the grading of a maximum of 300,000 cubic yards, a maximum of four (4) drive-through facilities, and the construction of new water lines, road segments, storm drains and sewage lines. The undergrounding of all above ground utilities along both sides of San Bernardino Avenue, Alabama Street, and Lugonia Avenue shall be done in coordination with the County of San Bernardino and Southern Califomia Edison, using public utility Rule 20 A funds. 8. APPROVE a revision to an approved Final Development Plan for Phase I (power center) - Area A, subject to Conditions of Approval for a portion of the regional mall with 500,000 thousand square feet of retail area, with no more than two (2) drive-through facilities, including a temporary detention basin, the grading of a maximum of 100,000 cubic yards and the construction of new water lines, road segments, storm drains and sewage lines; and undergrounding all above ground utilities along both sides of Alabama and Lugonia ; 9. APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 14742, subject to conditions for commercial purposes to establish 50 commercial parcels, includingll lettered parcels for common area parking and access purposes and 39 numbered commercial parcels on 128:!: acres; 10. ADOPT the Findings for all related actions as contained in the staff report or within the related' documents; II. FILE a Notice of Determination; and 12. APPROVE the Water and Waste Water Facility Plan, acting as the Board of Directors for County Service Area 70 - Improvement Zone EV-l. CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL -Redlands Venture [Majestic Realty ] PAGE 15 STAFF REPORT - RMCIE273-97/009434/0292-081-0I/PM 14742- Planning Commission Hearing September 20, 2001 West Redlands, California! S3 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS/RELATED DOCUMENTS 1. DISPLAYS . Exhibit #1 - Map ofunincOlpOrated areas within the Inland Valley Development Area . Tentative Parcel Map 14742 . Preliminary Development Plan . Final Development Plan alternatives AI, A2, Bl, B2 and C 2. Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Repon [FSEIR.] SCH# 19991 01123 - General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA Area, and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project [Note: This document was delivered earlier by separate mailing/delivery from Advance Planning] 3. Errata sheet for FSEIR SCH#1999101123 4. Proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for FSEIR SCH#1999101123 5. Proposed Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 6. Proposed General Plan Text Amendment 7. Proposed Development Code Amendment 8. Proposed Developer Agreement 9. Proposed Conditions of Approval for the Preliminary and Final Development Plan 10. Proposed Preliminary and Final Development Plan Text ( Separate bound document) 11. Proposed Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map 14742 12. Applicant's Requested Revisions to Conditions of Approval 13. Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas 14. Project History Summary 15. Recent Correspondence APPLICANT'S REQUESTED REVISIONS to CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL for Preliminary & First Phase Final Development Plans and Tentative Parcel Map 14741 ~a&TTca. .....". ...... -.....~lKD D'VmIOD ro COIm'nDJ:I OI'.A.I'PaOV~ REQUESTED REVISIONS TO THE. CITRUS PLAZA PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONDmONS OF APPROVAL The following outlines the project proponent's request to revise Planned Development Conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 9, 1996. The primary intent of these requested revisions is to recognize that the project will remain within unincorporated territory, and that there are options for the provision of water and sewer utility service. The requested revisions also recognize modifications to mitigation measures included in the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project 1. Proiect Description: These conditions of approval apply to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. The project site is located in an area bounded by San Bernardino Avenue, Highway 30, Lugonia Avenue and Alabama Street Hi tat "East "all~' t:;mQQr llpt;iii~ Plaa ~a. The project consists of a Pre1imin..ry Development Plan, which &JCII G~'CC is referred to as the project "Concept Plan "I\.~g 'g~' tilt il~17 '.'aIlr~' C;mllllr llpc;iii~ Plaa;: a Final Development Plan on 1>hase I - Area A and Tentat'; ?arcel Map 14742. These conditions of approval are for the Preliminary and Final Development Plans. The conditions of approval for Tentative Parcel Map 14742 are separate. flI:g fllat.;. to tair FrsjlQt arl ~ tAc ;t:tati9R gf:Hi .mrzl;~\mQi;Qg m.&tRut 8R~ an amllulmlll.t tll tllt"EaGt "aUr~' C;ma;r llpcuiii; Plaa The following descnbes the Preliminory and Final Development Plans.... The Final Development Plan (FDP) for Phase I - Area A: c. Atemporary detention basin to be replaced ~itlml thrco ~'r:m; ;ftar br II;;'1p~'priorto the commencement of Phase 2 2. An approved Final Development Plan (FDP) with environmental review is required prior to issuance of any building or grading permits for a Planning Area or subarea. The applicant may establish as many subareas as deemed necessary, but must file a separate FDP on each subarea Within five years of the date of approval for this Preliminory Development Plan (PDP) a minimum of one FDP must be approved, have conditions completed, and have building permits issued. Thereafter, a minimum of one FDP must be approved, have conditions completed, and have building p=its issued within five years of the preceding FDP approval. Failure to fU1fil1 this approval shall invalidate this approval and the Planned Development shall become null and void. This Planned Development will expire if the implementing FDP's are not completed within the sequential five year periods. The initial FDP must be approved and have building p=its issued by :J;)1;rml1;r 1~. :1991) five years from the approval date of the PDP or this approval will become invalid. This will be the only notice proVlded of this expmtion date. S. The applicant shall agree to defend at their sole expense any action brought against the County, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval in compliance with San Bernardino County Ordinance #2684. Legal representation required for any such action shall be determined by the applicant. The ajlpli;a;;t CRall rcim'ew:n tat CQlmt;:. itc aglfJt[~ gf&~lrc~ ~r imp19:~ttCJ tsr ala:' S9m;t ~gJ;tr aiiQ attgiSc:"(: ftll:: .'''9idl tal Cgun~~J itc agUJtCJ gm~ml oc RRplgr,et m~';1 PI~wld ;:' 9 ~gYrt t9 pa:' rK] rt~t gfE:u~l1 a~tig:a. The County may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve the applicant of his obligation under this condition. SI18/01(F:IA_PDlc:lT]LZA\REVlSION 2001\REVJSED CONDmONS lB.DOC) I ., au.nanc1llWo'n" co. c:mt1lO ...... ~ anmmn TO c:omnnOftOl' APPaOV~ 13. The water purveyor shall be the City ofRedlands or one oftlie agencies identified in Section 3.3.2.2, Water Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent ErR for the CItrus Plaza RegIonal Mall. 14. Method of sewage disposal shall be the City ofRedlands or one of the agencies identified in Section 3.3.2.1, Sewer Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent ErR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. 15. Each Final Development Plan shall be consistent with the approved project, including the PreliminRry Development Plan exhibits and text, conditions of approval. Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Plan for each portion of intended development within each Project Planning Area. Each FDP shall be consistent with the standards and regulations of the Development Code illliil tk, iact vaU~' Cllmasr Sp,dRG i'lm, unless specifically modified by the approved FDP or amendments thereto. Each FDP shall include the following: 17. General Design! Aesthetics. Each FDP shall incorporate the following: (Third bullet to read:) All new utility lines shall be placed underground aRa ta, a~'=IQPw "iU '.'grk ~ggFW3w.'cl~' ..qtk tal CgUll~' and ~9utk'm ~a1it9t:Aia iQi~~nl (~~) tg UR9~UAg aU .xi[:tiRg iii!;: ar~nmg tl:le F~.ttr gftltc titl, hotk QR aag gt:fc.ite Th.t g~ntl~FW Eh3U eitktr m~g~gratl' tat exattaQS git:tFwnm~nlliR'r Hit; tal ,lfgtr:i~al }lon'lf gi~migR [j~1:t;m tiJr tar :r;Cg.i9RaJ. maJJ or make BRaasia.l maRgcm.c:etc ..itR ~C~ tg Bert tRf exi&tmg 9armSYti9R Iilurt: (1JIO' or }II:I:) pbu;ed "mgW~2'lma 'tllr 'trm.imit:d9R 1m.CI: aa.:c tQ, wcpgHtis~' gEtAI C'~nm.t?( aR9 ~Ci' ts lmQ;r~91mg 1 18. ~ The applicant shall submit with the first FDP a master sign program for review and approval. Each subsequent FDP shall incorporate the elements of this sign program or submit for aoproval any additions or modifications to the overall master sign pro gram. The sign prr , shall be utilized uniformly throughout the regional mall and shall comply with the fot: ~: - w _ the exception of an electronic message sign, aAlI signs shall be lit only by steady, stationary, shielded hght Exposed neon IS acceptable. Ifinstalled, the electronic message sign shall be designed, constructed and operated in a manner to limit glare onto adjacent propertles. - All sign lighting shall not exceed one-half (0.5) foot-candle. - No sign or stationary light source shall interfere with a driver's or pedestrian view of public right-of-way or in any other manner impair public safety. . I The above ground electrical lines referred to in the existing conditions of approval have since been undergrounded. S/18/01(F:\A]DIClT]UAlREYISlON 2001\REVlSED CONDmONS JB.CCe) 2 II&oISftZC DALft CO. ...... ....... ........_._ DI'IIIO.' to conl'nOn or.APraaVAIo n.", ...10.",11 ;1 R9 IXttR9r .1,~tigBis mtccagt cigRt. _ There shal1 be no more than one frees standing sign per phase per frontage, except along State Route 30 there may be one additional sign for the movie theater listings. _ No free standing sign shall be more than 25 feet above the road to which it is oriented. _ Monument signs shall not exceed six feet above ground elevation. 30. Mitigation Measure No. 27: ~ Sheriff's Department Facilities. All costs incurred by the project proponent in the development of onsite policing facilities, including facility and equipment expenditures, shall constitute in-kind offsets against any corresponding fees assessed by the County and/or the City ofRedlands (I 8, RIGIl!uiiSR):I1l 51 11) for policing facilities. 31. Miti~ation Measure No. 28: ~ Sheriff's Department Staffing. Based upon a proportional distribution of project-related impacts, as determined by the pFimal'l' la",' w'mamlRt G5'lr4S1 PrQ-r4l1c;County Sheriff, the project proponent shall equitably participate in a funding or associated fee program to offset those a81R~' costs associated with the provision of additional law enforcement personnel, equipment and/or public facility directly attributable to the proposed project. In assessing the proponent's equitable allocation, la\'!' mfQilltmcat ag_ilGtb.e County Sheriff.h.llllllll6i,brreco!!;l1ize alternative sources of public revenues (e.g., increased sales tax pTnr."ed~) which the project will contribute and which~ constitut~ plltlRlial offsets against other public IRa~tiIlHli exactions. - 34. MitiJ1;ation Measure No 8: Prior to the commencement of construction activities within Phase I, the +A8 project proponent shall litRtr: (1) liI~'~jl' a.s;ill~al IljltraQllRG aG aR Hltcnm YGC upgRtIi. aria 9fP-AalJ. tI ~gigRiW )4~; 2r~) m tat a.ln:mGt ~f ~gRGtllt\u't ~ & iRtiRIR 1_ we, hydroseedmg the Phase n area with a blade grass mixture upon disturbed areas timed with winter rains and/or applymg a degradable soil binding additive to the surface of the soil as an interim erosion control measure until a favorable rain conditions prevail. 47. The water purveyor shall be the City ofRedlands or one of the agencies identified in Section 3.3.2.2, Water Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent EIR. tor the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. 49. Method of sewage disposal shall be the City ofRr.rll.nds or one of the ~encies identified in Section 3.3.2.1, Sewer Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent EIR for the CItrus Plaza Regional Mall. 51. Sewage disposal shall be DEHS and Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board approved. Submit evidence of service to Building & Safety at time of~ grading plan review. 56.)K:";fl''';~'il. Hga&1.n}Ts :n. Gralli.Rg aRQ arcs~iat;Q Qc"cJsPlilgRt plaRG alljall;;tt tG tal Sgutlltm <:alffllmi.a lilliGIlR (1I~ m;mmt ~Illl!! Na'bama S'lrcct &M 11 'be ~llg~;lI ~ith SCi illr tat J1lHllIlLC sf GsaclIuliag tag rdgllatillR Ilf r.~GtiBg pllm;r FlllcG alllRS taat l'ight sf ....~,.l 57. Miti~ation Measure No.2: Permanent drainage improvements will be required per the apJliQjlli:ltc SSmpgIOCRtc Ilftag lia&t "alJ~' ('gmliQr Spc~m~ ..JaR standards of the County of San Bernardino and the provisions of the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza Re~onaI Mall to mtercept and conduct drainage flows through or around the sIte m an approved manner. 5118101(F:IA..PD\CIT_PLZAIREVlS10N %OOIIREVlSED CONDmONS lB.DOC) 3 lUn8ftC uu.f'!' co. c:mm ...... II&q1;lZIft:D JU:ftIIon '1'0 co:mmoI'. or.&l'PROVAI. Interim drainage improvements, such as an on-site detention baSin, constructed in conformance with County adopted detention basin policies and design standards and criteria, or other such measures as agreed to by the County Department of Transportation and Flood Control may be constnlcted upon approval oithe County as an interim measure for Phase I developmen~ pm;Q R;t tl; ;/liseell be ~"arll fi'gm fiat g~Gyp:mG~'. Such interim measures shall be removed, and the permanent drainage system shall be installed With the first mcrement of development of Phase n. 58. Mitigation Measure No.9. ,tq.R f,wle :mQfgr appIiG;wle, tlw prgjcGt prgpliliWRt &h3J.l: (1) lifHrdt.. gSIU~t;ySti~R m~tmgJ~ ~~Ratm'al ~~~l:ktr that Gig iH?t rc,\uirl m?~g (I.g ~ 9R~~; ~Where architectural coatings are to be applied, the project proponent shall specify the use ofhigE:vo1ume low-pressure or manual application ofpamts and cOatIngs on structures. Pre- finished, pre-primed andlor natural products may be utilized for building trim andlor accents~ .1[1 plf' .._<is:;',; or pl'l pnm.,g an; [maid. ~"~Qg m;lmng 3DQ. tAm prggu~tr nRa pH pIimca ..~aUllgm1; aR~ (4) r;p'Qi~" tAl lUll 9fR9R pgUutiag Fg..~gcr ~gaMg gpR:ati;t;.c F~p;r ;g~tlri metal prgjestc 71. Mitigation Measure No. 16: Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of development, the project proponent shall submit an appropriate flow test and capacity analysis to tat C'~' sfR eal:mQ; }hliGipal T}til.itltG PcpmHImt the serving agency to precisely determine the current flow and r"'1lR;n;ng capacity of sewer lines. If addil1oI1al improvements are c1eterm;nl'!rlto be necessary, they shall be installed by the developer. 72. Mitigation Measure No. 15: Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of development, the project proponent shall submit a hydraulic study to the County :mfl!sr C'it:: gf P .c1il:mQi which identifies the CUII'ent flow and available capacity of existing water lines and the design specifications of the fire flow system. The report shall present conclusions concerning the capacity of existing water lines to provide adequate distribution for the proposed proj ect. The developer shall install any improvements required by the report. 74. Delete mitigation measure. The dwellings referred to in the existing condition have been removed. 75. The above referenced project is protected by the San Bernardino County Fire C'31iflilmia Department gfF;r'G~' and FiI:c P.gtestl;1l. - County SeIVlce Area 38. Pnor to constnlction occuning on any parcel, the applicant shall contact the Fire Department for verification of current fire protection! development requirements. AI new construction sball comply with the existing Uniform Fire Code (UFe) Requirements and all applicable statutes, codes, ordinances, or standards of the fire department 76. Mitigation Measure No. 20: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the San Bernardino County Fire C'aIH;mia Department 9ff9T'~' anti Fire P...t;~iga. County Servlce Area 38 :mG'gr tat C~' sfR edl.rmGi: Firt DCfmHIcat shall be afforded an opportunity to review building plans for compliance with applicable standards for construction, access routes, sprinkler systems, fire hydrants, fire flow, and water main requirements. 81. Delete the condition of approval, as it has been deletedfrom the Final Subsequent EIRfor the project. 5/1810 l(F:\A_POICIT ]LZA\REVISION 2001 \REVISED CONomoNS lB.DOC) 4 J&An;I'nC a.u,n ,f>>, l2ft1lI ..... ........_._ anmzon TO conman or APPaOV.... 83. Mitigation Measure No. 22: During construction, on-site security measures shall includeo ~ the provision onow-level security lightin~. Additional measures may include the provision of pnvate secunty personnel durmg hours when construction actlVlties are not bemg performed and/or ~the securing of all machinery and related equipment. ; ail; e,l tllt p;s'iciSR sflg!?' l"p~t~um:.P ligktiag 85. Miti~ation Measure No. 20: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the County Sheriffs Department Sf 'tl1; C'it!: sf lil.llJ.aasH; PsJ.i;; t'1Ipa;:tmcnt shall be afforded the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans, so as to: (1) facilitate emergency access; (2) ensure the consideration of design strategies which facilitate public safety and police surveillance; and (3) offer design recommendations to reduce potential demands upon police services 85a. All costs incurred by the project proponent in the development of onsite ~olicinll; facilities, mcludin~ facllity and equipment expenditures (if any), s~ consuMe m-kmd offsets all;aJnst any correspondinll; fees assessed by the County for pOlicing facilities. 87. Mitill;ation Measure No.5: -^ t tho time sf pl'Qjtct O\lG1.lpaR~', ll~' pk:wt, tat p;QjC\lt p~s_t dlaU rnJbDHt g pI;jl~t r;p';QiRG tmR[JH~r;tati9R QaRaRG mrmaglHlCRt cm)~ pr9S;am., tal T.D~{ lUg gram. da.aIl iR~hult, gut ma~' Rst 'sf linHtld ts tR; f9Us"'iRg ~{ (:t;atcgi,~ l;C' o\QH;T,) P.ul. 1501 il;Q8I'am Companies employing 100 or more persons, ifrequired by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) or other ll;ovemmental agency at the .tlme of phased occupancy, shall pa:llii.Gipat. HI ta. tmplementatisll sf a Transportation Demand Management (TOMl program. The TOM prowam shall be reviewed and modified '];Rt pmgmRfl ~r iRQt.~gYal t:lt. ;mplg~rcH: rl:lalll?f ~angcQ aRQ. ~o~~.-...tfg nqtJil otAw OR &it. cmpIQ~~~ Eagk m)( pr9pm it r.e~Cg ;r iC' A.Q)W \mdl! wctHtg Rub 1 j01 tQ RW~I a ggaI gf RQm,.tag aR A-,',;ngv ",aisle ltidcrtmp (A '(P.} gf 1 ; iRdvig.yalr plr .~clHgl. _A ,;lR'.'IHlCRt ;ftmG g~al ~g~~ rcrn.lt ill 3. di~rCaGC Hi IHlplg~"r plak k;ur gIRwati;R of 15 t~ 20 p~cat 'bel;'.' tal "ctm1g~tt arrum.:ptig;ur \Iced iR tllt imp3.~t aRaJ.~'L'r 'Thin .~'guld. rccYk in an g.'cIall pcak R9ur prgjc~t tram~ gl'RtntiQi} QCG;r1Ij' gfa'bgm 5 F~1Rt -\B s.'vnU cite ll>>f p:r;9gmR CRan 'be Q.~~llgpld. ill G;BjUR~ti9li ..itk i!kt1ur tI gftkl Fk;j,~ the plttpQti sf tail: prsg;-aRl ".Q.11 bf to Gg'U~atf citr amaaitilr au;' t~ F}:Q.qgr RQ,Eltac4 matcl1iRgJ t;;mit inf;liiR!l~tigR:mG ~imilar Gll'q~lr to tit; ;mFlg~~;tc gfdtl tlRamr..itk list: .l-...._ 1 QQ mlplo~p"t '];RI[; (:cl"i~cr tItall "sc jl;Q.'iQI4 ~m tal mm;aaglm.cRt gfR~c gfth. Hsi~Uial ;Rail or g_ll;~:1tioR \low'ClJic&t II; all m<plo~'tc& I;a allQitiIlR, &Mul; lie ^ ~w a;spt a mlt aQrzklrdng rC@;Ral ckopping cmt5[~ ae it: I.quirt; g:' tar mlrrlRt FrQrrallmi11~mlRtatigR Frgsnm EFW), tkr PN3;~t daall gsm}?!:,' ~'ith tkg~; II~:r;RRlRtt: }Ttmc;9Yli potlmiaJ m'a~lt: arc a"'aila'blc to OR ritt tIR~t~ in asm"iag tmr Rg=EQ.~ gsal nt agmal pl'Qgram mlligR ic impltmc&ttil. ~iU glliOtaiR 'tl1llcr H1U&UrtG v.~ch an (sa to btHloct d,!.gw,t Fwrr, tit. m ofmta(;llrt& ~t; &homq lit "aRtq over the life of the project to take advantage ofnew opportunities, such as the expanding regional rail System. Potential measures may include: (1) a central ridesharing office under direction of a Transportation CoordiiiatOr to provide one-stop commute service; (2) personalized rideshare matching; (3) employer-operated or employee-owned vanpool service; (4) guaranteed ride S118lO1(F:,^_PD\CIT]LZA\REVlSION 2001\REVlSED CONDmONS JB.DOC) 5 ~u.u.'lTco. """",,PloAZI. UQaaTED UftIZOD TO casmnon OJ' APPaO'V.u. home; (5) preferential parking locations for carpools. and vanpools; (6) on-site sale of transit passes and distribution of schedule infonnation; (7) safe and secure bicycle storage areas; (8) coordination with Omnitrans to further enhance service to the site; (9) promotional programs, including direct involvement of upper-level employer management to show the commitment to the program: and (10) adjustable work hours to allow employees to participate in ridesharing arrangements or reduce the number of days per week each employee commutes. In :;l~hlitig:a~ tar :ptQjc~t ittclf [\.3-111:3;'.' ts aid. till tD}{ pT98l"MR k~. prs.iGing chop'pmg mQ (;Wq~t gppslitlmitiCt1 Nt" tkc ~x~fJangmgRrm~' c;:splg:"mGt tit;t~ tRWG:'t.,g.Y.~g t11"liW'Q NT cmplg:',:,c tg lea.~t tAl ana rzlmmg tar ga~' ;:as. T,~d~.g tIltir gq1CRQCR~1 OR karmg aa iYtgmOOMC a.'H~lal?l, "t}IT' i,g.,lStigR ~~m IR adQiti2R tg tal ~C}...Q}m'E mctiag Rulf 1~Ql1 "'high WQQt;:tt ta.; B-lllRstr gf..w~l;[ \lGid. for Qg~t mpcl ttrc:mJ. stair p~~amc aR,g, pI(gjc~t featuret nqY J:'lg.,gi t:egi2Ral gm:l~rzlr aAQ 'IP;h.i~1, mJl.c ~ftr:V',l (UlIT) The meRcurvc ;ldo?' ":'"'111 'Qotl;. J:t~l~' tRrl;F1gtR oftkoi:c ~r '":"4:H~ ~f g;Qlratca. ~Prioritization ofTDM Strategies. In order to reduce traffic impacts surrounding the site, reduction of vehicle trips in general will be extremely important; however, reduction of regional impacts will require that the longest trips, which contribute most to the regional VMT and congestion, be targeted by the project TDM program. Programs which most effectively reduce longer trips shall be emphasized and include vanpool programs, compressed work weeks, telecommuting and linkages to regional transit facilities. ~Delivery Mana!!:ement System. The site tenants will have deliveries which emanate from throughout the region. A system of tracking vendor deliveries to various facilities within the site shall be considered. This system would allow the tenants to move deliveries outside of peak travel times, utilize local vendors and consolidate deliveries whenever possible. 90. This mitigation measure should be deleted since the undergrounding project has been completed. 91. This mitigation measure should be deleted since agricultural use of the project site has been terminated. 98. The project proponent requests that this measure, which calIs for a diagrammatic representation of the project site at each entrance be deleted. Provision of such signs could encourage vehicles to stop at project entries to read the map, thereby backing traffic up onto surrounding public streets, and causing a potential safety hazard. 101. Automatic fire sprinkler systems shall be installed on all new buildings and remodeling projects excee~oQ 100 s.f. approved by the ~ County Fire Department. CSA 38. This system shall comply with NFP A Pampblet #13. The applIcant shall suomt hydraulIC calculations and detailed plans showing type of storage and use with the applicable protection system. 102. An automatic fire alarm system shall be installed in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code. Developer to submit detailed plans to the ~ County Fire Department - CSA 38 for approval. 5/18101 {F:IA_PO\C1T]UA\REVISION 2001\REVISED CONomoNs m.ooC) 6 IUJSftIC au.tT co. .............. UiQUU"%I:D azvmmn'tO COKDmOn op APPItClV4Jo 104. All venting for cooking and heating appliances sball vent ~ to the outside. Where applicable, an automatic hood and duct fire extinguishing systemi&-may be required. A1l1Jlicant shall submit ~etailed plans to the ~ County Fire Department - CSA 38 for approval. S/l&101(F:IA_PD\CIT_Pl.ZA\REVISION 2001\REV1SED CONDmONS lB.DOC) 7 ~auz.ft'ClD. =-- JUZ& ~_._ _____ 'I'D c:onmcnrI or API'ItOVAJ. 105. 118. Emergency access roads shall be designated to provide legal vehicular access to the County Maintained Road System to standards acceptable to the County TransportationlFlood Control Department and the San Bernardino County <:~Hli3 Fire Department gfillWIltl:;.' a.il.a Nrt P;Qtrrallil . County Semce Area 38. This will entail deslgil and construction of channel crossings for 100-year Q with bulking. ThC!e shall be shown on the Final Development Plan and confumation of maintenance arrangementS" satisfactory to the County shall be provided before occupancy. 120. Trees, irrigation systems, and landscaping required to be installed on public right-of-way within this project area shall be maintained by other than the County TransportationIFlood Control Department, and shall be as specified in County TransportationlFlood Control standards for tree planting. Maintenance procedures acceptable to TransportationlFlood Control Department shall be instituted prior to issuance of a road permit. It ic illltrd ~at tilt ~,'PC[ gf =c~ F'1iHUJfd OR flat up;;i;gctw Sit, ~f~ti9lK @ Str..cltt" gg R9tmr;t ~~1:s:cm t;tmdam m4 ~~1 Rgt 'got pV1Aittcd URlccr hgtR trJm.s aRQ r~ft~' mnmt'RaRs, icro'l: 4H rirglrld. 121. This condition should be deleted. since the project has been redesigned to eliminate the "excessive" number of drivli!Ways previously proposed on Alabama Street. 122. Ifrequired by CALTRANS, monument signs shall be redesigned to meet CALTRANS standards. 125. Miti~tion Measure No.3: Phase I and n Improvements (Constroction Obli!l3-tions~ Prior to final inspection and occupancy the project proponent shall construct the following on-site and off-site transportation improvements. The construction costs of off-site improvements shall be agreed upon between the County Transportation /Flood Control Department, other Responsible Agencies, and the project proponent prior to the co=encement of construction of those improvements. The project proponent shall receive a credit for any amount exceeding the assigned "fair share" percentage and may use this credit to offset other required "fair share" contributions. Fair share contributions shall be as determined by the traffic report prepared by Crain & Associates (revised August 1995) and as approved by County TransportatiOD! Flood Control Department. 5/18I01(F:\A]DIClT]LZA \REVISION 2001 IREVlSED CONomoNS JB.DOC) 8 l&AJU'nC,a&lLft c:a. cmm ...... ~"'_._ uvuml. TO COJm1'ftOU or API'&O"VAL ~ The Project Proponent Shall Construct the Followine: On-Site Improvements: PHASE I (power Center) Alabama Street (l/2width), Lngonia Avenue (1/2 width), SR-30 Frontage Road (Spencer Drive) (Full width), - The roadways adjacent to the portion of phase I site development sball be improved to County ElIrl T'arJlilj' ~1<Fi,kr Ip1rijir D{lIlI standards in conjunction with that phase of development. Project to provide full installation ~ Grglli~. . PHASE IT (Regional Mall) _ Alabama Street (1/2 width), San Bernardino Avenue (112 width), SR-30 Frontage Road (Spencer Drive) (Full width), The roadways adjacent to the portion of phase IT site development sball be improved to f~ ~rl Val'l13' Cgr:lOidgr Iprrijir D'a1l standards in conjunction with that phase of development. fie; ect to provide full installation ~g gnd~. The Project Proponent Shall Construct the Followine: Off.Site Improvements: The project proponent shall contribute a "fair share" requirement for off.site improvements. The percent ot respoDSlbility tor Oft-SIte lDlprovements are asSIgned as tollows. for those IIIlprovements where the project proponent's responsibility is less that the full cost of those improvements, the project proponent shall be entitled to a credit for any amount exceeding the assigned.percentage of responsibility. PJU ~i I ~g~~W ~CRtR") Phase I Improvements _ San Bernardino Avenue and SR.30 Freeway Northbound Rampstrennessee Street ._Provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. The traffic signal ~ sball be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent 1raffic signal at San Bernardino Avenue and the SR.30 Freeway southbound ramps at the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road i!fspsRisllatc "fair cilar," QSRm"'bmitm. 5S 7 pDrGDst _ San Bernardino Avenue and Texas Street. Install a two-phase traffic signal. _Provide eastbound and westbound left.turn lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 24.9 perceut. _ Lugouia Avenue - The southerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR.30 Frontage Road sball be improved to provide a second travel. The percentage shall be reconfirmed at the time of construction. Proportionate "fair share" contribution 17.0% PHASE n Development (Regional Mall) Project Buildout Improvements Prior to the completion of the project, the project proponent sball contribute a "fair share" for the fol1owing off-site 1raffic improvements: 5118101(F:IAJDlcrrJUAIUVISION 2001\REVlSED CONDmONS JB.DOC) 9 ILUZl'ftCDALn co. c:manI PLoW. tZQ.._._UVDlOD TO c:aJ>>ft'lOW. OF APPIlCJ'I"4 San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Southbound' Ramps ~ Add on a northbound approach to the Frontage Road to include a right-turn-only lane. The northbound approach of the frontage road to include a right-turn-only lane. Modify the signal to add a northbound right-turn phase, which overlaps the westbound left-turn phase. Reconstruct the north leg to provide southbound dual left-turn lanes. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 39.3 percent. . San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Northbotmd RampslTennessee Street Provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes and two through lanes on San Bernardino Avenue. Provide a right turn lane, a through left-turn only lane and a left turn only lane in the southbound direction on the north leg (SR-30 Freeway ramps). Provide dual left-turn lanes on the south leg (Tennessee Street). This measure may require flaring of the south leg to accommodate the additional lane. Modify the signal to provide a southbound right-turn phase concurrent with the eastbound left- turn phase and north-south opposed phasing The traffic signal shall should be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at San Bernardino Avenue and the SR-30 southbound ramps at the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Spencer Drive). Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 33.S percent San Bernardino Avenue - The northerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road shal1 be improved to provide a second travel lane. The percentage shall be reconfirmed at the time of construction. Proportionate "fair share" contribution - To Be Determined 126. Mitiltation Measure No.4: Phase I and II Improvements (Fair Share Oblij1;ation} Prior to final inspection and occupancy of the first structure in each phase the project proponent shall deposit into an appropriate traffic facilities fund a fee to offset traffic impacts of that phase. The fee shall be equal to the sum of all the following "fair share" contnbutions for the improvements listed below. The fecrnay be reduced by any credits that have accrued from constructed road improvements. The fee shall be calculated based upon the assigned percentage as applied to the then current construction costs. The construction costs of off-site improvements shall be agreed upon between the County Transportation /Flood Control D"~I~nment, other Responsible Agencies, and the project proponent. Fair share contn'butions shall bt: l1S detennined by the traffic report prepared by Crain & Associates (revised August 1995) and as approved by County Transportation/Flood Control Department. PHASE I (power Center) Lugonia Avenue and: Orange Street - Restripe parking Restrict parking on the northbound approach i"nd provide an exclusive right-turn lane. Proportionate ''fair share" contnbution: 19.9 percent. Orange Street and Pearl Street (I-I 0 Freeway Eastbound Ramps) - Provide eastbound and westbound left-turn-only lanes on Pearl Street Proportionate ''fair share" contnbution: 11.7 percent. San Bernardino Avenue and California Street - Contnbute a "fair share" percentage for the ~onstruction of a signal on San Bernardino Avenue at California Street. Proportionate "fair share" contribution - 13.8 percent California Street and Lugonia Avenue - Insta11 a twtrphase traffic signal. Widen the north leg of the California Street by 10 feet and provide left-turn lanes on the north and south legs. Proportionate "fair share" contnbution: 1.0 percent 5/1 8/01 (F:\A]DICIT]LZA\REVISION 2001 \REVISED CONDmONS IB.DOC) 10 IUoS8IIt: DoU." QD. ....... ...... ~ BVlIIO.' 'to cocmon ar.APPaClTAL PHASE II (Regional Mall) Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street - Implement parking rcstrictions and provide two travel lanes in all directions in addition to lcft.turn cbaImclization. Provide an exclusive right-turn lanc on the northbound approach. This will require widening at some "hold out" parccls north and east of the intersection. Modify the traffic signal phasing to provide lcft-turn phasing for all approaches, plus an "overlap" northbound right-turn phasc along with the cast/west left turns. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.7 percent Lugonia Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Spencer Drive)- Provide a westbound right-turn-only lane on Lugonia Avenuc. Proportionate "fair sharc" contribution: 58.5 percent. Lugonia Avenuc and Tennessec Street- Provide two eastbound and two wcstbound travcllancs in addition to the left-turn channclization. This will require widcningalong thc project frontage and along thc south side of Lugonia Avenue to thc east of the intersection. Provide dual northbound lef\tum lanes on Tennesscc Street Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 27.3 percent Lugonia Avenue and Texas Street - Install a two-phasc traffic signal. Provide two travellancs in all directions in addition to left-turn channelization on both roadways. This will require widening of Texas Street north and south of the intersection to providc suitable transitions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 11.7 percent _ California Street and the 1-10 Freeway W cst bound Ramps . Install a traffic signal with a northbound left-turn phase. Flare thc W cst Sidc of the north leg of California Street to provide a righHum-only lanc and two through lanes southbound and dual left-turn lanes northbound. This may require acquisition of somc right-of-way north of thc intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contnbution: 0.6 percent _ California Street and the 1-10 Freeway Easlbound Ramps- Install a traffic signal with a southbound left-turn phase. Widen and install an island on thc 1-10 Frceway castbound off-ramp to allow "free" right turns. Provide two northbound through lanes on California Strect. Proportionate "fair share" contnbution: 0.7 percent _ Coulston Avenue and Alabama Street - Extend the second wcstbound through lanc along Coulston Avcnue to thc east leg of the intersection and includc parking rcstrictions. Proportionate "fair sharc" contnbution: 36.9 percent _ 1-10 Freeway Wcstbound Ramps and Alabama Street- Provide dual northbound left-turn lancs and a southbound right-turn-only lane on Alabama Street This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. Proportionate "fair share" contn"bution: 30.5 percent. 1-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps and Alabama Strcet . Provide one right turn only lane and one left/through/right optional lane on the eastbound off-ramp. Provide a northbound righ~tum-only lane on Alabama Street. Proportionatc "fair sharc" contnbution: 27.9 percent. 5118101(F:V.]llICIT_PL.ZA\REVISION 2001 \REVISED CONDmONS lB.DOC) 11 ~UII.'fTca. Cl'l'IrOll ...... UiQUUTaI JlZ9D:O.. 'I'D caRma.. or.APNOVAL Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street - Remove islands along Redlands Boulevard and flare along the south curb west of the intersection to provide three through lanes and a right-turn-only lane in the eastbound direction. Widen Alabama Street to provide dual northboUlld and southbOUlld left-turn lanes and three travel lanes in each direction. This improvement will require additional right-of-way (or sidewalk easements) to be acquired in the northwest and southeast quadrants as well as traffic signal modifications. Some additional "hold out" right-of-way along Alabama Street may also need to be acquired to provide suitable transitions. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.1 percent., Colton Avenue and Tennessee Street - Provide an eastbound right-turn-only lane on Colton Avenue. Provide a southbound right-turn-only lane on Tennessee Street. Modify the traffic signal to provide protective left-turn phases in the eastbound, southbound and northbound directions only. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 8.5 percent. Redlands Boulevard and Temessee Street - Provide northbound and southbound left-turn lanes and ;estrict parking along Tennessee Street, modify the signal to eliminate nort1zsouth opposed phasing and east-west left-turn phasing and instead provide two-phase operation. Proportionate "fair share" contnbution: 14.7 percent. California Street and Redlands Boulevard - Reconstruct the south leg of California Street by Providing a box culvert for the flood control channel. Flare the south leg of intersection to provide two through lanes and left-turn channelization in both the northbound and southbound directions. Remove island to provide three through lanes in each direction. on Redlands Boulevard. Modify signalization as necessary. Proportionate "fair snare" contribution: 2.4 percent Barton Road and Alabama Street - Modify the traffic signal to provide southbound right-turn phase ~oncurrent with the eastbound left-turn phase. Either alter the middle southbound lane to allow only through movements or eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 1.4 percent. Third Street and Palm Avenue - Provide westbound left-turn channelization on Third Street. Provide dual northbound left-turn lanes on Palm Avenue. This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. Proportionate "fair share" contnoution: 7.9 percent. Ford Street and 1-10 Eastbound Freeway Off-Ramp - Install a two-phase signal. Coordinate the ;ignsl timing with the adjacent ~10 Freeway westbound off-ramp new traffic signal timing. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.8 percent. Ford Street and 1-10 Westbound Freeway en-Ramp - Install a two-phase signal. Proportionate "fair share" contnoution: 4.7 percent. University Street and 1-10 Eastbound Freeway Off-Ramp - Install a two-phase signal. Coordinate this ,,; gna! with adjacent traffic signals, as necessary and appropriate. Pro', 'nonatc "fair share" contribution: 8.3 percent. S/l 810 I (F:\A_PDICIT]LZAIREVISION 2001\REVlSEO CONDITIONS lB.DOC) 12 au.DftlC JI&AZ,'ft =. ....... ...... u:QloI&o..lw:..naaon 'f'D COCmoa'l or IIP'I&1VItJ. Cypress Avenue and 1-10 Westbound Freeway Off-Ramp - Install a two- phase signal. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.5 percent. Orange Street and Pearl Street (I-I 0 Freeway Eastbound Ramps) - Provide eastbound and westbound left-turn-only lanes on Pearl Street Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 6.3 percent. Ormge Street and Colton Avenue - Install leading eastbound and westbound left-turn phasing. Provide an eastbound right-turn lane on Colton Avenue. Restrict parking and extend the second northbound travel lane on Orange Street along the north leg of the intersection. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 1.6 percent. Base Line and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps. Provide an eastbound right-turn-only lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 4.6 percent. _ Boulder Avenue! Orange Street and Fifth Street. Provide a westbound left-tumonly lane on Fifth Street. Modify the median island on the south leg of Orange Street to provide two through lanes plus a northbound left-turn-only lane. Modify the existing signal to provide leading northbound and southbound left-turn phasing. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.2 percent. S/18101(F:\A]D\CIT_PLZA\REVISION 2001\REVISED CONDmONS IB.DOC) 13 IUoD8TSC UAloTI' co. c:mm ...... JISQ'DDTI:D unsKIft TO ccummon 0,. AI'nOV.u. Regional Freeway System 1..10 Freeway Improvements '!hI wllQ":,,illg plfgrRtag.r appl~' tg l;~al ~M'r g;M~'. I -215 to Waterman. Add two eastbound lanes. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.0 I percent. Waterman Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue. Add two westbound lanes. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.17 percent. _ Tippecanoe Avenue to Mountain View Avenue. Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.44 percent. Mountain View to California Street. Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.83 percent. SR-30 Freeway to Orange Street Add one westbound lane Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.62 percent. Orange Street to 6th Street Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.92 percent. Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 4.79 percent 6th Street to Uuiversity Street. Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.37 percent Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 5.46 percent University Street to Cypress Avenue. Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.64 percent Cypress Avenue to Ford Street. Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.95 percent Redlands Boulevard to Wabash Avenue. Add one westbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 2.56 percent Wabash Avenue to Yucaipa Boulevard. Add one westbound lane. proportionate "fair share" contribution: 3.14 percent Add one eastbound lane. Proportionate "fair share" contribution: 0.24 percent S/18101(F:IA_PD\ClT]LZAIREVlSION 2001\REVJSED CONDmONS lB.DOC} 14 II&oII8'nCUALtText. ....". PWIO UQDUl'D ISY1IIOft 'to commo.. OF.II"PaO'IAI. 126. The project proponent respectfully requests that this condition of approval be deleted. The requested revisions to Condition of Approval 125 incorporates the traffic/circulation improvements detailed in Condition of Approval 126. 127. A local detention basin shall be required as an interim drainage improvement until a stonn drain can be built. The basin shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the''Detention Basin Design Criteria for San Bernardino County," and with the ''Drainage Report - Citrus Plaza Phase L" This latter report was prepared by Pardue, Comwell and Associates, Inc., and is undated but was received by the Land Development Engineering Office on September 28, 1995. The final basin design shall be submitted with the first grading plan or building permit, whichever comes first and the construction shall be completed prior to occupancy of the first structure. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to maintain the detention basin until such time that a stoIIIl drain is constructed to replace it. An agreement shall be entered into between the developer and the County specifying the developer's responsibilities. A certificate of deposit, or other acceptable security, shall be made out to the San Bernardino County TransportationIFlood Control Department m the amount of $50,000.00. This money will be used to insure adequate maintenance of the detention basin in case the developer defaults in his agreement. The certificate of deposit, or other acceptable security, shall be required prior to occupancy of the first structure. 128. P=anent drainage improvements shall be required per C'1l1lRv."c liaR T(gl1e,' ~:q;lkr SJaciJia PIli" Ji.1q~1I'a'<r 'f Rap 12Ft draina!l:e study prepared for the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza ~ Mall, modified as may be necessary as determined by detailed hydrolo81c and hydraulic studies to be performed by the developer's engineer and reviewed by the Land Development Engineer. The storm drain is to be built within the right-of-way of Alabama Street and shall be for the entire length, that is, from the site to the Santa Ana River. Completion of the storm drain shall be prior to Phase n improvements. ~~ thrrt ~rcm :lrsm the aa!e Ilf \lc;llFr-c~' \If the iH:;t I;t;:nctllrf lluilt 11,- tilt a.".lsprr Bonds and agreements for faithful perfonnance and labor and materials shall be required prior'to issuance of the first occupancy permit to insure the construction. The first bond shall be based on the best engineering estimate available using information already existing. The design of the facility shall be completed and all approvals and permits obtained within two years after the first occupancy of a structure to be built by the developer. At the time, bonds and agreements shall be modified to reflect the cost estimated based on the final design. 129, The project proponent respectfully requests that this condition of approval be deleted. Because of the work undertaken for the Subsequent EIR and the Final Development Plan for Phase 1, a measure callingfor review of more complete plans seems unnecessary. Performance standards have been set forth in the Final EJR, and the project has been conditioned to meet all . applicable requirements S/18101(F:\A_PD\CIT_PtZA\RIMSION 20011REVlSED CONDmONS lB.DOC) 15 IIWSI'nC IlULTI' co. c:mulO ...... aQ~ U91IIOn '10 canman OJ' AJ'ftavAl. REQUESTED REVISIONS TO CONDmONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14742 The following outlines the project proponent's request to revise Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map 14742 that were approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 9, 1996. The primary intent of these requested revisions is to recognize that the project will remain within unincorporated territory, and that there are options for the provision of water and sewer utility service. The requested revisions also recognize modifications to mitigation measures included in the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall proj ect 1. Project Description. Tentative Parcel Map 14742 is a commercial parcel map that converts 17 parcels into 19 numbered commercial parcels and 3 lettered parcels for common driveways and reciprocal parking areas within a comm=ial center. The site includes approximately 128 gross acres and 120 net acres. The project site is located in an area bounded by SanBemardino Avenue, Highway 30, LugoniaAvenue and Alabama Street ia tk, i~I1"aIl~' Cgmagr ~F,cifig Plan .:\rra. ...,;+"':.... tRf ~~ ofimh.lCRQI gftkl C~' gf:R,Qlmgl:. Included are Assessor Parcel Numbers 0292-081-01, 02, 03, 04, 06,07,08,12,14,15, 18, 19,23,24,26,27, 28, 29, and 32. 2 '\Y It?tc QI'I d,t:i8IU~tCg i"'~ (iia~t 't'aUrr C'gmggr 5pc;iR~ PlamliRg \Ha, The site is desipted ''Planned Development: by the San Bernardino County General Plan aRQ jiH.'CR (iaot Valt13'{..:'uRagr Sprsiiil1 Plaa,1l.'sllllial Cg_=i~. The site has a proposed PlaRRca PreHm;T1efY Development Plan and a Final Development Plan for Phase I that i5 ~ a concUlTent filing WIth this Tentative Parcel Map. All lots shall adhere to the deS1gn SfandardS set forth in the . Planned Development text and the adopted PrelimiT,",y and Final Development Plan maps. The roads around the perimeter will be dedicated, but will not be paved with this approval. 4. This Conditional Approval shall become null and void unless all conditions have been complied with and recordation of the final map authorized by such approval has taken place within 36 months after the date of approval of the project. One (1) extension of time not to exceed three (3) years may be granted. A written request must be submitted with the appropriate fee prior to the date of expiration. This approval will expire \Iii 12'1!i1'9S three years from the effective date of approval by San Bernardino County. There will be no remmder sent, the appl1cant IS responsIble to submlt a tune extensIon request. 7. The project proponent respectfully requests that this condition of approval be deleted since the utility undergrounding that it calls for has been completed. 21. This minor subdivision is protected by the Cal.ifgmia tlhioigR gf FgmtP.' ad FiK Prgtr~ti9R San Bernardino County Fire Department, County Service Area 38. Prior to any construction occumng on any parcel, the applicant shall contact the fire department for verification of current fire protection requirements. All new construction shall comply with the existing Uniform Fire Code requirements and all applicable codes, ordinances, or standards of the fire department. 5118101(F:IA_PD\CIT_PLZA\REVISION 2001\REVISED CONDmONS IB.DOC) 16 ~UALnClD'. ....... ...... -...._:.A 1t&VDK'D w c::acman Dr.Al7'aDV,u, 25. The water purveyor shall be the City of Redlands or one of the a~encies identified in Section 3.3.2.2, Water Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent ErR for the Citrus Plaza RelPonal Mall. 27. Method of sewage disposal shall be the City ofRedlands or one of the agencies identified in Section 3.3.2.1, Sewer Infrastructure, of the Final Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza RelPonal Mall. 33, Miti~ation Measure No. 14, Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, the project proponent shall enter into an agreement with the City of Red.lands or other desi~ated water purv~or~ addressing the continuing use and/or management of eXistIng on-sIte groundwater well(s) md'1Qmg tal pSGd\?b C91Hi,~ti9B tg tAt ~itr sf R,dlm91:' Ir..i~g R9R p;tablf ...ratR" \m'i: 19~atld ....:+\.:... tail ug*;;'ma A "IRUI Rs&t gf "P~I'. 35. Water systems designed to meet the required fire flow of this developmer1t shall be approved by the fire department having jurisdiction. The developer shall furnish the fire department with two copies of the water system improvement plan for approval, Water systems shall be operational and approved by the fire department prior to any framing construction occurring, The required fire flow shall be determined by the appropriate calculations, using the San Bernardino County "Guide for the Determination of Fire Flow", Water systems shall be operational and approved by the fire department prior to any framin~ cODStlUction occuning. The required fire flow shall be determmed by the appropnate calculations, usmg the San Bernardino.County "Guide for the Determination of Fire Flow", Water systems shall have ~um eight (8) inch mains, six (6) inch risers Fire flow: 4,000 GPM @ 20 psiJ 4 hr. duration 43. Mitigation Measure No. 17. The project proponent shall convey any required access and utility easements and associated rights-of-way to the C~. llf~cataRgE appropriate a~ency, as deemed necessary by tAl C'~. illgmlCr that agency, for the construction and maintenance of sewer lines and associated facilities. SlI8I01(l':\A]DICIT]LZA \REVISION 200 1 \REVISED CONDmONS lB.DOC) 17 RECENT CORRESPONDENCE ~ "'-~"- . . --..~ Driven To Suecu. San Bernardino County Land Use Services Planning Division Attn: Pat McGuckian 385 N Arrowhead A venue, First Floor San Bernardino, California 92415-0182 8~@rgG~rgill) !j \j /:.JJ 2 2 200\ August 20, 2001 Dear Mr. McGuckian: We would like to thank you for the opportunity to make comments and suggestions regarding the Redlands Joint Venture (RMCJE273-97/01APN:0292-081.01"'). Omnitrans will be providing transportation east and west on San Bernardino Avenue as well as Lugonia Avenue. In addition we also plan to have routes run north and south on Alabama street Enclosed you will find a copy of "Designing For Transit". This booklet helps with implementing public transportation with land development. We hope that you will include this in your plans for the Redlands Joint Venture. Thank you for your time and if you have any further questions please do not hesitate in contacting me. Sincerely, Rohan Kuruppu Director of Planning .-==~=-..=-~::-":=.''::'= "':'-:':'-::0:.:..:. ~:~.,..:;. ,".": ,,:,:,~:::,.,==--,~"...;,a.:.o.::;.......~_~=,,::::~;':...:.:.;..;.....~:=-J'~~=- -.=-=-= Omnltrens . '700 West AfIh S1reet . Sen Bernerdino. CA 92411 Phone: 909-379-7100 . Web site: www.omnitrens.org . Fex: 909-889-5779 Serving the communities 01 Chino. Chino Hills. Co~on. County 01 Son Bernardino. Fontana. Grand Terrece. Highland. Lome Linda. Montclair. Ontario. Rancho Cucamonga. Redlands. Ria~o. San Bernardino. Upland and Yucaipa, . e California Regional Water Quality Control Board~ Santa Ana Region . ~ 1nll:nlCtAdd:ess: hllp:l/wWw~wrcb""zav/lWqcb8 3737 MaiD Str<et, Suite 300. Riverside. Co,....... 92.501.3348 Pbonc (909) 782-4130 . FAX (909) 781-6:!88 Gray Dam (;ay,rn,,, W"1lISton lL Bickox S.crrl/lrJ for EnvironmtnJDl p",- 77Ir 'Mrr1.IvJllmf.faclng C4l(foml4/z rral. EvrrJ CaI/fomltm Mull III IllU ~ GCtiDn III rrduJ:6 ""'lY ctlMU7IptUm. For 0 Ust ofllmp'" WC)'I ,...... rrduc. tJ.mIWI oM CIlI )'0"1'''''''' ctlIfI. I" O.,Wfb.rltr at wwwolWrcb.=-,ovIrwqcbB. August 17, 2001 OO[gA:~O~[g@ Pat McGuckian County of San Bernardino . Land Use Services DepartmentIPlanning 385 N. ArtowheadAve. First Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 RESPONSE TO PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE PDPIFDPfI'PM - CONDITIONS, TEXT, AND PLOT PLANS AND THE FINAL StmSEQUENT Em (CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL) f NO STATE CLEARING HOUSE NUMBER AVAILABLE Dear Mr. McGuckian: Staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB), has review the proposed revisions doc=nt for the above referenced project. The project area consists of about 129 acres bounded by Alabama St., State Highway 30. Lugonia and San Bernardino Avenues near the City of Redlands in the County of San Bernardino. TIic Citrus Plaza Regional Mall is proposed to be constructed on the project area. As a result of the proposed construction activity occuning in an area over five acres, a General ConstrUction Activity Storm Water Runoff Permit must be obtained by the project proponent. A notice of intent (NOl) with the appropriate fees for coverage of the project under the General Construction Activity StoIm Water Runoff Permit must be submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board at least 3lHiays prior to initiation of construction activity at the site. Contact Milasol Gaslan at (909) 872-4419 or review the Construction Activity General PeIlIlit and Fact Sheet on the SWRCB website (www.swrcb.ca.gov) for information. There is widespread experience that urban development impacts water quality. Therefore, to lessen impacts to water quality standards and protect beneficial uses the following principals and policies should be considered for the project: 1. This project will increase the amount of area covered with pavement or strUctures. This will alter the rate and volumes of groundwater recharge and surface water runoff. We encourage the use of pervious materials to retain absorption and allow more percolation of storm water into the ground within the site. Please consider the use of pervious materials, such as grass (grassed swales), permeable/porous pavement, etc., to line runoff channels and parking areas. Grassed swales reduce the pollutants in storm or urban water runoff by filtering the runoff through the vegetation and the subsoil matrix and/or allowing infiltration into the underlying soils. Studies have shown that grassed swales remove nutrients, total suspended solids, and metals from impacted runoff. Porous pavement is an alternative to standard impervious pavement and should be considered for use in at least some of the parking areas of the project. One type of porous pavement contains an underlying stone reservoir to temporarily store surface runoff allowing it to infiltrate into the subsoil. California Environmental Protection Agency {) R.cycl<d Poprr ~- Pat McGucldan County of San Bernardino August 17, 2001 Page 2 2. AIl. offsite detention basin is proposed to be used as III: bterlm drainage improvement until a st= drain can be builL Detention basins or holding ponds within a project site capture dIy weather urban runoff and the first flush of rainfall runoff. These basins are designed to detain runoff for a m;nimnm time (e.g., 24 hours) to allow particles and associated pollutants to settle. Consider the construction of a permanent on site detention basin (s) to lessen the impact of runoff from the project to the water quality of the area. 3. The feasibility and effectiveness of constructed/water quality wetlands for treatment of runoff from the project should be considered. Constructed wetlands throughout the Santa Ana River Watershed have been found to be very effective in removing pollutants from urban runoff and st=wat~.. 4. No waste material may be discharged to any drainage areas, channels, streambeds. or J:.reams. Spoil sites =t not be located within any streams or areas where spoil material could be washed into a W~ro~. . 5. Appropriate best management practices (BMPs) must be developed and implemented during construction to control the discharge of pollutants, prevent sewage spills. and to avoid discharge of sediments into the streets. storm water conveyance channels. or waterways. 6. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for any discharge of wastes to surface waters. or Waste Discharge Requirements for any discharge of wastes to land, is required by the California Water Code. For more information on the construction of the Best Management Practices (BMPs) mentioned above (grassed swales, porous pavement, constructed wetlands, and dIyfwet detention ponds please review the EPA website www.eoa.lov/nDdeslmenuofbmosloosl.hllll. Hyou should have any questions, please call me at (909) 782-7960 or Mark Adelson at (909) 782-3234. Sincerely, J)~ .J<\,{' 1~ Q-fJ David G. Woelfel . Planning Section cc: Scott Morgan - State Clearinghouse California Environmental Protection Agency 6 R..,.,lcd Poper (((jlll ~ .488()(:I(jt~8 ()f SC)ullierl1 <<:aIlfClrl1ld1 2007 Sawtelle Boulevard, Suite 4 Los Angeles. Callfomia 90025 Telephone (310) 473-6508. Facsimile (310) 444.9771 FAX TRANSMI'ITED September 6, 2001 Mr. JohnP. McGuckian Planner m San Bernardino County Planning Department 385 North Arrowhead Avenue .. San Bernardino, California 92415-0182 RE: Citrus Plaza Phase 1 Traffic Impacts Dear Pat, As .requested in the conference call I held with you, other County staff and the project proponent, we have reviewed the potential traffic impacts of the Phase.l Citrus Plaza project. In particular, we have reviewed which roadway improvements will be needed due to Phase 1 project traffic impacts, so the project can be required to construct those improvements. This review of traffic impacts was originally conducted to establish the conditions of approval for the project in 1996, and our current analysis is a review of the conclusions which we reached with the County at that time. The most relevant information for this review is Table 18 on page IV-I 0 of the adopted (August 1995) Traffic Impact Analysis Repor:t That table shows that four intersections would be operating at worse than a Level of Service C when cumulative impacts, as well as project traffic . impacts, are considered through completion of the first project phase. At two of these locations. San Bernardino Avenue and the Northbound CA-30 ramps, and San Bernardino Avenue and Texas Avenue. the project will have a substantial traffic impact. Therefore, it was decided in 1996, and remains appropriate today, that the proj ect should be obligated to construct the mitigation measures at these locations. Any cost for construction which is beyond the project fair share at those two intersections will be subject to reimbursement and credit at other locations. At the remaining two intersections with near-term improvement needs - Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street, and Orange Street and Pearl Avenue -- the project would not contribute to the adverse levels of service. Rather it was concluded then (and now) that the MENLO PARK LOS ANGELES ~~@~DW[grr\\ lJil SEP 1 2 2001 S~LE Lettcr to Mr. John P. McGuckian Scjltember 6, 2001 . Page Two degradation of LOS at these two intersections is attributable to cumulative impacts and not due to impacts from this project. Therefore, although a "fair share" payment of 12 to 20 percent was computed for each intersection using the conservative CMP methodology, no construction obligation was assigned in 1996. There has been no change in anticipated traffic impacts since that time. Therefore, it is still appropriate that the project's traffic impact at these locations be considered less than signmcant and that any project contribution to a cumulative traffic impact be addressed by the fair share amount calculated in the Traffic Impact Analysis report. . . In summary, our review indicates that the decisions made in 199,6 regarding thc;Phase 1 traffic conditions of approval were soundly based on the traffic impactanalysiSTesults. Therefore; we would recommend that no change be made to the 1996 conditions of approval regarding Phase 1 traffic improvements for the Citrus Plaza project. If you have any questions, pleasc feel free to call me. . Sincerely, L~~ Senior Transportation Engineer GR:sdk Cl1094 cc: Jacob Babico 10hn Burroughs Terri Rabhal 325 S. LaSalle Street Redlands, California 92374 September 19, 2001 plHnn,ng Commission San Bernardino County 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, California 92415 To whom it may concern, Please consider the enclosed comments before you act on Item #3 (FilelIndex RMC/95- 0005/E273-97/01l0292-081-0 1) on the agenda for September 20, 2001. That item pertains to the development of Citrus Plaza in an unincorporated area known as the "doughnut hole." I encourage you to table the application for the following six reasons. First, the county and the city ofRedlands are in the midst of discussions that may lead to different plans. Those delicate negotiations may be greatly confounded by the proposal you are considering. For example, careful reflection will be needed to understand the implications of the repeal of portions of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. In addition, Red1ands and the county need additional-time to" consider my recent recommendations to expand their negotiating teams, aher the membership of these teams, and give voters fina1 approval or disapproval of any deal. Second, the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (S.E.I.R.) is inadequate in regard to police and fire protection. These sections are vague. Sufficient protection is not guaranteed. Plans place an unfair burden on the Red1ands Police Department and the Red1ands Fire Department. I recommend that you seek further consultation with the sheriffs office, county fire department, city police chief; city fire chief; and all associated unions. Third, the Traffic/Circulation section should be reviewed with an eye toward requiring mitigation measures for Phase I that will be postponed until the development of Phase II. For example, alterations to the ramps on Interstate 10 and the intersection ofRedlands Boulevard and Alabama Street are likely to be needed as a resuh of Phase 1. In addition, caution should be exercised in case Phase II is never completed. A fourth concern relates to the water and sewer options that are offered. A couple of the options call for pipes to be sized to meet the exclusive needs of the Citrus Plaza project. These options should be eliminated, since it would be extremely expensive to resize pipes once they are in operation, or to install parallel lines. Infrastructure should be built initially with the capacity to handle demand when the entire 1,100 acres of the "doughnut hole" are developed. Piecemeal plHnn,ng is a fifth concem LAF.C.O. has repeatedly expressed its wise advice that piecemeal annexation is not as preferable as annexation of the entire "doughnut hole." Likewise, piecemeal development is inferior to comprehensive development. The "doughnut hole" is a unique and controversial area. As a result, it deserves special treatment. The plHnn,ng Commission should look beyond the 128 acres of the Citrus Plaza project. Of course, comprehensive p1anning would require a new environmental impact report, one that ensures that the needs of all property owners in the "doughnut hole" and all county residents are respected. Finally, the city, county, United Doughnut Hole Owners Property Association, Curci Trust, and Majestic Realty signed an onerous settlement agreement last February that prevents the city ofRedlands from exercising its fundamental responsibility or free speech right to respond during the pl~nn;ng and approval processes for the Citrus Plaza project. The February agreement is being challenged in court, and is likely to be overthrown. If the plaintiffs prevail, Redlands would be free to pursue its challenge of AB 1544, and demand the enforcement of the decision it won preventing the county from changing its general plan without an adequate environmental review. Planning control may revert to Redlands, invalidating any action that you take on the 20th. It would behoove you to wait until the lawsuit is settled. At the least, the pl~nn;ng Commission then would have the opportunity to consult further with the city of R.c-rll~nds in the true spirit of cooperation and effectiveness. Thank you for considering my opinions. Sincerely, fi~.1lr Gary A. Negin, Ph.D. CC: County Supervisors, Redlands Council Members, The Sun. The Press Enterprise. The Redlands Dailv Facts. The East Vallev News . 1 . •, •, 1 1 1 ' 1 ,- , ~ ~ ? ~ I ~ • . • r ' Prepared for: County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Departm ent 1" State Clearinghouse No. 1999101123 June 2001 1~ S-I ~- 9/23/oz COUNTY Of SAN BERNAROINO ' LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~ AND PUBLIC SERVICES GROUP MM ~L•14.Ollq f PIANNING DIVISION ~~~'~~ rs;c~+^`-- `- `'"'s 395 North Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, CA 9 241 5-01 82 (909) 387-4131 orec;o- c! ~a^r_ use se•: ees First Floor Fax (909) 387-3249 Third Floor Fa>~q~~~'~~ D ' '5505 Civic Drive • Victorville, CA 92392 (760) 243.8245 • Fa 'hhll A NISTRATIDN ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ I, ! http://www.co.san-hernardino.ca.us/landuseservices D JUL 3 1 2001 ~ 3 0 ~ l~I, ' July 26, 2001 i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Su.•~'r1D n~ ' MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT GENERAL MANAGER'SOFFlCE RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES/INTERESTED PARTIES RE: NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF A FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE IVDA FACILITIES PLAN AND CITRUS PLAZA PROJECT, COPMRISED OF THE FOLLOWING COMPONENTS: (1) Repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) as it pertains to the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County; (2) General Plan and Development Code amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Project Area which incorporate relevant provisions from the EVCSP; (3) Water and wastewater facilities plan for unserved or underserved portions of the IVDA Redevelopment Project Area; (4) Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project. Dear Reader/Reviewer: Enclosed for your review is the Final Subsequent EIR for the IVDA Area plan amendments, facilities plan and revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project, as described above. The project area is generally located on approximately 1,100 acres of unincorporated land northwest of the I-1011-210 interchange. The Final Subsequent EIR is comprised of a revised Draft Subsequent EIR and updated appendices, ' comments received on the Draft EIR and responses. A separate notice will be sent to announce the date and time of the Planning Commission Hearing on this item. Comments and questions may be directed to the address listed above, or please call (909) 387-4147. ' Sincerely, y~.~~~ 1 TERRI RAHHAL, Senior Planner ' Advance Planning Division Enclosure - ~ 1 1 . ~ . ' State Clearinghouse No. 1999101123 June 2001 c,°~ar~d =or: San Bernardino County Land L'se Services Department 38~ N. Arro~+~head Avenue 3rd Floor ' Jan Bernazdino, California 9_'-~1~-018_' ' car>c ?y PCR Services Corporation 233 ~•ilshire Boulevard, Suire li0 Santa ;Monica, California 90401 ' r=_- 310.451.4488 ~nx 310.451.5279 1 PREFACE ' Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA Area and Associated V1'ater and ~~~aste Water Facilities Plan for Unserced IVDA Areas and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Retail Center Project-SCH #199101123 ', , Contents: This Final Subsequent Em•ironmental Impact Report (EIR) has bezn prepazed in ~ accordance with the California Environmental Qualit}~ Act (CEQ.4) and the State and Count` guidelines for implzmentation of CEQA. The Final Subsequent EIR consists of the following: Volume I of the Drafr Subsequent EIR as revised; Comments Received on the Draft Subsequent EIR during the 4,-dap public rzciew period ' (August 29, 2000 -October 12,'_'000) with responses added as Chapter 11; Updated appendices of the Drafr Subsequent EIR -Only the appendices that have been revised or updated aze included in this document. Original appendices that remain unchanged can bz found in Volume II of the Drafr Subsequent EIR. r Correspondence received during preparation of the Final Subsequent EIR which clarifies or amends comments submitted during the public review period of the Draft Subsequent EIR is added as Appendix I. User Notes: Comments received during the public review period of the Draft Subsequent ' EIR are numbered to facilitate tracking of itemized responses. W'hzn a response results in a revision to the EIR text, the page number(s) of the Final EIR where the revised teat occurs is noted in the response, and the comment number is noted in the mazein of the affected page(s). Several editorial text revisions have been incorporated in the Final EIR at the request of the Count\•. The margin note: "County-Initiated Change" appeazs throughout the text to denote these revisions. County ' initiated changes aze not included as responses to comments. They do not revise the project description or affect the analysis of the EIR. The County-initiated changes are mainly corrections of word processing errors and text edits for clarification. Due to the number of County-initiated changes and the length of some of the comment responses, the text revisions aze not presented in strike-outlunderline format. In order to maximize the user's ease in reading, revisions are denoted ' by margin notes and corresponding vertical bars. Couon of San Bernardino Land Gse Sen~ices Department SCR tia 1999101121 ' Cimu Plana Reeional S1aIVI VDA Watu d SeHV Services plan Final Sulnequrnt EIR-June 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................1 2.0 SUMMARY 11 ' 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 52 4.0 RELATED PROJECTS AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 88 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 92 ' S.1 Land Use 92 5.2 Earth Resources ................................................................................125 5.3 Hydrology/Water Quality ....................................................................143 5.4 Transportation/Circulation ...................................................................162 5.5 Air Quality ......................................................................................188 5.6 Noise 211 5.7 Public Services And Utilities ................................................................220 5.7.1 Water Supply ...............................................................................220 5.7.2 Sanitary Sewers ............................................................................225 5.7.3 Solid Waste .................................................................................230 5.7.4 Fire Protection .............................................................................240 i 5.7.5 Law Enforcemen[ .........................................................................249 5.8 Human Health ..................................................................................259 5.9 Aesthetics ........................................................................................273 5.10 Cultural Resources .............................................................................283 5.11 Socioeconomics ................................................................................295 ' 5.12 Biological Resources ..........................................................................303 ' 6.0 GROWTH INDUCEMENT 319 7.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................322 8.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED 340 ' 9.0 REPORT PREPARATION 342 Couuts of Sao Beroardioo Laod Lax Scrviccs Dcparimmt SCH. Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water 8 Sewer Services Plan Final Subscquent EIR -June 2001 Piet TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) ' 10.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................344 11.0 COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR AND RESPONSES 347 , APPENDICES , A Notice of Preparation (NOP) ' B Notice of Preparation Responses C Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program -- Updated D Proposed Text Amendments to County of San Bernardino General Plan and ' Development Code -- Updated E Traffic Validation Study -- Updated F Air Quality Data -- Updated G Infrastructure Options Analysis H Biological Resources Technical Report , I Correspondence Received During Preparation of the Final Subsequent EIR r Couory of Sao Beroardroo Laod Use Scrvices Departmcnr SCFL h0.1999101173 ' Citrus Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Water 8 Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnl EIR-June 2001 Page ii , 1 LIST OF FIGURES Page '` - 1-1 Inland Valley Development Agency Areas, Proposed Project Area, and Surrounding Incorporated Cities 6 3-1 Regional Context 53 ' 3-2 Location of Areas A and I 54 3-3 Sewer Option 1 63 3~ Sewer Options 2A and 2B 65 3-5 Sewer Option 3 67 3-6 Proposed Water Supply Option 1 71 3-7 Proposed Water Supply Options 2A and 2B 72 ' 3-8 Proposed Water Supply Options 3A, 3B and 3C 74 3-9 Proposed Water Supply Options 4A and 4B 76 3-10 Proposed Water Supply Options SA and SB 78 3-11 Proposed Water Supply Options 6 and 7 79 3-12 Citrus Plaza Site Plan -Alternative 1 86 3-13 Citrus Plaza Site Plan -Alternative 2 87 5.2-1 Project Area Soils Map .........................................................................129 5.2-2 Earthquake Fault Map ..........................................................................131 5.3-1 TCE Plume and Existing Groundwater Wells ..............................................146 5.12-1 Vegetation Communities and Sensitive Species ............................................312 ,. '-- Couoty of Sao Bcroardino Land Usc Scrviccs Depanmcut SCR tia 199910157 Cima Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page iii LIST OF TABLES , Page t 2-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 18 3-1 Summary of Proposed Amendments [o County General Plan , and Development Code 57 3-2 Current Water and Sewer Service 60 ' 3-3 Comparative Summary of the Three Sewer Options 61 3-4 Comparative Summary of the Seven Water Options 69 4-1 CMP-Related Projects List -Study Year 2010 89 ' 5.1-1 Land Use Implications of Proposed County General Plan Amendments Affecting the IVDA and East Valley Corridor Area ......................................103 5.1-2 Analysis Of Project Consistency with SCAG RCPG Policies ...........................112 , 5.2-1 Engineering Properties Hanford Sandy Loam ..............................................130 5.2-2 Significant Earthquake Faults .................................................................134 5.4-1 Level of Service Descriptions as a Function of Delay Values ...........................166 5.4-2 Actual and Projected Traffic Growth ........................................................170 5.4-3 Actual and Projected Traffic Conditions ....................................................173 5.4~ Traffic Analysis Mitigation Program Effectiveness .......................................186 5.5-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards ...............................................................189 5.5-2 Pollutant Standards And Redlands/Central San Bernardino Valley .....................193 5.5-3 Construction Emissions Attributable to the Proposed Infrastructure Plan .............198 5.5-4 Proposed Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities Emissions ......................200 5.5-5 Total Estimated Daily Construction Emissions ............................................204 5.5-6 Total Estimated Daily Operational Emissions '` ............................................205 5.5-7 Combined Construction and Operational Emissions ......................................206 5.5-8 Project Cumulative Air Quality Impacts ....................................................208 ' 7-1 Environmental Comparison of Proposed Project and Alternatives .....................338 Couon of Sao Bernudioo Laod Use Scrvicn Dep~rtmaot SCR Na 199910tl13 , Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA ~4'ater 8 Sewer Scrviccs Plan rival Subuqurnt EIR-lure 2001 Page iv , . ., 1,Q INTRODi}CTION Iii I' 1 _ _ _ ' 1.0 INTRODUCTION ,_ 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF EIR 1.1.1 Intent of CEQA ' The purpose of this Final Subsequent Emrironmental Impact Report (Final Subsequent ElR) ~~,~ is to sen~e as an informational document for public agency decision-makers and the public as to the 1ni0d~° Change silmificant environmental effecu of 'the project, to identify possible ways to minimize those significant effecu and to describe reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. This document is required by the Calirornia Environmental Oeralin .9ct (State CEQA Guidelines) and the County of San Bernardino CEOA Guidelines (County CEQA Guidelines). ' The purpose of this Final Subsequent EIR is to provide objective and authoritative planning information in a logical format to assist County of San Bernazdino (County) staff, the County's Planning Commission, the County Boazd of Supen~isors and the general public in their consideration of any environmental consequences associated with the implementation of the proposed project. When certified, the resulting documentation will be utilized by the County (in iu capacity as Lead Agency) and other Responsible and Trustee Agencies, as defined by CEQA, to evaluate the em~ironmental effecu of the proposed discretionary actions and approvals necessary to implement and operate the proposed project. This Final Subsequent EIR is comprised of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Technical Appendices (included as Volume II of the Drnfr Subsequent EIR) revised with minor corrections and/or additions in response to comments received during the public review period, as more fulh described in Section 1.~. The Drafr Subsequent EIR was circulated for public review on August 29. 2000. The public review period, during which interested aeencies, organizations and members of the public aze invited to submit written commenu. was noticed and conducted in compliance with CEQA Section _' 1091 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 1 ~ ] 0> and 1 X087. The 4~-day public review period required ' by CEQA Guidelines Section 1 ~ 105 concluded on October 12, 2000. 1.1.? Proposed Project This Final Subsequent EIR analyzes the proposed project, which consisu of the following: (1) repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) as it pertains to the unincorporated azeas of San Bemazdino County; (2) General Plan and Development Code amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) County or San Bernardino Laod lse Seniors Dcpanmcot SCFL Na 1999101121 Ciuus Plaza Reewnal MaIVIVDA w`aza & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 1 I.0 Introduction redevelopment project azea which incorporate respective provisions from the EVCSP: (31 «~ater and Wastewater Facilities Plan for the two tu3served or underserved portions of the IVDA area: and 141 ~;::;'~ ~ revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project (hereinafter. "proposed project'). This ` a'` Subsequent EIR sen'es as a program EIR for the General Plan and Development Code amendments. and a project EIR for the infrastructure options (i.e., 4 different sewer options and 14 different water options) and the development of the Citrus Plaza Project ' 1.1.3 Prior Project Approvals (i.e., Citrus Plaza Project) On September 6. 1989 the County of San Betnazdino adopted the East Valle}' Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP). This action established the EVCSP as the regulatory planning doctunent , for the unincorporated portions of San Bemazdino County that aze within the boundaries of the Specific Plan. As such. the EVCSP policies and development standazds superceded those General Plan and Development Code regulations that previously regulated development within the affected azea. The adoption of that specific plan effectively deleted and replaced the land use designations of the County of San Bemazdino General Plan General Plan, including the corresponding zoning maps and zoning provisions for the affected area. The goals, policies and objectives for land use and planning identify' the strategies, intended direction and specific measures for the Specific Plan azea. A Draft and Final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 94082084) was prepared by the County in September and December 1995, respectively, evaluating the potential environmental effects of the Citnts Plaza project. The Citnu Plaza project. at that time. relied on certain infrastructure (i.e,. sewer and water) services from the Cin• of Redlands. The Final EIR was certified in 3anuary 1996. and the Citrus Plaza project was approved by the San Bemazdino County Boazd of Supervisors. In the January 1996 approval the County approved a Concept Plan and Preliminary' Development Plan for the entire Citrus Plaza Site, a Final Development Plan for Phase I (approximately 49 acres) and a commercial parcel map for the Citrus Plaza Site. After the County approved the CitnLS Plaza project. Redlands Joint Venture (hereinafter, "Applicant") was unable to obtain service agreements from the City. In response, the County prepared a Supplemental EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 94082084) in September wherein the irt&astructure needs of the Citrus Plaza project were met via on-site facilities. The Count}' certified the Final Supplemental EIR in November 1996. Following the certification of this Supplemental EIR by the Count}' in November 1996, revisions to the Citrus Plaza project approvals made based on the November 1996 Supplement were set aside by the Courts; hence, the need for this doctunent. , 1.1.4 Subsequent EIR and Incorporation by Reference As proeided in Section 151>0 of the State CEQA Guidelines, this Final Subsequent EIR incorporates prior environmental documentation and related technical studies for the proposed ' project. These documents, incorporated by reference herein, include the following: Couoty of Sao Bernardino Land lst Services Department SCn.tia 1999101123 Citnu Plaza Rcgtonal MaIVIVD.4 W"azcr & Sewer Services Plan Fnal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Pale 2 I I.0 introduction ' • Final EIR, San Bemazdino County Genernl Plan. County of San Bemazdino, Mai 1984; • Final EIR, East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. County of San Bemardino. September 1989: • Final EIR, Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan, Inland Valley , Development Agency. June 1990; c"a"ee M Draft EIR. Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. Volume I. Ultrasystems. September 199: • Drafr EIR. Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Volume II, Technical Appendix, Ultrasystems. September 199>; • Final EIR. Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Ultrasystems, December 199. ~~nn This Final Subsequent EIR analyzes the proposed project. which consists of the following: ~"~"~~ Lange (1) repeal of the County's portion of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP): (2) General Plan and Development Code Amendments related to land use. water and wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Project Area which incorporate respective provisions from the EVCSP: (3) Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for two unnerved or underserved portions of the IVDA Area; and (4) revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project. The General Plan and Development Code Amendments are required to implement the infastructture options, and in turn the infrastructure operations aze required to implement the proposed revisions to the Citrus Plaza project. S This Final Subsequent EIR has been prepared for the purpose of providing new information in addition to the previously prepared environmental documentation and related technical studies for ~oAOa~ G the proposed project. As an informational document. this Final Subsequent EIR informs affected charge governmental agencies and the general public about the potential significant effects of the proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA guidelines, Section I ~ 16?, a subsequent environmental impact report would be required for a proposed project if one or more of the following requirements are met: (1) substantial changes aze proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous ' EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new si~tificant em~ironmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstance under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new siertificant enivironmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects: or (3) new information of substantial importance, which was not knowm and cotild not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was C•u•n of San Bernardino Laud Cse Services Depanme•t SCH. ~0. 1999101I2i Guns Plaza Regional MaIL7 VDA wazer d Seller Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 3 I.0 Invoduction certified. now exists. For these reasons a subsequent environmental impact report has been or.pared , for the proposed project. T1tis document, submitted in full compliance with the State CEQ.4 Guidelines and the , County CEQA Guidelines, identifies and evaluates the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects attributable to the proposed project. This Final Subsequent EIR in ~~a~~ conjunction with the previously prepared envirortmental documentation and related technical studies ~^~'~e for the proposed project, provides the environmental basis for discretionary actions which may be taken by the County (acting in that agency's capacity as Lead Agency) and b}' other Responsible and Trustee Agencies. 1.1,5 Scoping Process The Count}• has proposed changes to its planning documents (i.e.. General Plan. Specific Plan) with regard to the reeulation of development within the unincorporated azeas within the EVCSP azea. The County determined that these changes as well as the proposed revisions to the Citnu Plaza project were required to be evaluated in an EIR. In response, the San Bernazdino County Planning Department prepared and disseminated a Notice of Preparation (County NOP) designed to encourage agency and public comment on the environmental issues and the alternatives camry In~sate0 to be analyzed in this Final Subsequent EIR. All agencies, entities, groups and individuals that c,a„9e submitted comments on the previously prepared em•ironmental documentation and related technical , studies for the proposed project were again provided formal notice and encouraged to submit commenu for inclusion herein. The County NOP is included as Appendix A herein. All parties receiving copies of the County NOP are listed in Appendix A. In addition, all written comments received by the County on the County NOP have been included in Appendix B herein. ~~~h 1.1.6 Organization of the Final Subsequent EIR ~~~~~~ea c~a,~ To avoid needless duplication. this Final Subsequent EIR incorporates b}• reference information presented in the previously prepared environmental documentation and related technical studies for the proposed project. Additional information and analysis is included to the extent required to enstue a thorough analysis of additions/changes to the proposed project and its potential environmental impacts. For each of the environmental issues examined herein, specific information and analysis is provided including but not limited to: (1) environmental setting; threshold of significance criteria; (3) impact analysis; (4) cumulative analysis; and level of significance afrer mitigation. This Final Subsequent EIR analyzes the following environmental topical issues: land use, ' earth resources, hydrologylwater quality, transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, public services Couon of Saa Bernardino Laad Cse Services Department SCH. Na 1999101121 Gina Plaza Res~onal MaIVIVDA W'arerB Sewer Seniors Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 ' Page 4 I.0 introduction and utilities. human health, aesthetics, culrural resources, socioeconomics, biological resources :uld erow[It inducement. 1.1.7 Mitigation Monitoring ', Pttrsuant to Section '_' 1081.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines. when a public agent} adopts findings corrunitting itself to mitigation measures after preparing an em~irorlmental impact report. the agenc}• shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the emirollment. Shou]d the County elect to adopt the mitigation measures recommended in this Final I Counr. ` ~~;aia Subsequent EIR or subsequentl}• added hereto, the County is required to adopt a Mitigation uarse Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) defining the Count}•'s strategy for the implementation and monitoring of those measures. The MMRP replaces the Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Program (MMCP) for the Citrus Plaza site that was approved in lanuarv, 1996. A draft of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is included as Appendix C herein. 1.2 REGIONAL CONTEXT AND PROPOSED PROJECT BACKGROUND ' The unincorporated portion of the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan (IVDA Area) includes eleven azeas (i.e., Areas A through K) and is located between the Cities of San Bemazdino, Loma Linda, Highland and Redlands (see Figure 1-1 All of these azeas aze adequately served by water and sewer infrastructure with the exception of Areas A and I. which aze the focus of the infrastructure component of this Final Subsequent EIR. The determination of adequate service is based on consultation and interviews with County staff and various water and sewer providers in the azea, as well as field verification. Areas A and I are the focus of the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan addressed in this Final Subsequent EIR. Area A consists of approximately 969 acres, while Area I consists of approximately 82 acres. Thus, the total Infrastructure Facilities project azea for the proposed water and wastewater infrastructure plan is approximately 1,061 acres. The Count< Boazd of Supervisors has initiated a General Plan Amendment to develop land use, water and wastewater policies to assist in the revitalization of the unincorporated azeas of the IVDA Area. The intent of the proposed amendmenu is to make it cleaz that the policies of San Bernazdino County allow for provision of public services by agencies other than the City of Redlands in the unincorporated IVDA Area that fall within the EVCSP. As part of this project, the Count' is considering several policy revisions intended to increase the options for providing water and wastewater services in the IVDA Area. The proposed plan amendments are for IVDA Area A and H. Area I is not located in the EVCSP. Counn~ of San Bernardino Land Gse Sen~iccs Dcpartmcnt SCH \a 1999101127 Civus Plaza Regional MalU1VDA blazer d Sewer Sen rtes Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 5 _ ~ _ ' ~~•- ,- ~ -" -- , ,a ~ ~z i < ~, 30 ~ , m I, I .I 'I o~ 3r D - ~, , ` i m Patton 330 , , K ~ ~ ~ , I "1T ' .30 1. ~ ~ I ' ~ , ~ i ~ ~ ~ i r ~1 +~F r O { J i [ ~ m ,,'. 5th St. 30 i r~ I , + T t{ 1 1 I San Bemardmo In t?~F, k4~">+•• r q' A"l.~ ~ay~Y`i ; , v ~ 'f! ~l /Yw ~liK~v ~ dt~-~ ~ $ ~f x_s ' ' Pioneer Ave. ~, ~ ' A ~-~ x + ,'` • rx ~.,;;~°~.,,;:y, .~.y "T Lu onia Ave. LEGEND r r i_____ ~ Ciry of Redlands .•.-,r~..-. - _ ~ C,ry of Loma Linda - - _ _ -- -- _ ~ Ciry of Colton ~ ~ _ - O Ciry of San Bernardino .~' ,~ ~ _'• ~' H ~ Ciry of Highlantl ~~~f, ~ ,, i - - _ - A,K Unincorporated San Bemardino ,.., , . ,. ~ County IVDA Areas ; _ . ~ Proposed Project Area ` ~- V r ~ 9 F, - ~ j~,~ ;ti ` _ _ _ _ _-. iN NO SCALE '~ Figure 1-1 Inland Valley Development Agency Areas, ~ Proposed Project Area, and Surrounding Incorporated Cities Source San Bernardino Coun and PCR Services Co ra0on Paoe 6 ~' 1.0 Introduction I~ ' Rather than proposing extensive amendments. the project proposes to repeal the East \ alley Comdor Specific Plan as it applies to unincorporated azeas. The project retains relevant pmvulons of the East Valle}' Cotridor Specific Plan by adding the land use plan, community design guidelines and development standazds from the Specific Plan to the Count} General Plan and Development Code. 1.3 LEAD AGENCY, RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES The following is a listing of Lead. Responsible and Trustee agencies for the proposed project. Although it has been the intent of the Counn• to present a complete list of Responsible and Trustee Aeencies which may utilize ilus Final Subsequent EIR as the environmental analysis in inu:aie~ support of anti discretionary actions relating to the project, there may exist other Responsible and cyan°` ' Tnutee Agencies not identified herein. Faihue to identifi• those agencies and/or related permits, approval or associated entitlements does not preclude those agencies from utilizing this EIR in their decision-making process, as this EIR is intended to cover all State and local governmental approvals which ma}' be needed to construct or implement the project whether explicitly listed or not. LEAD AGENCY RESPONSIBLE ANA TRUSTEE AGENCIES Federal Agencies United States Department of the Army Corps of Eneineers -Los Angeles District Attn: Regulatory Branch 300 North Los Angeles Street P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325 United States Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Field Office A[tn: Scott Eliason 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, CA 92008 State Stale of California Department of Fish and State of California Department of Game Transportation District 8 Attn: Streambed Alteration Team Departmen[ of Transportation Planning 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 At[n: CEQA/IGR Coordinator ' Long Beach, CA 90802-4467 464 W. 4th St., 6th Floor San Bernardino, CA 92401-1400 County of Sao Bernardino Land Gse Services Department SCR ~a 1999101123 CInLLS Plaza Regional M1IaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 7 1.0 Introduction ' State of California Division of Forestry ' 3800 Sierra Way San Bernardino, CA 92405 State of California Depattment of Health State of California Regional Water Quality Services Control Board Drinking Water Program Santa Ana Region Attn: Jeff Stone, District Engineer Attn: Gerald Thibeault. Executive Officer 1836 South Commerce Cen[er Circle, Suite B 3737 Main Stree[, Suite 800 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Riverside, CA 92501-3339 Regional South Coast Air Quality Management District Attn: Henry Hugo, Program Supervisor 21865 Eas[ Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182 County Local Agency Forma ion Cotttmission San Bernardino County Office of Special Attn: James M. Roddy, Executive Officer Districts 175 W. 5'" Street, 2n° Floor County Service Area No. 70 San Bernardino, CA 92415-0490 Attn: Emil Marzullo, Direc[ot 157 W. 5'" Street, 2n° Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0450 San Bernardino County Public Health San Bernardino County Transportation/Flood Department Control Department Division of Environmental Health Services 825 E. Third Street 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, CA 9241.1-0835 San Bernardino, CA 92415-0160 San Bernardino County Architecture & San Bernardino County Fire Department Engineering Department 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 3rd Floor 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0179 San Bernardino, CA 92415-0181 San Bernardino County Sheriffs Depattment 655 E. Third Stree[ San Bernardino, CA 92415-0061 Cities Ci[y of Redlands Cotnmunity Developmen[ City of Redlands Department Public Works Department Attn: Jeffrey L. Shaw, AICP, Director P.O. Box 3005 P.O. Box 3005 Redlands, CA 92373 Redlands, CA 92373 Couuty of San Bernardino Laod Csc Services Depanmtot SCn. Na 19991011Zi Gents Plaza Rcgional MaIVI VpA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 8 1.0 Introduction Ciry of Redlands City of San Bernardino Municipal Utilities Department Water Reclamation Department - P.O. Box 3005 399 Chandler Place Redlands, CA 92373 San Bernardino. CA 9240' City of San Bernardino City of Riverside Developmen[ Services Departmen[ Utilities Department 300 N. `D" Street 3900 Main Street San Bernardino, CA 92418-0001 Riverside, CA 92532 Utilities and Rater District Edison Interna[ional San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water Attn: Planning Depattment District 287 Tennessee Street Attn: Sam Fuller, Opera[ions Manager Redlands, CA 92373 P.O. Box 5906 San Bernardino, CA 924E-5906 1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD AND LOCATION OF DOCUMENTS In compliance v<ith Section 15105 of the State CEQA Guidelines. the public review period for a draft EIR submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review b}' state agencies shall not be less than 45 days. Therefore, [he public review period for this Drafr Subsequent EIR was 45 days. ~„"ry Imbale0 Cormnents and questiotls on the Draft Subsequent EIR were to be directed to: cnaaga San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue. 3'° Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Attn: Terri Rahhal. Planning Division Phone: (909)387-4131 Fax: (909)387-3223 The Drafr Subsequent EIR, and all previously prepazed documentation which is incorporated ~„"N by reference, were available to be reviewed at the follo«ing location: '""'a'etl Lnange San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 3`d Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 ' Attn: Terri Rahhal, Planning Division Phone: (909) 387-4131 Fax: (909) 387-3223 County of San Bernardino Laod Use Sen~ims Depanmrot SCF1. Na 1999101173 CiWS Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Rater B Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 9 1.0 Introduction LS STRUCTURE OF FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR ~ -' : _ r ~ _---; This Final Subsequent EIR for the proposed project is comprised of the Drafi Subsequent j EIR and Technical Appendices as revised with minor corrections and/or additions and Responses to Commenu received during the public review period. Volume I of this Final Subsequent EIR consists of the same chapters and sections which were included in Volume I of the Drafr Subsequent EIR revised with additions and corrections where appropriate. If an addition or correction was made in response to a comment received from an agency. organization, or individual during the public review period. then the comment which created the corresponding change in the text is indicated in the mazgin. If an addition or correction was made not in response to an agency, organization, or individual during the public review period, then the statement "County initiated change" is indicated in the mazgin. Volume I. Section 11.4 of this Final Subsequent EIR also consists of Resporues to Comments regarding the Draft Subsequent EIR including responses to the comments provided during the public review period in accordance with Section 1088 of the CEQA Guidelines. Also included are copies of the comment letters submitted during the public review period. Volume II of this Final Subsequent EIR consists of the same technical appendices which were included in Volume II of the Drafi Subsequent EIR and therefore is incorporated by reference and will not be reprinted sepazatel} as part of the Final Subsequent EIR. If an addition or correction was made in response to a comment received from an agency. organization, or individual during the public review period, then the comment which created the corresponding change in the text is indicated in the mazgin. Furthermore, those portions of the Technical Appendices included in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR which are modified as a result of comments on the Drafr Subsequent EIR aze included in Volume I of the Final Subsequent EIR. Couon~ orSao Beroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCH. fia 149910US Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Serviccs Plan Final Subsequen[ EIR-June 2001 Page 10 ' 1 .,. ~ 2,Q SUMMARY r t t i '_ 2.0 SUMMARY ~ ~ 2.1 PROJECT UNDER REVIEW ~, , This Final Subsequent EIR analyzes the proposed project, which consists of the following: ~~°a°~ (1) repeal of the EVCSP as it pertains to the unincorporated areas of San Bemazdino Counn: (2) cnaroe i , General Plan. Specific Plan. and Development Code Amendments related to land use. water, and wastewater services in the Iriland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Project Area: (3) Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for the tw•o unnerved or underserved portions of the IVDA Area; and (4) revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project. The proposed General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code aze for the implementation of a water and wastewater facilities plan to serve unincotpoated IVDA areas and the Citrus Plaza project site. The proposed facilities plan includes several options for bringing water ', ' and wastewater services to the azea, including the provision of services by County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1, and other governmental agencies that may include, but aze not necessarily be limited to, the Cities of San Bernardino, Riverside, or Loma Linda: the San Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District; and the Inland Valley Development Agency. In addition to these sources, the Citrus Plaza project may receive water and sewer service from the City of Redlands. The certified 199 Citrus Plaza Final EIR fully analyzed the environmental effects of this option for obtaining water and sewer sen•ice and as such, no further environmental analysis of this particulaz option is required. '' ~ The Citrus Plaza project is an approximately L~-acre, master-planned conunercial project located within the unincorporated Iriland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Project Area A. The proposed mixed-use regional center will include restaurants and entertainment uses in addition to traditional retail uses. At full buildout, the Citrus Plaza project is planned to cw,nh InibaceE include approximatey 1.8~ million square feet, constructed in a number of phases. The potential charge environmental effects of the Citrus Plaza project were first assessed in a Drafr and Final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 94082084) prepared by the County. Within this document, infrastructure services (i.e., sewer and water) in support of the Citrus Plaza project were to be provided by the City of Redlands. Following certification of the 199 Final EIR, attempts by the project Applicant to implement this aspect of the C1tTUS Plaza project failed. In response, the County prepared and later certified a Supplemental EIR wherein the infrastructure needs of the Citrus Plaza project were met via on-site facilities. Based on the 199 Final EIR and the Supplemental EIR the County approved a Concept Plan and Preliminary Development Plan for the entire site, a Final Development Plan for Phase I (approximately 49 acres), and a commercial pazcel map for the Citrus Plaza project site. Following the certification of this Supplemental EIR by the County, changes to the Citrus Plaza County or Sao Bernardino Laod Gse Servitor Dtparlment SCII. Na 1999101173 Cimu Plaza Reeional Ma1V1 VDA water R Sewer Services Plan Final Su65egtunt EIR- June 2001 ' Page 1 I ?.0 Summan project approvals based upon the November 1996 Supplement were set aside by the Courts. Thr Januaro 1996 County Citrus Plaza Project approvals remain in effect. I ~~,, 3~z= . tr~ The primary revision proposed for the Citrus Plaza project is to provide water and wastewater sen~ices be an alternative method to provision by the City of Redlands, according to the proposed facilities plan for the unincorpornted IVD.A Area. Minor revisions to the site plan aze also t analyzed within this Final Subsequent EIR, but no changes are proposed that would substantially affect the Npes of uses. the total square footage, or points of ingress and egress to the site. Anew development agreement will be considered with the Citrus Plaza project as currenth• proposed. 2:2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Almost all proiect activities will produce some level of impact upon the environment, either directly, indirectly, or cumulatively (i.e., in combination with other reasonably foreseeable development activities). CEQA and its implementing guidelines recognize that there are varying degrees of potential em~ironmental effects caused by those projects which require review. For example, certain physical impacts upon the environment may result in the generation of effects which roduce inconse uential environmental effects, thereby re uirine no mitieatin actions on the P q q _ g part of the permitting agency. Other physical changes which may result from approval may cause a L moderate effect which can be avoided or reduced to an insienificant level through the imposition of specific mitigation measures applied to the project. Other actions ma}' cause a significant effect upon the environment which can be reduced, but not eliminated, through the application of specific mitigation measures. Those environmental effects which cannot be reduced to less-than-significant levels are considered to be "significant unavoidable adverse impacu." CEQA allows agencies to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable ~, environmental rids in determining whether to approve or conditionally approve a pending project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable" by the Lead Agency. Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Subsequent EIR, but are not mitigated to aless-than-significant level. the Lead Agency is required to adopt in writing (i.e., Statement of Overriding Considerations) the specific reasons to suppolt its actions based upon information presented in the project's administrntive record. r 23 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT Based on the project's Initial Study and responses to the project's NOP, the County concluded that a number of environmental issues were inapplicable to the proposed project based upon the nature of the project and/or the absence of any potential impact upon that issue, and/or Couoly of San Bvoardioo Land Cse Scnitts Dcpartmmt SCF1. tin 1999101/23 Gtrus Plaza Reelonal MaIVIVDA Water d•Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Pale 1? ~.0 Summan impacted to a degree deemed to be less than significant and, therefore, not walrantin, further r-- _ consideration in this Final Subsequent EIR. No substantial evidence has been presented folh~ssmg _ ~"= _aar;e the dissemination of the Counp NOP which supports other than a less-than-sieniticant detemunation for the following em~ironmental issues: ,, .~'atural Resources;alinerol Resources. Project implementation still not sienificanth increase the consumption of an}' renewable or non-renewable natural resource~mineral resource, significantly increase the localized demands for those resources, or adversey affect either the distribution system(s) or recocerv of those resources. P:tblic Sen•ices-Schools and Libraries. There is no residential component in the Citrus Plaza project, and the number of srudents generated by the retail and other on-site commercial uses would not adversely affect existing or planned school or libran• facilities in the project area nor create a significant new demand for additional school or librar, facilities. Utilities-Electricity. Gas, and Communication Sen•ices. Based upon information obtained through consultation ssith individual service providers concerning the ready availability of service systems and the projects ± growth pazazneters of those utility purveyors. adequate electrical, natural gas, and communications services and systems presently exist within the project area. Counq InNaletl Gage (Deletetl( Recreation. There is no residential component to the Citrus Plaza project, and the retail uses Hill neither adversely affect existing or.planned recreational facilities in the project area nor create a significant new demand for additional recreational facilities. 2.~ SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS The environmental anah•ses included herein (i.e., see Section -3.0. Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Ivfeasures) conclude that impacts to the following environmental issues can all be reduced to ales-than-significant level afrer the incorporation of mitigation measures: earth resources, hydrology/water qualiiv, public services and utilities, human health, aesthetics, cultural resources, socioeconomics. biological resources, and growth inducement. This is consistent with the prior environmental documentation and related technical srudies completed for the proposed project. The environmental analyses included herein also conclude that impacts to the following em•ironmental issues cannot be reduced to ales-than-significant level afrer the incorporation of mitigation measures: land use (cumulative), transportation/circulation (cumulative), air quality (project and cumulative). and noise (cumulative). This is consistent with the prior environmental ' documentation and related technical studies completed for the proposed project, with one exception. The previous environmental documentation included solid waste as a significant tmavoidable impact. Since the completion of the previous environmental documentation, the San Timoteo Counp of San Bernardino Land Cse Smites Dapanment SCFi Na 1999101173 Guus PIaTa Re_ewnal h1alUIVDA N~a[er d Sewer Sera ices Plan Fnal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page l3 ''.0 Summar. Landfill has been expanded, and therefore project impacts on solid waste facilities would now be less than significant. Thus, no new significant impacts aze identified due to implementation of the proposed project. The following is a summar}' of unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the development of the proposed project: Land C'se. Although project impacts upon land use would be less than significant ,the cumulative loss of existing agricultural resources within the East Valley Corridor azea resultinc from the implementation of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan would continue to produce a s-3 significant unavoidable adverse land use impact. o-; Transportarion''Circ:llation. Project-related and cumulative impacts upon each of the key intersections and street segments analyzed can be mitigated below a level deemed to be significant; however, the regional freeway system will experience congestion both with and without the proposed project. Based upon regional impacts anticipated upon the I-10 Freeway', project impacts on future level of service (LOS) conditions have been detemvned to be significant. Air Onalip~. Based upon the methodology' and threshold standazds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SC.4QMD), air emissions during the construction of the proposed project will exceed established threshold values for reactive organic compounds (ROC), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulates (PMIO). Similazly, based primarily on project-related traffic. forecasted regional air emissions during the operation of Citrus Plaza Project will exceed standards ca,~h for carbon monoxide (CO). ROC. and NOs. '~~9 :ybise. Project-specific noise impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant after the incorporation of mitieation measures. Ho~cever, the proposed project will incrementalh~ contribute to increased noise levels within the East Valley azea of San Bernazdino County. As a result, cumulative noise impacts will remain significant. Energte The projected project, in combination with related projects, will consume nonrenewable energy resources. This energy consumption will produce a cumulative impact on regional energy resources that will remain significant. 2.5 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY Based upon the nature and magnitude of the proposed land use (i.e., regional commercial center), the Citrus Plaza project development has the potential to alter the existing shopping patterns of azeawide customers and influence the choices made by future customers who may enter into the ,~„; region. By diverting business from existing retail centers. the Citrus Plaza project may indirectly o""9e County of San Beraardmo Laod lse Semces Dep~nment SCH. ]a 1999101173 Gaut Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA wazerB Sealer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2(ql Pale 14 '_0 Summan t affect the long-term viability of less competitive opportunities that may now exist within the re~lon. i _ To the extent that other business operators (and affected local agencies) perceive a dtmmution in " revenues based upon a reduction in the number of customers or sale proceeds, the introduction of I ~"3-,. competing btsiness operntions may be perceived as an azea of controversy. Ptusuant to Section 1131 of the State CEQA Guidelines, economic or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment, unless those economic or social effects directly or indirectly manifest as physical changes to the environment. \o substantial evidence has been provided to the County which would suegest that the development of the Citrus Plaza Project would result in the creating of adverse economic conditions upon established ~_~~a~,. ."~__ commercial azeas or enterprises to an extent sufficient to manifest as a physical change in other off- site azeas, such as the creation of blighting conditions. r In addition, a number of cotnments have been received by the County . in response to the previous environmental documentation prepazed for the proposed project, raising inter jurisdictional issues concerning the provision of water and wastewater services to the Citrus Plaza site. This issue constirutes a potential area of controversy. 2.6 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED As required under Section 1~L3 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Subsequent EIR is required to identifi~ any issues to be resoh~ed, including the choice among altematives and whether or how to mitigate the significant effects identified as part of the environmental anah sis. Presented below aze those issues which warrant further consideration during the decision-malting process: Selection Among Alternatires. This document provides the Count}' (and affected Responsible Agencies) with a discussion of both the project and other project altematives which could be implemented b}' those agencies. In recognition of the inclusion of these options herein, the County (and affected Responsible Agencies) may elect to pursue an alternative to the project in lieu of the proposed project described herein. :Need for Additional Technical Analysis. In the preparntion of this environmental document, it has been the County's intent to provide affected agencies and interested groups and organizations with a sufficient level of analysis to facilitate participation and informed decision-malting. As ~~eh required under CEQA, what is required is the production of information sufficient to understand the '~,~~ enivironmental impacts of the proposed project and to permit a reasonable choice of altematives so faz as environmental aspects aze concerned. County Policies. Ntunerous County policies potentially relate to the proposed project. Those policies address environmental quality considerations, the provision of on-site services, the Counn~ of Sao Bernardino Land Cse Seniees Department SCR Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Re_¢ional MaIVf VDA wmer B Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Paee 15 ..0 Summan selection between alternative delivery systems. and inter-governmental coordination in infras[ructurz , planning and development. All applicable Count}' policies. as excerpted from the San Bernardirru Co:rnry General Plan and other applicable polic}' documents, aze presented herein. Independent of , the CEQA process, it is the role of the advisors and the legislative bodies of the Count}' to interpret those policies and determine their application to the proposed project. Following the certification of ' the Fitral Subsequent EIR the County's decision-making body will be required to take action upon the proposed project. As part of that action, the County' Soazd of Supervisors will be required to determine both the relevancy of all applicable policies and the application of those policies to the proposed project. 2.7 ALTERNATIVES Pursuant to Section li126.6(f) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the range of alternatives required in a Subsequent EIR is governed by a rule of reason that requires the Subsequent EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. Of those alternatives, the Subsequent EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the Lead Agency detemlines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project. The range of feasible alternatives shall be selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision making. Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibilin~ of alternatives are site suitabilin~. economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency'. other plans or regulatory limitations. jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire. control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site. Several alternatives were analyzed in the previous environmental documentation for the proposed Citrus Plaza project. Using the guidelines above, alternatives to be analyzed must meet the following criterion: (I) be able to reduce at least one significant em•ironmental effect associated with the proposed project: (3) meet or partially meet the project objectives; and (3) be feasible. Alternatives considered in the previous em~ironmental documentation for the Citrus Plaza project that aze still being considered include the No Project Alternative and Development of an ,M "~ Alternative Land Use. which would include either a Corporate Headquarters/Office Development, r~~ or a Stadium~.4mphitheater Complex. 2.8 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Table 2-1 (Stunmary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) is provided to facilitate the incorporation of this environmental analysis and the recommendations contained herein into the decision-making process and to promote understanding concerning the proposed project and its environmental effects. The consolidation of all identified impacts and mitigation measwes into a single table is provided to: (1) offer a convenient format for the review of those mitigation measures; facilitate the preparation of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program which car. be implemented by the County (and other Responsible Agencies) to ensure that these measures are Coontr of San Bernardino Land L•se Services Deparlmcol SCtL Na 1999101113 Citrus Plaza Resional hfall/lVDA N'azer & Sewer Servims Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Pate 16 ?.0 Summon ' implemented at the appropriate time in the development process; and (3) fulfill the disdo,ure obligations established under CEQ.4. ~- ~ , Counn~ of San Bernardino Land Cse Servitts Depanmeot SCH. tia 1999101 V3 Cimu Plaza Re_sional Ma1VIVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 17 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~' = {3 F Y ~ ~ f. ~ '~ ~ I ~ ~ z~ 7 i n ~ ~ N ~ G ~ Q C ~ '~ a~ v z 2 5 U ~ z x~ ~ u V' G ~ s u: ~ ~ w ~ N Z ~ 5 ~ ~ n~i ~ ~ h r ~ ~ ~ iJ ~ ~ v .'~3 ~D .f i ~ L Z ~ ~ +t ~ ~ C X_ N u`r.'. ~' ~ 'J y ~ m 3~ f , Z ~ ~ ~ =fl -_ ~ ~ ~s ~ 3 ~ X y _ J ~ Z r v :6 N M j y Y r~ =ww V i ~ _ ~ 6 T f _ z' fJ N C ~ i'. r i G V ~ i y H';a ~ v uR e. ~ d ry G ~ uy i3 ~ ~ z, e ~ •f. ~ a~~i- e~ Nov =~o~~ m~ ~~a fl, v ` ~ H U E '~ y R X C~ U O G'~ O p,i w ~.~'O L „' 'J.,, fL ~ q G 'd v k a Y G L ~ v d~ i ~ ~ d ~ G ~ ?, ~ 3 O r ~' ~ R ,,__ _x ,~,~ i=_' u ~ 3 ': air ~ Z ~ 6 ~ U ti r~ Y a J w p4 =,~, Z' 6G~ ~' '! 7 `!' N ~ Z y F G ~ A e~ Y ~ j ;~j A ~ ~ 3 3 ; e u i ~~n s ~L Y ~ Q m G 7 u F ~ w Q ~ J ~' ~ ~'- .J. ~ 0 Y Z ~G ~ s: ~ ~ ~ TL J '$ 7 G N ~ C~ ~ 2i E .Y N G ~ ~ ~ u 4 V i = = x~ ~ asp '~ ; ~ ~ ~ g ~ r ° 3 G ~ o `" ~ L ° 'Fj N . ~ ~ ~ O q ~D O 9 n G N a ~ J ~ GF O~$n0 ~:l p' ~ E aXi. fi yN ~i ~ H~~ o e`+ S' ~ '= G i a tDa"~y p `v+ ~ 'F. ..3a~N3w ~ y ~ ~ ~ d m ~ D @~ ~ ~,c~~~vwc~~~ o~~~ d ~~rc^~u~F ~ ~ Z.. i .s_~,~~~ ~ 3~ v- U ~I ~ _ , L d ~' m = d ~ ~ ° _ v. Z mQ~ , - - ~,~ o r rv ~ Z Z Z ? I1 iJ r 'J_ T J _ _ f ~ ~ ^ -d J ~ C u _ _ _ G ~ ~ v. i ~ ` ^ = j - G: ~.5 = = on ~ = 3 c = :r._ 'u 3 '.^.. v c o~~ G 'm n ~ ~ ~ ~ G .D a ~ L _ 7 .,J _ y ~ = O 2, ~ ~ -D - _ ° 3 = _ e n 'a - O r _ ~ V - r l _ :J T o O ~ r_ ~ ~- U J e J = j ^ ~ J - n J ~ ~ N ej~ ~ ~ O - ~ G~ v 7 ~, 7 ', m ~ ~ J p Q= e~3 r .C G ~ G~-~ 7 G? O C~ y 5 ` v V U ~' ~ _ - v ~ i :l r a ~i" Vl ~ N ~ O ~ E y ~ y G 7 cJ Yi - C e ', J ? 9 O L 7 m~ q Y~ C L ~ E- ~ _ _s=~ - -_ s r _ H C ~ O '~ 22 u=iL'.' 3 vm U > ~ a ~ " `e t. 7 '~ Q a p ^J e h ea < ~ ~`.D 2 'e S J r p~ n s L m ~, ~ ~- 1 .y A g ` Z Z Z ' J Jr Z ~ 4" ~ C ~ ~ ^ ~' I1 '~ ~ c. 4 ~ i < ~ 9~c z as '` O ~ G_ o. _'. ~ f-.~ " v, 7 Cp ~ ~ I ~3 - s= ~ y ^n n v .3 J~ 'z' s ~ ~ a ~ N ~ ? u ~t Z ~ ~ r• ~ ~ H : ^ J ~ J I ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ° ~ ~ ~ r ~ X ~ 3 'v, ~ 3 s= = ctS m 1' < ~ '7 b•j T r ~ N _ T7 d '~ C ~ ~ ~ y p v G O ~ ~ Ry Y sr ~E vr ~ :n ~ N '_ J~ °N~ U ~ ~ L ~3 9? ~ ~ FT v~ 'v~ v G ~J C. J .j ^ S~ ~ f~ :3~ N j G N R ' R T . ~ ~ < ~ D G rJ ,Y ~ '~ ~'JJ G j N~ 7 ~ J /J V r C6 1 a Z ~ ~ a ~ ~,~ ~ ~ C~ ~ r '' N J ~ i~ ~ 7 ~ u J ~ ~ °~'~ O ~ MoD y' g^ ~, 7 ~^' 1 ~ J i^~ < ~ r i? F R ~ i O ~j ~ ~ 3 (A _y _ Z a X p ' Y J ~ ~ J 6 V ~ O l y J C ~ ° ~ a~ c G ~ ~ d Y Fi y ~ ~ ~ v ~ k c ~ L~ 3~ C ~ rr7 G _'. C S u N S NJ. C '~~' Tea q '~ N yy N _ ~ U t~6 `~~i ~ p G i d V I .ir ~ ~ ~ - pfY ~i y ~ o L at y c Z, Z 5 Z~ 4"' c 2 z ^ ' r z n G r ~ ~ '~ J j N Vj ~ u 3 C u '~ + ~ e~ a ~ ~ 3 r 1 3 ' ,~ 4 U t ~ _ r '(' U ? T k ~ u n N j O~j 'F. G G "s H~ V ~ ~3 J cC.i O 7` ,~ pp U f ~ ~ N k "' 3 Z s 3-= N i v.~ ~ ~ j~ ~ ~ 3; G u c ~ =~'^~ c.~~ ~ 'cs 'cs. as ;'3 ~ n T c3 ~,= ~ ~ G o '. l,u Lam'' j ~.~~Yf3 3 ~' m~ o ~ u r ~' = ~ N' r '" -' ~ . Y 7 w u fn L a G u 2. 5 3-'+' 3 s ¢ ~ ,: a 3~ n e+,-.. ~'u~'-,~~'S a ~Z W G'~e'u YiaGU ~..~u~ e~'y^u„~es~.~~~ ni .J u~ u ~ J n y .^c.. N om. 3 y, 'N' u ~ n c C .'8 ~ ~ ~ u ~ -~'~_- '~, "~ v ^3~7~ Chi •' ° ~3 °c ~'~ e yy°=''23 ~JO~' a~ ~ - ~ :, ~ a '~ - C 'ri v ^ '~ ~ e $ 3 ~" o ,. ~ I ' ~ ~ ~3 ~ n i ~~c- w c LG y r n ~ i u -- u_~& a 3_ • o E m ~, g °a r 1•;~ ~ Z o c C 3 3~ c ~p u a o Y ~ y O u G C C ~ 3 V Q 3 ~ v~ v y 3 c~i Y f~ 7 ~ c E G u c~ °ia, i u e ~g ~ c~~~ _ ~ ~ V U ~ T ^ _ ~ 7 ~ ~ Z O i 3 c Q o ~ z z z z ~ S ~ C ^ _ L 1 ~ Lmm ~ v J 3 ~ y v ~ C .n ~ ; ~ _ - r. U j NM ur+ ~' y C v. < J3~~ 3N~==^ z ~, ~ _ s ~ -~ ~ s n` ~ r O J ~ = ^ c`~i ~ U c _ ~ .c ~ 0 2 g~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ? u ~ cOi ~ ~ _ _ O __,? q L C 07 L' C p y ^ ^ n L 7 0 _p _ L2 J~~ i u ~ :0 G u O e`a u ~ ^ ~ .~- y 7 ~ O ~'L3 c ~'^ C -j z ~ ~ -. .O ` G .^.9 J y ~ L h o < 2 3$ v~ y u ;J, ~ s g~ 3 n 5 r,~ y o e N C ~ U o 7 y u ~ O u w ~ c~c_ ~ C ~ d o n O J _ ~ G Y u~ L 7~ U 0 .O 1 E' z = u ~ 7 j r y 7 G~ ` ^ ~ z ^ ~ ~ ^ ^ p ~ ) ? L 4 y '^ ~ i ~ V i ~ .7 y~ K~ J r ` ^ ~ ~ v ` ~ _ , ~ ^ N C n :J ~ ~ U _ N n ' e 7 r r__^ u u ~ 7 h _ e ~ rG ~ ~ ' P v u o ,~ ~ y -O __p ~ Z r ,Z L 7 O .G H H ~ Ci '?" 7 "iX 2 u C G C ~ ~, u ~ ~ O aV. G m ~ ^ '' a m _ V~ 6 n O G J O v ^ h O 5 ~ 3 ~~, ~9 HS :F u ~ u y o` n` 0.~ e < ='o u o y m o O U V] ?Ui u~~~ G ~ -~ u~ F e L Cy~LO~G~~ C '~~~yC a~ W u d ~ v n ~ O O K a m e ~ a o~ E F L 3r k" Z~ m .c - u po+ a 1 A V~~ ~ N ~ - ~-~ r= ~ o ~ ~ ~ z z ~`~f .f z~Q~ z ~ JN m O ~ ~ ~ 'l. _ n G ti ~ ~ C C~ u~~ - J C G J 4y o^ ~,. ~ tf+ ?, ~, 3 ~ O v ` O ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ . u- f _' J l y ~t -, N ~ oS i v C ~ ~ ~ ~ f' eE z, ~ ~y ~s",:= ~ s-a~33a Z 3 i TJ v v~ > N ± a ~ y d U CJ ~ .7j ~ V y ~ ` T 7 9 i ~ E ~mj O _ •f ^ j ) _ k :71' L 3 ~ ~ C~ 7 i 'J 'J U '~ `lf J ~ = U I ~ i ~ '~ J ~ [i UJ 7 y tC i ~ ~ ~ G ~ . 'J y R ~ '` 6 'f. 1 :i i ~ ~ v U ti G j L G N ~ H r r is -J' ~ ~ ^'_ _ '. < J°' -' ~3 ` y C~ u~ .~v- v O O ~ "~ J '''^a ~I f ~" o a U ~ ~ ~ V y ~~jj r U~ ? v~ 3 R G ,~jl n, v~ 9 "a k h ti~~ G T T` w 5 C S'J ~ U, u n N~ ~ m c ~ ~ c p ~ 3 c u d'3 ~ ~ c E ~ i2 ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y Y v?+ r } v' .y Z N c c m c $ 3~ ~'m 'C o _ w _ W`~J ~~~~N ~~oN ? ~4 ~, bi J M T ~,`{ ~ ~ m Z ~ G. 1 u G 9 - J ~ , N ' V i y G~ ~II C'r x ~ ~`t. G q ~ = 7 V ~ fd' b $ ~ v3j .'~~ r y ~ ~ ~ ? ' ~ 9 v. G 7 U d 'J •../ A 3'CC O ~ N~ 3 G~ ~ A V ~' ~ :0 7 w 9 ~ c/I ~ I z J Lp Or ~ J j - ~ j i a ~ ~ ~ i i ~ G ~ V R ~[y ~ ~' ~ y _ i~ r L N .r i ~ uy` ~ i L i O O a~i ;4 G T+~j ~ vG O 7 3« tic `z ~ n g ~ ~ G t ' '%- ~ G ~ ~ c ~ ~ f c E n ' ~ R $. « ~ ~ i . n ~ fi ~ ~ e E o H E 3 g ~ ~ ~ ~' ~' r' ~ 0 3 J ~ .Y.. ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ n z ~ « uo ~ « ~ ~ G CC ~ N ~ u i ` ~ ~ ~ ~ h? = A ~ i U' a 4~~ 70 ~ ei s: s G CC ca 3 V- ' = '.. '.p ~ ~ es ^ ~ ~ v u ~ ~ ~ o G ' ~L o :J> ~ Y 3 ~ ~ p G' s ~ Y cP ~ 'v ~ ~ ~ .~4 y ~' = j ~ G « Y ~ ° .'o n ~ ~ qv~ c '.nom' ~ V oo °,: 7 3 x u j s 3 ? -^ = ^ ','. ~ ' m ,k ~ G Sn U ~d ~ U1 ~ ~ i OJ U .0 ~ •/ ~ r 9 u ~ 7 ~ w ~ y~ ~ ~ k y R 1 11 i Cpp ,D =r 'L :f j .r ~ L Z m4E ' "' n 7 N u} V yy G C I~ 4a U ~ Y o T ' = 3 r n `GO :~'~3ia J i =s _ _ = y 1 ~ X K 3'r. 't 3tv~ ~ '3 ~ Jl -~ ~ ~ N 3 C H :D d :G.M 3 G~ i G m IO ~ 7~ 7 = u i ~ _ v O . ] ~ p t V ~ ..- u i < ~ v `P 3 3 ~ ~ f ~t~c A ~ F •g ~' ma 3 =s" -'= :o'er '^ m'{ .~~' c _ <' < '.. 'v '~ ~ e~ C u ` a~ ~- v F 3 _ A i Z ~ J ~ es ,~ ~ a 3~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ u ~ C i i ~ ~ ~ 3 on ~ c v`. < < Fr ~ 3 m ~~VU e.3 '~ ~ u ~ ~0y 0 ~ •J Q .'~ y V u~ c ./J } ~ G ~ 06 cg a `O J 9 CC M ~' r ~ `o " r „'c a~ p e; y C i i oE~ u€~ ~ u r d C ` d ~ ~ m - ~ z > 9 E R ri = < ~ I~ - c I w C I c r y aa` ~ IJ_ < U i I m -_ z ~ N~ r u ~ - - ~' 7 ` Z ~ N ~ J ~ CVO fn .`_l+'7 r~ r_ C G o ~ i ~" - a y cs u ,~ ~ p7 ? S p ~ _c ~ 7 ~ _i - c c _ G 3 h t - ~ O xc -^u F e '~ o C~ 7 P~ ya G u 3 ~ .'~ u i~ ip gi p" "' n i R _G c F o °rr, 5 ova _ ~ 3 ~',>, ~ 3 ~5 uc~ N~ ~ ? .N ~ O ~ O Gzt ~ y :i a ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ? ` ~ ~ c->` ? ~ 3 ~ A O 3 ~ 3 ~' s ~ -~ ~ ~ o ~ c c u a ~ 3 u y- u l _ ~ • ~ _ _ S,') Y^ V n N ' U E p :l ~ .`7 N S v~ L lQ L L 3 y G~ ~ '^ `yam F O O L 7 'i i 3~ J~ a~ Z < p u N ~ Y N'~ v u~~?~ p ~ 'O ~ o ~ m .p O 3~ G E 3 N v y C c a-~~ `~-' = c< ~- 4 n m `u" ~ ^`' O y y z y v; ~ ,r a u~ ;7~ '$ o z n r~ ~' ,_ ~ 3 •o C 'Z c ~ u ~ a°-< v < C j x eCS G 40 ~ ~ Z 2 p ? ~'U 7 ~ '7 '" 8_' .~, r _ L y v `V C ~ Y3 9 ae G ~ ' Y ~ E ° i ~a ~ m" w ~ J ~ a e a' r- a 0 v =f= ~ - ~ ~ _ d J _ ~ ~ W I' l Z M Q E m r' ~ ~ ~ ~J ~ ri .y. ~ ~ + i d A ~ 6 '~. i ,~ 'r. Y II ?4 ~ ~ ~ ' _ ~ ,~ ~ C J w ~ a '~' ? `raj w G ~ ~ ~ w -. n ~ ~ s -L G e~ L ~ .d ~, ~ v 7 a w ~ ~ ~ ^ . ~ w I Z w ~ e3 ~ > l w _ _ u ci v y '~r', 'I ~ '~ ~ J 7 ~ w ~ `s'~ ~ ~ 2 ya'. u'ro y c' i "~ O' ~ L' 3 3 rL ~ v a o~ ~ ~ ; a^~ v ~ < ~ v ` r w ~ ? 7 G w w h y ~ a y ~ 3 ~ o ~ G ~ n ,. c r o ~ i ~ ~ c 4 ~ ~ y ~ 3' y' '~ rn '~, o g R~ ,,., o ~ '!+ :n c a = i v° G G G G 3~~ y'~ `"' $ d r G G ^~, `y 3 O y '. ~ ' ,^ ~ °tj ` 1. v G i y n 'y ~ ` ~ N ' w ~ wr ~ ~ 7 ~ G ~ ri ~ U J '~ L GD .i ''~? szr. o~ y33 w ~'3`cz. I ~ 5? v ~r i'3 3 ' A 3 v n= 1 0 _ J 3 ~ .J o y ~ w ~ ~rn ' w ~ u- . V+ p ~ C mow„ C '~' M ~'~} ~ ~ G + p ~ ',> ~ '~ u ~ m iy ~ G a`~i w^- ~ ~ 7 '' ~ . G . J T ^ j '~ 6 i _ ~ ~ > w G _ _ J G. :i ~J 7 G ~ 7 7 = y j ~ J f' E ~ C v ~ .L,. ~ J ~ V' w J .a ~ ~ v 'J. tR4S Y ~ ~ 3 V ~ ~ .ri +' <3'w _"''- v u~ 7 X tP ~ C~ D c! 3 `7,.+ ~'Gn ry .~-~ s E 4 c N n °pp ~ ~' ° v. ~ C° Z O `n ~ ~ 3 cL ~ 7 y.0 ~ D7' ' r, ~ ~ u ~ .Ti 'r R f' q t I ~ ~ o~ ~ an"z ~,> '1. „r, ; a ~g a ~ 'm =z E ~ 'e ~ 6 7 . _ O V E E a c t+~ .-, ~ m ;m'~ _ ~ ~SU r T ~ ~ ~ v 9 y m i o > < Z ~ 7 E r - - N ~ ~t . C ~ u d C i < ` ~ U > U ~ ~ .-~ ~ J > _U r V U O J~ 'J i s O ~ ~j T '7 'J O '~ 'J N . ^J J ^ ") ~ U .^O ~ r J < j ~ ~ c y ~ > ~ Yom.. ~ = u 'c ~ c . - ? 3 v L %S N 7 N? V. ~ Q -_ D r 7n G;~ O ~ e3 ~Y ~ N Z ~ Y ~ v % u i = O 3 ~ _ y O < '~J ~ d .N C. i OO.r C V O. y L G -y ~ ,J ~ _ ~ 7 j = ~ v r V.~ ~ U U '~~ Y Q D A~ G T E ~ T~ y~L'~ r ~O G N N < p J ~ O N .' ^ 7 ~ ? ~ C 'f' J `J C! '-U,' y V L ~ _ 'n N U ~ R N ~ ~ ^0 ^J U a. C v V O O C~ 7 O .Xj J C u ~ 7~ ~ R U C 4^ 00 Y C C' O U CJ tC U 3~~ l y C O .U. rs = .a .-. l c J ~ ~ = _ ~ O N ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~' 7 ° '' y ~ ~ ~ ~ .v a ~ 0 3 0 u 5 ~ v ~ on ~ - e3 _ 2 C C w Z J^- 7 O S c^ 7 B~ ~ oU G.'C J G? y 1 L~~ O G y C- O~ ~, 1. O. q GY ~ L 9 '~•' C T L N? v J n `p G am- chi N~ ~ a L- v 0` > ~ ~ O ~ o O U4 O ~ U~ C n '.' '~ > r U U ~' L O U~ v A - } R C y ~ ^ y>> ` ~ ~ a0 O ~G ~ U U U t0J ~ ~ ~0 -J y 9 O < c 7 N 'O G .p `2. O ~y G~ _ ` O O S. N~ < O h L J ~ t r J U O~ :G C-' V C ~ U O m UPj ~ _~p u ~ C~ v ro `a tO 3 . ?'a ? c ~ c . v y C L O v r~ N O G. m G u ~ w u A r - J- C L y C n C 7 C S E _ w L ~ R C C H ~x E_ ~ '~ ;S .c c _ m ,~ m r_ a+ Q /' ,~ > > _ 7 ` _ _ O ~ ~ . ~ 2 r' a Z ~ _ ~ ~ z Z ' i-r p v ~ ~ Y aa`E U z -=,~ :~-_ ~ s < ~ ' _ i _ , N ? r Vi ~ ~ U ~ ~ Z " " - O :u a r J ~ J Q L~ n w q _ _u j~ > ,~~- P = ~ > ; a ~_._'. > v ~ ~ J ~ -0 O Y 7 Z 7 z 'y -? ~j ..J :J Q ' Q T u =t C 3 _ s ~~'_ J v .J ~ ~ R ~ C 7 ~ ~ z G i y v u r M, :t, T > ~ =x ~ fir, 3 "-~ a 'f v o i7 C ~ ? _ " _ > ~ G .E ~ ~ o ~ N ~ ~ 3 = 3 F R C .J ~' n ~ G f J Y f V C ^ y ~ y _ r e G.~ u J U ~ ~ 7 ~ V ~' ev ~ e > y U L C ~ O _ u O~ R y C ~ ~ c y Z 3 0 ~ °, ~ c y . O ~ U ~ C~ ^ C L R L~ ` c .Z N y C L r N LC O Y~ 7L' ,~ C a cuv. J N _J _ l' CS ~ C i 0 J 8~ '„ x _ c ^, _ 5 ~ ~ ~ 'z u E d ~ = ~ Z ~ z I g e ~ c~~ 2 ~- ~ ~ c N.^ ~ 2 Y ~ I ;i 4 ~ I Jy'~ P a ~ ~ G ~ u n Sr] $~ ,~ n L vG' ~ G Z u ~ = ~ 3 ~ 0 ^^-. U G ~ L ~ N d ~ V c~ - $ `3 z ~ ~ N ~ C m Q ~ ~ ~ , u ' e ~ ~ ~ 3,. C ~ ~ N_ ~ ~ u ~" J ~ C C ' L N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~' Or '~ u y G ~ ~ ~ a ~ v Y ~ ~ u F ti ~ E ~ '= u ° ~ ~ ~ ~ C 3 Z w - c ~ v ~ z H '°~s ~, ~ ~ Z cv ~ 7 < E W t`3 j ~ i w t Z !G. '~ 'arp O ~ p ~ z ~ v E ~ ~ s~ ~ = ~ 0 u m ~ N O ~O ~ C ~ ~ C 'u ~rs ~ '> p v G ~ v~ m m ti v _ E n N V V S~~ D N N U G ~ 4^ 'l. m 3 ~ F _ ~ l V c Q ~ 3 ~, oo ~ ~ m m rJ' •'^ ~ u 0.... f~s3 ~ u cam: ~i ~ ~ v 7 v F `^.fi '~ vv - ° ti ~ . r • •~y .s .f~ f.~ n d ~ ~ Z ~ Qr ~'pG v 2 ` v ~U ~ + V l ~ ~ ~,, ~ ~ ~ J 1 v w.~ :1 x ~ ~ r L ~ _ ~ ~ ^' w 3 r. _ ~' L~ 3 C~ C y r J , f~ y. __-a r^ ~ ~nr ~- ~s i t- ~ s ~t _ os ~- i u ~ r.~ ti aim ~.n O 3 ~r J i ilN J a O N t6 J^J l V L .O rS ~ J_ Z C~ ms's e ~ ~ ~u r~ n~~> z ~'~'~r N3~u ~ cr-, f3n'xN.' c ~ » ~ = b # m._ - ~ ~ ° ~ '~ n :off c m s o y," '~ C' N 'l w ^ ^ O raj 7 ~ + ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ - ~ L ~ l i ~ ~ ~ T F O V i ~ J ^ y ,~ 7Fi G in ` V r ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ q J _ Z ~ ~' _ io9 i.0 '~ r c c ~u m i r .J.' .J. ~" a '" n iJ G ~ ~ ±, T G ~t C`~ .Q 'ters L i}. '3y ~ 'O X n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 7 C ~ ~ c .4+, r F ~ ,^ ~ L of ~ + ~ ~ v ~ .r o u y d o ~ c cn~ F '`L 3 $ "N ~ ~ ,z ~ ~ 3 ° N x; u m ~ rL ~+' ? '3 v - .ter. G y ~ ~ ~ v ~ N p e = 7 ~ Jr ~ N' G ~ ~ v e ~ f u .y. ~ w~ u '3L ~ y ~ L w _ J= h ~ r 3 ~ V V O L V ~' V 9 + i C V V ~ ~i r C Y G ~ :D Zw. ~ u V R C~GG X~ 1 e G rN V 'J - H V r J 0 ~ '6 V x i Z D r_ .°3r_ d ~ : ~ C b v ~ai,~ ^n ~.,x A ' kGkzz r~3u ~-f 00~s~), C 6 N C L V i Yh 1 V O Q~ N f C V• 7 9 P V S O• ~ G v ~.r 3 r C 9 ~ ~ ~ '~ . uaS C z ~' ~ V + ~ ~ N C y' Y e7 'y ~ ~ i 3 } V E U ~ - L - ~ `:r Z'~ ~ A ~ 1 ~ .l u~ ~ ~ ' - Z e Q ~ " ~ m s s 7 0 ~ .- ~ n N ~ < ~ ~ L C 1 G~ E ~' ' ,~ d`U b , .3 C ~ G b _ v ,. 1~ y~ d O q - s - Tj `G O in ~ n u ~ F ~•- ^ ~ I y u a ened~ ap i~ F r '~ ~, ~ Yn G .:i C n ~ j<~~ ' V d u L ~ ~ N G~~ O N J is G G•.J r 7 C~ %' U G C > . y 4 u '~ ~ u n .- ~ u u~ J O r j V '~ x u X 00 N T n V nfr ~4j ~ ~ u ~ 3 ~ G H z L~~ c~~ u~ y~ 3 d u y c3 N~ u en d~~ F c - G ~ i- r u i G cs " G rv, ~ 7 c '~' ~ G u m t~ J p ~ d 'q = N u u n G ~ '~+ ~ i ~ .N d N iC U ~ •7 " ~ i d T T d! 3 Sj d C ~ '~ N ~ Y •r~. ~ k 'J D C C 1 7• Y ~ u~ i 7 O~ d .O j n. y j~ i ~ J~ ~ Z J i m a O J= ~ a~j r N i 7 G~ ~ V T'O ee a ~J O ~ u G m d 9 Z 3 C am, r S J .' r ,~ H C ~' n C c~ ei °' u v v '. '.) N? 3 V ~' L~ 7 d n j~ ~1 '~J, ~ G d C3 7 n , N i i ' ^ J y = .-j ~ i ~ ~ O ~ ^ J N O ~ C I d O rJ '~ 'J% ', `Ga ~~3 d I ~ ~ '-: v ° ° o d E" 3 ~ ~ fat G v 'L 'i. r 'u~ - O U: ~ a . ~n d' ~ ~ J G ..s ~ N ~ o v R. od dg g"~' a ~ ~ ~ N C ~J~y u = n ry d ~ O l= N d C O ~ ~ G i ~ ~ - ~ O ~ 5 W V ~ m V d c~~ , ~c~ - u n ~ Z. Q 7 E G ~ Z. 7 ~ ~ n O ~ V = r z~ L ~ C y ~aU <r~ Z - h C Q v7 E Z 'r v_ z < ~ ~' a ~ ~ ~ ' d N ~ 4 a ~r ~ - tr: Z ~ O _ y ~ s+ ~ r 3 7 ^ U .n ~ ~ ^ i !s c ~ O ' Li ~ = Y ~ ~ < ~ ~ 5 ~ o tr 'n ~ E , y y y ~ O O cL = v O ~ 3 V.` O U z ~ U z ~ Q~ VI y Y "a ~ ' y ~ ~ 3 7 = ~ .rj O~ y~ v F O y ci ^ '~ O L R t0 C U- O C ~ u o`D v m c 3 a y N A F r O > ~ G ep er3 ~ v u '~ a 'a7 {C 3 y e y O a '.. L nH+ X~ O e E c E~ A Vv, ~ 'y Z Z fir. o u 3 ~ a P -~ ~ ,z_ L $ ~ 1 c ~' ~ ~ 6 i Z Z `'~ - ~ .o , z ` { Z. i 9 L c 'l: :n C Q Z ~ ' ~ .V.. -o av.'s. ~e=r "c :r" N ~ Zvi U' _ ~ u .-~• :/: O r - ;J ~r~`• - 'r. =- Ga` p - C X F^ _ rj y s = ~ ' ~ ~ ` U n '~ L H V J ~ ~ J V 4 ~ ' U G O Z C V 'J L ~ ~ C f ~ ~ V ~ A Q ~ ~ 1 U ~ C, ~£j ~ ~ V ~, ~ ~ ~ r J ~ . M y } ^ ~ ~ 7 ~ Z F .~-. ~ ~ v v y r d U ., ' cl ~ Pl ~ ~ ~ ? ~ G ~ ~ ~ x Z .J y t - ~ L _ ;J t V W v o ~ ~ ce u E3 L r u 11 ~ ~ ~ R ~G :/: C ~iS ~ ~ ~ ~ n G ~ a `n..~ 'f. ~ e < w 7 ~.- - e S u 5 3~ e m d ~ °-s' ~'^ G~ ems c c" ~ i ~"' = u j.' j u N~~ G d v w C w ~ & v C gusy ~ ~ ~ ~ p i C ~CV3 n .O ~ V .y ~ Y G C G S'. d, Y~, N r u~ Y N C~~~~ H U W :C! ~ G "~C 7 ~~M ,~U u~= ' o a o ~ a _ -_~ ~,i= U i ` i t 2 l ~ ~ L u J ~ ~ z z f ` ~ LO F _ O ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ^'~ f ~ J n G ~ 1 r. ~ .r Y ~ c ~ G U .t t may. ~ 3 C ~ ^a=i C O y Sv ~ ~, Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ? 'i' $, ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ e~ ~ fib' a ~., = Y 3 I 4 ~y~~~ 3t Ste. ~^~c.~ , Ir S 'JY G O'n S ~F ~", ~ u ~J ~ D G u. C ~ ~ ~6 O u ~ ~'? ~ G 5. u O ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ui cL ~ '~ L ~u G 'L ~ ~ u .D F u v' v~ 1 > Sy ~ 7 y'~ j7 ~ ~ ~ t yr ~ N u ~ _ r r ~ .n ~' of ~ Z -~ u~ tea. 3 ~ y ~ ~ ~ ,c v c= o ~ v fa+ ~' u :J O 'v+ N u 3.. v u-~ s r 4 G r O~ u '~..'~ w 3 v ~ ~ J ~ = 1. l - V ~ N _ J~ ~ G ~ _ ^ ~ ~ ~ a N T.~U'±''J .J N3 :4 'fit CE n_k~1C ~GJ ~ v v u v~ a c ~ G'o p.9 e v ii. ~ ~ y ~ d "J d c ~ ~N r' ~i Vy ~- S M G N ~ O E ~ Q .L W m. T m ~ ~ U ~ ~ - U C ~ V V C ~ ~ •n i. r.. C _ N .7 Z Z z I~__ C ? = `f. f y ? _ I C C. N N~ J 3 U '! I ~ O ~ C _2 V` y C v J i 00 u M r L t1 n ~ I~~ Y L - ~ c'_ c z ~ r. u S _ n ~ ~ Z ~ L~ y U U~ U < _ . - e~ - C ~ ~ ~ ~'~' ~ ~ is F "~ U G i .7 .O .n .N- J _ ~ ~ _ ~ o u~ B 3= o C ei Z N 7 ~ F t~ C n ij `u _ ' e 3-? ~ 7 _ U N u u C_ yp ~ L ~ r~ U ~ T C` " U L R~ V N W u L 7" ~ , _ L U X L ~ A p fYi O` C "~ ~CL ` O~ O O~ O L Z ! 7 = CJ U vi 7 T :J y y L 0 7 C G y J C .G.. N L ~" L r H~_~vi ~V r. GGC~~-H~ N ~U C. ~ ~ 'r C-1 O ~ ~ r G ^ C '.'~ :s7 _ T y-~ ~' a N u T~ J u '- ~ ~ _ _ C n n ^,) - 7 G~ y G G ~ - J- C 3 ~D ~ U u O O r chi f < ~- y ~ E ~ 3 u 3 a .- ° c~ r ~ Z L_ ~ <<% C v O ` ~ ~ ~ w~ a - ~ y c o a ~ J N ~ ~ 0 3 u o u ' E ` ~ o`sg c d.3 O ~ L u u c ~ 3 i2 T~ ~ m` 'ao > U~ ~ C V N C C V: m C a~ ~ y C.. ~ o C ~ ~ id L `e ~ r N ~ u~ a u u ~ u e J U° J ~, U~ a A U ~ ~ V CJ c J u , .I ~ _ O ~ .~j J CI ~d 7 Y '.~' Z a ~ J O ~ G~~ v r i Z N ~ z z' z' I d ~ v ~ N ''' '•'~ L C a - 'G n ~ :r Lqq ~ d _ .Y ~C p .r v. _ cd E 2~ 2~_ - U z 3=mss 3=':~C i < _ _ ~ - :, I _ J _ _ r ~ „ ~ ~ ~ N ~ " _v +J' _ : N (i u U = ~ pp ~ G ter'. . Z A O p ~ G p N V c ~ r ~ Q N ~ ~ '~ C 7 c ~ u u p u ? _ u - ~ L 3 R ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ -'" °N` Q N _ ~ = N y ~ u w= y-- 3 ~ _ N , ~ u j u C w ~ ~ r s` v ~ ~ ~'p V T'u O - ~ - ~ a ~ N c _ _ `~- Z :,~ ~ C p p :J ,. a 7 e0 j T ~ ~ =9 ~ 7 u Z u J C~ T T 7 '-' .y. 7 ~ _ U ai ~ ~ n e° n _ ~ J O ' r -' C v ~ cJ ~ ~ ~ t. G , U~ 4 Y G G 7 O d ~ '•~ 7 v $ '. J ~ 2 O u C >, ~ ~ O ~'- e0 n u y L = 0~ ~ u Z :J C n F L H~ a v. a" c~ '~ u ~ v u rLO_u :o r w^ E ~:'0 5 o r u- ~3 3 c u c e, >, y ~h+ acC = a = 3 a='~ u ~ m L G u u tai C=-_ h O~ .y ~ w 5 ~ u V+. Nli lO L° d N ~ V. A v~ e`'. O C ai C_ d p~ J~ '2. ~ 'S ~ ~" ~ N J 0 T. NN N ~ T-~ L L. L W i~ ~O p~~ u C ~ q~ ^ 00 i 1-0 ~ ~ p 3 . Q~ Z N . R. T.~'+ V a! ~ N N. V V M " I ~ - u lC' s L • z 1 7T 6 ~' ~ Z ~ ~ V V ~ ~ G r ~ - _ ~ '. ~ ~ . V ~ ~,°'y <J i ~ ~ ~ 1 ~r o° va~ti '~ . n ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ h Is: y 9 ~ ~ ~ x = ~ r .v =~2 L H ~ 7 =7 U G r °1~~.~^ ~'~' Z C ~ ~ , , ~ F y G r C A p U_ u f. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q J 7 4 ~ ~ u ~ c 3 7 t~" ~ w a~~L V ~ in ~ ~vaT~`^ ~ ~ 3 p y J ~ u ~ q G _T 6 ,,~j, `y ~'~ s u O T'u N , ~ ~ ~ Fj J O ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ 7 y ? ~ G 7 _ = i '~ Z a , y'o ~, F ~ ~ ~ j G v s ~ %=u. H z a , i u t'~ c a ~ g Y `a 7 S LZi7 % j ~ ~ ~ J .77,f V. ~ ~ -'~\ 7~ n j 7' G i 3 V O O r u .'j ~ $ Y N ~ U G i 7 ~ y V: rr z O Z' ~ ~ e G N L ~'~ 7 y, O^ pp ~ N r 3 O 7 ~ ~ d 9 YS, U i D 1 ~ U~ A~ V V G y ca .r u ~ a ~ = ~ .N G ~ G ~ U 'J ~ 'c o c Z ~, `l = a v ~ ~ R s ~ I ' _ U ~I Q ~ u ~ = - s z ~E e e ~ ~ z z z z `- = • IJ - d _ ~ r ~ ~ o ~ = s N ' ° ., - _ - U c ~ Z r n s n ~ I _ J - u L ~ O N ^J _ r ~ v G '3 3 C T'n L '~ N v ~ ~ u z o m N en ~ ~ c 3 C '.~. u A y '~ G ~ ~ ~ „ _ ~ -' .'~j :0 i C.p of ~ 3 L u _ ~ U e = c~._~ a ~'F u.= c u~ O .a'.0 C C .' ~ O U O :J ~ C : 1 ~ ~ ~ es N ~ W ~ ~ N ~ ~ = 7 = :G ` 2 ~ cui O ~ ;vL 7 ^ n ~ ~". N~ ~ 7 N~ ~ j u .7 ~ C j L > _ O u n v j u id ..I C _ G ~ - O ^a^ ~ :n - u < ~ ~' ~'- - y y .'o ?°-3` mo`o' ~ ~ i - u u. ~ ~ J v A= J ~ u u p •Q L C u ; ~ O „a m ? n= o ~ y~ N ~ 3 ~ J 'y7 Uj ~ U G •U ln. C C.! r ~ u ., •y o O Y VI a ` U U C y !, d E u J_ ~ u= O G r u~ m eJ L .U v° c ci ~ L .v ~ v C e~ n 5~ UG d v .U~ p t < EDP _ m m L U G_ N yr U~ ~ N V N -J ~ 2V' ' o o~ z 9 d~ 0 3 2 u~ o e ~ 1 'r Z 3~ 5 3 y :3 3 3 y U 3 °i 3 U i° ' r - ~ ~ ~ a ". ~ l z frV i Z _ 'f ': V = ~ z I a a ^ ~ _ _ N i ~ y ~ ^ ~ 'G7 1 e~ ~V 'f I V ~ JG J ~ c' E=~ Z 3 ~ I ~G ' ^ i N {pp ~ J~ ~ Jv ~ , G V i k c~3 _ ~ -:~ ~'~ 2 z v. G ~ 6z. ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 y'r~ c b L J L ~ CJ ~~'j Q I~ G ^'r. P! n J~ a _ s =3~ G~ ~ t Z f y$ y ~ ~ 3 o ~~' ~ G' ~ ..' -_.. :, ~ c o '.'. ~ n ~ ' ~Z4~ ~ `J ~ U ? ~l+ri : ~ ? 3 r 3 ~ i G V Z i, T v~ `L. c `v `'?% a~ 3 I W ~ ~ ,. C, o .S y G~ r ~I ' 1 ~ ~s z ~ ^n G c II ~ v: c t a u ~ = J y c a ~ /J ~ ~ y ~ , i ,~ E:.. o r v mq:_ I RU 'E-•' ~ ~ u. G~ y ~ v ~ p v ~,. V ~ 9 3 y ~~LL'' cc55 E Du N L 3 °?' ~n d ~ ~ ~ y~ v ~ '~ .,, 'm n ~ c ~ ~ ~ c i I • .l 9 ~11L ' IZ d ~ ` ~ ^ z l v. J ,l Z ~ Q"~ z N .a r~ 7 6 G ~ v ~ ~ ~ N O co-S G ? r c u o ~' ; n~ 3 '~ v~Onm7 C O~v' 4~ U 3 c~ ~ ~.J ~ ~ I 3 v j N D ~ 4 < , V ~ N :0 ~ ^ ? y '~ ° o e' ~ C 7 u _ Q `d 'r^.. ~ 7 N Z ^ ~ U ~ ~ ~ u ~ L lip 7 4 F_ ~ ~ ~ 7 7 ~ ~ ~ c T~ '^' ~ ./1 V~ 3 F G ^ ~ ^ ,~ Z ~- - ~" ~ t6 ~ 7 4 yp~p1 '~ a 'n v~ !A L U ~ F N'U J ~ _ u r ~ T ~ y ^ ? ~ ~ v' n ~ - .3 ;J N ~ S 4 ~J O~ y 7 7 v x Z ~ 7~ u ? J V s'3 ~'F..'ilA~ U ~ O 7 ~ ~ ? i r ~ S W4.' m a c G ,. c~ y c a~ -' '~ Z ~ O Z aJ < ~ ° ~ ,y n3~ v z ~ eG O i " ~ y ~ N n O ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ O N ~ ~ ^ ~ L' 'O N V r "~ ` 5 a u G ~ ~ d °' p p'°°' w ~oo " Y ~, ''~' "u ~ ~ ~ ~ C G ~' V 7 w b' O! ~ u O r ~ ~ O O ~ R ~ ~ ~ G ~ 7 Cz+ ~' f. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ C C R'O ,~.. w U N ~ u G~~ ^ o o v ~ .N`r} Lp._ ~ i Y L ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ L ~ V ~ } L ~ ~ ~ Y s o idx W ~ j L~ ~ ~ _ ~r~ ~=- o _ N O Z Z Z Z ~ -. C _ J S L d N 'C h C N ~ b rii O R. r = ,~ = C 1 I J T r ? N 7 ~ ~ ^a U fTJ z 3H A `o ~"^ 3 y o ~ u -~ G.a u~~ - S = w v ~ CS U ? C U .y 0 N L U~ U~ y r T a y L .- T U L~ - L N cO = _ _ -~ > R r u N '-' ~ t c u ~ c v, u ~N.. ~ 3 u ~ u S'^ ~ t u_ ~ ~ 'c ~3 c ~ 4 ~ > > ~ u ~ u ~ = ='~p y u Q c~p p p V F O u~~ GeD. Z u^ a :J u~ ~- - G ~ ~ L L ~ H J ~ v ~G '.7 ~ L ~ H ~ ~ ~ 1 J' < C ~ u ~ v .u.. ? ^`rii ci = `c" ,cu ~ G G ~ •- - v ~ mC" ^'c? 2 ~ m. a >,~ ~ n ~ c~ ~ 7 n .J 3 ~ _ ~' ~ = ~ '~ ~ - N to C - L ~ U ') '~ 4 O y rJ C U = ~ D ~ u ~ G~ S~ ~ '^ ~ ~ 4 33 Z - _ v n ~ ~ i y J U ^ t _- C O~ m U O~=^ - O u O_ ~ ~ •j .=O c u O ~ _O u a ~ v~ Z` aD O n C O D D C ~ d `u c u ~ j= G F j j 'w ~ J c ~0 ~ u u G F „ .n O' ~ G~ ~ ~ ~ v; `u W : ~ E _ e = e W 3 Y e n ~ - u C I m t 'Y r/ n, C `e R1 t. L e e e ~% V 1 -= 1 =- x= u ~ Z - a °' u C W 2 d 0> ~ Z I l '!1 ~ t z Z N N ~ ~ I{11 ~ @:J ~ o U ? Z '~ U < ^ ~ ~ ty c ~ ~ ~ I 1? n L ~ ' O n y J + 7 u c r °' u v 'f, y y ':1 y n O '3 ~' r '~ v T V ~ C- , ..0 ~ i ~ V X^ V~~ V^ r V -N n J y L G r ', ., G` n xx~ ,- ~ .'y 7~ 7 X~ ^0 3~ G ~ ~ O' j y~ 'Vi v r~. U 7 G n Z <~7~u~~-N ~`L cJi~ ~ + ~v^ M vN u G+ :D G m N y J 5~^ C A B ^ o a - ~ s ~ ys a 1. O- = ~ ~ .~-. 3 < ~ ^ ,~ o 4 n o v O L u 3 ~ ~ v ^J .v. y '7' u C ~ k X~ Z 1 o c ,~ R v O 7 ~ =~N Fyn' -ai e' a~ ^^J ~ G = V ~ N ~ 'y ~1 ' V. J J = 'r,~ n is U 91 O _ T 'FJ U 7 . l J E G G' v 7 0 .v'. n e4 y- ~ '.J G d S m L G 3 ~ V ~ O O V G ¢ m C Y u n g i~ ~ O 7 e C u r ~ r~s ? L ~ y ,N i4 ~ ~ G ` ~ v ~ n ~ ~ e . V y .J L u n /J p v ~ ~ ? Z y ^ G + t - - ~ ~ ~a=. -_ { d J ~L c ~'~ R ~ V ^ - ~ - 1 j d z I r zae=3 z z G - N rl I ^ G C ~ ~ i ~ f"1 N ~ ~ ~ N J ~ O ~ , ~ ~ c~ r~ iI a ~/`~ ay o ~ r ~ 3 ~ M .t U 3 0 r `" ~ ~I 1¦{ u '3 _ _ 1~y l .7 5 w F ~N D ~ L 7 O C Z. G ~N~ vr'j U~ J ~L nU NCR 'J ~ '~ 7] y ~ _ ~ CS G Yi - T V ~ ~ N c _ = G V C 3 G tai. ; w3~ ~" 7 v n7, } , ,^ 3 ==~_u TG ~ ~ ~ ^Y y cam. a '. V ~ N ~ ~ ~ V ? r v ~ .7J - '~ %.~ ~ 'U "~ j G LT" ~ X 'J~ < L ~ N ~ V ~ ~- ~ Y i u .v- G J ~' ~ c~ 3 g~ ~ o u~ %~! C 3 ~ v ~$ ..~, 7! H~ ~ C dS g 'erg N o ~ ~ y;?3is3.N^ ~ " es 3 ~ ' o < 3~ N- .n r v g> J y N i 9 G Y V ~ C C V N ~ N 7 rN ~ ~ ~ V e0 d rVi. ~ Vi 4 4 r 7 ; ~ ~ p Y{ J T v C+ 4 ''~ m 5 4 ~ 4 N ~ '~ ~ ,~i w Gv 'J ~L G ~ A C ~ ~ ~ M - - ~ = t z ~ , _p V ' ~ _ C z ~ y~~ z ~ ...3 v ~ oet£ Z Z N J N 1 ~ = v ~ N N . y i N ='~ I o '' ~ Y 3 ~ r' ~ H ~ v ~ ~ r. ~ n r _ .O y 7 ~ se u p ~ a ~ ea ~'~, ~ ~ n i _ '~ v O ;J ~ J tS V ~ ~ f3 ~ ^ ^ ~ r 7 G :'~ ~' °o. F N 'J U~ j'J 4 t~'N 4~ ~e 'J' rJ ~ a N ~ ~ 4 r~ ~ ~ nac ~ w c~ si n c~ 3 ~ ~' ~tj ~ N ~n~C ~Y??~~~' ~ cep>.- U a " ~ 3 ~ Y ~ ~ TN ~ 3 N c it ~ sL ~ v ~ ~ i F ~ ~ y 7 ''. 3 = ? ~ y. r~N~ ~ u ~ I + ~ ~ ~ ~1 J ^ ~ ~ Z ~ 4~ i f ~ , i I J = = ~ ~ ~ ~ V p j l 'J~. ~ U' N N ~ `J ~ J W '~~ L' $y ii :S ~ U: ~ 7 'J i r U O^ i' J l_ 7 7 ~ l _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'J i p > ' ~ Ci O "J V O u ^'P •'~ 0 1 `g' ~ ~ a ~ s 3'~ I, N 4~ ~ a S ~ ~ v r ~ 7 ~ e VR .y. : ~ ~ ' S v`. 3'z~' "~ J ~ ~% U~~ V U 9 '_~ u ' 3, ~ u ~ c ='N N 4 ~ ~ 3 , G. O- C V N J u G'J ~ ., r. aa~~ - 9 C ~ = Y d .-^~ ~ C Q~ ~ _ Z Z a N 7 z z" z z I! ~ u C = N ~ l cE ~m _ b.?rv < v < = z 3 ., =d ~ U 'J ~ ~ _ ', :J Lai ~ ~ ..D ev u u u z ~ H H Q ~ ~ ~ (u~ ~ s ' ~ ~ 7 _ ` ~C O C OY ~'~_ v 0 j ~ ~ urn v, 3 a'L :n R a u v a r _ Ci 7 N _ - U Oi o 3 3 ~ ~ ~ '~ u-u~. ~ o yr _ y - U ~ ~ O u d ~ S ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~in '%n L U A .u. C ~ L u 3 G '~ 'J l) U u [n U S N U U ~ U J~` ~ U Z 7 n 3 u m = ~ c = L 9°~ -' 8 k7 '.7 ~ ~ = u u S v~ ..n 'u > = ~ 4 '7' i Ci ~ A J CJ ^ ~ ' G ~ A :0,~ ~L Fn J Ci VI ~ ~ '7 '_ u .L ~ m CO'] ~n n 'r _ - y~ ~d °- _ ~3 U Y ~ ~ ~ _ m ° ~ ~ ° ~ G a C - u ~ 1 _ u Lu C C 'u Y ~ 7= u F i3 u '~ i o .m V H G U R ~ y ~ y A u ~ u j h m 0 o N u ? H ~ 3 c °e ~ '~- v ~ u Z a ~ i T: m "a+°.'oE Z. ~ ~ Z ~ ,. ~, Y ~ ~ ~ a G_ 11 N ~ _ ch-s Z 0{ & O ~ 9 ~ = O Y Q _ N ~ ~y G_ ~' G~ Uxih ~'~~ J f p < ~' A J I v 3 1 L.D iQi G j i 3 m .'. ~ i ~ N ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ •4 t 5 " 3} 2 .o a ~ J u~ 5 ~ '?~ ', ~ V ~ N ` ,+ ~ G. y ~ chi ~ ~ y ~ ~ o v'N o~ J ~J./ c3 A 7 ~ ~ G r ~ -r ~ ~ 3 is L ~ C ~ N ~- ~n ~ v ^ v ~ ~ v ~ ~ N CS 3 ~ iN ~ J ' J1 ~ U ''3A r '~ tC N~ N O "3 y 5 r P' tL ~ C V ~' $ es C CS i 9 .i L.r _ 4 .'.0 S < Q^, ti3F~aL~c"r N ~' r -~ is ~,,. u ^ "r ~ u~"~ O v 3 cy. u ~ '~. y~ J v H ~.bb ~ ~ ' SAD 7 f3 ~ .Oyp~ ~ N ~ . n U ^ r rn w ~, ~ V f. 7 ~ N. r Cy C . z n~ ~ 3 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ $ m ~ ~ ~.-. ~ m `J ~ i O ~ v '3 w v F .n ~ O~ 5 i gg ~ - ~ ~ y~ ~ i 'bi ~ ` u n e a y. v. ~ 7 ~ z u~ E=~ v S Y2 ~~- ri ~ d~~ I --- m 3 _ ~ . .y r ~a- z z s _ ', '( y N r ~ G ~ ~ ~ S y N _ yCy ~ O V y a~ G :J Ca G ~4 L C v _O _ ' I_. a 6p'-. E F~~ O- ~ p ~- z z I - s.~ ~ A ~ ~T ~ ~ ~ ? ~ a c ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ a ` U :D U ~ C+ Z = R `- ~ oL J o £'H r < Y ~ v $ y ~ ~ . r ~ ~ R r~i ` ~ 3 y ~ P .j < O ? J V u p F d v j p ? ~ c N V a y 1'J vi CJ p i J L i S 3 _ Gs,1J (s. V L j :J 3~~ ~ '~ n 3 9 J '~ ~ J ~ Z z 3 ~ "z' y s c ~ 3 ~ 3 w u 3~ G V ~' ~ . 1 Z y ~ u G ~ G C C , ~ '.V ~ - y 'r' Y. ~ V p ~ u C ~ y ~ r ~ c rV.. U ? ~ V ' :D v' c G o= h p~ a y ~ ` G z .- 3 -~ ~ 3 ~ u ~ O cuVd ~ 7 u u O p- ~ ~O O e .7 u ~ G y u ~'~ e a eke n' 3 ~~ud ~ ~oO p ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ c E- u w ',~, Ci' ~ y ~v G C 3 z U U~ ~ R O O p ~ ~ C'a0 1 ~3 ~ ~ w~ aE 9a ~ ~ ~ '^ 'E ~ ~.F m-Eo u o m m C ~ ~ ~ O p. ~ C m ~ ~ V 4 ~ a ~ i ~ ~ C cJ ..L c p ~ui ao`~`c ~g ~U •y. 'm~ 1 u y a~ v p y c a ~'?_ p 'v V W 2 U ~ ~ ~ p R z~ ~ ' u H y ~ ~ ~ y V ~ v ti 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ m m ~ ~ U I~I f-` _r s_ s , ~ a d u _s ~~m" ~ - Z>~'o $ =' ' Z _ N ~ _ ^ L L .G U Z f ~ ~' ` F '.. L ' ~ ^ ~ I ^' ~ ^ ~ y ~ ~ = y ~ T I Gam' v. '= ~ , .D .U., ~ - - ~ _ •- O z ~' 3 ~ u ~ 3~ s T ;i J ~ r > O :l /~ n 5 i ^ .L Y~ i~ r V 1 F T u G~ O~ v h~ ~ V wC ~i .y ~ = J ~ ' ~ a ~ O V u C ^ L ~ r G ,~ ~ _ > pT ~ G ~ u ~ rJ yy D u, a ~ V~~ O ~' V ~ U G~ 'O z L J_~ y T R: j 3 r r .7 N ^ d ~ ~jJ CL F y_ n i p C i y V ~p u~ _ ^ G ~ J y r L V ~ C~ .tt. J~ ~ ^~"J N ~cc~~ ~ C ~ V :J .A s . ~ .'~'. C ~ v m G A :s ~ S . C i 'O m ' ~ ~ : v ry ` ~ G ` u ~ Ou' ~ 7 y ~ 7~ 3 .G ? s y= i ~yJy 3 , '' ,~ ?- y~ o ice. ~ 7 ~ ~ m 7 u ': ^ n ~ .- ~'': ~ ~ ou C ~G ' ~3 =x ~ 3> ~<=i''o ~ " J. ~G Z GL r V cs , Z -s ~3 _ ems. • U r y J ~ 7 ~ L C ~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ u , S' ' ' u ~ G y ~ ~ o ~'~ %~~~ U~ G ~'v V v J . V v p O G O~ ~ C ',~., uv. u 1 - - V ~ m ~ m ~ d Y I1 . 7 d U %~ L _ Z i 7 E ~ r ~Q- c Z V of 7 2 F N C X C ~ < as c ~ z a 1j3~, ~, I - II ~ = ~ = ;, W '~ ~ C V O n V ~ y ~ ~ < = . n L C far] ~ ~ v O ~ R Z x :''u & ~ D~ u^ ~ 7 2 o G p O 1 ~ V N U^ ~, U' _ ~ ~ Vim. ~ G a ~~_~=-,~d~ U a u u 5~~ 6= F.. 1 ~ F ~ '~ ~ . A~ ~j ~ u 4 G y 3 ~ > F ~ ' w ~ '~ u G. ~ 3 a J v~ a '~ CS7 ~ ~ H'J 99 3 V1 ~ ~ O p ^D.~ ~ ^ G V n O- 9 3 a eC`r'~Sa~'='~3 ~ ~ •3 y y ` ~ r ~ ~ G ~ ,cVS u ~ ~ 5 Q Q L~ y`'F. ~ T T r Z ~ ~ 3 ~ Z L W 3 V '„VS 7 i ~ 7 O " ' ~ 3 C C m J z ~ p Z ? ~- ~-~ y u_; u w ~ ~ ~ N N ry `f3 G ~ L~ J U~ J J E N ^.>- oD O t N ^-r ~ J j y u f g, E ~' 0 3 -0~` c ~ cas V1 a 3 ,a u H ~ 3 w ~ m ° ~ 9 g ~ C 3 G m U C E ~ ' g ~ E ~ vd E in u ~ n ~qq O u o 5 > H 4 ~ UJ O O u Lsl v ZDO ~ ~ ~ '~ ' 3.O PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 I 1 1 '_ 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 PROJECT LOCATION The em•ironmental analysis contained in this Subsequent EIR focuses on the potential _ environmental effects of the following: (1) repeal of the EVCSP as it pertains to the unincorporated azeas of San Bemazdino Count}; (3) General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Project Area: (3) Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for the two unserved or underserved portions of the IVDA Area: and (4) revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project. The locations of the IVDA Area, EVCSP area under study and the Citrus ' Plaza project aze shown in a regional context in Figure 3-I . The unincorporated portion of the IVDA Area includes 11 sub-areas (referred to as Areas A through Kj. IVDA Areas are shown on Figure 1-l. The unincorporated sub-azeas aze located between the Cities of San Bemazdino, Loma Linda, Highland and Redlands. All 11 Areas are adequately served by water and sewer infrastructure, except for two azeas - Areas A and I, which Cann _ aze the focus of the infrastmcture component of this Final Subsequent EIR. The determination of ~~c°.n~ adequate service is based on consultation and interviews with County staff and various water and sewer providers in the azea. as well as field visits. In terms of land azea, Area .4 consists of approximately 969 acres, while Area I consists of approximately 8? acres. Thus. the total project azea for the proposed infrastlucture plan is approximately 1,0~ I acres. ' Area A is generally bounded by the SR-30 Freeway on the east, Lugonia Avenue on the ' south, California Street on the west and Palmetto Avenue and the Santa .Ma River on the north. Area A was historically used for agriculture, and currently includes a mix of agriculture, vacant land, a few residences, a church school. All existing buildings within Area A are served by on-site ' septic sewage systems. Area I is located west of Bryn Mawr Avenue and is generally bounded by San Bernardino '_ Avenue to the south, Mountain View Avenue to the west and the Santa Ana River on the north. Area I is partially developed with an electrical power generation facility (including a small office) which is operated by the Mountain View Power Company and a storage yazd for Monier Roof Tiles. Water service within Area I is provided by local wells, while sewage treatment needs aze met by on- site septic systems. Existing water and sewer services aze private and aze not anticipated to be adequate for future anticipated land uses. Figure 3-2 shows the location of Areas A and I in a local context. ' Couory or San Bernardino Land Gse Services Department SCH. tin 1999101123 Cirtus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA water 8 Sewa Serves Plan Final SuMequen[ EIR -loot ?001 ' Page 52 1 ...t. ' ~' i ~ ~ N /, `r'Z Sc yam` ` "' \ / L~ 1 Win.-. n'v ! ' i it ' i i tt ~ I HI F1hl~ ' ~ ° 'm 1 ~ `~s a~, i ~~'~ 1 1 LEGEND IVDAAreas ' East Valley Corridor Specific Plan Boundary ' I I I NI° ' Figure 3-1 NOT TO SCALE Regional Context I Source: Ultrasystems Environmental Inc. and PCR Services COroora110n Page 53 ' ~ ~ T.~ ~'l~ l c " , + ~~II~ ~.Ii'., r, ~ ~ 1r' i. ,II f i ¢ ¢ ~ ~ w II!i F- J _ i Y. t .Y•` l` ! V a ~ ~~i 1 tc. r v i.n I' l y ~' ~ 7~ ! I ~ ^~f' ~`au I Q \ ~ O IY~ 1 ~ ~M 1 T ~ II Q ~ I ~ J 1 ~ 1 Z Z l 3"" ~ KyF~ 3 l FF JJ Z ~ 0 ea. I ~ : Z W 3i .444 : ~ ~ Q l ,\ S I ~ t: a:::.. I t _ ,~ : ,:: I I s ~ ~ i ~ _ ~, ~ °' , ~ i~ ~ ' ' I, _ ,, I. , ~ 3.Y 3C~m_ I \ ,~ ~' I v~ I ~ i 6 ~'t ' 1' ~ ~ o ~ ~ ' '~~~ ~ 'std nYNL.Y ' G m ~ ~ ~ Q ~ 1`t U U U WI l i I s a p J ' Page 54 3.0 Project Description t The Citnu Plaza project as originally approved and as proposed in the ctJrrent recisions. ' consisu of an approximately LS-acre site generally bounded by the Tennessee Freeway (SR-.0) on the east. Lugonia Avenue on the south, Alabama Streit on thz west and San Bemazdino Avenue on , the north. The Citrus Plaza project site is located in the southeaster]} portion of Area A. Regional ' access to the Citrus Plaza site is provided via both thz azea's freeway network and arterial highway :o~•o system. Freeway access presently occurs at San Bemazdino Avenue along the SR-30 Freeway and 1n531~ ' Cnange at Alabama Street along the I-10 Freeway. Additional vehiculaz access to thz Citrus Plaza project azea is available from: (I) Lugonia Avenue to the south. (2) San Bernardino Avenue to thz north, and (3) Alabama Street to the west. Figure 3-~ also shows the location of the Citrus Plaza project in a-., a local context. laa~eteal 3.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objectives for the proposed project aze as follows: ' County Change IVDA Areas ' • To identifi service options which meet the water and sewer demands for development ' within the unincorporated portions of the IVDA project azea that aze either unserved or deemed by the Counn• of San Bernardino as underserved; and • To supph water and sewer service to these unincorporated azeas b} the Count}• of San , Bemazdino or another a¢encv. • Repeal the County's portion of the formal Specific Plan to eliminate cumbzrsome water ' and sewer service provisions while retaining valued land use and design standazds and ' communit}• design guidelines. Citrus Plaza ' • To provide a greater degree of flexibility in the design of the Citrus Plaza project so as to Counq ' better respond to changes in mazket conditions during buildout of the project. '~I"~ 33 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ' The proposed project consists of the following four components: (1) repeal the County's , portion of the EVCSP, (2) Genera! Plan and Development Code amendments, (3) infrastructure options for the provision of water and sewer service to the unincorporated portions of the NDA area , Count) of Saa Bemardt•a Land lase Services Department ~g ya 19991UI173 Cetus Plana Regional MaIV7 VDA water d Sewer Services Plan Fuel Subsequent EIR -June 2001 , Pace 55 ' 3.0 Project Description which aze currently unserved, and (4) revisions to the Preliminary and Final Development Plans and a new Development Agreement for the Citrus Plaza project. The following sections provide a description of the General Plan and Development Code Amendmenu first, followed by a description of the infiastructure options, and the description of project characteristics concludes ~tiith a description of the proposed revisions to the CitrrLS Plaza project. L 33.1 Amendments To County Planning Documents r The County Boazd of Supervisors has initiated a General Plan Amendment to develop land _ use, water and wastewater policies to facilitate revitalization of the unincorporated portions of the ' IVDA Area. The intent of the proposed amendmenu is to make it cleaz that the policies of San Bemazdino County allow for the provision of public services by agencies other than the Cit}' of Redlands in the unincorporated IVDA Area. As part of this project, the County is considering several policy changes intended to increase the options for providing water and wastewater services in the NDA Area. The proposed project also proposes to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific ' Plan as it applies to the unincorporated azeas, and corresponding changes to the San Bemazdino County Development Code. I, t The General Plan service policies and facilities plan proposed for the IVDA Area conflict with the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (adopted in 1989). Rather than proposing extensive amendmenu, the project, which is the subject of the Program EIR portion of this Subsequent EIR, proposes to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as it applies to specific unincorporated areas (see Figure 1-1). The proposed plan amendmenu aze for IVDA azeas A and H. Area I is not located in the EVCSP. The project retains relevant provisions of the Specific Plan by incorporating iu land use plan. community design guidelines and development standazds into the County General Plan and Development Code. A summary of the major content issues of the proposed policy ' ' amendmenu is presented in Table 3-1. ' The proposed policy amendmenu support the implementation of a water and wastewater facilities plan to serve the unincorporated NDA Area, including the Citrus Plaza project site. The proposed facilities plan will include several options for bringing water and wastewater services to ' the azea, including the provision of services by County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-1, and other governmental agencies that may include, but will not necessarily be limited to, the Cities of San Belnazdino, Riverside or Loma Linda, the San Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District and the Inland Valley Development Agency. A complete copy of the proposed text amendmenu is provided in Appendix C of this Subsequent EIR. It is these plan amendmenu that are the subject of ' the Program EIR portion of this Subsequent EIR. County of Sao Beroardioo Land Ust Strvita Depanmtot SCfi No. 199910ll2i Citns Plaza Regonal MaIVI VDA Water & Scwn Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 56 3.0 Roject Description ' Table }1 ' SUMMARl' OF PROPOSED AMENDME:STS TO COL'1~T1' GENER4L PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE ' Proposed Policy or Re>;ulation Document Delete references to East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. General Plan pace 1-F?-I Clarif} the intent of the General Plan Polity on the coordinazion of land use planning General Plan Page I -F7-I , N adjacent tin and counn areas. Delete EVCSP reference to Cultural Resource Overla}'s. General Plan pace II-C? ] ' Add provision to permit County Service Areas (CSA) and Community Service General Plan Pages ?-C4-3, 4, 5. Distrito (CSD) or other public agencies [o provide water service to NDA Areas A 8 ' and I when no existing service provider is able or willing to do so. Allows the creation of private water systems in the NDA Areas A and I. Policy WA-l, µ'A-3, WA-i, WA-9 ' Delete reference to specific sewage treatment faciliries currently identified in the General Plan Pace II-Dl ? ' General Plan and add language to clarify tha[ the Count}' could permit the construction of new sewage treatment facilities as deemed necessary. Add examples of parties that may provide community sewage systems. Emphasizes General Plan page Q-DI-3 ' that in sphere of influence for 1VDA areas additional options for sewer service connections stated in policy LU-9 (as revised) apply. P°Ircy WW-~ ~G,°~ae 9 Change the rertn Package Treatment Plants to Wastewater Treatment Plants Genernl Plan page II-D 1-i , (R'TPs). ~ Policy WW-3 Clarifi that IVDA Areas A and I are not restricted by existing General Plan Policies General Plan page II-DI-4 and t ~ on wastewater and include language pennining the conswction of new WTP or II-D-6 connection to existing facilities tether than connexion to nearby city wastewater Policy W'W-3, 5.6, and 9 collection and treatment facilities. Clarif} tha[ IVDA Areas A and ]are no[ restricted by General Plan policy to General Plan page 11-D6-'_ ' discourage extension of existing facilities or development of new facilites in a leap- frog fashion. Modifies annexation policy in the General Plan to provide exceptions for NDA ' Areas. Adds Rural Commercial Highway Commercial, and Specific Plan land use districts General Ptan pages [I-D6-7; III- ' to the General Plan thus expanding the number of Official Land Use Distrito from B2-30 fourteen to seven[een. Rovides for public facilitiesinfrastructure service to be applied in NDA Areas A General Plan page ll-D6.45 ' and I independent of Cin Spheres of Influence and based on the goals and policies Goal D-61 of the Countv General Plan. Clarifies the intent ofjoint planning activities with cities for Sphere of Influence for General Plan page II-D6~5, 46 ' NDA areas. Rovides for public facilities/infiastruxure services to be applied in count' NDA Areas A and I independent of Ciry Spheres of Influence and based on the Policy LU-9, 10 mmaua Garage goals and policies of the County General Plan. , Adds East Lama Linda and East Valley Corridor planning areas to text and map General Plan page III-B2-1 references. Dele[es the specific numbers of Washing onia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) to be Geneml Plan page III-B2-28 ' preserved along designazed streeo within NDA Area A. County of Sao Beruardioo Laud Lse Services Department SCA Na 1999101!13 ' Citna Plata Reeional MaIVI VDA water & Sewer ScmceS Plan Final Subsequent EIR -Jmn 2001 Page 57 ' ' 3.0 Project Description ' Table 3-1 (Continued) SUMMARY OF.PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO COUNT}' GENERAL PLAN ' AND DEVELOPMENT CODE %ounry Proposed Police or Re¢ulation Document '""'a`~` ' Ccaye Incorporate the axiom, goals, policies, and objectives from the EVCSP to the General Plan meieiea General Plan and apply them to IVDA Areas A and H. Land Use Revelations Development Code pages (r ' 13.1 through 61430 Circulation Development Code pages 6 _ 1431 tlvoua~t 6-14.52 ' Site Desien Standards and Guidelines Development Code pages 6 14.52 through 614..87 Community Facilities EVCSP Division 6 Source: PCR Service Corporation 33.2 Proposed Infrastructure Systems The Infrastnlcttlre Facilities project includes the irtstallation of water lines, water reservoirs and sewer lines in the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area that aze cturently tJnserved. The Infrastructure Facilities project may also include the future construction of water and/or wastewater ~^~' Iniaabo treatment facilities. Most of the proposed utility infiastructure (except the reservoirs and any cn~ treatment facilities) would be located underground and within existing roadway and utility rights-of- way. However, limited agricultural areas or azeas of undeveloped open space in the IVDA area may be affected by the Infrastructure Facilities project. It is these improvements, along with the minor ' revisions to the Citrus Plaza project, described below, which aze the subject of the Project EIR portion of this Subsequent EIR. Eleven areas, as shown in Figtue 1-1 within the tulincotporated portion of the fVDA Area were evaluated with regard to the availability of sewer and water service. This analysis concludes ' that most of these I 1 azeas, as shown in Table 3-2 aze either entirely or partially served (water and sewer) by the East Valley Water District (EVR'D). Area B, in addition to being served by the EVWD, also receives water sen~ce from the City of San Bemazdino, while water service in the westerly portion of Area C is provided by the Baseline Gardens Mutual Water Company. Some azeas within Area C aze also on local septic systems, while the balance of Area C receives sewer ' service from the EVWD. Area H is served by the City of Loma Linda and the City indicates that adequate capacity exists to serve cturent County zoning requirements. Areas J and K aze two railroad right-of--ways and, as such, do not require water or sewer service. Couory of Sro Beroardioo Laud Use Sen~ices Depanmeot SCH. No. 1999101127 Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVf VDA water g Sewer Srn~ias Plan Fuml Subsequent F.IR-June 2001 Page 58 3.0 Project Dzscrintion ' Two of the 1 I azeas. Areas A and I, are currentl}~ unnerved or are deemed b} the Counn tc ' be unnerved. Area A is approximatel} 969 acres in size and is commonly referred to as the "Donut Hole." This acreage excludes the Caltrans property, which does not require service, and propem ' within the City of Redlands. This area has historicall}' been tiled for agriculture and is currenth a miztwe of agriculture. vacant land, a few• residents, and a church school. Existing water sen•ice is provided by the Cit}~ of Redlands via small diameter pipelines and all existing buildings use on-site septic sewage systems. Area I is approximatel}• 82 acres in size. Existing development consists of an electrical ' power generation facilit}• and a storage yard for Monier Roof Tiles. Propert}' owTers in Area I are currently served by local wells for water and use on-site septic sewage systems. ' The electrical power generation facilit}• (power plant) is located on >4 acres within Area I. The power plant was built in the 19~Os and is fired by natural gas. Mountainview Power Company. ^~~°n IntOattt7 the operator of the facility, has recently proposed to enlazge the power plant to provide 1.100 c~an9e megawatts from the current 136 megawatt output. Two power blocks, each consisting of a natural gas-powered turbine that feeds steam to a generating turbine, will be installed. The power plant currently supplies power only during peak summertime use, but the enlarged plant would operate year-round to supply power for the growing needs of Riverside and San Bernardino County. The Mountainview Power Company must prepaze an environmental impact report and obtain approval from the California Energ}~ Commission before the power plant enlargement can proceed. t 33.2.1 Sewer Infrastructure 3.3:?.1.1 Area A Regional System Three options hate been identified for the deliven• of sewer service to Area A. The three t options aze identified as follows: (1) sewer to Cin~ of San Bernardino ~t'astewater Treatment Plant Igo. 3, ('_) sewer to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI). or (3) sewer to a local wastewater treatment plant within Area A. Complimenting these s} stems is a local sewer collection system (refer to Section 33?.13 for a description of the local sewer collectior. system). A summary of a few key attributes of each sewer option is provided in Table 3-3. It is these three options that ' augment the connection to the City of Redlands system described in the 199 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and replace the on-site (Citrus Plaza) system proposed in the 1996 Citrus Plaza Draft Supplemental I~a. a EIR. A description of the three curently proposed sewer options is presented in the following sections. Counn~ of nan Bemard~oo Land Lse Sen~¢es Department SCR \a 1999101173 t ' Cinus Playa Re»onal MaIVI VDA N'arcr & sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrne EIR -June 2001 Pale 59 3.0 Proiec. Description Table 3-2 _ CURRENT WATER A.~'D SEWER SERVICE ' Service Provider Area Water Sewer Comments A None None Minimal water service to individual customers (less than 10 customers) provided b} Cin of Redlands. _ Sewer by local septic systems. Water and sewer ' inliasmlcttue within unincorporated area is inadequate to service ultimate development. B City of San Cin of San Primarily served b} EVRD. Bemazdino;EVRD BemardinoEVR'D C EV WD and Baseline EV~I'D Primarily served b} EVwD. Approximately ~30° o Gardens Mutual Water water service by Baseline Gardens Mutual Rater Company Co. Some instances of private septic systems. D EVw'D EVWD 100%waterandsewerservicebyEVWD. E EVWD EVWD 100°.owaterandsewerservicebyEVWD. ' F EV WD EV WD 100° o water and sewer service by EVND. G EVWD EVWD !00°,'owaterandsewerservicebyEVR'D. H City of Loma Linda City of Loma Linda 100°io water and sewer service. Less than 10 services. 1 Private wells Private local septic system Power plant served by private water and sewer system. No other properties within area currently require water or sewer service. 1 No service required No service required Rail Road Right of w'ay. K No service required No service required Rail Road Right of Wa} . /EI rytiD =East 1'a/let Ii'ater District/ ' Source: Psomas, County of San Bernardino Inland Valley Development Agenn C nincorporated Areas Aand / k"ater Supply and Sewerage Options. August 1999. 3.3.2.1.1.1 Option 1: Connect to the City of San Bernardino The City of San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2 is located south of Orange Show Road and east of "E" Street. The plant has a rated capacity of 33 million gallons per day ' (MGD) and is cturentl}~ opernting at approximately 26 MGD. There is an existing tnuil: sewer line in San Bernardino Avenue. which temvnates at MotJntain View Avenue. This trllril: sewer was ' originally constructed to serve lands east of Mountain View Avenue including NDA Areas A and I. The Ciry is largely built out and is not expecting any large increases in wastewater treatment ' capacity. This unused capacity is surplus at this time. Psomas, the Applicant's engineer, has met its with the City of San Bernardino staff and has reviewed with them the City's cturent capacity and '~ County of Sao Bernardino Laod Use Senices Dcpanmeat SCH. tin. 1999101 V3 Cetus Plaza Regional MalU1VDA Weser & Sewer Sen~tces plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 60 .,,, r i iir iri ¦ ~ o r. ~ N N ~ p to ~ D ~ ~ -o Z ~ m A n ao ~ ` ^' ~ „ 5' ~ o r R <`r R ^o ~ ~ 06 3y > ~ £n ~ ga ? s ,~, z, ~ ~ t < c i d ~ Vi ~y p ^ f ,^,~ rn < ~' '9 Pte' -n ~ m W < 3 N 3 ~ ? a a~+ ? ° 3 ~ 5~ o ci. ~ ~ j D 5' ~ ~ ~ o c ~ m ~ Q,' ~ m y y 8 --1~0 ~ =i Pj C1 ~ 3 3 ~ ~ ~ ay rv ~ ~'w'W ~ -y' es s~ ~ RS~~~+ E ~,8 ~ w ~ ,O ..d ° d D ~ ~ > ~ Asa w ~m ~ ~ H ~ 5' v n a m A W ~ °, N ~ ~ ~ r~~v v, o c ~ o A S~ c m ° ^ °e n "~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ d ~ W tl~ p1 0~0 ~ ~ O_ S [si d to N i.W ~ ^ Cf1 g $ S ~ m M o- ' 7y A ~ O O z ~ ~ m^ n ~ m `g ~ F+ ~ y ~ N Wwj 5' ''~ ~o > o' ~ s m ~ ~w ^3 m c z ~ ~' g• m a o ~ ? 5. o ._, n a ~ o " z s o c ~ ,~ x s r ~ ~ ~ . ~ m 5' fD ~ r o ~ ~ ~ v ~Dn ~ - ~~" °~o m v_ ~ 3.~0~ w ~' o'~ B O 6 m ~ ti~ ~~o V'o ~ ~~~W ~~a7 3 0^ ~' N G ~ ~ N~~ ~ ~ to lNi ~ D ~ ~ O S O ~ ~ ~ ,.. Y`, °0 ~ o ~ ~ ~ 3 f a 0 x n z ~ a ' ~ ~ ~ 5' ~ ~ ~ d ~' 8G ~~,~ ~ ' 3.0 Project Description ' expected growrdr rates. Based on this review, it was detemtined that the City could accept the estimated 1.7 million gallons per day (mgd) anticipated from the project at its facility under an a-ts appropriate service agreement without affecting the City's ability to provide existing or expected future sewage rate growth. Providing sewerage service through this agency will not have an impact on other portions of its service azeas. ' Implementation of this option would require the ptuchase of capacity in the City, of San Bemazdino Wastewater Treatment Plant, construction of a trunk sewer in San Bemazdino Avenue from Mountain View Avenue (i.e., current eastern temlinus) to Area A, and the payment of a proportionate shaze of the facility's operating and maintenance costs. Pursuant to City of San ' Bernardino Resolution No. 95-102, the City's connection fee ordinance, capacity can be purchased on an incremental basis proportional to development wZthin Area A. ' To implement this sewer option, the Local Agency Fornlation Commission (LAFCO) w211 require an out of azea service agreement and the San Bemazdino City Council will have to approve ' the agreement. Wastewater flows from the local sewer collection system will be conveyed to the City of San Bemazdino Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2 via a proposed trunk sewer, approximately 5,300 in length, along San Bemazdino Avenue from California Street (the collection ' point for the local sewer system) to Mountain View Avenue. At this location the new tnltlk sewer would connect wrath the existing 18-inch trunk sewer which would convey flows to the wastewater ' treatment plant. To serve Phase 1 of the Citrus Plaza project under this option, a 10-inch sewer line would be installed which would later be upgraded to an 18-inch line to accommodate buildout of Area A. Sewer Option 1 is illustrated in Figtue 3-3. 3.3.2.1.1.2 Option 2: Connect to Santa Ana Regional Interceptor ,~"a1ed" ' The Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) pipeline is an industrial waste facility originating in Fountain Valley at the County Sanitation District of Orange County (CSDOC) and ' terminating at the City of San Bemazdino's Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2. The SARI pipeline was built to capture industrial wastes and prevent them from being treated and dischazged to the upper portions of the Santa Ana River Watershed. The SARI facility is owned and operated by the ' Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA). The SARI sewer was constructed in conjunction with the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County to transport highly saline waters ' and industrial water from the watershed to the Pacific Ocean for treatment and disposal into the Pacific Ocean, rather than allowing discharge to the Santa Ana River. SARI capacity is available and could be purchased through the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). Implementing this option requires purchasing capacity in the SARI system as well as treatment and disposal capacity from the CSDOC. Capacity within these facilities can be purchased incrementally proportional to development within Area A. ' County o(Sao Bernardino land Ux Services Department SCH. No. 1999101121 Citrus Plea Regional MalVl VDA Winer & Sewtt Services Plan Final Subsequent ED2-June 2001 ' Page 62 ~ M e~+ ' _ M C L +r _ _ _Lf. _ 'Jf~O - ~- o-.-.:.::-_..~..-. .- - _..~n.~_. _.- -- ~ . -._-__ .-~1v d ml r - v ,.cF -I m~ a ~ ~ -- - -- _- ~ ors -- ~ - -~.......~..............3 -- - - - - --- ~ i ~6 ' ~'" °I ° ~ G -- I I - I r -- I I N OI ~I `' , _-._ ~I ~I t:Y.~aW.: I I -, ^ ~ N O m h ,v N d A L .y L . C a 'c , d - I ` ° m _ _ ,_~ _ _ - a _ _ - N ~D _9 a N y y ~ 8 O H .o° ng m o m ~ 'm -- ~ __-aa a m` ~Y ._Z a ~ ~ $ a C - - .- -_ -._ --_ 1 ~ a _ ___-.._ IC) 4 -__ _- 1~ j GI __- _- u IC o' '.X _ - Vl IW - ' _ _.- ~ 1 -__-__ _____._._-- 1 1... _ _ _ - 1 1 ~t 1 _ _ _- 1 1 -_ 1 - ,, ~, 3 3 -- - _ ~ m y a~ 'O y Z , -- I O ~ ~ - - - ~ i m ~ 3 t ~ -- ~ -- -1------ o ,- ~ _ T ' -`" ~ ~ b~ _ ~ C ~ y - _ __-___.__ ___.-._.___ fl] N- .- 1 ~ O y O --_ _ C p ~ C y .- ~ O. . _ -- _ _- _ - -_ --.. -NZ_~_~_ ~ O W O d d --- -. _ _ v 3 ~ i --~-_- _ --_ - -- _- _ o a ~ ' _ w ; i ~ -__ - --_ _ -_ -- W Page 63 --_ _ - ' 3.0 Project Description ' Psomas, the Applicant's engineer, has detemlined that the SAWPA SARI line could accept s is the estimated 1.7 million gallons per day (mgd) anticipated from the proposed project under an ' appropriate service agreement w7thout affecting the ability to provide existing or expected future sewage rate growth. ' Two SARI options aze proposed. Sewer Option 2A calls for the construction of an 18-inch trurll: sewer, approximately 22,300 feet in length, in San Bernardino Avenue from Area A to the ' SARI connection at the City of San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2. Under Sewer Option 2B, an 18-inch trunk sewer, approximately 5,300 feet in length, would be constructed in San Bemazdino Avenue from Area A to Mountain View Avenue where it would connect to the existing ' 18-inch line in San Bemazdino Avenue. Under Sewer Option 2B, a flow diverter would be constructed at the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant at the end of the trunk sewer to split the Area A sewage flow to the SARI. The improvements proposed under Sewer Option 2B aze the same as Sewer Option 1 except that the facilities that would accommodate the flows aze different (i.e., the City of San Bemazdino Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2 under Sewer Option 1 and the SARI under Sewer Option 2B). To serve Phase I of the Citrus Plaza project under Sewer Options 2A and 2B, a 10-inch sewer line will be installed which will be upgraded to an 18-inch line, as described above, to accommodate buildout of Area A. Sewer Options 2A and 2B aze illustrated in Figlrre 3-4. 3.3.2.1.1.3 Option 3: Local Wastewater Treatment Plant ' Option 3 would involve the construction of a local wastewater treatment plant along California Street north of San Bernazdino Avenue. This facility would be designed to serve all of ' Area A via a gravity system. This local sewage treatment plant would be regulated by a permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region. In order to meet all dischazge ' requirements, an advanced wastewater treatment plant would be required. This would include tertiary treatment as well as demineralization in order to lower salinity to the level required for dischazge to the Santa Ana River or for reclaimed water use (i.e., on-site irrigation). More details co„~a regazding dischazge issues aze found in Appendix G, including Appendix II-C therein. Phase I of ~~;,g ' this Option will consist of construction of a 10-inch sewer in Almond Avenue and California Street, a 0.138 MGD wastewater treatment plant, and an outfall to the Santa Ana River. This on-site ' facility can be expanded as development within Area A takes place. Under Sewer Option 3, no westerly extension of the sewer conveyance system as proposed under Options 1 and 2 would occur. ' Sewer Option 3 is illustrated in Figtrre 3-5. The wastewater treatment facility would be a treatment plant, owned and operated by the ' office of special districts of the County of San Bernardino. This wastewater treatment facility will expand as development occurs in IVDA Area A. The wastewater treatment facility would contain 1 primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment. Primazy treatment will consist of flow metering, screening, grit removal and/or a comminutor, and flow distributor. Secondary (biological) treahnent will be extended aeration, including flow equalization, nitrification, ' Cooary or Sao Bernardino Land Usc Services Department SCA Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Su65equrnt F,IR-June 2001 ' Page 64 . - ~m j N w ! O 1 • m ~ L \ W _ I ~ i ~ ~ F--- I_ - - - ~o-~ - ~ - - p,,.~...,......,_,_ -- - ~ ~...e.. OI Ci NI C33~~ ^1 I ^I 9 ~ , I -_ . -_~ ~I N b"MTiy.r. ~~' 1 O ~ N d N i" c a c , m ~~F` o m - -_-. n.- __~,~ ~ c a $ N ~ Q { ~ H d Y ~ NO w 9 °o ~ ~ ~ d o m m a m m m£~ _.-. _.-- 8 ' N m i\iIY _Z ~ 8 9 O ZI ~ _ -.._ ~ m p ~I F ~ m - -- -- a7i`' - t a e~- 1 N _ ~ - SI W -____ ' _ ~1 -_ .-_-_-_ - _pM 1 -- ~ 1 ~_.__-__ - ~1 _-- - i _- 1 _ ~ 1 ' _ _ r I ~ Y ~- ~ i ; o - --_- - --- -- o $ --- ,~ ~ ~ 3 a~ D Y ' - - c m O ' - ~ mo~ 1 ~- 2 O) C N N N ~-_ Q7 N a` 1 c C f4 fA ~ O O a - ar ~s - -- - -- - j - _ _ Page 65 , 3.0 Project Description ' denitrification, and clarification. Final tertiary treatment will consist of coagulation, filtration, disinfection and demineralization. Disinfection will be by the use of ultraviolet light or chlorination. Inmatee The design and subsequent operation of the wastewater treatment facility will comply with the r^~^ea pemutting and water quality requirements and associated standards as imposed by the County, Santa ' Ana RWQCB and all applicable regulatory agencies. 3.3.2.1.2 Area A Local System The local collection system, at buildout of Area A, would be configured as a grid constructed within Alabama and California Streets (north-south pipelines) and Palmetto, Pioneer, San Bernazdino and Almond Avenues (east-west pipelines). The local collection system is the same for all three of the sewer options described above. Within the local sewer collection system, sewer lines vary between ' six and 15 inches in diameter with most lines being 10, 12 or 1~ inches in diameter. The overall length of the sewer lines by pipe diameter are as follows: (I) 6-inch sewer - 1,300 feet, (2) 8-inch sewer - 3,700 feet, (3) 10-inch sewer - 11,600 feet, (4) 12-inch sewer - 7,400 feet, and 1 ~-inch ' sewer - 6,300 feet. The local collection system to serve Citrus Plaza Phase 1 consists of 2,600 feet of 10 inch sewer lines in Almond Avenue (between Alabatna and California Streets) and California Street (between Almond and San Bernardino Avenues). In addition, the10-inch line in Almond Avenue (between Nevada and California Streets) and California Street (between Almond and San Bemazdino Avenues) constructed as part of Citrus Plaza Phase 1 would be upgraded to 12-inch and ' 1~-inch sewer lines, respectively, to accommodate buildout within Area A. The local collection system for Area A buildout and Citrus Plaza Phase 1 aze shown in Figures 3-3, 3-4, and 3-i. 3.3.2.13 Area I Regional System ' The City of San Bemazdino maintains an 18-inch diameter trtutk sewer at the intersection of San Bemazdino Avenue and Mountain View Avenue. Sufficient capacity is available within this facility to serve Area I (and Area A as well -see Sewer Option 1 for more information): This ' facility can be used via the following: (1) payment of a one-time capacity fee and monthly operation and maintenance costs, (2) securing a LAFCO out of area service agreement, and (3) San ' Bemazdino City Council approval of a service agreement. 3.3.2.1.4 Area I Local System ' Area I under all three Sewer Options would connect dtrectly to the existing 18-inch trunk sewer in San Bernazdino Avenue at Mountain View Avenue. As such, no local collection system within Area I is required. '__ County or Sm Bernardino Laud Ux Services Department $CH. Na 1999101121 ' Citrus Plana Regional MaiVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 66 ~M c- c `' " !- R ~ -~ ~ L _I ~ { a [ - ~o- ~-- ~ - i - - -- - -- - - - _ ~ ~ ~ r6~, _ ~ _ tt - ~ ..-._ . ' f i. ~ - N O' ^I d ~ • 1 P P , _ \ ~ - ---'--_ -- a m ` - a ~ C w C O~ ~m , ~ d ~ d v - a ~ P O P . aJ.` - p5 m _ -, -_.. _ O O y a` `m 3 ~ ' 88 _ ~ !1 N O m Z m O H _ ~ ~ 1 _ ~ E ._- m _ "-_ _ --~. U _ _ _ _ J - - N 1 it Y -- 3 ` d p - - - _ ~, _ 3 - ~--- ce m Z _ _- 'o _ - c ~ ~O m .-..-_ ~---- "-- . - m ~ y ~ r ~ , _ _ ~ _..____-_.. _ _ ~ r d .- N _-_ _ _- .- ~ d y d -- _,-- .--.~ _ oaaa , -- - ---- - - - _ --~----. - p 1 ---- _ _ _ , -- ~----- w j ~ ~ -- - ~ --- --- - - - -- - W '' :1 I ' _ -- -- - Page 67 ' 3.0 Project Description 33.2.2 Water Infrastructure ' 33.2.2.1 Area A Regional System ' Water facilities to serve Area A include a supply source, water transmission lines and water storage reservoirs, as well as water treatment and pumping facilities. Seven options have been identified for the provision of v<ater service to Area A. The seven options aze identified as follows: (1) development of local wells (Options 1 and 2), (2) purchasing water from IVDA's airport water facilities (Options 3 and 4), (3) purchasing water from the City of San Bemazdino (Options ~ and 6), and (4) purchasing water from the City of Riverside (Option 7). A summary of a few key attributes ' of each water option is provided in Table 3-4. It is these seven options that augment the connection c~unry Initlatad to the City of Redlands system described in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Draft EIR and replace the on-site cn~ (Citrus Plaza) system proposed in the 1996 Citrus Plaza Draft Supplemental EIR A description of the seven currently proposed water options is presented in the following sections. Appendix G (page 18, Figures II-5 and II-6, and Tables 8-2 and 8-3) provides fiuther detail regazding the ' proposed water facilities, including the proposed size, location and estimated cost to build these facilities. ' 3.3.2.2.1.1 Option 1: Wells Within Area A ' The water supply under this option would be obtained from local wells located within the northern portion of Area A. This location was selected since it is anticipated that this area may not be impacted by groundwater contamination. Further details regazding the impacts of the proposed ' water supply pumping on contaminate migration is found in Appendix G at pages 18-19 and in Appendix II-H to Appendix G. As the State Department of Health Services ("DOHS") requires fail- ' safe redundancy in water supplies, two wells will be constructed. Conceptually it is proposed to drill these wells to an approximate 1,000-feet depth, a depth which is typical for domestic water wells constructed in the immediate azea. It is forecasted that the wells would have a capacity of ' approximately 2,000 gallons per minute ("gpm") and could be operated alternately. The wells would be located approximately 1,000 feet north of the edge of existing areas of groundwater contamination. ' To operate these wells an extensive water quality monitoring program and water treatment ' plant would employ a dual pass cazbon treatment with 100 percent redundancy and include a disinfection station. Option 1 is illustrated in Figure 3-6. 3.3.2.2.1.2 Option 2: Wells North of the Santa Ana River The County of San Bernardino Flood Control District owns several pazcels of land north of the Santa Ana River in the vicinity of 5th Street and west of the SR-30 Freeway. Wells located ' County of Sao Bernardino Land lax Service Department SCn Nu 1999101121 Cirrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Srnices Plan Final Subsequrnt QR-June 2001 Page 68 _ ~' ~ J V O~ T to to A A W W W N N O g`; W a w a W a m a ~ m a w a -z~ ~ ,~ , " d~ Am N~ vin ~n nn ~ ~ ~ r r ' CO o p7 o CO o CO o p7 o CO o o rt~ 0 0 0 o R A o < j < < < < < > > > ~ > > n 3~ 3~ ~R ~R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~s ~s ~s ~s ~s ~s ~s ~ s a a s S° n C1 n A n a m H y p $~7 ~`2 ~~2 ~~2 ~~2 ' p^ a d v v o 0 as ~°, ~°, ~°, ~°, ~°, ~°, a a a a a ~ c e N ~ ~ m c<'0. ~ ~' ~ 5 '7 5 '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 5 ~ ~ o ~ ~ N ~ F 3. ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~3 ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ C o; m R' R' ~, Pi' N ~ K 'e ~e ~ ~ 7. N n a d d d H w „ w w 2~ m o 0 0 o A n 3 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~' o ~ ~ ~' ~' ~ rn ~' ~ w c m E E R R G 3 w ~~.' o F F 7~ ~ v~ q w g 07 N c "' ~ C rn rn ° ° ~n ~ A w --7 ^ 2 Q°i ° ° £ 'mss o W a T > a ~ acv' ab > ~ moo, 63 ~, ~ m 3 ~ a R n o~ a a a a o. o. c, a ~ a ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ei dapp eq^e W ~ Y " a ~ ~-1 0 0 0 a -~ A ~ C .,_' ~' O A A ~ ~ ~ ~' y ~' a y ~' w ~iW,, rn o 0 o w rn w -,~, ~ y~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ °o g g g °o g °o g g $ S l ~' gyp' ~' : ~ a ~d ~o ~CC ~ ^ r~ S R z 0 0 0 ~ ~ a m A 'j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~£~a a~ ~ '~~ ~ ~ 'o '3 a m ~ ~ 'a ~ ~ ~ ~ c A ~ Z a~ ~ ~ a ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > 0 0 o c o R ~~, o o aN ~ 'm a N N b 3 a a a > a ~ ~ as ~ ~ ~ P ~ T ~ ~ d c ~ ~, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z o z z z n ^ ., 30 ~ ~ z~~ o notS.~~o~~~ u $' n ~ w vi ~ ~ ~ ~ }3~ Q ~ 9 d -~i ~ (~D ~o m C °~, O v ~ °' A N H I ~ g a g~~~ d dIA ;' ~ ~ ~ '~ c c c ~ ~ a •'^ ado ~ ~ ~ ~ c 5• ~d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S' G 'T-' p £ tlo < Oo A ~q ~ c` 3 i t~D `G d O_' ~' 3.0 Project Description north of the river aze partially out of the influence of existing groundwater contamination. As such. a water treatment facility ma}' be required, and if so, wotild be operated consistent with all DOHS ' requirements, which would preclude any significant groundwater contamination impacts from occurring. Option 2 consists of two alternative alignments for the water supply lines (i.e., Options 2A and 2B). The Option 2A line occurs within the SR-30 Freeway right-of--way. Under this ' Option, a 16-inch diameter pipeline, approximately 13,600 feet in length, would be constructed in the shoulder or median of the freeway and either placed on the side or bottom of the bridges or inserted in sleeves within the bridges. Under Option 2B, the 16-inch diameter pipeline wotild be ' constructed in the Alabama Street right-of--way, with an approximate length of 16,600 feet. Implementation of Option 2A would cross the Santa Ana River via the SR-30 right-of--way and via ' the Alabama Street right-of--way under Option 2B. To serve Phase 1 of the Citrus Plaza project under these Options, a 10-inch water supply line would be installed which would later be upgraded to the 16-inch line described above to support buildout of Area A. As is the case with Option 1, an area within the northeast comer of Area A is set aside for future reservoirs and related support facilities such as a future pump station and water treatment facility. Water Options 2A and 2B aze illustrated in Figure 3-7. ' 3.3.2.2.1.3 Options 3 & 4: San Bernardino Airport Options ' The IVDA operates a water supply and distribution system for the San Bernardino International Airport (formerly Norton Air Force Base). This system is divided into two pressure zones, designated as Areas 1 and 2. Area 1 serves the westerly portion of the Airport ("IVDA West Side System") and Area 2, the easterly portion ("IVDA East Side System"). IVDA staff has indicated that there is a possibility of serving Arrz A from these facilities and that they are not affected by any groundwater adjudication, which would limit the number of wells and quantity of ' water produced. Water quality from these facilities is generally very good, however several wells have been affected with groundwater contamination and require treatment. Obtaining water from ' the IVDA East Side System is designated Option 3, while use of the IVDA West Side System is designated Option 4. Three alternative pipeline alignments are proposed under Option 3, while two pipeline alignments aze proposed under Option 4. ' Options 3A, 3B and 3C include connection to the IVDA East Side System, in the vicinity of ' Well No. 11. Zone presstue within this azea is set by an elevated tank with an overflow elevation of 1,294 feet. For the purpose of this analysis a minirnum tank elevation of 1,264 feet was assumed. As such, a booster pump station will be necessary in the vicinity of the connection to pump water to the Area A reservoir. Option 3A is a pipeline of approximately 18,600 feet in length in the Alabama ' Street right-of--way. Option 3B is a pipeline of approximately 20,400 feet in length located in the SR-30 right-of--way, similaz to Option 2A. Option 3C is a pipeline of approximately 20,500 feet in ' length located in California Street, crossing the Santa Ana River and then via roads within the ' Coutrty of Sao Bernardino Laud Ux Servicn Dcpartmeat SC}L Ro. 1999101173 Citrus Plays Regional MaIVf VDA W Ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -bore 2001 Page 70 ' ~ ~ J C --- - ° I `" ym ~ ~o a a> iv l~~ 12 12 i ~ .- t 3 c E ~ rr m o_ ~ c UI _ ~ ~' >m 1) -1 g" ~1 p"~ 1 16"(10"1 J m E 0~i U tli > ~' , -' ~ ~ ~ .o ~ 12' ~ 12" 1 16" ~ 16 1 ~ m c j y c 1 1 1 i r o - i N d R 0= NI N~ iNl <V~ ~ ~ - _ - ~ 12" 1 12" ~ 12" L ~ ~ ' -_ o ~ ~ a m ' a 1 1 ~ 1 1 -`_ -- - 12" ~ N ~ N _ ~ 0 R G C _ ~ L L 1 N d _ O ~ ND ~ m ' C N m O -.. c a $ m U h G 9 0 O C m 0 (j - a t0 ~IA~~J N _ V s~ a m 9 O m Z N _ E _ ~O a o , -- - N - - --._ --__ - - ~ - - 1 -.-__-_` -_~ - 1 _ _.- _- _ __.- - T , - - _- ~ ~ --- a~ c .-_ - _- C N D -- ------- - 2 ~ ~- ~ o c 1 _ _ ___._-_ --- C ~ Iq '._-_ _----- p I jjI i - _ _ - - - - _ .-- - - - W I f I --- - -- -- --...-- J Page 71 1 ' - -- ~ m N o umi `m C tp N R " y N .r _ _ ,6~1, d Q ~Q _ I "-•-•---•-•~ -~----~ -==i---- T 12" ~ 12" ~ 16" ~ , s" ~ d --- mom ~- -i -; ~ i fl. i - ~ f0 E ~i a~ Ni h~ ~ LL~ d j ~' ~, ~, N CO i L c E~ i i ~ i ~ v s i c Ni ~i ,._~z:.i a a y oN~ ~ a iz• y d N L L a c - ~ ~ m a _ ~C P N m C m 0 y m T~ ~ O ~ ^, o LL c - p L ~ m G C - _ O` d n - - - a m ~ a" d o m Z ~ - -. _ _- E _ a _ ~ - -_ - - -_ _ -_. _- --_.____-.. ~ Y - ~ O - - -_ -- c ; m Z - --- d c NCO r O ' _ - -. -. _-- _ _ -- _ - ____- 7 O O y _ - - __- - _ _- - - o O O o_ o - ------- -- -- p 1 ~ i - - ---- W 1 i -- - --- ~ ~ - ---- ~ _ -- -- - _ _ - - - W _ 1 I - ------ ~ _-- ~-- - J ' Page 72 3.0 Project Description , Airport. Implementation of Option 3A would cross the Santa Ana River via the Alabama Street , right-of--way and via the SR-30 right-of--way under Option 3B. Under Option 3C, the pipeline installation would occur via microttlnnelling under the Santa Ana River and setting the construction , sites on both sides of the river in ruderal habitat above the riprap. Using this approach to construction, disturbance to the surface of the wash w711 not be necessary. Water would be conveyed from the IVDA East Side System via a 16-inch diameter line. To serve Phase ] of the ' Citrus Plaza project under Options 3A, 3B and 3C, a 10-inch water supply line would be installed and upgraded to the ]6-inch line referenced above to support buildout of Area A. Options 3A, 3B , and 3C aze illustrated in Figtue 3-8. Options 4A and 4B include connection to the IVDA West Side System in the vicinity of , Tippecanoe and Harry Sheppazd Avenues. The zone pressure within the IVDA West Side System is set by an elevated tank with an overflow elevation of 1,214 feet. For the purposes of this analysis a minimum tank elevation of 1,183 feet was assumed. As such, a booster station will be necessary in ' the vicinity of the connection to pump water to the Area A reservoir. Option 4A consists of a pipeline, approximately 10,600 feet in length, in Tippecanoe Avenue which would connect to the ' San Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District's (SBVMWD) proposed Central Feeder. The SBVMWD is a regional water wholesaler. The District's enabling act includes a broad range of powers to provide water as well as wastewater, storm water disposal, recreation and fire protection services. The District's responsibility for long range water supply planning includes , importing supplemental water and management of the groundwater basins within its boundaries. It is also a contractor with the State Water Project. The District developed a Comprehensive Regional Facilities Master Plan in August of 1995. ' The objective of this Regional Water Master Plan is to: "Develop regional facilities to coordinate management of available water resources to meet the ultimate quantity and quality requiremenu of all water purveyors and , increase the reliability of supplies by maY.imi?i_ng the use of local water resources and optimizing the use of imported water. The regional facility should be cost effective and be developed in a systetnatic phase program with the cooperation of the ' water purveyors." One such master plan project is called the Central Feeder. The Central Feeder is a proposed ' west to east pipeline connecting the District's proposed Baseline Feeder Extension to be located parallel to and westerly of Waterman Avenue to the proposed Mentone Reservoir, located east of the , City of Redlands. The proposed Central Feeder would be a 48-inch pipeline generally following San Bernardino Avenue. SBVMWD has expressed interest in constructing a portion of the Central Feeder along San Bernardino Avenue, which could then be used to convey water to Area A. ' Couory of Saa &roardino Laod Gse Services Department SCR No. 1999Wi123 ' Cvnu Plaza Regional iNa1NVDA W star & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnt EIR -June 2001 Page 73 ' x a,(~ ' c- y M o G.'4 H m ~ ~ ~ A N ~ M a¢ ___._,..,. ti c c 5 ~ E ~ Ni 12" 12" •j sz '0 m ~ ` 1 1= ~I c E ~ ,. - - - 76 (?0 1 - - - - - .rth_6" 10" m i6"(1~"~ m ~ -- - ~ Q::• ~°a ~ ~' 12 ~ 72" I 16" j 16"-ii i ~ Q ( 1 1 1 ~ ~I o 3 1 I I I i! -- V 1 1 I J ~ 'I NI NI NI NCI ~ o¢ it ~ I I ' 4,. t0 m m ' N ~I ~ ~ 12~-±_12~ I 12~~ ~1 -i I NEE -I mr~ . I I ' 1 I ~ ~ 12" - _ \ m y E c ~ v ~ ~ ~ a c ~ N _N `1 o ~ ~ - ° n -_ _ - - -_-_ m ' "~E mE m m c (n ~ m ~ a m U'a~ umi ~ m W ~ o ~ '_ n- N ' ~ m i; a `m ~ °o a ~ 1 m °c o m _ _ Z - a ' _ _ _ - O N 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ J _ _ _ O y _ _ ._-. _ ~ Y - - _ _ _ -_-_- _._-. _ C O - OJ Z - m c -- ---- - -- _ ~ m m o c c c d ~ ~ o 0 0 ~, -c . -- - ~ -- ~ ----- c r. •r. m - - o aao.s w -- _ _ - _- - ooOOao ' -__ -- - - - ~ I ~ ~ ~ - - - Z i ; i ~ -- --- W i - - - - - --- -. "- - W I 1 I ' ----_ _-- -- -- -- Page 74 3.0 Projett Descriprion Option 4B is similaz to 4A but includes a dedicated, water transmission pipeline. of ' approximately 26,100 feet in length, from the IVDA West Side System to the Area A reservoir (i.e., water conveyance w2thout the SBVMWD Central Feeder). Implementation of Options 4A and 4B , would cross the Santa Ana River via a bridge along Tippecanoe Avenue. Water would be conveyed from the IVDA West Side System via a 16 inch diameter line. To serve Phase 1 of the Citrus Plaza project under Options 4A and 4B, a 10-inch water supply line would be installed and upgraded to ' the 16-inch line referenced above to accommodate buildout of Area A. The water supply to be used under Options 4A and 4B is not currently, nor anticipated in the future to be, affected by groundwater contamination. Options 4A and 4B are illustrated in Figure 3-9. , 3.3.2.2.1.4 Options 5 & 6: Connect to City of San Bernazdino ' The City of San Bernazdino operates the water transmission and distribution facilities west of ' Mountain View Avenue. The City's water supply is lazgely from wells located north of Mill Street. . . TrarLSmisslon 1 lines run north to south m Ti canoe and Waterman v p pe ppe A enues and loo to ether. P g Option 3 connects to City of San Bernardino facilities at Tippecanoe Avenue, while the connection , under Option 6 occurs at Waterman Avenue. A pump station will be consuvcted under both Options 5 and 6. Within each of these Options aze two alternate conveyance systems -conveyance ' via the SBVMWD Central Feeder or via a dedicated pipeline. To summarize, Option SA connects at Tippecanoe Avenue via the SBVMWD Central , Feeder, Option ~B connects at Tippecanoe Avenue via a dedicated pipeline, Option 6A connects via a pipeline at Waterman Avenue via the SBVMWD Central Feeder, while Option 6B connects at Waterman Avenue via a dedicated pipeline. Under Options ~ and 6 transmission occurs via a 16- , inch diameter pipeline, approximately 3,300 feet in length under Options SA and 6A and approximately 18,800 and 24,600 feet in length under Options ~B and 6B, respectively. In addition, ' implementation of Option 6B includes a bridge crossing of the Santa Ana River along San Bernazdino Avenue. To serve Phase 1 of the Citrus Plaza project, a 10-inch water supply line would be installed and upgraded to the 16-inch line referenced above to accommodate buildout of Area A. ' Options 3A and 3B aze illustrated in Figure 3-10, while Options 6A and 6B aze illustrated in Figure 3-11. 3.3.2.2.1.5 Option 7: Connect to City of Riverside ' The City of Riverside has groundwater pumping rights in the Bunker Hill groundwater basin within the City of San Bernardino. The City has a 42-inch diameter transmission pipeline in Waterman Avenue. Option 7 consists of connection to the City of Riverside at San Bernardino and ' Waterman Avenues via two alternative conveyance systems (i.e., Options 7A and 7B). Under Option 7A conveyance occurs via the SBVMWD Central Feeder, whereas under Option 7B ' conveyance occurs via a dedicated pipeline. Option 7 is the same as Option 6 except for the connection to the City of Riverside under Option 7 rather than to the City of San Bernardino under '_ Couery orSae Beroertlioo Lead Ux Strvim Department SCH. No.1999101113 Cirrus Plata Regional MaIN VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Fetal Subsequent EIR-Jmte 2001 Page 75 ' ~ i ~ ~,~ 2~ 3 ~ C ~ N 1 I OOLL - a~ - O m N ^ O ~ L 3 ~ ~ ~ E - ~ _ ~ _ y a ^I o a~ x,_12^, 12.-~W ~ ~ O O O d ~ I NI p (:"r a 2 ~ 72" ~ 72 ~ 76" 16" ^i y _ 1 1 •!i ~ d -I f V ¢ ~ '" 1 ^i ^IIII: N1 op c 1 1 ;li ^I m p 1 I 1: I R C I 1. 1 ~ E u7 -- - 72" I 72" r 72' R m a ~ ~' t~a .i: i '~I ' , - - ~.-..-.,........ i-..___ 12,. -- I - ^ y m y m m N ~p d I ' m 0 ' -L ,~a a ~ '~ a~ o m I~0 ~' m _ w i~ F » ' N m D I[ q a du `°' ~ ~'~ o Q ~ o° i°IU 9 oa g~ ~Q W _ L i. E a o o _ _ c ~ Z I i aj 'o U ~ '~a ~ w ' . _ - _ _ I ~ y O N LL ' ¢ N c m U -- is"(to°) - I' c U ~ -- - --_- \ f0 ~ Ln Y _ _-.__- o p y ~ [0 ~ p m~ N p L L O i i - 3D 3 O1LL UN ~ O Q m O U ~, C C ~ t _ _ C O O~ C o00ao ~ _ ---- - _ -_- _ o i - - -_ ~ - W I ~ , 1 -- _ _ - - - ~ - - _ ~ - 1 _ _ - - Z _ I ~ .ti 1 J -- ~:- _ _- - W Page 76 3.0 Project Description , Option 6. Under Option 7, transmission occurs via a 16-inch diameter pipeline, approximately' , 3,300 and 24,600 feet in length under Options 7A and 7B, respectively. In addition, implementation of Option 6B includes a bridge crossing of the Santa Ana River along San Bemazdino Avenue. To ' serve Phase 1 of the Citrus Plaza project, a 10-inch water supply line would be installed and u ded to the 16-inch line referenced above to accommodate bluldout of Area P8a A. Citrus Plaza Phase 1 improvements also include a pump station at the City of Riverside transmission pipeline in ' Waterman Avenue. Options 7A and 7B are illustrated in Figure 3-11. 3.3.2.2.2 Area A Local System ' The local distribution system, at buildout of Area A, would be configured as a grid constructed , ~7thin Alabama, Nevada and California Streets (north-south pipelines) and Palmetto, Pioneer, San Bernardino and Almond Avenues (east-west pipelines). The local distribution system is the same ' for all seven of the water options described above. Within the local water distribution system, water lines vary between 12 and 18 inches in diameter with most lines at 12 inches in diameter. The overall length of the water lines by pipe diameter are as follows: (1) 12-inch water - 30,000 feet, ~N ' (2) 16-inch water - 2,600 feet, and (3) 18-inch water - 2,000 feet. '~°;,~ The local distribution system to serve Citrus Plaza Phase 1 consists of 2,000 feet of 18-inch ' water lines in Almond Avenue (east of Alabama Street). In addition to the pipelines themselves, the local water system includes a water treatment plant, ptJmp station and reservoir. ' Capacity of the water treatment plant to serve Citrus Plaza Phase I would be 0.138 mgd. The Citrus Plaza Phase 1 water treatment facilities are a project option for meeting fire flow and , water pressure requJrements only. However, the preferred method for meeting these requirements would be via the extension of pipelines to the project site. Therefore, the Citrus Plaza Phase I water as ' treatment facilities would only be developed if project water pipelines would not feasibly meet fire flow and water pressure requvements. The capacity of the water treatment plant for buildout of Area A would be 1.738 mgd to meet the demand attributable to buildout of Area A. Adjacent to the ' water treatment plant would be a pump station and reservoir. To pressurize the Area A water distribution system, a plJmp station, sized to supply fire and , maximlJm day demands, will be constructed. It is anticipated that the maximlrm day reservoir demands would be replenished in 24 hours or less. The proposed water supply facilities would be , built incrementally as development occurs in Area A. Storage requiremenu for buildout of Area A are forecasted to be approximately 4.9 million ' gallons ("mg"). Of this total, approximately 3.9 mg is required for emergency and operating storage, while an additional 1.0 mg is required for fire suppression. This capacity is based on fire ' Couory of Sao lieruarditro resod list Services Departmcut SCB No.1999101127 , Citrus Plaza Regional McIVI VDA Winer & Sewer Servias Plan Fvial Suluequent ):IR-June 2001 Page 77 ' ' a ~ o m 3 " r, ~ ' - ~ R o m aci ~ ~$ I OLQ i U (n U ~ > _ :- to ' I _ ~ - N N ~.r y tp N a¢ i m c c - _-' - _ _' ~ ~ O Ol ' LLo a m i ^ ~ 12 12" '~ ' ry . ~ E ~ ~i i I al o. L1, ~" a " 'sl -_-__- '~ 3 -- _ m - ---- -- - ~ J O a 12" ~ 12" 1 16"~~; 16 1 _ Uri NI iVl ^II: NI m N ..:..-0 ~1 ~I li i - 12" ~ 72"~~j 12" " v A o. y _ I m . ---- 1 1. _ ~ viii d D. 0. 1 li d: , i ~ Ali 1 1; t2" - N N I ': i m N N ~ L ~ ~ u m acv _8 O ~~pp 4 ~ n N 6-ti~__ _-... m N C ~I w R ~ x y m C } g 0 0 `m 1 ~ ° ~ tjt~ O cy ~p y7 m C d W ~ ~ m --- - o c a ~ ~ `y y ' ____-_ _ _- -. oho I•d ~ boa ~'o ~ v c _T - C__._ y LL _ U U 7i ~ R ~ _ ~ _ ~U :i c 1 - ----~-- - ~ ? m o - - ~ m o 3 _ _ orr ~ y ~ ~ c i - - --- --- o ¢ m o - ---- = In In ~ ' - ~_'~ - --. - ~ o o ~ c o n aL y ~OOdO _ _ -_._ W I 1 V i - -- - ~ _ -. ---- --- ~- ---- J I ' Page 78 a I ~, - -° U ti -- -- -- ~ r. ~3 ~ i c ~ , c~~° ' `- m oma~i mm i +C7 I U(pU t ~ i - - - ~ a¢ r ~ _ - - ~ ~ o m _ -..,,._, _ i, 5 = E -- ` IL ~ m 'i 12" r 12-~ ~ d o~m =1 ~ = a -- =1 - _ _ ~ m _ d -- ~ - --r _ o ~ 3 12 1 12' 1 16" 1: 16" 1 ~ m , C I \ J O C _ 1 I rli ~ ~ s N N 1 1 Ili '1 a~ C d N I 1_ JI. _ _ i d 1Q ~ I o _- 12°'~' lz° ~' lr o - i ii d ~ ~I ~1: ^I 1: ' '~ 12' ~ N _ y N ~ i 41 m ° `o u , y c sR - y a I R m m C 'm a m : ~ 8 m ~ I U "a ' _ pc i~ E-(Z ~e Q O N i V ~ c d ~ iQ m _ ~ r:~ m E _ Z ~O a , I:~ ~ V r 0 ~ ~ N in- - ~ LL , _ °'~'a ~ m _ -- c0 -~ C O ^ ~Ii ~ d - c U , °- -- I --- ~ m - C N r~ , d -_ - ~ ~ m > /,'•~ - - ~ ~ ¢ r • fQ ~ y Y _-..-_._-_ O TU _._- I ~ m ^ m Z U U O \ r; ~ C -- C C ~ ~ \ ~ O O of n - ___- - -_ -_ _ - - y~u - ~ •a -a L N ' _ - _ IVI o00ao _ _ --- ----- _ _ C I ~ 1 1 .- " ' ~ - ---'---- ---- - - -~ -- - - - - W I r 5- I --_ - _ --- -- - --- --_ ------ - C7 J - - -- - -- -- Page 79 _ ' t 3.0 Project Description t flow requvemenu of 4,000 gallons a minute for a four hour duration with two average da}'s of _ storage capacity. Reservoir capacity to serve Citrus Plaza Phase 1 is 1.35 mg (960,000 gallons for water storage and 390,000 gallons for emergency and operating storage). 8-5 (deleted) Groundwaters extracted from wells will be treated to provide drinking water in accordance with California Deparunent of Health Services (DHS) standards, and the office of special districts of the County of San Bemazdino. The water treatment facility will be owned and operated by the office of special districts of the County of San Bernardino. The water treatment facility will be expanded as development in IVDA Area A occurs. The water treatment facility will treat water by disinfection. Disinfection of the water supply, through the use of a chlorine generator system, will conform with DHS guidelines. Rock salt will be used in a brine and through an electrolytic process, a sodium hypochlorite solution will be produced. A metering pump will deliver this solution to the treatment point. Chemicals will be stored on-site in state-approved chemical storage enclosures. ' Adjacent to the wells, in the northeast comer of Area A is an azea set aside for future reservoirs and related support facilities such as a future pump station and water treatment facility to serve development in Area A beyond the Citrus Plaza Phase 1 development. The local collection system for Area A buildout and Citrus Plaza Phase 1 aze shown in Figures 3-6 through 3-11. ' 33.2.2.3 Area I Regional System ' The Motmtain View Power Generation Facility rues water for industrial purposes (process water) as well as domestic uses in support of the facility's office space. All of the water demand t within Area I is served by local wells. It is anticipated that the requisite process water would continue to be obtained from local wells and domestic water would be obtained via a connection to the City of San Bernardino potable water distribution system in the vicinity of Mountain View and San Bemazdino Avenue. ' The owner of the Mountainview Power Facility in Area I has announced plans for future expansion which aze currently undergoing review by the California Energy Commission. The Mountainview Power Company has filed an application with the California Energy Commission (Application for Certification 00-AFC-2) to expand the electrical energy production capabilities of its existing site. With regard to water and sewer facilities their application indicates "Water requirements for the project aze 4,655 gpm at full operation and will be supplied by a combination a-9 ' of sources. A minimum of 50% of requirements will be supplied through the use of secondary effluent from the City of Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The other water supply sources for the plant will be onsite groundwater derived from two existing wells located on the property site and from two new wells to be drilled on site that will draw TCE contaminated water from the middle aquifer. Mountainview Power has agreed not to use the high quality lower aquifer ' County or San Bernardino land Ux Srrvi°n Departmrvt SCH. No.1999101121 Citrus Plare Re®onal MaIVrVDA Water & Sewer Smites Plan Final Subsequent IIR-June 2001 ' Page 80 3.0 Projec[ Description ' water in excess of their current usage except in an emergency. Mountainview Power proposes to ' instal] approximately 2.3 miles of new reclaimed water supply pipeline for transport of secondary 8.9 effluent. Wastewater dischazge will be sent through an existing 12-inch water pipeline and a ' proposed ],100 foot connector to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) discharge line." The Regional Water Quality Control Boazd has indicated that the City of Redlands must obtain an amendment to its existing waste dischazge requirements in order to allow the City of Redlands to ' provide the secondary efluent treatment from its wastewater treatment plant to Mountainview Power Company. As a point of information, the annexation of the area within which the Mountainview Power Facility is located was annexed to the City of Redlands effective December ' 29, 2000.' 33.2.2.4 Area I Local System ' Area I under all seven water options would receive its water supply from local on-site wells ' (process water) and from the City of San Bemazdino potable water distribution system, as described above. As such, no local collection system within Area I is required. 33.2.3 Construction of Water And Sewer Pipelines 33.23.1 Pre-Construction Activities ' The proposed water and sewer lines, as previously described, would be located almost ' entirely within existing roadways and utility rights-of--way. Prior to construction, surveying of the affected areas would be undertaken and, where required, the right to proceed would be obtained ' through conveyance of required access and utility easements or associated rights-of--way. Separate trenches would be required for water and sewer lines pursuant to the San Bernardino County Public , Health Department requirement that a ten foot distance be maintained between water and sewer lines. The area of disturbance associated with pipeline construction would vary depending on local conditions. Should the pipelines be constructed within roadway right-of--ways, an additional azea ' beyond the outer edge of the roadway would be required to allow for equipment access and pipeline installation. As part of the surveying effort, local records and sources such as "Dig Alert" would be ' consulted to insure that all utility lines located within the right-of--way and consRuction zone are identified so they can be avoided. Final construction plans would be developed in accordance with applicable land use plans and state and local regulations governing pipelines. Plans would be ' conditioned to address traffic control and possible effects on public and private property due to clearing, excavation and other pipeline corlstnJCtion activities. [ Telephone comersmion with A1r. James Roddy, Local Agency Formation Commrssron, County of San Bernardu[o, ' January 16,100/. G,~ Couury ofSau Bemardioo laud Use Services Departmem SCR No. 1999101r2i ' Ciuus Plana Regional MaIVI VDA Winer & Sewtt Services Plan FvW Subsequen[ EIR -hme 2001 Page 81 , 3.0 Project Description 3.3.23.2 Pipeline Construction The general sequence of construction would involve initial clearing of the right-of--way. excavation and laying of pipe, and right-of--way clean-up. As proposed, it is anticipated that a pipeline length of 500 feet would be under construction at any one time. The individual sequences ' of construction aze described below: Clearing of Right-Of-Way For those limited sections of pipeline not within roadway right-of--ways, the alignment would be cleared of obstructions to allow for access and operation of construction equipment. Obstacles such as boulders, crops, trees, and fencing would be removed. The removal of such ' obstacles would only take place where there would be interference w2th construction activities and all steps would be taken to avoid unnecessary clearing or disturbance. Where required, storage azeas would be secured through temporary use pemvts or pemussion from private land owners. ' Excavation and Laying of Pipeline Immediately prior to excavation, and after coordination with affected jurisdictions, signage and roadway detours would be put in place to redirect traffic around the construction zone. Where temporary lane closures or other activities would limit access to property, means would be provided to maintain access for vehicles and pedestrians throughout the construction period. Construction would proceed one segment of pipeline at a time, including cutting of pavement, if applicable, trench excavation, laying of pipe, placing of fill, and fatal pavement repair, ' if applicable. Although detailed plans have not been developed, it is estimated that construction would be generally undertaken for pipeline segments ranging in length from 100 to 500 feet with the pipeline ditch open for as little time as practical. For purposes of this analysis, a trench dimension of X00 feet in length, six feet in depth, and ten feet in width is being assumed. ' The construction process, for those locations within existing roadways, would begin with road asphalt being cut, removed, and disposed of or recycled. Excavation of a pipeline trench would then be undertaken mechanically with a ditching machine, except where hand digging is used for locating buried utilities such as other pipelines and cables. As excavation occurs, stones, roots and other obstacles that could interfere with operation of the ditching machine would be removed and segregated from soil that is set aside for fill. Cut-and-fill excavation would be undertaken in a manner that would maintain existing roadway grades, natural grades, drainage, and topography to the extent feasible. Where existing grade and topography along the right-of-way cannot be ' maintained, appropriate engineering design would be implemented to support adequate drainage and slope stability. If unstable soils aze encountered, shoring with steel or wood walls would be put in place in accordance with applicable regulatory standazds and as approved by a soils engineer. Couory of Sao Beruardioo laud Gac Senices Department SCn. Na 199910tl13 Citrus Plara Regional MalVl VDA W arer & Sewer Services Plan Fbial Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 82 3.0 Project Description ' Followittg trenching, bedding for the pipeline consisting of sand or similaz granulaz material would ' be placed in the trench, and the pipe would then be laid and installed. In all instances the depth and separation from ,existing and proposed pipelines would meet or exceed regulatory requirements. ' After installation of the pipeline, the trench would be backfilled and compacted to engineering standazds. Final Clean-up and Restoration of Right-of--Way , After installation of a pipeline segment is completed, stockpiled spoil would be removed, if r applicable. Where trenches aze placed in roadways, final pavement repair would be performed and traffic controls would be removed or relocated. Where pipeline segments aze laid outride of ' roadways, natural grade would be restored and fencing or other affected property would be replaced or compensated for in accordance with pre-construction conditions. ' Special Construction Techniques Under a number of water and sewer options, proposed pipelines would cross the Santa Ana ' River. With the exception of Water Option 3C, these river crossings would be within existing right- of-ways. For Water Option 3C, a 16-inch line would cross the Santa Ana River, in the vicinity of California Street, by the use of a micro tunnel, as described above. Summary With normal and expected project management, pipeline excavation activities would have ' extremely limited impact. There aze no unusual land use features or traffic flow considerations that 9'15 would create difficulties for pipeline installation using normal management practices. In addition, , the construction and therefore the impacts, if any, would beshort-term in duration and similaz to other pipeline construction performed Countywide. Construction staging, stockpiling, storage and pazking requirements and the temporary disruption to normal traffic flow and land use activities will ' be incorporated in detail in the final construction documents. These doctuments will be subsequently reviewed and permits issued by the appropriate agency responsible for the public right of ways, i.e., ' Caltrans, County of San Bernardino Special District for Transportation, and the City of San Bemazdino. Details of the Traffic Control Plan will be prepared in accordance with the Caltrans Manual of Traffic Control or the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook, depending on the ' jurisdiction with control of the right-of--way impacted. Construction staging and methodology will be in accordance with the County of San Bernardino Special Districts Department Standazds for Sanitary Sewers, the Office of Special Districts County of San Bernazdino, California Standazds for ' Domestic Water Systems, The Green Book of Standazd Specifications for Public Works Construction and the American Water Works Association Standazds. Construction documents will ' be similaz to those being used for construction of the water facilities in Oak Hills, County Service Couury of Ssu Beruardiuo Land Use Services Departmeur SCfL Na 1999101173 ' Cim~t Plena Regional MaIVI VDA Winer & Sewn Services Plan Final Subsequem E[R-Jum 2001 Page 83 , 3.0 Project Description Area 70-J; Phelan and Pinion Hills, County Service Area 70-L. Pipelines and other facilities would s t5 _ be constructed as development takes place. 3.4 REVISIONS TO APPROVED PRELIMINARY/FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN/ TENTATIVE MAP (CITRUS PLAZA) ' The Citrus Plaza project site is an approximately 125-acre master-planned commercial project, which is proposed by the Applicant as a regional commercial center that includes restaurants ~~ah and entertainment uses in addition to traditional retail uses. At full buildout, the Citrus Plaza project, '~°~ ' as proposed by the Applicant, would include approximately 1.85 million square feet, constructed in two phases. In January of 1996, the County certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (State ' Clearinghouse No. 94082084) for the Citrus Plaza project, and approved a Concept Plan and Preliminary Development Plan for the entire site, a Final Development Plan for Phase 1 (approximately 49 acres), and a commercial parcel map for the Citrus Plaza project site. These January 1996 approvals remain in effect for the Citrus Plaza project, which is the subject of an implementing development agreement. ' As approved in January 1996, the Citrus Plaza project is required to obtain water and sewer services from the City of Redlands. The primary revision proposed for the Citrus Plaza project, by the Applicant, is to provide these services by an alternative method. The Applicant also proposes that anew- development agreement be considered with the revised project as well. Citrus Plaza remains a two phase development with Phase 1 still proposed as a Power Center located within the southerly portion of the Citrus Plaza project site. Phase 2 development is ' proposed to be a Regional Mall located north of the Power Center. The Applicant, at this time, seeks to incorporate minor revisions to the approved Preliminary and Final Development Plans for the project. At this time, two development scenarios are under consideration as a means of providing a specified degree of flexibility in the implementation of the Citrus Plaza project. Furthermore, within each of the two scenarios a portion of the Phase 1 site is reconfigured with an alternate design. The two development scenarios aze referenced as Scenarios 1 and 2, while the alternate designs aze referenced as Scenarios lA and 2A. It is these development scenarios that are addressed in the Project EIR portion of this Subsequent EIR The revised Phase 1 Citrus Plaza project includes approximately 500,000 square feet of development, while the Citrus Plaza project at buildout contains approximately 1.85 million square feet of development. The site acreage and amount of development proposed as part of the revised Phase I Citrus Plaza project would be equal to or less than what was approved by the County in January 1996. Should the Phase 1 Citrus Plaza project utilize a smaller portion of the Citrus Plaza site, and/or a lesser amount of development, the Phase 2 Citrus Plaza project would be expanded to the maximum site acreage and square footage ' previously approved by the Cotmty. In addition, the revised Phase 1 Citrus Plaza project would include the same or fewer nlunber of drive-thru facilities, gas stations and a single theater in relation Cauary of Son Bernardino I.aod Use Services Depanmmt SCiL Na 19991011Zi Citrus Plaza Regional MaIUIVDA Waver & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 84 3.0 Project Description ' to that set forth in the Final Development Plan approved by the County in January, 1996. A dia~oram ' of the site lan for both of the tw>o develo ment scenarios is rovided in Fi ~ ~°""" P P p gores 3-1_ and 3-13. ,",pa,ep While minor revisions to the on-site circulation system aze proposed, overall site access (i.e., Change '> driveway locations from perimeter streets) remains the same in both scenarios and substantially conforms to that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. Under certain of the options evaluated, a water storage facility capable of holding up to approximately 1 million gallons per day in order to store fire flow, as well as an associated pump as station, will be located on the Citrus Plaza site. This would be a limited Facility for fire flow storage and would not be used as a water source. The location of this small water storage facility and associated pump station aze shown on the site plans in Figures 3-12 and 3-13. The water storage ' facility is shown as a circle on the right-hand side of these site plans, adjacent to Spenser Street and immediately east of the proposed building, The associated pump station is shown as a rectangle adjacent to the fire flow water storage facility. In addition, Appendix G discusses the storage facility and associated pump station in further detail. The truck access for such water facilities would be the same truck access to be rued for deliveries to the retail stores w2thin the Citrus Plaza site and as such ' would involve no issues of uses, access or changes on the local circulation patterns. 1 1 1 County of Sin Beraardroo Uod Uu Semces Department SCii. Na 199910U73 ' Cirnu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent I7R-June 2001 Page SS ' . -.r N~ o~ _ ~--- - - -- ~abamaAvenue ---- ------------------ - 1 11, I ll 1 „ '~ ~ ~ „-,- -~- - - - - - -~- - 'Irtmfrrtni'rR'RII ~ I E ~ hOP~ ~ 31 I i I D ~ ~ I.I ~ ~ I ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I Itlllrlffiti ~ ~ ~ ' ~ I i ~ ~ i~ ~LLLlllll~ ~_I iE f n riaw I ~ r I~ ' i ~ ® 'nN~f-f;flllKl j ~ II _ ~rr~rl'r' I ice- I I 1 -. u$Hf„r~~if}fl"rr~rN~H?;.11 ~ ~ ~ ~I L _ -' J- fi rlml rrm1r' I!{I~'~HW{fk~~'{~11N~f~'rf{I ~ ~ ~ ~ Ill C lfri~;~IIL J ril lirrllllll'~,... .,.,.,,.L ~ ~, ~~IIIU I~r ~ C I~ ~~~I m I 11- ~+~?ih~1 I}f~ir* +t{~i{}tlrir`WHIi~rH) I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~H4i I I ~ 'II I~ 1fkkl+U iNri+i~H+r~Nt~?Ntl~'rfii ~ ~,_ li ° I~ ~HHHHru] ', I I iI ~ i I~{ItiYrt~ ,H{~im {f~i S ohs ~I~ri ~~I I~ f ~ ~11 ~I IF'I'N~J 'f~h{}~`#r H}HrWr,J ~ -_ ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ I I ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ I I I ~ '^ I ~i+Ifid1 '.1-~`,'r-'% I~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ CIO ~ l I I~4~'fi~l /~I I~~- ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~J N ~ ~ D ~ li .i II--~, I 'c I! , .-• r I 1 -i - - -- -- ---------- ---_- «T ,. mops ~ ~ I - - - - -- - - --- --------------- ------ - f~4F'rff~l$~Il = ~ ~ '' i ~f( lr~I 1s I~~~I ~ ~ ~ ~I O I € O±kkrf' Hl o-l~l~fkk'fk'r~' .I `~- -- = i'' ~ ~ _ r~1 C ~ - '~ IIIII~II ~~~j}~~ I ~ ~ i~ii1 O QIiIIR1 I III „TIn-TT~ ~ ~r/"~+~I'I II~~I IfI ILprL=;l Ilfi ~ V j I~ - ~ I m ~ L I ~ III~q R~RIjI ? ~jy~r I ~ i - '~ I O ?In,l l n. \ IITI Ti YI7~li1i1~ ~ II ~~I~ ' ' 3 0 ~ ~ : Irih~Hif{~t ~ ' _ ~ ~ ~ ', i ~I ~ ice, I '=r iu i ~ ~ u~l-. ~F ,III a I n f__- m - _ _ w i _ ___- H ~ ,., ~ „li = I I I i ifFr171IIRR1 I ~' J 2 S ~ '~' ' ~ HNw~NU ~ ? ~ I';'MHtIfIHI ~ ~ - i SPe \ I d ~ n w ~ I I ~ A ' ' I, ~ ro, Boer pry t``;rr i t7 i € i ~,I ~ ~iJ w i.u,n~.~ ~ ~ ,~ - v ~ ' d I ~ Tennessee Freeway -Route 30 0 T r---------------~ ~ I - I F _ Shops ~ ~ D l J-~ I d ~ - Y~.I ~ ~ A ', II A ~ ~~rt~}riffi~~ ~ v ~ ~ ed~? 1 ~~~i'.~ '~ A ~ _ ilk %~ I~ I ~ II. i fH i~~~~~f~I~H~~'+~ ' ~ ! I ~ ~-r,rirJll ~ ~ ~II~ ~ 34~' 1;{f'rJ I L 1 I r~ ~III'fF, 1 - ~- I -1I ~-~-= -----~-°-_-==-_ - ~ I -~cw~ ~`-' Ilii~ I n T y b i..~ N R i 7 i 9 K ~ a_ -+ ~ ~ ~ r, C w r; ~ x - N i ~ ~ -r - - - - - - + - -Alabama Avenue - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_- - - - - - - - - - - - - I ~ I 1 I ~'~ 0~ 1 ~ I i i `*mnnnnnnrt~ a (A Sho 6 I I ~ i n uur' ~IIIIIIIII~ II _ ,;~IrHI"m#ffr^~fk~h~h'k l~ ~m ~ ~ ~ -ter. '~-, ' ~t ti~ ~ ~ 't~rrtL ; : Ii{'~~hnl{i~{rl~r~'}~{'~rfl~ I 3 ~ ' ~ s ~ s r i c ~ ~ ~ - - ~, ` [Wtldtfl ~NrH~i1EHWtff „TH;f'h~+j j ~ I I -~ ~ = ~ ~ ~,'~"~ _ II ~7{~iti~{l I~~~f}Ilil I N I I r IF.,-~~ ~;,. ~t' ^~~c r ~ ~ ~-~„~.,~ Fc _ I ~ I ~~i~ ' 1 f~ o' a r I ~ a,.etrtF~ _ C ~.~ifl fiRl IIII IT~fR~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~.~j~p,~, nP1 III I ~ < p.v..f'~ O - ,Yl ,.e'^~ Y 1 ~ ~~~itU'`'~-~ ~ J '~ L ;~' ~ ~ ~ D ~ /r~ %" ~~il~ ~ ILJI m p / I - m F i `o (tRR}IHIH4Nkff18fHmHftHffO ~ 3 ` I E ~~J " ~ A _ ~ ~ ~ m I IHHm IffIH{!IiHffr"r ffNO ~ d _ , .T• I J ~~I~+ii r.----- ,~T va ~+ir ~.~-~-r~.~---1 ~ O ~III~yy~~II111!!11~~~~{.u~~~~II ~~II UIIIIIII' ij I Ul. ~' ~ ~, II.W III IIIfRrtii~'iil _ C 1 a` W Z I~lll~~~I~~~~1L~~~~l i ~ N ul I ~ ~ z~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~R~11iIRi11111 IIIRRiIf~~i111111N tlIl7LLL-. ~ ~ - ~., ~."F K'' N y N ~ I~ ~ .,III IIi lirtrtllll i~I ~iRirtN I ~ 4 IT ~ ~ ~' ~' a, N I ; ~ ~ aNl~iff4H~NHIffff~tikHllfffHl J ,, '."~' ~ 111 ~~~~jfjll~,f~~~j~~~f~~~~~~(~7 - 1 Y .s M' ~ L ~ ~LUQQUU{luQ~l ~ o~ 'I~~~~ ~ ~ ~ r ,~ A ; i i `' r "__i f -_ _ =1h8HR~fH;ihA~ftf ~ ° i ~ ~ ''~~ ~ '"~ ~ { ~ ~ i `~"91fNrtIIrtH~I4ff14fHH~ ; - 3 ~ ~ 1 ~ _ v h ~ I' LI ~ih~ m - I ~ "" '_ -' D 'I~~ ~1.. m ro dui+i~~~ 1. c` ~ ~' ~ ~ ' i ~ 1 - i r S - 'x i~ ~ _ _ - _ r i % ~ J o v ~ . I~ 8 ~ m.~~_~I ~ ,i~ I I i r{ I '~ ~ ~ ~E ~ 4' ~~'i ~ ~ ' ~'i~iT~ 1~ Sho s ~ ~~' -r T ~ ^ UtIIIl ~ P ,II ~ a ~ ~ ~ III I1HIH-H?•N~NNfWH'~. ,~ , t l~i ~ ~ ° ~ $ ~ ~ x -' d ~ _ ~ ~-III d I ~ -- -~^ -- ---~-rt Jk' iI ~~~-_~-LEI I per prw 'ti'`~::a ~ ` o" I ' $ - - - - - - ---~ . ~-'^'~'- I I Tennessee Freeway -Route 30 r---__-~-_~~_ T,-.~. TY•?4 ~~'r. i ~ ~ ~ ~k. ,& ~,~, , ~Y ~ '~ :<, m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Mi., ~b~4:. ~~~, 1_rrn~rrmrmn_ ~~', ~'x'~~71 ~ 1 -I - u ~a ~ '' O ~ ~ ~" III sE ~ ' '~/ ~ 1 ~ ~ s = x..,. ~ ~ ~ -- ~b z ~~': -.~ O U1 II ~ ~ I~~ ,~ ~1 'I - ~~/~~' 3 I o / N ; D ~ D 1 0 _' I I' I'_ ~ Shaps } A 1---~, - L_ ~-1--,---,'~ ~ ~ _=----__ ~T ~~'~: ., ~ N ~' w . ro 5 ~ ~ o ~ ~ rt m w I ro N W L ..,. 1~.0 RELATED PRO EGTS 4.0 RELATED PROJECTS AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Pursuant to Sections 11061(c) and 15130(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project's incremental effect may be cumulatively ' considerable. Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project aze considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. As defined in Section 1535.1, a cumulative impact consists of an impact which is created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR together with other projects causing related impacts. Pursuant to Section 15130(6) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion ' need not provide as great of detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should be guided by the standazds of practicality and reasonableness. and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute rather than the attributes of other projects which do not contribute to the cumulative impact. The following elements are necessary to an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts: either (1) a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency; or (2) a ' summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated ' regional or areawide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency. ' During the preparation of the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, an inventory of ' past, present and reasonably anticipated future projects was developed and is presented in Table 41. While the 1995 list of related projects served as the base document from which to start, the complete list of related projects was updated to reflect the projects with an application for approval pending at the time the notice of preparation was released for the Subsequent EIR. At the request of the a->> County's Department of Public Works, the related projects list was reviewed and updated as part of the Final EIR to reflect 2000 conditions. This updated related projects list was compiled by ' reviewing the records of each relevant jurisdiction. Lists of current projects were obtained from City staff when available and, when lists were not already compiled by City staff, the relevant ~, , planning department records were reviewed. The updated 2000 related projects list was compared to the 1995 list to determine the appropriate basis upon which to conduct the project's cumulative _' County or Sao Beroardioo Laod Use Services Depanmtot SCR Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -lace 2001 Page 88 4.0 Related Projects and Cumulative Impacts Table 4-1 ' CMP-RELATED PROJECTS LIST- STUDY YEAR 2010 Project Name City Dwelling Units Employees r QDC San Bemardino 0 100 Santa Fe Railroad Projecu San Bemardino 0 400 ' Inland Center Mall Expansion San Bernardino 0 ],352 Baseball Stadium San Bemardino 0 50 79 Lot Subdivision Highland 79 0 , 7 Lot Subdivision Highland 7 0 San Bernardino International Trade Center (Norton AFB) San Bernardino 107 9,501 , San Bernardino International Trade Center (Norton AFB) San Bernardino 0 4,014 20,000 sq.ft. Retail Store Highland 0 44 ' 90,000 sq.ft. Medical Clinic Highland 0 324 5 Lot Subdivision Highland 5 0 Sand and Gravel Processing Plant Highland 0 400 , Specialty Auto Center Highland 0 28 168 Lot Subdivision Highland 168 0 ' 9 Lot Subdivision Highland ~ 9 0 15 Lot Subdivision Highland IS 0 26 Lot Subdivision Highland 26 0 , 26.5 l Acre Manufacturing Assembly and Warehousing Redlands 0 300 Barton Center Redlands Redlands 0 3,900 196,148 sq.ft. Office Building Loma Linda 0 785 , Park Business Center- 91,500 sq.ft. Commercial Redlands 0 294 ' Cancer Research Wing - 137,000 sq.ft. Loma Linda 0 443 LLU Recreation and Wellness Faciliry- 80,000 sq.ft. Loma Linda 0 288 Outpatient Rehabilitation Center-34,500 sq.fl. Loma Linda 0 124 65 Lot Subdivision Highland 65 0 ' 158 Lot Subdivision Highland 158 0 16 Lot Subdivision Highland 16 0 58 Lot Subdivision Highland 58 0 ' 7 Lot Subdivision Highland 7 0 Phase? Highland 0 ]24 48 Lot Subdivision Highland 48 0 ' 135 Lot Subdivision Highland 135 0 101 Town Homes Highland 101 0 59 Lot Subdivision Highlatd 59 0 ' 88 Lot Subdivision Highland 88 0 45 Lot Subdivision Highland 45 0 Couaty ofSfn Bernardino Land Ust Serviets Departmrnt SCH Na 1999101127 ` Citnes Plaza Regional MalUfVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 , Page 84 4.0 Related Projects and Cumulative Impacts ' Table 41 (Continued) _ CMP-RELATED PROJECTS LIST-STUDY YEAR 2010 ' Project Name City Dwelling Units Employees 116 Lot Subdivision Highland 116 0 ' 40 Lot Subdivision Highland 40 0 33 Lot Subdivision Highland 33 0 105 Lot Subdivision Highland 105 0 ' 7 Lot Subdivision Highland 7 0 81 Lot Subdivision Highland 81 0 277 Condominium Project Highland 277 0 ' 62 Lot Subdivision Highland 62 0 Open Space Commercial Lot Highland 0 124 70 Lot Subdivision Highland 70 0 333 Lot Subdivision Highland 333 0 95 Lot Subdivision Highland 95 0 ' S1 Lot Subdivision Highland 51 0 101 Lot Subdivision Highland 101 0 79 Lot Subdivision Highland 79 0 147 Lot Subdivision Highland 147 0 Revision to 10 Lot Subdivision Highland 10 0 72 Lot Subdivision Highland 72 0 ' 239 Lot Subdivision Highland 239 0 47 Lot Subdivision Highland 47 0 326 Lo[ Subdivision Highland 326 0 ' 47 Lot Subdivision Hiehland 47 0 Dole Packaging Plant - 18,820 sq.ft. Industrial Redlands 0 38 67,200 sq.ft. Commercial Redlands 0 208 LDS Church - 15 ~ 15 sq.ft. Redlands 0 2 Police Station Relocation San Bernardino 0 416 Carousel Mall Expansion San Bernardino 0 642 l4-Screen Theater (2,066 seats and two 800-sq.ft. restaurants Redlands 0 66 ' analysis. These comparisons as analyzed in Appendix E, Traffic Validation Study, demonstrate that !i the 1995 related projects list included more cumulative growth than was identified in the updated a-tt ~ 2000 list. In order to provide a conservative analysis the assessment of the project's potential cumulative impacts is based on the lazger (more inclusive) related projects list presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. e•n (tleleled) The anticipated environmental effects to be produced by the project, in combination with the related projects presented in Table 4-1, are analyzed for each environmental issue in Section 5.0, under the cumulative impacu disctJSSion, therein. To the extent possible or practicable, reasonable, County of Sao Bermrdioo Laod L'u Services Department SCIL No.199910112) Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Sut~sequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 90 4.0 Related Projecu and Cumulative Impacts feasible options for mitigating or avoiding the project's contribution to any significant cumulative , effects have been identified. County afSaa [kraardiao Land list Servkes Department SCFL Nn 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional AAaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Smices Plan Final SuMequerrt EIR-June 2001 Page 91 , 1 - ~ ~ '~• .' ' S.O ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1 - 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ' S.1 LAND USE ' 5.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.1.1.1 Regulatory Environment The Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) is a joint powers authority consisting of ' the cities of San Bernardino, Loma Linda, Colton, and the County of San Bemazdino. The IVDA was Formed for the purpose of planning for the redevelopment of the area surrounding the San Bemazdino International Trade Center (formerly Norton Air Force Base). The Inland Valley ' Redevelopment Project Area Plan was adopted in 1990 due to deteriorating and dilapidated buildings and properties, health and safety hazards, obsolete buildings, shifring and incompatible ' uses, inadequate utility infrastructures, deteriorated public rights-of--way, and severe housing and social needs throughout the Project Area. The IVDA areas include 1l azeas in unincorporated San Bemazdino County (Areas A - J, as shown on Figure 1-I and listed, along with Area K, in Table 3- ' 1). The Citrus Plaza project site is also located within the County of San Bernardino and Area A. The locale of Citrus Plaza and IVDA Areas A, H, and I aze within the Valley Region and East Valley Subregion of the County General Plan. Additionally, Area A and H are located within the 4.1 ' azea governed by the policies of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP). The Citrus Plaza project site is designated for Regional Commercial use under both the adopted County General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Regional Planning ' The IVDA Area and Citrus Plaza project site are located within the planning area of ' Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the southern California region's federally designated metropolitan planning organization. The Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) contain policies to govern regional growth to the yeaz 2015 and beyond. SCAG data contained in the RCPG was utilized for the local evaluation of the regional jobs/housing analysis, through its population projections for Regional Statistical Area 29 (RSA 29).2 Amore detailed discussion of socioeconomic issues is provided in Section 5.11 of this Subsequent EIR. The San Bemazdino Associated Governments (SanBAG) is a subregional organization with ajoint-powers agreement between the County and its 24 cities and is a member ' 2 The Regions! Statistical Area (RSA-19j is the SCAG designated district for the area encompassing the proposed project site and [he City of Redlands. County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Drpartmeot SCH. Na 1999101 V3 ' Citnu Plea Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Juice 2001 Page 92 5.1 Land Use agency of SCAG. SanBAG is the subregional council of governments (COG) and administers the , Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County (CMP). SanBAG is responsible for the review and approval of the project's traffic impact analysis as required under the Counry's ' Congestion Management Plan (CMP). Amore detailed discussion of transportation and circulation related issues is provided in Section 5.4 of this Subsequent EIR. The proposed project is also ' located within the South Coast Air Basin and therefore is within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD provides air quality management for the South Coast Air Basin and works to attain the regional standazds for air quality as set forth by ' the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board. SCAQMD and SCAG prepaze the Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. A more detailed discussion of air quality related issues is provided in Section 5.5 of this Subsequent ' EIR. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board has the planning and regulatory authority for activities affecting surface or ground water quality. Issues related to water quality aze ' discussed in Section 5.3 (Hydrology/Ground Water) of this Subsequent EIR. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) through its separate organizational districts, is responsible for preparing and implementing regional transportation plans, constructing and maintaining State roadways (e.g., ' the I-10 and I-210 Freeways), preparing route concept plans, and coordinating State and local ~n actions regazding State transportation facilities. Issues related to transportation and circulation are 1ni0~ discussed in Section 5.4 of this Subsequent EIR. County of San Bernardino General Plan and Land Use Policies ' The San Bemazdino County General Plan is the primazy policy document for the ' unincorporated area of San Bernardino County and contains the goals, policies and implementing actions for a variety of issues including natural and man-made resources. The Land Use Element of the General Plan provides policies for guiding the physical development of public and privately ' owned land in the unincorporated azea of San Bernazdino County and integrates all land use issues into a set of coherent development policies. As discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall (December 1995), the ' San Bernardino County General Plan provides goals and policies which tazget the conservation of , the County's agricultural resources. The County General Plan also provides actions which aze intended to guide the development of commercial lands uses. This discussion, provided in Section 5.1 (Land Use) of that 1995 Final EIR, is incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR ' In addition, the County of San Bernardino Development Code establishes procedures for the ' processing of Preliminazy and Final Development plans which are intended to facilitate development of properties where greater flexibility in design is desired and to provide a more efficient use of land than would be possible through strict application of land use district regulations. ' This process is also intended to serve as an alternative site planning process that encourages more creative and imaginative planning of mixed use multiphased residential, commercial or industrial Couory orSaa Bemardioo Laod Uu Servim Depanment SCri ho. 1999101x13 Civus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 93 ¦ ¦ 5.1 Land Use developments within the framework of a single cohesive development plan. Prior to the approval - (or conditional approval) of a planned development, the County is required to make findings that the ' project is consistent with the Code. The County of San Bernardino Development Code further establishes specific design and development criteria for new developments in San Bernardino County. Development standazds, _ procedural regulations and other provisions of the County of San Bemazdino Development Code apply except where they conflict with a specific provision of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. When conflicts occur, the provisions of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan take precedence. ' The 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall concluded that the loss of open space will result by the removal of agricultural land from the proposed Citrus Plaza project and mCioa~ ' redesignation of land use from Agricultural Preserve to Regional Commercial with the adoption of cn~ the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Although this loss of Agricultural Preserve designation represents less than 0.09 percent of the total acreage within San Bernardino County containing prime agricultural soils it is still considered a regionally significant impact. As also stated in the Drafr EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, the proposed Citrus Plaza project is consistent with I the San Bernardino County General Plan and East Valley Corridor Specific Plan land use designations and is compatible with surrounding land use. This discussion is incorporated into this Subsequent EIR by reference. Sphere of Influence r The project site is presently within the jurisdictional boundary of the County of San Bernardino. Area H is within the Loma Linda Sphere of Influence.' The County and the Cities of 41 Redlands and Loma Linda participated in a joint planning program for an approximately 4,350-acre portion of east San Bernardino Valley. In 1989 the County and the Cities of Redlands and Loma ' Linda adopted the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, and amended their respective General Plan policies and zoning standards to reflect the land use regulations of the Specific Plan' In taking these actions, the Specific Plan's policies and regulations replace the existing County and applicable ' municipal regulations for the Specific Plan azea. Both planning documents contain supplemental policies and standazds which provide further regulations affecting the development of the project site. Area A and H are located within the boundary of the East Valley Condor Specific Plan. Area I is located outside of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan boundary, as shown on Figure 3-1. ' Section 65859 ojthe California Gove.°nment Code author~es local agencies to prezone unincorporated territories adjoining them, in order to allow these agencies to plan jor their jutvre development. In taking this action, agencies are able to sigma! their intern regarding land use policies which are to be in effect upon the subsequent annexation of those areas; however, prior to arurexation those policies have no regulatory ejject. ' County of San Bernardino, Ordinance No. 335/ (September 6, 1989); Ctry of Redlands, Ordinance No. 1086 (September 5, 1989) and Resolution No. 4433 (January 3, 1989) ar amended by Resolution No. 51 (July l8, 1995). Coaoty orSao Bernardino Land Usr Servioes Dcpartmeot SCH. Na 1999101111 1 Gnus Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Wnter&Sewcr Scrviccs Plan Final Subsequent ElR-1mn: 2001 Page 94 5.1 Land Use East Valley Corridor Specific Plan ' The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan became the superseding land use regulation for ; IVDA Area A and H on September 6, 1989. The adoption of that Specific Plan effectively deleted and replaced the land use designations of the County of San Bemazdino General Plan, the City of Redlands General Plan, and Loma Linda General Plan, including the corresponding zoning maps ' and zoning provisions of the County, the City of Redlands and the City of Loma Linda for the affected area. The goals, policies and objectives for land use and planning identify the strategies, ' intended dtrection and specific measures for the Specific Plan azea These aze discussed in Section ~.1 (Land Use), provided in full in Appendix D (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan: Axiom, Goals, Policies and Objectives) and referenced in Section 3.1 (Statement of Objectives) of the 199 Final ' EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall and are incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. As discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, the objectives of the ' East Valley Corridor Specific Plan are to provide awell-planned community which will attract major businesses to the area in order to provide a job base for the azea and strengthen the local , economy while ensuring high-quality development through design guidelines and standazds. In accordance with these objectives, the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan contains a broad outline of those development standazds to regulate and guide future development in the East Valley Corridor. ' Division 4 (Community Design) of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan contains separate sections addressing circulation standards (Section EV4.0101 et seq.) and site design standazds and guidelines ' (Section EV4.0201 et seq.). Both of these design components have been individually addressed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Section 5.8, Aesthetics, and a complete listing of these guidelines aze provided in Appendix I (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan: Site ' Design Standazds and Guidelines) of that document. In addition, Section 5.4 (Transportation/Circulation) of the 1995 Final EIR provides a discussion of other applicable sections of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan that address the local circulation system. This discussion ' and corresponding guidelines aze incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. The Citrus Plaza site is designated "Regional Commercial District" by the East Valley ' Comdor Specific Plan. A Regional Commercial District is intended to create and preserve an azea for development as a regional center, containing major retail outlets, office complexes, hotels and ' motels, entertainment centers and secondary pazcels commercial and service uses. Because of the intensity and diversity of permitted uses, the Plan provides that all pazcels within the Regional ' Commercial District shall be developed in accordance with a site plan proposed for the entire District. Permitted uses within the Regional Commercial District include, but may not be limited to: , (1) regional mall; (2) entertainment center; (3) hotel complexes; (4) conference and convention ' centers; (5) stadiums and amphitheaters; (6) corporation headquarters offices; (7) uses permitted in Couoy of Sao Beroardioo Lead Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101123 , Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewcr Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 95 , - 5.1 Land Use the Neighborhood Commercial District and Administrative Professional District;5 and (8) other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the County, the City of Redlands, or the City of Loma Linda Planning Commission at a public hearing, as provided in Section EV3.0135 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. "' Conditionally peanitted uses, as listed in Section EV3.0140 of the East Valley Condor Specific Plan, include: (1) temporary and permanent governmental facilities and enterprises (federal ' State and local) where buildings and/or property aze publicly owned or leased; (2) temporary support facilities associated with the construction of highways and other public facilities including, ' but not limited to, batch plants and equipment storage yards; (3) institutional uses including, but not limited to, schools and universities, conference centers, hospitals, churches, rehabilitation centers, and day care centers; (4) public utilities and public service uses or structures including, but not limited to, reservoirs, pumping plants, electrical substations, central communication offices, microwave and repeater huts and towers, and satellite receiving stations; and (5) social care facilities with seven or more patients or clients. t The Regional Commercial District provisions, in conjunction with the general regulation of ' the East Valley Condor Specific Plan, provide the planning procedure which is to be followed for development activities proposed within that district. The Eas[ Valley Corridor Specific Plan, Division 6. Community Facilities, includes provisions for the delivery of water and waste water service to the East Valley Corridor azea. ' Water is currently provided to the East Valley Corridor area by the City of Loma Linda (within its City limits or spheres of influence and includes a major intertie with the City of San Bernardino for supplemental water supply when needed) and the City of Redlands (within its City limits or spheres of influence). As identified in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, no major water distribution facilities exist north of Lugonia Avenue, in the City of Redlands jurisdictional boundaries or sphere of influence. Presently non-potable water service to this area (primarily for agricultural use) is provided by a series of private wells and small mutual water companies. This 4"1 area is identified as eventually being served by the City of Redlands as the land is converted to more intensive uses. As previously presented in Table 3-1 the City of Loma Linda has adequate capacity to provide water to meet existing and future demands of Area H (as indicated by the County zoning map). ' S Such uses include the following: (aJ retail sale ojgoodr generally charactereed by relatively long-term utility or consumption; (6J provision ojservices to individuals and business establishments; (cJ cultwal, entertainment and recreational facilities; (d) transient lodgings (e.g., hotels; motels); (e) repair and servicing ojarry article which is ' permiaed to be sold in this District; (JJ other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission, as provided in Section EV3.0140 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; and ores listed in Section EV3.0l40 ojthe Eart Valley Corridor Specific Plan. County of Sao Berwrdino Laod Uae Services Department SCH. Na 1999101121 Cittus Plea Regional MaIVIVDA Wnter&Sewer Services Plan Fvial Subsequem ElR-Jmk 2001 Page 96 ~.I Land Use Waste water service is provided by the City of Redlands Municipal Utilities Department and ' City of Loma Linda Community. Services Department. As stated in the East Valley Corridor ; Specific Plan, both cities have existing master plans to extend their sewer systems within their respective jurisdictions and spheres of influence. Sewage treatment is provided by the City of Redlands Municipal Utilities Department and City of San Bemazdino within the City of Loma Linda , and minor flows from the City of Redlands sewered azeas west of Nevada Street. Other agencies identified include the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) and the San Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). A major project of the SAWPA is the Santa Ana ' Regional Interceptor (SARI) which intercepts and transports high-salt water and non-reclaimable wastewater from the upper basins to the Pacific Ocean. Final reaches of the SARI line aze proposed ,~~ ' to extend as faz as the San Bemazdino treatment plant. The SBVMWD boundazies encompass the cn~a East Valley Corridor azea and they aze the lead agency for a regional wastewater management facilities plan evaluating water quality and dischazge requirements for all of the area treatment ' plants. This plan could result in the need for a higher and more costly level of treatment. Currently Area A is served by local septic systems. This azea is identified as eventually being entirely served by the City of Redlands sewer lines and waste water treatment facility or SARI line, since no ' agreement exists with the City of San Bemazdino to accept and treat additional waste water flow resulting from future development. As previously presented the City of Loma Linda has adequate ' capacity to provide waste water service to meet current and planned land uses of Area H (as indicated by the County inning map). The infrastructure plan presented in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan is intended to , serve as a general guide to future public agency decisions concerning the provision of public ' services and facilities. This plan recommends additional water supply and sewerage facilities to serve Area A based on Infrastructure Planning Areas. The Citrus Plaza site is designated IA which includes azeas not yet developed but where plans for development aze underway. Within Area A, north of San Bemazdino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue and east of Alabama; and south of San Bemazdino and west of Alabama Street is designated as Planning Area II. Planning Area II contains land which requires substantial infrastructure improvements and has good potential for development , in the neaz future. The remaining portion of Area A is identified as Planning Area Ill. This area is also considered to have good development potential but is not likely to be developed before Areas I , and II. The compatibility standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan require that every use ' of land or building within the East Valley Cortidor be required to operate in confomuty with specific performance standazds, compliance with those standazds, therefore, ensures physical and operational compatibility between adjoining land uses. Development projects which aze either , permitted uses or permitted subject to certain land use review permits, as defined by the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, and which operate in compliance with the specified performance standazds ' would, therefore, be deemed compatible with any existing and future land uses located proximal to the project. County of San Beroardioo Land Use Services Depanmenl SCH. Na 1999101173 Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Wazer&Sewer Services Plan final Subsequent ElR-3we2001 t Page 97 ~ ' S.1 Land Use 5.1.1.2 Physical Environment A detailed discussion of the existing setting for the proposed Citrus Plaza project is provided ' i^~aatea in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Section 5.1 (Land Use). The discussion, ~,an9e as summarized below, is incorporated into this Subsequent EIR by reference. The project site is located within the geographic area identified as the Valley Region in the San Bernardino County General Plan. This region is bordered on the west by the Chino, Puente and San Jose Hills, on the north by the San Gabriel and San Bemazdino Mountains, to the east by the San Bernazdino range, Yucaipa and Cnfton Hills, and to the south by the alluvial highlands ' extending south from the San Bemazdino and Jurupa Mountains. The Valley Region comprises approximately 192 square miles and includes an estimated 210,000 residents. Within the Valley ' Region, the project site is included within the East Valley Subregion or RSA 29. The East Valley Subregion encompasses eight incorporated cities (Colton, Gland Terrace, Loma Linda, Highland, Redlands, Rialto, San Bernazdino and Yucaipa), the adopted Spheres of Influence for each of those al communities and other contiguous County areas. Area A (including the Citrus Plaza site) is encircled by the corporate boundaries of Redlands and Area I is located neaz the western boundary of the City. Area H (within the IVDA Area and EVCSP) is not a part of the proposed project area ' and has adequate water and wastewater service available. Therefore a detailed discussion of this area will not be presented. IVDA Areas A and I As discussed in Sections 5.6.1 (Water Supply) and 5.6.2 (Sanitary Sewers) of this Subsequent EIR, Areas A (approximately 969 acres) and I (approximately 82 acres) of the unincorporated portion of the IVDA Area aze not adequately served by water and sewer infrastructure. As such, these two Areas aze the focus of the infrastructure component of this Subsequent EIR. Thus, the total project area for the proposed infastructure improvements (IVDA Areas A and I) is approximately 1,051 acres. Area A is generally bounded by the Tennessee Freeway (SR-30) on the east, Lugonia ' Avenue on the south, California Street on the west and Palmetto Avenue and the Santa Ana River on the north. Area A was historically used for agriculture, and currently includes a mix of ' agriculture, vacant land, a few residences, a church school, chapel and a monastery. Water service to several pazcels of Area A is currently provided by the City of Redlands via small diameter pipelines and to other portions of Area A by local wells for non-potable (agricultural) use. All ' existing buildings within Area A aze served by local septic sewage systems. Area I is located west of Bryn Mawr Avenue and is generally bounded by San Bernardino Avenue to the south, Mountain View Avenue to the west and the Santa Ana River on the north. Area I is developed on 54 acres with an electrical power generation facility (including a small County of Sao Berosrdioa Laod Use Services Drpsnmeot SCH. Na 1999101123 Ci[rus Plaza Regional Ma1Vl VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 98 5.1 Land Use office) which is operated by the Mountain View Power Company. As further described under , Section 3.3.2, (Proposed Infi~astructure Systems) of this Subsequent EIR, additional components aze proposed for this facility to increase power output. These improvements are anticipated to be confined to the present site boundaries and would require environmental documentation and review by state and county agencies. Also located on Area I is a storage yazd for Monier Roof Tiles. Water , service within Area I is provided via local wells, while sewer needs are met by local septic systems. Existing water and sewer services are private and are not anticipated to be adequate for futtrre anticipated land uses. Figure 1-1 shows the location of Areas A and I in a local context. , Citrus Plaza Site ' The Citnu Plaza project, as originally proposed and currently revised, consists of an approximately 125-acre site located in the easterly portion of Area A. Regional access to the Citrus , Plaza site is provided via both the azea's freeway network and arterial highway system. Freeway access presently is provided to the site via Alabama Street, where that roadway crosses above the I- , ]0 Freeway, and from San Bemazdino Avenue, where that street crosses under the elevated SR-30 Freeway. The proposed Citrus Plaza project azea is predominately level and was historically used for tacioat e ' agricultural production, bui is currently graded in anticipation of development. No structures exist a,a~ on the site. A number of existing water and wastewater facilities currently exist in the general a$ , vicinity of the Citrus Plaza Project site (refer also to Sections 5.7.1 (Water Supply) and 5.7.2 (Sanitary Sewers) of this Subsequent EIR for additional information). In addition, two water wells ' exist within IVDA Area A, but not within the Citrus Plaza site, and have been historically utilized as domestic and/or irrigation water sources for the Citrus Plaza site. All existing off-site land uses aze physically separated from the Citrus Plaza project site by dedicated public streets. Agricultural Lands , Although portions of Area A (generally south of Pioneer Avenue, west of I-30, north of Lugonia Avenue, and east of California Street-including the entire Citrus Plaza site), were , designated as Agricultural Preserve` in 1970 in response to the Williamson Act,' this designation was removed from the East Valley Corridor area with the adoption of the East Valley Corridor , Specific Plan. This removal of this designation reflects a public policy decision to remove the site's eligibility from any Williamson Act contract, signaling the anticipation of a change from an Agricultural Pruerve is defrned in Section 5110/ of the California Governmem Code as an area devoted to either ' agriculture use, recreational use, or open space use ojarry combination ojsuch uses. ' The Williamson Act is a State statute (California Government Code, Section 5/100 et seq.) which provides a property ' tax reduction jar certain agriculture and open space (ands designated by a county or city with the purpose ojslowing [he corrversion ojthese Jands to urban and suburban uses. County of Sao &roardioo Laad Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101121 Citrtu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-tune 2001 , Page 99 - 5.1 Land Use agricultural to anon-agricultural use. The majority of Area A is designated by the Soil Conservation Service as Prime Farmland with a small portion to the east designated as Farmland of Statewide Importance. The Final Environmental Impact Report for East Valley Corridor Specific Plan concluded that the cumulative loss of agricultural resources is a significant unavoidable adverse impact. Therefore the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan Section EV2.0205 includes a policy to preserve existing viable agricultural activities as long as feasible while the azea transitions to more intensive uses. The complete text of this policy and supporting objectives aze provided in Appendix D (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan: Axiom, Goals, Policies and Objectives) of the 199 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. Area I is designated as urbanized. 5.1.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The thresholds of significance aze as follows: m~a o Change ' A project will have a significant land use impact if the project will result in any of the following effects: (1) conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community; (2) induce substantial growth or concenR~ation of population; (3) displace a large number of people; (4) disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community; (5) conflict with established recreational, educational, religious or scientific uses of the area; (6) convert prime agricultural land to non-agricultural use or impair the agricultural productivity of prime agricultural County ~ai6ale0 land; and/or (7) conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community Change i ' conservation plan. The Final Environmental Impact Repoli for the San Bemazdino County General Plan identified the following threshold of significance: Conversion of open space containing sensitive ecological resources, productive resources, or is necessary to protect public safety, to urban land uses would constitute a significant adverse effect that cannot be mitigated below a level of significance. The EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan concluded that the potential impacts ' upon existing agricultural resources within that planning area resulting from the conversion of an agricultural use to anonfarm-related activity could not be mitigated to a level of insignificance and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted for the Plan. Although no physical change ' directly occurred as a result of the land use policies contained in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, it was concluded that the potential impacts addressed in that eazlier document may, in fact, materialize with project level development and should be addressed as part of the environmental evaluation of potential project impacts. The following threshold of significance has been included to address this issue: Couory of Sao &roardiao Laod Use Services Deparlmmt SCN. Nn 1999101127 ' Citrus Plata Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page I00 ~.I Land Use In assessing the level of significance, this EIR is required to examine the effects of the ' conversion of an agricultural use to anonfarm-related activity in the context of the proposed project, ; local and cumulative impacts. 5.13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.13.1 Proposed Plan Amendments , County General Plan ' The County Boazd of Supervisors has initiated a General Plan Amendment to develop land ' use, water and wastewater policies to encourage economic development and the provision of services to unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area. In addition, other minor revisions to clarify the County and cities role for land use planning within the Sphere of Influence azeas and updates to ' land use districts are proposed. The General Plan service policies and facilities plan proposed for IVDA Areas A and H conflict with the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan (adopted in 1989). Area H is the only other IVDA Area within the East Valley corridor specific planning and is shown on ' Figure 1-I. Area A is located in the East Valley Corridor Planning Area and Area H is located in the East Loma Linda Planning Area. Rather than proposing extensive amendments, the project , proposes to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as it applies to Areas A and H. The intent of the proposed amendments is to make it cleaz that the policies of San Bemazdino County allow for the provision of public services by agencies other than the Ciry of Redlands in the unincorporated , IVDA Area. As part of this project, the County is considering several policy revisions intended to increase the options for providing water and wastewater services in IVDA Area A. As shown in Table 3-1, Area H has adequate capacity to serve current County caning requirements. Thus the ' provision of water and sewer services aze specifically directed towazds IVDA Area A. The proposed project also includes amendments to the County General Plan with corresponding changes , to the San Bemazdino County Development Code. No changes aze proposed for the development standards of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as applicable to the remaining portion of the unincorporated IVDA Areas A and H. Accordingly, limited agricultural activities within IVDA, ~^n , mi6ated Area A will be maintained as an interim land use pending ultimate development of this azea. Change A summary of the major content issues of the proposed policy amendments is presented in Table , 5.1-1. The proposed policy amendments support the implementation of a water and wastewater ' facilities plan to serve the unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I including the Citrus Plaza project site. The proposed facilities plan will include several options for bringing water and wastewater ' services to the area. A discussion of these options is provided in Section 3.0, Project Description, of County of Sao Bernardino Laod Use Service Dcpartmeol SCH. Na 1999101173 Citrus Plata Regional MaIVIVDA Wafer&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequem ElR-1ma: 2001 , Page ]01 1 ' 5.1 Land Use ' this Subsequent EIR. A complete copy of the proposed text amendments is provided in Appendix D - of this Subsequent EIR. ' The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR evaluated the proposed Citrus Plaza project for consistency with all of the EVCSP policies and design codes and concluded that the proposed Citrtu Plaza project is generally consistent with the applicable plans, policies and design codes. m~oa~a Because of the manner in which the County wholly incorporated these plan policies and design cna~ ' conditions into the County General Plan and Development Code, the Citrus Plaza project would still be consistent with these plan policies and design conditions as included in the County General Plan and Development Code. Although the proposed project is generally consistent with applicable plans and policies, in further reviewing these policies, it was detemvned that three of the Policy/Actions of the San Bernardino General Plan warrant more detailed review for consistency with the proposed ' amendments due to the further changes in the project. County of Saa Beroardioo Land Use Services Department SCH. Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 102 5.1 Land Use , Table 5.1-1 ' LAND USE IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED COUNTY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AFFECTING THE IVDA AND EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR AREA , Proposed Policy or Regulation Document Implications Delete references [o Eazt Valley Corridor General Plan page 1- This amendment would remove the Fast , Specific Plan. F2-1 Valley Corridor Specific Plan as a separate planning document for unincorporated Areas A and H. Additional proposed ' amendments to the General Plan add the relevant content into the General Plan and/or the Development Code. Clarify the intent of the General Plan Policy on Oeneral Plan Page 1- Existing policy implies cities have veto ' the coordination of land use planning in adjacent F7-1 power with regard to land use in the IVDA city and county areas. Area Sphere of Influence. The intent of the amendment is to clarify that the County ', Board of Supervisors is responsible for all land use decisions in the unincorporated areas of the County, and cities have final ' autfioriry within their boundaries. Delete EVCSP reference to Cultural Resource General Plan page The General Plan includes the same Overlays. II-C2-2 Cultural Resource Overlays. ' Add provision to permit County Service Areaz General Plan Pages These policies provide alternative (CSA) and Community Service Districts (CSD) lI-C4-3, 4, 5, 8 opportunities for water service in areas or other public agencies to provide water service where the existing provider is unable or ' Policy WA-I, WA- to IVDA Areas A and I when no existing service unwilling to extend service to a proposed provider is able or willing to do so. Allows the 3, W A-5, WA-9 development. creation of private wazer systems in the IVDA Areas A and 1. Delete reference to specific sewage treatment General Plan Page Provides clarification that the intent of the facilities currently identified in the General Plan ?-D I-2 General Plan is not to prohibit the and add language to clarify that the County construction of new sewage facilities ' could permit the constmction of new sewage beyond those listed in the General Plan N treatment facilities as deemed necessary. 1989. Add examples of parties that may provide General Plan page The inclusion of potential service providers , community sewage systems. Delete reference to II-Dl-3 and sewer offset programs provides dry sewers and add provision for sewer offset ~ additional flexibility for the provision of Policy WW-_ programs. Emphasizes that in sphere of community sewage systems. ' influence for IVDA areas additional options for c01"~ Change sewer service connections stated in policy LU-9 (as revised) apply. Change the term Package Treatment Plants [o General Plan page Provides a more general term, i.e., Package , Wastewater Treatment Planrs (WTPs). II-Dl-4 Treatment Plan[ is a specific type of Policy W W-3 W~ew'ater Treatment Plant. Clarify that IVDA Areaz A and I are not General Plan page This policy provides alternatives for waste , restricted by existing General Plan Policies on li-D I-4 and II-D-6 water service and thereby ensuring that wastewater and include language permitting the existing providers do not have veto power ' Policy W W-3, 5, 6, conswction of new WTP or connection to and 9 over proposed developments in IVDA existing facilities rather than connection to Areas A and I. nearby city wastewater collection and treatment Couoty of Sae Beroardiao Laod Usr Services Department SCN. Na 1999101173 , CiussS Plau Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 103 , - 5.1 Land Use ' Table 5.1-1 (Continued) LAND USE IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED COUNTY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AFFECTING THE IVDA AND EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR AREA Proposed Policy or Regulation Document Implications facilities. Clarify that IVDA Areas A and I are not General Plan page This policy provides alternatives for water ary ' restricted by General Plan policy to discourage ?-D6-2 and waste water service and thereby m~6a~ea extension of existing facilities or development of ensuring that existing providers do not have G'anya new facilities in a leap-frog fazhion. veto power over proposed developments N Modifies annexation policy in the General Plan IVDA Areas A and I. to provide exceptions for IVDA Areas. Allows exemption for I VDA Areas from County annexation policies, because annexation may not be consistent with overall regional planning decisions of the County, other cities and agencies. ' Adds Rural Commercial, Highway Commercial, General Plan pages Land use designations and development and Specific Plan land use districts [o the II-D6-7; II1-B2-30 standards are still the same for Areas A and Genetal Plan thus expanding the number of I. Official Land Use Districts from fourteen to seventeen. Provides for public facilities/infraswcture General Plan page Reiterates that the County Board of service to be applied in IVDA Areas A and 1 11-D6~5 Supervisors has the ultimate decision over independent of City Spheres of Influence and Goal D-61 land uses within the unincorporated IVDA based on the goals and policies of the Cowry areas. General Plan. ' Clarifies the intent of joint planning activities General Plan page Reiterates that the County Board of County with cities for Sphere of Influence for IVDA II-D6~5, 46 Supervisors has the ultimate decision over m'ua~ea areas. Provides for public facilities/infraswcture land uses and water/waste waer service in change services to be applied in IVDA Areas A and [ Policy LU-9, 10 unincorporated IVDA areas. ' independent of City Spheres of Influence and based on the goals and policies of the County General Plan. Adds East Loma Linda and East Valley Corridor General Plan page This amendment would remove the Eazt planning areas to text and map references. III-B2-I Valley Condor Specific Plan az a separate planning area for unincorporated Areas A ' and H. Deletes the specific numbers of Wazhingtonia General Plan page The Wazhingtonia robusta is identified az a robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) to be preserved III-62-28 historical and scenic resource to be ' along designated streets within IVDA Area A. preserved. The deletion of specific numbers and location would not result in a greater loss of this resource since Landscaping Guidelines established in Section 86.03630 (q of the Development Code require the submittal of a Landscape Plan and encoltrages the preservation or relocation of existing mature trees. In addition, Section 86.030625 (g) and (h) of the Development Code identifies the streets deleted from the proposed General Plan County ofSao Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101121 ' Citn~s Plata Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent FlR-June 2001 Page 104 ' S.I Land Use Table 5.1-1 (Continued) LAND USE IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED COUNTY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AFFECTING , THE IVDA AND EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR AREA Proposed Policy or Regulation Document Implications , Amendment and encourages the preservation or relocation of the Washingtonia robusta along these streeu. ~,,,,~ ImfiateC Incorporate the axiom, goals, policies, and General Plan These amendments to the General Plan Charge objectives from the EVCSP to the General Plan delete references to EVCSP, areas outside lae~ereal and apply them to IVDA Areas A and H. unincorporated County, requirements to , coordinate and expedite development with other cities in the designated Sphere of Influence for IVDA areas, redundant references, and creation of additional , residential land use districts. The amendments do include policies to coordinae with responsible agencies and , jurisdictions on growth management, land planning, and transportazion planning. Since the General Plan amendment includes all the relevant goals, policies, and actions , of the EVCSP and since the County Board of Supervisors is responsible for all land use decisions in the unincorporated areas of the ' County, these two planning documents are r~ann im6meo consistent. Cnanpe Land Use Regulations Development Code These land use regulations are consistent pages 6-14. l with those N the Cortununiry Land Use through 6-14:L0 Section ofthe EVCSP. All County Planning docttmenis are ' required to be internally consistent, therefore the regulations incorporated into ' the Code will be consistent with the General Plan. Circulation Development Code The proposed Circulation Design ' pages 6-14.21 Guidelines generally reflece the content of through 6-14.52 the existing Circulation Element in the EVCSP and include text revisions to reflect OounR only those areas of the EVCSP within u~eared ' unincorporated San Bernardino County. Site Design Standards and Guidelines Development Code The proposed Site Design Standards and pages 6-14.52 Guidelines generally reflect the content of , through 6-14..87 those existing Standards in the EVCSP and include text revisions applicable to those areas and land use designations within , unincorporated San Bernardino County. The detailed parking requirements and parking standards are cross-referenced to Chapter 6, Division 7 and requirements for Couory orSsm Bernardino Land Use Services DePnrtmeot SCN. No.19991Oll73 ' Ciws Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 105 5.1 [.and Use Table 5.1-1 (Continued) ' LAND USE IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED COUNTY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AFFECTING THE IVDA AND EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR AREA Proposed Policy or Reltulation Document Implications parking swctures have been added. Community Facilities EVCSP Division 6 This section was not included in Development Code. Source.' PCR Services Corporation. These consist of the following: Policy/Action WW-5. Except as otherwise provided herein, because commtuuty sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, connection to the community sewerage system shall be required for any proposed development or subdivision of land within a sewer or sanitation district. In azeas where sewers aze required by the appropriate RWQCB and a sewer or '~ , sanitation district does not exist, a district and appropriate assessments shall be established. Exceptions may be approved subject to review and approval by the County Department of Environmental Health Services (DEHS), the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, and the wastewater agency. ' Although community sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, provision for establishment of a Community Service District or County Service Area is included for azeas, such as IVDA Areas A and I, where such a service district does not exist. The approved Citrus Plaza project has been previously determined by the County to be consistent with the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan which includes Area A. And since the proposed project would incorporate all relevant elements of the EVCSP or provision of sewer service to underserved IVDA azeas within unincorporated San Bemazdino County into the County Plans and Codes, no inconsistency exists and the proposed project is deemed consistent with Policy/Action WW-5. Policy/Action LU-9. Because State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility after annexation to manage lands within their adopted Spheres of Influence, the County has a responsibility to coordinate its land use policies with the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursue plans, policies and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standazds ' have been agreed to and jointly adopted. The County has ultimate authority for all land tlse decisions for potential development within all Unincorporated azeas of the County, including those Unincorporated areas which aze placed in a city's Sphere of Influence by the Local Agency Formation Commission. Cooory of Saa &roardiao Laod Use Service Department SCH. Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaINVDA Wattt&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 106 1 5.1 Land Use The County will refer development applications to affected cities for comment, and may ' require development to conform to city development policies and standards whenever appropriate, ' as determined based on the goals and policies of the County General Plan. In certain situations, the County may determine that it is not appropriate for development to conform to city development policies and standazds. For example, the County has determined that the County's regiotal goals ' and policies for plattrting and development in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Area require special attention and that the County should consider making land use decisions which may differ from SOI cities' plans for the same area, where this is appropriate. Accordingly, the County may chose to plan for the provision of urban services for the IVDA Area from public or private sources other than SOI cities, such as a County Service Area or mutual water company. ' In addition, the following policies and standazds that encourage annexation and the use of city standazds within city Spheres of Influence will be considered: ' (a) Adopt joint regulations/plans with cities when mutually acceptable, through the adoption of , overlay districts, specific plans, zoning regulations and standards, infrastructure support plans, and other appropriate mechanisms. (b) Require service connections for projects that are less than one mile away from sewer ' availability. Exceptions (for wastewater treatment plants, individual on-site and multiple , owner septic systems, holding tanks, and experimental systems) may be approved by the County, the appropriate regional water quality control boazd, and the wastewater agency (if the project site is in its jurisdiction and sewer service is available, as defined in the UPC). Service connections under this policy may be provided by connections to a municipal sewer system, the sewer system of another regional agency, or a sewer system to be operated by a County Service District. ' (c) Support city annexatiottsJincorporations of urban designated lands, in general. Consider the , merits of individual proposals based on community interest, the city's ability and commitment to develop and provide services, and consistency with the goals and policies of the County General Plan. , (d) Consider implementation of growth control limits adopted by cities as they apply to spheres, unless such limits conflict with the goals and policies of the County General Plan. (e) Consider Joint Power Agreements (JPAs) with cities to allow for city or County ' development fees to be collected and distributed accordingly. (f) Consider the nature and intensity of development in adjoining incorporated areas and review the City's pre-zoning, General Plan designations and infrastmcture plans when establishing Improvement Levels and land use designations within a Sphere of Influence. , Couory of Sao Bernardino land Use Services Department SCFI. No.199910ti23 Citrus Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-lone 2001 ' Page 107 ' S.1 Land Use ', , (g) Designate Sphere of Influence areas as Planning Areas in the General Plan and utilize special city standazds in these areas to the extent they aze consistent with the County General ' Plan and Development Code. The jointly developed and adopted East Valley Comdor Specific Plan furthers County Policy/Action LU-9. However, following adoption, the City of Redlands has not subsequently implemented those master plan improvements located in the area of the approved Citrus Plaza ' project as identified in the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan. Rather, the City has adopted policies which inhibit the provision of public services to projects consistent with the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan which aze located outside of the City of Redlands' corporate boundaries unless the site ' has been annexed to the City. Since the Citrus Plaza site is located within IVDA Area A ,the lack of water and wastewater services conflicts with the County redevelopment goals. In accordance with County policy, the provision of water and wastewater services by the County is authorized when cities have been unable or unwilling to provide services to projects located in unincorporated azeas. Accordingly as provided in Policy/Action WW-5, subject to the review and approval of the County DEHS and the RWQCB, the County may serve as the wastewater agency for the Citrus Plaza project and may grant an exception for the use of wastewater facilities which would be owned and operated by a County Service District. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy/Action LU-9. ~, Policy/Action LU-10. Because the County wants to minimize land use conflicts between the County and other agencies that have jurisdictional control over lands located within the County, and because the County wants to cooperate and coordinate with adjacent municipalities and other regional agencies to address regional problems such as traffic congestion, air pollution, water quality, waste management and job/housing imbalance, the following policies/actions shall be implemented: ' (a) Review the master plans and/or general plans of affected agencies and consider the provisions of those plans in the implementation of the County General Plan. The County may consider and chose not to include city general plan policies for SOI areas that are within unincorporated azeas within the IVDA, where necessary, to be consistent with the County ' and other agency plans for regional planning and development in the IVDA Area. (b) Solicit comments from the military and other Federal and State agencies that control land in the County on projects which are proposed neaz their facilities, as described in sub-policy (d) below. ' (c) Develop a procedure to assure that the County, the incorporated cities, and the various ' special districts refer major planning and land use proposals to all affected jurisdictions for review, comment and recommendation. 1 Couoty orSao Bertrerdieo l.aod Ux Services Depanmeet SCH. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Waver & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 108 ~.I Land Use (d) Establish a "Review Area" around each state, military, or other Federal jurisdiction, and ' review development proposals or proposed General Plan amendments and revisions within , the established Review Area with the appropriate agency. (e) Work with State and Federal land management agencies to eliminate conflicts between , public and private lands by reducing the checkerboard pattern ofpublic/private ownership. (f) Work with State and Federal land management agencies to ensure that large blocks of public , land aze not further subdivided or classified as Government Small Tracts, and to ensure that disposal of public lands shall be based on definite proposals for development consistent with , the County General Plan. (g) Work with State and Federal land management agencies to facilitate public/private land , exchange to eliminate the need to cross public lands to reach privately owned lands. Such lands shall, when exchanged, be subject to all the policies and standards of the "Resource Conservation" (RC) District. However, if such land is determined by the County TransportationlFlood Control Department or by FEMA to be subject to severe flooding, it shall be subject to the policies and standards of the "Floodway" (FW) District. A General , Plan Amendment is required to determine the appropriate land use designation for exchanged lands. (h) Work with State and Federal land management agencies in the designation and protection of wilderness and restricted natural areas in the approval and management of recreation events and sites. (i) Work with Indian tribes and State and Federal agencies in the development of plans for land within their jurisdictions. (j) Permit development adjacent to prisons and similar detention facilities only when compatible with the security needs of the facility and public safety is assured, and: i) Work closely with State and local officials responsible for admitlistering these facilities when considering land use proposals on adjacent lands. ii) Discourage high-density residential uses on adjacent or nearby parcels. , (k) Work with cities within the San Bernardino County to reach consensus on regional planning and growth management issues utilizing joint forums and/or regional agencies such as , SANBAG, as appropriate. Coaory of Sao Bemardioo Land Usc Services Departmeos SCH. Na 1999101 V3 Cimu Plana Regional MalVf VDA W ater & Sewcr Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 , Page 109 ' S.I Land Use (I) Continue working towazd a consensus on regional planning and growth management issues with surrounding counties through SANBAG, SCAG, MDAQMD, and SCAQMD. ' (m) Continue to work on specific projects to improve traffic flow, such as the Foothill Freeway (State Highway 30/I-210) extension project. The environmental documentation and review process has afforded the City of Redlands and ' affected agencies an opportunity to examine and comment on the potential physical environmental effects of the Citrus Plaza Project and the provision of water supply and wastewater treatment ¢9 facilities for IVDA Areas A and I. The land use issues were addressed and resolved with regazd to Couaq I, , Citrus Plaza project consistency with the Regional Commercial land use designation assigned to the ~am~m Change azea of the approved C1truS Plaza Project through the adoption of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. That is, by amending the existing plans and codes through the adoption of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, by definition, any area specific inconsistency was subsequently resolved. And since both the approved Citrus Plaza Project and the proposed project would incorporate all y.y relevant elements and land use designations of the EVCSP into the County Plans and Codes and land use and zoning maps, no inconsistency exists. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy/Action LU-10. The projects proposed plan amendments would implement County General Plan ' amendments and associated changes to the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and County ', Development Code to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated County IVDA Areas A and increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to IVDA Areas j A and I consistent with redevelopment goals for the IVDA Area. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a change in land use, substantive increase or change in the geographical azea included as the proposed project, or substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable within ' Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline routes. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in any impacts to land use beyond those levels which have been previously disclosed in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan EIR or the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR, and are thus concluded to be less than significant. ' Consistency with Existing Regional Public Policies In response to the NOP prepazed for the proposed project, SCAG indicated several policies of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan that may be applicable to the proposed project. Conformance with those policies relevant to the proposed ' project (based on scope of policy and components of the project) is presented in Table 5.1-2. Couory of Sso Bernardino Laod Use Services Departmwt SCFL Na 1999101173 Cirrus Plena Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -Jmc 2001 ' Page 110 5.1 Land Use , 5.13.2 Infrastructure Facilities ' The following environmental impact analysis applies to all project sewer and water options. , The project includes the installation of water lines, water reservoirs and sewer lines in the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area that aze currently unnerved. The project may also include the future construction of water and/or wastewater treatment facilities within IVDA Area A, not located on the Citrus Plaza site. Construction of these facilities would require the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from the County of San Belnazdino. Most of the proposed utility ¢13 infiastructure (except the reservoirs and any treatment facilities) would be located underground and ga3 , within existing roadway and utility rights-of--way. However, limited agricultural areas in IVDA Area A or other areas of undeveloped open space in IVDA Areas A and I may be affected by the ' project. 1 i t 1 Couory ofnao Bemardmo l.aod Use Semces Depanmeot SCA. Na 1999101173 , Citns Playa Regional A1aIV1 VDA Water & Sewer services Plan Pinal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page I11 ' ' S.1 Land Use Table 5.1-2 - ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY W ITH SCAG RCPG POLICIES Relevant Policy Analysis of Project Consistency Growth Management Chapter (GMC) of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide Policies Related to Growth Forecasts ' 3.01 The population, housing, and jobs SCAG projections for RSA 29 (dated December 14, 1999) were used in forecazts, which are adopted by Section 5.11 (Socioeconomics) ofthis Subsequent EIR and are consistent SCAG's Regional Council and that with San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) Subregion and reflect local plans and policies, Unincorporated SANBAG forecazts (April 1998). shall be used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. ~, , 3.03 The timing, financing, and location The provision of water and wastewater service to IVDA Areas A and 1 of public facilities, utility systems, would not extend beyond projected demands of those areas. In addition, and transportation systems shall be land use designations and development standards from the EVCSP are used by SCAG to implement the incorporated into the proposed General Plan and Development Code region's growth policies. amendments. GMC Policies Related to the RCPG Goal to Improve the Regional Standard o(Living ', ' 3.04 Encourage local jurisdictions' The proposed General Plan and Development Code amendments would efforts to achieve a balance incorporate the existing Land Use/Growth Management policy for the East between the types ofjobs they seek Valley Corridor to maximize employment opportunities in a region which to attract and housing prices. has a significant imbalance of housing versus employment opportunities. Development of the Citrus Plaza site would include a wide variety of commercial, restaurant, and entertainment uses. These uses would provide for a variety of workforce types that could be accommodated by the existing housing availability, az further detailed in Section 5.11, Socioeconomics. 3.05 Encourage patterns of urban The proposed General Plan and Development Code amendments would development and land use which increase [he options for [he provision of water and wastewater service to reduce costs on inftazwcture the IVDA area and incorporate existing policies for the provision of construction and make better use of community services and facilities to the East Valley Corridor. This is existing facilities. consistent with the IVDA purpose of promoting economic development and providing services to the unincorporated I V DA area that are curtently unnerved or underserved. The oprions presented would also allow the County to choose the most cost-effective and timely manner to provide water and wastewater service to these underserved areas. 3.08 Encourage subregions to define an See above. economic strategy to maintain the economic vitality of the subregion, including the development and use of marketing programs, and other ' economic incentives, which support attainment of subregional goals and policies. 3.09 Support local jurisdictions' efforts See above. to minimize the cost of infraswcture and public service Couory of Sao Bcroardioo Laod Usr Services Departmrot SCH. No. 19991011]3 Citrus Plaza Rcgional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 1 l2 5.1 Land Use Table 5.1-2 (Continued) ' ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SCAG RCPG POLICIES Relevant Policy Analysis of Project Consistency delivery, and efforts to seek new sources of funding for development and the provision of services. ' 3.10 Support local jurisdictions' actions See above. to minimize red tape and expedite the permitting process to maintain ' economic vitality and competitiveness. GMC Policies Related to tfie RCPG Goal to Improve the Regional Quality of Life , 3.11 Support provisions and incentives Refer to discussion under Policy 3.04. created by local jurisdictions to attract housing growth in job rich subregions and job growth in housing rich subregions. 3.12 £ncourage existing or proposed The General Plan and Development Code amendments incorporate , local jurisdictions' programs aimed policies and design guidelines to provide for alternative transportation at designing land uses which modes and to reduce vehicle trips. The provision of water and wastewater encourage the use of transit and service will allow for the development of I VDA Areas A and 1, consistent ' thus reduce the need for roadway with the County's regional goals for the planning and development in this expansion, reduce the number of unincorporated redevelopment area. As stated in Section 5.4, auto trips and vehicle miles Tlansportation/Circulation, proposed mitigation measures for Citrus Plaza traveled, and create opportunities include a TDM program to reduce vehicle trips. In addition, bus service for residents to walk and bike. would be provided to the project site. As referenced m the 1995 Final E[R prepared For Citrus Plaza (September 1995), implementation of some of the roadway improvements would reduce some existing road widths in order to avoid excessive road widening. In addition, the development of shopping and service opportunities on the Citrus Plaza site would reduce the need for employees to leave the site during the day. 3.13 Encourage local jurisdictions' See above. plans that maximize the use of existing urbanized areas accessible , to transit through infill and redevelopment. 3.14 Support local plans to increase See above. density of future development located at strategic points along the regional commuter rail, transit and aMivity centers. , 3.15 Support local jurisdictions See above. strategies to establish mixed-use , clusters and other transit-oriented developments azound transit stations and along transit corridors. Connty of Sao tkraardioo Laod lise Services Department SCH. Na.1999101 V3 CimtS Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Fv~al Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 113 5.1 Land Use Table 5.1-2 (Continued) ' ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY W ITH SCAG RCPG POLICIES Relevant Policy Analysis of Project Consistency 3.16 Encourage development in and See above. -- around activity centers, transportation corridors, underutilized infraswcture systems, and areas needing recycling and redevelopment. 3.17 Support and encourage settlement Although residential uses are not permitted uses, development of the Ciws patterns which contain a range of Plan site would include a wide variety of commercial, restaurant, and ' urban densities. entertainment uses. III 3.18 Encourage planned development in Environmental impact reports for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan, the East _ locations least likely to cause Valley Corridor Specific Plan, Citrus Plaza project, and this Final in~"~ environmental impact. Subsequent EIR include a detailed analysis and mitigation measures to Change address the above-referenced issues relevant to the project site. In addition, the General Plan and Development Code amendments incorporate policies and Design Guidelines that address these issues. As referenced in the haft SEIR, the proposed project would result in significant cumulative impact to agricultural resources. The preservation of agriculnlrel activities as an interim use is incorporated in the proposed General Plan amendments. 3:20 Support the protection of vital See above. resources such as wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, woodlands, production lands, and land containing unique and endangered plants and animals. ' 3? 1 Encourage the implementation of See above. measures aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. 3:22 Discourage development, or See above. encourage the use of special design requirements, in areas with steep slopes, high fue, flood, and seismic hazards. 3?3 Encourage mitigaion measures See above. thaz reduce noise in certain locations, measures aimed az preservation of biological and ecological resources, measures thaz would reduce exposure to seismic ' hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans. Couory of Sao Beroardioo Laod Use &rvices Department SCR No.1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subxquent E1R -June 2001 Page 114 5.1 Land Use Table 5.1-2 (Continued) ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SCAG RCPG POLICIES Relevant Policy Analysis of Project Consistency GMC Policies Related to the RCPG Goal to Provide Social, Political, and Cultural Equity 3.25 Encourage the efforts of local The proposed General Plan amendment would incorporate policies to jurisdictions, employers, and maximize employment opportunities. The proposed project would include service agencies to provide a wide variety of employment opportunities to serve an area identified as adequate training and retraining of job-poor. workers, and prepare the labor force to meet the challenges of the regional economy. 3.26 Encourage employment See above. , development in job-poor localities through support of labor force retraining programs and other economic development measures. Core Regional Transportation Plan Policies 4.01 Transportation investments shall be Regional Performance Indicators are objectives that facilitate mobility, , based on SCAG's adopted accessibility, environment, reliability, safety, livable commwities, equity, Regional Performance Indicators. and cost-effectiveness. Individual projects are evaluated for conformance with these objectives by the local agency. The Congestion Management Plan (administered by SanBAG) incorporates these goals for the CMP ' network. These goals are also supported by the proposed General Plan and Development Code Amendments which incorporate East Valley Corridor policies and design guidelines for transportation. As further described in Section 5.4, Transportation(Circutation, the proposed Citrus Plaza site is consistent with the CMP. in addition, the roadway improvements and mitigation recommended for the Ciws Plaza site have been designed to facilitate access, improve circulation, promote overall safety, and maintain an LOS C on study area highways and intersections. Subsequent development of Area A would also be subject to SanBAG CMP requirements and review for conformance with the County's LOS C criteria. 4.02 Transportation investments shall As further described m Section 5.4, Transportation/Circulation, mitigation mitigate environmental impacts to measures proposed for the infrastructure facilities and Citrus Plaza site an acceptable level. would reduce all project and cumulative traffic impacts below a level of significance. However cumulative traffic impacts upon the I-10 Freeway will continue to be significant with or without the proposed project. 4.04 Transportation Control Measures This policy is supported by the proposed Genernl Plan Amendments, shall be a priority. which include policies to reduce vehicle trips and provide opportunities for alternative travel modes, and the Development Code Amendments which provide special consideration for public trnnsi[, pedestrian access, and recreational trails. Mitigation proposed for the Citrus Plaza site includes a transportation demand management (TDM) program as further described in Section 5.4, Transportation/C'vculation. ' r County of Sao Bernardino l.aod Uu Services Department SCN. Na 19991011Z7 Ciws Plaza Regional MalUl VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Sutrsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 115 ' ' S.1 Land Use Table 5.1-2 (Continued) ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SCAG RCPG POLICIES Relevant Policy Analysis of Project Consistency Air Quality Chapter 5.07 Determine specific progJaDts and As stated under Policy 4.04, this policy is supported by the proposed associated actions needed (e.g., General Plan Amendments, which include policies to reduce vehicle trips indirect source rules, enhanced use and provide opportunities for alternative travel modes, and the of telecommunications, provision Development Code Amendments, which provide special consideration for of community-based shuttle public transit, pedestrian access, and recreational trails. Mitigation services, provision of demand proposed for the Citrus Plana site includes a transportation demand management based programs, or management (TDM) program as further described in Section 5.4, vehicle-miles-traveled/emission Transportation/Circulation. In addition, [he development of shopping and fees) so that options to command service opportunities on the Citrus Plana site would reduce the need for and control regulations can be employees to leave the site during the day. Additional emission reduction assessed. strategies are presented in Section 5.5, An Quality. Open Space Chapter 9.04 Maintain open space for adequate As stated under Policy 3.23, environmental impact reports for the IVDA protection of lives and properties Redevelopment Plan, the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, Citrus Plaza against natural and man-made project, and this Final Subsequent EIR have been prepared and include a moet~ hazards. detailed analysis of natural and man-made hazards. These documents also provide mitigation measures to reduce any identified harards to an acceptable level. In addition, the General Plan and Development Code amendments incorporate policies and Design Guidelines that address these issues. 9.05 Minimize potentially hazardous See above. developments in hillsides; canyons; areas susceptible to flooding, earthquakes, wildftre and other , known hazards; and areas with limited access for erne aency equipment. 9.07 Maintain adequate viable resource As referenced previously, development of the proposed project would production lands, particularly lands result insignificant cumulative impact on agricultural resources. The devoted to commercial agriculture preservation of agricultural activities as an interim use is incorporated in and mining operations. the proposed General Plan amendments. Water Quality Chapter 11.08 Ensure wastewater treatment The option of providing a local wastewater treatment plant would be 1 agency facility planning and consistent with the IVDA purpose of promoting economic development facility development be consistent and providing services to the unincorporated IVDA area. The provision of with population projection the wastewater treatment plant would not extend beyond projected contained in the RCPG, while demands of those areas. As referenced in the proposed General Plan taking into account the need to Amendment, such a facility would be sited and operated in conjunction build wastewater treatment with the local agency providing service to the project, DEHS, and the facilities in cost-effective RWQCB to ensure public safety and environmental protection. N increments of capacity, build well enough in advance to reliably meet unanticipated service and storm Connty of Sao 8eroardino Laod Use Services Depanmcot SCH. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jmre 2001 Page l l6 5.1 Land Use , Table 5.1-2 (Continued) ' ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SCAG RCPG POL?C1ES Relevant Policy Analysis of Project Consistency water demands, and provide standby capacity for public safety and environmental protection objectives. Source: PCR Services Corporation, June 1000. Land Use Compatibility ' All potential land use impacts associated with the Citrus Plaza project were adequately addressed in the previously certified Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall with the exception County of potential issues related to the proposed changes to the provision of water supply and wastewater In;oa,~ ' treatment and the introduction of new on-site facilities (i.e., water supply facilities and wastewater o'a"9e treatment facilities) which were not evaluated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. ` Therefore, further analysis of those uses would be required to assess the potential impact of those facilities upon adjoining land uses. Water Supply Facilities Water facilities to serve Area A include a supply source and water transmission lines ,water storage reservoirs, as well as water treatment and pumping facilities. Seven options have been identified for the provision of water service to Area A. The seven options aze identified as follows: (1) development of local wells (Options 1 and 2); (Z) purchasing water from IVDA's airport water a-s facilities (Options 3 and 4); (3) purchasing water from the City of San Bemazdino (Options 5 and 6); and (4) purchasing water from the City of Riverside (Option 7). It is these seven options that replace 9-13 the connection to the City of Redlands system described in the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall e-z2 Final EIR and the on-site (Citrus Plaza) system proposed in the Citrus Plaza Draft Supplemental t EIR. A description of the seven currently proposed water options is presented in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Subsequent EIR. The local collection system is the same for all seven of the water options. The proposed water supply facilities would be built incrementally as development occurs in Area A. Information regazding the water treatment plant, the on-site reservoir and the pump station for buildout of Area A is presented in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Subsequent EIR. Adjacent to the wells, in the northeast comer of Area A is an area set aside for future reservoirs and related support facilities such as a future pump station and water treatment facility for buildout of Area A. In addition, the operation of water supply facilities within Area A would require the issuance of a Conditional Use Pem3it (CUP) by the County of San Couory ofSau Brroardioo Laod Use Services Departmetrt SCH. Na 1999101123 ' Citrus Plana Re Tonal MaIVIVDA Water& Sewer Services Plan B Final Subsequent EIR -lace 2001 Page 117 ' S.1 Land Use Bemazdino. Under all seven water Options, Area I would receive its water supply from local on-site 8.5 wells (process water) and from the City of San Bemazdino potable water distribution system, as 9-13 described in the Project Description. As such, no local collection system within Area I is required. The construction and subsequent operation of water supply facilities will introduce a new land use and, therefore, has the potential to create potential land use conflicts affecting other off-site areas. However, operational standards aze provided in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan which as dictate specific performance requirements for all land uses and structures within the East Valley y Is Corridor planning azea. Of these standazds, those that most directly apply to the proposed water _ production, treatment, and storage facility are noise, odors, toxic gases, glaze, and hazardous materials. Accordingly, potential impacts related to air quality, noise, human health and aesthetics are addressed under corresponding topical sections in this Subsequent EIR. Based on the distance of the proposed water supply facilities from other off-site uses and screening by both a perimeter wall and intervening structures, the water supply facilities would not result in the creation of land use conflicts with any off-site uses. Additionally, since the proposed a-s water delivery system would not result in an increase in the amount of square footage of commercial development presently authorized upon the approved Citrus Plaza Project site and since the g73 proposed improvements aze cleazly authorized under the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, no new land use impacts not previously discussed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR would result from the implementation of this system. Project impacts aze therefore concluded to be less than significant. Wastewater Treatment Facilities County InilialeC ~, Change Three options have been identified for the delivery of sewer service to Area A. The three options are identified as follows: (1) sewer to City of San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2, (2) sewer to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI),or (3) sewer to a local wastewater treatment plant within Area A. Complementing these systems is a local sewer collection system. It is these three options that replace the connection to the City of Redlands system described in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and the on-site (Citrus Plaza) system proposed in the Citrus Plaza Draft Supplemental EIR. A description of the three currently proposed sewer options is presented in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Subsequent EIR. As proposed, a wastewater treatment plant would be constructed in Area A along California Street north of San Bernazdino Avenue. These facilities would be designed and sized to collect and 9-13 treat wastewater generated only by uses from Area A. Wastewater, receiving both tertiary treatment, demineralization and denitrification (if required), would be used for on-site irrigation to the maximum extent possible. The wastewater treatment plant will be designed in a manner that will allow the facility to accept and treat 100% of the sewage generated within Area A. The treated effluent will be discharged to the Santa Ana River and/or used on-site for landscape irrigation. As Cooery of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Depanmmt SCFL No.1999101173 Citnu Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Winer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 118 5.1 Land Use with the water supply facilities, the construction and operation of the proposed wastewater treatment ' facilities will result in the introduction of a new land use not addressed in the_ 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. As required under the project's proposed Plan Amendments, the 9_I3 wastewater treatment facilities must comply with the performance standards established therein. Of these standards, those that most duectly apply to the proposed wastewater treatment facility aze noise, odors, toxic gases, glaze, and hazardous materials. Accordingly, potential air quality, noise, human health and aesthetic impacts are addressed under corresponding topical sections in this Subsequent EIR. The operation of both the water and wastewater facilities will necessitate the on-site storage of hazardous wastes. Although the EVCSP EIR concluded that- land use impacts would be significant based upon the introduction of hazardous materials into the East Valley Corridor azea, that conclusion was based not upon the mere presence of those materials, but upon the potential 9-13 adverse effects that those materials may have upon adjoining residential receptors. However, since residential development is neither authorized within the Regional Commercial District nor allowable in adjoining azeas, the introduction of additional buffer areas designed to minimize potential land ' use conflicts between residential and non-residential development aze deemed unwarranted and aze not directly applicable to the proposed project. Therefore, no significant impacts would be expected to occur. , All uses of the Revised Citrus Plaza Project aze required to comply with the applicable provisions of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, unless otherwise amended through formal action by the County. Therefore, based on permitted land uses, no prohibitions now exist precluding the development and subsequent operation of the proposed water supply and wastewater treatment facilities. The project revisions aze intended to increase the options for the provision of water and 9.13 wastewater services to IVDA Areas A and I. These project design revisions would not result in a substantive increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable to aesthetic resources within Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline routes. Accordingly, implementation of the revised project will not result in new or substantially worse impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. Project impacts aze therefore concluded to be less than significant. 5.133 Citrus Plaza Site Summary Of Previous Environmental Analysis The 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall stated that based upon the prior environmental documentation and review, the independent finding of the County was that the issues to be addressed by the EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall shall include: (1) the potential impacts resulting from the conversion of the Citrus Plaza project site from an agricultural to an Couoty orSso Bernard~oo Land Uu Services Dcpartmeor SCR Na 1999101113 Citrus Plea Regional MaIVI VDA Wuer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subxquenr EIR-June 2001 Page 119 ' S.1 Land Use 1 urban use and (2) an examination of the application of existing and proposed public policies to both the Citrus Plaza project and the Citrus Plaza project site as an aid in determining the Citrus Plaza ~^h - InitialeG project's potential consistency with applicable public policy. cna^ge Loss of Agricultural Land The impact of the cumulative loss of agricultural lands was addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, concluding that the implementation of the plans and policies outlined eliminates existing prime agricultural areas producing local, regional and cumulative impacts on agriculture. Although the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan assigned an agricultural preserve status to other existing agricultural areas, it designated the Citrus Plaza project site for anon-agricultural land use (regional commercial center). Although the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR indicated that there would be a significant adverse impact due to the loss of agricultural land, this would no longer occur since the Citrus Plaza site is no longer _ used for agricultural purposes due to the death and subsequent removal of Citrus trees previously located on-site. The proposed project would therefore not result in any significant impacts to agricultural resources. N In the context of existing uses, the current agricultural operations in Area A (i.e., citrus groves and truck gazdening to the west and north) will not be directly impacted by the proposed Citrus Plaza project. The continuing operation of those uses is consistent with the planning policy to maintain agriculture as an interim land use. The Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan concluded that the cumulative loss of agricultural resources constitutes a significant unavoidable adverse impact. Since the adoption of ' the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan produced the impetus for this area-wide transition from an ii agricultural to an urban center and since on-site activities will not produce physical changes upon off-site pazcels, any Citrus Plaza effects upon azea-wide agricultural uses will not result in a significant impact upon those off-site uses. Consistencv of Plans and Policies Based on prior environmental documentation and the discussions within the 1995 Final EIR 1 for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, the project site designated land uses and mitigation measures are consistent with the County's and Cities General Plan policies and the South Coast Air Quality ' Management Plan. Upon adopting the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, the Boazd of Supervisors of the County of San Bemazdino made the finding that the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan was consistent with the San Bemazdino County General Plan 8 On September 5, 1989, the City Council e CiryofRedlands, OrdrnanceNo. 335/, August 7, 1989. County of San Berardino Laod Use Services Department SCR Na 1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water @ Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jwie 2001 ' Page 120 5.1 Land Use , of the City of Redlands made a subsequent finding that the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan was ' consistent with the City of Redlands General Plan.9 As discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza project, the actual floor azea ratio (FAR) for the project, determined by dividing the total project size in square feet by the total lot azea in squaze feet, is approximately 034:1. This FAR is well within the limits permitted by the regional , mall designation of 0.4 as established by the East Valley Corridor Specific P1an.10 Further, although a number of project specific design standards for the project as proposed differ from the standazds contained in the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan, the Counry's adopted Plarmed Development process established a formal procedure for the consideration of such design variations. Accordingly, the 1995 Final EIR for Citrus Plaza states that the proposed Citrus Plaza project conforms with the existing public policies applicable to the project site. Land Use Comnatibiliri ' The issue of land use compatibility was thoroughly addressed in the Environmental Impact Report for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. As a result of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan planning process, the project was formally designated for Regional Commercial use. ~^°^n IniaaleE Development of a regional commercial use on the Citrus Plaza project site would be consistent with cbanya the land use policies and development standazds outlined in both the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and the General Plans of the County of San Bernardino and the City of Redlands. The Draft EIR for Citrus Plaza concluded that if there is proper adherence to the regulations and development standazds contained in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, the project will, by definition, be compatible with both the adopted Specific Plan and adjoining land uses. Revised Project Impacts The Citrus Plaza project site is an approximately 125-acre master-planned commercial project, which is proposed by the Applicant as a regional commercial center that includes restaurants and entertairunent uses in addition to traditional retail uses. At full buildout, the Citrus Plaza project , as proposed by the Applicant, would include approximately 1.85 million square feet, constructed in two phases. In January of 1996, the County certified a Final Envirorunental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 94082084) for the Citrus Plaza project, and approved a Concept Plan and Prelinilnary Development Plan for the entire site, a Final Development Plan for Phase 1 (approximately 49 acres), and a commercial parcel map for the project site. These January 1996 approvals remain in effect for the Citrus Plaza project, which is the subject of an implementing development agreement. ' ° City of Redlands, Ordinance No. 2086, September 5, 1989,p.1. ~0 Section EV4.0240(a)(3). C°uaty °[San Bernardino Land Ux Servces Department SCR Na 1999101173 ' Citrus Plana Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 121 , ' S.1 Land Use As approved in January 1996, the Citrus Plaza project is required to obtain water and sewer ~""n services from the City of Redlands. The primary revision proposed for the project, by the Applicant, 1ni°a'etl - cnxga is to provide these services by an alternative method. The Applicant also proposes that a new development agreement be considered with the revised project as well. Citrus Plaza remains a two phase development with Phase 1 still proposed as a Power Center located within the southerly portion of the project site. Phase 2 development is proposed to be a Regional Mall located north of the Power Center. The Applicant, at this time, seeks to incorporate minor revisions to the approved Preliminary and Final Development Plans for the project. At this time, two development scenarios are under consideration as a means of providing a specified degree of flexibility in the implementation of the Citrus Plaza project. Furthermore, within each of the two scenarios a portion of the Phase 1 site is reconfigured with an altemate design. The two development scenarios are referenced. as Scenarios 1 and 2, while the altemate designs are referenced as Scenarios lA and ZA. It is these development scenarios that aze addressed in the Project EIR portion of this Subsequent EIR. The revised Phase 1 project includes approximately SOQ000 square feet of development, while the project at buildout contains approximately 1.85 million square feet of development. The site acreage and amount of development proposed as part of the revised Phase I project would be equal to or less than what was approved by the County in January 1996. Should the Phase 1 project utilize a smaller portion of the Citrus Plaza site, and/or a lesser amount of development, the Phase 2 project would be expanded to the maximum site acreage and square footage previously approved by the County. In addition, the revised Phase 1 project would include the same or fewer number of drive-thru facilities, gas stations and a single theater in relation to that set forth in the Final Development Plan approved by the County in January, 1996. A diagram of the site plan for each of the two development scenazios is provided in Figures 3-12 and 3-13. While minor revisions to the on-site circulation system aze proposed, overall site access (i.e., driveway locations from perimeter streets) remains the same in both scenarios and substantially conforms to that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR. The Citrus Plaza Phase 1 water treatment facilities are a project option for meeting fire flow and water pressure requirements orily. However, the preferred method for meeting these requirements would be via the extension of pipelines to the project site. Therefore, the Citrus Plaza ~ e-s Phase 1 water treatment facilities would only be developed if project water pipelines would not feasibly meet fire flow and water pressure requirements. All potential land use impacts associated with the project were adequately addressed in the previously certified 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Project with the exception of potential ' issues related to the proposed changes to the provision of water supply and wastewater treatment. As such, given the minor nature of the proposed revisions to the Citrus Plaza project, potential land use impacts are concluded to be less than significant. r B.s (deleted) 9-13 (deleed) Couory of Sao Bernardino Laud l;u Services Depanmeot SCFL No. 1999101123 Cims Plaza Regional MalU1VDA Water & Sewcr Services Plen Final Subsequent EIR -Jmie 2001 Page 122 S.i Land Use , Although the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR indicated that there would be a significant adverse e 3 impact due to the loss of agricultural land, this would no longer occur since the Citrus Plaza site is no longer used for agricultural purposes due to the death and subsequent removal of Citrus trees 9-s t previously located on-site. The proposed project would therefore not result in any significant impacts to agricultural resources. , 5.1.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative impacts on land use identified in the final Environmental Impact Report for East Valley Corridor Specific Plan pertain to the loss of prime agricultural land and the potential usage, production and storage of hazardous materials. However, the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall concluded that based upon the proposed on-site land uses, the lack of proximity of residential uses, the site's physical separation from uses that may involve the usage, production and storage of hazardous materials and the supposition that all future uses that may occur within the East Valley Corridor azea will be subject to those performance standards outlined in the East Valley Corridor Plan (and subsequently, incorporated into the project's proposed Plan Amendments), this Counq ia~sa~ee latter issue is judged not to be significant relative to the proposed project on a cumulative basis. Change Both project development and cumulative development activities anticipated in the East Valley Corridor area will result in the conversion of existing agricultural operations to non-farm related uses, thereby diminishing the regional inventory of lands devoted to agricultural productivity. As discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, from a project specific perspective, the incremental reduction of land area allocated to farm use would not be significant. However the Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan concluded that the cumulative loss of agricultural resources constitutes a sigtlificant unavoidable adverse impact and the incremental reduction of that regional resource through site-specific development activities would contribute to that declared environmental effect. Therefore, the cumulative effects attributable to all azea wide development activities on the loss of agricultural land would be deemed to be significant. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and aze more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the ' related projects utilized in the 1945 Citrus Plaza Final EIR aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. 't'his results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur ' Couory ofSao Beruardioo Laod Use Services Departmcot SCH. Na 1999101123 Cious Plaza Regional J.1aIVI VDA Water & Scwer Services Plan Fvial Subsequem EIR -June 20(11 Page 123 5.1 Land Use ' (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). It ca,~h was further concluded that compliance with the land use and performance standazds contained in the '~a~ East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (and subsequently incorporated into the project's proposed Plan Amendments) will ensure that all future land uses within the East Valley Corridor will be constructed and operated in a manner as to avoid the creation of land use conflicts. Cumulative impacts aze therefore concluded to be less than significant. 5.1.5 MITIGATION MEASURES Proposed Plan Amendments As no significant impacts to land use are expected to occur as a result of implementation of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures aze required. County ' Infrastructure Facilities Project 1ni°~d Change As no significant impacts to land use are expected to occur as a result of the implementation ' of any water and sewer option, no mitigation measures are required. Citrus Plaza Project The mitigation measure included in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR which ' addressed maintaining existing agricultural uses pending the commencement of construction operations for Phase 2 is no longer applicable since no agricultural uses remain on the Citrus Plaza 9s site. 5.1.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The loss of existing agricultural resources within the East Valley Corridor azea resulting from the implementation of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan is still considered a cumulatively 8.3 significant unavoidable adverse land use impact. Project impacts on all other land use issues aze less than significant. 9-5 County of Sao Beroardioo Laod Uae Services Department SCR Na 1999101173 Ciotts Plaza Regional Ma1Vl VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 124 ' S.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.2 EARTH RESOURCES 5.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.2.1.1 Introduction San Bernardino County is subject to a variety of geologic hazards, especially in the heavily populated Valley azea, exposing residents and development to varying degrees of risk. These t include: seismic activity (earthquake-induced phenomena such as fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, seismically generated subsidence, seiche, dam inundation, landslide/mudslide (or 1 mudflow), non-seismic subsidence, erosion and volcanic activity. All of the above affect property and existing or potential uses. Other geologic hazards include collapsible, expansive and sulfate- reactive soils. These hazazds, however, aze controlled under current building and safety practices." 5.2.1.2 Physical Environment 5.2.1.2.1 .Infrastructure Facilities The project azea is located along the northern mazgin of what is referred to as the Peninsulaz Ranges Geomorphic Province of Southern California. The Peninsulaz Range, which extends ' southwazd from the Transverse Range through Baja California, is characterized by Mesozoic-age intrusive rock masses flazlked by volcanic, metasedimentazy and sedimentary rock. ' Geologic Setting a-zs San Bemazdino Valley region is a broad, gently sloping lowland that flanks the southwest mazgin of the San Bernazdino Mountains. The lowland is underlain by alluvial sediments eroded from bedrock in the adjacent uplands and washed by rivers and steams into the valley region, where the sediment has accumulated in layers of gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Sediment accumulation has continued for several million years, during which time anever-thickening blanket of sediment gradually has buried the original hill-and-valley topography of the San Bernardino Valley; Perris 1 Hill and the Shandin Hills aze vestiges of that original topography that have not yet been buried by ' '~ San Bernardino County Genera! Plan, San Bernardino County Public Services Group, Land Use Services Department, p. I/-A1-1, Adopted July 1989, Revised May 1999. County o1Saa Bernardino Laad Uu Servicts Department SCFL No.1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequern EIR-]arts 2001 Page 125 5 ? Earth Resources ' the encroaching sediment. Deeper parts of the sedimentary fill are older and aze well consolidated; a-zs , near-surface sediments are younger and are only slightly consolidated. The relatively loose neaz- surface sediments potentially are susceptible to earthquake-induced liquefaction. , Neaz-surface alluvial sediments of the San Bemazdino Valley region accumulated in two depositional regimes: (1) alluvial fans that extend downslope from the mouths of mountain canyons and (2) river flood plains of the Santa Ana River and Cajon and Lytle Creeks. Although the alluvial-fan deposits tend to be coarser grained and more poorly sorted than the flood-plain deposits, both alluvial suite show considerable range in particle size from place to place in the San Bernardino Valley. Near the mountain front, the deposits consist of san-bearing cobble and boulder gravel interstratified with layers of sand and gravely sand. Downstream from the mountain front, the ' gravelly sediment gradually becomes finer grained. Where the alluvial-fan and flood-plain regimes meet in the vicinity of metropolitan San Bernardino, sand and silt ultimately predominate over subordinate layers of clay and pebbly gravel , Within both the alluvial-fan and flood-plain regimes, the latest cycle of river and stream development in many areas has led to channel downcutting that has left older parts of the sedimentary blanket standing above the level of the modem channels. Very young loose sediment is accumulating in the bottoms of the incised channels, while the higher standing sediments are ' inactive, are firmer and more compacted, and are developing pedogenic-soil profiles. This pattern of downcutting and backfilling has occurred several times in the long history of the alluviated , lowland, leading to a complex pattern of surficial-geologic unit -each representing a different depositional age and (or) a different sediment type. Faults The San Bemazdino Valley region is the site of numerous faults, some of which aze capable , of generating large earthquakes. The major faults are strike-slip structures of the San Andreas family -faults that generate earthquakes when blocks on either side of the fault plan slide right- laterally past each other. These include the San Jacinto fault and the modem trace of the San Andreas fault. Many of the smaller faults aze normal or reverse dip-slip faults that have evolved because of complications within the San Andreas fault system (Matti and others, 1985). Dip-slip faults generate earthquakes when blocks on either side of the fault plane slide up or down relative to each other. Reverse dip-slip faults include the Cucamonga fault along the base of the southeastern San Gabriel Mountains (Morton and Matti, 1987; Matti and others, 1982) and the San Gorgonio Pass fault zone (Matti and others, 1985). Normal dip-slip faults include the Grafton Hills fault complex (Matti and others, 1985) and other normal faults observed or inferred to occur in and around the San Bernardino Valley and San Bernardino Mountains (Matti and others, 1985; Weldon, 1985). There are no known active faults in the Donut Hole. Couary of Sao Beroudioo Laad Use Services Department SCIi Na 1999101121 Civus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 126 i ' S? Eanh Resources ' $OIIS 8-26 The soils of the Donut Hole area aze generally classified as Hanford Series sandy loam. This ' nearly level soil is on valley floors and tce slopes of alluvial fans. Also included are small azeas of Greenfield sandy loam and small scattered patches of soils that are loamy sand below depths of 40 :, inches. Runoff is slow and the hazard of erosion is slight if the soil is left unprotected. This soil is used for irrigated crops such as citrus and vegetable crops small grains and pasture. Representative profile of Hanford sandy loam, about 100 feet south of Palmetta Avenue and about one-fourth mile west of Nevada Avenue, NWI/4NE]/4SE1/4 sec. 17, T. I S., R.3.W.; San Bernardino base line and meridian: • A 0 to 12 inches, pale-brown, sandy loam, brown when moist; massive; slightly hard, friable, non-sticky and non-plastic; many very fine and fine roots; many very fine and -- fine, tubulaz and interstitial pores; slightly acid, gradual, smooth boundary. • C1 IZ to 32 inches, pale-brown sandy loam, brown when moist; weak, fine, subangulaz blocky structure; slightly hazd, friable, non-sticky and non plastic; common very fine and fine roots; common, very fine and fine, interstitial and tubular pores; neutral; gradual, smooth boundary. • C2 32 to 60 inches, very pale brown, sandy loam, brown when moist; massive; slightly hazd, friable, non-sticky and non plastic; very few fine roots; few, very fine and fine, interstitial and tubulaz pores; neutral. The A horizon is pale brown, light brownish, gray or brown. Its texture is sandy loam or coarse sandy loam. The soil is generally massive by may have weak, fine or medium, granular or subangulaz blocky structure. Thickness ranges from 8 to 14 inches but is 12 inches in most places. The C horizon is pale brown, very pale brown, or light yellowish brown. Its texture is sandy loam, fine sandy loam or coarse sandy loam. Reaction ranges from slightly aid to neutral but it may be mildly alkaline in some places. Some fine pebbles occur in a few places but generally do not exceed 5 percent by volume. Thin lenses of loam often occur. The following aze engineering properties for this soil type. Representative soil types are shown on Figure 5.2-1. Psomas does not anticipate difficulties in following standazd industry construction techniques in the soils on the property as listed al Table 5.2-1. 1 County or Sao Bernandi•o La•d Use Servitts Department SCFL Na 19991011]3 Cinuc Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Wazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 127 Earth Resources 5.2.1.2.2 Citrus Plaza Site ' The Citrus Plaza project site is located within the upper Santa Ana River Valley. In the , vicinity of the site, the upper Santa Ana River Valley is bounded by the San Andreas fault zone and muatm the San Bemardino Mountains to the north, the Grafton Hills to the east and the San Timoteo Hills to the south. Lateral movement and uplift of the region has occurred on a series of northwest- r trending faults which aze thought to be related to the regional tectonic framework. Currently, there are no structures on the Citrus Plaza site. The site has been cleazed and is a$ , awaiting development. Published geologic maps indicate that the Citrus Plaza site is underlain by Quartemary alluvium. The alluvium deposits typically consist of unconsolidated, layers of sands and silts. ' Exploratory borings have been conducted on the Citrus Plaza site. These borings encountered a layer of loose to medium dense silty sand in the upper eight to ten feet, underlain by sands and a series of layers of silts and sands. Beneath the upper layer of organic materials, native alluvium composed of sand, silty sand and gravelly sand was encountered. The total depth of the alluvilun is estimated to be at least 50 feet. Regional earthquake faults in relation to the project area are shown , in Figure 5.2-2. 5.2.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The analysis of earth resources uses significance thresholds as set forth in the County General Plan EIR as well as the CEQA Guidelines. As indicated in the Final Errvironmental Impact Report for the San Bernardino County , General Plan, specific criteria for the classification of potential impacts associated with geologic hazards in the County have been established as part of that program-level document. Referencing the EIR for the County's 1989 General Plan update, significant impacts associated with geologic ' hazards are generally defined as those which directly or indirectly affect life, property or major public facilities (e.g., transportation and utility corridors) pursuant to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. I County of Sua Bernardino Laod lise Smires Depanmeot SCR Na 1999101121 Citrus Plana Regional MaIVt VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 128 II~ N ~"~ J ~ 6_ f . ~ ~ d ~ ~' ` d ' a m F. ¢ F- J ~ v °' v ~o ' Yh ~ /1 ~y ~ _ ~./ OD a ' d~ Z .S U ~ w 8 1 ~ R WI tli,YL •Tr` a r } O U O ~ ~ t "' Z ¢ '. ~ ~ m p 2 ~ c s N ' Q J ~ s ~ o Q a z z a Y 3 Wo a a mQ m z z o N - aQ m Q ~ o ~w a m r r W ~ ~ e ? z Q M3 u~ o ' U 0 N 0 o m ~ ~ a a r a r m E o '~tx 30NYTiedLL ~ 'env . Y]i d! tl1 7 1 ,u O N 1 1 + V I ~ ~ Y~1 C N T H C ~ E E '' c o E o a-',a c T T O T t0 3nV IYMti31 ~ ~ ~ N tl3iYM • N ~ ~ ~ N v m m m E u o ~ ~ g E ~ > > m • 2 F F=- ~ R 9 O 3nr m,H eY O W p m° d M ~ cs x r'r' N a ' e W a s3 J 1S 3 Page 329 5.2 Earth Resources , Table 5.2-1 ' ENGINEERING PROPERTIES HAIVFORD SANDY LOAM , Property Degree any kind of limitation for: , Dwelling without basement SliJrt Septic tank absorption fields Sli~tt Shallow excavations Slight Sanitary landfills Severe-moderately rapid permeability , Depth to bedrock or hardpan feet Classification: 8-26 Unified SM , AASHTO A-2 Percentage less than 3 in. passing sieve: No. 4 (4.7mm) 100% No. 10 (2.Orlrm) 90- 100% No. 40 (0.42mm) 60 - 75% No. 200 (0.074mm) 20 - 30% Liquid Limits Non-plastic , Plasticity Index Non-plastic Permeability 2.0 - 6.0 inches per hour pH 6.1 - 7.8 pH units per hour Shrink-Swell Potential Low , Based upon these standazds, a significant geologic, geotechnical and/or seismic impact , would result from the development of a site which is subject to: (1) surface rupture sufficient to produce structural damage; (2) ground shaking of sufficient magnitude to exceed corresponding design criteria; and/or (3) liquefaction. The State CEQA Guidelines provides thresholds for determining significant environmental , impacts. A project may be deemed to have a significant impact on geology and soils if the project would result in impacts to any of the following environmental issues: Expose people or stnJCtures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, '' injury, or death involving: - Rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on ' other substantial evidence of a known fault (refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42), - Strong seismic ground shaking, - Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, County orSnn Bernardino Lam lase Services Depanmcot SCH. Nn 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIU1VDA Wattt&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent f:IR-June 2001 Page 130 i ~' y A .L u, l3- d T A + ~- ~-~ s ~ Y ~+~- ~-~- ~, + -~+ + + ~"~- I ~ ~ + } ~ /.' ~ /T T 1 .n ~ ~ O ~~.V 2 v° ., `}y m ~ , ~ j~ ~ly+° ,~~~,' a ~- /~' m s ° ' ~ + + + ~ ~ . ; m s ,~ wm~ //J-;,~, m , ~, l / ~ N~cV \ '~ ,y- .' ~r I ~ / / /• l + o ,, o~ ~I } W t J ~ ~ Page 131 5? Earth Resources - Landslides. • Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. , • Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of , the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. • Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code , (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. ' • Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of , wastewater. 5.23 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues addressed herein include seismic groundshaking, ground rupture, unstable geologic units, liquefaction, subsidence, seiches and expansive soils. Since the project area is located in a relatively flat azea, landslides do not represent a significant hazard to the project. The project azea , does not involve the construction of septic systems. The potential for impacts related to erosion are addressed in Section 5.3, HydrologyfWater Quality. 5.23.1 Proposed Plan Amendments The proposed plan amendments would modify existing County General Plan policies and , associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific P?an to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed ' amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed amendments do not affect earth resources. ' Therefore, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed Plan Amendments. j 5.23.2 Infrastructure Facilities ' The following environmental impact analysis applies to all project sewer and water options. , County of Sa• Bernardino Laod Usa Services Department SCIi. Na !999101173 , Ciws Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Scrvices Plan Final SuDsequrnt EIR-June 2001 Page 132 ' 5? Earth Resources 5.23.2.1 Seismicity, Ground Shaking, Ground Rupture and Unstable Geologic Units ' The project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project, Citrus Plaza Project) would result in the ~~nn Im~aied construction and operation of water storage reservoirs, water pumping facilities, water pipelines and change sewer pipelines. Depending on the options selected, the project could also result in the construction and operation of an outside water treatment facility, two groundwater production wells and a wastewater treatment facility. t The project azea is located in the highly seismic southern Califotnia region within the influence of several fault systems that aze considered active or potentially active. An "active fault" is ' defined by the State Mining and Geology Boazd as one which has "had surface displacement within Holocene times (about the last 11,000 yeazs)." This definition does not, however, mean that the faults having no evidence of surface displacement within Holocene times are necessazily inactive. ' In contrast, "potentially active faults" aze those faults which show evidence of surface displacement during Quarternary time (i.e., between 11,000 and 1.6 million years ago). Active and potentially active earthquake faults aze capable of producing potentially damaging seismic ground shaking in the project azea. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the project azea will periodically experience ground acceleration as the result of small to moderate magnitude earthquakes. The most common hazard from an eaz[hquake is ground shaking. The factors determining the degree of ground shaking include: distance from an earthquake epicenter (and focal depth); force or magnitude of the earthquake; and soil, geologic and groundwater conditions. An earthquake on a nearby fault may be felt as a single high acceleration jolt. In contrast, an eazthquake ' more distant from the receptor may be felt as a prolonged shaking since the waves travel longer distances. These two extremes of motion-high acceleration and prolonged shaking affect property in different ways. The former causes shearing in structures which cazlnot withstand the suddenness of the ground motion. The latter may cause damage when the affected structure lacks the structural integrity to remain intact while shaking. Approximately thirty active faults have been mapped within 100 kilometers (approximately 62 miles) of the project azea. Of the 30 active faults, 8 faults could impact the project azea and ' contribute to future seismicity in the azea. Table 5.2-2 lists these 8 faults along with the maximum inn m~oako credible earthquake that could be expected. The maximum credible earthquake (MCE) is a term mange used to describe the scale of an earthquake size, as the largest eazthquake expected to occur on a pazticulaz fault, based on past data and correlation. ' The Glenn Helen-Lytle Creek-Clazemont fault, San Gorgonio-Bazrning fault, Hot Spring- Buck Ridge (San Jacinto) fault and San Andreas (San Bemazdino Mountain) fault would generate the strongest seismic groundshaking within the project azea during a major earthquake, in consideration of their proximity to the project area and a potential MCE event. Without proper Couoty of Sao Bernardino Laod Usc Services Dcpartmrnt SCFL Na 1999101121 Cimis Plaza RegiorW MaIVI VDA W azer d Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jwe 2001 Page 133 5.2 Earth Resources Table 5.2-2 ' SIGNIFICANT EARTHQUAKE FAULTS A Maximum Credible Earthquake , Fault Name (Richter Ma¢nitude) Casa Loma-Clark (San Jacinto) 7,p Cucamonga 7.0 ' Elsinore 7.5 Glenn Helen-Lytle Creek-Claremont 7,p Hot Spring-Buck Ridge (San Jacinto) 7,p North Frontal Fault Zone 7.7 ' San Andreas (Mojave) 8.3 San Andreas (San Bernardino Mountain) g.p ' San Gorgonio-Banning 7.5 engineering features and controls, this could result in a significant environmental impact to the proposed project associated with groundshaking. Pursuartt to the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act, the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) has delineated "earthquake fault zones" in proximity to A certain active and potentially active faults within California. Governmental agencies with these fault zones within their jurisdictional azea are required by statute to regulate development within those ' defined areas. CDMG has designated the San Jacinto and San Andreas Fault systems as earthquake fault zones. In addition, both an unnamed fault and the Loma Linda fault cross the project area westerly of Mountain View Avenue, trending in a northwesterly to southeasterly direction. Some of , the proposed sewer and water pipelines could be within the fault rupture areas of these faults. Without proper engineering features and controls, this could result in a significant environmental impact to the proposed project associated with ground surface rupture and project facilities being , located on unstable geologic units. Depending on the final locations selected, any sewer or water pipelines located within fault rupture areas will be designed, engineered and operated so that the ' pipelines will be able to withstand strong seismic ground shaking as a result of major earthquake. With additional engineering protection, as needed, no significant impacts aze anticipated. The San Bernardino County General Plan includes policies for development occurring within areas containing geologic hazards. Because the risks from geologic hazards can be , successfiilly mitigated through a combination of engineering, construction, land Ilse and development standards, the County shall: (1) require sites to be developed and all structures designed in accordance with recommendations contained in any required geotechnical or geologic reports, through conditioning, consmJCtion plans and filed inspections; (2) require that all recommended mitigation measures be cleazly indicated on all grading and construction plans; and Couory orSa Berrtardmo Land Use Services Department SCR Nn 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent I:IR-June 2001 Page 134 ' 5? Earth Resources ', , (3) require all facilities to meet appropriate geologic hazard specifications as determined by the County Geologist for discretionary and ministerial authorizations.'Z ' Because many structures with important functions and potentially severe consequences of failure do not fall under County control (i.e., dams, utility installations, transportation structures) the ' County shall: (1) continue to work with public utilities, school districts, railroads, the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and other agencies supplying critical public services to ensure that they have incorporated structural safety and other measures to be adequately protected from seismic hazards for both existing and proposed facilities; and (2) encourage utility companies _ to institute orderly programs of installing cut-off devices on utility lines, starting with the lines that appeaz to be most vulnerable and those which serve the most people. Adequate emergency water supplies shall be established and maintained in azeas dependent upon water lines which cross active fault zones. ' The San Bemazdino County General Plan requires that transportation facilities (i.e., roads, ' freeways, rail, rapid transit) and utility systems cross active fault traces a minimum number of times, and to be designed to accommodate fault displacement without major damage that would cause long-term and unacceptable disruption of service. Utility lines shall be equipped with such mechanisms as flexible units, valuing, redundant lines or auto valves to shut off flows in the event of fault rupture." Because of the potential for displacement along faults not classified as active, the County reserves the right to require site-specific geotechnical analysis and mitigation for development ' located contiguous to potentially active faults, if deemed necessary by the County Geologist. In areas determined by the County Geologist to be subject to significant seismic shaking, all structures and facilities will be designed and constructed to withstand ground shaking forces of a minor ' earthquake without damage, of a moderate earthquake without structural damage, and of a major earthquake without collapse. Critical, essential and high occupancy structures shall be designed and ' constructed to remain standing and functional following a major earthquake and shall be so engineered as to withstand maximum probable ground motion accelerations." ' 5.2.3.2.2 Liquefaction ' Liquefaction is defined as the transitory transformation of sandy water-saturated alluvium with properties of a solid into a state possessing properties of a liquid as a result of earthquake S t' San Bernardino County Genera! Plan, San Bernardino County Public Servrces Group, Land Use Services Department, p. //-AI-?, Adopted July 1989, Revised May 1999. i3 /bid, p. II-AI-B. Ibid County or5an Bernardino Land Uu Scrvims Department SCH. Na 1999101127 I~~I Carus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water d Sewer Servitts Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 135 5? Farah Resources , shaking. The project area is generally ttnderlain by loose to dense silty sands and sands. Based on ' the results of field investigations and historical data review, the groundwater level is expected to be at a depth greater than 50 feet. The lack of groundwater present in the upper 50 feet of soil indicates aas ' that the soils beneath the project area will have a low susceptibility to liquefaction. Groundwater levels are expected to be deeper than 120 feet below the ground surface. Based upon the depth of groundwater and the project azea's low susceptibility to liquefaction potential, liquefaction impacts , will not be significant for the majority of the water and sewer pipeline routes. However, the presence of locally occurring groundwater or perched groundwater cannot be ruled out, and may present a possibility for a localized occurrence of liquefaction at varying depths below the surface. Liquefaction potential would be greater for those water pipeline options that would cross the ' Santa Ana River (e.g., Water Options 2B, 3A and 3C). Seismically induced liquefaction could occur due to intense groundshaking in the saturated loose sediments of the Santa Ana River. ' Pipelines traversing liquefiable soils can result in pipeline failures, especially where the pipe goes from non-liquefiable to liquefiable soils. Possible methods to improve liquefiable soils include stone columns, in-place compaction, gravel replacement, and grouting. The pipe can also be , supported on deep foundations or it could be routed around or taken below the liquefiable areas where feasible. Without proper engineering features and controls, liquefaction could result in a significant environmental impact. , The U.S.G.S. published "Liquefaction Susceptibility in the San Bernardino Valley and , Vicinity, Southern California - A Regional Evaluation, 1989". They identified areas susceptible to a-zs liquefaction for a magnitude 6.75, 7.0, 8.0 earthquake on several faults, including the San Andreas. The Donut Hole is outside (to the south) of the worst case (magnitude 8.0 San Andres fault). The , only pipeline alignments susceptible to liquefaction aze along San Bernardino Avenue west of California and those crossing the Santa Ana River to the north. Damage to buried pipelines from liquefaction is not expected to be as significant as to above ground structures. This was the case of ' the Northridge earthquake. The pipelines, trenching and bedding will be designed specifically for the soil conditions encountered. The pipes will be of a flexible material with flexible joints with , appropriate aggregate bedding. The Ductile Iron Pipe Association (DIPA) suggests the use of restrained joints when 1 significant differential settlement, including liquefaction, might occur. It is also possible to use expansion fittings like the EBAA Iron "Flex-Tend", at connection points to structures such as ' reservoirs, pump stations or well head. The Natiortal Clay Pipe Institute (NCPI) indicates that the length of the pipe pieces and shape of the joint bells will allow for deflections to occur with no joint damage. They also pointed out that it is not a good idea to concrete encase the pipe because the pipe will break where the concrete breaks, it is better to have asemi-flexible system. An example of Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) surviving an earthquake was the Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles. There were changes County of San Bcrnardioo Land Use Service Degnment SCFL Na 19991011]3 Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Scrvices Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 136 , ' ~ _' Earth Resources ' in grade associated with the ground moving, but the pipe generally stayed intact and operable. There are a variety of construction methods available, such as those described above, to ensure that ' the pipelines will be constructed so as to deal with any liquefaction hazards. Therefore, no significant impacts from liquefaction aze anticipated. ' 5.2.3.23 Subsidence ' Seismically induced subsidence is a generally level, vertically downwazd movement caused by a lessening in soil water pressure, caused by fault-produced shifts in the ground water. In -- addition to destabilizing a structure's foundation, subsidence can also result in sufficient reductions ' in elevation to cause the structure to be flooded by an adjacent body of water. Due to the anticipated depth to groundwater, estimated at 120 feet below ground surface, no significant impacts to the ' proposed project from seismically induced subsidence is anticipated. 5.2.3.2.4 Seiches t Seiches are water surges (waves) within an enclosed body of water such as a lake, reservoir or even a swimming pool. These waves aze generated primarily by earthquakes. The action produced is similaz to that of a pan of water tilted back and forth until it spills over the sides. The maximum height of seiche waves is dependent upon many variables, but they could be as high as 10 ' feet or more. The variables relating to the height of seiche waves include the size, shape and depth of a reservoir, the propagation of earthquake waves with respect to the reservoir, and the proximity and the size of the earthquake. Seiching in reservoirs can occur when seismic shaking gives rise to a standing wave in the water, which strongly vibrates the structure. Tank failure could result in the sudden release of the reservoir's contents, causing localized flooding immediately downstream. Geotechnical hazards to I' the integrity of reservoirs aze controlled through proper structural engineering of the reservoir to ' enable it to withstand expected seismic forces, thereby minimizing potential damage and associated hazards. With the implementation of design engineering and control features, no significant seiche related impacts for project reservoirs aze anticipated. 5.23.2.5 Expansive Soils ' Shrink-swell potential (e.g., expansive soils) is the relative change in volume to be expected of soil material with changes in moisture content, that is, the extent to which the soil shrinks as it dries out or swells when it gets wet. The extent of shrinking and swelling is influenced by the amount and kind of clay in the soil. Shrinking and swelling of soils has the potential to damage ' building foundations, roads and other structures. A high shrink-swell potential indicates a hazard to the maintenance of structures built in, on, or with material having this rating. Soils in the project area have low shriril:-swell potential and therefore no significant impacts aze anticipated. County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCR Na I99910ll27 Citrus Plaza Regional MalU1VDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page l37 5.? Earth Resources , 5.23.2.6 Soil Conditions Related to Construction ' Although problematic soil conditions are not anticipated for construction occurring in ' Hanford sandy loam soils, shallow excavations for water and sewer pipelines would be severe within the following soils found in the project area: (1) Tujunga loamy sand (TuB), (2) Tujunga gravelly loamy sand (TvC) and (3) Soboba stony loamy sand (SpC). Without proper engineering ' features and controls, this could result in a significant environmental impact. Shallow excavations aze those that require digging or trenching to a depth of less than ~ feet, as for example, excavation , for pipelines and sewer lines. Severe means that soil properties aze so unfavorable and so difficult to correct or overcome as to require major soil reclaznation, special designs or intensive soil maintenance. With the implementation of the engineering features described below (e.g., ' infrastructure facilities construction and pipeline construction) no significant impacts resulting from problematic soil conditions aze anticipated. 5.23.2.7 Additional Issues Relating to the Installation of Subsurface Water and Sewer Pipelines (All Areas Other Than The Citrus Plaza Site) ' A geotechnical report shall be prepazed and shall consider the following as potential measures to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The geotechnical report will be approved ' by the County Geologist. All vertical or steeply sided trench excavations greater than five feet in depth shall be braced , and shored in accordance with good construction practices and all applicable safety ordinances and codes. ' Due to the potential for local trench wall instability, temporary cut slopes needed to achieve the proposed subgrade elevations may be required to be constructed at inclinations no steeper than ' 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) in the existing and newly placed fill soils. Heavy construction loads, such as those resulting from stockpiles and heavy machinery, shall be kept back from the top of the ' excavation a distance equal to the depth of the excavation. If very steep or vertical-sided excavations in excess of five feet deep are necessary, the , sidewalls shall be shored in accordance with OSHA standazds to provide temporary trench stability during construction. The design of the temporary shoring system shall be reviewed and approved by ' i the soils engineer. The contractor shall be responsible for the structural design and safety of the temporary shoring system. The constntction of the pipeline trenches will result in the excavation of soil. This soil ' would be stockpiled in proximity of the trench for the period of time that the pipeline is being ' installed. This stockpiled soil is potentially subject to erosion. Without proper controls in the form Coaaty of Sao Beroardioo Wad Ust Services Dcpartment SCFI. Na.199970183 ' Cimts Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page l38 ' ' S? Earth Resources ' of best management practices (BMPs), adverse erosion and water quality impacts may occur. _ Mitigation in the form of a menu of BMPs is recommended to address these potential impacts. 1 Pipe bedding may be required to consist of sand or similaz granular material having a minimum sand equivalent value of 30. The sand shall be placed in a zone that extends a minimum of 6 inches below and ] 2 inches above the pipe for the full trench width. The bedding material shall be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Trench backfill above pipe ' bedding may consist of approved, on-site or import soils placed in lifts no greater than 8-inch loose thickness and compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Jetting of pipe bedding or trench backfill materials is not permitted. ' 5.23.2.8 Additional Issues Relating to the Construction of the Proposed Water ' Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities at the Citrus Plaza Site A geotechnical report shall be prepazed and shall consider the following measures to reduce ' potential impacts to less than significant levels. The geotechnical report will be approved by the County Geologist. ' All trees, surficial vegetation, concrete (if encountered) and deleterious, organic, inert and oversized materials (greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension) shall be stripped and isolated ' prior to the removal of reusable soils. If significant quantities of oversized materials are encountered, provisions may be available for on-site disposal. Areas to receive fill shall be stripped of loose or sofr earth materials until a firm subgrade is exposed. The stripping work shall include ' the removal of existing uncompacted fill, topsoil, and alluvium that, in the judgment of the geotechnical engineer, is compressible, collapsible or contains significant voids. If identified, undocumented fills will require removal and replacement as compacted fills. Stripping operations aze likely to expose a firm, non-yielding native subgrade that is free of ' large voids. The subgrade soils exposed at the bottom of each excavation shall be observed by the geotechnical engineer contracted by the project proponent, prior to the placement of any fill to ' confirm that all potentially collapsible soils have been removed. Additional removal may be required as a result of observation and testing of the exposed subgrade soils. Prior to the placement of compacted fills, after site preparation and excavation, processing of the approved subgrade should be performed by scarifying to a depth of 6 to 8 inches, moisture conditioning to within two percent of optimum moisture content and compacting to a minimum of ' 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Fill should be placed in lifs no greater than 8-inches thick, loose measurement, and shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density under the slab-on-grade and foundations azeas and 95 percent of the maximum dry density in the upper 6 inches below proposed Coaoty of San Beroardioo Land Use Servirrs Department SCR No. 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 139 5.2 Earth Resources pavement azeas. Import material, if required, shall be accepted by the geotechnical engineer before ' placement in fill. All earthwork operations shall be observed and tested under the supervision of the geotechrricalengineer. ' Due to the loose, compressible nature of the upper 4 to 10 feet of the existing soils, , overexcavation and recompaction will be required prior to placement of foundation systems pursuant to the requirements of a qualified State-registered geotechnical engineer contracted by the project proponent. Removal in the order of ~ to 10 feet may be required for slab and footing ' components, respectively. Localized azeas requiring deeper removal may also be anticipated. The proposed structures may be founded on a series of shallow continuous strip and squaze ' footings. Foundations shall be placed at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for interior and exterior footings, and shall bear on a minimum of five feet of engineered fill. , The engineered fill should also extend beyond the edges of all foundations at least five feet. Slab-on-grade floors shall be placed on at least three feet of engineered fill. A vapor barrier ' may be placed below the floor slab in azeas where moisture sensitive flooring materials are planned. If utilized, the barrier may be covered with two inches of clean sand and shall be underlain by a ' layer of one inch of clean sand to protect the barrier during construction, act as a capillary break, and aid in the proper curing of the concrete slab. All azeas adjacent to buildings, including planters, should be designed to drain away from the structure to avoid accumulation of water beneath the slab , or footings. 5.233 Citrus Plaza Site ' Environmental impacts from seismicity, ground shaking, liquefaction, seiches and soil ' conditions related to construction on the Citrus Plaza site would be similar to the environmental impacts described above, except for the discussion of the Additional Issues Relating to the , Installation of Subsurface Water and Sewer Pipelines (Section 5?.3.2.7). In relation to ground rupture and unstable geologic units, no known faults, identified as either active or potentially active by the State Department of Mines and Geology, are present on the Citrus Plaza site. ' 5.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS , All related projects, as identified in Section 4.0, will experience a similaz level of potential ' seismic effects as those forecasted for the proposed project given the level of seismic activity M throughout Southern California. These potential impacts are reduced to acceptable levels via 01~ compliance with all local building codes. Cnher earth resource impacts for projects within the , EVCSP area will be mitigated to less than significant levels via compliance with the mitigation 1 County or San Bernardino Laod Ust Services Department SCH No.1999101173 Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElA-1mte 2001 ' Page 140 - 5? Earth Resources ' measures set forth therein. Furthermore, general compliance with local codes relative to potential earth resource impacts will reduce such impacts to a less than significant level. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on ' a list of related projects identified in the San Bernazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These same related projects are used for the analysis - of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and aze more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the ~„~y related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR are still appropriate for use as the basis '~~e for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past ' five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). As - such, cumulative impacts on eaz[h resources aze concluded to be less than significant. ' 5.2.5 MITIGATION MEASURES - 5.2.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments No mitigation measures would be required for the Plan Amendments. 5.2.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project and Citrus Plaza Project The previous envirotunental analysis included the following mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to earth resources to less than significant levels. These mitigation measures are incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. ~ A project specific geotechnical study shall be performed by a registered engineering ' geologist. If this geotechnical study concludes that unsafe or unstable geologic features exist within the project azea that will result in problematic construction and operation of ' the proposed project, the geologist will recommend specific engineering design features to reduce any impacts to a level of insignificance. Upon completion of that subsequent investigation, a general review of the project plans and specifications shall be conducted ' before they aze finalized to verify that all geotechnical recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented during design. ' • A geology report, prepazed by a registered geologist, shall be filed with and approved by the Director of Building and Safety for the Citrus Plaza project and Special Districts for the infrastructure facilities. A deposit to cover the costs of the review shall be submitted County ofSaa Bcenardioo Wad Ust Services Department SCR Na 1999101173 ' Citnu Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent E1R -June 2001 Page 141 5.2 Earth Resources , with the report. An additional deposit may be required, or a refund issued, when the ' costs do not match the deposit. The review costs shall be paid in full prior to recordation of the final map. ' As the potential exists that the infrastructure improvements that are not on the Citrus Plaza site may be subject to adverse liquefaction effects, the following mitigation measure is proposed. ' • A registered engineering geologist will investigate azeas within the project azea that aze ' potentially subject to liquefaction. Design studies may include borings and penetration tests in liquefiable azeas along with a risk assessment of the design ground motion, if necessary. This mitigation measure, for the purposes of clarification, applies only to ' those infrastructure improvements that aze not on the Citrus Plaza site. 5.2.53 Infrastructure Facilities Not On Citrus Plaza Site In addition, the following BMPs or their environmental equivalent, shall be incorporated, as ' appropriate, into the construction process during the installation of pipelines in which soil is stockpiled in a manner which has the potential to create an adverse erosion or water quality impact. Potential BMPs could include the following: , • Earth dikes. Earth dikes are temporary beans or ridges of compacted soil that channel , water to a desired location. • Drainage swales. A drainage swale is a channel lined with riprap, asphalt, concrete or , other materials. They aze installed to convey runoff without causing erosion. • Hay bales. Hay bales with filter fabric can be installed azound any storm drain inlets that ' may be affected by construction, to prevent clogging by sediment. This includes storm drains in roadways that receive sediment from mud that is tracked onto pavement. ' • Sediment traps. Sediment traps can be installed in drainage pathways, at storm drain gat inlets or other dischazge points from disturbed azeas. ' 5.2.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ' With the incorporation of the project design features, conditions and mitigation measures ' identified above, eazth resource impacts would be less than significant. Cowry •rSa• Bernardino Land Use Services Departmear SCtt Na 1999101/73 ' Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Fetal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page I42 , 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 53 HYDROLOGY/WATERQUALlTY ' 53.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 53.1.1 Introduction The County of San Bemazdino has experienced severe and widespread flooding throughout ' its history. Several major drainage basins have the potential to subject residents and property to a h,°,,;;"~ high risk of flooding. In addition, the cumulative increase in impervious surfaces has increased change problems related to surface water run-off. While complete avoidance or protection through control facilities is not practical, considerable improvement can be made through both structural and nonstructural methods. The County currently utilizes land use districts to prohibit habitable structures in floodways as identified by the Federal requirements necessary to participate in the National Flood Insluance ' Program. The consistent adoption of overlays is needed to require special review, conditions and the prohibition of some uses in floodplain azeas (azeas subject to 100-year floods), including dry ' lakes. In addition, there are land use policies and development standards which can be implemented including reduction of impervious surfaces, increase of percolation, infiltration and recharge, and the control of urban run-off.15 I ' The County of San Bemazdino faces water supply and distribution issues in common with ' all other counties in the Southern California region. The urbanizing azeas of the County are dependent upon adequate quantities and qualities of potable water being available. At present, the majority of the County is dependent upon locally available supplies of groundwater. However, imported water will play an increasing role in satisfying the demand for water throughout the County.,` 'S San Bernardino County General Plan, San Bernardino County Public Services Group, Land Use Services Department, p. !1-A2-1, AdopledJuly 1989, Revised May 1999. 1b Ibid, p. //-C4-1. Couuty of San Bernardino Laod list Servicts Depanmcot SCR Na 1999101123 ' Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Pinal Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 143 5.3 Hydrology/WaferQualiq~ 53.1.2 Physical Environment ' 53.1.2.1 Infrastructure Facilities ' Surface Water. Surface water resources in proximity to the Infrastructure Facilities project , azea include the Santa Ana River to the north and west and San Timoteo Creek, Mission Zanja and ,~;;~ Morey Arroyo to the south. Water dischazged from the Infrastructure Facilities project area will ~""~ ultimately dischazge to one or more of these drainage systems. , The Infrastructure Facilities project area falls within the jurisdiction of the Regional Water ' Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region and is included within that agency's Water Quality Control Plan -Santa Ana Basin (8). The Santa Ana Region includes the Upper and Lower Santa Ana River watersheds, the San Jacinto watershed, and several other small drainage areas. The Santa , Ana Region covers parts of southwestern San Belnazdino County, western Riverside County and Northwestern Orange County. For the purpose of water quality management, the malnstem of the ' Santa Ana River is divided into six "reaches," defined as a hydrologic and water quality unit. Specifically, the project site is located within Reach 5 which extends from the Seven Oaks Dam to the San Jacinto Fault, which mazks the downstream edge of the Bunker Hill groundwater basin. , In addition, the Santa Ana River basin plan defines the "beneficial uses of the region's , surface water and groundwater resources." One of the declared intents of the Water Quality Control Plan - Santa Ana River Basin (8) is to maintain and enhance water quality for those beneficial uses cited therein. Declared beneficial uses in Reach 5 include: (1) municipal and domestic water ' supply; (2) agricultural supply; (3) groundwater rechazge; (4) recreation; (5) warm freshwater habitat; (6) wildlife habitat; and (7) threatened and endangered species support habitats. As indicated in the Water Quality Control Plan -Santa Ana River Basin (8), specific ' narrative and water quality objectives are established for all inland surface waters. These objectives ' address a multiplicity of issues, including wildlife habitat degradation. algal growth, unionized ammonia and total ammonia nitrogen concentration, sulfate, coliform, boron and chlorine residual limits, prohibition on changes in coloration, total dissolved solids objectives, avoidance of dischazged floatable materials, fluoride concentrations, etc. Groundwater. The Infrastructure Facilities project azea lies within the Bunker Hill , Groundwater Basin. This Basin is composed of alluvial materials deposited by the Santa Ana River and its tributaries. In the project azea, these deposits (which are considered part of the groundwater aaa~ basin) aze several thousand feet thick and are composed of interbedded gravels, sands, and discontinuous finer materials. Groundwater levels in the area have historically ranged between 120 to 160 feet in depth below the ground surface. Groundwater regionally flows from east to west in ' the project area The direction and rate of groundwater flow is the result of groundwater recharge. Groundwater recharge occurs from natural drainage from the Santa Ana River and Mill Creek , Couory of Sao Bcroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCtL Na 1999101121 Cims Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 , Page 144 i _ 5.3 HydrologylWa[erQuality ' streamflows and additional natural rechazge from other stream channels. Recharge also occurs _ from artificial recharge. Streamllow is diverted from the Santa Ana River, Mill Creek, and other ' channels into percolation ponds, and the percolation produces groundwater recharge. ' The Basin Plan establishes a number of beneficial uses for the Bunker Hill subbasins. Those beneficial uses include: (1) municipal and domestic water supply; (2) agricultw~al supply; (3) industrial service supply; and (4) industrial process supply. The Santa Ana River flows are a substantial source of groundwater rechazge in the lower basin, which provides domestic supplies for more than two million people. These flows account for about 70 percent of the total recharge. Any discharge to surface or groundwater resources must be in compliance with adopted water quality ' standards. Historically, shallow wells in the project azea have been predominantly used for citrus irrigation. Many of these local agriculttual wells are affected with various fomis of contamination _ including (predominantly) regional-scale contaminant plumes of trichloroethene (TCE) and ' perchlorate. It is believed that the TCE and perchlorate plumes originated from an aerospace facility east of Redlands operated by Lockheed Martin. The contaminant plumes are heavily monitored, ' and Lockheed Martin is under aclean-up order from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)." The Redlands Plume is shown in Figure 5.3-1. The TCE plume currently includes an azea of approximately 4 square miles and is approximately 6 miles in length. The perchlorate plume currently includes an azea of approximately 5 square miles and is approximately 6 miles in length. The plumes are moving westward. The TCE and perchlorate plumes are limited to the upper parts of the groundwater system. It is estimated that the TCE plume is limited to a depth of 400 feet below the ground surface and the perchlorate plume is limited to a depth of 500 feet below the ground surface." The City of Redlands wastewater treatment facility is located adjacent to and north of the ' proposed well sites (Water Option 1). The City disposes of treated wastewater into percolation ponds that are located within an area between the well sites and the Santa Ana River chafinel. The ' "County of San Bernardino /eland 6'alley Development Agency Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options, p. /8, Psomas, August 1999. ' '$ County of San Bernardino !eland Val/ey Developmeru Agency Area A (Donut Hole) /mpact of Water Supply Pumping on Contaminam rLAigration, Psomas, p. ll, August 1999. County ofSao Beruardioo Laod Ux Servires Dcpartmcnt SCH. Na 19991011]3 Citnss Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-loot 2001 ' Page ] 45 ~ro~ M eb ~ v Y ~ ~ ,%~a tx ~ osz-~ U ~ ^- ~ -~a ~ o ~ 1 1 a ao _s P N tlNV '~ a t Y y ~OJ. ~ 4_ 1 _ $ ~o Z Y- ~- ~ M N Q 4 ~ L Q Q d N F w ° ~ ~ W Q „,.~^ Nw ~ N U, z o s x ~ ~r~ ~y.V 39tM3nd~- J i 1 i u y G ~ '~ 4 NJIR31 ~ 7 d • oa ~ ~ a y3.MM N j d O 9 ~ o ~ O ~ 3nv M' °" J o y5 3 G P m ~s s Pace t46 - 33 liydrology/WaterQualhy daily dischazge of the ponds is about 6 million gallons per day (MGD), or 4,200 gallons per minute may - (gpm). The percolation ponds rechazge treated water to the groundwater table." ' Lange 5.3.I.Z.2 Citrus Plaza Site Surface Water. Portions of the Phase 1 (Power Center) area presently drain southwazd and dischazge to an existing storm drain located within the Lugonia Avenue right-of--way between Alabama Street and California Street. This storm drain facility consists of 48-inch and >4-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and extends westwazd along Lugonia Avenue towazd Mission Zanja ' Creek. Presently, less than half of this segment has been designed and installed. The azea of Phase 2 (Regional Mall), inclusive of portions of Phase 1, currently drain ' northward to a storm drain located at the intersection of Alabama Street and San Bemazdino Avenue and ultimately dischazge into the Santa Ana River. This facility is anunder-street drain, consisting of two catch basins and a pipe that collects runoff on one side of the intersection and then releases the runoff onto the other side of the intersection. There are currently no structures on the Citrus Plaza site. The site has been cleazed and is a$ currently awaiting development. Groundwater. The Citnls Plaza Project site presently contains two active wells that have ca,,,ry historically produced non-potable water for on-site irrigation purposes. As was stated in the 1995 cna~ge ' Final EIR, an investigation of groundwater quality below the Citrus Plaza site has been undertaken, based upon samples of the well dischazge stream from one of the on-site wells (i.e„ Mascart Water Company Well) during normal irrigation operations. The analytical results indicated that only TCE was detected in the water at a concentration of 1.7 micrograms per liter, which does not exceed California Department of Health Services requirements for maximum contaminant levels. 53.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE ' The analysis of hydrology/water quality uses significance thresholds as set forth in the ' CEQA Guidelines. The State CEQA Guidelines provides thresholds for detemiinirJg significant environmental I impacts. A project may be deemed to have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality if ~ the project would result in impacts to any of the following environmental issues: t 19 Ibid., p. 1. Couoty of Sao Beroardiao Laod Use Services Departmcar SCrL rya 1999101121 t Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1N VDA Wazer & Sewer Strvices Plan Final Su lxequent EIR -June 2001 Page 147 5.3 Hydrolog}(WaterQuality ' • Violate any water quality standards or waste dischazge requirements. • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater ' recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing neazby wells , would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted). • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or azea, including through the alteration of the cowse of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in , substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or azea, including through the ' alteration of the cowse of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. • Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stolmwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. ' • Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. , • Otherwise substantially degrade water quality. • Place within a 100-yeaz flood hazard area structwes which would impede or redirect m~oai"~ ' flood flows. cn~ee • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injwy or death involving ' flooding, including flooding as a result of the failwe of a levee or dam. • Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. 5.3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues addressed herein include the project's potential impacts to surface hydrology from t flood hazards (e.g., with resulting potential impacts to existing regional storm water facilities), erosion and sedimentation, dewatering, scow, seiche and water quality. As discussed below, , impacts to groundwater drawdown and water quality are less than significant. Cou•ty or San &raardioo Laod Usc Services Department SCH. Na 1999101 V3 , Citrus Plaza Regional MallllYDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 14S -- 5.3 Hydrology/WaterQuality 533.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ' The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within ' Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As proposed future development ' projects would be subject to CEQA, potential impacts regarding hydrology/water quality would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no environmental impacts to hydrology/water quality aze anticipated with the implementation of the proposed Plan Amendments. 533.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all project sewer and water options. The project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project, Citrus Plaza Project) would result in the c°""~ IniGatatl construction and operation of water storage reservoirs, water pumping facilities, water pipelines, and ceanga sewer pipelines. Depending on the options selected, the project could also result in the construction ' and operation of an on-site water treatment facility, two groundwater production wells. and a wastewater treatment facility. 533.2.1 Surface Water Flooding Introduction of impervious surfaces in the project area will increase the quantity of storm waters dischazged from the project area and alter the quality of that runoff, thereby imposing additional demands upon azeawide drainage facilities and impacting both existing water quality ' within regional surface water and groundwater resources. Grubbing and associated grading activities will eliminate ground cover within the project azea and, thereby, increase the project area's I~„~ susceptibility to the influences of surFicial erosion. rJ'~ ' Project implementation will result in a change to existing drainage patterns, increase the quantity of cleaz flow, and decrease the quantity of bulk flow through the introduction of impervious surfaces. By introducing impervious surfaces onto the project azea, the ability of surface waters to permeate into the azeawide groundwater basin is minimized. In addition, the construction of paved surfaces which are subject to travel by motorized vehicles (e.g., pazking area, driveways, etc.) may Counry of San Bernardino Laod Ux Servim Departmcat SCFL Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 149 5.3 Hydrology/WaterQuality ' potentially impact the quality of existing surface waters through the introduction and conveyance of particulate and other pollutants which may be deposited upon those surface roadways. However, ; Ccunry such impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance as the project proponent will be required ~~~b~~ to implant BMPs in order to obtain permits for the control of stormwater dischazge as required by ceangt the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region and San Bernardino County. , The project area is not located in either the fltJOdplain of the San Timoteo Creek or the Mission Zanja Channel. On-site surface flows, which presently follow natural drainage patterns influenced by site topography, will be redirected along project azea streets and through on-site and/or off-site drninage conduits. In this fashion, on-site drainage will be controlled and directed to designated on-site storm drain conduits which will safely convey storm waters to outlets. The County of San Bemazdino Department of Transportation and Flood Control has , identified capacity constraints in the Mission Zanja Channel To the extent practicable, the proposed project will be engineered and designed so that minimal project generated surface flows will drain into this channel. It is anticipated that the majority of project flows will eventually drain into the Santa Ana River channel. The connection to an outfall at the Santa Ana River may involve the construction of a concrete headwall and possibly anenergy-dissipation structure. After design and engineering improvements, no significant flooding impacts aze anticipated. Flooding could be a concern if buildings or structures associated with the on-site water , treatment facilities (Water Options 1, 2A, or 2B) or buildings or structures associated with the on- site wastewater treatment facilities (Sewer Option 3) were located within the boundary of the 100- , year floodplain of the Santa Ana River. Final site selection for on-site buildings and structures associated with these facilities will incorporate the most cturent data obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), National Flood Insurance Program to ensure that no buildings or structures associated with the on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities aze located within the 100-yeaz floodplain. Erosion and Sedimentation During construction, when existing vegetative cover is removed from disturbed soil areas, ' those areas will become more susceptible to the influences of erosion. Given the properties of the soils located within the project area (soil properties aze more fully described in Section 5.2, Earth Resources), the potential for erosion is slight. The implementation of traditional engineering erosion control methods and best management practices (e.g., proper grading techniques, appropriate ' sloping of the construction site, sand bagging, drainage swales, regulaz watering of disturbed azeas), which constitute standazd conditions of grading pemrit approval, will effectively control fugitive ' dust and sediment transport during all construction operations and will control the dischazge of sediment into the area's storm drain system. Additionally, the project proponent will be required to obtain applicable NPDES pemtits (e.g., Consttuction Activities Stormwater Permit, Section 401 ' Couory arSao Beroardioo Land Use Servi[es Department SCIt Na 1999101121 ' Cittus Plaza Regional Ma1VI VDA Wazer & Sewn Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 150 53 Hydrology,'Water Quality ~' ~ Water Quality Certification) for storm water dischazges and non-storm water dischazges generated -- by construction and post-construction development, as may be required by San Bemazdino County and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region for the dischazge of urban pollutants. No significant impacts from erosion and sedimentation aze anticipated. ' Dewatering ' Due to the anticipated depth to groundwater in the project azea, estimated to be at least 120 feet below ground surface, only very limited dewatering during construction would occur if atypical ' conditions were to be encountered during the installation of subsurface pipelines. Should such conditions occur, temporary dewatering during construction, where necessary, is not expected to involve substantial quantities of water. Such water will be disposed of in accordance with NPDES ' dischazge permit conditions as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. Because only minimal amounts of water would be involved, no significant a-ts impacts from dewatering aze anticipated. Scour ' Pipeline improvements within the Santa Ana River channel (e.g., Water Options 2B, 3A, and 3C) will be installed underground at sufficient depth to avoid scour or modification of the Couan Iniaalen watercourse, and the ground surface will be restored to approximate pre-existing conditions. After Cbarige design and engineering improvements, no significant impacts associated with scour aze anticipated. Seiche Reservoir failure could result in the sudden release of the reservoir's contents, causing localized flooding immediately downstream. The reservoirs will be constructed in accordance with ' applicable Uniform Building Codes and American Water Works Standazds for Welded Steel Structures. Also, seismic design standards based on regional geology will be incorporated. Therefore, the possibility of reservoir rupture and flooding is considered small. With implementation of design engineering and control features, no significant impacts from seiches aze anticipated. ' Water Quality ' The conveyance of wastewater under all options, with the exception of Sewer Option 3 which includes the construction of a wastewater treatment plant ,would result in less-than- ' significant water quality impacts. This would occur because the wastewater, under all options, y 13 would be conveyed to facilities which can accommodate the wastewater flows generated by Citrus Plaza within their established capacities and that these facilities are equipped with systems which preclude adverse water quality impacts. Wastewater Option 3 will involve the construction and County of San Beruardiuo Land Use Services Department SCtL ~a 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIU1VDA Water B Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-lone 2001 Page I51 5.3 Hydrology/Water Qualiq , operation of a wastewater treatment plant along California Street north of San Bemazdino Avenue. This facility would be designed to serve all of the project area via a gravity system. The proposed ; wastewater treatment plant will be pemutted by the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region and will require a Waste Dischazge Permit and NPDES Permit. In order to meet all dischazge requirements, the wastewater treatment facility would include advanced tertiary treatment, ' as well as demineralization, in order to lower salinity to the level required for dischazge to the Santa Ana River or for reclaimed water use (i.e., on-site irrigation). , Phase I of Sewer Option 3 will consist of the construction of the wastewater treatment facility, construction of a 10-inch sewer in Almond Avenue and California Street, and the , construction of an outfall to the Santa Ana River. Phase I will serve approximately 125 acres of regional commercial (e.g., Citrus Plaza) with an estimated average daily capacity of 0.138 MGD. o,an9e The wastewater treatment facility will be expanded in several phases to accommodate future , development in the area. As the Phase I plant is expanded, its components will be absorbed into the expanded plant. The completed facility will have a fmal average day capacity of 1.738 MGD.20 The wastewater treatment facility will produce reclaimed water that is adequately disinfected, oxidized, coagulated, clarified, and filtered as required for stream dischazge. The plant ' will contain primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment. Primary treatment will consist of flow metering, screening, grit removal, and/or commutator and flow distribution. Secondary (biological) ' treatment will be an extended aeration or similar process including flow equalization, nitrification, dentrification, and clarification. Final tertiary treatment will consist of coagulation, filtration, demineralization, and disinfection. Disinfection will be by the use of ultraviolet light and/or chlorination. Approximately 75 percent of the effluent flow will be demineralized. The dimineralization stream will be blended with the remaining non-demineralized stream to produce an effluent meeting or exceeding the stringent Santa Ana River discharge requirements. The wastewater treatment facility will be designed and built with any required redundancy.'' Sludge produced during the treatment process will be digested, dewatered, and hauled to a ' commercial sludge disposal facility. Sludge produced in Phase I will be stored on-site in a sludge storage tank, emptied when full, and hauled to an appropriate disposal facility. Brine produced , during demineralization will be concentrated and hauled to an appropriate disposal facility. The design of the process piping, equipment arrangement, and unit structures in the , wastewater treatment facility will allow for efficiency and convenience in operation and maintenance and provide flexibility of operation to achieve the highest possible degree of treatment , -0 County ojSan Bernardino /eland galley Development Agency Unincorporated Areas A and 1 Water Supply and Sewerage Optioru, Appendix C, Wastewater Treatment Plant, Preliminary Design Concepts, p. /, Psomas, August i°~"~ ' /999 (included as Appendix G of the Final Subsequent E/R). cJ+anse 21 /bid. P. 4. County of Sm Bcrnardiuo Laod Use Services Department SCFI. No. 1999101121 ' Cim15 Plaza Regiotul MalI/IVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Fuel Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 152 5.3 Hydrology/Water Quality under varying circumstances. The wastewater treatment facility shall contain instrumentation and alarms as required. The alalms will, at minimum, provide warning of: (1) loss of power from the normal power supply; (2) failure of biological process; (3) failure of the disinfection process; (4) failure of coagulation process; (5) failure of filtration process; and (6) any other process failure ' which is required by applicable regulatory agencies. The wastewater treatment facility will have a redundant power supply source. Normal electrical power will be supplied by the local power company. In addition, a standby power generator will be connected into the wastewater treatment ' plant power center through an auto transfer switch and alarm device. If power is interrupted, an alarm will immediately be sounded, and through the auto transfer switch, the standby power generator activated.tZ The proposed wastewater treatment facility will not result in the degradation of any of the beneficial uses of the Santa Ana River since the water would receive tertiary treatment and meet all of the water quality requirements imposed on this facility by the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd. Mitigation measures to address the potential for an accidental release of untreated or ~~~h minatea partially treated effluent at the wastewater treatment facility aze included in Section 5.8, Human Caanga Health, within this document. No significant impacts to surface water quality aze anticipated. Regazding water quality resulting from storm water runoff, under the requirements of NPDES, the County would be required to obtain a General Construction Storm Water Permit, which ' contains the following three major requirements: (I) eliminate non-storm water dischazges; (2) develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); and (3) develop and implement a Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the General Permit. The SWPPP typically consists of all Best Management Practices (BMPs) which will be implemented to reduce or eliminate the dischazge of pollutants to storm water which is the most important requirement and the key to source controls. The overall objective of the entire storm water program is to reduce or eliminate the ' dischazge of pollutants into the storm water conveyance system. The permit objective is achieved by way of pollution prevention. To eliminate pollutants in storm water, one can either clean it up by ' removing pollutants or prevent it from becoming polluted in the first place. Because of the overwhelming volume of storm water and the enormous costs associated with pollutant removal, pollution prevention is the only practical approach. Pollution prevention, which means stopping the ' generation of pollution at its source by reducing the use of products containing pollutants, is, in fact, the basis of the entire storm water pemtitting program. Once pollutants have been generated, ' pollution control BMPs must be employed to prevent the existing pollution from coming into contact with waters of the State. BMPs to be employed for the proposed project during construction include the tlse of proper grading techniques, appropriate sloping of the construction site, sand ' bagging, drainage swales, and regulaz watering of disturbed areas. With the implementation of Ibid Couory ar Sao Beroardioo Lied Uu Services Department $CR Na 1999101 V3 ' Citrus Plea Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan - Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 153 5.3 HydrologvJlNater Quality project BMPs during construction, no significant impacts to surface water quality would occur. ,~"„~ ' Also refer to Sections 5?.3?.7 and 5?.5.2 (Earth Resowces) for additional information regazding cnangc BMPs which are recornmended to be incorporated into the project during the installation of , pipelines in which soil is stockpiled in a manner which has the potential to create an adverse erosion or water quality impact. 5332.2 Groundwater Drawdown Water Options 1 and 2 rely on water wells located in the northeastern portion of IVDA Area A which will deliver an average supply of 1.973 MGD, or 1,400 gpm. The wells will be about ' 1,000 feet in depth. The groundwater table in the vicinity of the proposed wells is more than 100 ~„~y feet below the land surface, and the wells will be perforated over the interval from about 800 to '~;;,°~a 1,000 feet below the land surface, or 700 to 900 feet below the water table. To operate these wells, a ' water treatment plant, also included in Water Options 1 and 2, would be constructed and operated, with an extensive water quality monitoring program consistent with the requirements of the California Departrnent of Health Services. Reservoirs will also be constructed and operated. Reservoir storage is required to provide fire storage, daily operating storage, and emergency storage. Ptunp stations will be necessary at each reservoir to pressurize the distribution system. The pump , stations will be sized to supply fire and maximum daily demands?' The selected siting of the two groundwater production wells will have no significant impact ' upon the production of adjacent wells. Only one of the proposed wells will operate at any given time. By alternating operational drawdown, impacts from the resulting cone of depression will be minimal. The volume of groundwater being extracted is small relative to the overall size of the grotmdwater basin. No significant impacts associated with groundwater drawdown aze anticipated. Water Options 3 through 7 utilize facilities which aze wholly or partially served by the San , Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). As set forth in the SBVMWD Regional Water Facilities Master Plan, there is currently excess capacity of as much as 60,000 acre-feet/yeaz , of groundwater in a number of existing wells in the Bruilcer Hill Groundwater Basin Pressure Zone. Construction of new groundwater wells has been identified by SBVMWD as part of that agency's water resotJrce management strategy. The Regional Water Facilities Master Plan states that as water demands grow in the future, additional Btutker Hill Basin production will be needed in addition to the capacity available in existing wells or replacement wells. Additional dedicated high-capacity , wells would be added as needed, with depths and locations to be determined. Thus, impacts on groundwater drawdown associated with Water Options 3 through 7 would be less than significant. County of Saa Bernardino Laud Usc Services Department SCH. Na x999101 V3 ' Citrus PIaTa Regional MaIVIVDA Watcr& Sewer Services Plan final Subsequem EIR-June 2001 Page 154 53 Hydrology/Water Quality Both the IVDA and City of San Bemazdino have indicated surplus water supply capacity to provide water service. The City of San Bemazdino, IVDA and the City of Riverside obtain the ' majority of their water supply from the Bunker Hill Groundwater Basin. The demands of the project are not expected to have a noticeable impact on the availability of groundwater from the Bunker Hill Basin and not result in an agency having to develop an additional water supply. The City of San Bemazdino has high groundwater issues in parts of the Ciry that have caused construction-related problems. Both the City of San Bemazdino and San Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District have been reviewing options to lower the groundwater table in these azeas. Water service by the City of San Bemazdino would help mitigate the City's high groundwater s-za problem by assisting in lowering the water tables in the affected azeas. San Bemazdino Valley Municipal Water District is currently negotiating with the Orange County Water District to sell them surplus groundwater from under the City of San Bernardino. SBVMWD is a state water contractor ' and has surplus capacity available, which also could serve the Donut Hole azea. No significant impacts associated with groundwater drawdown aze anticipated. ' Water Quality ' Water Options 1 and 2 rely on the water wells located in the northeastern portion of IVDA Area A, while Water Options 3 through 7 rely on the use of existing facilities. Impacts to ~ groundwater aze not anticipated to occur with implementation of Water Options 3 through 7, as the ' existing facilities that would serve the Citrus Plaza project include systems in place, as required, to satisfactorily address groundwater quality issues and that the quantity of groundwater extraction ' associated with serving the Citrus Plaza is consistent with the capacity limitations at these facilities. As such, groundwater impacts associated with the implementation of Water Options 3 through 7 aze less than significant. With regazd to Water Options 1 and 2, nitrate (NO3) has historically been encountered in existing wells within the project area, in concentrations that exceed State drinking water standazds, ' due to long-term fertilization of citrus agriculture. Nitrate concentrations aze higher in the upper part of the aquifer, and the nitrate level can be minimized by extracting water at deeper depths. ' With regazd to Water Options 1 and 2, available data indicates that TCE and perchlorate contamination does not occur in the vicinity of the proposed water well sites. It is estimated that the TCE and perchlorate plumes are located more than 1,500 feet west and 3,000 feet south from the closest project wells. It is estimated that both the TCE and perchlorate plumes will pass by the closest project wells in the yeaz 2009. When these plumes pass moving westwazd, the longitudinal, e-71 ' zs County aj San Bernardino Inland Valley Development Agency Area A (Donut Hole) /mpact of Water Supply Pumping on Contaminant Migration, Psomas, p. /, August 1999. County of Sao 8eraardino Land Use Services Dcpar[ment SCR Na 1999101173 ' Citrus Plare Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 155 5.3 Hydrology/WarerQualiry or east-west centerline of the plumes will be approximately 2 miles south of the closest project , well?' '' The Donut Hole is part of the IVDA. The IVDA has expressed interest in providing water to the Donut Hole. IVDA can construct additional wells if necessary and is not restricted by any ' adjudication. Special Districts would expect to pay the cost of additional treatment, if additional treatment is required, and this cost will be added to the fees and/or charges imposed for supplying water. , Proposed water-supply pumping will not induce the migrntion of the TCE or perehlorate ' contaminants into the wells. The horizontal limit of the capture zone for the wells does not extend into the TCE or perchlorate plumes. The horizontal capture zone for the wells, within the lower aquifer west of the proposed wells, extends approximately 1,300 feet north and south of the ' proposed wells. Groundwater more than 1,300 feet south or more than 1,300 feet north will not be drawn into the proposed wells. The vertical limit of the capture zone for the wells does not extend ' upward into the intervals contaminated with TCE of perchlorate. The vertical capture zone for the wells extends from the base of the lower aquifer [0 450 feet below the ground surfacers No contamination occurs in the lower aquifer, which is the aquifer within which the proposed water supply wells would be perforated. Wells would be perforated from approximately 800 to 1,000 feet below the ground surface 26 It is anticipated that the extraction of an estimated 1.973 million gallons per day from project groundwater wells would not result in significant movement of the contaminant ' plume, as a result of the proposed project. No significant impacts to groundwater quality are meua a anticipated. , With regazd to Water Options 1 and 2, since the volume of groundwater that would be extracted for the proposed project is small, relative to agricultural uses that have historically extracted groundwater in the project area, and since project groundwater wells will be drawing groundwater from a relatively lazge groundwater basin, no significant impacts related to drawdown ' are anticipated. The project groundwater wells will not have a significant impact upon the production or water quality of adjacent groundwater production wells. Only one of the groundwater wells associated with Water Options 1 and 2 wrill operate at any given time. except in the event of an , extreme fire emergency when both wells may be operational. By alternating operational drawdown, any impacts from the resulting "cone of depression" will be less than significant. Regarding the City of Redlands wastewater percolation ponds, the recharge water would ' remain in the upper aquifer in the vicinity of the proposed project wells under Water Option 1, and ' za Ibid, p. 12. ' -5 Ibid, p. 17. za Ibrd.. P. /8. Couaty arSaa aeroardiao Laad Use Services Dcpartmcar SCK Na 1999101 V3 Citntc Plaza Regional MalUIVDA Water&Sewer Service Plan Final SuMegant ElR-JUrc 2001 t Page 156 ~ 1 - 5.3 Hgdrology/WaterQualin ' potentially wastewater-contaminated groundwater would not be captured by the wells. While the - horizontal limit of the capture zone for the proposed wells under Water Option 1 does extend beneath the wastewater percolation ponds, the vertical limit of the capture zone for the proposed wells does not include the upper or even the middle aquifers. Consequently, the proposed water- supply pumping will not capture the wastewater percolate.=' No significant impacts to groundwater quality aze anticipated. ' The proposed water treatment facility would employ a dual pass carbon treatment with 100 percent redundancy and include a disinfection station. Granulaz activated cazbon (GAC) will remove contaminants via adsorption as water is passed through cazbon filters. When the removal ' efficiency drops, the GAC is removed and replaced. The spent GAC is reactivated off-site by commercial GAC vendors. The facilities consist of several pressure vessels piping and valves. The ' finish water will be disinfected in accordance with California Department of Health Services requirements. A water quality monitoring system shall be installed along with established operating protocols to ensure that water quality continues to meet California Department of Health Services ' standards. With all requisite systems in place, no significant impacts to groundwater quality are anticipated. ' 53.33 Citrus Plaza Site 533.3.1 Surface Water ' The County's Comprehensive Storm Drain Plan No. 4 indicates that storm drainage discharged from the Citrus Plaza Project site should be conveyed northerly along Alabama Street to a point of dischazge into the Santa Ana River. The San Bernardino County Transportation and ~^ry me~aree Flood Control Department has further indicated that, due to capacity constraints in the Mission Zanja Channel, the facility plans presented in the County's Plan most closely corresponds with the County's current storm water planning for drainage improvements affecting the Citrus Plaza Project ' site. ' Storm drain improvements identified as part of the Phase I (Power Center) development will involve the collection and conveyance of storm waters from the area of that development to an interim detention basin to be constructed on a 16 t acre area located in the northwesterly portion of ' the Phase II (Regional Mall) site. This detention basin will decrease peak flows generated from the Citrus Plaza site, eliminate existing flooding conditions at the intersection of Alabama Street and ' San Bernardino Avenue, and aileviate existing flooding conditions downstream along San Bernardino Avenue. After design and engineering improvements, no significant flooding impacts or impacts to surface water quality are anticipated. Z' /bid, p. 17. County of San Btroardino band Use Services Deparlmeot SCN. Nw 1999101 V3 ' Citrus Plaza Regional bialVIVDA Water & Sewer services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 21101 Page 157 1 5.3 HydrologylWater Quality 533.3.2 Groundwater The local wells currently located on the Citrus Plaza Project site historically provided non- ' potable water for irrigation associated with agricultural uses. Historical non-potable water rsan~ consumption on the CltruS Plaza site is estimated at 731,808 gallons per day. It is estimated that the , Citrus Plaza regional mall would substantially reduce the historical non-potable water use from 731,808 gallons per day to 151,897 gallons per day. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated ' Options for the two active on-site groundwater wells (identified as the Alabama Street and ' Lugonia Avenue wells) include, but may not be limited to: (1) retention of one or both of the wells by the project proponent andfor subsequent operation by a small mutual water company as private wells; (2) cap (abandon and destroy) one or both wells in accordance with standazds established by the RWQCB; or (3) dedication of one or both wells with associated easements. No significant impacts to groundwater are anticipated. 53.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' As discussed above, no significant impacts from flooding, erosion, sedimentation, dewatering, seiches, or impacts associated with scour are expected as a result of the proposed ' project. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to ctmulative impacts would be de minimis, and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed project would not result. ' The conveyance of wastewater under all options, with the exception of Sewer Option 3 which includes the construction and operation of a wastewater treatment plant on the Citrus Plaza i~aaim ' site. would result in less-than-significant water quality impacts. Mitigation measures to address the cn~a potential for a release at the wastewater treatment facility are included in Section 5.8, HtJman ' Health, within this document. With incorporation of the mitigation measures, impacts to water quality would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to the substantial degradation of water quality, and cumulative impacts associated with , development of the proposed project would not result. Impacts on groundwater drawdown associated with Water Options 3 through 7 would be , less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be de tninimis, and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed project would not , result. For Water Options 1 and 2, the water treatment plant would be constructed and operated with an extensive water quality monitoring program, consistent with the requirements of the California Department of Health Services. With all requisite systems in place, impacts to groundwater quality , and dJawdown would be reduced to less-than-signiftcant levels. Therefore, the proposed project 1 County of Sao aeroardioo Laod Uac Services Depanment SCtI. No. 1999101113 Civus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & $ewtt Smices Plan Final SuMequrnt E[R- Junc 2001 , Page 158 ' - 53 Hydrology/WaterQualiry ' would not contribute to substantial groundwater drawdown, and cumulative impacts associated with _ development of the proposed project would not result. Afrer design and engineering improvements, no significant flooding impacts or impacts to surface water quality aze anticipated as a result of development of Citrus Plaza. No significant impacts to groundwater are anticipated. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis, and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed ' project would not result. State and local regulations governing water quality, including the General Permit for Storm Water Discharge and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), are in place to reduce potential impacts to acceptable levels. Mitigation measures have been included to ensure that water quality continues to meet California Department of Health Services standards. Compliance with these regulations would reduce the potential for impacts related to potential discharge into surface - water or changes in water quality to levels of insignificance. Therefore, the proposed project would i not contribute to the substantial degradation of water quality or hydrology-related impacts, and cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed project would not result. ' Similar to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process, and any project-related impacts would ' be expected to be reduced to the extern feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The. analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bernardino 1 Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project s cumulative impacts and aze more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the i~,n~ ' Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 199 Citrus Plaza Final EIR o'~° aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative ' impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which ' was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). Thus, no cumulative impacts would occur. 53.5 MITIGATION MEASURES ' 535.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ' No mitigation measures for the Plan Amendments aze required. ' County of Sao Bcroardioo Laod Use Services Deparlmeot SCFL Na 1999IOll73 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall/IVDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Pinal Subsequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 159 1 S.i Hydrology/WaterQualin~ 53.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project ~ n , IniLateO Large Water Options 1 and 2 ' • Water Treatment Facilities. A water quality monitoring system shall be installed along ' with established operating protocols to ensure that water quality continues to meet California Department of Health Services standazds. • Water Treatment Facilities. The project facilities' operator shall initiate consultation ' with all federal, State, and local agencies, as appropriate, and shall secure any and all permits and meet all regulations in force at the time of permit issuance so that, if , required, a safe chlorine spill management system shall be provided for the water supply facilities. ' • Water Treatment Facilities. If required for treatment, the proposed chlorine spill system shall be designed in accordance with the regulatory obligations of all applicable governing agencies and shall be capable of processing the worst-case accident and shall be capable of operation with the primary power supply out of service. Water Options 2B, 3A, and 3C , • Underground pipeline improvements shall be installed at sufficient depth to avoid scour caroa ' Imhaletl or modification of the Santa Ana River channel. Disruptions to the ground surface shall Charge be restored to approximate pre-existing conditions. Sewer Option 3 Only ' cou~y m~harea Charge • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. If required by the RWQCB through the permit I°NGedI ' process, blending of reclaimed water with lower TDS water will be required to reduce the salinity, boron, and chloride concentrations in those waters used for on-site irrigation. Alternatively, landscape plants selected for the approved Citrus Plaza project shall be ' selected based upon their tolerance to those constituents. aat • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The project proponent and/or facilities' operator shall ' obtain any and all permits and associated approvals as may be required from the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) and such other ' agencies with jurisdiction by law over the site and the resources located thereupon prior to the construction and operation of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment facilities. Such permits shall include, but may not be limited to, waste dischazge requirements and ' water reclamation requirements. Couuty of Sao Beru•rdiuo L•od Use Services Dep•rtmeot SCH. No. t999101I2i ' Citrus Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 160 ' S3 Hydrology/WaterQualin ' • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The water quality of treated effluent shall satisfy the _ water quality objectives contained in the Water Quality Control Plan -Santa Ana River ' Basin (1995), as established by the Regional Water Quality Boazd, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB), or subsequently imposed upon the project by the RWQCB by the permit process. • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The wastewater treatment facilities shall be constructed and operated in accordance with California Department of Health Services ' wastewater reclamation regulations regarding treatment process, water quality, treatment reliability, and emergency response requirements to ensure that the wastewater treatment facilities avoid the creation of undue health risks. Additional mitigation measures which ~~a~~ address accidental releases of untreated or partially treated effluent aze included in Section 5.8, Human Health. ' Water Option 2 and Sewer Option 3 and Citrus Plan Site Options ' • The project shall intercept, detain, and conduct accumulated off-site drainage around or tluough Area A in a manner that will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream s-z ' properties, as demonstrated by an approved storm drain plan. In the case of the Citrus Plaza project, permanent drainage improvements will be required per the appropriate components of "Comprehensive Storm Drain Plan No. 4" to intercept and conduct ' drainage flows through or azound the site in an approved manner. Interim drainage improvements such as an on-site detention basin, constructed in conformance with ' County adopted detention basin policies and design standazds and criteria, or such other ~ measures as agreed to by the County Department of Transportation and Flood Control may be constructed upon approval by the County as an interim measure for Phase [ ' development for a period not to exceed three yeazs. County ' Citrus Plaza Project Imuatea Chage • Grease traps shall be installed and maintained at all restaurant and food services ' facilities. ' 53.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ' With the incorporation of the mitigation measures identified above, hydrology/water quality impacts would be less than significant. ' County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Dep•rlme•t SCH. Na 1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 161 ~- - 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.4 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION 1 5.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ' 5.4.1.1 Regulatory Environment The San Bernardino Associated Governments (SanBAG) administers the Congestion ' Management Plan for San Bemazdino County (CMP). The Congestion Management Plan (CMP) is astate-mandated program designed to address urban congestion. The requirement to prepaze - regional Congestion Management Plans was enacted by the California legislature to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions made through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A Countywide approach has been established by the local CMP agency to ' implement the statutory requirements of the CMP. The Countywide approach entails designating a highway network that includes all state highways and principal arterials within the County and monitoring the network's standards. Monitoring of the CMP network is the responsibility of local i ' jurisdictions. ' SanBAG is also responsible for the review and approval of the project's traffic impact analysis as required under the CMP. In addition to analyzing a project's impacts on local intersections, all development projects requiring preparation of an Environmental Impact Repoli are subject to the Land Use Analysis program of the CMP. This requirement allows for both an assessment of overall future freeway conditions and a determination of project-specific impacts on regional transportation facilities. Proposed projects which have the potential to affect the designated CMP network (mainline freeway segments and principal arterial streets and highways) aze required to identify and to mitigate, where feasible and appropriate, their adverse effects on the network. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), through its sepazate organizational cea~N districts, is res nsible for re grin and im lementin re Tonal trans nation lans, constructin ~~~e° Po P P g P g g )ro P g ~a ' and maintaining State roadways (e.g., the I-10 and SR-30 Freeways), preparing route concept plans, and coordinating State and local actions regazding State transportation facilities. ' The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan became the superseding land use regulation for the project site azea on September 6, 1989. T'he adoption of that Specific Plan effectively deleted and replaced the sections of the County of San Bernardino General Plan and the City of Redlands General Plan that address the local circulation system for the affected azea. The Circulation Plan 1 Couory ofSan Berosrdino Liod Use Service Department SCR Nw 1999101173 ' Cinus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2IX11 Page 162 5.4 Transportation/Circula[ion constitutes a component of the East Valley Corridor Specific P1an38 adopted as part of the County' of 1 San Bernardino Development Code.'-' These conditions aze discussed in Section ~.1 (Land Use), provided in full in Appendix D (East Valley Comdor Specific Plan: Axiom, Goals, Policies and ' Objectives) and referenced in Section 3.1 (Statement of Objectives) of the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. This discussion and coaesponding guidelines are incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. t 5.4.1.2 Physical Environment ' A detailed discussion of the existing transportation/circulation setting for the proposed project is provided in the 1995 Fina] EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Section i.4 ' (Transportation/Circulation). The unincorporated County area which includes the Citrus Plaza project site and the adjacent area surrounded by the corporate boundaries of the City of Redlands are ' served by a network of streets and highways providing local circulation and access. These facilities are described in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Section 5.4 (Transportation/Circulation). This discussion, as stunmarized below, is incorporated into this ' Subsequent EIR by reference. Existing Freeway, Highway and Local Street System t The I-10 Freeway provides the major east-west transportation route serving the East Valley ' Corridor Specific Plan area. It extends from the Pacific Ocean in Los Angeles County (on the west) to the California-Arizona border (on the southeast). In the vicinity of the project azea, the I-10 ' Freeway has full freeway-to-freeway interchanges with the I-215 and SR-30 Freeways. In addition, ramp connections are available at Waterman Avenue, Tippecanoe Avenue/Anderson Avenue, Mountain View Avenue, California Street, Alabama Street, Tennessee Street, Orange Street, ' University Street and Cypress Avenue, as well as at other locations to the east and west. The SR-30 Freeway generally runs in a north-south direction through the City of Redlands. A full freeway-to- freeway interchange is provided at the southern terminus at the I-10 Freeway. Surface street ramp ' connections are available at San Bernardino Avenue, 5th Street and Baseline Street, as well as at other locations to the northwest. The SR-30 Freeway serves for infra-regional and local trips for ' communities along the foothills of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains. Four arterial highways (i.e., Alabama Street, California Street, Mountain View Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue) have duect access to the I-10 Freeway and one additional arterial highway (i.e., San Bemazdino ' Avenue) has an existing interchange with the SR30 Freeway. 1 i, 28 Section EF'a.0105 et seq. (Circulation Plan), bast Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Z9 Covnry of San Bernwdino Devefopment Code. Section 86.030850 (East Valley Corridor Planning Areal. Conory or Sao Beraardioo Land Uu Strvitts Depanmeot SCFL Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 ' Page 163 --- 5.4 Transportation,~Circulation t Rail ' Two major rail lines of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad serve the East Valley Corridor azea. Public Transit ' Omnittans operates awell-coordinated system of bus routes throughout the urbanized areas of southwestern San Bemazdino County and is the primary service provider in and around the East ' Valley Corridor azea, inclusive of the City of Redlands. Omnitrans has one line that provides direct access to the entire western boundary of the proposed Citrus Plaza project site. In addition to routes operating in the general vicinity of the proposed Citrus Plaza site, Omnitrans operates additional routes which offer transfers to this route and enable fairly direct service to the Citrus Plaza site from most areas within the City of Redlands and the stJrrounding Cities of Yucaipa, Loma Linda, San Bemazdino, Highland, Rialto and Fontana. Air Travel ' Ontario International Airport is located approximately 20 miles west of the East Valley ' Corridor area and provides both regional access and service for the Citrus Plaza project site. In addition, the Redlands Municipal Airport provides another aviation node in the project area. The proposed project is designed to address localized corrunercial demands and does not include activities that directly relate to airport tJSe or demand. Thus, implementation of the proposed project would not create an impact to airport travel or airport facilities and no further discussion of this issue is warranted. t I Analysis of Existing Traffic Conditions The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included a traffic analysis for the Citrus ' Plaza project in accordance with the requirements and associated methodologies set forth within SANBAG's CMP for San Bemazdino County. As a few years have passed since the completion of this traffic study, a recent analysis of traffic conditions has been completed to validate the analysis as well as the adequacy of the mitigation measures set forth therein. The analysis presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, as stunmarized below, is incorporated into this Subsequent EIR by reference. The recently completed validation report is provided as Appendix E ' to this Subsequent Draft EIR. These traffic studies analyzed conditions at a total of 28 local and 13 additional CMP intersections. ' The analysis of existing traffic conditions concludes that all but eight of the analyzed intersections (i.e., five study intersections and three additional CMP intersections) are operating at level of service (LOS) C or better doting the P.M. peak hour. (See Table 5.4.1 for a definition of County or Sao Bernardino Laod Usr Services Departmcot SCH. Na 1999IOr123 ' Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan - Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 164 5.4 TtanspottatiorJCirculation , LOS). In 1999, three of these five local intersections operate at LOS F, one additional intersection operates at LOS E, and the fifth intersection operates at LOS E. The three CMP intersections (i.e., ; California Street/I-10 WB ramps and F1B ramps; University Street/I-10 EB ramps) aze opernting at LOS F and aze all Stop sign-controlled. With regazd to freeway conditions, all analyzed segments aze operating at acceptable levels, although the I-10 Freeway is currently experiencing congestion ' near the I-21 ~ Freeway. 5.4.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance were derived from the State CEQA Guidelines at ' the time the 1995 Final EIR was written and aze incorporated by reference. These thresholds aze Caro wamm , also used in the analysis of the updated traffic study. A project may be deemed to have a significant CAarga transportation/circulation impact if it will: (1) conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located; (2) cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation ' to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system; (3) encourage activities which result in the use of large amounts of fuel, water, or energy; (4) disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community; and/or (5) interfere with emergency response plans or emergency , evacuation plans. The San Bemazdino County General Plan contains a policy that recognizes that while the , development approval process is dependent upon a balance between new development, transportation facilities and the timing of needed construction or improvement of transportation ' facilities, the County shall approve development proposals only when they are consistent with the county's objective of maintaining a LOS C on highways and intersections affected by the development. Furthermore, the EVCSP also establishes the objective to provide sufficient roadway ' and intersection capacities to maintain a minimum LOS C. In recognition of the policy and objective statements, a project that produces a level of service worse than LOS C would be deemed ' to be significant. For state highway and freeway segments, a significant impact would occur if a project results in a level of service worse than LOS E. The 1945 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR also included a discussion of the intent of ' the County to "design a comprehensive, functional and efficient circulation system of sufficient , capacity to accommodate projected traffic demands at all phases of development, which is consistent with regional master transportation plans." This discussion is incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. Further, the standazds which were in force and effect upon adoption of the ' EVCSP have been subsequently modified through the preparation of other azeawide plans and policies. Those plans include, but may not be limited to the SanBAG Congestion Management Plan for San Bemazdino County and the SCAG Regional Mobility Element of the Regional , Comprehensive Plan. No formal LOS standards are contained in either the Regional Mobility Plan or the Regional Comprehensive Plan. ' County orSao Bernardino Lead Use Services Department SCH. No. 1999101127 ' Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1Vl VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subscgttent EIR -June 2001 Page l65 5.4 Ttanspona[ion~Cvculation Table 5.4-1 _ LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS ' AS A FUNCTION OF DELAY VALUES Level of Stopped Delay per Service Vehicle (seconds) Description of Operating Characteristics A 5.0 or less Uncongested operations; all vehicles clear in a single cycle. B 5.1 to li.0 Light congestion; occasional approach phase is fully utilized. C I5.1 to 25.0 Moderate congestion; occasional backups on critical approaches. D 25.1 to 40.0 Congestion on critical approaches, but intersection functional. Vehicles required to wait through more than one cycle during short ' peaks. No long-standing lines formed. Used as the desirable design level for many urban areas E 40.1 to 60.0 Severe congestion with some long-standing tines on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected turning movements. -- F More than 60.0 Forced flow with stoppages of long duration. Source: Crain & Associates. The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR also included the following threshold which is incorporated by reference into this document. This threshold is also used in the analysis of the m ~"~ ' updated traffic study. A significant traffic impact is defined as a location where the project would c"a"sa contribute 50 or more trips and where cumulative traffic would cause traffic conditions at an ' intersection to degrade below the San Bemazdino County General Plan and East Valley Comdor Specific Plan's objective of LOS C (i.e., an average stopped delay of more than 25 seconds per vehicle). 5.4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.4.3.1 Proposed Specific Plan Amendments ' The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and ' associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and ' wastewater services to individual development sites within the IVDA area. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or ' guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual ' County of Sao Bernardino Laod Usc Services Depanmcm SCFI. Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 166 5.4 Transportation/Circuiation development projects, such as Citfvs Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all future development projects which are of a sufficient size to adversely affect the transportation system are required to be analyzed pursuant to SANBAG's CMP requirements, ' potential impacts on the transportationJcirculation system would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts aze anticipated with the implementation of the ' proposed Plan Amendments. 5.4.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities ' The following environmental impact analysis applies to all project sewer and water options. , Implementation of all infrastructure options would occur either subsurface or on a development site within IVDA Area A (i.e., the proposed water and wastewater treatment facilities proposed under Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3). As such, no long-term impacts would occur and ' potential impacts on the azea's circulation system would be less than significant. However, the demolition and subsequent removal of all existing improvements now located along the proposed ' pipeline routes as well as the construction of future pipelines and the water and wastewater treatment facilities under Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 could result in impacts to the roadways in the immediate vicinity of any particulaz construction site. Such impacu could include lane closures as well as limitations on access to private property. However, if these effects did occur, they would be temporary. To assure that any such temporary impacts are minimized, access to and through the pipeline construction zones, as well as the water and wastewater treatment , facilities under Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3, would be maintained at all times for both vehicles and pedestrians during the construction period. In addition, haul routes would be identified in advance, if required. As a result, the potential impacts associated with the construction of any infrastructure option would be less than significant. 5.433 Citrus Plaza Site ' Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis , The Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan identified the following traffic and ' transportation-related impacts: • Projected increase in vehicle mileage would decrease service levels of existing roads. This would be a less than significant impact. • Three intersections of the proposed circulation network have less than LOS C conditions. This would be a significant impact. • Proposed development would incrementally and cumulatively increase regional traffic. , This would be a significant impact. Cowry ofSa• Bernardino La•d Use Servies Depnnmmt SCR Na 1999101 V3 Cious Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Sulrsequem ElR-Juno 2001 , Page 167 _ 5.4 Ttansporta[ion/Circulation Although transportation system improvements are not specifically identified as mitigation - measures in the Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, the transportation system ' improvements constitute components of the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan. Those street improvements that aze designed to minimize and/or avoid the cumulative environmental effects associated with the buildout of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan are detailed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and incorporated by reference. The project specific environmental impacts identified for Citrus Plaza in the 1995 Final EIR include the following: ' • Phase I of the Citrus Plaza project would significantly impact three study area intersections and one other CMP intersection, prior to mitigation, during the P.M. peak ' hour. Based on the analysis of yeaz 2010 conditions, prior to mitigation, the completed project (Phase I and II) would significantly impact 19 study area intersections and eight other CMP intersections in the P.M. peak hours. • Project-related and cumulative traffic impacts upon the local street system can be ' effectively mitigated to LOS C or better through the implementation of azeawide street improvements. This would be a less than significant impact. • Without substantial basic capacity improvements, the already congested conditions on i the I-]0 freeway will worsen both with and without the proposed project. This would be a significant impact. Project impacts on the SR-30 freeway aze less than significant. • Traffic conditions at the project's vehiculaz access locations on Alabama Street, San Bemazdino, Lugonia Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Spenser Drive) ' can be effectively mitigated. This would be a less than significant impact. • Project development could result in a substantial increase in transit ridership for those bus lines directly serving the CltrnS Plaza site. While the increased ridership from Phase I could be easily accommodated by existing service levels, improved service would be ' required at project buildout in 2010. Since Omnitrans would be able to accommodate the increase in service, project impacts aze less than significant. ' • Project implementation will increase on-site pazking demands. With consideration of the project's proposed pazking plan and the requirement that the project comply with all ' applicable code requirements, project impacts on pazking would be less than significant. Revised Project Impacts The following discussion is based on the Traffic Validation Study which is included as Appendix E of this document. The approved traffic analysis, dated August 1995, analyzed project Coutrry of Sao Ber••rdioo L•od Uu Services Department SCR Na 19991011]3 Citrus Plata Regional MaIVIVDA blazer&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent FJR-June 2001 Page 168 5.4 Transportatiom'Circulation and cumulative traffic impacts through the year 2010. At the time the traffic analysis was prepazed, ' the project was expected to have a first phase built within a year of project approval. Due to legal ,~ delays, that first phase has not yet been constructed. However, buildout for the revised project is projected to occur well within the period extending through the year 2010, the buildout year for which traffic impacts were previously analyzed. ' Two sepazate analyses were performed as part of the Traffic Validation Study to review the change in traffic conditions in light of cun•ent growth patterns. In the first anal}'sis, the traffic , volumes which aze currently present on study area roadways (based on counts conducted during 1999) were compared to the 1994 traffic levels. The rate of traffic growth was then compared to , that assumed in the traffic analysis. In the second analysis, the current level of approved and proposed land use intensification was compazed to the assumed land use growth in the traffic analysis. Together, these two elements were used to determine the adequacy of the projections of , traffic conditions contained in the approved 1995 traffic analysis given the recent growth patterns in the project azea. Comparison of Traffic Volume Analysis. As a first step in this analysis, 1999 conditions were compared to 1994 conditions to establish parity in terms of existing (baseline) traffic ' conditions. Current (1999) traffic volume counts were conducted at all 41 study intersections (28 project area intersections and 13 other CMP intersections). Utilizing the same procedures as followed in the August 1995 traffic analysis, these volumes were then used to compute the volume to capacity N/C) ratios and LOS for all study intersections. As is shown in Table ~.4-2, the traffic volume growth at the study intersections is consistent with the projected annual growth in the region. A comparison of the haffic volumes at the study intersections shows a total growth of 5.1 percent or an annual growth of 1.0 percent in traffic in the ' five years since 1994. Table 5.4-2 also contains the projected growth in traffic volumes. As this table shows, the total pre-project traffic volume growth for study intersections, in comparison to ' existing conditions, was 82.7 percent and the average annual compound rate was 3.8 percent. This does not include any additional growth anticipated to result from the project. Thus, the actual traffic growth patterns have been well below the predicted growth levels. Further, the total traffic volumes ' at every study intersection are well below the cumulative traffic volumes analyzed and mitigated in the 1995 traffic analysis. 1 Coooty or Sao Bernardino Laod Uu Strviees Department SCFL Na 1999]0] ID Citnu Playa Regional MalU1VDA Water&Sewer Services Plan final Subsequent pR-June 2001 ' Page 169 n ~ C ~ N O n ~ c ` ~ 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 o e o e o 0 0 0 o e e o 0 o e e e a e e o o e e e e e o e e~ e e e o o e e o e e _ I U O ~O - 00 vl O V' 00 N~ P O r e0 1~ Q N~ b N a h 1~ M vt 00 - Q h Q~ h N N O N ~/i a0 p~ O M O~ C ~D M ~O Q M O~ t~ ~ Q Q~ M 00 1~ r N ' ^ ~ Y P N I~ 00 \O M I~ P~ O~ 00 ~ 1~ N r h 1~ O~ h V1 V ~O .^-. P M ~O P O 00 Z~ C I .P. _ N - - - ~ u A V ~ Q ` 0 L .N- r vl-M P v1 O7 N1~-aO O~ O~-R vt-v1 ~O OEM ~071~ MO O~oO ~~, O i h~ ul -- M t~ N- B O O ~O - M O V O~ _ r O 00 v1 P h N N-O~ T Q-r O~ Ov~~~O R 00 ~O7 ~O 00 t~ ON~DR oOOOM 1~ a ut t o 0 0 0 0 0 e o e o o e e o 0 0 o e o o e o e o 0 ~ I to e e o e o o e a e e e o e o e e o o e o 0 o e e o a o pp~ ' W M r M "f M O~ O H M~ C N eO M V1 h 00 \O M h O Q~ Vl N 00 P u I ~ O N~ vi eD V R t~ - P 00 O N N vi - O lV V ri O N~~~ N o0 t i l b CI = - - ~ ^ ~ II _ P' ~- b O 00 O r T M O O N 7 0 ~n Q~ N M O~ N 1~ r P O h O O- N Q i O~ N O vi N N t~ vi N O ~D V N V~ t~ C~ C N ~ N M C N O M T j y o0 M ~n Q~ O~ - 0 0 00 ~O - t~ ~ N N M T O ~O M 1~ C R C N M N CI c. Q V - 00 V'1 O~ 00 V1 I~ h M Q M a0 ~ T P ~ f~V O I~ M - ~O N ' O O N ~ O M O 1~ ? N - ~ O ~/? N r ~ n 1 e? O` 00 ? '~? 00 '~'~ DO ? ~ M j~ uM N N N tV N N- N N M M M M M M M vi - (V ri M C M ri N M N :O u, ry •ti U L E a~ ' ~ U ° ~ ~ ~ N N N O O 1~ 00 M 00 N w1 vi N N 00 P P~ M N O t~ O oD N N N ~O Lu C P ~ vi ~D O~ ~D Q O~ M O vi Q` P ~D O t~ 00 00 M P N R e0 O V ul Q ~D 00 00 G O O, C R N h - 1~ ~ v~ t~ M ~O vi ~D M N R ~O v~ ~ ~p v1 R M M O' Qw O v1 t~ ~ p, C-- - -- N-NN N M-^ NNN N -R e ~ v~~d. v u u C ~p N N O C I~ `D 00 M 00 N M a0 1~ N R 7 r 0- O t~ N M_ C ~ L d ~ V l~ CT O t~ N - v1 M O~ vi N 1~ i~ N o0 v~ t~ T O~ ~O O~ O~ I~ N ~O O~ m W p I.} C Q P~ ? b~ r M O o0 R O Q-~- O~ O o0 vi M O O~ V h- t~ rt ~- ' f per, P ~- -- - -._-N-NIVNN--NNN---~ C V ~ I < n I n ~ i ~ "~'%n~0 E E c R y y ~ R O~~ O ~ t~0 ~ R ~ C Cn e u ' v,I u ~Oo ~ n ~ UUin¢4 ~viFF ~ d yrn ~~z u ~'¢m-F~'E ~ ~ dam' ~an~ paaQ~ aaa°~i ~,0-01+ A ~ o m m ~ o e2! ~ @3 = 4 ~ c `~d' r~ E F m ~3 E~ ~ ~ ~ °' v is v a~i F~ ~ ~ ~ e3i ' i iI>-ii>m cvv C C ai<C ~FUZZ~¢ '~`" •~a~ _ =~~~~a'!a'!a!' c~aS cp Ao ~0~'v'v'oo~~1' as ~ ::3 a~~~~~¢¢¢¢¢<mO~mO~mmO¢mmnm~~~,~ ;o E E E E E,~o.m,m,m m ~a~m o~m-'o~ v9 c~ 3 Ilmc~mm`moooooo3c~i_3c~i y`~3~g~~A~o~sm ~w C c wmmo4ononoo coo.o~00-~'v~a ~ z ttl ~ A ttl ttl > > > > 3 ~ O - = L - O L L d d ~ Vi V1 hNN~.~..7 ~~-.~ U- 2' _ V CC CL 1' C.' m~ s ` c Y O 9 pp I ~ N M R h ~p 1~ 00 P O ~ N_ ri 7 vl ~O I~ 00 O~ O N M 7 vi ~D 1~ 00 V1 - ~- - N N N N N N N N N e I ~ G ' C e U U T~ a to 0 o e~ o 0 0 0 0 U vw O~?N OO OOMOC~or MCrm ,v G y ~N O~ r1-OQ~DQriN C O~NI-Nri Z = , Y G\ Q M 00 M- M G M 00 O 00 r ~D r 00 O ~ C J S ' i~ y r V1 r O~ - M M M r Q P N MI M ~ c3 ~' ~~nv'^i vQiN OO rCi oNO `-'rrrri ~I~h r: ~ ~ N-~-MQ~n F" ~ ~ Q h ' ~e e o~ o e o o e e a e e o 0 ' C N Q ~ M oo vi r'? O ~G - j oo - O C P r N N M~ M M O~ Q N 1` V'1 ~I - V'1 - u' - Q' D\ ~ M N r- 0 0- Q O~ O O~ O~ N- M '' ~ i G\ G1 ~ Q Q. r N r r vi v~, e0l N `J N- ~ r NQQMN JNQ - M , ~/ ~ Q r 70 Q 00 N r Q V1 00 - M- N Q CIO r N r 0~a0NO~n o0abhr ~ O~ - N N M- M N M Q 00 O O Q r ~ ~ N - H1 N Nl M M t•1 t~1 h V1 N ' O d- M N NIA 3 d it O ~ O' v u CG\ .yi~M vQi .D r Q N~ r r 1Q~1 Q ~D ~IQ N ~ ~ oa ~vooo~oQQ--~_rvv,oo~o , .C ` ~,..,~ ~ N N N- - N O O U N r F U ~ dl ~ , N u ~ ~ r N- ~/1 r O~ Q- 00 Q N- 00 T M Q ~ ~ M Q r N DO M Q O ~O O O N rl- - ~ d S T CM 00 ~D =- M O Q- r- r M ~O N _ Q- - N N N-~ N-- O r N ~D ' R C U' F w ~ I `u a ~ ' I 1 1 ~ ~ I ~ ~ > ' li ~ a Q oaadyC y ~ ~~a C'~ ~ ~ ~ =~po~3 >ma'> vmm ~ ~vo ~ a ~n o o¢ 3 a<~ ~ N ~ a ~~oo~'3v1' asU am ~A ~ > -¢ ~ v > ~ 3 09g'3a~t yrnviv~in >Zv~mi v :c ' `e y u d N L Q u~ 0> ~ m u L op o0 c0 00 O O a~ A n ~ £MM ~v~FQ a5 a A a"'riri~00000av~i~nF a~ ~ ° c ~ r O 67 'pp , - N M Q v 1~ D r a 0 O~ O- N M i C h m O e ~ ' e U U 5.4 Transportation/Circulation The level of service for these 41 intersections were compazed to the existing wear 1994) traffic conditions shown in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR traffic study. Table ~.4-3 contains the comparison. As shown in this table, additional intersections have degraded below the LOS C. Table 5.4-3 also compares the 1999 condition to the forecast 2010 conditions prior to ' completion of the project. As this comparison shows, all intersections currently operate at the same or a better LOS than was accounted for in the 199 Traffic Analysis for "Without Project" - conditions. ' In summary, traffic growth has been slower than was anticipated in the 199 Traffic Analysis. As would be expected, some growth has occurred but the area-wide traffic volumes in five years (from 1994 to 1999) has grown by only about one-sixteenth of the amount forecast for the sixteen-yeaz period from 1994 to 2010. In other words, the traffic analysis assumed that all of the traffic growth which has occurred in the last five years would occur in just over one yeaz. Thus, it is reasonable to assume the total traffic growth occurring by the year 2010 will be well below the forecast in the 1995 Traffic Analysis. Further, conditions at all individual intersections have remained within the range of voltJmes and LOS values forecast for those intersections. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate, and even somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative traffic volumes and impacts. No changes have been made to the project which would change the traffic generation or alter access pattems to and from the site. Since the project has not changed, the 1995 Traffic Analysis remains an adequate forecast of project traffic impacts. Thus, project impacts aze adequately ' addressed by the 1995 Traffic Analysis as presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. Therefore, implementation of the revised project will not result in new or substantially greater impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. ' Land Use Growth. Land use growth from related projects in the Cities of Redlands, San Bemazdino, Highland and Loma Linda was also updated for comparison to the related projects included in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. The updated related project list for each jurisdiction, which contains a summary of all of the projects currently on file with these cities, is ' shown in the Traffic Validation Study (see Appendix E). Other than the Citrus Plaza project, no current projects were identified for the County portions of the study area. In order to provide a more detailed look at growth patterns, the related projects in the City of Redlands were subdivided into four regions (Northeast Quadrant, Northwest Quadrant, Southwest Quadrant and Southeast Quadrant) while related projects from the more remote areas within the Cities of Highland, Loma Linda and San Bernardino were grouped using their City boundaries. A summary of the related projects land use growth by azea is included in the Traffic Validation Study (see Appendix E). County ofSaa Bvnardino Laod Use Services Department SCH. Nw 1999101121 Citnu Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Wa[er& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 172 1 ' ° = o '~OU~ria.mrs.Um~u.u.u.u.oc,.UUV.mm~cz~u.UUDuau P~J U N ^- '. ? ~y~~ O T ~ O ~ ~ = ¢ ~ p ~ ~ N P r > Q N O ON N N Vt vl O ~ ~ 00 O ~ ~ O ~ ~ O -. -. yy ~ z ~ z` - C C 9 •1~ ^ L ' a ¢ O O, I f Y ,=Ua 1""' ~ $! ? F sUv~`i o~oN¢~oo¢om~o~o¢~¢4rn~+ao~oN VOi o~o~av'~i ono o"'o.~o~ ' h 3I ~' G O- Z O Z O C O Z- Z Z C ~- 0 0- 0 0 0 '..~ - O o o O °I'mUUUm Q¢Um mLL LL CLmmmUUmmUUCgU V~UU H ,~ O_ N O OI W ^ N N ¢ ~ N ~ N1 ~ a ¢ Q ~ N_ ~ ~ N W 00 i~ N of N ~ N ~ ~ , U U'r di Z Z Z a ~~I ~I x ' y ~~,V~i r~i.v°Oiv`~i¢v Ev°v¢~¢¢-~~~~~v~n~~ev ~r~iv a ~'~~'ocoZCZC OOZ oZZ-OCOOOOO Ci00000C O - i 7 O U Irn': .J a yl°~,m UU~m mmmUUUv-[z.mmmmUmm V U~mm~mU ~ CIS' M ea ~ .O". '' N1 e F H .- r u ,~, m o~>i:°_oN¢roc_,o~oa~o¢.~__N~na~naooN~cN- m ~ eU vl Z ZZ -_- d E. ¢ e9 D i u 4 ~ , L ~ F~'~U'. r~i ~n v'Oi¢n~v°`i~v~i¢a¢¢M°r°~v`Di~e~-i v~"ie~oODO V~i~v`Oi~v~' ai ~~10 0 0 Z O Z O O O Z O Z Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ , u Q 6 E ~ ' a~ _ 1 ~ y ~ in R Q R~ h~ u u ~ dlmOo rc6e A~ AUK UUN¢¢~inFF ~ v ~ N~ ny a `i'~6m~F0 C eEa v ~`/~~°~ ns 3S i) t° E°`S aj v h v ca C r ~ e q'S o v'I v'f ~ ,,`~, `~-° ;o °' A e E d ~ E °' ~ m E ° ~' S~ - 3 > y Z at , `~l~ en ¢ c ~2 K A A E~ A E ~ E v v A v v E> v is ~ w u v v via v v ~ <a C m ai ¢ pC `a r2 E- U Z Z n¢> ~' u vl~4a'3¢Q¢U''~ oFF-O 0.'¢ C.' > OC v a ¢ ~uic° °c ~ c °caf ~ W @323@S`O~°~OQY.oOpv~i~oc~ct¢p^`°, ~ ac v ~ ~- v v ai v ai ai ~ > e o R> ~ ~ ~$ a > ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 E .-~~`a A A n A <¢««0o¢OOo'm00 ; m-W mm.o aid g~ ``a'' ~' L L 4 Y L A fa la fa A i m m O m m~ 9 m CO 9 T i m m m m m ~o c o 0 0 .0 3 W_ 3 W y; 3 n7 0~~~~ o~ `i' E <c oO aA o0 eD o0 dOOO OOO 3 ~ O O C'O 'O 'O ~" ~ I A A~ eta CN 7 '> 7 7 7 7 --' O -~ C V ^ G v 6> Q1 61 A t 9 'e0 ~v~rn~yv~-7..1..7..1-7 ..1 .-.?U.., a,_.:. UcC cKa~:mFU. `a m` `e "~ ~ f- N ~'1 O' ~/1 ~D l~ W H O y N c~1 ~ V7 ~O 00 a O N N N N N N N N jO d I r. ~ '. C p I ~ a_ 0 v ;J ' C N X O C U u o m mL[][r][L QLL¢ULC. U(]p0 a~ z =,'. c ~ ~ z 'A a,o O NQ Q_Q_G_~QN~Nt`~'+1NM -o T ' ~ C9 ~' ZZZZNZ X Q C' ~ O Q s ~ U 0.I a r, m ~ ? F r ~QQQG~<oNmaao^o ~' 31 ozzzz-z~_oooo H m U U ri m O Z m U m m m U 1 y y C ~' ' C p l ~ Q Q Q Q~ Q t~ b~~ O in UU ZZZZ Z e N X m O o~ _ O -c~MC~ Q Q Q C rn P vi ~D c~ R R ~ C Z Z Z Z O Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 v U ~ H mmmu.GGZmUmmmm c m ~ o ~ _ U F ~ d = a °6¢QQ~<c~~oyaoo ~ ~' u ~U ZZZZ Z A ~ o Q e a ' ~ a` ~ .H m m x p E.. a F'471'~ N<<QQa¢~v'^i ern ~p :p e00n ~ I o Z z Z z o Z o 0 0 0 0 0 1 < ii ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ a ¢ 9 ~ R N C " u a a0.ama y ~- ~y B 2 C L.~ ~ 'G m m ~i d~ ~ y y m G ~ao_m_pjOpQ3 g ~ e~~~ h~ =U~o_oa13Sa:U ~m E E > ~a i,d>..y ui~a~S ~Sm~a ~ ¢ pim~iv~! ~<<nininrn °'mm °e ~ A ~ Z in ~ ° f ~N~ ~ o°'nma°'omaoo v ~, 'O 9 > G G~ C~. E ~ Nf p, e v O O G T v v i0 1' 1i 6 m m a: u.u.0000OO0.v~rnF- y W e ~ --ri Niah~~oo O~O'~~~ ~°' u3 5.4 Ttanspottation~Circulation , Land use data from the 1995 Traffic Analysis were also separated using the same azeas as , were used to subdivide the current related projects. Traffic Analysis land use growth projections by the subazeas for the years 1999 to 2010 was calculated based on a lineaz interpolation using the ' existing (1994) and future (2010) land use data from the Traffic Validation Study. The data contained in the 1995 Traffic Analysis, analysis methodology and cun•ent land use data aze included in Appendix E. This comparison of the related projects land use growth shows that the current land ' use growth trend is well below the land use growth trend assumed in the 1995 Traffic Analysis model. The related projects land use growth in number of employees and total dwelling units is , approximately 46 percent and I S percent of the land use growth assumed in the model, respectively. Thus, future traffic projections aze more than adequate to accommodate the currently proposed related projects. , Based on the analysis provided above, the use of the 1995 Traffic Analysis to evaluate the , traffic impacts of the revised project is very conservative. It assumes that the past five years have accounted for five-sixteenths of the assumed land use growth. The traffic volume analysis shows that only one-sixteenth of the assumed growth has actually occurred. Thus, the amount by which ' the remaining 1995 Traffic Analysis growth exceeds the current related projects is even greater than is indicated by the Traffic Validation Study. As illustrated by the Traffic Validation Study, the Citrus Plaza Traffic Analysis model utilized a very conservative approach for projecting traffic gowth. The actual growth in trnffic ' volumes has been well below that projected in the 1995 Final EIR traffic study. Further, the land use growth from the currently proposed related projects is less than half that assumed in the Traffic Analysis for employment sites and less than one-sixth that assumed for residential uses. Thus, , future growth will be well within the Traffic Analysis projections. As a result, the Traffic Analysis can still be relied upon as an adequate and, in fact, very conservative projection of future traffic ' conditions. The mitigation measures developed based on those projections aze, therefore also, more than adequate. Accordingly, there is no need to update the Traffic Analysis any further at this time. 1 5.4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As shown in the Traffic Validation Study, traffic growth, as described above, has been ' slower than was anticipated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR Traffic Analysis. Further, conditions at all individual intersections have remained within the range of voltunes and LOS values forecast for those intersections. Thus, the 1995 Traffic Analysis is an adequate, if somewhat conservative, forecast of future cumulative trnffic volumes and impacts. It should also be noted that since the project has not changed, the traffic analysis remains an , adequate forecast of project traffic impacts. No changes have been made to the project which would change the traffic generation or alter access patterns to and from the site. Thus, project impacts, as Couory of San Bernardino Laod Use Services Department SCH. No.19991011]J Citrus Plaza Re Tonal MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan B Page 175 final Sulnequen[EIR-June 2001 , 5.4 Transportation'Circulation well as cumulative impacts, are adequately addressed by the traffic analysis presented within the ,~a;~ - 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. Thus, implementation of the revised project will not Change result in new or substantially worse impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Final EIR. ' The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. This 1995 list of related projects was updated as g-tt ' part of the Final EIR to reflect 2000 conditions. The updated 2000 related projects list was compared to the 1995 related projects list and as analyzed in Appendix E, Traffic Validation Study, the 1995 list included more ctumulative growth and thus provided a conservative analysis of 1 potential cumulative impacts. Refer also to Section 4.0, Related Projects, for additional discussion. ThlJS, no cumulative impacts would occur with regard to cumulative impacts to the local street system. However, as discussed previously, the already congested conditions on the I-10 Freeway will worsen without and with the proposed project. Based upon this evaluation, cumulative traffic impacts upon the I-10 freeway will be significant. ' 5.4.5 MITIGATION MEASURES County 5.4.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ~^n~azee Change Since no significant impacts to traffic and circulation aze anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures aze required. 5.4.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project ' New Mitigation st • A hatil route shall be designated prior to commencement of construction activities. The haul route shall not travel by any sensitive receptors such as residences, schools, ~„nh ' hospitals, etc. cn ~`" age 5.4.53 Citrus Plaza Project The Firtal Envirotunental Impact Report for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan included three mitigation measures as part of that document's analysis of transportation issues. These mitigation measures are not incorporated into this Subsequent EIR since each of the referenced program-level mitigation measures have been replaced by project-specific mitigation meastues. The San Bernazdino County Planning Department has determined that the recommended project mitigation measuues fully incorporate the intent of those meastues. Cou•ty of Saa Bemardi•o La•d Uu Servi<n Department SCH. Fa 1999101121 Gnus Plaza Regional Ma1Vl VDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 176 5.4 Ttansportation~Circulation Previously Proposed Mitigation Measures ,~ The 1995 Cittvs Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included the following mitigation measures '' to reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. These mitigation measure are incorpornted into this Subsequent EIRJO No new or additional mitigation measures are required. , Arterial Improvements This section describes mitigation measures recommended to increase arterial capacity in the project azea. These measures aze intended to accommodate increased traffic generation due to the project as well as other ctunulative developments. The project should equitably participate in implementation of these measures. The street improvements aze designed to both reduce project-related traffic impacts to less- than-significant levels and to ensure that sufficient roadway capacity exists to accommodate all ' anticipated area growth. As such, some of these improvements may be installed by others, especially for those locations which are relatively remote from the project site. Should any of the improvements be implemented by others, no additional mitigation measures would be required of , the Citrus Plaza project at the subject locations. Implementation of many of these measures is necessary to meet the LOS C criteria ` recommended in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. As noted in the 1945 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, in order to meet this goal without requiring excessive roadway and right- , of-way widths, some improvements will require a reduction in roadway lane widths from the City of Redlands' existing policy of 14-foot curb lanes and 12-foot interior lanes to 12-foot curb and 10-foot interior lane widths. The proposed lane widths aze, however, typically used throughout both ' southern California and the nation and aze, therefore, not considered adverse from a traffic engineering perspective. ' Phase I Improvements The project proponent shall contribute a "fair shaze" requirement for off-site traffic L improvements. Of these arterial improvements, the following traffic mitigation and proportionate "fair share" contributions aze required for the Phase I project: • San Bernardino Avenue and SR30 Freeway Northbound Ralnps/I'ennessee Street-Provide dual eastbound left-flan lanes on San Bernazdino Avenue. The traffic J0 San Bernardino Counry Planning Department, Final Errvironmental Impact Report Citrus Plata Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 9x082084, November 1996, p. 6. Counry of Snn Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCIL Na 1999101113 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIUI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent E{R-June 2001 ' Page 177 - 5.4 TransportationiCirculation signal shall be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at adt - San Bernardino Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway southbound ramps at the SR-30 ' Freeway Frontage Road (Spenser Drive). • San Bernardino Avenue and Texas Street-Install atwo-phase traffic signal. Provide eastbound and westbound lefr-ttun lanes on San Bernazdino Avenue. • Lugonia Avenue-The southerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road shall be improved to provide a second travel lane in a total 64-foot paved _ roadway. Project Buildout Improvements Prior to the completion of the project, the project proponent shall contribute a "fair-shaze" requirement for the following off-site traffic improvement: • San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Southbound Ramps-Add on a ' northbotmd approach to the Frontage Road to include aright-turn-only lane. Modify the signal to add a northbound right-ttun phase which overlaps the westbound lefr-turn _ phase. Flaze/reconstruct the north leg to provide southbound dual left-tum lanes. • San Bernardino Avenue and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps/Tennessee Street-Provide dual eastbound left-turn lanes and two through lanes on San Bernazdino Avenue. Provide aright-tum lane, a through left-tum only lane and a lefr-tum only lane in the southbound direction of the north leg (SR-30 Freeway ramp). Provide dual left- ' tum lanes on the south leg (Tennessee Street). This measure may require flaring of the south leg to accommodate the additional lane. Modify the signal to provide a southbound right-tum phase concurrent with the eastbound lefr-flan phase. The traffic signal shall be interconnected or otherwise coordinated with the adjacent traffic signal at aat San Bemazdino Avenue and the SR-30 southbound ramps of the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road (Spenser Drive). • San Bernardino Avenue-The northerly half-roadway between Alabama Street and the SR-30 Frontage Road shall be improved to provide a second Navel lane. • Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street-Restripe pazlcing on the northbound approach ' and provide an exclusive right-ttun lane. • Orange Street and Pearl Street (I-]0 Eastbound Ramps)--Provide eastbound and westbound left-tum only lanes on Peazl Street. County of Sao Beraardioo L•od Gse Services Department SCR Na 1999101121 ' Citnn Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent BlR-June 2001 Page 178 i 5.4 Ttansportation/Circulation • San Bernardino Avenue and California Street---Contribute a "fair shaze" percentage ~~~n for the construction of a signal on San Bemadino Avenue at California Street. '~° • California Street and Lugonia Avenue-Install atwo-phase traffic signal. Widen the north leg of California Street by 10 feet and provide left-tutu lanes on the north and ' south legs. • Lugonia Avenue and the SR-30 Freeway Frontage Road-Provide a westbound right-turn-only lane on Lugonia Avenue. • Lugonia Avenue and Tennessee Street-Provide two eastbound and two westbound travel lanes in addition to the lefr-turn channelization on Lugonia Street. This will require widening along the project frontage and along the south side of Lugonia Avenue to the east of the intersection. Provide dual northbound lefr-turn lanes on Tennessee Street. • Lugonia Avenue and Texas Street-Install atwo-phase traffic signal. Provide two , travel lanes in all directions in addition to left-turn channelization. This will require widening of Texas Street north and south of the intersection to provide suitable , transitions. • Lugonia Avenue and Orange Street-Implement parking restrictions and provide two travel lanes in all directions in addition to left-turn channelization. Provide an exclusive right-turn lane on the northbound approach. Modify the traffic signal phasing to provide ' left-turn phasing for all approaches, plus an "overlap" northbound right-turn phase along with the east/west lefr turns. • California Street and the I-10 Freeway Westbound Ramps-Install a traffic signal with a northbound left-turn phase. Flaze the west side of the north leg of California Street and to provide aright-turn-only lane and two through lanes southbound and dual lefr-turn lanes northbound. This may require acquisition of some right-of--way north of the intersection , • California Street and the I-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps-Install a traffic signal with a southbound left-turn phase. Widen and install an island on the I-10 Freeway ' eastbound off-ramp to allow "free" right rums. Provide two northbound through lanes on California Street. • Coulston Avenue and Alabama Street-Extend the second westbound through lane along Coulston Avenue to the east leg of the intersection and include parking ' restrictions. t Couory or Sao Bcrn•rdi•o Laud Use Services Department SCH. Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regions! MaINVDA Water Sewer Services Plan Pinal SuLsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 179 - 5.4 Ttansportatiott/Circulation • I-10 Freeway Westbound Ramps and Alabama Street-Provide dual northbound lefr-tam lanes and a southbound right-ttJm-only lane on Alabama Street. This improvement will require minor traffic signal modifications. • I-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps and Alabama Street-Provide one right-tam-only lane and one IefUthrough/right-optional lane on the eastbound ramp. Provide a _ northbound right-rum-only lane on Alabama Street. • Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street-Remove islands along Redlands - Boulevazd and Haze along the south crab west of the intersection to provide three through lanes and aright-tam-only lane in the eastbound direction. Widen Alabama Street to provide dual northbound and southbound left-tam lanes and three travel lanes in each direction. This improvement will require additional right-of--way (or sidewalk easements) to be acquired in the northwest and southeast quadrants as well as traffic signal modifications. Some additional "hold out" right-of--way along Alabama Street M may also need to be acquired to provide suitable transitions. • Colton Avenue and Tennessee Street-Provide an eastbound right-tam-only lane on Colton Avenue. Provide a southbound right-tam-only lane on Tennessee Street. Modify the traffic signal to provide protective lefr-tam phases in the eastbound, southbound, and northbound directions only. • Redlands Boulevard and Tennessee Street-Provide northbound and southbound lefr- ' tam lanes and restrict pazking along Tennessee Street. Modify the signal to eliminate north-south opposed phasing and east-west lefr-tam phasing and instead provide two- phase operation. • California Street and Redlands Boulevard-Reconstruct the south leg of Califomia Stteet by providing a box culvert for the flood control channel. Flare the south leg of the intersection to provide two through lanes and lefr-turn channelization in both the northbound and southbound directions. Remove island to provide three through lanes in each direction on Redlands Boulevazd. ' • Barton Road and Alabama Street-Modify the traffic signal to provide a southbound right-tam phase concurrent with the eastbound lefr-tam phase. Either alter the middle southbound lane to allow only through movements or eliminate the crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection. • Third Street and Palm Avenue-Provide westbound lefr-ttJm channelization on Third Street. Provide dual northbound left-tam lanes on Palm Avenue. This improvement will require minor traflic signal modifications. County of Sao Bernardi•o La•d L'se Services Department SCR M1a 1999101121 Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequen[ElR-June 2001 Page 180 5.4 Transportation/Circulation • Ford Street and I-10 Eastbound Freeway Oft Ramp-Install atwo-phase signal. , Coordinate the signal timing with the adjacent I-10 Freeway westbound on-lamp new traffic signal timing. • Ford Street and I-10 Westbound Freeway On-Ramp-Install atwo-phase signal. • University Street and I-10 Eastbound Freeway OftRamp-Install a two-phase signal. Coordinate this signal with adjacent traffic signals, as necessary and appropriate. _ • Cypress Avenue and I-10 Westbound Freeway Off-Ramp-Install atwo-phase , signal. • Orange Street and Pearl Street (I-10 Freeway Eastbound Ramps}-Provide eastbound and westbound lefr-rum-only lanes on Peazl Street. • Orange Street and Colton Avenue-Install leading eastbotund and westbound left-rum phasing. Provide an eastbound right-rum lane on Colton Avenue. Restrict pazking and extend the second northbound travel lane on Orange Street along the north leg of the intersection. • Boulder Avenue/Orange Street and Fifth Street-Provide a westbound left-ttun-only lane on Fifth Street. Modify the median island on the south leg of Orattge Street to provide two through lanes plus a northbound left-rum-only lane. Modify the existing signal to provide leading northbound and southbound left-rum phasing. • Base Line and SR-30 Freeway Northbound Ramps-Provide an eastbound right- ' ttun-only lane. Implementation of the recommended measures will bring all impacted intersection locations to LOS C or better. Regional Freeway System I-10 Freeway Improvements ' • 1-215 to Waterman Avenue-Add two eastbound lanes. • Waterman Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue--Add two westbound lanes. • Tippecanoe Avenue to Mountain View Avenue-Add one westbound lane. • Mountain View Avenue to California Street-Add one westbound lane. Counrv of Sao Bernardino Wad Use Services Depanmwt SCR Na 1999101123 ' Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page l81 ' 5.4 Transportation/Ctrculation • SR-30 Freeway to Orange Street-Add one westbound lane. ' • Orange Street to Sixth Street-Add one westbound lane. Add one eastbound lane. • Sixth Street to University Street-Add one westbound lane. Add one eastbound lane. • University Street to Cypress Avenue-Add one westbound lane. • Cypress Avenue to Ford Street-Add one westbound lane. - Redlands Boulevard to Wabash Avenue-Add one westbound lane. • Wabash Avenue to Yucaipa Boulevard-Add one westbound lane. Add one eastbound lane. At the time of project occupancy, by phase, the project proponent shall submit either a project-specific transportation demand management (TDM) program, if required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), or a waiver stating that no such plan is presently required pursuant to the regulations of that agency. If required, the TDM program shall include, but ' may not be limited to, the following TDM strategies:" • Companies employing -100 or more persons if required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) or other governmental agency at the time of phased occupancy, shall implement a transportation demand ranagement (TDM) program. The programs for individual site employers should be expanded and coordinated with other Bat site employers. The TDM program shall be reviewed and modified over the life of the project to take advantage of new opportunities, such as the expanding regional rail system. Potential measures include: (1) a central ridesharing office under direction of a Transportation Coordinator to provide one-stop commute service; personalized rideshaze matching; (3) employer-operated or employee-owned vanpool service; (4) guaranteed ride home; (5) preferential pazking locations Hiihin any designated employee pazking areas and convenient pick-up/drop-off locations for carpools and vanpools; (6) on-site sale of transit passes and distribution of schedule information; (7) safe and sectJre bicycle storage areas; (8) coordination with Omnitrans to further enhance service to the ' site; (9) promotional programs, including direct involvement of upper-level employer management to show the commitment to the program; and (10) adjtJStable work hours to allow employees to participate in ridesharing arrangements or reduce the ntJmber of days ' per week each employee commutes. rt As authoraed under Section EV~.02a0(b)(3J ojthe East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, afloor-area-ratio bonus ojup to 1~ percent can be obtained ij the proposed development implements a "transportation management plan, including car and vanpooling, flexible work scheduling etc. " Couory orSao Bernardino L•od Use Services Department SCR No.1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 182 5.4 Transpoltatior?Circulation In addition, the project itself shall serve to aid the TDM program by providing sit shopping and service opportunities for the expanding nearby employment sites, - thereby reducing the need for employees to leave the area during the day all , reducing their dependence on having an automobile available. • Prioritization of TDM Strategies. In order to reduce traffic impacts stnrounding the , project site, a reduction of vehicle trips in general will be extremely important; however, a-0t reduction of regional impacts will require that the longest trips, which contribute most to r regional VMT and congestion, be tazgeted by the project TDM program. Programs which most effectively reduce longer trips shall be emphasized and include vanpool programs, compressed work weeks, telecommuting and linkages to regional transit facilities. • Delivery Management System. The site tenants will have deliveries which emanate from throughout the region. A system of tracking vendor deliveries to various facilities adt within the site shall be considered. This system would allow the tenants to move deliveries outside of peak travel times, utilize local vendors and consolidate deliveries whenever possible. ' Public Transit Improvements Omnitrans routes planned to serve the project site contain sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional transit riders generated by the project. No additional transit capacity , will be required due to the development of the Citrus Plaza project. Site Access ' The project TDM program will reduce traffic voltunes at the site driveways. This, in tum, will substantially improve conditions at the intersections of the internal roadways with the adjacent public streets; however, even with this improvement, conditions will remain adverse at the major driveways on Alabama Street, the SR-30• Freeway Frontage Road (Spenser Drive), and on San Bemazdino Avenue. To alleviate these conditions it is recommended that these intersections of the internal driveways and adjacent roadways be signalized. With implementation of the project TDM program and signalization of these five intersections, all driveways are anticipated to operate below ` their capacity. Of these intersection improvements, only the signal at the intersection of Alabama Street and , the south project driveway will require signalization as part of the Phase I development. Based upon this analysis, the following mitigation meastJre is recommended: ` County of $•• Bcroardi•o l.aod Use Scrvica Department SCK Nn.1999101173 Civus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Sutnequent E[R-June 2001 ' Page 183 5.4 Transportatiom'Circulation ' • The intersections of the internal driveways and site adjacent roadways shall be signalized aal _ in accordance with the following schedule: (1) Phase I signalization is limited to the ' intersection of Alabama Stree[ and the south project driveway; and (2) Phase 11 signalization shall include the following additional intersections: Alabama Street and the north driveway; SR-30 Frontage Road (Spenser Drive) at the north driveway; SR-30 ' Frontage Road (Spenser Drive) at the south driveway; and San Bernardino Avenue at the main driveway. Parking The Phase I (Power Center) site pazking facilities will be designed to meet or exceed actual demand, so no adverse impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is needed. Although the Phase II pazking facilities have not yet been designed, the following mitigation - measure is recommended to avoid potential impacts: ' • Phase II parking facilities shall be designed to meet then prevailing County parking ~+n miaa~tE demand rates when Phase II receives design approval. cnan~e 5.4.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The very extensive mitigation program described above is designed to meet two basic criteria: (1) all study intersections, considering all cumulative growth including the project, must be shown to operate at Level of Service C or better; and (Z) all other CMP study intersections, II ~ considering all cumulative growth including the project, must be shown to operate at Level of Service E or better. As shown in Table 5.4-4, the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR mitigation measures achieved these goals, even though much higher growth than is actually occurring was assumed in that document. Thus, with the exception of the already congested I-10 freeway, the recommended mitigation measures are more than sufficient to reduce all project and cumulative traffic impacts to a less than significant level. The originally developed project conditions of approval, which incorporated those mitigation measures and required extensive project participation in area-wide programs, are also still sufficient to address potential project traffic impacts. Therefore, ' the revised project would not result in the introduction of new significant or substantially worse transportation and circulation impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Final EIR. Based on the 1995 Traffic Analysis, the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that without substantial basic capacity improvement, the already congested conditions on the I-10 freeway would worsen with or without the proposed project. Based upon this analysis, Coutrry of Sao Bero•rdioo L•od Use Services Departmtot SCR Na 199910117} Citrus Plaza Regimul MaIN VDA W Ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 184 5.4 Transportation/Circulation cumulative traffic impacts upon the I-10 Freeway will continue to be significant. This conclusion is also consistent with the fmdings of the Final EIR for the EVCSP and would be a unmitigable impact. Therefore project-related and cumulative impacts upon each of the key intersections and street segments analyzed can be mitigated to a level of insignificance; however, the regional freeway system will expetience congestion both with and without the proposed project. Based upon the expected regional impacts to the I-10 Freeway, cumulative traffic impacts upon the I-10 Freeway will continue to be significant. r~ r County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCH. No. 1999/01121 Citrus Plana Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Sul+sequen[ EIR-June 2001 Page 185 , 5.4 Transportation'Circulation Table 5.4-4 -- Traffic Analysis Mitigation Program Effectiveness Traffic Analysis 2010 Traffic Analysis 2010 ~ Conditions Without Project Conditions ail ~ Intersection or Mitigation With Project or Mitigation Project Area Intersections V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS 1. San Bernardino Ave. & Alabama St. 0.59 15.00 C 0.59 15 C ' 2. San Bernardino & I-30 S/B On-Off Ramps 0.84 30.00 D 0.79 22 C 3. San Bemarditto Ave. & 1-30 NB On-0ff Ramps 1.12 104.00 F 0.70 23 C 4. San Bernardino Ave. & Texas St. N/A N/A F 0.95 20 C 5. San Bernardino Ave. & Orange St. 0.60 8.00 B 0.60 8 B 6. Lugonia Ave. & California St. N/A >]00 F 0.93 14 B 7. Lugonia Avenue & Alabama St. 0.80 16 C 0.80 t6 C 8. Lugonia Ave. E/o Indiana Ct. 0.60 7 B 0.72 12 B 9. Lugonia Ave. & Tennessee St. 0.87 29 D 0.76 20 B 10. Lugonia Ave. & Texas St. N/A 97 F 0.44 6 C 11. Lugonia Ave. & Orange St. 1.82 677 F 0.71 23 C 12. I-10 W/B On-Off Ramps & California St. N/A N/A F 0.74 l5 C 13. I-10 E/B On-Off Ramps & California S[. N/A N/A F 0.95 21 C 14. Coulston Ave. & Alabama St. 0.95 26 D 0.86 23 C ' 15. 1-10 W/B On-Off Ramps & Alabama St. 1.21 105 F 0.91 l6 C 16. 1-10 E/B On-Off Ramps & Alabama St. 0.93 20 C 0.91 20 C t 17. Industrial Pazk Ave. & Alabama St. 0.84 22 C 0.84 22 C 18. Redlands Blvd. & Alabama St. 1.22 l23 F 0.82 25 C 19. I-10 W/B On-Off Ramps & Tennessee St. 0.50 5 B 0.50 5 B 20. I-l0 E/B On-Off Ramps & Tennessee St. 0.83 15 B 0.83 15 B 21. Colton Ave. & Tennessee St. 0.90 30 D 0.80 22 C 22. Redlands Blvd. & Tennessee St. 0.98 56 E 0.83 20 C 23. Redlands Blvd. & California St. 1.55 392 F 0.75 24 C 24. Redlands Blvd. & New Jersey S[. 0.83 18 C 0.83 18 C 25. Redlands Blvd. & Nevada St. 0.83 20 C 0.83 20 C County of Sao Beraardiao Laod Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101113 Civns Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Warer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 186 5.4 Transportation/Circulation Table 5.4-4 (Continued) ' TraRc Analysis Mitigation Program Effectiveness ` Traffic Analysis 2010 Traffic Analysis 2010 Conditions Without Project Conditions Intersection or Mitigation With Projector Mitigatioa 26. Barton Rd. & Alabama St. 0.67 31 D 0.72 20 C 27. Third St. & Palm Ave. 1.03 54 E 0.72 23 C , 28. Fifth St. & Palm Ave. 0.74 20 C 0.74 20 C Other CMP Intersections 1. Redlands Blvd.ll-SO E/B Ramps & Ford St. 0.48 l2 B 0.48 12 B 2. Ford St. & I-10 E!B Off-Ramp N/A NIA E 0.78 8 B 3. Ford St. & I-10 WJB On-Ramp NIA N/A E 0.76 $ B 4. University St. & 1-10 E/B Off-Ramp NIA NIA F 0.72 6 B 5. Cypress Ave. & I-10 W/B Off-Ramp N/A NIA D 0.94 24 C ' 6. Orange S[. & Pearl Ave. 1.40 212 F 0.97 23 C 7. Orange St. & 1-10 W/B Ramps N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8. Orange St. & Colton Ave. 1.06 21 C 0.85 2I C 9. Orange S[./Boulder Ave. & Fifth St. 1.21 137 F 0.82 23 C , 10. Palm Ave. & Baseline St. 0.82 21 C 0.82 21 C l 1. SR-30 N/B Ramps & Baseline St. 0.99 33 D 0.75 6 B 12. SR-30 S/B Ramps & Baseline St. 0.94 27 D 0.94 27 D 13. Tippecanoe Ave. & San Bernardino Ave. 0.87 34 D 0.87 34 D Cauoty of Sna Scrnnrdieo Land Usc Scsvices DepaAment SCH. Na 19991[11123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Sulrsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 187 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ' S.5 AIR QUALITY i ~ 5.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.5.1.1 Regulatory Environment A number of statutes, regulations, plans and policies have been adopted which address air quality concerns. The Project site and vicinity is subject to air quality regulations developed and implemented at the Federal, State and local levels. At the Federal level, the U.S. Environmental protection Agency (USEPA) is responsible for implementation of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA). Some portions of the CAA (e.g., certain mobile source requirements and certain other requirements) aze implemented directly by USEPA. Other portions of the CAA (e.g., stationary source requirements) aze implemented through delegation of authority to State and local agencies. 5.5.1.1.1 Federal Level The CAA was first enacted in 1955 and has been amended several times in subsequent yeazs (1963, 1965, 1967, 1970, 1977 and 1990). The CAA establishes federal air quality standards, N known as National Ambient Air Quality Standazds (NAAQS) and specifies future dates for achieving compliance. The CAA also mandates that the state submit and implement the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for local areas not meeting these standazds. These plans must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the standazds will be met. The County of San Bemazdino is included in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which was designated anon-attainment azea for certain pollutants that aze regulated under the CAA. By a separate state statute, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) was established as the local air pollution control agency for the Basin. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to include an additional ' standazd for ozone and to adopt a NAAQS for fine particulates (PM2.5). Table 5.5.1 shows the national ambient air quality standazds currently in effect for criteria pollutants. The 1990 Amendments to the CAA identify specific emission reduction goals for areas not meeting the NAAQS. These amendments require both a demonstration of reasonable fiuther progress towazd attainment rod incorporation of additional sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The South Coast Air Basin fails to meet national standazds for ozone (03), cazbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PMIO) and therefore County orSao Bernardino Land Uu Services Ikparlmtot SCH. No. 1999101121 Citnu Plea Regional Ma1N VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-loot 2001 Page 188 ri z~ _s y~ ~x R N ~ %~ ~ n o c a G T Qs E~ ~°' a N ~ ~' D ~ w ~ N V C ~ a0 O O d F tC r ~ p " O ~ O 4 ~ ~ ~ O. p p v i N `..~' ~ v 0" ~ '+pp 'v ,Cj'F U p ~ C G y ? v ,A ~ d O ry 6 lr. as O GL i ~ ~ ~ ~ O G .U ~ V v ti c 3 O G V N cC ~L 1 8 = . b a~ ~.L _ s ~p O O O j y Z ~70 T A 'U~q ..Z t ~ ° ~ a ~ ,. p- G1 W v C ~n ou ~ b ?i -o R d ''~ 4 N V O U y .3 ~ e T N F c ~ u ~', '~ ~ .-. ~ O S~ v O. G E C al t ~ u ~ 4 '~ C p, oh 6 ' ¢Ln 0 7 ~ ~ O "' ~ ~ a ~E Q, o'U C ai ~ ~ J ~ ~ ao.~ ~ ~ V ID Z.. o ~ -~ ~ ~ N,n~ r- £ E Q,~ I N O O y a p -~ i. p, ~1 q M O` O `i ~ ='n s. C p "~~ 1 N ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ c~ V~ ./ ~ ¢4 a av C w eu ~ ~ 2 4 Q `r '~ C d ~ w ~ O y. N yy y ~' 00 = ^ ~ 6 7 F ~ N q n O 0 V V 00 "' Q 7 Q 4 r c-~ O ~ ~' ~0 ,pa yo ~ c V `L o rg+ ~- O o~ Z- -d ~ ~ ~ } ? R ~ s x 3 a ~aoH ~ ~ H H~ L o c ~n 6LP 'u- G cs Vi C E ~ ~ O u N m = u ~ ~ 7 N ~' q G 4 'J r' tO4~ O N ~' 0. ~ G d ~ ~ p ~ ~ L0.. 6. X > v, u A U '- Y u u n = R 7 ¢ ~ O v 3 ` ~ ~ 9C 7 O ~ ~ ~ 3 R L ~ U ~ _ '30 ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ n r~ u N y Vi .A d :0 C ti ~ ~ ~ U (5 u P ao C L Q ~ Q ~ N Q sit s {ate t ~ _ R 7 U1 d Z` a~D T P. C } =i O y ~n ~ c F c .'~r v Z' ~' o s ~ 7 0 .a H A a«~ J, a a rye- o °' ~' j, 3 ~ ~ ° x a F, F. " ~ = ~ S W t n~ ~ ~ 4 ~' ~ ~ ~ S C "^ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ £ Z e R I ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 a c~ c 0 6c a p S. ~ O o ~ ? r u ~ a C ai If ~ ~ ~ aeN E £ ° ~3 'R ~ O ~ O C G } eo u_ m v r~ ~ ~ ~ S. y a ~ ° G 'r ~ 3 ^C, y G s u L4 eo cc i u W E G E~ ~' Q s G Q 4. Q N i ~ Vl m d r ¢ u~ N ¢ C V e a '~( V d 6 r y u~ z ~ " U U L .C d o ,~ d O "~~ U A a ~L a p ~ ../ is 5.5 Air Quality is considered a federal "non-attainment" area for these pollutants. No official detemvnation has been made regarding the attainment status of the new ozone and PM,.; standazds. The South Coast Basin will likely fail to meet both standazds. However, at present, no methodologies for determining impacts related to PMa.s have been developed nor have any strategies or mitigation programs for this pollutant been developed or adopted by federal, state or regional agencies. 5.5.1.1.2 State Level At the State level, the Califomia Air Resources Board (GARB) is responsible for implementation of the Califomia Clean Air Act (CCAA). The CCAA sets forth requirements that apply to emission sources in the State in addition to the CAA. Some portions of the CCAA (e.g., mobile source and consumer product requirements) aze implemented directly by GARB. Other portions (e.g., stationary source requirements) aze implemented through delegation of authority to local and regional agencies. The CCAA, signed into law in September 1988, sets air quality standards in the State of California that aze generally more stringent than the corresponding Federal requirements. The CCAA requires all azeas of the State to achieve and maintain the California , Ambient Air Quality Standazds (CAAQS) by the eazliest practicable date. Table 5.~-1 also shows the California ambient air quality standards currently in effect for criteria pollutants. The GARB is the State agency responsible for the coordination and administration of both State and Federal air pollution control programs within California. The GARB undertakes research, sets CAAQS, provides technical assistance to local Air Quality Management Districts (AQMDs) and Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs), compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures and provides oversight of local programs. 5.5.1.13 Regional Level--,South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over approximately 12,000 squaze miles consisting of the four-county South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and the Los Angeles County and Riverside County portions of what used to be, under state classification, the Southeast Desert Air Basin. While air quality in this azea has improved, the Basin requires continued diligence to meet air quality standazds. The SCAQMD has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMP) to meet the California and national standards. The most recent version of the AQMP was adopted in 1997. Portions of the AQMP that aze required to meet federal CAA requirements have been submitted to the federal EPA and therefore will become federally enforceable upon USEPA approval. The 1997 revision describes a comprehensive air pollution control program focused on attaining the California and national ambient air quality standards in the Basin and those portions of the Southeast Desert Air Basin that are under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. In relation to eazlier plans, the 1997 revision places greater emphasis on the most highly effective controls and regulations, rather than a breadth of controls on smaller sources such as land uses. It focuses more on particulate emissions that result from incomplete fuel combustion than previous plans, recognizing recent research on Couary or Son &roardino Laxd Use Smicn Dcpanmcnt SCJL Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR - Jtme 2001 Page 191 , 5.5 AvQualiry 1 particulates and health effects. Notwithstanding, the 1997 AQMP still calls for the implementation _ of all feasible control measures and the advancement and use of technologies for which breakthroughs aze on the horizon. In addition to the AQMP and its rules and regulations, the SCAQMD has published a handbook (CEQA Air Quality Handbook, most recent version: November 1993) intended to provide local govefrunents and CEQA practitioners with guidance for analyzing and mitigating project specific air quality impacts. This handbook provides standards, methodologies and procedures for conducting air quality analysis in EIRs. 5.5.1.2 Existing Conditions The distinctive climate of the Basin is determined primarily by its terrain and geographical location. Regional meteorology is lazgely dominated by a persistent high pressure area which commonly resides over the eastern Pacific Ocean. Seasonal variations in the strength and position of this pressure cell cause changes in the weather patterns of the area. Local climatic conditions aze characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent rainfall, moderate daytime on-shore breezes, and moderate humidity. This normally mild climatic condition is occasionally interrupted by periods of winter storms and Santa Ana (hot easterly flow) winds. The Basin is an azea of high air pollution potential, particularly from June through September. This condition is generally attributed to light winds and shallow vertical atmosphere mixing. This frequently reduces pollutant dispersion, thus causing elevated air pollution levels. Pollutant concentrations in the Basin vary with location, season and time of day. Ozone concentrations, for example, tend to be lower along the coast, higher in the neaz inland valleys and lower in the faz inland areas of the Basin and adjacent desert. Over the past 30 yeazs, substantial progress has been made in reducing air pollution levels in Southern California. The azea previously was in non-attainment for all NAAQS, except sulfur dioxides (SOZ). The area is now defined as in attainment for nitrogen dioxides (NOZ), lead, and SO2, with CO approaching attainment. While the local monitoring station is currently below state and federal standards for CO, the Basin as a whole is still experiencing exceedances for CO. PMIo and ozone levels, while reduced substantially from their peak levels, are still far from attainment. ' The SCAQMD maintains a network of air quality monitoring stations located throughout the Basin. As defined by the SCAQMD, the monitoring station most representative of existing air quality conditions in the azea of the project site is the Redlands/Central San Bernardino Valley. The most recent data available from this monitoring station encompasses the years 1994 to 1999 and is presented in Table 5.5-2. This data shows a general trend indicating improving air quality conditions over the six-yeaz period for which data is provided. Couury ofSao Bernardino Land Use Services Depanmeot SCH. No. 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Fital Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 192 5.5 Air Qualip~ Table S.S2 , POLLUTANT STANDARDS AND REDLANDS/CENTRAL SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Omne (O~)' California Standard (1-hr m~g. > 0.09 ppm) National Standard (1-hr avg. > 0. l2 ppmJ Nations! Standard (8-hr mpg. > 0.08 ppm) MaximumConcentrationl-hr period (ppm) ?3 ?4 .22 .20 .32 .154 , Maximum Concentration 8-hr period (ppm) .188 .174 .164 .143 .186 .130 Days California standard exceeded 140 123 117 108 76 59 Days National I-hr standard exceeded 98 69 6~ 3~ 43 12 Days National 8-hr standard exceeded 91 96 88 79 60 36 Carbon Monoxide (CO)° ' California Standard (/-hr avg. > 20 ppm) Cal jornia Standard (8-hr avg. > 9 ppm) National Standard (1-hr avg. > 35 ppmJ National Standard (8-hr avg. > 9 ppmJ Maximum concentration I-hr period (ppm) 9 8 6 8* 6 n/a Maximum concenvation 8-hr period (ppm) 6.> 63 4.6 6* 4.6 4. t I Days Califomia I-hr standard exceeded 0 0 0 0* 0 n!a Days National I-hr standard exceeded n/a n/a nia N/a n/a n/a ` Days Califomia 8-hr standard exceeded 0 0 0 0* 0 0 Days National 8-hr standard exceeded 0 0 0 0* 0 0 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO=) ° California Standard (1-hr avg. > 0.25 ppm) National Standard (AAM> 0.05334 ppmJ Maximum I-hrconcentmtion(ppm) .18 .i?* .IS .14 .11 .139 Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM) ' Days Califomia standard exceeded 0 0* 0 0 0 0 County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 , Page 193 5.~ A'uQuality Table S.S2 (Continued) POLLUTANT STANDARDS AND REDLANDS/CENTRAL SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY 1 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Percent National standard exceeded n/a n/a Na n/a n/a n/a Sulfur Dioxide (SO,) California Standard (l-hr avg. > 01.i ppml National Standard (AAti1 > 0.03 ppm) Maximum I-hr concentration (ppm) 03 ° .02" .01 .01 .02' n/a Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM) ~ .0002" .0006 ° .0001 .0001 .0007 n/a Days Califomia standard exceeded 0" 0" 0 0 0• n/a Days National standard exceeded n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Particulate Matter (PMra)' California standard (?-1-hr avg. >.i0~rgim3) National standard (2-1-hr avg. > 1~O~.gim') Maximum 24-hr concentration (µg/m') 138 172 128 103 97 92 Percent samples exceeding Califomia standard 40.7 40.7 41.7 38.3 31.7 36.7 Percent samples exceeding National standard 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 it AAti1=Annual Arithmetic Mean ppm =parts per million pgim3 =micrograms per cubic meter n%a =not available Note: Ambient data for frne particulate matter (PM2.3) is not available since this pollutant was only identifred as a criteria pollutant in 1997 and, as such, data has not been collected on PM?..i concentrations. ' ~ Less lhan 11 ju11 months ojdata. May not be representative. ° Data obtained from Redlands monitoring station ' ° Data obtained from the Central San Bernardino Valley Monitoring Station. Source: South Coast Air Quality Managemeru District, Air Quality Data /99-1-/998. County of San Bernardino land Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 194 5.5 Air Quality , 5.5.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance aze used in this analysis if the project will: ~~nN I Inibaie<1 Change • conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals; or • violate any ambient air quality standazd, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. In addition, as indicated in Section 15064(I) of the CCR, "if an air emission or water , dischazge meets the existing standazd for a particulaz pollutant, the Lead Agency may presume that the emission or dischazge of the pollutant will not be a significant effect on the environment. If other information is presented suggesting that the emission or dischazge may cause a significant effect, the Lead Agency shall evaluate the effect and decide whether it may be significant" Furthermore, the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included thresholds of significance from the Final Environmental Impact Repon for the San Bemazdino County General Plan. As indicated therein, future development authorized under the 1989 General Plan update (GPU) "provides for increased population growth which will result in additional emissions , generated in the County, thereby incrementally contributing to the exceedance of State and federal air quality standards This incremental exceedance and the potential for receptor exposure represents Class I impacts to air quality. If attainment of the pollutant standards occurs as projected, the impact due to exceedance would be considered Class II. Class III (impacts adverse yet not significant) include construction-generated impacts due to the additional development in the County. No Class IV (beneficial) impacts would occur upon adoption of the GPU." In addition to the above thresholds, the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included additional thresholds as established by the SCAQMD and are incorporated herein. Specific criteria air pollutants have been identified by the SCAQMD as pollutants of special regional concern. Based upon this categorization, the following significance thresholds for emissions has been established by the SCAQMD for project operations: (1) 55 pounds per day of ROC; (2) 5> pounds per day of NOx; (3) 550 pounds per day of CO; (4) 150 pounds per day of PMIO; (5) 1 ~0 pounds per ' day of sulfur oxides; and (6) California State 1-hour or 8-hour CO standazds. Projects in the Basin with daily operntion-related emissions that exceed any of the above emission thresholds may be considered to be significant. Separate threshold standards have been recommended for assessing construction-term , impacts, which aze averaged over a 3-month period to include only actual working days. The following significance thresholds for atr quality have been established by the SCAQMD on a County otSan Bernardino Laod Ltse Services Department SCH. No.19991011]3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVrVDA Water & Sewer Scrvices Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 195 , ' SS AirQualin~ quarterly basis for project construction: (1) 2.5 tons per quarter of ROC; (2) 2.5 tons per quarter of NOx; (3) ?4.75 tons per quarter of CO; (4) 6.75 tons per quarter of PMIO; and 6.75 tons per quarter of SOx. If emissions on an individual day exceed 75 pounds/day for ROC, 100 pounds/day for NOx, 550 pounds/day for CO, 150 pounds/day for PMio, or 150 pounds/day for SOx, project impacts could be considered significant. The SCAQMD also recommends that "additional indicators" should be used as screening 1 criteria with respect to air quality. As identified in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook, a project may be judged to produce a significant air quality impact if the: • Project could interfere with the attainment of the federal or State ambient air quality standazds by either violating or contributing to an existing or projected violation; i ~ Project could result in population increases within the regional statistical area which would be in excess of that projected in the current AQMP and in other than planned locations for the project's buildout yeaz; • Project could generate vehicle trips that cause a CO hot spot; r • Project will have the potential to create or be subjected to objectionable odor over 10 dilution to thresholds; • Project will have hazardous materials on-site and could result in an accidental release of air toxic emissions or acutely hazardous materials posing a threat to public health and safety; • Project could emit an air toxic contaminant regulated by District rules or that is on a federal or State air toxic list; • Project could involve burning of hazardous, medical, or municipal waste as waste-to- energy facilities; • Project could be occupied by sensitive receptors within a quarter mile of an existing facility that emits air toxics identified in District Rule 1401 (New Source Review of Carcinogenic Air Contaminants) or near CO hot spots; and • Project could emit carcinogenic or toxic air contaminants that individually or ' cumulatively exceed the maximum individual cancer risk of 10 in 1 million. Couury ofSao Bcrnardiuo Laod lise Services Depsnmcnt SCfi Nn 1999101121 Circa Plaza Regional MaIN VDA Water & Sewcr Services Plan Final Subsequent FJR-June 2001 ' Page 196 5.5 AvQualiry , 5.53 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS , 5.53.1 Proposed Plan Amendments The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA area. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect air quality would be subject to CEQA, potential air quality impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments aze anticipated. , 5.53.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities project mma~" sewer and water options. Potential air quality impacts associated with the installation of subsurface a pipelines would be limited to those resulting from construction as there aze no operational aspects of , these facilities that would generate long-term post-construction emissions. The construction of the pipelines would occur in several stages with emission generation being the greatest during the initial trenching and excavation phase as the largest numbers of equipment would be in operation in conjunction with fugitive dust emissions associated with the handling of excavated soil. As a specific construction schedule for the installation of the pipelines is not available, conservative ' assumptions have been made in order to provide a quantification of construction emissions. The emissions forecast is based on the assttmption that the construction pipelines would be installed in stages and that individual trenches would be 30,000 sgtlaze feet in area (e.g., a trench that is six feet deep, ten feet wide and 500 feet in length) and that only one trench of this size would be under construction at a given time. The quantification of emissions also includes emissions associated ' with the following types of construction equipment: (i) two backhoes working ten hours per day; (2) two tracked loaders working ten hoots per day; (3) two motor graders operating ten hours per day; and (4) one rniscellaneotrs piece of construction equipment (e.g., water truck) operating ten ' hours per day. The emissions associated with this level of construction activity is shown in Table 5.5-3. As indicated therein, total emissions associated with the prescribed level of activity would be less than sigtificant. However, should these emissions occur concurrently with the construction of , e-s the water treatment facilities in the northeast portion of Area A (all Water Options), the wastewater treatment facility located in the northwest portion of Area A (Sewer Option 3), Citrus Plaza or if &24 multiple trenches were under construction at the same time, the total combined NOx emissions ' would exceed the SCAQMD's established thresholds and a significant construction air quality ats impact would occur. Couety of Sao Beroardioo Laod Use Servites Depanmeot SCR No. 1999101 V3 Citns Playa Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 197 , _ _ ' S.5 AirQualin Table S.S3 _ CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN g.pq CO ROG NOS PMta SOa A. Piceline Construction Fugitive Dust Emissions - - - 34 - Construction Equipment 25 9 86 7 8 Total Project (Ibs/day) 25 9 86 42 8 SCAQMD Daily Threshold 550 75 100 150 I50 Difference (525) (66) (14) (108) (142) Significant? NO NO NO NO NO B. Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities Fugitive Dust Emissions 0 0 0 63 0 Construction Equipment 228 40 539 36 54 ' 8 24 Total Project (Ibs/day) 228 40 539 99 54 SCAQMD Daily Threshold 550 75 100 I50 I50 Difference 322 35 (439) 51 96 Significant? NO NO YES NO NO C. Concurrent Construction (Piceline+Treatment Facilities) Fugitive Dust Emissions 0 0 0 97 0 Construction Equipment 253 49 625 43 62 Total Project (Ibs/day) 253 49 625 140 62 SCAQMD Daily Threshold 550 75 100 I50 I50 Difference 297 26 (525) 10 88 Significant? NO NO YES NO NO Source: PCR Services Corporation, May 2000 Construction emissions associated with the proposed water and wastewater treatment facilities (all Water Options and Sewer Option 3) aze also shown in Table 5.5-3. As the potential exists that pipeline construction could occttr concur7tently with the construction of the water &2q treatment facilities in the northeast portion of Area A (all Water Options) and the wastewater treatment facility located in the northwest portion of Area A (Sewer Option 3), Table 5.5-3 also County of Soo Bcroardino Laod Use Serviees Department SCR No.1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Sutrsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 198 5.5 Air Quality presents the construction emissions which potentially could be genernted by these concurrent construction activities. a za The quantification of emissions from the water treatment facilities in the northeast portion of 8.24 ' Area A (all Water Options) and the wastewater treatment facility located in the northwest portion of Area A (Sewer Option 3) is based on moving 14,000 cubic yards of earth and that on-site earth movement would balance (i.e., there would be no importing or exporting of earth materials from the Project site). The actual construction of these facilities, at peak times, would involve the following construction equipment: (1) two lazge back hoes, (2) two standard size back hoes. (3) two small bulldozers, (4) two motor graders, (5) two cranes, (6) two ship loaders, (7} two earth compactors, (8) one boring and jacking machine, (9) four 10-wheel dump truck, and (10) four 1 %-ton stake trucks. , Total emissions from these activities would be less than the prescribed SCAQMD thresholds for all of the criteria pollutants analyzed, except for NOx. As such, emissions associated with the construction of the water and wastewater treatment facilities in Area A aze considered to be less than significant relative to CO, ROC, PM lo, and SOa, while emissions of NOS would be significant. Should pipeline and treatment facility construction occur concurrently, emissions of CO, a-za ROG, PMio, and SO" as showTt in Table 5.5-3, would be less than significant, while emissions of NOx would be significant. , The follow2ng environmental impact analysis applies to Sewer Option 3 and all Water Options. The operation of the proposed water and wastewater treatment facilities would also generate air emissions from various solaces. The range of potential air quality effects include cou~n iNaaled emissions from employee travel and energy consumption. Each of these operational emission cna~ye sources are described in the following paragraphs. Notwithstanding, both facilities would be constructed and operated in accordance writh SCAQMD permits, rules and regulations. In order to satisfy all SCAQMD requirements, emissions from regulated sources would be reduced to acceptable levels. Existing County Special District employees will operate the water facilities. The operation e-zi ' of this facility would generate approximately four vehicle trips per day. Liquid chlorine will require one delivery per month. The proposed wastewater treatment facilities will be highly automated; therefore, no more than two State-certified wastewater operators may be required to operate and maintain those facilities. A total of 24 vehicle trips per day are estimated. Sludge will require hauling five to six times per month or a total of 10 to 12 truck trips per month. Liquid chlorine will 8-z1 , require one delivery per month. Emissions attributable to energy consumption would occur in conjunction with the plunps , associated with two groundwater wells in addition to the electrical equipment that would be within the groposed water and wastewater treatment facilities. As the final engineering for these facilities ' is not completed as of this date, the emission forecast incorporates conservative asslmmptions so as to not understate the project's impacts. As showm in Table 5.5-4, estimated emissions associated with County of San Bernardieo Land Use Services Department SCN. Na 1999101113 Citrus Plea Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Serviws Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 , Page 199 1 5.5 Air Quality ' Table 5.5-4 PROPOSED WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES EMISSIONS CO ROG NOS PM~a SOS Emission Source 8-27 Employee Trips 7 2 1 Negligible Negligible Haul Trips 6 Negligible I Negligible Negligible Energy Consumption 10 2 57 Negligible 1 Total Project (Ibs/day) 23 4 59 1 1 SCAQMD Daily Threshold 550 75 100 150 150 Difference (527) (71) (41) (149) (149) ' Significant? NO NO NO NO NO ° Less than 0.05 pounds per dav. i Source: Citrus Plaza Regional Mal! Supplemental EIR /996. facility operations, including energy consumption, are less than the SCAQMD's thresholds and are a-z7 thus considered to be less than significant. Odors aze not anticipated to occur with the operation of the water treatment facility. The ~"ry operation of the proposed wastewater treatment facility may, from time to time, result in the off-site 1n1tla1ed Change migration of odors. Specifically, during calm wind days, these odors may be perceptible to off-site receptors. The principal sources of odors in wastewater treatment plants aze from: (1) unwashed grit; (2) scum on primary settling tank wells; (3) organically overloaded biological treatment processes; (4) sludge-thickening tanks; chemical miring operations; and (6) digested sludge in drying beds or sludge holding basins. Treated effluent storage may occur within an open in-ground 9.13 ' water reservoir, in lieu of an enclosed storage tank. All treated effluent dischazged to that reservoir would meet both County and RWQCB standazds for landscape irrigation. As a result, that reservoir and the reclaimed water stored therein is not identified as a significant source of odors. ' With proper design and maintenance, the routine development of odors will be reduced or eliminated. Because of the proximity of the proposed treatment plant to azeas open to the public, strict odor control measures will be undertaken. Should an odor problem exist, the greatest potential impact will be upon other on-site uses. Based upon the need to maximize the control of potential odors, the facility operator will obtain any and all permits as may be required by the SCAQMD and implement a best available control technology (BACT) odor control system to reduce emissions to a level of insignificance. ," ~"~ ~a~ County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Depanmeot SCi1. No. 1999101123 Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 200 5.5 Av Quality 5.5.33 Citrus Plaza Site , Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Constructed-Related Impacts The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR described the project as being constructed in a minimum of two separate phases, representing the "power center" (i.e., Phase I) and the "regional mall" (i.e., Phase II). Within each major development phase, sepazate subphases may exist as components of the overall construction process. Although no formal construction schedule has been , submitted by the project Applicant, the construction period for Phase I is anticipated to require approximately six months, while the construction period for Phase II is anticipated to require approximately 12 months. Both construction phases aze not anticipated to occur concurrently, but aze scheduled to be undertaken sequentially (i.e., Phase I is scheduled for completion prior to the start of Phase II construction activities). Construction emissions will be generated from site preparation activities, off-road construction equipment, construction worker travel, haul truck travel, paving operations, storage and , dispensing of gasoline and diesel fuel and the use of cleaners, paints and solvents. In addition, temporary electrical power will be required. This power would be obtainzd from existing electrical transmission facilities along Alabama Street. It is anticipated that temporazy generators or natural , gas hookups would not be required. Since electrical consumption will be limited to that necessary to power electrified construction equipment and will cease upon completion of construction, the amount of electrical energy required is negligible and was, therefore, not included in the quantitative ' assessment of the project's construction air emissions. In summary, the construction analysis concluded that construction-related emissions are anticipated to exceed established SCAQMD thresholds for NOx, and PMIO during construction of Phase I. During Phase II construction activities, ROC emissions, in addition to NOx, and PMIO aze anticipated to be significant. Operational Impacts The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR analyzed the operational or long-term impacts associated with the project as consisting of emissions generated by stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources include off-site generation of electricity and on-site consumption of natural gas for space and water heating. Mobile sources refer to traffic generated by the proposed land use. The forecast of mobile source emissions was based on infoanation presented in the , project's traffic study. In summary, the operational analysis concluded that operational emissions attributable to Phase I as well as Phase II are anticipated to exceed established SCAQMD thresholds for CO, ROC, and NOx. In addition, the analysis concluded that concurrent Phase I operational , emissions and Phase II construction emissions would result in significant impacts with regazd to CO, cane Im6ateU ROC, NOx, and PMIO. In addition, the analysis concluded that project development would not CI~ai9e Couuty orSau Beruardiuo Laud Use &rvices Department SCn. ~a 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -lace 2001 Page 201 ' 5.5 AirQualiry result in any local carbon monoxide (i.e., hotspot) impacts and that the Citrus Plaza project would be consistent with applicable regional plans. Revised Project Impacts it ~ Constructed-Related Impacts A full quantification of all construction emission sources was included within the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. As such, these analyses aze incorporated by reference. The only change to the Citrus Plaza Project is the potential inclusion of a water treatment facility within a-s ' the Phase I area which would only be constructed should insufficient water pressure be available to meet the fire flow requirements of the Citrus Plaza Project. The emissions attributable to the 1 construction of this facility would not increase the peak construction emissions of the Citrus Plaza Project. All other aspects of the Citrus Plaza Project construction are unchanged from that _ previously analyzed, thus, the only differences in the emissions forecast would result from changes ' in emission factors. For all construction-related sources, except those associated with construction worker travel and haul trips, no changes have occurred with regazd to emission factors. Therefore, the analyses presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR remain technically valid. Emissions associated with construction worker travel and haul trips have been recalculated to reflect current emission factors (i.e., EMFAC7G). No other modifications to these analyses are required as ' there have been no other changes to the assumptions incorporated into these analyses. Total estimated construction-related emissions attributable to the proposed project are presented in Table 5.5-5. The data presented therein integrates the valid data presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR with the updated analyses of construction worker travel and haul trip emissions. All supporting calculations are provided in Appendix F. While Phases I and II are anticipated to be constructed sequentially, combined Phase I and II emissions are provided for informational purposes only and will likely exceed the actual quantity of construction-related emissions that will be generated during project development. Construction-related emissions, as shown in Table 5.5-~, aze anticipated to exceed 1 established SCAQMD thresholds for NOx and PMIO during construction of Phase I. During Phase II construction activities, ROC emissions, in addition to NOx, and PMIO are anticipated to be significant. Operational Impacts A full quantification of operational emission sources was included within the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. As such, these analyses aze incorporated by reference. As the project has remained unchanged (except for minor differences in proposed square footage) from that previously analyzed, the only differences in the emissions forecast would result from changes in County of Sao Bernardino Laod Use Services Deparlmeot SCFt Rw 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall/1VDA Water & Sewer Servires Plan Final Subsequem EIR- June 2001 ' Page 202 5.5 Air Quality emission factors. For the identified stationary sources no changes have occur-ed with regazd to , emission factors. Therefore, the analyses presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR remain technically valid. Emissions associated with mobile sources have been recalculated to '- reflect current emission factors (i.e., EMFAC7G). No other modifications to these analyses aze required as there have been no other changes to the assumptions incorporated into these analyses. Total estimated operational emissions attributable to the proposed project aze presented in Table 5.5-6. The data presented therein integrates the valid data presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR with the updated mobile source analysis. All supporting calculations aze provided in Appendix F. Operational Phase I as well as Phase II emissions, as shown in Tabte 5.~- 6, aze anticipated to exceed established SCAQMD thresholds for CO, ROC and NOx. , Although the project's impacts would be considered significant based on the SCAQMD's significance thresholds, the significance of these impacts need to be placed in a broader context. Specifically, if the project is not constructed, patrons living near the project site would need to travel further distances to similar types of facilities to obtain the goods and services that would be available at the project site. These longer travel distances would create emissions unto themselves which would only be worsened by the additional congestion that this type of travel would create. As previously discussed, Phase II construction is anticipated to commence upon the completion of Phase I construction. While construction emissions for both phases are not anticipated to occur concurrently, air emissions associated with Phase I operations will occur simultaneously with Phase II construction-related emissions. As such, an analysis of combined Phase I operation and Phase II construction emissions is presented in Table 5.5-~. This analysis indicates that combined activities would result in significant impacts with regazd to CO, ROC, NOx and PMIO. , The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR also included amicro-scale CO "hot spot" analysis to determine if project increases in traffic would produce CO concentrations at intersections so as to cause an exceedance of either the CAAQS or NAAQS. This analysis is incorporated by reference into this Final Subsequent EIR. While future traffic conditions, with and without the m~~ project, are conservatively assumed to have not changed since the preparation of the 1995 Citrus r"~e 1 Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, changes in emission factors have occurred. In the case of CO, emission factors have increased. While the emission factors have increased, the magnitude of the increase is not sufficient to alter the conclusion that the project would have a less than significant impact on local CO concentrations. The 1995 Citnu Plaza Regional Mall Firtal EIR also included an analysis of the project's , consistency with regional plans. This analysis is incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. While the regional plans have been updated since the preparation of the 1995 Citrus Plaza Couoty of Sao Bcroardioo Lind lise Services Department SC1L Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR- June 2001 Page 2Q3 ' i 5.5 Air Quality ' Table S.SS TOTAL ESTIMATED DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS ' Estimated Emissions (Ibs/day) Emission Exhaust Emissions Threshold Construction Air Pollutant (Ibs/day) Mobile Sources Equipment Fugitive Dust Total Phase 1(Power Center) CO 550 148.61 113.73 -- 262.34 ROC' 75 13.74 23.79 -- 37.53 NOX 100 37.18 33213 -- 369.41 SOX 150 2.23 37.64 - 39.87 PMtn 150 3.93 32.31 482.69 518.93 Phase II (Regional Mall) O 550 237.76 227.46 -- 465.22 ROC' 75 30.53 47.58 - 78.11 NOX 100 41.68 664.46 - 706.14 ' SOX 150 2.77 75.28 - 78.05 PM,o 150 4.58 64.63 931.42 1,000.62 Phases 1 and Phase II" CO 550 38637 341.19 - 727.56 ROC' 75 4417 71.37 II5.64 NOX 100 78.86 996.69 - 1,075.55 SOX 150 5.00 112.92 - 117.92 ' PMia 150 8.51 96.93 1,414.11 1,519.55 ° Does no[ include ROC emissions produced from the application of architectural coatings (319 pounds per day), paving operations (327 tons per day), and fuel vapor losses (0.3~ and 0.95 pounds per day for Phase !and Phase I/, respectively). Phase 1 (Power Center) and Phase (Regional Mall) construction activities will not occur concurrently; therefore, the Phase /and !I scenario presented herein is provided only for injormationa! purposes and does not reflect either the actual or predicted emission characteristics which will manifest from project implememation. Source: PCR Services Corporation and Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, 1995. Couoty ofSao Bernardino Land Lx Services Depnrtmmt SCR No. 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Serviccs Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 204 5.5 Av QualiR~ Table S.S6 , TOTAL ESTIMATED DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS' Emission Estimated Emissions (Ibs/day) , Threshold Natural Motor Air Pollutant (Ibslday) Gas Electricity Vehicles Total Phase 1(Power Center) CO 550 0.97 4.46 1,881.55 1.886.98 , ROC 55 016 0.22 667.61 682.09 NOx 55 5.80 25.62 236.34 267.76 , SOa 150 -- 2.67 14.95 17.62 pM~o 150 0.01 0.89 3.59 4.49 Phase 11 (Regional Mall) , CO 550 2.67 10.01 4,754.47 4,767.15 ROC 55 0.1 0.50 2.036.30 2,089.51 , NOx 55 16.04 57.54 703.93 777.51 SOx 150 -- 6.00 55.45 61.45 ' PM~n 150 0.03 2.00 13.33 15.36 Phases 1 and Phase 11 CO 550 3.64 14.47 6,636.02 6,654.13 ROC 55 0.97 0.73 2,703.91 2,77 L60 ' NOa 55 21.84 83.16 94027 1,04527 SOx 150 - 8.67 70.40 79.07 , pM,o 150 0.04 2.89 16.42 ]9.85 ° Includes )d pounds ojROC due to the release ofgaso/ine vapors from project-generated vehicles. /nclvdes 52 pounds ojROC due to the release ojgaroline vapors from project-generated vehicles. Sovrce: PCR Services Corporation and Cimts Plaa Regions! Ma!! Fina! EIR 1995. County of Sau Bernardino Laud Usc Services Department SCH. Na 1999101113 , Citrut Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequetd EIR-Jurre 2001 Page 205 , 1 55 Air Quality Table 5.57 COMBINED CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ' Emission Threshold Emissions Operational Construction Combined ' Air Pollutant Operation Construction Emissions Emissions Emissions CO 550 550 1,886.98 4652'' 3,352 20 ROC' S5 75 682.09 78.11 760.20 NOS 55 100 267.76 706.14 973.90 SOt 150 150 17.62 78.05 95.67 PMia 150 150 4.49 1.000.63 1,005.11 ' Source: PCR Services Corporation and Citrus Pla=a Regional Mall Final EIR, 1995. ' Regional Mall Final EIR, they have not changed in a manner that would alter the analysis or the conclusions presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. As such, the Citrus Plaza ' project is concluded to be consistent with all applicable regional plans. 5.5.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' The SCAQMD has set forth both a methodological framework as well as significance thresholds for the assessment of a project's cumulative air quality impacts. As the current methodology is different from that included within the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, a ' new cumulative analysis has been prepared. The SCAQMD's methodology differs from the cumulative impacts methodology employed throughout the remainder of this Final Subsequent EIR, ' in which all foreseeable future development within a given service boundary or geographical area is predicted and associated impacts measured. The SCAQMD's approach for assessing cumulative impacts is based on the fact that the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan forecasts attairunent ' of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the federal and State Clean Air Acts, taking into account SCAG's forecasted future regional growth. Therefore, if all cumulative projects are individually consistent with the growth assumptions upon which the SCAQMD's AQMP is based, then future development would not impede the attairunent of ambient air quality standards and a significant cumulative air quality impact would not occur. Cumulative air quality impacts for the project were evaluated in the context of San Bernardino County as a whole. Based on the SCAQMD's significance threshold, a project would have a significant ' cumulative air quality impact if the rate of growth in vehicle miles traveled exceeds the project's rate of growth in employment when compared to the regional average assumptions upon which the -' Couury of San Bernardino Wod Use Servires Departmcot SCH. No. [999101123 Citnu Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final SuMequent EIR- Jtme 2001 ' Page 206 5.5 Air Quality ' SCAQMD's AQMP aze based. An assessment of the project's cumulative impacts associated with , Phase I and Phase II are presented in Table 5.5-8. As shown, the rate of growth in vehicle miles traveled for both Phase I and II is greater than the corresponding rate of growth in employment. ,- Therefore, the project would have a significant ctunulative impact on air quality. 5.5.5 MITIGATION MEASURES ~°'"ry m~oated 5.5.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments Since no significant impacts to air quality are anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed , plan amendments, no mitigation measures aze required. 5.5.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project All Water Options and Sewer Option 3 ' • The County and/or facility operator shall initiate consultation with the South Coast Air , Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and shall secure any permits as may be required by that agency, including those required for the installation and operation of the proposed back-up electrical generator and such other mechanical equipment as may be 1 required for the safe and efficient operation of the proposed facilities and such other permiu as may be required by that agency to control odors associated with facilities ' operations. Receipt of any requisite permits from the SCAQMD will effectively mitigate any related air quality impacts associated with both water and wastewater treatment facilities. ' Additional Mitigation Measures for Sewer Option 3 Only • The wastewater treatment facilities shall be designed utilizing a "best available control technology" (BACT) odor control system to ensure the minimization of off-site odor ' transport. These measures may include, but aze not limited to, consist of covering some of the treatment units such as the headworks, the primary clarifiers, and sludge thickeners. Gases capped underneath the covered azeas will then be collected and treated. • All treatment operations (including sludge storage) associated with the wastewater , treatment facilities will be enclosed and vented to system of activated carbon or other such media as approved by the SCAQMD. County of Saa Beraardiw t.and Use Services Departmcnl SCH. Na 1999101123 Ciuus Plaza Regional MaiVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page ?07 ' ' S.i Air Qualin~ ' Table 5.5-8 _ PROJECT CUMULATIVE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS ' Phase 1 Phase Il Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled for Project' 113,142 306,405 Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled Countywide' 31,462,143 34,495,124 Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled Ratio 0.003596 0.008883 ' Number of Employees at Project' 1,034 1,694 Number of Employees Countywide` 2.096,300 2,340,900 Employment Ratio 0.000493 0.000729 Significance Test- , Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled Ratio Greater Than Employment Ratio Yes Yes ° Increase over existing conditions. " Data obtained from Table A9-/3-A of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Qua/try Handbook ,Yovember 1993. ` Data obtained from SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan, Socioeconomic Projections. April 1998. Source: PCR Services Corporation. Ma}' _'000. • If required by the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd through the permit process, the wastewater pumping and activated.cazbon-treatment (or other media) systems shall have back-up or redundant systems to avoid downtime in the event of equipment failtJre. ' 5.5.5.3 Citrus Plaza Project Site ca,an Inital•E Lnarge ' The 199 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall included the following mitigation measures to reduce impacts to air quality. These mitigation measures are herein incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. No new mitigation measures aze required. N Construction-Related Impacts M • To minimize the amount of fugitive dust generated during construction operations, the following actions shall be undertaken by the project proponent and shall be included as notes on the grading plan: (1) enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil µt binders according to manufacttuers' specifications, to exposed piles (i.e., gravel, sand, dirt) with 5 percent or greater silt content; (2) water spraying or other methods shall be used during grading operations to control fugitive dust; (3) all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboazd (i.e., minimum vertical distance between top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of CVC Section 23114; (4) sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public paved roads County of Sao Bernardino Laod Usc Services Dcpartmmt SCFi Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Su[uequent EIR-June 2001 Page 208 5.5 AirQualin~ ' (recommend sweepers with reclaimed water); (5) apply water three times daily, or non- , toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved pazking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces; (6) traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to be , reduced to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less; (7) apply non-toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturer' specifications to all graded construction azeas which aze inactive for ten days or more; (8) suspend all excavation and grading operations when wind speeds , (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour; and (9) monitor for particulate emissions according to South Coast Air Quality Management District's specified ' procedures and implement additional fugitive dust palliation strategies. a-3 9-5 • Where feasible and/or applicable, the project proponent shall: (1) specify construction ' materials with natural finishes that do not require coating (e.g., brick); (2) where coatings aze to be applied, specify the use of high-volume low-pressure or manual application of paints and coatings on structures; (3) use pre-finished or pre-primed and sanded wood ' molding and trim products and pre-primed wallboazd; and (4) specify the use of non- pollutingpowder-coating operations and power-coated metal projects. • Specify the use of concrete, asphaltic cement, or emulsified asphalt. Avoid cut-back ' asphalt wherever feasible. Operational Impacts • In those locations specified by the permitting agency, the project proponent shall: (1) ' construct on-site or off-site bus tumours, passenger benches or shelters; (2) consttuct on- site bicycle and motorcycle facility improvements and include bicycle and motorcycle ' parking facilities, such as designated pazking areas, bicycle lockers and racks; and (3) construct on-site pedestrian improvements, as required by the County of San Bemazdino, such as sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. ' • Where feasible, synchronize traffic lights on streets impacted by development. • To minimize energy consumption, where feasible, the project proponent shall (1) provide ' shade trees to reduce building heating and cooling needs; and (2) use energy-efficient and automated controls for air conditioners. 5.5.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER NIITIGATION The incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures will reduce the emissions generated by construction and operation of the proposed infrastructure facilities as well as the Citrus Plaza ' project. While the air quality impacts from the installation of a single segment of pipeline aze less aanya than significant, the construction of multiple pipeline segments would result in NOx emissions which are concluded to be significant, even with the inclusion of the recommended mitigation ' measures. Notwithstanding the reduction in emissions, NOx and PMIO emissions would remain County of San Bermrdioo Laud Use Servitts Dcp•rlmcnl SC}t Na 1999101173 ' Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 209 ' S.5 AirQualiry ' significant for both phases of Citrus Plaza construction, and ROC emissions would be significant with Phase II, but not Phase I, construction. In terms of operational emissions. Citrus Plaza Phase I as well as Phase II emissions, as shown in Table 5.5-6, aze anticipated to exceed established ,c,°,;;;~ SCAQMD thresholds for CO, ROC and NOx. The combination of Citrus Plaza Phase I operational c"'"9e emissions and Phase II construction emissions would result in significant impacts with regazd to CO, ROC, NOx and PMIO. County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Depanment SCFL Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 210 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.6 NOISE 5.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.6.1.1 Introduction Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air. Noise can be defined as unwanted sound. Sound is characterized by various parameters that ' include the rate of oscillation of sound waves (frequency), the speed of propagation, and the pressure level or energy content (amplitude). In particulaz, the sound pressure level has become the most common descriptor used to chazacterize the loudness of an ambient sound level. The decibel (dB) scale is used to quantify sound intensity. Because sound pressure can vary by over one trillion times within the range of human hearing, a logarithmic loudness scale is used to keep sound intensity numbers at a convenient and manageable level. ' Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the entire spectrum, noise measurements aze weighted more heavily within those frequencies of maximum human sensitivity in a process called "A-weighting," written as "dBA." Human hearing can detect changes in sound levels of approximately 3 dBA under quiet conditions. Changes of less than 3 dBA aze only discernable under controlled, quiet conditions. Time variation in noise exposure is typically expressed in terms of a steady-state (avernge) energy level equal to the energy content of the time varying period (called Energy Equivalent Noise ' Level or Leq) or alternately, as a statistical description of the sound level that is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period. Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, additional noise descriptors have been ' developed which characterize noise in terms of what occurs over a daily period (i.e., 24 hours). The two 24-hour noise descriptors are the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and Day-Night ' Noise Level (Ldn). CNEL noise levels are determined by adding 5 dBA to the actual noise levels occurring ' during the hours of 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. and 10 dBA for the hours from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. The Ldn descriptor uses the same methodology except that there is no additional increment added to the noise levels occurring between 7:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.t~t. Both descriptors give roughly the same 24-hour level with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive. For the purposes of this analysis, the more stringent CNEL value is used. Conoty of San Bcroardioo Land Use Services Department SCH.IVw 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regwnal Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 211 5.6 Noise ' 5.6.1.2 Regulatory Environment , The Noise Element is aState-mandated component of the San Bernardino County General Plan. The purpose of the Noise Element is to establish uniformity of policy and direction concerning actions to minimize or eliminate excessive noise. It includes objectives, policies, standards, criteria, programs, diagrams and maps which aze to be considered when decisions are , made affecting the noise environment.'Z The overall purpose of the Noise Element is to protect the citizens of San Bernardino County , from the harmful and annoying effects of exposure to excessive noise, and to protect the economic base of the County by preventing the encroachment of incompatible land uses within areas affected ' by existing noise-producing uses. The general goals of the Noise Element aze the following: (1) to develop and adopt specific policies and an effective implementation program to abate and avoid ' excessive noise exposures in the County by requiring that effective noise mitigation measures be incorporated into the design of new noise-generating and new noise-sensitive land uses; (2) provide sufficient noise exposure information so that existing and potential noise impacts may be effectively ' addressed in the land use planning and project review processes; and (3) protect areas within the County where the present noise environment is within acceptable limits." Circulation and transportation systems (e.g., roadways, airports and railroads) aze the most noticeable noise ' producing activities within the County, and subject some areas to unacceptable noise levels." 5.6.13 Infrastructure Facilities , A noise survey conducted as part of the County of San Bernardino General Plan Update ' identified major arterials and highways which generate noise levels in excess of 65 dBA. Noise levels at residential locations adjacent to Interstates 10, 15 and State Highway 71 range from 70 to ' 75 dBA. This noise level is greater than is considered acceptable. At residential locations adjacent to State Highways 30 and 60, noise levels ranged from 60 to 65 dBA.JS Because excessive noise can interfere writh sleep, speech and health, yet can be mitigated to , acceptable levels through land use design requirements, areas within San Bernardino County shall ' be designated as "noise-impacted" if exposed to existing or projected future exterior noise levels from mobile or stationary sources exceeding County standazds. In addition, new development of "- San Bernardino County General Plan, Public Services Group, Land Use Services Department, p. 1/-BI-1, Adopted ' July 1989, Revised May 1999. t' /bid, //-B1-5. , 3a Ibid, I/-BI-4. 's Draft Environmental Impact Report County of San Bernardino General Plan Update. ERC Environmental and , Energy Systems Company, Sedway Cooke Associates and Wildan Associates, p. V//I-60, May 1989. Couory of San Bernardino Laod Use ServioesDepanmcnt SCFL Na 1999101173 , Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 21 Z , 5.6 Noise ' residential of other noise-sensitive land uses will not be permitted in noise-impacted azeas unless _ effective mitigation measures aze incorporated into the project design to reduce noise levels to ' County standards. Noise sensitive land uses include residential uses, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, churches and libraries." ' Primary sources of ambient noise within the project area include truck and automobile noise _ along the I-10 Freeway, SR-30 Freeway, San Bemazdino Avenue. Lugonia Avenue, Alabama Street ' as well as other major, arterial, and collector streets. In addition, ambient noise in the project azea includes airplane overflights associated with the San Bernardino International Airport and Redlands Municipal Airport, and noise from trains on the BNSF Railroad. ' 5.6.1.4 Local Physical (Citrus Plaza) The Citrus Plaza project site has historically been used for agriculture and is currently cleared and awaiting development. Existing noise sources are the same as for the infrastructure ca,nry facilities, discussed above. ~~,°; ~ 5.6.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The State CEQA Guidelines provides thresholds for determining significant environmental impacts. A project may be deemed to have significant noise impacts if the project would result in impacts to any of the following environmental issues: • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in ' the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels. • A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. J6 San Bernardino County General Plan, Public Services Group, Land Use Services Deportment, p. !I-BI-6, Adopted July 1989, Revised May /999. County orSuo Bernardino God Use Services Dcpartmeot SCH Na 1999101173 Ciuus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnt EIR -June 2001 Page 213 5.6 Noise ' • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been ' adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project azea to excessive noise levels. ' • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project azea to excessive noise levels. , 5.6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ' Cqunly ' 5.6.3.1 Proposed Plan Amendments m~oa~ao Charge The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and ' associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and ' wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geogrnphical area of the proposed project, height or bulk of , project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, ' which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect the noise environment would be subject to CEQA, potential noise impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts ' associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments are anticipated. 5.6.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all project sewer and water options. Potential noise impacts could occur during the construction/installation of the proposed infrastructure facilities and during the operation of the proposed on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities (Water options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3). No operational noise impacts aze anticipated with the implementation of all other water and sewer options as the facilities under such options would be subterranean and would not result in noise levels which would be audible at ' locations above the surface. Temporary constructior. noise levels vary mazkedly because the type and the amount of , equipment used during the various phases of construction generate a wide range of noise levels. The ' greatest noise levels associated with construction activities are generated by lazge earth-moving , equipment. The noise produced by an assemblage of heavy equipment ranges up to about 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the equipment source. Point sources of noise emissions aze County ofSao Beroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCH. Na 1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MalVIVpA Wafer&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequen[EIR-June 2001 ' Page 2 t4 5.6 Noise atmospherically attenuated at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Based upon the above referenced equipment noise estimates, the distance to the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour is estimated to be approximately 446 feet for an $-hour construction day. Any sensitive exterior receptors located within 446 feet of the construction effort could, therefore, be subject to noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or greater. The Calvary Chapel, including its elementary and high school, is located directly southwest of the intersection of Alabama Street and San Bernazdino Avenue. As part of the proposed project, water and sewer pipelines may be installed within San Bematdino Avenue, Alabama Street and Almond Avenue. ' An exterior noise level of up to 66 dBA will be allowed provided exterior noise levels have ' been substantially mitigated through a reasonable application of the best available noise reduction technology, and interior noise exposure does not exceed 45 dBA with windows and doors closed. Requiring that windows and doors remain closed to achieve an acceptable interior noise level will necessitate the use of air conditioning or mechanical ventilation." Ambient (e.g., existing) noise levels along San Belnazdino Avenue and Alabama Street have been modeled (e.g., using the Caltrans Noise Prediction Model) at 65 and 67 dBA, respectively. ' Developers aze required to depict on any appropriate development application review, any ' potential noise sources known at the time of submission and mitigation measures that insure these noise sources meet County Noise Ordinance Standards. In addition, for construction that will occur adjacent to any developed/occupied noise sensitive land uses, the developer shall submit a ' construction related noise mitigation plan to the County for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. The plan must depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the project through the use of ' -such methods as temporary noise attenuation fencing, preferential location of equipment and the use of current technology and noise suppression equipment" With the inclusion of these measures which reduce noise, and the temporary, short-term nature of the potential construction noise impacts attributable to the construction of the alternative infrastructure options, potential construction impacts aze concluded to be less than significant. ' Both the water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities will include a number of mechanized noise sources, including pumps, compressors, and comminutors. These facilities may produce noise levels in exceedance of adopted County sandazds. sa Ibid, p. II-BI-lO. ' County of Sao Berosrdioo laod Usc Services Dcpanmeot SCFL No. 1999101121 Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA blazer & Sewtt Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-lone 2001 Page 215 5.6 Noise ' The predominant noise source associated with the proposed water treatment facilities aze the ' electrical pumps used to extract the groundwater. The noise generated by mechanical equipment anticipated at the water treatment facilities has been estimated based upon available published data. '` The unattenuated Leq for the combine motor and pump is estimated to be between 66.0 and 68.0 dBA, measured 50 feet from the noise source. In addition, equipment operations would have the potential to generate discreet frequencies and overtones that could be discernible to off-site ' receptors. The majority of all equipment associated with the operation of the water treatment facilities will be housed within an enclosed structure and/or sound attenuated. Noise levels shall be , maintained at or below County standazds, established by the San Bernardino County General Plan and San Bemazdino County Development Code. No significant noise-related impacts aze anticipated from the ongoing operntion of the proposed water treatment facilities. ' Of the various noise sources present at the proposed wastewater treatment facilities, the noise sources that have the greatest potential to be audible aze the pumps involved with the ' movement of liquids. As proposed, the headworks and associated equipment will be constructed within an enclosed building and/or sound attenuated. That structure will provide acoustical shielding and reduce the potential conveyance of sound energy. Noise levels shall be maintained at or below County standazds, established by the San Bemazdino County General Plan and San Bemazdino County Development Code. No significant noise-related impacts aze anticipated from ' the operation of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities. 5.633 Citrus Plaza Site , Construction of the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall could result in noise impacts to sensitive land ' uses located neaz the site, including the Calvary Chapel and the Redlands Daycaze Center, located south of Lugonia Avenue on Indiana Court. Construction noise controls and mitigation measures , will be implemented so as to reduce construction noise to a less than significant level. Operation of the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall would incrementally increase ambient noise along existing roadways. These incremental increases in noise levels would be less than significant. 5.6.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As discussed above, with the incorporntion of the recommended mitigation measures, the , development of the infrastructure facilities will not result in the generation of significant construction related impacts and no operational noise impacts would be expected. Localized noise generated by the construction and operation of Citrus Plaza wdll be reduced to less than significant ~nh , levels with the incorporntion of the recommended mitigation measures and operation of Citrus Plaza ~^~b~^ Change would contribute to azeawide ambient noise levels along existing roadways. Although neither the ' development of the infastructure facilities nor Citrus Plaza will result in the generation of significant noise impacts, the development of the proposed infrastructure facilities in combination County ofSao Beroardmo Laod Use Semar Department h0.19991U1113 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Wazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Sub Page 216 x9^~r EIR-lace 2001 ' S.6 Noise with Citrus Plaza will incrementally contribute to increased noise levels within the project area. Similaz to the proposed project, noise from the construction and operation of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any project related noise would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and any recommended mitigation measures. Nevertheless, the EVCSP EIR found that cumulative noise impacts on the overall environment from these incremental increases in ambient noise levels could not be mitigated below a level deemed to be significant: Accordingly, cumulative noise impacts will be significant. 5.6.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.6.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ,~,""~ ' CAange No mitigation measures would be required for the Plan Amendments. 5.6.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project and Citrus Plaza Project Site • All construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., except in emergency situations, and not permitted on Sundays. • All construction equipment shall utilize properly working mufllers and the engines shall be equipped with shrouds. ' • All construction equipment shall be in proper working order and kept in a proper state of tune to reduce backfires. ' • Pazking/fueling, and servicing operations for all heavy equipment and on-site vehicles ' shall be at a minimum of 450 feet from the property boundaries of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycaze Center. • If heavy equipment is to be operated within 450 feet of the property boundaries of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycare Center for three or more days consecutively, except in response to emergency conditions, the project proponent shall notify the administrator of Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or Redlands Daycaze Center at least five days prior to the commencement of this construction and shall specify the expected duration of neaz-site construction activities. 1 Cowry of Sao Bcruardiuo Laud Ux Services Depanmeot SCR Na 19991011]3 CiNU Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 317 5.6 Noise ' 5.6.53 Additional Infrastructure Facilities Project Mitigation Measures ~°""~ , InilialeG Change • For water and sewer pipeline construction that may occur within San Bernazdino '~ Avenue, Alabama Street and Almond Avenue, within 4~0 feet of the property boundary of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School, a noise mitigation plan shall be prepared that will depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from ' this equipment will be mitigated during constroction of the project through the use of such methods as temporary noise attenuation fencing, preferential location of equipment ' and the use of current technology and noise suppression equipment. Water Options 1 and 2 Only ' • Water Treatment Facilities. Mechanical equipment, including pumps, blowers, fans, , electric and alternatively powered motors, generators, and compressors, shall be housed within an enclosed structure where necessary to meet those County noise standards in force at the time of the facilities' construction, including any subsequent modifications , thereto. • Water Treatment Facilities. The design of the water supply facilities and the , specifications for the equipment to be installed therein shall include noise control measures to ensure that County noise standads are not exceeded by equipment ' operations. • Water Treatment Facilities. Final engineering designs shall be reviewed by a qualified , acoustical consultant and specific noise control recorrunendations shall be provided to ensure compliance with County noise standazds. Sewer Option 3 Only • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Mechanical equipment, including comminutors, , pumps, and compressors, shall be housed within an enclosed structure where necessary to satisfy County noise standads. Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The design of the wastewater treatment facilities and the specifications for the equipment to be installed therein shall include noise control measures to enstue that County noise standazds are not exceeded by equipment 'I operations. Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Final engineering designs shall be reviewed by a qualified acoustical consultant and specific noise control recommendations shall be provided to ensure compliance with County noise standazds. Couory orSno Bernardino Laud Use Services Depanmeat SC1L Na 1999101127 , Civus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 2l $ , I 5.6 Noise 5.6.5.4 Additional Citrus Plaza Project Site Mitigation Measures can Inrtiatea _ Cnange • A noise mitigation plan shall be prepazed for any Citrus Plaza construction-related activities occurring within 450 feet of the property boundary of the Calvary Chapel, Elementary and High School or the Redlands Daycare Center. The noise mitigation plan will depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the project through the use of such ' methods as temporary noise attenuation fencing, preferential location of equipment and the use of current technology and noise suppression equipment. The mitigation measures identified above, which aze applicable to the Citms Plaza site, would also ' reduce potential noise impacts at the above referenced locations. 5.6.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Project-specific noise impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant after the incorporation of mitigation measures. However, the proposed project will incrementally contribute to increased noise levels within the East Valley azea of San Bemazdino County. As a result, cumulative noise impacts w511 remain significant. 1 Couory orSao Bernardino Lmd Lx Serviccs DepartmeoJ SCH. Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Water & Sewer Servitts Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 219 _, 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 5.7.1 WATER SUPPLY ' 5.7.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ' 5.7.1.1.1 Infrastructure Facilities Water is predominantly supplied to IVDA Area A by private local wells. Minimal water service to individual customers (less than 10 customers) is provided by the City of Redlands to IVDA Area A. Water is supplied in IVDA Area I by private wells. 5.7.1.1.2 Citrus Plaza Site According to the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, water supply to the Citrus Plaza site is cunrently provided by two local wells as well as 12-inch pipelines located within Nevada Street, Colton Avenue, and Lugonia Avenue.99 The local wells currently located on the Citrus Plaza site historically provided non-potable ' water for irrigation associated with agricultural uses. The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR estimated that on-site non-potable water consumption was approximately 731,808 gallons per ' day.°° As previously stated, water supply services throughout Area A, including the Citrus Plaza site is currently considered inadequate.41 5.7.1.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE r The following thresholds of significance were derived from the CEQA Guidelines at the time the Citrus Plaza Regional Final EIR was written and aze incorporated by reference into this document. "A project will normally have a significant effect if the project will: (1) conflict with 3v San Bernardino County Planning Department, Drafi E/R Citrus Pltca Regions! Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 99082084, September /995, p. ~.t5. l-6. J0 San Bernardino County Planning Departmem, Draft E/R Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, September /995, p..i.ti.l-7. County of San Bernardino, /eland Valley Development Agenry, Unincorporated Areas Aand /Water Supply and Sewerage Options, August /999, p. 4. Couory of Sou Berrnardioo Lmd Osc Services Depar[mmt SCR Na 1999101173 Citn~s Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 220 5.7.1 Water Supply adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located; (2) substantially , degrade water quality; (3) contaminate a public water supply; (4) substantially degrade or deplete groundwater resources; (5) interfere substantially with groundwater rechazge; and/or (6) use fuel, , water or energy in a wasteful manner.""- The Final EIR included thresholds of significance from the San Bernardino County General ' Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report, which are also incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR, as follows: , "Significant impacts to water supply and quality from implementation of the proposed GPU [General Plan Update] will involve the potential to create substantial , additional demands for water or to create or contribute to existing water quality degradation (pursuant to Appendix G(f), (g), (h), (1) and (o) of CEQA). The level of , significance and ability to mitigate such impacu will vary with a number of factors, including geographic location, existing water supply and quality characteristics and climatic conditions.'"' , The current CEQA Guidelines (as amended January 1, 1999), Appendix G, state that a significant impact to water supply would occur if: (I) the project would require or result in the , construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; or the project did not have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements or resources, or if new or expanded entitlements aze needed. The EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan concluded that numerous improvements would be required to accommodate projected growth within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan azea. The recommended new facilities would constitute a moderate to high impact and the projected , cumulative demands in combination with projected growth would be considered a moderate to high impact. The following thresholds of significance have been included to address this issue. The proposed project will have a significant effect upon the environment if: • The County and/or the City of Redlands, in conjunction with the project proponent, is unable to provide an adequate water supply, water treatment and/or water distribution system to the project site or to that portion of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan area ' which encompasses the project site, in a manner and in a time frame consistent w2th °'' San Bernardino County Planning Departmem, Drafi ElR Citrus P!¢a Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 99082084, September 1995, p. 5.6.1-9. " San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draf~ EIR Citrus Pla=a Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 1995, p. 5.6.1-9. Couory o(Sa• Rer•ardino Land Cse Servitts Department SCR Na 1999101121 , Citrus Plaza Regional MaIUI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page oo l 5 7.1 Water Supply project-specific and cumulative project demands as identified by the County and/or the City of Redlands; or ' • Any proposed expansion to the azea's water supply, water treatment or water distribution system fails to conform with the recotrunendations of the County and/or the City of Redlands, as contained in the Final Report: East Valley Corridor Facilities Specific Plan (Facilities for Water Supply, Sewerage and Reclamation. Stormwater Drainage and - Roads) or any subsequent amendments thereto; or ' • The project fails to comply with the provisions of AB 325 and/or City of Redlands - Ordinance No. 21 ~ 1. 5.7.13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS County 5.7.13.1 Proposed Plan Amendments '""iate° Change The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA area. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical area of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, ' which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect the water supply would be subject to CEQA, potential water supply impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments are anticipated. 5.7.13.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities project ca.^n Iniuatetl water options. The proposed water options are a set of options for the delivery of water services to change IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed water lines would be constructed entirely underground within existing roadway and utility right-of--ways. The proposed water lines are conveyance systems that do not consume water unto therselves. As such, the proposed water options would not impact the water supply system. No significant impacts would occur with the implementation of any of the proposed water options. ' County of San Bcroardioo L•od Use Strviccs Department SCH. Na 1999101113 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jtme 2001 Page 222 _ 5.7.1 Water Supply ' 5.7.133 Citrus Plaza Site , Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis , The analysis presented in the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that , project implementation would result in the daily average demand of 238,627 gallons of water, of which approximately 151,897 gallons would benon-potable water and approximately 86,730 gallons would be potable water" (477,24 gallons maximum daily demand and 736,606 gallons per day at peak hour demand's). Existing on-site daily water consumption was previously estimated at approximately 732,368 gallons, of which approximately 560 gallons is potable water and approximately 73],808 gallons is used for agricultural purposes. The water demands that would , result from development of Citrus Plaza would increase daily on-site water consumption by 86,170 gallons of potable water and decrease daily demands by X79,911 gallons of non-potable water.J6 , The previously proposed water delivery system was concluded to be capable of meeting maximum daily demands and fire flow requirements simultaneously. Revised Project Impacts Since the revised Citrus Plaza development would not vary in the types or amount of on-site ' uses, the on-site daily water demand for the revised project would not vary from the previous analysis. As stated in the previous analysis, the proposed water supply facilities would be able to accommodate water demand at buildout of the Citrus Plaza development. No significant impacts to water supplies or facilities would occur. 5.7.1.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS , One of the purposes of the proposed infrastructure facilities is to create an additional water resource which could be utilized for a variety of applications. According to the Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options report, the proposed water distribution and Veatment facilities are designed in a manner that would accommodate future growth in these azeas.°' As such, implementation of the infrastructure facilities component of the project would provide , San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E/R Citrus Plo=a Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, September 1995, p. 5.6.1-14. a5 San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E/R Citrus Pl¢a Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September /995, p. 5.6.1-/5. , °b San Bernardino County Planning Department, Drafi E!R Citrus Plara Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, September 1995, p. 5.6.l-14. 47 County of San Bernardino, Inland Valley Deve/opmem Agency, Unincorporated Areas Aand /Water Supply and , Sewerage Options, August /999. County of Sao Beraardioo Laod Gse Services Departmcot SCH. No. 1999101123 Citnu Plara Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 223 5.7.1 W'a[er Supply water supplies to azeas that currently have limited water supplies, Areas A and I; including Citrus Plaza. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis and ' cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed project would not result. 5.7.1.5 MITIGATION MEASURES c~~~a 5.7.1.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments '~~9 Since no significant impacts to water supplies and facilities are anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures are required. 5.7.1.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project No mitigation measures are required as the proposed water options would have no impact on -- the water supply system. 5.7.1.53 Citrus Plaza Project Site Although the 199 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall concluded that there were _ no significant environmental impacts to water supply, it identified the following measures to further - reduce or avoid even the less-than-significant effects. With a minor modification, these mitigation measures aze herein incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. • Prior to the recordation of the Pazcel Map, the project proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Counry of San Bernardino addressing the continuing use and/or management of the existing on-site groundwater well(s). If well(s) are not used or ' dedicated they would be properly abandoned in accordance with State and County regulations. la3 • Prior to issuance of building permits for each development phase, the project proponent shall submit a hydraulic study to the County which identifies the proposed water production and distribution facilities and design specifications of fire flow system. The report shall present conclusions concerning the capacity of existing water lines to provide adequate distribution for the proposed project. In Change 5.7.1.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The less-than-significant impacts would be further reduced following implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above. ' Conoty of San Bernardino Laod Llse Services Department SCR Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Sulraquent ElR-June 2001 Page 224 _ 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ' S.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 5.7.2 SANITARY SEWERS 5.7.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.7.2.1.1 Infrastructure Facilities Currently, Areas A and I aze served by a private local septic system. According to the Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options report, service throughout Area I is inadequate or no sanitary sewer service is available.°8 5.7.2.1.2 Citrus Plaza Site The Citrus Plaza site, being located within IVDA Area A, is served by a private local septic system. As described in the preceding paragraph, this system is inadequate or no sanitary sewer service is available.09 A City of Redlands sewer line crosses the site. s-ts 5.7.2.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The San Bemazdino County General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report includes thresholds for sanitary sewer service. As indicated therein, a project would have a significant effect on sanitary sewer services if it would: • "Increase demands on the capacity of local or regional wastewater collection or treatment services such that new or substantially expanded facilities are needed; or • Result in the substantial modification, relocation or closure of an active wastewater 1 collection or treatment system; or 's County ajSan Bernardino, /eland Palley Development Agency, Unincorporated Areas A and 1 Water Supply and Sewerage Options, August 1999, p. 4. J9 County ojSan Bernardino, Inland Valley Development Agency, Unincorporated Areas A and 1 Water Supply and Sewerage Options, August 1999, p, 4. County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCIL Na 1999101173 Cimu Plea Regional Ma1V1 VDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Fvial Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 22S 5.7.2 Sanitary Sewers • Breach published national, State or local wastewater standazds or regulations relating to , effluent dischazge, maintetlance or receiving water quality or protection of pubic water supplies.'>so The current CEQA Guidelines (as amended January I, ]999) indicate that a significant impact to sanitary sewer services would occur if the project: (1) exceeds wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Boazd; (2) requires or results in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ' construction of which could cause significant em~irorunental effects; (3) result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. 5.7.2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ' 5.7.23.1 Proposed Plan Amendments Coven InNated Change The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and , associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geogrnphical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies of guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical envirotunent. As all development projects which have the potential to effect the sanitary sewers would be subject to CEQA, potential water supply impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments are anticipated. 5.7.23.2 Infrastructure Facilities , The following envirotunenta] impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities Project ,~°°~ ' sewer options. Implementation of the proposed project would provide public sanitary sewer services to Areas A and I, areas that currently have limited or no sanitary sewer services. The proposed sewer lines would be constructed entirely underground within existing roadway and utility '0 San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft 6!R Citrus Plo=a Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. , i 94081084, September 1995, p. 5. t5.1-5. Cowry orSan Beroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCR No. 1999101]?3 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 226 , 5.72 Sanitan Sewers right-of--ways. The proposed sewer lines aze conveyance systems that do not generate sewage unto themselves. As such, the proposed sewer options would not impact the sewer system. No ' significant impacts would occur with the implementation of any of the proposed sewer options. 5.7.23.3 Citrus Plaza Site Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The analysis presented in the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that - project development would generate approximately 86,730 gallons of wastewater per day (gpd) (»,680 gpd in Phase 1 and 31,00 gpd in Phase 2); this represents ales-than-significant impact 51 Use of treated effluent within the Citrus Plaza site boundaries would reduce demands upon regional wastewater facilities, including those operated by the San Bemazdino Valley Municipal - Water District and the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, thereby, incrementally reducing the need for those agencies to expand treatment capacities in response to azea wide demands. t Revised Project Impacts Since the revised Citrus Plaza development would not vary in the types or amounts of on- site uses, the on-site daily sewage generation for the revised project would not vary from the previous analysis. As stated in the previous analysis, the proposed wastewater facilities would be able to accommodate sewage generation at buildout of the Citrus Plaza development. No significant impacts to sewage facilities would occur. Development of the proposed Citrus Plaza project would not have an adverse effect on the City of Redlands' sewer line that crosses the Citrus Plaza site. Under no circumstances would 9-ts buildings on the Citrus Plaza site be constructed above the subjec? sewer line. Development activities above the subject sewer line would be limited to pazlting and landscaping areas. Given this commitment there would not be any impediments to access the subject sewer line in the event of the need for future maintenance. Thus, in no case, would Citrus Plaza construction or operational activities adversely affect the subject sewer line. '~ San Bernardino Counry Planning Department, Draft E/R Citrus Pltra Regional Ma//, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, September 199.1, p..i.6.2-8. County of San Bernardino Land Ilse Services Departmeol SCH. Nn 1999101173 Citnu Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnt EIR-June 2001 1 Page 227 5.7? Sanitary Sewers ' 5.7.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS One of the purposes of the proposed infrastructure facilities is to provide sanitary sewer services to Areas A and I. According to the Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options report, the proposed water distribution and treatment facilities are designed in a manner that would accommodate future growth in these azeas.57 As such, implementation of the infrastructure facilities component of the project would provide improved sewer services to areas that currently have limited or no sewer services, Areas A and I, including Citrus Plaza. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis and cumulative , impacts related to development of the proposed project would not result. 5.7.2.5 MITIGATION MEASURES County 5.7.2.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ~niualetl Change Since no significant impacts to sanitary sewer services are anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures would be required. 5.7.2.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project , No mitigation measures are required as the proposed sewer options would have no impact on the sewer system. 5.7.2.5.3 Citrus Plaza Project Site Although the previous environmental analysis concluded that no significant impacts would occur as a result of the development of Citrus Plaza, mitigation measures have been developed through consultation with affected governmental agencies and services providers to further reduce the less than significant impacts to sanitazy sewer services. These mitigation measures are herein modified, as required, and incorporated into this Subsequent EIR.SJ • If required by CSA-70 EV-1, prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the Phase I development, the project proponent shall submit a flow test to the County of San , s' County of San Bernardino, /nland tialley Development Agency, Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Optioru, August / 999. " San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E/R, Citrus Pltea Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, September 199.1, p. 5.ti.1-l4, and Final E/R, Citrus pl¢a Regiona! Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 99082084, December 199.1, p. 5. Counry~ of San Bernardino Land Uu Services Department SCH, Na Ig99IpI I~ Ciaus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jwe 2001 Page 228 ' 5.7 '? Sanitary Sewers I , Bernazdino. If additional improvements aze determined to be necessary, the project proponent shall install any improvements required by the County, based upon that information. • As required by CSA-70 EV-1, the project proponent shall convey any required access and utility easements and associated rights-of--way to the County of San Bernardino and such other public agency as may be determined by the petmitting jurisdiction, for the construction and maintenance of sewer lines and associated facilities. f 5.7.2.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The less than significant impacts that would result from the proposed project would be further reduced following implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above. r i Couory of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Dcpartmeat SCR No. [999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA W a[er & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 229 1 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ' S.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 5.7.3 SOLID WASTE 5.7.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.73.1.1 Regulatory Environment In response to a Statewide shortage in remaining landfill capacity, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Act), commonly known as Assembly Bill (AB) 939 was passed. This Act is a comprehensive waste management law which requires that all cities and counties in the State of California divert 25 percent of the solid waste going to landfills by the yeaz 1995 and 50 percent by the yeaz 2000. AB 939 specifies that this goal be achieved through source reduction, recycling and composting. To identify how the current waste stream will be diverted, AB 939 also requires that each Ciry and County prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element consisting on nine components: (1) waste generation; (2) source reduction; (3) recycling; (4) composting; (5) special waste; (6) education and public information; (7) disposal facility capacity; (8) funding; and (9) integration (of all components). In addition, each City and County must prepaze a Household Hazardous Waste Element. These elements describe how the individual Cities and Counties will obtain the stated diversion goals and how the affected agencies' plan to dispose of hazardous substances such as household cleaners, paints, pesticides, and motor oils' The County's Sowce Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element (SRRE/HHWE) were adopted by San Bernardino County as a single element in August 1994. Approximately 3,000,000 tons of solid waste are generated annually in San Bernazdino County,55 30 ],255 tons of which is generated by the unincorporated portions of the County.sb " San Bernardino Counry Planning Department, Final E/R Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 9a08208a, December 1995. " San Bernardino County Public Services Group Land Use Services Department, General Plan, adopted July 1989, revised May / 999. 56 California Integrated Waste Management Board, Jurisdiction Disposal by Facility: Drsposal during 1998 for San Bernardino- Unincorporated, http://xn»v.ciwmdca.gov/LGTools/DRS! November l9, 1999. Couory of Sao Bertrardino Land Use Serviccs Department SCH. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W au:r & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 1 Page 230 5.7.3 Solid Waste , In September 1994, AB 688 (Solid Waste Act of 1994) passed into law. AB 688 specifies t "for the purpose of determining the base amount of solid waste from which the diversion requirements of this article shall be calculated, `solid waste' does not include the diversion of agricultural wastes; inert solids, including inert solids used for structural fill."57 5.73.1.2 Infrastructure Facilities , The locations of the proposed infrastructure facilities aze not of the type that generate solid waste. 5.7.3.1.3 Citrus Plaza Site t The Citrus Plaza project site has historically been used for agriculture and is cturently cleazed and awaiting development. Solid waste generated in the project azea is presently collected cn~e by private solid waste haulers, that include the Loma Linda Disposal Company, and is transported to the San Timoteo Landfill. Agricultural wastes generated in the project area are presently processed, mulched and resource recovered in accordance with the California Code of Regulations, Title 23 specifications.se The San Timoteo Landfill is a 114-acre Class III nonhazardous solid waste landfill (366-acre parcel) located on San Timoteo Canyon Road and Refuse Road, approximately five miles south of the Citrus Plaza site. The landfill is owned by the County of San Bemazdino and is operated by the County through its contractor NORCAL/San Bernardino, Incorporated. The landfill currently receives approximately 400 tons of solid waste per day and is pearitted to receive 1,000 tons per day se The overall permitted capacity of the San Timoteo Landfill is 14,800,000 cubic yazds and the remaining capacity (as reported by the operator) is 2,816,228 cubic yazds.00 Although the previous analysis identified the estimated closure date of the San Timoteo Landfill as 1997, the landfill has since expanded and, thus, the new closure date is ?016 61 ' SectionJ1781.21a)(aj,PublicResourcesCode. 'x Title la, Division 7, Chapter 3, Article 8 (Agricultural Solid Waste Management Standards) of the California Code of , Regulations, April 1992. i9 California Integrated Waste Management Board, California Waste Facilities, Sites, and Operatioru Database, hap;JJww~s~.ciwmb.ca.gov/SWIS/, November I?, 1999. so California Integrated Waste Managemenu Bomc( California Waste Facilities, Sites, and Operations Database, http://www.ciK~mb.ca.gov/SWISS November l1, 1999. et Palmer, Donnave, SWIS Contact, California Integrated Waste Management Board, personal communication, December 9, 1999. Couaty or Saa Bcrufrdino Laxd Ux Serricts Deparlmeot SCH. Na 1999101113 Ciltus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 231 5.73 Solid Waste I 5.7.3.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance were derived from the CEQA Guidelines at the time the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR was written and aze incorporated herein: • A significant increase in solid waste generation and disposal would result in the diminished capacity of local and/or regional solid waste landfills. Landfill capacity has been identified as critically low throughout California, particularly in metropolitan azeas such as the San Bemazdino Valley Region.62 This could result in a solid waste capacity shortfall, necessitating the need for additional solid waste facilities or the expansion of L existing landfills. Should project-related and/or cumulative project demands predicate the need for new or expanded solid waste facilities, the resulting demand upon existing facilities and the concomitant need for new or expanded facilities would constitute a significant environmental impact. • If the development of the project and/or other cumulative projects were to prevent the County or the City of Redlands from complying with its AB 939 mandates for the reduction of solid and household hazardous wastes, that impact would be judged to be significant. Furthermore, the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included thresholds of significance from the Final Environmental Impact Report for the San Bemazdino County General Plan. As indicated therein, any future expansion project, redevelopment plan, or new development project would have a potentially significant effect on solid waste management services if it would: • Increase demands on the capacity of local or regional solid waste collection, handling or disposal services such that new or substantially expanded facilities aze needed; or • Result in the substantial modification, relocation or accelerated closure of an active solid waste facility; or • Breach published national, State or local standazds or regulations relating to solid waste management 63 ' In addition to the significance thresholds identified, the current CEQA Guidelines also County Initlaleo consider the following as constituting a threshold of significance if the project wrill: cnan<x 61 Steve Wilson. Interim Planning Manager, County of San Bernardino, Solid Waste Management Department, Planning/Recycling Division, letter dated September 28, 1994. "' County ojSan Bernardino, General Plan Upda[e Final E!2 State Clearinghouse Na. 881014!/, May /989, page Y7I1-217. County of Sao Beroardioo Laod list Services Dtpartmcot SCH. Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water& Sewcr Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 1 Page 232 5.7.3 Solid Waste • Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's c~~~n Inmate9 solid waste disposal needs. change 5.733 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.733.1 Proposed Plan Amendments , The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create [he potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect the solid waste system would be subject to CEQA, potential solid waste system impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments are anticipated. 5.73.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all infrastructure Facilities project ca,~N IniM1atetl sewer and water options. Potential solid waste impacts associated with the installation of subsurface Charga pipelines would be limited to those resulting from construction. All construction debris vrill be disposed of at local landfills. The potential gtJantity of solid waste would be of a relatively limited nature and would occur on a one-time basis. As such, potential impacts associated with Water Options 3 through 7 and Sewer Options 1 and 2 would be less than significant. Operational impacts would be limited to only the sewer option (i.e., Sewer Option 3) which includes the proposed wastewater treatment facility. No operational impacts aze anticipated with the options using subsurface pipelines as this type of construction does not generate solid waste on an s~13 on-going basis following the completion of construction. Sewer Option 3 of the proposed project involves the construction of a wastewater treatment plant at the northwest portion of IVDA Area A, neaz the intersection of California Street and Palmetto Avenue. Sewage sludge is a by-product of the wastewater treatment process. According to the California Department of Health Services Guidelines, municipal sewage sludge is not a hazardous waste. As a result, municipal sludge may be disposed of in a Class III landfill. County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Departmcnt SC1L ~a 199910112) Cimts Plana Regional MaIVIVDA Wa[er & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 233 x.7.3 Solid Waste The closest disposal option for sewage sludge is the Synagro Regional Composting Facility _ in the County of Riverside. This facility is owned and operated by Synagro Technologies. The facility is currently permitted to accept a maximum daily tonnage of 500 tons of sewage sludge per day. The current owner/operator, Synagro Technologies, purchased the facility from RECYC, which was the operator at the time that the previous analysis was conducted. The Synagro Facility has available capacity to accommodate sewage sludge generated by the wastewater treatment facility. The wastewater treatment facility would generate sludge on the order of 1.2 tons per day and hauled once every 4 days or 5 or 6 times per month. Each trip will average approximately 5 tons. In addition to composting, sewage sludge can be disposed of through permitted land application by companies such as Bio Gro, a division of Wheelabrator Technologies. Land application involves applying treated wastewater solids directly to crops for animal feed through spraying or spreading or incorpornting it into the soil through injecting or plowing.h0 Ordinarily, permitted land application of sludge occurs on farmland located in remote azeas, away from extensive human populations. Based upon the current availability of disposal options for the sewage sludge that would be generated by the operation of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment facilities (i.e., composting or land application), no solid waste impacts from this facility aze anticipated. All on-site sludge generated by the wastewater treatment facilities will be maintained in enclosed containers prior to off-site disposal. No outdoor open-air drying or storage of sludge would occur.65 Although the RWQCB, the permit issuing authority, does not have any specific ~ requirements regazding a sludge management plan, the Project proponent has included a mitigation measure that includes a sludge management program for the disposal of all sludge produced by the wastewater treatment facilities. The plan will be simple and will generally consist of sewage sludge storage and dewatering by a belt press or similar process on site and hauling and disposal at an approved private sludge handling facility such as the Synagro facility. This plan will be developed in accordance with Waste Dischazge Requirements. Water supply options all include disinfection and could include, if necessary, a TCE removal facility. No other water treatment is anticipated. The disinfection with liquid chlorine will not generate any solid waste. TCE treatment with GAC will generate waste cazbon. Discussions with x33 Calgon, the lazgest supplier of cazbon, indicate that 120,000 ]bs. of cazbon will need to be replaced approximately once each five to six years. All cazbon will be recycled by Calgon or another 6' Bio Gro, KeyBenefttsojTreatedWastewaterSolids,http://wwt+~.bio-gro.com/serv0l.htm. cs San Bernardino County Planning Department, Final E1R Citrus P[~a Regional Mall, State Gearinghouse No. 9x081084, December 1995. County of Suo Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCH. Na 199910ll13 Civus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Einal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 234 5.7.3 Solid Waste supplier. The cazbon will be handled in the same manner as it is handled by the City of San a-33 Bemazdln0. 5.73.33 Citrus Plaza Site Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis r The proposed Circus Plaza project will generate solid waste during construction through the removal of vegetation and potential remaining building debris waste during construction. In addition, non-compatible soils and oversized materials within the soils may be removed and disposed during grnding operations i Construction and demolition wastes would be generated both during the removal of any remaining on-site structures and during the construction of on-site improvements and will include inert solids comprised of rock, concrete brick, sand, soils, asphalt, and sheetrock. Construction debris typically represents less than ten percent of all construction materials that aze utilized during project development. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would minimize the amount of construction and demolition waste and recycle as much concrete, wood, metals, drywall and cazdboazd as possible from the waste generated by project construction.b' Citrus Plaza project implementation would result in the generation of solid wastes both in the short-term (during construction activities) and in the long-term (during operation). At buildout, an estimated 27,280 pounds, 13.64 tons (based on the County of San Bemazdino generation rate of 10 pounds per employee per day), of solid waste would be generated from daily project operations °B Revised Project Impacts Since the revised Citrus Plaza development would not vary in the types or amounts of on- site uses, daily solid waste generation for the revised project would not vary from the previous analysis. The San Timoteo Solid Waste Disposal Site would serve the proposed Citrus Plaza development. The San Timoteo facility has a permitted daily throughput of 1,000 tons and an actual throughput of approximately 402 tons per day. The total permitted capacity of the San Timoteo facility is 14,800,000 cubic yards and the remaining capacity is approximately 2,816,228 cubic bb San Bernardino County Planning Department, Frnal E!R Citnts Plaza Regional Mall, Stale Clearinghouse No. 94082084, December 1995, page 5.6.3-7. 6' San Bernardino County Plannrng Department, Final E!R Citrtcs P(cea Regions( Mafl, Slate Clearinghouse No. 94082084, December 199.1. 6" San Bernardrno County Planning Department, Final E/R Citrus Plaza Regional MaIJ, State Clearinghouse No. 9408108.1, December 199.1, page 5.6.3-l2. Couory orSao acroardioo Land Use Services Dcpartmmt SCH. Na r999101r21 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 235 5.7.3 Solid Waste yazds 69 This is a greater capacity than reported at the time the previous analysis was conducted. Although the previous analysis identified the estimated closure date of the San Timoteo Landfill as 1997, the landfill has since expanded and, thus, the new closure date is 2016.'0 The San Timoteo facility, therefore, has enough capacity to receive the additional 13.64 tons of solid waste from the daily operation of the Citrus Plaza development. The impact to existing solid waste disposal sites from the buildout of the Citrus Plaza development would decrease when compared to the previous analysis because the permitted daily throughput has since increased by 600 tons. Construction debris wastes consist of building material debris (concrete, wood, metals, drywall and cazdboazd) associated with the construction of new buildings. Construction debris wastes aze defined as solid wastes. in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14. Construction debris wastes aze highly recyclable due to their relatively homogeneous nature (easy to separate) and because of their economic value. As a result, construction debris wastes are commonly recycled by building contractors. A.B. 939 requires cities and counties within the State of California to divert 50 percent of all solid wastes that would ordinarily be disposed at solid waste landfills. The project proponent would minimize the amount of construction debris waste and recycle as much concrete, wood, metals, drywall and cazdboazd as possible from the waste generated by Citrus Plaza project construction, in order to help the County meet its A.B. 939 goals. ` It should be noted that currently there aze no structures on-site. The site has been cleared and is currently awaiting development. 5.7.3.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As discussed above, no operational impacts aze anticipated with the infrastructure options using subsurface pipelines as, upon the completion of construction, this type of construction does not generate solid waste on an on-going basis. Operational impacts would be limited to the sewer mo°aim option which includes the proposed wastewater treatment facility. Based upon the current availability of disposal options for the sewage sludge that would be generated by the operation of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment facilities, no solid waste impacts aze anticipated. 69 California Integrated Management Board California Waste Facilities, Site, & Operations Database. bttp://www.crwmb.ca.gov/SWIS! November 11, 1999. '0 Palmer, Donnaye, SW/S Contact, California Integrated Was[e Management Board personal communication, December 9, 1999. County of Sau Beroardiuo Land Use Services Department SCfI No. 1999101121 Citrus Playa Regional MaIVI VDA Wares & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jmte 2001 Page 236 5.7.3 Solid Waste Since the Citnts Plaza project will result in the generation of municipal solid waste at a level that can be effectively serviced by existing municipal solid waste disposal facilities, the impacts of the Citrus Plaza Project will not be individually significant. Based on then current conditions, the EVCSP EIR concluded that cumulative impacts upon County facilities would be significant. With the expansion of the San Timoteo Landfill, the level of solid waste generated by the proposed project is within the planned for capacity of the San Timoteo Landfill. Therefore, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures project related impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance. Thus, the proposed project would not substantively contribute to solid waste related impacts and cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed project would not result. Similaz to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to solid waste generation would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recorlunended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion d~fanagemenr Plan for San Bernardino County. These same related projects aze used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and are more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the mmat e Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR Cdr aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past ftve years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occtu). 5.73.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.73.5.1 Proposed Pian Amendments Charge No mitigation measures to reduce solid waste impacts due to the proposed plan amendments would be required with this Subsequent EIR. 5.73.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project Although no significant impacts would occur as a result of the infrastmcture facilities, mitigation meastu~es have been developed through consultation with affected governmental agencies and service providers to further reduce the less-than-significant impacts. County of San fleroardino Land Use Services Dcpartmenl SCH. Na. 1999101121 Cana Plaza Regional MalVl VDA W ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 237 5.73 Solid Waste Sewer Option 3 Only • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Prior to the corrlmencement of facilities' operations, CSA-70 EV-1, in cooperation with the San Bemazdino County Public Health Department, Division of Environmental Health Services and the County of San Bemazdino Solid Waste Systems Division, a sludge management program for the disposal of all sludge produced by the wastewater treatment facilities shall be developed. All sludge generated at the wastewater treatment facilities shall be disposed of at a site(s) approved and permitted to accept sewage sludge. • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Adequate operating records, as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region and other permitting agencies, will be maintained and available for inspection by regulatory agencies. Those records shall include, but not be limited to, the quantity of sludge e~cported, sold, or aat distributed, the destination of the sludge, the type of treatment (if any) and labeling used, and all required analysis. 5.7.3.53 Citrus Plaza Project Site ~~a ~aa"e Charge Although no significant impacts would occur as a result of the Citrus Plaza project, analysis presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included the following mitigation measures which fiuther reduce the less-than-significant impact, all of which aze herein incorporated into this Subsequent EIR:" • The project proponent shall submit a solid waste management plan addressing: (1) the implementation of available technologies to reduce and recycle solid waste both during construction and after completion of the project; (2) design standazds for access to, location and construction of trash container enclosures in order to facilitate implementation of automated refuse collection; and (3) proposed actions to divert and/or recycle inert wastes generated during the demolition and construction phase of the project. • In order to accomplish established source reduction and recycling objectives, prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for each development phase, the project proponent shall submit a sotlree reduction, recycling and composting plan which services to promote the diversion of solid wastes from local landfills. '~ San Bernardino County Planning Department, Final EIR Ci[rus Phca Regional Mall, Smte Clearinghouse No. 9408?084. December 1995, Mitigation Measures Nos. l8 and l9, page 5. Coeoty or San Beroardioo Land lise Services Department SCK Na 1999101121 Civus Plaza Regional Ma1VI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 238 5.75 Solid Wute L 5.73.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Due to the expansion of the San Timoteo Landfill, the level of solid waste impacts due to ~z. implementation of the proposed project would not remain individually or cumulatively significant. ~,,,ry With the incorporation of the above-mentioned mitigation measlues, the less-than-significant '~,~~ impacts would be further reduced. No adverse effects would occur. County of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Depanmcat SCH. Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plana Regional MaIVI VDA Wazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 239 t 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTfLITIES 5.7.4 FIRE PROTECTION 5.7.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The San Bemardino County Fire Department, County Service Area 38 (CSA-38) provides 7_z fire protection for portions of the unincorporated County area. Currently CSA-38 comprises the °"r southwest comer of the County and is generally bounded by Los Angeles County to the west, State 7.z Route 58 (SR-58) and Interstate 40 (I-40) to the north, Yucca Valley to the east and Riverside County to the south. This service area includes approximately ~0 percent of the County's population.'' The California Division of Forestry's contract to provide fire protection services to the project area was terminated in July 1999. The fire protection responsibility is now with the San Bemardino County Fire Department. ~-z CSA-38 is within the Valley region of San Bemardino County. Fire protection service personnel in the Valley region consist of 155 paid firefighters and ]20 volunteer firefighters, totaling 275 persons. The ratio of paid firefighters to population is 0.7 firefighters per 1,000 people, a relatively low ratio. If volunteer firefighters are taken into account, the ratio is 1.3 firefighters to 1.000 people, a more typical ratio of a comparable corrununity." Currently, there are no new fire stations planned for the Valley Region and no funding mechanism has been established by the County to assess and collect development impact fees for the provision of additional facilities.7d As large projects have occurred, each project has been assessed to determine impacts on County services and some projects have been required to provide capital improvements or funds to offset impacts. Based on the Development Impact Fee Report, a ' Pau! Miller, Fire Marshall, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Counry Service Area 38, personal communication, July?4, l99~. _j County of San Bernardino, Genera! Plan Update Final EIR jor the San Bernardino Count}, SCH No. 88101411, May 1989, p. VIII-266. '{ Smith, Terry, Assrstan[ Chief. Operations, San Bernardino County Fire Department, personal communication, December 2. 1999. Couory of Sau Bemardino Laod Cse Servites Departmcol SCH. Na 19991011]3 Cim~s Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA W au:r & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 240 5.7.4 Fire Protection recommended fee of $0.20 per gross leasable squaze foot was identified as mitigation for general I commerciaUindustrial development impacts upon County fire protection services.'S The InstJrance Services Office (ISO) rates an area's level of fire risk based on provisions of staffing, stations, apparatus, equipment and engine and ladder companies for various land uses. This ISO rating is on a scale of 1 (low risk) to 10 (high risk).'6 The current ISO rating for the project site , a-t is 5 or 9, depending on the number and location of fire hydrants on the site. If a fire hydrant is within 1,000 feet and a fire station is within five miles of the site, then the ISO rating would be if 7-3 not, then it would be 9. ~ z Additional back-up response is provided both from other County facilities as well as through service agreements and/or contracts with adjacent jurisdictions. Current facility, manpower, ~a and equipment levels aze considered adequate to serve existing conditions. 5.7.4.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance were derived from the CEQA Guidelines at the time the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR was prepazed and are incorporated herein: • The project, either directly or indirectly, creates an unfulfilled need for additional staffing, equipment or facilities which cannot be addressed through an existing funding mechanism and, by that failure to provide additional staffmg, equipment and/or facilities, creates a public health hazard; • The project results in an increase in emergency response times beyond acceptable levels, as established by affected service providers; and/or • The project adversely affects existing emergency response plans and comparable alternative measures cannot be provided through other reasonably available alternatives. Furthermore, the 1995 Final EIR included thresholds of significance from the San , Bernardino County General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report, which aze hereby incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. As indicated therein, "any futtJre expansion project, redevelopment plan or new development project undertaken in any of the three geographic azeas 'S County ojSan Bernardino, Regional Fire and Local Parkr Developmem Impact Fee Report jor the County ojSan Bernardino, California, April 1991, Schedule I. / (Summary of D!F Costs by Service Provision) for the Fart Valley Development /mpact Fee Drstrict No. 3, p. 5 and Schedule 1.9 (Fire Facility and Equipment Cos[), p. 6. c County ojSan Bernardino, Final E/R for the San Bernardino County General Plan, SCH No. 88101411, May 1989, , p. V///-166. County of S•n &ro•rdino Laod Gse Services Department SCFL Na 1999101173 Citrus Plan Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Scwer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 241 5.74 FireRotection covered by the GPU [General Plan update] would have a significant effect on fire hazards and fire protection services if it would: • Create potential fire hazards for people, animal or plant populations; ' Impose pressure on the capacity of local or regional fire protection services such that new or substantially expanded services are needed: or, • Breach published national, State or local standazds or regulations relating to fire protection."" Although the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan will not be applicable to the revised project, the previously proposed project included thresholds of significance contained therein. However, these thresholds of significance will not be incorporated into this Subsequent EIR because the revised project includes proposed plan amendments that would repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as it applies to unincorporated County azeas. In addition to the significance thresholds identified, the clllrent CEQA Guidelines also i~a~aha it consider the follovtiing as constituting a threshold of significance: cna~e ' • The project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives. 5.7.4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.7.4.3.1 Proposed Plan Amendments a Change The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed a-a9 amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within ' County ojSan Bernardino, Genera! Plan Update Final EIR for the San Bernardino Caunty, SCH No. 88/ 0?4l 1, May 1989, p. V/I!-5l. County of San Btr••rdi•o Land Ose Servites Dep•nmmt SCiL Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 242 -- 5.7.4 Fire Protection Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical envirotment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect fire protection services would be subject to fees and tax revenues, potential fire protection impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments are anticipated. Since the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change in land use or the construction of a development project (see Section 5.1, Land Use, in this Subsequent EIR), no change in population, fire protection service area, or emergency response times would occur and State or local fire protection standardsJregulations would not be violated. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a significant impact to fire protection services within and m~~~"a slJrrounding the project site. r"~a 5.7.43.2 Infrastructure Facilities S The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities project sewer and water options. The proposed pipelines would be entirely located underground, within existing utility right-of--ways, and would not require fire protection services following buildout. , However, there is a potential for existing on-site vegetation to be removed and stockpiled adjacent to the proposed alignment for an extended period of time; thus, resulting in a potential fire hazard due to the flammable nature of such materials. In other words, the construction of the pipelines would potentially result in a significant impact by creating a potential fire hazard by stockpiling flammable materials. The proposed water and wastewater facilities would be served by the local water system proposed in Area A (see Section 3.0, Project Description). The water availability for fire flow for Area A would be 4,000 gallons per minute over a period of four hours, which is the amount required pursuant to the previous consultation with the County's fire protection agencies. This is based on approximately 4.9 million gallons (mg) of total water storage, of which 3.9 mg would be set aside r$ for emergency and operating storage and 1.0 mg for fire suppression. The San Bemazdino County Fire Department determines fire flow based upon the Insurance Service Office (ISO) requirements and County Ordinance 3610. The ISO requirements, along with the requirements of County Ordinance 3610, have been reviewed and it has been determined that 4,000 gallons per minute (GPIvt) and four hours of storage are more than sufficient for the project. Therefore, the required fire flow would be met upon buildout of the revised project and no significant impact would result. County of Sso Bcroardioo Land Use Services Department SCH. Na 19991011]3 Cittus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequem ElR-June 2001 Page 243 5.7.4 Fire Protection 5.7.433 Citrus Plaza Site Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Implementation of the proposed Citrus Plaza project will result in the conversion of the rAaaN ~°ma~e Citrus Plaza site to a regional commercial center. In that transition, the site will be converted from Change an existing land use which imposes only limited demands upon municipal services to a future land use which has the potential to place considerably greater demands upon azeawide fire protection facilities, agency personnel and equipment requirements. The Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Drafr EIR indicated that in the event that the County became the fire emergency primary response agency for the project azea, two additional fire stations and engine companies would be required to address future demands associated with the buildout of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan azea.18 In order to address project-specific impacts, one new station (and associated staffing level of 3 persons for 3 shifts) would be required to obtain the rAaair County's standazd for minimtJm response times.'9 Please note that based on the January 12, 2001 initla~ea letter from the County Fire Department, no new fire station is required. ~~'~ As stated in the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Draft EIR, and later confirmed in consultation with the San Bemazdino County fire protection agencies, the fire flow requirement for Phase I (Power Center) is 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm) over a four hotu duration. Phase II (Regional Mall) fire flow requirements would add an additional 4,000 gpm requirement onto the present system. Recent fire flow test results confirm that present capacity exists to meet only Phase I fire flow requirements, but that system improvements can satisfy this additional fire flow requirement 80 Based upon the environmental analysis contained in the Cittvs Plaza Regional Mall Draft EIR, no significant impacts to fire protection services would occur with implementation of the previously proposed Citrus Plaza project. Revised Project Impacts As stated in the General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report for the San BeJnardino County, "because the general fire hazazd rating in the County is extremely high, it is J8 San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E1R Citrus Pla=a Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 9408108x, September 1995, p. 5.6.a-19. ° Miller, Paul, Fire Marshal, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, County Service Area 38, I correspondence, July 20, 1995 and personal communicatlon, July 3l, 1995. "0 San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draf[ EIR Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, Sate Clearinghouse No. 9x081084, September 199.1, p. 5.6.1-18 and 5.6.1-19. Couoty of Sao Beroardioo Laod Gu Services Department No. J999tUJJ2i Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water 8 Sewer Services Plan Final Subscquent E[R-June 2001 Page 244 5.7.4 Fire Protection likely that most large land development projects proposed in the future would result in potentially significant adverse effects on local fire hazazds and fire protection services.... It is also likely that all such impacts can be mitigated (Class II} through incorporation of appropriate design and by arranging appropriate expansion of fire protection services."81 However, the water system improvements that are included in the revised project will result in adequate water resowces to meet the County's fire flow requirements for development of both Phases I & II of the Citrus Plaza project. As noted in a letter from the San Bernardino County Fire Department, dated January 12, ~-~ 2001, the County Fire Department is satisfied that the EIR adequately analyzes fire protection and emergency medical services to the project and that the proposed mitigation measwes will , adequately mitigate the potential impacts of the Project. As noted in the January 12, 2001 letter, the County Fire Department after further review has concluded that the initial fire response for the Project site will be provided by San Bemazdino County Fire Department Stations 9 and 23. In addition, service agreements and/or contracts are t-~ available with adjacent jurisdictions for the appropriate additional fire and medical emergency response that may be required. The County Fire Department has concluded that with these agreements or contracts adequate staffing and equipment will be available to serve the Project azea with satisfactory fire protection services within required response times. With the fees and taxes to be received from the Citrus Plaza Development and later Donut Hole developments, the County Fire Department has concluded that it will be able to provide a response in both staffing and equipment in a manner that meets the Department's current requirements as well as that of the Insurance Service Office (ISO). The County Fire Department after further review has determined that the American Medical Response (AMR), which has a contractual relationship with the County of San Bemazdino for the purpose of providing emergency medical response services to various azeas of the County, has the capacity to provide emergency medical services to the Donut Hole within required response times and therefore there is no potentially significant impact associated with Emergency Medical Services (EMS). In addition, the County Fire Department has since its October letter had the opportunity to ~-s analyze the tax revenues that will accrue to its department upon construction of Phase 1 of the Citrus Plaza project, as well as tax revenues that will result from the eventual build out of the Donut Hole. Those tax revenues will be adequate to pay for service to the project, assuming future development within the Donut Hole pays appropriate, proportionate fees for additional costs incurred in serving this azea. The project is conditioned to pay appropriate proportionate fees. er County ojSan Bernardino, Genera! Plan Update Final E/R jor the San Bernardino County, SCH No. 88/0?d! 1, May 1989, p. !'I!I-.i1. County or Sao Bernardino Laod Use Services Dcpantacnt SCH. Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 245 L 5.7.4 Fire Protection 5.7.4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As discussed above, no operational impacts are anticipated with the infrastructure options using subsurface pipelines within existing utility right-of--ways as, upon the completion of construction, this type of construction would not require fire protection services. Operational impacts would be limited to the infrastructure facilities located on the Citrus Plaza site. Although, site clearing and construction activities could result in potential impacts to fire protective services during construction of the pipelines, a mitigation measure has been included which would reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. In the conversion of the Citrus Plaza site to a regional cornmercial center, the site will be converted from an existing land use which imposes only limited demands upon municipal services to a future land use which has the potential to place considerably greater demands upon azeawide fire protection facilities, agency personnel and equipment requirements. Mitigation measures have been included which reduce cumulative demands on areawide fire protection facilities or identified equipment requirements to a level of insignificance. Further, the water system improvements that are included in the revised project will result in adequate water resources to meet the County's fire flow requirements for development of both Phases I & II of the Citrus Plaza project. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which would ensure compliance with all applicable code and ordinance requirements and minimize the potential impact to fire protective services to a level of Counq InNateO insignificance. Therefore, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures Citrus Plaza project Cnanga related impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance. Thus, the proposed project would not substantively contribute to fire protective services related impacts and cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed project would not result. Similaz to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to fve protective services would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 199 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemadino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino ' County. These same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and aze more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus m`n~ Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential ctmulative impacts. This results since cna~ the actual background growth which has occtured in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of ctunulative growth is asstuned than has and/or is anticipated to occtv). No ctunulative impacts aze expected. County of San Beroardioo Land Usc Services Depanmcot SCH. No. 199Y101173 Citnu Plea Rcgional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 246 5.7.4 Fire Protection 5.7.4.5 MITIGATION MEASURES , 5.7.4.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments County InNateC Since no significant impacts to fire protection services are expected to occilr as a result of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures aze required. 5.7.4.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project , • All vegetation and other potentially flammable materials that may be removed during construction of the pipelines and water and wastewater facilities will be removed by the facility operator in a timely manner in order to avoid stockpiling. 5.7.4.53 Citrus Plaza Project Site Mitigation Measures , The previous enviroltmental analysis included the following mitigation meastres to reduce the impacts to fire protection services to less-than-significant levels. These mitigation measures aze herein incorporated into this Subsequent EIR.B'- No new mitigation measures aze required. • Prior to the issuance of building permits, the San Bernardino County Fire Department 7_z shall review building plans for compliance with applicable standards for construction, access routes, sprinkler systems, fire hydrants, fire flow and water main requirements a3 • Prior to framing construction, approved fire hydrants and fire hydrant pavement mazkers 7-5 shall be installed. Fire hydrants shall be six-inch diameter with a minimum of one (1) four-inch and two (2) two-and-one-half-inch (2'/Z) connection as specified by the Fire Department. The design of the fire hydrant and the fire hydrant pavement mazker shall be approved by the Fire Department. All fire hydrant spacing shall be 300 feet.eY "' San Bernardino County Planning Department, Final E!R Citrus Plcca Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, November 1996, p. 6. "' San Bernardino County Planning Department, Final E!R Citrus Plrta Regional Mall, Stare Clearinghouse No. 94082084, December 1995, Mitigation Measure No.20, p..i. "' San Bernardino County Planning Department. Final EIR Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, December 199, Mitigation Measure No.2l, p..i. Cowry orSa• Bernardino L•nd Use Services Dcpar[ment SCIi. No.19991011]3 Citrus Plaza Regional h1aIV1 VDA Watcr & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 20(11 Page 247 5.7.4 Fire Protection L 5.7.4.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION As stated in the Final EIR, the impacts that would result from the proposed project would be reduced to ales-than-significant level following implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above. 1 Counry~ of San Bernardino Lantl Ux Services Departmcnl SCJL Fw 1999101123 Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA W ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 248 ~- E ' T AND MITIGATION MEASURES a0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC S 5.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 5.7.5 LAW ENFORCEMENT 5.7.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Citrus Plaza project azea is within the patrol area of the San Bernazdino County ~~°~" Sheriffs Departments Central Station (655 East Third Street, San Bernazdino), approximately cnar~ge ~ seven miles from the Citrus Plaza site. The station is staffed with 37 sworn officers (including 23 patrol officers)89 and 11 general employees (i.e., civilian personnel); the station currently maintains -. seven patrol vehicles. One patrol vehicle is presently assigned to that beat azea that includes the Citrus Plaza site.86 The response time for emergency calls originating from that station averages approximately six minutes.8' The Central Station's patrol azea encompasses approximately 95.1 squaze miles and serves a population of approximately 38,000 residents. In addition, the Central Station serves the Cities of Grand Terrance and Lorna Linda, which comprise 35,000 residents. The County Sheriffs Department maintains a current ratio of 1.1 deputies per 1,000 people.88~ sv However, no formal standard has been adopted by the County concerning a required or recommended deputy to population ratio. Additionally, the number of individuals typically applies to the resident population and does not directly apply to employees, shoppers, movie patrons and others. Although the County Sheriffs Department does not maintain a recommended standard officer-to-population rntio, the County has determined that existing service levels are sufficient to accommodate existing needs.90 x' Central Station is currently in the process oJhiring approximately three additional oJTcers, which would result in a Lora! oJ37 sworn officers. X6 The project site is located within Central Station's Beat No. 3, which rs comprised ojseveral reporting districts, including Reporting District SB-001. This reporting district encompasses the project site and comprises an area of approximately 1.76 square miles. x' Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, personal communication, December /, /999. xx Ratio does not take into account the populations ojthe Cities of Grand Terrace and Loma Linda. x9 Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, persona! communication, December 1, 1999. '0 Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, personal communication, December 1, 1999 County of Sao Beroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCR Na 1999101121 Circa Plata Regio~l MaIVIVDA Water& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 249 5.7.5 Law Enforcement ' The current standard for staffmg used by the County Sheriffs Department, when contracting for services, is based on crime statistics and workload rather than based upon population.91 According to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the San Bemazdino County General Plan Update, "The number of officers and their distribution is determined by need, based on automatic dispatch reports describing response times, handling times, number of calls-for-service, ' Part 1 and Part 2 uniform crime reporting, as well as time-and-motion studies.'"' That document concluded, "The current level of stalling for law enforcement in the County permits no proactive patrol in many unincorporated azeas. As a result, responses by County law enforcement officers are strictly based on calls for service and the priority of the call. The desired minimum level of recommended staff, according to the Sheriff, would allow the various stations to provide 20 percent , proactive patrol time."~' Currently, the adequacy of County police protection is determined by a proactive patrol fermula, which is based on the crime rate within the targeted County area and on the number of hours spent responding to calls for service versus the corresponding number of hours available for preventative patrols. Based on this formula, police protection for the patrol area is not considered adequate by the County Sheriffs Department for existing conditions.93 According to the County Sheriffs Department, five additional officers are needed to reach the proactive patrol goal of 35 percent 9S The City of Redlands Police Department currently provides back-up response, as needed, to , the project area.96 That agency is presently housed in two locations within the City of Redlands. Patrol units and personnel are dispatched from 212 Brookside Avenue, located approximately two miles from the Citrus Plaza site. Investigative personnel respond to service calls from the department's Administrative Offices located at 30 Cajon Street. The California Department of Highway Patrol (CHP) provides traffic management services on the San Bemazdino (I-10) Freeway and Highland (SR-30) Freeway, unincorporated highways and other dedicated County roadways in the project vicinity. All services are provided from the San Doug Haller. Fisca! Services Manager, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, Sherds Bureau of Administration, interoffice memorandum dated July 3/, 1995. '' County ojSan Bernardrno, Fina/ Ertvironmenta! /mpact Report for the San Bernardino County General Plan, p. V/ll- 168. 93 County ojSan Bernardino, Fina! Errvironmenta! Impact Report for the San Bernardino County General Plan, p. V//1- 168 and 169. 9J Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, personal communication, December 1, 1999. 9J Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, persona! communication, December 1, 1999. 96 Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, persona! communication, December I t7, 1999. Couory of Sao Bcraardiao Lod Use Services Department SCA Na 1999rOtl23 , Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Warer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EtR-]une 2001 Page 250 , 5.7.> Law Enforcement Bemazdino office, located at 2211 Western Avenue, San Bemazdino (approximately 1 ~ miles from the project site). Staffing at this facility is currently comprised of 63 uniformed and 1_' non- uniformed personnel 9' Field personnel are assigned patrols along the following highway segments: (I) along I-~, from Sierra Avenue (south) to Oak Hi11 Road/Cajon Summit (north); (2) along 121, from I-15 (north) to the Riverside County line (south); and (3) along I-10, from Sierra Avenue ' (west) to the Riverside County line (east). These assignments also include all unincorporated roadways within these service areas..°a The Citrus Plaza Project site is located within CHP Beat 2Q, which extends from SR-30 at i~aca"a _ Highland Avenue (north) to the SR-30/1-10 interchange (south). Typical calls for this azea include, ~"~^~ but are not limited to, accident responses, removing hazards from the roadway surfaces, and enforcement. The Citrus Plaza site is near the convergence of four patrol azeas, which allows for the closest unit to be utilized in an emergency situation. As a result, the CHP response times are considered adequate based on the location of the site, the CHP's beat structure, and the time of day the situation occurs. 5.7.5.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance were derived from the CEQA Guidelines at the time the 1995 Final EIR was written and are incorporated herein: "The project would be judged to produce a significant environmental effect if any of the following conditions occur: (1) the project, either directly or indirectly, creates an unfulfilled need for additional staffing, equipment, or facilities which: (a) cannot be addressed through an existing funding mechanism; and (b) results in the creation of a 'public health hazard' in the absence of that staffing, equipment, or facility; (2) the project results in an increase in emergency response times beyond acceptable levels, as established by affected service providers; and/or (3) the project adversely affects the existing emergency response plans and comparable measures, actions or plans cannot be provided through other reasonably available alternatives."'9 Furthermore, the ]995 Final EIR contained a threshold of significance from the Final Environmental Impact Report for the San Bemazdino County General Plan, which is hereby v Scott, Michelle, California Department of Highway Patrol, San Bernardino area once, personal communication, November 30, 1999 9R Captain M L. Senna, Commander, California Department of California Highway Patrol, San Bernardino Area, letter dated September 16, /994. 'v San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft Errvironmenta! /mpact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 9=1082084, September 1995, p. x.6.5-7. Couory' of San Bernardino Land Usc Services Department SCf1 Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Playa Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 251 5.7.5 Law Enforcement ' incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. As indicated therein, diminution in the quantity and qualin~ of public services is considered a significant impact. In addition to the significance thresholds identified, the current CEQA Guidelines also Covary Inmates consider the following as constituting a threshold of significance: Lange a The project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered law enforcement facilities, need for new or physically altered law enforcement facilities, the constmction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios. response times or other performance objectives. 5.7.5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.7.5.3.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ~„ay mmatea Chaage The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA area. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of ' project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within a-~9 Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. The plan amendments would make no change in the current land use regulations and zoning restrictions applicable to the area. All permitted uses, development densities or intensities, or other regulations or development would remain the same as the current standards. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect police services would be subject to CEQA, potential police services impacts would be appropriately , addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments aze anticipated. Since the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change in land use or the construction of a development project, no change in population or law enforcement service: area ~~'~ ' would occur (see Section 5.1, Land Use, in this Final Subsequent EIR). Therefore, the proposed cn~~ plan amendments would not result in any impacts to law enforcement services within and surrounding the project azea. Connry of San Bernardino 6aod Usc Services Depanmcot SCH. Na 1999101123 Citntc Plaza Regional MaIU1VDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 252 5.7.5 Law Enforcement 5.7.53.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities project ~~~n sewer and water options. Construction of the infrastructure facilities, under all project sewer and coa~g water options, may affect local traffic conditions. This could result in the increased need for police services. Following construction of the proposed pipelines, the demand for law enforcement services will be negligible. The pipelines will be entirely constructed underground and will not require - additional security services. However, the proposed water and sewer facilities proposed under Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 may require additional security measures to prevent such crimes as graffiti and vandalism, but would not rise to a level of significance. Since the project m~"a site will remain within unincorporated San Bemazdino County jurisdiction, the San Bernazdino cnarga County Sheriffs Department would be responsible for law enforcement services for the proposed water and wastewater facilities. 5.7.533 Citrus Plaza Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis As stated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, the proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in the introduction of workers, construction equipment and building materials onto the project area, as well as temporarily increase the ntJmber and types of vehicles to and from 1 the project site. As a result, short-term measures may be needed to ensure both the continuing use of affected roadways, the safe and efficient movement of vehicles and the avoidance of any potential conflicts between construction and non-construction vehicles. Furthermore, the on-site storage of construction equipment and building materials during the project's construction phases may potentially necessitate police involvement unless adequate safety and security measures are implemented. Although non-automotive (i.e., pedestrian, bicyclists) activities in the Citrus Plaza area are presently limited, vehicular and non-vehicular conflicts may occur during construction operations at both the project area intersections and other points of ingress and egress to the project site. This potential conflict is most evident in the azea adjacent to the Calvary Chapel Christian High School, located at the southeast comer of San Bernardino Avenue and Alabama Street. Once the project is operational, on-site retail establishments will house materials and other commodities generally desired by consumers. The availability of these products, in combination with the concentration of individuals and on-site businesses, may present opportunities for criminal occurrences involving individuals and/or property. The potential also exists for crimes against property, particularly towazd unattended automobiles. Loitering and vagrancy in association with CounW ofSao Bernardino Land Use Services Depanmenl ~~h0.1999IUII23 Citrus Pla>e Regional MaIVIVDA Watcr & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -Jwe 2(ql Page 253 5.7.5 Law Enforcement ' entertainment and recreation-oriented commercial activities was also included as a potential law enforcement impact in the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. The law enforcement services analysis within the 199 Final EIR included the potential for the Citrus Plaza portion of the project, and its associated increases and redistribution of traffic, to result in the increase in both the number and severity of vehiculaz accidents, including accidents , involving motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists in azeas where multiple modes of transportation aze allowed to occur simultaneously. However, the previously proposed project included design features that would alleviate potential vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at the Citrus Plaza site. The San Belllardino County Sheriffs Department would be the primary law enforcement provider serving the project site. That depaztment indicated that additional staffing would be required for both the intensification of the Citrus Plaza site, the increased concentration of individuals, and the introduction of additional traffic. Based upon reseazch conducted by the County Sheriffs Department, personnel needs were quantified as: (1) two full-time patrol officers (eight hours per day and seven days per week); and (2) supervisory support from the local watch commander. In association with these personnel requirements, one fully loaded patrol vehicle assigned to the Citrus Plaza site would be needed. In addition, these patrol officers would require augmentation through the provision of private on-site security officers. The County Sheriffs Department also recommended that an on-site security office be provided as part of the Citrus Plaza development. Since the previously proposed project included the annexation of the Citrus Plaza project site into the City of Redlands, impacts on the Redlands Police Department were also described. Based upon an evaluation conducted by the Redlands Police Department, the following staffing needs m~~m would be required to meet the increase in demand associated with the buildout of proposed Citrus rJ'~'~ Plaza project: (1) four officers; (2) one detective; (3) one community service officer; (4) one clerk; and (5) 0.5 public safety dispatchers. Potential facility demands would be compensated through the City of Redlands development impact fees, which would provide funds for any needed law enforcement facilities on the project site. The Redlands Police Department also indicated that there would be a need for a network of rooftop "cat walks" as well as emergency vehicle pazking neaz the entrances to the mall and the major tenants. , Although there would be no change in California Department of Highway Patrol jurisdiction or service azea, an increase in demand for Highway Patrol services would occur upon project buildout. Based on traffic projections, increased services will be needed on both the San Bernardino (I-10) and SR-30 Freeways. Cauory~ of Sao Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCF1. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 254 1 5.7 ~ LaH Enforcement Revised Project Impacts As stated in the 1995 CILCUS Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, impacts to law enforcement services would occur during construction and operation of the proposed Citrus Plaza development. The only difference between the impacts described in the previous and revised analyses is the retention of the project site within unincorporated San Bernardino County jurisdiction. However, the City of Redlands would continue to provide backup law enforcement services to the Citrus Plaza :ou^n mn~atec site.'°° Furthermore, additional California Department of Highway Patrol services would be change required upon buildout of the Citrus Plaza development. Therefore, all impacts associated with the _ development of Citrus Plaza that were previously identified are still applicable to the revised project. ' As such, Citrus Plaza project development has the potential to create a significant law enforcement impact prior to the imposition of mitigation measures. ' 5.7.5.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' As discussed above, no operational impacts are anticipated with the infrastructure options using subsurface pipelines within existing utility right-of--ways as, upon the completion of construction, this type of construction would not require law enforcement services. Although, site clearing and construction activities could result in potential impacts to law enforcement services during construction, mitigation measures have been included which would reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Potential operational impacts would be limited to the infrastructure facilities located on the Citrus Plaza site. In the conversion of the Citrus Plaza site to a regional commercial center, the site will be converted from an existing land use which imposes only limited demands upon municipal services to a future land use which has the potential to place considerably greater demands upon areawide law enforcement facilities, agency personnel and equipment requirements. Mitigation measures have been included which reduce cumulative demands on azeawide law enforcement facilities of identified equipment requirements to a level of insignificance. On-site security features and an on- site security office would be provided as part of the Citrus Plaza development. In addition the project includes design features that would alleviate potential vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at the Citrus Plaza site. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which would ensure compliance with all applicable code and ordinance requirements and minimize the potential impact to law ~' enforcement services to a level of insignificance. Therefore, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures, Citrus Plaza project related impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance. Thus, ~^ry Initlaletl the proposed project would not substantively contribute to law enforcement services related impacts ~aMx and cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed project would not result. ~j gym' Hagen, Sergeant, San Bernardino County Sherds Department, personal communication, December /0, 1999. Couory of San Bernardino Laod Ust Services Departmeol SCR No. 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water& $ewtt Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 255 5.7.E Law Enforcement Similaz to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an ,~;;e", 1 individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any impacts related to law ~"~ enforcement services would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and recornmended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino , County. These same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and are more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus ' Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative , growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). 5.75.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.7.5.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments c°""~ , inl"alea Lange Since no significant impacts to law enforcement services aze anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures aze required. 5.7.5.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project Since no significant impacts to law enforcement services aze anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed infrastructure facilities, no mitigation measures aze required. 5.7.5.53 Citrus PIa7a Project Site The previous envirorunental analysis included the following mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to law enforcement services to less-than-significant levels. These mitigation measures aze herein incorporated into this Subsequent EIR.101 No new mitigation measures are required. ~ 'i During construction, on-site security measures shall include: (1) the provision of private security personnel during hours when consttuction activities aze not being performed; (2) 10' San Bernardino County Planning Department, Final Errvironmental /mpact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084, November 1946, p. 6. Couety or Sao Benardioo Laod lfse &rvins Depanmcot SCFi. Na 1999101123 Ci[nu Plara Regional MaIVI VDA Wafer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 256 S.Z~ Law Enforcement the securing of all machinery and related equipment; and (3) the provision of tow-level security lighting. ' • Private on-site security shall be provided to augment police department efforts directed towazd limiting criminal occurrences, assisting in traffic control and minimizing ' unauthorized access to the project site. The level of on-site security shall be consistent with the stated requirements of the primary law enforcement service provider. ' • During operation, on-site security features shall include: (1) cormercial building orientation which facilitates visual surveillance opportunities (e.g., video) and territorial ' influences; (2) exterior security lighting for both pazking and building azeas; (3) well- designed vehiculaz and visual access to the fronts and backs of all structures; and (4) an adequately sized and appropriately positioned police facility or facilities, as determined ' by the primary service provider, to facilitate on-site interviews, prisoner processing and release. • Prior to the issuance of building permits, the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department and/or the City of Redlands Police Department shall be provided the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans, so as to: (1) Facilitate ' emergency access; (2) ensure the consideration of design strategies which facilitate public safety and police surveillance; and (3) offer design recommendations to reduce ' potential demands upon police services. • To reduce accident potential during construction operations, the following measures shall be implemented: (1) use of proper informational signage and lighting; use of barriers, fencing, and/or appropriate coverage to isolate those construction azeas potentially susceptible to commercial traffic; (3) use of warning signs, pavement ' mazkings and/or flagmen when traffic volumes warrant; and (~lj avoid storage of materials and equipment within the street travelway. ' • Police Deparment Facilities. All costs incurred by the project proponent in the development of on-site policing facilities, including facility and equipment expenditures, shall constitute in-kind offsets against any corresponding fees assessed by the County and/or by the City of Redlands (e.g., Resolution No. 5111) for policing facilities. ' • Police Department Staffing. Based upon a proportional distribution of project-related impacts, as determined by the primary law enforcement service provider, the project proponent shall equitably participate in a funding or associated fee program t~ offset ' those agency costs associated with the provision of additional law enforcement personnel, equipment and/or public facility directly attributable to the proposed project. ' In assessing the project proponent's equitable allocation, law enforcement agencies shall consider alternative sources of public revenues (e.g., increased sales tax proceeds) which Couory of Sao Bcnardioo Laod Use Services Departmcot SCR ho. 199910J12r Citnu Plara Regional MaIN VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 257 5.7.5 Law Enforcement ' the project will contribute and which may constitute potential offsets against other public exactions. 1. 5.7.5.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ' Impacts that would result from the proposed project would be reduced to a less-than- significant level following implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above. ' 1 County ofSao Bernardino Land Use Services Departmcm SCR Na 1999101127 Citrus Plaza RegiorW MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 258 ' ' S.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES S.8 HUMAN HEALTH 5.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.8.1.1 Regulatory Environment The major categories of hazazdous waste produced in the County include metal containing liquids, waste oil, oily sludges and baghouse waste. These wastes come from a variety of industries ' ranging from small businesses, such as automotive services and plating companies, to lazge industries like steel manufacturing.102 AB 2948 (Chapter 1>04, Statutes of 1986), commonly known ' as the Tanner Bill, authorized counties to prepaze Hazazdous Waste Management Plans (HWMP) in response to the need for safe management of hazazdous wastes. On Mazch 31, 1987, the County of San Bemazdino Boazd of Supervisors authorized the preparation of the County HWMP. The t preparation of the HWMP included extensive public participation. Consistent with state law, an advisory committee was established to advise County staff and local government officials on issues pertaining to the management of hazazdous wastes. The County HWMP was adopted by the County t of San Bernardino Boazd of Supervisors and approved by the California Department of Health Services in February 1990. ' The County HWMP serves as the primary planning document for the management of hazardous waste in San Bemazdino County. The County HWMP identifies the types and amounts of wastes generated in the County; establishes programs for managing these wastes; identifies an application review process for the siting of specified hazazdous waste facilities; identifies mechanisms for reducing the amount of hazazdous waste generated in the County; and identifies goals, policies and actions for achieving effective hazardous waste management.10J 5.8.1.2 Infrastructure Facilities ~°an Ininaied Change ' No known hazardous waste is present at the locations of the proposed Infrastructure Facilities Project. 1 t0' San Bernardino County Genera/ Plan, San Bernardino County Public Services Group, Land Use Services ' Department, p. 11-83-1, Adopted July 1989, Revised May 1999. t 03 Ibid County of Sao &roardioo Lmd Use Scrvites Deparlmcnl SCIL Na 1999101 V3 Civus Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Water& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 259 5.8 Human Health , 5.8.13 Citrus Plaza Site ' The Citrus Plaza Project site has historically been used for agricultural operations and is ~^^ry , Inrtiateo cturently cleazed and awaiting development. Limited soil staining and azeas of rubbish disposal Caange have been observed on-site. Empty plastic drums and sludge pots associated with agricultural production may also be located on-site. t 5.8.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance were derived from the State CEQA Guidelines at ' the time the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR was written, the thresholds and associated discussions aze incorporated by reference. A project will normally be considered to have a , significant effect upon the environment if the project will: (1) conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the commutity where it is located; (2) breach published national, State or local standards relating to solid waste or litter control; (3) substantially degrade water quality; (4) ' contaminate a public water supply; (5) substantially degrade or deplete groundwater resources; (6) interfere substantially with groundwater recharge; (7) create a potential public health hazard or involve the use, production or disposal of materials which pose a hazard to people or animals or ' plant populations in the area affected; and/or (8) violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. As indicated in the Final EnvirorJmental Impact Repoli for the San Bernardino County ' General Plan, criteria for identification of those effects which are potentially significant (defined therein as Classes I, II, and III) aze based upon definitions of significant effects formerly provided in ' Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Impacts which cannot be adequately mitigated aze Class I. Impacts which can be mitigated to ales-than-significant effect are considered Class II; Class II impacts also result when the level of service identified for an azea (i.e., improvement level) ' differs from the "Offtcial Land Use Designations of the General Plan Update." Class III impacts are those which are adverse but not significant (i.e., since these impacts can be accommodated through existing service expansion plans). Class IV impacts aze beneficial impacts that result in a reduction ' in fire hazard or decrease in demand for fire protection services. In accordance with that program- level document, a project would have a potentially significant envirotunental effect with respect to t the management of hazardous wastes if it would: • Increase demands on the capacity of local or regional collection or treatment or disposal ' services such that new or substantially expanded facilities are needed; • Result in the substantial modification, relocation or closure of an active disposal site; or ' Counry of Sm Bernardino Lend Uu Scn~ices Dcp•rtment SCfL Na 1999101123 , Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water& sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 260 ' S.8 Human Health • Breach published national, State or local standards or regulations relating to collection, _ transport, treatment or disposal of hazardous wastes. The following thresholds of significance were derived from the cturent State CEQA Guidelines. A project may be deemed to have a sigtificant impact on hazards and hazardous materials (e.g., thereby causing impacts to htunan health) if the project would result in impacts to any of the following environmental issues: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine - transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. t • Create a significant hazazd to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. • Emit hazazdous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. ' • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project ' result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project azea. ' • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazazd for people residing or working in the project azea. ' • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. ' • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands aze adjacent to urbanized azeas or where residences aze intermixed with wildlands. The proposed project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project) could result in the construction i o°~ and operation of a water treatment facility and a wastewater treatment facility. Therefore, the ' following thresholds are also utilized for the proposed project: ' Count' orSa• Bernardino Land Use Services Depanmeot SCR Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subxquent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 261 5.8 Human Health , • Create a potential public health hazard or involve the use, production or disposal of ' materials which pose a hazard to people or animals or plant populations in the area affected (former tlueshold). '' • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials (current threshold). ' 5.8.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ' 5.83.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ' The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a ' substantial increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects writhin ' Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical envirorunent. As all development projects which ' have the potential to effect human health would be subject to CEQA and other local codes and ordinances, potential human health impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan , amendments aze anticipated. 5.8.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities 1 The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities Project rAe~n sewer and water options. The project includes the installation of water lines, water reservovs and~~e sewer lines in the unincorporated portions of the IVDA Area that are currently unnerved. The , Infrastructure Facilities Project may also include the future construction of water and/or wastewater treatment facilities. Most of the proposed utility infrastructure (except for the reservoirs and any treatment facilities) would be located underground and within existing roadway and utility rights-of- ' way. Via compliance with applicable laws, as well as local codes and ordinances, any potential for an impact upon human health would be reduced to aless-than-significant level. Notwithstanding, a potential public health hazard may result from the following: (1) an accidental release of untreated ' or partially treated wastewater effluent from the on-site wastewater treatment facility (Sewer Option 3 only); and (2) the transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials associated with the , operation of the on-site water (Water Options I and 2) and wastewater (Sewer Option 3) treatment facilities. These two potential hazards are addressed below under sepazate subheadings. Cou•rv of nan Bcrnardi•a L••d Use Servi[es Department SCH. M1a 1999101127 ' Ci[rus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final subsequent EIR-Jwe 2001 Page 262 , S.8 Human Health ' 5.83.2.1 Accidental Release ofUntreated/Partially Treated Wastewater Effluent ' Wastewater is a public health issue when it contains pathogenic organisms. In the event of an accidental release or upset event, untreated or partially treated effluent from a wastewater treatment facility could be released and constitute a potential health risk. The potential effects ' resulting from the dischazge of untreated or incompletely treated effluent would be directly related to the time of occurrence, the duration of the discharge, and the volume of the dischazge. In the case of such an event, immediate changes in water quality of the receiving area would occur. In the event that the dischazge was to surface waters, that dischazge would yield temporary deleterious effects _ upon surface water ecology and potentially limit the range of beneficial uses of that water. Coliform bacteria are a large group of organisms used to indicate the possible contamination ' of water by wastewater. Any dischazge of untreated wastewater entering surface waters would raise the coliform bacteria counts in the immediate vicinity. There are several potential sources of coliform bacteria. Coliform from non-fecal sources, such as soil, present no known health hazards; ' whereas fecal coliform bacteria, which originates from animals, do indicate a potential health hazard. Any water in contact with the surface of the ground is likely to contain elevated coliform counts. Thus, discharges from storm drains and other surface runoff during peak rainfall periods are ' likely to influence the total coliform counts. When coliform counts are high during dry weather, wastewater contamination is the suspected source and indicates a potential health threat to persons using these waters. Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 3 of the California Administrative Code (CAC) contains Ranh ' s ecific desi n re uirements for reclamation lants. These re uirements rimaril relate to ensurin Inmates p g q P q P Y g Change reliability in the treatment process and effluent quality to ensure the safest operation possible and include the following: For in-coming wastewater at the wastewater treatment facility, wastewater will flow through ' a gravity wastewater line to an influent manhole. Submersible pumps will be provided in the manhole to pump the influent to the facilities. One or more grinders (communitors) will be provided to breakup any large materials in the wastewater stream. ' The wastewater will be treated fast in a suspended growth anoxic reactor in order to achieve ' partial denitrification. Chemical oxygen demand (COD) serves as the substrate or carbon source for i cell growth in the denitrification process. Wastewater is then treated in an aerobic basin for biological oxygen demand (BODE removal and nitrification with recycled flow back to the anoxic ~ reactor. Final settlement tanks remove most of the remaining suspended solids by settling. Retum activated sludge (RAS) from the final sedimentation tanks is returned back to the aerobic basins. Waste activated sludge is conveyed to the sludge holding tank. Counq' of Sao Bcrnardioo Land Use Services Department SCH. Na 1999101123 Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2IX11 Page 263 5.8 Human Health , Tertiary treatment begins with the addition of small dosages of aluminum sulfate (alum) to ' the clarified effluent and is flashed mixed in a rapid mix basin. Flocculation is then provided alth low-energy mixing so that small particles can combine to form large particles. These particles are , removed by dual-media gravity filtration. Each filter is backwashed and backwash water is stored in a filter backwash storage basin. The supernatant is returned to the rapid mix basin and the settled solids are pumped to the sludge holding tank. The filtered effluent is then chlorinated in a chlorine ' contact basin. Sulfur dioxide is then added for dechlorination prior to dischazge to the treated wastewater process basins. Waste activated sludge (WAS) from the fmal sedimentation tank and , the backwash solids from the gmvity filters are stored in an enclosed sludge holding tank. Dechlorination facilities using sulfur dioxide will be provided to reduce the chlorine residual ' leaving the chlorine contact tank. The dechlorination system may include a sulfonator, sulfur dioxide evaporator, sulfur dioxide gas detector, and chlorine residual analyzer. A chlorine gas detector and a sodium hydroxide type scrubbing unit may also be provided to reduce hazardous ' gases in the form of chlorine leaks and hydrogen sulfide gas buildup. Activation of the scrubbing unit and alarms will be automated once hazardous gases are detected. ' The facilities design requires the installation of an alarm and safety system designed to identify any disruption to the facilities operation (Section 60335, CCR). Daily sampling by the , facility operator for settleable solids and coliform bacteria are required to ensure that all treated effluent released from the facilities satisfies or exceeds adopted standards. Additionally, each ' reclamation facility is required to: (1) provide a sufficient number of qualified personnel to operate the facility effectively so as to achieve the required level of treatment at all times (Section 60325, CCR); and adopt a prevention maintenance program to ensure that all equipment is kept in ' reliable operating conditions (Section 60327, CCR). As proposed, all treated wastewater will be first discharged to the on-site storage reservoir. , Treated effluent within that stornge facility is to be used for on-site landscape irrigation. Dischazge to surface waters will only occur during those periods when water supply exceeds on-site irrigation ' demands. As a result, in the event of an unplanned dischage of untreated (or inadequately treated} effluent, those waters would be transported to the storage tank. Wastewater in that tank could then be recycled back through the plant for additional treatment. Orily in the event that the storage , facility was full or that a break occurred within the wastewater conveyance system would discharge of untreated effluent occur to the storm drain system. As required under Section 60323 of the CCR, "no person shall produce or supply reclaimed water for direct reuse for a proposed water reclamation plant unless he files an engineering report ' (with the California Department of Health Services). The report shall be prepared by a properly qualified engineer registered in California and experienced in the field of wastewater treatment, and shall contain a description of the design of the proposed reclamation system. The report shall cleazly , indicate the means for compliance with these regulations and any other feature specified by the County of Sao Beroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCB No. 199910//73 , Cibus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan rival Subsequen[ EIR -June 2IX11 Page 264 ' 5.8 Human Health ' regulatory agency. The report shall contain a contingency plan which will enstu~e that no untreated or inadequately treated wastewater will be delivered to the use azea." In compliance with this ' obligation, reasonable assurance exists that no untreated or inadequately treated wastewater will be dischazged from the treatment facilities which could pose a health and safety risk to either on-site or off-site receptors. 1 The wastewater treatment facilities will be designed to minimize the effects of emergency conditions. In the event of a power failure, an emergency generator will provide sufficient short- term power to allow continued operation of the treatment facilities. Emergency power would be provided to all necessary plunps and mechanical equipment. Should a major ptunp or mechanical ' piece of equipment fail, a standby unit will be available and would be automatically activated. All mechanical equipment will be supplied with coupling guards, belt guards, and other safety devices. ' Even with the implementation of engineering features and operational controls, the potential for the accidental release of wastewater from the wastewater treatment facility would exist, and therefore mitigation measlues have been incorporated to ensure that no adverse impacts would occur. 5.8.3.2.2 Transport, Use, Storage and Disposal of Hazardous Materials The proposed water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities would involve the transportation, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials in association with daily operations. The water treatment facility wrill require the use of chlorine as a water additive (i.e., chlorine is used ' as a disinfectant) and sulfur dioxide as a dechlorinate (or remove chlorine) to eliminate effluent toxicity. Polymer and alum may also be used as coagulants to assist in the removal of solids. ' Disinfection for the wastewater treatment facilities may further involve the use of a chlorination or an ultraviolet light system. The unplanned release of these hazardous materals, during transportation, use, storage, or disposal, could result in upset conditions. Two substances typically used to disinfect water (i.e., sodium hypochlorite and aqua ammonia) have the potential to produce human health impacts in the unlikely event of an unplanned release. Sodium hypochlorite is corrosive to wood and most metals, but is neither explosive nor flammable. As an oxidizer, contact with combustible materials may initiate or promote combustion. ' It is also incompatible with ferric chloride, a commonly used water treatment agent, with which is reacts chemically producing ferric hydroxide and liberating chlorine. The use and transport of sodium hypochlorite for disinfection applications at water and ~I wastewater facilities and swimming pools is widespread and the safety record is excellent. ' Commercial sodium hypochlorite aqueous solutions have an approximately 12.5 percent concentration. Approximately three percent solutions are used in household applications of bleach. Coaory orSaa Beroaraino Laod Use Services Department SCH. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Wazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -lone 2001 Page 265 ~.8 Human Health ' One gallon (gal) of 12.5 percent solution hypochlorite equates to approximately one pound (16) of , chlorine. Aqua ammonia (ammonia hydroxide) is an aqueous solution of ammonia. Typical commercial solutions have a concentration of approximately twenty (20) percent. Aqua ammonia is corrosive to copper, alttminum, and galvanized surfaces, but is neither explosive nor flammable. It ' is incompatible with acids and generates irritating vapors or chlotamines when mixed with commercial sodium hypochlorite solutions. Contact of liquid or vapor with skin. mucous ' membranes, lungs, or gastroenteric tract causes marked local irritation. The unplanned release of chlorine, sodium hypochloride or aqua ammonia could impact , facility personnel or off-site receptors. However, the use of chlorine has a long safe history in the waterworks industry. Standazd loading, transport, handling and storage protocols have been developed by the Chlorine Institute to maximize safety. The use of secondary containment for the , storage tanks, as mandated by existing environmental regulations, will minimize the likelihood of any unplanned release of either sodium hypochloride or aqua ammonia. As required by the ' Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), employee training on the presence of potential hazards, safe handling, and emergency procedures applicable to sodium hypochloride and aqua ammonia will be required. Even with the implementation of engineering features and operational controls, the potential for the accidental release of chlorine, sodium hypochloride, aqua ammonia, sulfur dioxide, polymer and alum, as well as other hazazdous materials used in the daily operation of the water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities, could occur. Therefore, mitigation measures have been incorporated ' to ensure that no adverse impacts would occur. Water supply options all include disinfection and could include, if necessary, a TCE removal a_sa facility. No other water treatment is anticipated. The disinfection with liquid chlorine will not generate any solid waste. TCE treatment with GAC will generate waste cazbon. Discussions with , Calgon, the largest supplier of cazbon, indicate that 120,000 lbs. of carbon will need to be replaced approximately once each five to six yeazs. All cazbon will be recycled by Calgon or another ' supplier. The cazbon will be handled in the same manner as it is handled by the City of San Bemazdino. 5.83.23 Airport Safety Hazards , The project area is in close proximity to the San Bemazdino International Airport and ' Redlands Municipal Airport. With the incorporntion of proper design features (e.g., height restrictions for water treatment and wastewater treatment buildings, reservoirs, tanks, etc., where ' necessary), no significant impacts would occur. Coualy of$an Beroardioo land Use Services Department SCH. tia 1999101113 ' Citrus Plata Regional Ma1VIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 266 ' 5.8 Human Health ' 5.8.33 Citrus Plaza Site Development will entail both the clearing of the Citrus Plaza Project site (e.g., removal of INtiate0 existing vegetation) and the excavation and subsequent recompaction of site soils to provide c~a^~ ' adequate structural stability and foundation for the proposed improvements. These activities will result in the physical alteration of the existing site and, should recognized environmental conditions exist on-site, may encompass areas possessing or potentially possessing hazardous substances and/or ' petroleum products. In recognition of the historic use of the Citrus Plaza Project site for agricultural operations, concentrations of pesticides and/or fertilizers may exist upon surface soils at concentrations which may constitute a potential health hazard. As discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall (December 1995), limited shallow subsurface soil sampling and analysis of the Citrus Plaza site was conducted to assess whether residual pesticides aze present in the shallow subsurface _, soils. Two soil samples (e.g., one in the western portion of the site in the citrus groves and one in ' the eastern portion of the site in the azea of field crops) were collected, at a depth of 6 to 12 inches below grade surface and submitted to a State of California certified laboratory for analysis of Organochlorine Pesticides and PCBs using USEPA Method 8080. The laboratory analysis ' concluded that these soil samples were below the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) value for DDE and DDT of 1.0 micrograms per kilogram (mg/kg), equivalent to parts per million, as identified in Title 26 of the California Code of Regulations. As a result, no substantial evidence exists that agriculturally related contaminants are present in soil surfaces at levels in exceedance of threshold criteria; however, mitigation has been included for this potential environmental impact. ' Existing records do not indicate the presence of any underground storage tanks within the ' project site; however, mitigation has been included to reduce this potential environmental impact, to a level of insignificance. ' Two wells, one located along Alabama Street (identified as the Alabama Street Well) and one on Lugonia Avenue (identified as the Lugonia Avenue Well) were noted as a source of irrigation water and leaking lubricants, but were not a part of the azea that has been physically ' surveyed. Soils azound the pumps were heavily stained and some of the material appeazed to be conning off into the subject property. However, vegetation growth did not appeaz to be impacted adversely, suggesting insignificant levels of contamination. However, mitigation has been included to reduce this potential environmental impact, to a level of insignificance. Empty smudge pots may exist on the site. Historically, in cold weather, kerosene or diesel fuel was burned in these pots to prevent frost accumulation in the orange groves. These pots consist of an upright two to three foot pipe attached to atwo-gallon fuel reservoir. Mitigation has been included to reduce this potential environmental impact to a level of insignificance. ' Couary or San Bernardino Laod Ux Services Departmeo[ SCR Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewcr Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR - Junc 2001 ' Page 267 5.8 Human Health Empty plastic drums may exist on the project site. Some of these empty drums may contain ' residual pesticides. Those plastic drums located on-site which have been identified as potentially containing pesticides or pesticide residues, and any other tanks, drums or associated storage ' containers subsequently identified on-site and potentially containing hazardous materials and/or petroleum products or residues therefrom, shall be inspected by a registered environmental assessor or other qualified professional prior to their removal from the project site. If subsequently ' identified, all material collection, disposal and remediation activities shall be conducted in accordance with applicable federal, State and local requirements, including compliance with the San Bemazdino County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Mitigation -has been included to reduce , this potential environmental impact to a level of insignificance. Five Southern California Edison (SCE) pole-mounted transformers aze located along the Alabama Street frontage. Each of these pole-mounted transformers will require relocation as part of project development (i.e., to accommodate the widening of Alabama Street). Relocations of power , poles shall be undertaken by SCE and shall occur in accordance with SCE's governing rules and regulations. No polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contamination associated with electrical ' transformers is anticipated. Mitigation has been included to reduce this potential environmental impact, to a level of insignificance. Implementation of the Revised Citrus Plaza Project will not result in new or substantially ^ ' worse impacts beyond [hose identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. cnage 5.8.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' In the event of an accidental release or upset event, untreated or paztially treated effluent ' from a wastewater treatment facility could be released and constitute a potential health risk. In the event that the dischazge was to surface waters, that discharge would yield temporary deleterious effects upon surface water ecology and potentially limit the range of beneficial uses of that water. ' Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 3 of the California Administrative Code (CAC) contains specific design requirements for reclamation plants which relate to ensuring reliability in the ' treatment process and effluent quality to ensure the safest operation possible. The wastewater treatment facilities will be designed to minimize the effects of emergency conditions. Even with the , implementation of engineering features and operntional controls, the potential for the accidental release of wastewater from the wastewater treatment facility would exist. Mitigation measures have been included to address the potential for a release at the wastewater treatment facility. With , incorporation of the mitigation measures, impacts related to accidental release of untreated or partially treated wastewater effluent would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, the , proposed project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project) would not contribute to impacts related to County human health and cumulative impacts associated with development of the project would not result. ~~,~ Cauoty of San Bernardino Land Usc Services Department SCn. Na 1999r01t2t ' Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 268 ' 5.8 Human Health ' The proposed water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities would involve the _ transportation, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials in association with daily operations. Even writh the implementation of engineering features and operational controls, the potential for the accidental release of chlorine, sodium hypochloride, aqua ammonia, sulfur dioxide, polymer, and alum, as well as other hazardous materials used in the daily operation of the water treatment and ' wastewater treatment facilities, could occur. Therefore, mitigation measures have been incorporated to ensure that no adverse impacts would occur. With incorporation of the mitigation measures, impacts related to hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, the proposed project (i.e., Infi-astructure Facilities Project) would not contribute to impacts related to c~,nh Iniliate0 human health and cumulative impacts associated with development of the project would not result. charge The project area is in close proximity to the San Bernardino International Airport and Redlands Municipal Airport. With the incorporation of proper design features (e.g., height ' restrictions for water treatment and wastewater treatment buildings, reservoirs, tanks, etc., where necessary), no significant impacts would occur. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project, Citrus Plaza Project) would not result. ' Development of Citrus Plaza will entail clearing and site prepazation. These activities will result in the physical alteration of the existing site and may encompass areas possessing or potentially possessing hazardous substances and/or petroleum products. Further, given the historic use of the Citrus Plaza site for agricultural operations, concentrations of pesticides and/or fertilizers, empty smudge pots, empty plastic drums or other artifacts of prior uses may exist upon the site. In addition, two wells were noted as a source of ' imgation water may be a source of leaking lubricants and five Southern California Edison (SCE) pole-mounted transformers may contain PCB's. Therefore, mitigation measures have been incorporated to ensure that no adverse impacts would occur. With incorporation of the mitigation ' measures, impacts related to human health would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to impacts related to human health and cumulative impacts associated with development of the Citrus Plaza project would not result. man ' rnnialen Change Additional related mitigation measures are included in the following sections: (1) 5.2, Earth ' Resources; (2) 5.3, Hydrology/Water Quality; and (3) 5.9, Aesthetics. Similaz to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an ' individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any project related impacts would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing code and ' recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bernazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These County orSan Bernardino Land Gse Scrviccs Deparlmcot SCR No. 1999101t2i Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 269 5.8 Httman Health , same related projects aze used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and are c~nN , more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR the '~°~e° arge Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 199 Citrus Plaza Final EIR '~ are still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's ctumulative impacts. Actually, the ttse of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential ctmulative impacts. This results since the actual background , growth which has occurred in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occw (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occw). 5.8.5 MITIGATION MEASURES ' County , 5.8.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments Initiated Charge Since no significant impacts to htunan health are expected to occw as a result of the proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measwes would be required. 5.8.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project , Water Options 1 and 2 Only , • Water Treatment Facilities. The water storage tank site shall be graded so as to ' encourage the short-term on-site retention of any dischazged water and direct the controlled release of that water to areawide storm drain facilities in the eventuality of an unplanned release of stored water. ' • Water Treatment Facilities. The handling of all on-site hazardous materials including but not limited to chlorine shall be handled in accordance with the manufactwer's a-3a , specifications for the safe handling of these materials. Sewer Option 3 Only • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The wastewater process basin site shall be grnded so man , as to encourage the short-term on-site retention and controlled release of wastewater dischazged fiom that reservoir to azeawide storm drain facilities in the eventuality of an , unplanned release of treated or untreated wastewater from those facilities. • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) shall be designed and constructed and operated in accordance with a Wastewater Dischazoe Permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Boazd, Santa Ana Region Cauuty at5mm Bernardino Land Ux Services Department SCtL Fa 1999101127 , Citrus Plan Regional MaIUIVDA Water & Sewer Servces Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 270 ' S.8 Human Health (RWQCB). The WWTP shall be designed and constructed such that any wastewater spill shall be contained within the site of the facility and rettJmed to the WWTP. The WWTP shall be designed and constructed such that any rainfall runoff off of treatment facilities shall be captwed and processed in the WWTP. The WWTP owner and operator shall have an accidental dischazge preventive and contingency plan approved ' by the RWQCB and in place at all times. Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3 Only ' Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. A Hazard Communication Program, including information about chemical hazards and other hazardous substances and their control, shall be developed to enhance worker safety. Included with this program shall be container labeling, material safety data sheets (as required under the Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act), and training outline. • Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. All chemicals and hazazdotJs materials shall be stored in a berrited and covered azea where any leaks or spills can be contained and stormwater diverted. All spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. • Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities. All drains shall be labeled with appropriate signage to discotuage improper material disposal. 5.8x.3 Citrus Plaza Project Site ,"I~""~ • The Citrus Plaza site shall be physically inspected by a registered environmental assessor ' or other qualified professional prior to or concurrent with the commencement of any grading activities on-site. Should suspected hazardous materials or petroleum products, including underground stornge tanks, be identified on-site, fiuther investigation and/or ' remediation activities shall be performed in accordance with established protocols. • Prior to the issuance of building permits: (1) A Phase I environmental assessment, undertaken by a registered environmental assessor or other qualified professional contracted by the project proponent, shall be conducted in direct proximity to 9949 ' Alabama Street and the on-site water wells for the purpose of ensuring that excavated materials do not contain potentially hazardous substances which may require either subsequent analysis and/or disposal in a landfill other than a Class III facility; (2) After removal of the smudge pots, an inspection shall be conducted by a registered environmental assessor or other qualified professional contracted by the project proponent to ascertain both the full extent of any on-site soil staining and the need for sepazate removal and/or remediation; (3) Any plastic drums located on-site which have been identified as potentially containing pesticides or pesticide residues, and any other County of Sao Bernardino Laod Use Services Department SCH. Na 1999101 V3 Cirrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR- Jurre 2001 ' Page 271 5.8 Human Health , tanks, drums or associated storage containers subsequently identified on-site and potentially containing hazardous materials and/or petroletun products or residues therefrom, shall be inspected by a registered envirorunental assessor or other qualified ' professional prior to their removal from the project site. If subsequently identified, all material collection, disposal and remediation activities shall be conducted in accordance with applicable federal, State and local requirements, including compliance with the , County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. • Grading and associated development plans adjacent to the Southern California Edison , (SCE) easement along Alabama Street shall be coordinated with SCE for the purpose of scheduling the relocation of existing power poles along that right-of--way. Additional related mitigation measures are included in the following sections: (I) 5.2, Earth Resources; (2) 5.~, Hydrology/Water Quality; and (3) ~.9, Aesthetics. ' 5.8.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ~„nh ' Imtlaka Lange Project impacts upon human health would be reduced to less than stgmficant levels with ' implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. County orSao Beroardmo La•d Lse Services Depar[me•t SCH. Na 19991011)3 , Ci[rus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Wuer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subxqucnt EIR - Jmre 2001 Page 272 ' ' S.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.9 AESTHETICS 5.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.9.1.1 Regulatory Environment The San Bemazdino County General Plan is the fundamental policy document for the unincorporated azea of San Bernardino County and contains the goals, policies and implementing actions for a variety of issues including natural and man-made resources. In addition it provides the rules by which land can be developed. The Land Use Element of the General Plan is the primary policy base for guiding the physical development of public and privately owned land in the unincorporated area of San Bemazdino County. The Land Use Element correlates all land use issues into a set of integrated development policies. The project site is located within the Valley Region, and East Valley Subregion. Additionally, both the project site and surrounding area aze located with the area governed by the policies of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. By adopting the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan in 1989, the affected agencies amended their respective General Plan policies and zoning standards to reflect the land use regulations previously included in each jurisdiction's plans and policies. Both planning documents contain supplemental policies and standazds which provide further regulations affecting the development of the site. The County of San Bemazdino Development Code and East Valley Corridor Specific Plan ' established specific design and development criteria for new developments in San Bemazdino County as well as parking regulations and sign regulations. The Citrus Plaza project site is ' designated for Regional Commercial use under both the adopted County General P?an and the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan. In addition, scenic highways are subject to additional land use and aesthetic controls under the County's Scenic Highway Overlay. ' The San Berazdino County General Plan presenu a methodology which allows for a ' qualitative assessment of a site's "value or priority" as an open space resource. However, the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concludes that since the project site is designated for Cuban uses, i.e., regional commercial, and since the County was not evaluating the site for preservation as an open space resource, this valuing system would not be applicable to the proposed CimLS Plaza ~c°~ project. This discussion is incorporated into this document by reference. r"~ I County of San Beroardioo Land Use Services Depanmenl SCH. Na 1999101123 Citna Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-lone 2001 Page 273 5.9 Aesthetics ' East Valley Corridor Specific Plan , As discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, the objectives of the ' East Valley Corridor Specific Plan aze to provide awell-planned community which will attract major businesses to the area in order to provide a job base for the azea and strengthen the local ' economy while ensuring high-quality development through design guidelines and standards. In , accordance with these objectives, the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan contains a broad outline of those development standards to regulate and guide future development in the East Valley Comdor. Division 4 (Community Design) of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan contains separate sections addressing circulation standards (Section EV4.0101 et seq.) and site design standazds and guidelines (Section EV4.0201 et seq.). Both of these design components have been individually addressed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, Section 5.8, Aesthetics, and a compete listing of these guidelines aze provided in Appendix I (East Valley Corridor Specific Plan: Site Design Standazds and Guidelines) of that document. In addition, Section 5.4 (Transportation/Circulation) of ' the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR provides a discussion of other applicable sections of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan that address the area's circulation system. This discussion ' and corresponding guidelines are incorporated by reference into this document. 5.9.1.2 Infrastructure Facility As all infrastructure facilities, except for the on-site water and wastewater treatment plants, ' well besub-surface, the aesthetic environment is.inconsequential as the proposed project would have no effect on this aspect of the environment. The aesthetic em~ironment within which the proposed water and wastewater treatment plants would occur is described in the fo11ow2ng section. 5.9.1.3 Citrus Plaza Site A detailed discussion of the existing setting for the proposed project is provided in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. The discussion, as summarized below, is incorporated into , this document by reference. The proposed project azea is predominately level and was historically used for agricultural production but is currently graded in anticipation of development. ' Freeway access is provided to the project area via Alabama Street, where that roadway crosses above the I-10 Freeway, southwesterly of the subject property. Additional regional ' vehicular access is provided from San Bemazdino Avenue, where that street crosses under the elevated SR-30 Freeway in the vicinity of the northeasterly comer of the site. The project site is ctrrently visible from the elevated SR-30 Freeway (from the vicinity of San Bernardino Avenue on the north to the I-10 Freeway interchange on the south), from those public streets which adjoin the project site and from those properties which are situated across those frontage streets which encircle the project site. Both existing and future land uses which aze located in proximity to the project site are provided a constant view of the site. That view is, however, defined by both the location of the County of $ao Bernardino Land Use Serviees Department SCH. Yu 1999101113 Cious Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W'azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 274 ' 5 9 Aesthetics ' use and the elevation of the observer. Since the termed height of the SR-30 Freeway is estimated to _ be greater than 3~ feet, no views of the project site aze likely from those properties located easterly ' of that right-of--way. As discussed in the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, the Final EIR for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan concluded that the views north of the I-10 Freeway are considered good primarily due to the extensive agricultural fields, citrus groves, Mexican fan palms, and the San Bernardino Mountains in the background. The I-10 Freeway does not adjoin the project site and its at-grade elevation limits roadway views by westbound motorists traveling between the M SR-30 Freeway interchange on the east and Alabama Street on the west. Partial views may, however, be obtained in those areas where intervening structures do not obscure site visibility. The limited views which may be obtained from this perspective are generally focused northerly beyond the project site towazd the San Bernazdino Mountains. The County has designated 32 roads as scenic highways with a scenic corridor extending 200 feet on either side of the designated route. The I-10 Freeway from SR-38 Freeway to the Riverside County line and San Bemazdino Avenue and Alabama Street aze designated as County scenic highways. Development along scenic corridors requires a visual analysis that demonstrates a-1 that proposed improvements are compatible with the scenic qualities present. In addition, scenic highways are subject to additional land use and aesthetic controls under the County's Scenic Highway Overlay. That portion of the I-10 Freeway located westerly of the SR-30 Freeway is not, however designated as a Scenic Highway by either the City of Redlands or the California Department of Transportation. The Design Guidelines, as discussed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and incorporated by reference provide specifications for circulation design standards and site design standards and guidelines. Overhead Utilities Overhead 115 kilovolt (KV) electrical transmission lines currently exist in the project area and along the frontage of the streets surrounding the Citrus Plaza project site. Under Rule 20A of ' the Public Utility Commission regulations, funding is available for undergrounding of overhead utilities. Eligible projects must meet specific critefia and the local agency is required to create an underground utility district for those projects which aze recipients of Rule 20A funds. ' As indicated in the San Bemazdino County General Plan, those segments of San Bernazdino ' Avenue and Alabama Street which adjoin the project site have been designated scenic highways. Along designated scenic highways, the San Belrlazdino County General Plan has established a policy to encourage undergrounding of all utility facilities for all plnjects requiring discretionary or ' ministerial action. In addition, other public policies require undergrounding of new and existing transmission lines when feasible. r ' Couory of Sao Bcroardino Land Use Sen•ices Department SCFL Na /999101127 Cimu Playa Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 275 5.9 Aesthetics Art in Public Places , The East Valley Comdor Specific Plan includes provisions for project applicants to obtain , density bonuses, defined as allowable increases in FAR, based on a determination of the significance of amenities, such as artwork or water features, provided on the site. ,~°~~ , CAaige 5.9.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE ' The following thresholds of significance were derived from the CEQA Guidelines at the time the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR was prepazed and are incorporated by reference: A project would be judged to have a significant environmental impact if the project ' will: (1) conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located; and/or (2) have a substantially, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. This threshold is based on the discussion presented in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Project which is incorporated by reference into this document. This 1995 Final EIR concluded that a project within the East Valley Corridor azea will be judged to produce ales-than- significant aesthetic impact if the project complies with those applicable design standards or any ' subsequent amendment contained in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The program-level EIR stated that with the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan's design standards acting as mitigation measures, the significant visual impacts can be reduced to a level of non-significance. The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that as failure to comply with those standards is not sufficient to produce a significant adverse envirorunental impact, any potential deviation from those standards must be individually examined and their resulting impact assessed to determine whether the modifications have the potential to have a substantially, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. Accordingly the following modified threshold is included in this doctment. The proposed project will be judged to produce aless-than-significant aesthetic impact if the project complies with the applicable design standards contained in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan or applicable design standards provided by any subsequent amendment to that Plan. The Final EIR for the San Bernardino County General Plan contains threshold criteria to assess the potential significance of the loss of scenic open space along scenic corridors. The 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza concluded that no designated scenic corridors exist in proximity to the , project site and the assessment of the loss of open space resources has been separately examined in that document. Therefore, as the criteria would not be applicable to the proposed project site, these standards will not be incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. County of San Bernardino Land Gac Scrvicn Dcpartmmt SCR Na 1999101121 Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 276 5.9 Aesthetics ' In addition to the significance thresholds identified above, the cturent CEQA Guidelines also ,~a;~ consider the following as constituting a threshold of significance if the project will: C°~"9e • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. • Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its sruroundings. • Create a new source of substantial light or glaze which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the azea. 5.93 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS County 5.93.1 Proposed Plan Amendments la~~ The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the East Valley Comdor Specific Plan and Development Code to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated County Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA area. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantative increase or change in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components or substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable to aesthetics within ' Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline routes. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is ' individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on [he physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to affect the aesthetic environment would be subject to CEQA, potential aesthetic impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments are anticipated. 5.93.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impadt analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities project County ' mmarea sewer and water options. No long-term aesthetic impacts would occur with those infrastructure cn~~ facility options which only include subsurface pipelines, as these facilities would not be visible once the construction of these facilities aze complete. However, short-term aesthetic impacts could occur during the actual construction of these facilities. Since these impacts would cease upon the Couuty or$a• aer•ardiuo La•d Ust Services Deparlmeut ~ SCH. No. 1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MaII/IVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan ~ Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 277 5.9 Aesthetics , completion of construction, potential aesthetic impacts aze concluded to be less than significant. Notwithstanding, potential aesthetic impacts could occur should the infrastructure options which include the on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities (Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer ' Option 3) be implemented. The potential aesthetic impacts associated with these facilities are analyzed in the following paragraphs. The 25-foot height of the proposed water supply facilities storage tank is consistent with ' both the approved height of allowable on-site uses and the authorized height of other adjoining land uses as established under the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. As a result of the area-wide height standards, the proposed above-ground water storage reservoir will be compatible with both existing and reasonably foreseeable future uses located in proximity to the Citrus Plaza Project site. Similarly, the projected maximum diameter of the water storage tank would not beout-of--scale with ~e^n the size of the other land uses which will be constructed upon the Citrus Plaza Project site and those ~mUatea Cnaige ' that are adjacent to the site. Other project design features, including fencing and landscape improvements, would add additional screening to the proposed facilities. As a result, the potential aesthetic impacts associated with the water supply facilities would be less than significant. The proposed wastewater treatment facilities would replace the previously approved "Pad Building" along Alabama Street and substitute the proposed wastewater treatment facilities. The maximum identified height of that facility is less than the corresponding height of both the approved Pad Building and other adjoining land uses upon the site. Similarly the proposed 66-foot diameter is ' approximately the same size as the Pad Building and substantially less than the nearest on-site use. Therefore, potential aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant. Further, the potential visual impacts generated by the proposed open in-ground reservoir would be less than those associated with anabove-ground tank. Citrus Plaza Site ' Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ' Project implementation would result in the replacement of the East Valley Corridor's existing agricultural setting with urban development. However this is consistent with the planned land use for the area under both the County General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that impacts upon visual resources could be effectively mitigated to a level deemed to be less than significant through project ' adherence to the approved architectural and design standards and landscape guidelines for the project site. Further, the County through its Development Plan process has established a mechanism to review and approve project specific signage. As a result, the Counry has proposed the inclusion of sign criteria w2thin the Development Plan for the Citrus Plaza project. County of Sao Bernardino land Use Services Depanmeor SCFL Na 1999101113 ' Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 278 5 9 Aesthetics r Current applicable design standazds, would require all existing and new utilities of 12KV or less shall be installed underground, and all overhead lines greater than 12KV shall be placed along ' the rear property line. As the existing line exceeds the 12KV standazd, undergrounding is not required. A Since the project proponent is not seeking a FAR bonus, there exists no established requirement to incorporate art in public places as part of the proposed project. The 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza project concluded that although potential deviations from the adopted plan design standazds for the project site have been proposed, the modifications to the design standazds as discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for Citrus Plaza do not result in the creation of significant aesthetic impacts. Since the proposed land use is consistent with the planned land use and since no substantial evidence exists to conclude that the project will have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect, no basis under the established criteria exists to conclude that the Citrus County InNated Plaza project will produce a significant adverse aesthetic impact. Therefore, notwithstanding the cnanga ' design modifications discussed in the 1995 Final EIR for Citrus Plaza. the project's potential impacts will constitute aless-than-significant envirotlmental effect. The 199 Final EIR for Citrus Plaza, Section 5.8 (Aesthetics) discussion and findings aze incorporated by reference into this Subsequent EIR. Revised Project Impacts The project design revisions which aze proposed would not result in a change in land use, County substantive increase in the geographical azea of the proposed project, height or bulk of project i~~~ components, or a substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable to aesthetic resources within the Citrus Plaza site. Accordingly, implementation of the revised project will not result in a significant impact on the aesthetic envirotunent. 5.9.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As discussed above, no operational impacts aze anticipated with the infrastructure options using subsurface pipelines within existing utility right-of--ways as, upon the completion of construction, this type of construction would not impact aesthetic resources. Potential operational impacts would be litnited to the infrastructure facilities located on the Citrus Plaza site. Citrus Plaza implementation would result in the replacement of the East Valley Corridor's existing agricultural setting with urban development. This change is consistent with the planned land use for the azea under both the County General Plan and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Couory ofSao Beraardioo land list Services Department SCN. No. 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 279 5.9 Aesthetics , Architectural and design standards and landscape guidelines for the Citrus Plaza project site Ana have been approved which reduce potential impacts upon aesthetic resources to a level deemed to be 'nibaie0 Lange less than significant. Further, the County through its Development Plan process has an established ; mechanism to review and approve project specific signage. Although potential deviations from the adopted plan design standards for the project site have been proposed, the modifications to the design standards as discussed in the 199 Final EIR for Citrus Plaza do not result in the creation of ' significant aesthetic impacts. Since the proposed land use is consistent with the planned land use, notwithstanding the design modifications, the project's potential impacts will constitute a less than significant environmental effect. Compliance with these regulations and guidelines would reduce the potential for aesthetic impacts related to levels of insignificance. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which would ensure compliance with all applicable plans and guidelines and reduce the potential impact to aesthetics to a level of insignificance. Therefore, the proposed Citrus Plaza Cana Imbatetl project would not contribute to aesthetic impacts and cumulative impacts associated with Charge development of the proposed project would not result. Similaz to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any project related impacts would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing regulations and guidelines and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and are ' more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 199 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). 5.9.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.95.1 Proposed Plan Amendments Since no significant impacts to aesthetic resources are expected to occur as a result of the , proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures aze required. County of Sao 8eroardioo Land Usc Services Department SCH. Na 1999101173 ' Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan rival SuUsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 280 , 5.9 Aesthetics 5.9.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project Penh InNatec Change Water Options 1 and 2 Only ,~ • Water Treatment Facilities. Perimeter landscaping, including palm trees and other screening vegetation, shall be installed around the on-site water supply facilities to provide screening and to minimize any visual impacts associated with the proposed water storage tank when observed from adjoining roadways. Sewer Option 3 Only • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Perimeter landscaping, including palm trees and other Ini aleryc ' screening vegetation, shall be installed aoound the on-site wastewater treatment facilities Ch"'ge to provide screening and to minimize any visual impacts associated with the proposed wastewater process basins when observed from adjoining roadways. • Wastewater Treatment Facilities. If constructed of a metallic material, the above-ground wastewater process basins shall be painted an eazth tone or similaz color to minimize the incidence of reflective glaze as perceptible from on-site and off-site locations. 5.9.53 Citrus Plaza Project Site The previous environmental analysis included the following mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to aesthetic resources to less-than-significant levels. These mitigation measures aze incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. No new mitigation measures are required. • Each Final Development Plan (FDP) landscaping plan shall include the following: (1) each landscaping plan shall provide a study demonstrating that loading zones and any outside storage within the viewshed of adjacent streets and freeways wrill be substantially screened though the use of plant material (within three yeazs of planting), azchitectural features, or by other structures; (2) in the interest of public safety, trees shall be planted not less than: (a) twenty-five feet from beginning of curb returns at intersections; (b) fifreen feet from curbs; (c) ten feet from street lights; (d) ten feet from fire hydrants; and (e) ten feet from driveways; (3) any azeas to be graded shall be landscaped for wind and - water erosion control and to assist in the reduction of fugitive dust; (4) project/site entry monuments as shown on the Final Development Plan; (5) show proposed landscape treatment and visrJal buffers; (6) landscaping as delineated on the approved Preliminary/Final Development Plans(s) shall be included on the landscape plan, including palm rows and specimen trees (24-inch box or lazger); and (7) outside furniture and other fixtures. All walls shall be decorative and incorporate features such as tree planter wells, columns, or other features. Show locations and materials proposed County of S•• Bero•rdi•o Land Cse Services Dep•nme•t SCFi Na I999101I23 Ciuus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 281 5.9 Aesthetics for use on all retaining walls. Retaining walls shall not exceed ten feet in height. All walls required by this approval shall require building permits. 5.9.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Project impacts upon aesthetic resources would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. , r r t t County of San Bernardiao land Use Services Departmeut SCFL Na /999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaII/IVDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 282 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ' 5.10 CULTURAL RESOURCES 5.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.10.1.1 Regulatory Environment The issue of cultural resources considers the project's potential effects on historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources. Each of these three subjects aze overseen by varying degrees of federal and state regulations. The evaluation and treatment of historic resotrces falls within the jurisdiction of several levels of government. Federal laws provide the primary regulatory framework for the evaluation of historic resources. However, the State of California and its local jurisdictions play active roles in the identification and documentation of such resources within their communities. Numerous laws and regulations require federal, state and local agencies to consider the effects of a proposed project on historic resources. These laws and regulations stipulate a process for compliance, define the responsibilities of the various agencies proposing the action, and prescribe the relationship among other involved agencies. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), the California Register of Historical Resources,1°' and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) aze the primary federal and state laws governing and/or affecting preservation of historic resources of national, regional, state, and local significance. At the local level, the County of San Bernardino General Plan provides for the designation and protection of local historic resources. Each of these federal, State and local laws and provisions is discussed below. r National Register of Historic Places First authorized by the Historic Sites Act of 1935, the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) was established by the NHPA as "an authoritative guide to be used by Federal, State, and local governments, private groups and citizens to identify the Nation's cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment "105 The National Register recognizes properties that aze significant at the national, State and local levels. To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a resource must be significant in ~', 10f Established by Assembly Bi!! 2881. ios Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 36 CFR Section 60.2. County of Sao Beroardioo Land Uu Services Depanmem SCH. M1a 1999101 V3 Citrus Plana Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Pinal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 283 S.IO Cultural Resources , American history, azchitecttue, azchaeology, engineering, or culture. Districts, sites, buildings. structtues, and objects of potential significance must also possess integrity of location, design. setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and meet one or more of four established criteria.106 Uriless the property possesses exceptional significance, it must be at least fifty yeazs old to be eligible for National Register listing. In addition to meeting the criteria of significance, a property must have integrity. "Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance.."10' Within the concept of integrity, the National Register criteria recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity. To retain historic integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of these seven aspects. The retention of specific aspects of integrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance.108 The seven factors that define integrity aze location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. In assessing a property's integrity, the National Register criteria recognize that properties change over time, therefore, it is not necessary for a property to retain all its historic physical , features or characteristics. The property must retain, however, the essential physical features that enable it to convey its historic identity.109 For properties which aze considered significant under National Register Criteria A and B, National Register Bulletin 1 y states that a property that is significant for its historic association is eligible if it retains the essential physical features that made up its character or appearance during the period of its association with the important event, historical pattem, or person(s).10 In assessing the integrity of properties which are considered significant under National ' Register Criterion C, National Register Bulletin li provides that a property important for illustrating a pazticulaz azchitectural style or construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that style or technique."' ioa Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms, National Register Bulletin /6, US Department of Interior, r Nationa! Park Service, September 30, 1986 ("National Register Bulletin 16' J. This bulletin contains technical information on comprehensive plannin& surver• of cultural resources and registration in the National Register of Historic Places. 10 National Register Bulletin /.i, p. aa. '0s /bid. ' '09 National Register Bulletin lJ, p. -16. 'r° Ibid "' "A property that has lost some historic materials or details can be eligible if it retalnr the majority ojthe features that illustrate iu style in terms ojthe massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern ojwindows and doors, texture of (Foornote continued on next page) County of San Beroardmo Laod llsc Semees Departmcot SCH. Yo. 1999IOIB3 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 284 5.10 Cultural Resources California Environmental Quality Act Under CEQA, a "project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment." California Public Resources Code Section 21084.1."= This statutory standard involves a two part inquiry. The first involves a determination of whether the project involves a historical resource. If so, then it must be determined whether the project may involve a "substantial adverse change in the significance" of the historical resource. To address these issues, guidelines to implement the 1992 statutory amendments relating to historical resources were adopted in final form on October 26, 1998, with the addition of State CEQA Guideline Section 1 X064.5. California Register of Historical Resources The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) was established to be a comprehensive listing of California's historic resources, including those of national, state and local significance. The California Register was established in 1992 by the State Legislature with the passage and signature of Assembly Bill (AB) 2881. The criteria for eligibility for the California Register aze based upon National Register criteria."' Certain resources are determined by the statute to be included in the California Register, including California properties formally determined eligible for, or listed in, the National Register of Historic Places."' ' While owner consent is required to list a privately owned resource, the statute provides that if "private property cannot be presently listed in the California Register solely because of owner objection, the Commission shalt nevertheless designate the property as eligible for listing."15 In January 1998 the state regulations implementing the California Register of Historical Resources (the California Register Regulations) became effective."` As provided in the California Register Regulations, the California Register consists of historical resources that are: (a) listed automatically; (b) listed following procedures and criteria adopted by the State Historical Resources materials, and ornamentation. The property is not eligible, however, if it retains some basic features corrveying massing but has lost the majority ojthe features that once charactereed its style. " /bid. "' Added in 1992 by A8 288/. "' See Cal. Pub. Res Code Section .i024.1(bj. "' See Cal Pub. Res Code Sec[ion X024.1 (d/. "' Cal. Pub. Res Code §.i024.1(n(5l. 16 The California Register Regulations are codified at 14 California code ojRegulations ("CCR) §4850, et. seq. County or Sao &rnardioo Land hse Services Department M1o. t999rUr113 Citrus Plana Regional MaIVIVDA W ores & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 285 5.10 Culturnl Resources Commission (State Commission); and (c) nominated by an application and listed after a public t hearing process."' . For surveyed resources to qualify for nominations, the resources must meet California Register significance criteria and the sturvey documentation must meet California Office of Historic , Preservation standazds.18 In particulaz, the California Register Regulations provides that if the survey meets the standazds. the Office shall recommend to the Commission that all resowces with a significance rating of category 1 through 4, or any subcategories thereof. on DPR Form 533 be listed , in the California Register. The Office shall review all category ~ determinations for consistency with the California Register criteria of significance as found in Section 4852 (b) of this chapter. California Office of Historic Preservation Survey The California Office of Historic Preservation utilizes athree-digit evaluation code , consisting of seven categories to specify National Register eligibility. The evaluation instructions and classification system used by the California Office of Historic Preservation are provided in its ' Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. County of San Bernardino General Plan As outlined in the Final EIR for the County of San Bernazdino General Plan,"° the criteria , for determining the class or level of effect of impacts to cultural resowces aze based on the following factors: (I) the significance of the resowce, i.e., if a resowce cannot be demonstrated to possess significance (scientific, cultwal or educational), there can be no adverse effect and (2) the degree to which a given action affects a resowce (destruction, impairment, isolation, enhancement). It further provides that importance, that is significance, is determined with respect to criteria outlined , in the CEQA Guidelines or in the Code of Federal Regulations for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The Ieve1 of impact is defined by one of fow classes. Class 1 impacts, those that aze unmitigable adverse and significant effects of a project, can occw through the destruction of significant azchaeological sites (prehistoric or Historic) without adequate testing, data recovery, and reporting. While Class IV impacts (which include those that aze beneficial to a cultural resource) aze rare, these impacts can occw under certain circumstances. The criteria further state that "A finding of no impact is appropriate for those resowces that are deemed as not significant under CEQA and local criteria. The loss or impairment of such resowces does not ' constitute an impact under existing regulations." t r California Register Regulations JJ CCR §-18SI. ua California Register Regulations laCCR §48.i2(b)(l)-(4) and 4852(el. rro Counry of San Bernardino, Final Environmental Impact Report (or the San Bernardino County General Plan, May 1989, P. VII/-IdJ. Couuty arSan Bernardino Laod Use Sen~ices Depanmcul SCIL No. 1999101127 Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA W'ater& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 286 5.10 Cultural Resources 5.10.1.2 Infrastructure Facilities Disturbance within the completed IVDA area is extensive due to the past and current urban development and agricultural use of the area. Asite-specific investigation was completed for IVDA Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline routes to ascertain whether features which constitute historic or potentially historic resources were present on-site. The assessment consisted of: (1) a records seazch conducted to determine whether any previously recorded historic or ' prehistoric material had been recorded on the pazcel; (2) historic map reseazch whose purpose was to disclose the locations of former structures that may have been present on the property; and (3) _ azchival research. Site-specific field reconnaissance has been completed for only a small percentage ' of the proposed Infrastructure Facilities Project area. Historic resources for the project azea include 23 azea-specific survey reports and ten general azea overviews. ca,"n Imtlaled Prior to the commencement of any field investigations, arecords search for IVDA Areas A r''a"~ and I and easements along the proposed pipeline route azea was obtained from the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bemazdino County Museum (AIC). This record review updates the prior site specific assessment performed for the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. The results of the record seazch indicated that for IVDA Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline route, no properties listed on the national register of historic places, properties listed as California historic landmazks, properties listed as California points of historical interest,"'-0 cultural landscapes, ethnic resources, or prehistoric azchaeological sites have been recorded. However, 14 historic azchaeological sites''' and more than 40 pending or possible historic sites''= have been recorded within aone-eighth mile of the IVDA Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline route azea. Five pending historical azchaeological site locations were identified within cone-mile radius of the srudy azea. Based on the available historical records and maps and comparisons with similaz environmental localities, the potential for prehistoric azchaeological resources along the terrace of the Santa Ana River is considered to be moderate. Based on the existence of sites identified within the proposed Infrastructure Facilities Project azea and on historic maps, the potential for historic resources, historic azchaeological resources, and cultural landscapes is considered to be high. c°~an Imtlaled Change 10 This category includes a listing ofsttes ojcounry or local historical interest ~" These are sites which are older than 50 years of age but either they have not as yet undergone evaluation or have not been determined to be eligible for Irsting. ''' Pending archaeological sites are those sites whose existence and location rs based upon early maps, historic references and hearsay, but their presence has yet to be confirmed County of San Bernardino Lmd Use Serviccs'Deparimenl SCtL hu I999IUI Ili Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 287 5.10 CulRUal Resources 5.10.1.3 Citrus Plaza Site , Disturbance within the Citrus Plaza Project site is extensive due to the past and current ~~"n IniM1atetl residential development and agricultural use of the azea. In particular, orange groves that were c,an9a planted in the eazly 1900s have, until recently, dominated the entire Citrus Plaza project site. The groves were supported by a lazge above- and below-ground irrigation system and were accompanied by several residences, two of which, along with associated buildings, remain. However, within the past I S years, a large portion of the groves were removed and replaced by irrigated row crops. A site-specific investigation was conducted for the Citrus Plaza Project site which included an assessment of existing on-site features to ascertain whether those features constitute historic or , potentially historic resources. The assessment consisted of: a records search conducted to determine whether any previously recorded historic or prehistoric material had been recorded on the parcel; (2) historic map reseazch whose purpose was to disclose the locations of former structures ' that may have been present on the property; (3) azchival research; (4) a field reconnaissance intended to identify any previously unrecorded cultural resources; and (5) a determination of significance or the lack thereof, of any identified resources.''' Prior to the commencement of any field investigations, arecords search for the Citrus Plaza t Project area was obtained from the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino ~""y County Museum (AIC)."-4 The seazch included a review of (1) previously recorded prehistoric and '~°~ ' historic azchaeological sites on and within aone-mile radius of the project; (2) pending azchaeological sites; (3) properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places; (4) properties Listed as California Historic Landmazks; and (5) properties Listed as California Points of Historical Interest. The results of the record search indicated that no historic or prehistoric azchaeological sites I have been recorded on the Citrus Plaza Project site and no prehistoric azchaeological sites have been recorded within aone-mile radius of the project site. However, based upon eazly historic maps four possible historic structure locations were identified within the development area. Ten historical i~~ archaeological sites have been recorded within aone-mile radius of the Citrus Plaza Project site. cna"9a These sites azea listed and characterized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. Of the ten sites recorded, the closest to the Citrus Plaza Project site is an early 20th century agricultural site located approximately 1/5 mile to the east and consists of a former orange grove that includes ~'3 A site-specific archaeological assessment, entitled An Archaeological Assessment of the /2dt Acre Citrus Pla=a Project, Redlands, San Bernardino County (Archaeological Associates, March 20, /995f. Included as Appendix J of the Draft E/R Citrus Pla=a Regional Mall, Volume 1!, Technical Appendix, Ultrasystems. September 199.1. tZ' A copy is included in the Draft EIR Citrus Pla'a Regional Mall, Volume Q Technical Appendix, Appendix J, Ultrasystems, September 1995. County of Sao Bernardino Laed Use Services Depanmcm SCH. rya 1999101113 ' Citrus Playa Regional MaIVI VDA W atcr & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 288 , 5.10 Cultural Resources remnants of a stand-pipe irrigation system and stone and concrete irrigation flume. Five pending historical azchaeological site locations15 were identified within aone-mile radius of the study azea. The Mill Creek Zanja is the only National Register site and California Historic Landmazk (No. 43) within aone-mile radius of the Citrus Plaza project site. It was listed in ]977 and is classified as an historic district. The Mill Creek Zanja was San Bernazdino County's first irrigation system. The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway-Redlands Station (Sbr-89) is the only Point of Historical Interest126 recorded within aone-mile radius of the Citrus Plaza Project site. The Santa Fe I~~t~a Railroad Station, located at 351 Orange Street, was built in 1909. ~an9e ' Field Reconnaissance Afield reconnaissance of the Citrus Plaza Project site azea was conducted on February 6, 1995. Additional follow up field work was conducted on February 10, 11, and 17. No prehistoric resources of any kind were encountered within the project area. Although the 1899 Redlands map indicated three structures situated on the property along Lugonia Avenue (southern boundary), no vestiges of any of the three were found. However the field reconnaissance did confirm the presence of two standing historic buildings and associated buildings within the Citrus Plaza Project site. Both comprise residences that date to the eazly 1900s. The first is located at 9949 Alabama Street and is characterized as a two-story Craftsman style house with an associated masonry reservoir. The second is located at 27495 San Bemazdino Avenue and consists of a two-story colonial Revival that is accompanied by several outbuildings. In addition to the two sttrviving historic structures, the field reconnaissance resulted in the discovery of five masonry irrigation flumes that provided water to the orange groves. These flumes most likely date to the eaz1y1900s when the groves were first planted. All five are located in the nolthem half of the study azea. Four of which aze situated in the orange groves. Currently, the Citrus Plaza Project site has been cleazed and is awaiting development. The as two farm residences have been demolished as was contemplated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR. Evaluation of Historic Resources ' A literature search and field reconnaissance survey were conducted to reseazch into the history of the Alabama Street and San Bemazdino Avenue properties and the masonry irrigation flumes. The azlalysis indicated that although the Alabama Street and San Bernardino Avenue properties and the masonry irrigation flumes are in excess of 50 years old, none qualify as eligible 11i Pending archaeological sites are those sites whose existence and location it based upon early maps, historic references and hearsay, but their presence has yet to be confirmed iae This category includes a listing ofsites ojcounry or local historical interest. ' Count' of San Beroardioo Laod lix Strvices Department SCR Na 1999101113 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Sufxequen[ EIR -June 2001 Page 289 x.10 Culnual Resources for the National Register listing under Criteria A or B because none are associated with prominent , historical figttres or events. Moreover, a reasonably thorough reseazch effort has failed to yield evidence suggesting that any of the buildings or structures is likely to yield information important to history. A detailed discussion of this research, a historic profile and architectural description of the two properties and the imgation flumes is presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and aze incorporated by reference into this document. The farm complex residences at Alabama Street and San Bernazdino Avenue as well as the five irrigation flumes aze of sufficient age to be regarded as potential historic resources. As such, each has been recorded with the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino Count}' Museum as an historic archaeological site. However, none of these potential resources were found , to be eligible for listing under the National Register or the Ciry of Redlands Historic or Scenic Resource Ordinance criteria. Therefore, the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded , that no further analysis or investigation was warranted related to these potential resources prior to demolition. These two farm residences were subsequently demolished during the clearing of the a~ Citrus Plaza site which is currently awaiting development. , 5.10.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE , An impact to historic resources would normally be considered significant if the project would result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource. The evaluation of the potential historic resources aze based upon federal government criteria which require that in order for a building or structure to be significant, it must be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, states that "substantial adverse change" means "physical , demolition, destruction, relocation, or alterations in the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired." The significance of a ' historical resource is materially impaired when a project: (a) demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in or eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Places; or (b) alters or demolishes those physical charncteristics that account for a determination by a lead agency, based upon substantial evidence in light of the whole record, that , the resource is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.''' The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR also included a threshold of significance from the Final EIR for the San Bernazdino County General Plan, which is incorporated by reference °' 19 CCR l X0645. County or San Bernardino Land Use Services Department SCR Na 1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-Jwre 2001 Page 290 , ' 5.10 Cultural Resources into this Subsequent Draft EIR. As discussed under this threshold, significance is determined with respect to the criteria outlined in the State CEQA Guidelines or in the Code of Federal Regulations for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Although no thresholds of significance aze presented in the Final EIR for East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, the program-level document includes a list of potential project impacts. However, the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza project concludes that the project lacks the potential to produce any of the environmental impacts described in that document. This discussion is incorporated by reference. ' In addition to the significance thresholds identified above, the current CEQA Guidelines also consider the following as constituting a threshold of significance if the project will: Caunry Inihatetl Change • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an azchaeological resource -- pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.x. • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. 5.10.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.10.3.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ' The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and Development Code to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated County Areas A and I. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantive change in land use, a substantial increase or change in the geographic azea of the proposed project, or substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to cultural resources ' within Areas A and I and easements along the proposed pipeline routes. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to effect cultural resotrces would be subject to CEQA, potential impacts to cultural resources would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments aze anticipated. ' County o!S•n Bernardino Land l~sc Services Dep•rlment SCH. No.199910112) Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 291 5.10 Culturnl Resources , 5.103.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities Project ' sewer and water options. Construction of the proposed Infrastructure Facilities Project could result ~~~e"e in both excavation along the proposed pipeline routes to accommodate the proposed improvements `~an9t and the demolition and subsequent removal of all existing improvements now located along the ' proposed pipeline routes. These actions could result in the following: (1) potential destruction or disturbance of unlisted prehistoric or historic azcheological properties by construction activities; (2) possible demolition or alteration of historic buildings and properties; and (3) the visual impacts of ' development may alter surrounding character of historic buildings or properties. As there is a potential for these impacts to occur, construction of the proposed Infrastructure Facilities Project ' could result in a significant impact on locally occurring cultural resources. 5.1033 Citrus Plaza Site ' Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Project implementation would result in both the excavation of the Citrus Plaza Project site to , accommodate the proposed improvements. Since the entire Citrus Plaza Project site has been extensively surveyed and no significant azcheological or historic resources were identified, project impacts were concluded to be less than significant. ' Revised Project Impacts Construction of the revised Citrus Plaza Project would require the same level of site disturbance as that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. As the analysis in ' that document concluded that project impacts on cultural resources would be less-than-significant with the inclusion of the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts of the revised Citrus Plaza project aze similazly concluded to be less than significant. 5.10.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Construction of the proposed infrastructure facilities could result in both the excavation ' along the proposed pipeline routes to accommodate the proposed improvements and the demolition and subsequent removal of all existing improvements now located along the proposed pipeline routes. As a result of the absence of detailed surveys of a majority of the IVDA area, it is not possible to provide detailed information concerning the presence of potential cultural resources which may exist in this subregion, but which have not been surveyed to date. Accordingly, there is , a potential for previously unidentified cultural resources to exist within the pipeline route area. Thus, construction of the proposed infrastructure facility options could result in a significant impact ' Couoty of Sm Bernardino Land Use Servitts Drpartmeol SCH. No.1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsegtcent EIR -June 2001 Page 292 5.10 Cultural Resources on locally occurring cultural resources. However, measures contained in the San Bemazdino County ~"nh General Plan will minimize potential impacts upon the area's cultural resources to a level deemed to '^'~a'~' Change be insignificant. As indicated in the 1995 Final EIR, the implementation of the Citrus Plaza Project will not produce a significant impact upon cultural resources, since no such resources have been identified upon the Citrus Plaza Project site. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis and cumulative impacts related to development of the proposed Citrus Plaza Project would not result. Similar to the proposed project ,each of the related projects would be reviewed on an individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any project related impacts would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance with existing regulations and ' guidelines and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These lr°,a~ ' same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and are chage _ more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a ' conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occurred in the past five yeazs and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). ' 5.10.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.10.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments Since no significant impacts to cultural resources aze expected to occur as a result of the ' proposed plan amendments, no mitigation measures are required. ' 5.10.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project and Citrus Plaza Project ~„"y mleaten Charge Previously Proposed Mitigation Measures The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included the following mitigation measure I to reduce the impacts to cultural resources to less-than-significant levels. This mitigation measure is incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. County of San Bernardino Laod Use Services Department SCH. t\a 1999101123 Cirrus Playa Regional MaIVIVDA Wazer& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 293 S.10 Cultural Resources , • If any historic or prehistoric resources are encountered during any phase of construction, t grading or development, the project proponent shall contact the County Museum and temporarily halt grading/demolition until such time as those resources aze evaluated for significance and appropriate mitigation measures aze formulated. New Mitigation Measures • Afield survey shall be conducted by a qualified professional for historic resources for a-at any portion of the proposed project site not previously surveyed prior to the issuance of a grading permit for that portion of the proposed project site. 5.10.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Project impacts upon cultural resources would be reduced to less -than-significant levels m~~a~a ' with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. caan~e County or Sao Bernardino Land Usc Servims Dep•rtme•t SCH. Na I999IOll23 , Citms Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 294 r 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.11 SOCIOECONOMICS 5.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.11.1.1 Regional Environment The unemployment rate for San Bernardino County was estimated at approximately 6.6 percent in 1998. This rate is substantially below the 1997 unemployment rate of 6.4 percent and ' compares favorably to the unemployment rate of 5.9 percent for California for the same yeaz. In San Bernardino County, the civilian labor force was estimated to be approximately 724,900 persons, 1 of which 684,100 persons were employed and 40,800 persons were unemployed in 1998. The ]999 County population was estimated at 1,654,000 persons and housing units were estimated to be approximately 604,060 dwelling units, with a 14.59 percent vacancy rate.'Z$ However, this 14.59 vacancy rate includes such cities as Big Bear Lake (73.60 percent) and Twenty Nine Palms (22.08 percent) which distorted the county-wide average due to a disproportionate percentage of the housing stock being used solely as vacation homes. The vacancy rates for the cities surrounding the project site, Redlands (5.17 percent), Loma Linda (7.70 percent), Grand Terrace (4.98 percent), and San Bernardino (7.83 percent) have an average vacancy rate of 6.42 percent."-9 The Citrus Plaza Project site is contained within Regional Statistical Area (RSA) 29, as ~^h InNaleA designated by the Southern California Association of Govemments (SCAG). In assessing growth 1 for the period 2005 through 2020, SCAG predicts that the population will increase from 69],012 persons in the yeaz 2005 to 929.603 persons by the yeaz 2020 within RSA 29.10 This represents a ' population increase of approximately 26 percent. Furthermore, SCAG predicts that employment between the yeazs 2005 and 2020 will increase from 245,252 jobs in the year 2005 to 356,125 jobs by 2020."' During this 15-yeaz span, the total number of jobs throughout RSA 29 will increase by ' approximately 31 percent. The number of households in RSA 29 will grow from 223,696 in 2005 to 307,612 in 2020, a 27 percent increase. As indicated by these projections, the rate of job growth is anticipated to exceed the corresponding rates for population and housing growth during this time ' ~'" County of San Bernardino, Department of Economic and Community Development, /999 Demographic Profile, hnp: //www. co.san-Bernardino. ca us/ecd ''9 mid r30 Southern California Association of Governments, RSA spreadsheet received from Javier Minjares, December l4, ' 1999. 13' /bid ' Couory of San Bcrnardino Laod Use Services Department SCIL Na 1999101123 Cimcc Plana Regional A1aIVl VDA Wuer & Sewer Services Plan final Subsequent EIR-Jwe 2001 ' Page 295 5.11 Socioeconomics , period. Furthermore, SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide states that SLAG will "support provisions and incentives created by local jurisdictions to attract housing growth in job rich subregions and job growth in housing rich subregions.""' As described in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the County of San Bernardino General Plan, the Valley region "is the most urbanized region in the County and continues to ' experience growth as a result of its proximity to Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Although this region represents only two percent of the County's land area, it contains about 80 percent of its population. The East Valley, which is experiencing tremendous growth pressures, encompasses seven incorporated cities.... There is substantial growth potential in the unincorporated azeas of East Valley, especially Agua Mansa, Bloomington, East Loma Linda/West Redlands and Yucaipa." ' Further, the Final Environmental Impact Repot[ for the County of San Bemazdino General Plan states, "Jobs/housing balance is a concept describing the relationship between an area's t employment (jobs) and dwelling units (housing). A balanced community occurs where people live relatively close to work. A ratio of jobs to housing that is much greater than one [1.0] suggests a community that is job rich and one that experiences considerable in-commuting. Conversely, a low ratio [less than 1.0] suggests a housing rich area and one that experiences considerable out- commuting. By providing affordable housing and opportunities for jobs, a balanced community seeks to reduce the need to travel, thus reducing congestion on the roads, conserving energy and reducing air pollutant emissions.""' The same document also reiterates the County's goal for the Valley region of 1.2 jobs per dwelling unit. "' ' According to the Ciry of San Bernardino General Plan, the City of San Bernazdino forecasts , a regional demand for an additional 2? million square feet of retail commercial use within its market azea.15 The potential regional mazkets for the Citrus Plaza Project and other lazge retail projects in co„~ro , Inmanxl the East Valley should not be perceived as serving the same population. The Citrus Plaza Project cnaagt ' seeks to respond to azeawide population increases which have occurred and which aze projected to occur in the easterly half of the East Valley Subregion. Conversely, based upon the location of other lazge retail uses in the westerly half of the East Valley Subregion, the predominant market azeas for ' those regional centers would include both the westerly section of the County planning azea and portions of the West Valley Subregion (e.g., Fontana Planning Area). ' 13' Southern California Association ojGovernments, Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide, 1998, p. 3-24. 133 County ojSan Bernardino, Final E/R jot the County ojSan Bernardino General Plan, p. V/11-260. 3J' lbid, p. V/11-264. , i3s Ciry ojSan Bernardino, Ciry ojSan Bernardino Genera! Plan, Land Use Element, 1989. Couoty arSao Bcroardioo Land Ust Servites Dcpartment SCR No. 1999101113 ' Citrus Playa Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 296 ' 5.11 Socioeconomics ' 5.11.1.2 Infrastructure Facilities ' For the proposed Infrastructure Facilities Project, the proposed pipelines would be c~e~n ~~n~ constructed entirely underground within existing utility right-of ways. Currently, there are no jobs, change population, or housing associated with these right-of--ways. Land uses on the proposed water and wastewater facilities sites are mainly agricultural. Amore detailed discussion of current on-site land uses is included in Section ~.1, Land Use, of this Subsequent EIR. 5.11.1.3 Citrus Plaza Site ' The Citrus Plaza Project site has historically been used for agriculture and is currently cowry IniaateE cleared and awaiting development. change 5.11.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following thresholds of significance were derived from the CEQA Guidelines at the time the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR was prepared and aze incorporated herein: • "Where a physical changes [sic] is caused by economic or social effects of a project, the ' physical change may be regazded as a significant effect in the same manner as any other physical change resulting from the project. Alternatively, economic and social effects of I'~ ~ a physical change may be used to determine that the physical change is a significant effect on the environment" (CCR Section 1513 ] • A substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project (CCR Section 1538?). I'i , • A Lead Agency shall fmd that a project may have a significant effect on the environment" if the environmental effects of the project "will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. either directly or indirectly" (CCR Section 15065(d)). ' • A project will have a significant effect on the environment if it will: (1) induce ' substantial growth or concentration of population; (2) displace a lazge number of people; (3) disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community; and/or (4) conflict with established recreational, educational, religious or scientific uses of the ' azea. "` 1 ° Reference in previous analysis is to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Since the previous analysis was completed, the CEQA Guidelines have been amended Cou•ty of Sao Ber•ardioo La•d Usc Services Department SCH. Na 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 297 _ _ -~ 5.11 Socioeconomics ' Furthermore, the Final EIR included the follow9ng thresholds of significance from the San ' Bemazdino Coun General Plan U ate Final Environmental Im act Re ort which aze here v tY Pd P P b. incorporated into this Subsequent EIR. ' • A project would be defined as creating an adverse impact if the project promotes a job/housing imbalance which is inconsistent with the policies of either County or the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), as reflected in that agency's ' Growth Management Plan and the County's efforts "to encourage the creation of jobs ' within San Bemazdino County to meet a goal of 1:L jobs to each dwelling unit.""' • The East Valley Comdor Specific Plan proposes guidelines for the development and ' land use of the project area. One of its main policies is to maximize generation of employment opportunities in a region which has a significant imbalance of housing versus employment opportunities... The potential increase in jobs created by the East Valley Corridor [Specific Plan] should play a significant role in alleviating the current population/housing to employment ratio imbalance in the East Valley RSA [Regional ' Statistical Area]. Based upon this program-level declaration, a significant environmental impact ' would be anticipated to occur if project development fails to promote the attainment of this regional goal and further exacerbates this existing jobs/housing imbalance. ' In addition to the significance thresholds identified above, the current CEQA Guidelines also Couaty consider the following as constituting a threshold of significance if the project wi1L•~;,°•a,~ • Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of , replacement housing elsewhere. • Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement ' housing elsewhere. 5.113 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ' 5.113.1 Proposed Plan Amendments The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and ' associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to County ojSan Bernardino, General Plan Update Frnal EIR, SCHNo. 88102411, May 1989, p. VI/1-26-0. Cowry ofSa• Bermrdi•o Land Use Services Depar[mrnt SCH. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnt EIR-June 2001 Pale 298 ' ' 5.11 Socioeconomics ' allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I. The proposed _ amendments include revisions intended to increase the options for the provision of water and 1 wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geographical azea of .the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments would not result in a change to the physical environment unto themselves. It is individual development projects, such as Citrus Plaza, which create the potential impacts on the physical environment. As all development projects which have the potential to have asocio-economic effect of note would be subject to CEQA, potential socio-economic impacts would be appropriately addressed. Therefore, no significant environmental ' impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed plan amendments aze anticipated. 5.11.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities ' Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ' The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities Project ~r°;"~ sewer and water options. Construction of those infrastructure facility options which aze limited to cn~e ' the placement of subsurface pipelines would not provide any long-term employment opportunities specifically devoted to the ongoing maintenance of these facilities. Implementation of the water and wastewater facilities (Water Options 1 and 2 and Sewer Option 3) will result in the addition of up to two additional full-time employment opporhJnities, but this would not create a significant impact. ' 5.11.33 Citrus Plaza Site Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis As indicated in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR, the Citrus Plaza Project, at ' buildout, would result in the generation of approxnnately 2,728 jobs. This projection, however, does not include construction employment or other off-site indirect employment opportunities (e.g., t trucking, manufacturing).138 Employees already residing in the azea surrounding the project site would fill the majority of the new job opportunities generated by the operation of the Citrus Plaza project. However, a relatively small number of new employees would relocate to the area, which ' would generate new households in the project vicinity. Based on the Redlands Unified School District's generation rate, a total of 218 new households would be created upon Citrus Plaza Project buildout.1}9 Since the County is currently considered ahousing-rich and job-poor azea, the Citrus ' tax San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft E/R Citrus Plaza Regional hfall, State Clearinghouse No. 9408208x, September 1996, p.i.10-1?. ' 139 San Bernardino County Planning Department. Draft EIR Citrus Plea Regional Mall, Slate Clearinghouse No. 94083084, September 1996, p 5.10-/3. ' Counry~ of San Beroardioo Laod Use Services Department SCFL Na 1999101 V3 Citrus Plaza Regional MalVl VDA W ater & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 299 5.11 Socioeconomics ' Plaza Project would fwther the regional objective towazds a jobs/housing ratio of 12:1.0. The 199 ca:"" ' ImUateO Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that no significant socioeconomic effects would c"an9e occur as a result of the development of the Citrus Plaza Project. '~ The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR also discusses the economic effects of , commercial competition that would result from the development of the C1tnLS Plaza Project. This analysis included the conclusions of two socioeconomic studies. One of the reports concluded that it was difficult to estimate the competitive impact of the proposed project on the existing downtown , Redlands merchants because "the timing of development of the second phase, as well as the composition of merchants, etc., is ambiguous, making estimates of impacts of these future elements on existing [City of Redlands] Downtown merchants tenuous."10 The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional ' Mall Final EIR concluded that no determination could be made as to the potential for off-site physical changes due to, either directly or indirectly, the economic and social effects of the proposed ' project. Revised Project Impacts ' Development of the revised Citrus Plaza Project would not vary in the types or amounts of ~"n ' Inmaletl on-site uses as that analyzed in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR. As the analysis in Change that document concluded that the Citrus Plaza Project's socioeconomic impacts would be less than significant, the potential impacts of the revised Citrus Plaza Project aze similazly concluded to be ' less than significant. The conclusions of the commercial competition discussion in the previous analysis would not change with the implementation of the revised project because the amount and types of uses proposed for the Citrus Plaza development have not substantially changed with the ' revised Citrus Plaza Project. 5.11.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As discussed above, the infrastructre facility options which are limited to the placement of ca,"y ' subsurface i lines would not rovide any substantive Ion -term em to ment o rtunities u n 1oiba1e° P Pe P g P Y PPo Po Change ' the completion of construction. Operational impacts would be limited to the infrastructure facilities located within IVDA Area A, not located on the Citrus Plaza site. a-s 9-13 ' As previously discussed in this Section, San Bemazdino Counry is a housing-rich region with ajobs/housing rntio that is well below its goal of 1.2 jobs per dwelling unit. Employees already ' residing in the azea surrounding the project site would fill the majority of the new job o,Jportunities "0 Abed Gabar Associates, Frscal and Competitive Impact Analysis of Citrus Plea Phase 1 and Phase II Shopping ' Cemer, November 1994, p. 6. County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Departmem SCH. Na 1999101 V3 t Citrus Plaza Re ~onal MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan & Final Subsequent ElR-Juno 2001 Page 300 5.11 Socioeconomics generated by the operation of the Citrus Plaza project. However, a relatively small number of new _ employees would relocate to the area, which would generate new households in the project vicinity. ' Therefore, since the County is currently considered ahousing-rich and job-poor azea, the Citrus Plaza project would further the regional objective towards ajobs/housing ratio of 1.2:1.0. Furtheanore, the Housing Section of the San Bernazdino County General Plan Update proposes a ' series of action including expanding the supply of commercially and industrial zoned land adjacent to predominantly residential azeas thus facilitating ajobs/housing ratio objective of 1:2 jobs per dwelling unit. Accordingly, no significant impact would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed Citrus Plaza Project and the proposed project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis. Therefore, cumulative socio-economic impacts associated with development of the ~~ae"a ' proposed Citrus Plaza Project would not result. cnaoge ' As stated in the previous analysis, "the Citrus Plaza project cleazly has a different primary mazket area (e.g., Cities of Redlands, Loma Linda, Highland and Yucaipa) than the Inland Center Mall and Cazousel Mall sites (e.g., Cities of San Bemazdino, Colton, Fontana and Rialto). As a result, although each center will potentially reduce the number of shoppers patronizing each center, the Citrus Plaza will not significantly effect [sic] the feasibility of Inland Center MalUCazousel Mall."'°' Accordingly, no significant impact would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed project and the proposed project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be de minimis. Therefore, cumulative socio-economic impacts associated with development of the ' proposed project would not result. Similaz to the proposed project, each of the related projects would be reviewed on an ' individual basis as part of the environmental review process and any project related impacts would be expected to be reduced to the extent feasible through compliance w2th existing plans, policies and guidelines and recommended mitigation measures. The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in ' the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bemazdino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan for San Bernardino County. These c~unry same related projects aze used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts and aze cn ' more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR ' aze still appropriate for use as the basis for the assessment of the proposed project's cumulative impacts. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background ' growth which has occurred in the past five years and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previously forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has and/or is anticipated to occur). ' t'~ San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft EIR Citrus Plaza Regions/ Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94081084, September 1996, p 5.10.18. ' in s rviees De arlmeot SCR Fa 199910ll21 County of Sao Bernard o Land U e & p Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W star & Sewer Services Plan Final Sulxequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 301 5.11 Socioeconomics , 5.11.5 MITIGATION MEASURES ' 5.11.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments, Infrastructure Facilities, and Citrus Plaza Site '~ Since no significant socioeconomic impacts are expected to occur, no mitigation measures I are required. ' 5.11.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ' No significant socioeconomic impacts would result from the implementation of the proposed ' project and, thus, no mitigation measures aze required. 1 1 1 t Couory of San Beroardiuo Laod Use Services Department SCH. No.1999101173 ' Citrus Plaza Regional Ma1V1 VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Sulrsequem EIR-Jwre 2001 Page 302 ' _' S.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ' 5.12 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ' 5.12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5.12.1.1 Infrastructure Facilities ' IVDA Area A (969 acres) and Area I (82 acres) aze located in the unincorporated azea of San Bemazdino County neaz the City of Redlands. This approximate 1,051-acre azea is bordered by ' the Santa Ana River on the north, agricultural fields to the west, Highway 30 to the east, and development to the south. Given the Infrastructure Facilities Project site's adjacency to the Santa i~;~~ Ana River and that one of the proposed water options crosses the Santa Ana River, the analysis of ceange ' potential impacts to biological resources also includes an assessment of conditions occurring within the Santa Ana Rivet In addition, Water Options 2A and 2B include the use of wells that aze located ' north of the Santa Ana River and west of Highway 30. This proposed well site crosses City Creek a-as and thus this azea was also assessed for the potential presence of biological resources. As IVDA Area I consists of urban development, no biological resources aze currently present. In addition the t Citrus Plaza site within IVDA Area A has been cleared and as such, no substantial biological resources aze present. The portion of IVDA Area A, exclusive of the Citrus Plaza site, and the ' adjoining portions of the Santa Ana River aze hereafter collectively referred to as the study azea. The study azea ranges in elevation from approximately 1,160 to 1,260 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The assessment of biological resources for the Infrastructure Facilities Project is based on information compiled through field reconnaissance, focused surveys, previous documentation, and cna~e appropriate reference rnaterials. Focused surveys and habitat evaluations were performed during the spring and winter of 2000. The Biological Resources Technical Report for the proposed project is ' included as Appendix H within this document. ' 5.12.1.1.1 Plant Communities/Habitats Natural community rtames and hierarchical structure follows the California Department of ' Fish and Game List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the Natural Diversity Data Base, January 1999 Edition. A brief description of these plant communities and the common plant species dominating them is discussed below. County or5an &ruardino Laod Use Serviccs Dcpartmeot SCH. Na 1999101123 Citrus Plea Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 303 5.12 Biological Resources ' Alluvial Fan Scrub ' Alluvial fan scrub occurs within the active wash areas of the Santa Ana River, below the ' upper benches, where it is dominated by sandy, rock alluvia deposited during infrequent episodes of severe overbank flooding. Vegetation is composed of an assortment of drought-deciduous subshrubs and lazge evergreen wood shrubs that are adapted to porous, low fertility substrates and to ' survival of intense, periodic flooding and erosion. As a result of its origin and physical environment, alluvial fan sage scrub develops in various phases that become increasingly vegetated ; over time afrer a major flood event. The phase within the proposed project can be referred to as "pioneer" with sparse vegetation, low species diversity and low stature. This would indicate it was recently within an active stream channel or scoured wash azea. Dominant species occurring within ' this vegetation community include scalebroom (Lepidospartum sguamatum), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), deerweed (Lotus scoparius), and hairy yerba santa (Eriodictyon trichocalyz). It should be mentioned that two endangered plant species in this habitat occur within , the Santa Ana River watershed. These include the Santa Ana River wooly-star (Eriostrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum) and slender-homed spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras). ; Orchard The vast majority of IVDA Area A, exclusive of the Citrus Plaza site, is made up of ' orchazds, which consists of rows of cultivated citrus trees. Portions of the orchazd aze actively being ' farmed, while the remaining portions have been abandoned. Non-Native Grassland ' Non-native grassland consists of dominant invasive annual grasses that aze primarily of ' Mediterranean origin. Dominant species found in IVDA Area A, exclusive of the Citrus Plaza site, include wild oat (Avena barbata), slender wild oat (Avena fatua), ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), foxtail chess (Bromus mardritensis ssp. rubens), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), and wild mustazd (Brassica sp.). Also present are red-stemmed filazee (Erodium cicutarium), and white-stemmed filazee (Erodium moschatum). Topographic factors that contribute to grassland presence include gradual slopes or flat areas with deep, well-developed soils in azeas below 3,000 feet in elevation. The species richness of ' grassland communities is dependent upon a number of land use factors, including intensity and duration of natural or anthropogenic disturbances such as grazing. Heavily grazed grasslands have a lower species richness. ' County of Sao Bernardino Laod Ust Services Department SC71. Na 19991011D ' Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 304 ' ' 5.12 Biological Resources Eucalyptus Woodland ' The open tree canopy has a dense grassy understory consistent with the non-native grassland species discussed above. This community occurs below the orchard from Highway 30 east about 500 feet. 5.12.1.1.2 Wildlife Populations The natural communities discussed above provide wildlife habitat. Following are discussions of wildlife populations in the study area, segregated by major taxonomic group. ' Representative examples of each taxonomic group either observed or expected in the Infrastructure ,~"~;~ Facilities Project area aze provided below. cna"9a ' Invertebrates General surveys for common invertebrates were performed during the spring of ?000. Butterfly and other insect activity was Tower than anticipated. Invertebrate species observed during surveys include pale swallowtail (Papilio eurymedon), Behr's metalmazk (Apodemia mormo virgulti), and California harvester ant (Pogonomyrmex californicus). Amphibians ' The potential presence of amphibians varies greatly between habitats within the study area. Terrestrial species may or may not require standing water for reproduction. Terrestrial species avoid desiccation by burrowing underground; within crevices in trees, rocks, and logs; and under stones ' and surface litter during the day and dry seasons. Due to their secretive nature, terrestrial amphibians aze rarely observed, but may be quite abundant if conditions are favorable. Aquatic amphibians aze dependent on standing or flowing water for reproduction. Such habitats include fresh water marshes and open water (reservoirs. permanent and temporary pools and ponds, and perennial streams). The study area has the potential to support a limited number of amphibians in ' the Santa Ana River and percolation ponds. Reptiles Reptilian diversity and abundance typically varies with habitat type and character. Some ' species prefer only one or two nattual communities; however, most will forage in a variety of communities. A number of reptile species prefer open habitats that allow &ee movement and high visibility. Most species occurring in open habitats rely on the presence of small mammal burrows ' for cover and escape from predators and extreme weather. County orSao Btruardioa Laod Use Services Depanmcot SCH. Na 1999101121 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 305 5.12 Biological Resources ' The study area has essential reptilian habitat characteristics and possesses the potential to varie of s ties. Re tiles ties observed durin surve s include westem fence lizazd support a ty pe p pe g y (Sceloporus occidentalis) and coastal westem whiptail (Cnemidophorus tigris multiscutatus). 1 Birds The scmb land habitat in the study azea provide foraging and cover habitat for year-round ' residents, seasonal residents, and migrating song birds. The overall condition of these communities , in the study area is good and mostly undisturbed. In addition, there aze several canyons and washes within and adjacent to the property that can provide a steady water supply for birds. The combination of these resources as well as the confluence of many community types provides fora ' high diversity of bird species. Representative avian species observed during surveys include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), black phoebe (Sayornis ' nigricans), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), westem scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), and California towhee (Pipilo crissalis). Much of the habitat within the study azea also provides foraging opportunities and breeding , azeas for raptors. Trees found throughout the project site provide perches for foraging over the chapazral, and coastal sage scrub natural communities. The various natural communities within the ' study area provide habitat for many small mammals resulting in a potentially large rodent population. Raptor species observed during surveys include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), ' and red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus). Mammals ' 'v in the tud azea is antici ated to su rt a v The dl erslty of habitats s y p ppo anety of mammals. ' During Feld surveys, a number of mammal species were either directly observed, or their presence was deduced by diagnostic signs (track, scat, burrows, etc.) including coyote (Canis latrans), California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and t desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). Other species, such as the bobcat (Lynx rufus) is expected to be resident or may occasionally utilize the property to forage or for cover. 5.12.1.13 Wildlife Movement Within the Study Area The study azea is located in an area of potentially low value to regional and local wildlife ' movement and has a low likelihood to be used by a variety of species for foraging and travel routes. ' The reasons for this aze the study area's close proximity to development and road crossings, and its providing limited food resources. Couory of Sao Beroardioo Laod Use Services Depanmeot SCH. Na 1999101121 ' Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 306 , 5.12 Biological Resources 5.12.1.1.4 Regional Biological Value of the Site ' Approximately 90 percent of IVDA Area A, exclusive of the Citrus Plaza site, has been altered for agriculture and the remaining approximate 10 percent is introduced non-native grassland. ' These conditions present limited biological value for resident and migratory wildlife. Within this portion of the Infrastructure Facilities Project site, there exists little to no wildlife movement corridors, however, the Santa Ana River does represent a corridor through the project vicinity. The c~ alluvial fan scrub and sensitive species habitats are the only resources contributing to the regional value of the Infrastructure Facilities Project site. In addition, the proposed well site under Water 8-38 Options 2A and 2B includes a section of City Creek that is a tributary of the Santa Ana River. The t river channel is likely to be a wildlife movement route that connects the Santa Ana River with the neazby San Bemazdino Mountains. Ciry Creek also supports alluvial fan scrub and San Bemardino ' kangazoo rat habitat. Together, these factors contribute to the regional value of this particulaz well site. 5.12.1.1.5 Sensitive Biological Resources The following discussion describes the plant and wildlife species present, or potentially present within the study area, that have been afforded special recognition by federal, state, or local resource conservation agencies and organizations, principally due to the species' declining or limited population sizes, usually resulting from habitat loss. Also discussed aze habitats that are unique, of relatively limited distribution, or of particular value to wildlife. Protected sensitive species are classified by either state or federal resource management agencies, or both, as threatened t or endangered, under provisions of the state and federal Endangered Species Acts. Vulnerable or "at-risk" species which are proposed for listing as threatened or endangered (and thereby for ' protected status) are categorized administratively as "candidates" by the USFWS. CDFG uses various terminology and classifications to describe vulnerable species. There aze additional sensitive species classifications applicable in California; these are described below. • Sensitive biological resources are habitats or individual species that have special ' recognition by federal and state resource agencies as endangered, threatened, or rare. The CDFG, the USFWS, local governments and special groups like the CNPS maintain watch lists of such resources. Sensitive Plant Communities/Habitats The project area supports one habitat type considered sensitive by resource agencies, namely the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). This is alluvial fan scrub, within the Santa ' Ana River, and is considered sensitive due to its scarcity and its being habitat for state and federally listed endangered, threatened, and rare vasculaz plants, as well as severe sensitive bird and reptile species. County or Sao Bernardino Laod Lsc Services Department SCH. Na 19991011ii Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA W azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-lace 2001 ' Page 307 x.12 Bioloeical Resources ' Sensitive Plant Species ' Sensitive plants include those listed, or candidates for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife , Service (USFWS), CDFG, and the California Native Plant Society (GNPs). Several sensitive plant species were reported in the CNDDB from the vicinity. Sensitive plant species in the study azea include the Santa Ana River wooly-staz and the slender-homed spineflower. In surveys conducted ' in the spring of 2000, the Santa Ana River wooly-star was observed in the study azea. The slender- homed spineflower was not observed in the study azea. Sensitive Wildlife Species Sensitive wildlife includes those species listed as endangered or threatened under the Federal ' Endangered Species Act (FESA) or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), candidates for ' listing by USFWS or CDFG, and species of special concern to USFWS or CDFG. Surveys were conducted in the spring of 2000 to determine the presence or absence of sensitive species, evaluate habitat for its ability to support sensitive species, and ascertain which sensitive species are likely to ' be present within the study azea based on expected habitat use, geographic range, and information collected during current and past surveys in the study area vicinity. The following sensitive animal ' species have the potential to occur in the study azea: San Diego homed lizard, coastal western whiptail, golden eagle, sharp-shinned hawk, Coopers hawk, red-shouldered hawk, loggerhead shrike, San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit, Los Angeles pocket mouse, San Bemazdino kangazoo rat, t gray fox and coyote. 5.12.1.2 Citrus Plaza Site ' The Citrus Plaza Project Site has been cleared. Therefore, no sensitive or otherwise ~^N Iniaaieo ' important biological resources currently exist on this site. a~ 5.12.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The environmental impacts relative to biological resources aze assessed using impact ' significance criteria which mirror the policy statement contained in CEQA at Section 21001(c) of the Public Resources Code: , "Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man's activities, ensure that fish , and wildlife populations do not drop below self-perpetuating levels, and preserve for future generntions representations of all plant and animal communities..." Couory of Sao Beruardioo Laod Use Services Drpartment SCN Na 1999101173 ' Cima Plara Regional MaIVIVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequen[ EIR-June 2001 Page 308 ' 5. t2 Bioloeical Resources ' The following definitions apply to the significance criteria for biological resources: • `'Endangered" means that the species is listed as endangered under state or federal law. • "Threatened" means that the species is listed as threatened under state or federal law. • "Raze" means that the species exists in such small numbers throughout all or a significant portion of its range that it may become endangered if its environment worsens. • "Region" refers to the area within the coastal azea of Southern Califonua including portions of Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties that aze within the range of an individual species. ' • "Sensitive habitat" refers to habitat for plants and animals (1) which plays a special role in perpetuating species utilizing the habitat on the property, and without which there t would be substantial danger that the population of that species would drop below self- perpetuating levels. • "Substantial effect" means significant loss or harm of a magnitude which, based on current scientific data and knowledge, (1) would cause a species or a native plant or ' animal cortununiry to drop below self-perpetuating levels on a statewide or regional basis or (2) would cause a species to become threatened or endangered. Impacts to biological resources aze considered significant if one or more of the following conditions would result from implementation of the proposed project: t • Direct loss ofindividuals of astate- or federal-listed threatened or endangered species. ' • Substantial effect on a species or native plant or animal community. • Substantial effect on a sensitive habitat. t • Substantial effect on critical, yet limited, resources utilized by state or federal listed threatened or endangered species. • Substantial effect on the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. ' Also, the determination of impacts has been made according to the federal definition of "take." The FESA prohibits the "taking" of a member of an endangered or threatened wildlife ' species by any person (including private individuals and private or government entities) or removing, damaging, or destroying a listed plant species on federal land or private land as a ' consequence of a federal action. The FESA defines "take" as `'to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, County of Sao Bernardino La•d Gse Services Department SCH. Nn 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 309 5.12 Bioloeical Resources would, kill, trap, capture or collect" an endangered or threatened species, or to attempt to engage in ' these activities. (50 C.F.R. Section 17 5.12.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ' 5.123.1 Proposed Plan Amendments The proposed General Plan and Development Code Amendments incorporate all relevant provisions which previously were set forth in the EVCSP. As the net effect of this component of the project is no substantive change in the regulatory envirotrment, the incorporation of the relevant ' portions of the EVCSP into the County's General Plan and Development Code would not result in any physical impacts. Without any physical impacts, no impact on biological resources would occur , and no further biological analysis is required. 5.123.2 Infrastructure Facilities The following environmental impact analysis applies to all Infrastructure Facilities Project sewer and water options. The proposed infrastructure options include four options for the provision ~'~"~ of sewer service and 14 options for the provision of water service to IVDA Area A. Three of the four sewer options would be implemented via the installation of pipelines within existing right-of- ways (i.e., roadways and/or concrete flood control channels) and thus no impact to biological resources would occur. Sewer Option No. 3, in addition to the installation of pipelines within existing right-of--ways, which would not result in impacts to biological resources„ includes the development of a local wastewater treatment plant in an undeveloped area, within the northwestern comer of IVDA Area A, wherein potential impacts to biological resources could occur. ' All water options include the designation of a zone, within a currently undeveloped azea, for the location of future reservoirs, a pump station and a water treatment plant within the northeastern , comer of IVDA Area A. As this azea is currently undeveloped, potential impacts on biological resources may occur. In addition, the water option which utilizes local wells within IVDA Area A ' (Water Option No. 1) may include improvements, adjacent to the previously described azea, which is also currently undeveloped and as such, may have a potential impact on biological resources. Furthermore, Water Option Nos. 2A and 2B include the use of wells that aze located on a disturbed ' site. An associated pipeline would cross City Creek, north of the Santa Ana River and west of g-~a Highway 30. In addition, one water option, specifically the option which connects to the IVDA East Side System via California Street (Water Option No. 3C), is proposed to cross the Santa Ana River, 1 at the northern terminus of California Street (i.e., not within an existing right-of--way). As such, this option could affect the potential biological resources present within this portion of the Santa Ana t River. All other aspects of all of the proposed water options would occur via pipelines installed Couory orSao Bernardino 4aod Use Services Depanment SCK Na 1999{0112) Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Wazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2IX11 Page 310 ' ' 5.12 Biological Resources ' within existing right-of--ways (i.e., roadways and/or concrete flood control channels) and thus no impact to biological resources would occur. Based on the descriptions provided above, an analysis of the potential biological impacts of the following Infrastructure Facilities Project components are analyzed in the following sections: ~„~n (1) construction of the local wastewater treatment plant (Sewer Option No. 3), (2) the location for '~,~9 future reservoirs, pump station and water treatment plant within the northeastern comer of IVDA Area A (all Water Options), (3) the crossing of the Santa Ana River for the water option which connects to the IVDA East Side System via California Street (Water Option No. 3C), and the use B38 of the well site north of Area A and the Santa Ana River (Water Options 2A and ZB). Figure 5.12-1 shows the locations of the described on-site improvements relative to the vegetation communities and sensitive species located in the project azea. ' To minimize potential biological impacts associated with the crossing of the Santa Ana River associated with the water option which connects to the IVDA East Side System via California Street (Water Option No. 3C), the County proposes that the pipeline installation for this water option occur via microtunnelling under the Santa Ana River and setting the construction sites on both sides of the river in mderal habitat above the riprap. With regard to Water Option Nos. 2A and 2B, the County proposes that the pipeline installation occur either via placement on the existing roadway ,~~~ bridge in proximity to the well site or via microtunnelling. Using these approaches to construction, cn~~ ' disturbance to the surface of the wash will not be necessazy, thereby avoiding direct impacts to any sensitive species and/or their habitat azeas. 5.123.2.1 Insignificant Impacts on Plant Communities ' Infrastructure Facilities Project implementation could result in the direct removal of portions of orchazds and non-native grassland. Neither of these represent sensitive plant communities, and their removal does not constitute a significant impact to plant communities in and of themselves. ' 5.13.3.2.2 Insignificant Impacts on Wildlife The primary impacts of the Infrastructure Facilities Project on wildlife resources aze the removal and disruption of habitat and displacement of wildlife, resulting in a less diverse and abundant local faunal population. Significant impacts on wildlife are generally associated with the ' County of Sau Bernardino Land Ilse Services Department SCn. Na !999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 311 ~w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1'iii~~ -z~~ -.fe ~ .K • ~ ' ± t: - ,.~J~ „-lis ' r~~; ,-o~a:t!"`" .r" ('/ [ < O G ~ ~ • CC ~i1 R ~, tr r)~f +i r ° --- , . . ~ s I ~vt ~ ~ ~ < c n ~ ~ O N~ --' Q'tlw~ tF~ ,~ rr - ±f{ '~` ~ ~ • I i r` I CG G N ^ ~' C rt a v: i r • +' t'i _ ~,yc~ lt~G. i ~T ~ : • i •o py •p O d -t R 4 - L h 7rl tF'• `!1 . •.'' ., :y; r=' t f, .., ~ty i " O ~ ~ p. ~ V ' ~ t S ,{ • 1:~t Cam- s~ f. ~ 1 G j13 ~ :.r'~ ~ t ~ d ~ i. 'y M T'~.~,c ?f~T ~' f 1,,. 1 ~ 1 ~ .}yv ~A: ( _ ,rd , !~,.~1. .1• f I:y k :r1rf+~ S it .tl ~~a: ''f' 1I~-1 Z: ` ~~v~:'4r~,~r` i ` 1 ry~ M y., I, a ~•' ~r i 1 5 r ~t IS.. : Y s . I~ ~r va 2 d 3: • ~' •~., r a '>4 .1T ~ 2~ , ••~," i t \ fit: `t _ -~' -' ~ tltl r R1{ { ^T ' to • 1 . ` •~~- ~ l , y I ~ ~ ~ r 1,~W t41j4 ".,~'. 3 ~i . -F& _ "f~a'~ L -~ ' 'c y ~ 1 iti'~ f 'k. r" ~ a.t ~d3/lS 4.Sf ~ -a~.3~ ~ ~ b t"-7 n ~- ~ ~ ~C'1 33, ~ ' ~ a^ '~f ~~r ~q~ -r r~ ~ S t~ ~r ~`s•n.: i~`y - t /~ ~q ~Q, 1 ~ ~ I ~ ~ .i Fr1.,~,'1 '~'{.r,+J ~ _i".T4 ,~'[~s :- r. - I r-T . ~,._ _ .r rui.~ ,. Y ~ ~ ., t'~Y-~ G ~ I - g gl 3 ~ - - ~, r~,ru ~ ~ . rl ` 1" 1 ~yy~~ , cD 4t iSU ~ ~ 'f.i}.~~F~ ~.tf~ t7r:} ,t 'd _.'~~ ilZ? ~ ` ~ ~9~ .,, _ ~~1 I~ r;T,2"a C ~ ri•~ }_j j ~~I~~ ~ ,fit i~~ °+' .-_~ t? N `'J, •,\, ., r,.i,6S5 i ru I ~ ~ F k .II ,,£'r _ •Jti l;~ T 1 1,r. ..i~ (C ' ~ ~, ~' i F U) S1i ! ti• ~ . Y Os• ~ +.AL~! .a~Y~i ~,~ .~Ji f' ~ r. - ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~'j ~ iQ..h ! ~ 'O u.~ ;(D ~ w ~ - ~" ,~:±~ ,,t • ~' to ~.t ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ '.3'' . • ~ -. • _ ~~'! .mss ~'' ' _ ~ . (D / \ ^ tam ~ ~ _ .i ~ ~ +cp w~ _ -mss ~f'~ ,~'a~ ~' ~ ro '~ - J ~~' ~i`.".,~~ '~Jri~.~~ r ~ r~ Elm r G{'+~,. ~ ~.~+"%~. IL•,~ - ..~.-- 1 ,. ~ L~..r-j ^c r~si ,~,'~~? ~~l -1. d~r .ICI. If t( ~ ~ 1. i f j. 7 :r 11 x .I. L1J r ~ ~ t t " 1 ~ _ '49d ~ 7 F. !Yf i?' ~'~'~. ~ - ~ ,6L'^,d:s?~+rt_ 'i~'f ~ -1~~3t: i~•~ .~'' Z~~3l~Yr~,.• \ ~.Yr.~ ¢ fiy *, ;A~ ~i ,- I ^" ~ , ~ ~-Ott'.'-qI7 ,. r ~ . ~ 5~ _ ~f vii l J .-~~~•~. ~'~rr t ~~..t.• ~1.. ~*::i *~K~ .-. - . .- ~ . /~ ~ ~ ^~ti ~,-'+ r&,, ~a4'~~. I ~ UQ fD 7 ~ ~ ~ "' ~--• ~ n N - ~ cn u 1 ..I'_ Biolo_ical Resources ' degree of habitat loss from the standpoint of physical character, quality, divelsit<. and abundance of vesetation. Infrastructure Facilities Project implementation in the short- and long-term would result ' in the direct removal of existing wildlife habitat and mortality of numerous common wildlife species wa_->= ~ existing in the study azea. Additionally, indirect project-related impacts would include increased human activity, increased ambient noise, nighttime light levels charncteristic of a developed urban ' em~ironment, and increased threat of road kill by traffic. Common wildlife species using habitats onsite would avoid habitats affected by these "spillover' impacts, thereby decreasing diversity beyond the actual development em~elope. Elimination or disruption of habitat for these species would not represent a regionalh 1 siertificant impact, and no significant impacts on common wildlife resources would result from Infrastructure Facilities Project implementation. ' Several sensitive wildlife species have at least a modernte potential to occur on the Infrastructure Facilities Project site. Short-term impacts may occur as a result of construction ' activities. Sensitive reptiles not observed but potentially occurring in the srudy azea include San Diego ' homed lizard. Belding's orange-throated whiptall, and San Bernardino ring-necked snake. As these species are not protected by federal or state listings as threatened or endangered. and loss of individuals would not threaten the regional population, removal of a limited azea of their habitat represents an adverse but less than significant impact to regional populations of these species. ' In addition several sensitive avian species were either observed in the study azea or have at least a moderate likelihood of occurrence including sharp-shinned hawk. Cooper s hawk, homed ' lazk, Bell's sage sparrow, and loggerhead shrike. As these species aze not protected by federal or state listings as threatened or endangered, and loss of individuals would not threaten the regional population, removal of a limited azea of their habitat does not represent a significant impact to ' regional populations of these species. Sensitive mammal species potentially occurring in the srudy area but not observed include the western mastiff bat, Los Angeles pocket mouse, San Diego black-tailed jack rabbit. San Diego desert woodrnt, and gray fox. Likewise, these species aze not protected by federal or state listings as ' threatened or endangered, and loss of individuals would not threaten the regional population, removal of a limited azea of their habitat does not represent a significant impact to regional populations of these species. ' 5.123.2.3 Impacts to Nesting Birds Cana Trees found on the Infrastructure Facilities Project site, as well as power poles, provide Change perches for fornging over the grassland and sage scrub communities. These communities provide ' Couot}~ of San Bernardino Land Csc Services Depanmmt SCIL Nw 1999101121 G[nu Plaza Re_eional Ma1VIVDA blazer ~ Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June?001 Page 313 5.1? Biological Resources ' habitat for many small birds and mammals resulting in a potentiall}' lazge pre}• population on the ' project site. Collectively, the abundance of prey and the availability of both perches and nesting sites would suggest that the study area is °being used by a variety of raptor species. During the ' course of field surveys in the study area, many active bird nests were observed including those of raptors. Breeding typically occurs from Mazch through June. Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the Migratory Treaty Act. A mitigation measure has been included for this ' potentially significant environmental impact. 5.12.32.E Impacts to the Santa Ana Wooly-star ' The Santa Ana River wooly-star, a federally endangered species, occurs in the alluvial fan scrub within the Santa Ana drainage. There will be no significant impacts to this species based upon the design features which include microtunnelling under the habitat within the drainage and setting ' the construction sites on both sides of the river in ruderal habitat above the riprap. In the absence of disturbance to the alluvial fan scrub, no significant direct impacu would occur. As mentioned above, no direct impacts to the Santa Ana wooly-staz relative to activities a-se within Area A and attributable to Sewer Option No. 3 or Water Option Nos. 2A and '?B are foreseen. However, the potential effects of construction activities can exceed construction related direct disturbances. In the case of the wooly-star, unauthorized travel between construction sites on either side of the river either by foot or vehicle, could degrade habitat quality and/or destroy ' individual plants. If this were to occur, this would be a significant environmental impact. A mitigation measure has been included for this potentially significant environmental impact. The well site north of the Santa Ana River proposed to be used as part of Water Options 2A e-as , and 2B would not occur in the City Creek floodplain. The associated pipeline could cross the creek, ' however. Any construction occurring within the City Creek floodplaln would impact alluvial fan scrub habitat and any wooly-staz individuals found there. While no wooly-staz individuals were observed during the December ?000 habitat evaluation, the potential exists for this species to exist ' within the floodplain. since sizable populations aze known from the Santa Ana River which lies approximately one mile from the well site. Any disturbance to the Santa Ana wooly-star would be considered a significant impact. However. no impacts associated with the pipeline would occur if ' the pipe is built on the existing bridge or by means of microtunnelling. As a result, a mitigation measure has been included for the pipeline construction under this option to require placement of the ' pipeline in the bridge or through microtunnelling. 5.12.32.5 Impacts to the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat ' The San Bernazdino Kangaroo Rat, a federally endangered species, can be found in alluvial ' fan scrubs in the study azea. There will be no significant impacts to this species based upon the Countr ofsan Bernardino Land tse Sen~¢es Department ~~No. 1999rUtl]J 1 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA water d Sewer Services Plan Pinal SubSeyuent EIR-June 2001 Page 314 ' ~~- I'_ Biological Resources design feature which includes microtunnellin under the habitat within the drainage and setting the ,. € construction sites on both sides of the river in mdernl habitat above the riprap. As mentioned above, no direct impacts to the San Bemardino kangaroo rat relative to B.3o activities within Area A and attributable to Sewer Option No. 3 or Water Option Nos. 2A and "?B ' aze foreseen. However, the potential effects of construction activities can exceed construction related direct disturbances. In the case of the San Bemazdino kangazoo rat unauthorized travel ' across the wash between construction sites on either side of the river by foot or by vehicle, could degrade habitat qualin• and,~or crush burrows used by this species. In addition, any night time construction lighting or high intensity security lighting could "spillover' into adjacent wash habitat ' used by the species, thereby causing detrimental changes to its nocturnal behavioral patterns, or increasing the rate of predation on this species. If this were to occur. this would be a significant environmental impact. A mitigation measure has been included for this potentially significant ' em ironmental impact. The well site north of the Santa Ana River proposed to be used as part of Water Options ZA g-3e and 2B would not occur within the City Creek floodplain. The associated pipeline could cross the creek, however. Any construction occurring within the City Creek floodplain. could degrade San Bemardino kangazoo rat habitat, adversely effect burrows, and offer a prolonged level of disturbance via equipment traffic and, potentially, nighttime lighting. These latter impacts could affect individuals away from the specific construction site. Furthermore, vibrations from vehicular traffic could disturb San Bemardino kangaroo rat individuals that exist within hundreds of feet azound the construction site. Furthermore, nighttime lighting can influence rodent foraying behavior ' and make individuals readily apparent to predators. If any of these impacts were to occur, a significant impact would result. However, no impacts associated with the pipeline would occur if the pipe is built on the existing bridge or by meazls of microtunnelling. As a result, a mitigation ' measure has been included for the pipeline construction under this option to require placement of the pipeline in the bridge or through microtunnelline. 5.12.33 Citrus Plaza Site ' No impacts would occur to biological resources associated with the development of the Citrus Plaza Project site as this site has been cleared and as such no substantial biological resources ~~,°e"e aze present. ~"'~ ' 5.12.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The analysis of cumulative impacts presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR is based on a list of related projects identified in the San Bernardino Association of Government's Congestion Management Plan jor San Bernardino County. These same related projects aze used for the analysis Couon or Sao Bemardino Land Cse Senices Department SCtL No. 1999101 V3 Gtnu Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA K'a[cr & Sewer Semces Plan Final Subsequrnt EIR-June 2001 ' Page 31 ~ ..1_ Biolo=ical Resources ' of the proposed project's ctunulative impacts and are more fully discussed in Section 4.0, Related ' Projects. Appendix E of this Final Subsequent EIR, the Traffic Validation Study, verifies that the related projects utilized in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR aze still appropriate for use as the ba,is' ' for the assessment of the proposed projects cumulative impacu. Actually, the use of the related projects list from the 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR yields a conservative analysis of potential cumulative impacts. This results since the actual background growth which has occulted in the past ' five yeazs and forecasted for the future is less than that which was previoush forecasted to occur (i.e., a greater amount of cumulative growth is assumed than has andlor is anticipated to occur). ' Most of the forecasted cumulative growl}[ would occur in azeas which would not have anv direct or indirect biological impacts on the Santa Ana River as they would not be located in , proximity to the Santa Ana River. However, some ctunulative growth may occur in azeas that would potentially impact the biological resources associated with the Santa Ana River. It is anticipated, given the widely recognized potential for biological resources within the Santa Ana ' River, that any development within proximity of the Santa Ana River would include an appropriate environmental analysis, including the identification of mitigation. This analysis, and potential ' mitigation, would reduce impacts from cumulative development on the Santa Ana River to less than significant levels. Since project (i.e., Infastructure Facilities Project) impacts aze also reduced to less than significant levels, with mitigation, it is concluded that cumulative biological impacts on the Santa Ana River would be less than significant. Even if impacts on the Santa Ana River or other biological resources in the azea occur, proposed project impacts aze fully mitigated and as such, the proposed project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project) would have a de minrmus contribution to any ' cumulative biological impacu. 5.12.5 MITIGATION MEASURES 5.12.5.1 Proposed Plan Amendments ' No mitigation measures aze required for [he proposed Plan Amendments. 5.12.5.2 Infrastructure Facilities Project CAUnn' Inieaad Change The following mitigation measure would be required for the sewer option which includes a local wastewater treatment plant (Sewer Option No. 3) and all water options. • Nesting birds. Mitigation for the taking of active nests ma} be accomplished in two ' ways. First, prior to the commencement of tree removal during the nesting season (Mazch-July), all suitable habitat shall be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of ' nesting birds b}• a qualified biologist. If any active nests aze detected, the azea shall be eat flagged and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. In addition, a biologist shall be County or Sao Bemardioo Land Lse Services Department SCR ti0. 1999101173 ' Citnss Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA w'azer d Scwer Sen~ices Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 316 1 ~.I'_ Bioloeical Resources present onsite to monitor the tree removal and grading to insure that nests are not ~' detected during the initial sun~ey. Second. as an alternative. tree removal and `tiding ~-! N could be delayed until afrer the breeding season. This would insure that no active nest; would be disturbed. N The following mitigation measures apply only to the water options which use the wells located north of the Santa .4na River (Water Option Nos. "?A and 2B) and the water option which N connects to the IVDA East Side System via California Street (Water Option No. 3C). e~sa • Pipeline installation under Water Option No. 3C shall occur via microtunnellin~ under the Santa .Ma River and setting the construction sites in ruderal habitat above the riprap. Pipeline installation under Water Optiotu ?A and _'B shall occur by the placement of the pipeline on the neazby existing roadway bridge in proximity of the well site or via microttutnelling. • Santa Ana Vb'ooly-star. Mitigation for the Santa Ana wooly-star shall be accomplished by preventing any type of access (foot or vehicle traffic) into the Santa Ana River wash sao durine construction. To ensure this. it is recommended that the construction be monitored by a biologist. Monitoring activities shall include apre-construction meeting ago to ensure the construction contractor fully understands restrictions to be placed upon construction aeeas and the staking of areas to be avoided, if necessary. Monitoring activities shall continue throughout the construction period for the water line across the a~ao wash and entail periodic visits by the biological monitor to verify the construction contractor's compliance with habitat avoidance practices. • San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. Mitigation for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat shall be accomplished by preventing any q•pe of access (foot or vehicle traffic) into the Santa a~ao .Ma River wash during construction. To ensure this. it is recommended that the construction be monitored by a biologist. Monitoring activities shall include apre- h ~'~ construction meeting to ensure the construction contractor fully' understands restrictions cna~e to be placed upon construction areas and the staking of aeeas to be avoided, if necessary. a<o Mortoring shall continue throughout the construction period for the water line across the wash and entail periodic visits by the biological monitor to verify' the construction a-0o contractor's compliance with habitat avoidance practices. In addition, night construction or high-powered security lighting shall not be permitted to spillover into the wash, so as not to disturb this species while it is foraging. e-ao M 5.12.5.3 Citrus Plaza Project site No mitigation measures are required for the Citrus Plaza Project. County ImoamG mange M C•unry of Sao Ber••rAioo Land list Services Depnrtmc•1 SCR Na 1999101127 Gmu Plea Regional Ma1V1 VDA U'azcr & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Pale 317 ~.l? Biological Resources 5.12.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With the incorporation of the mitigation measures identified above, impacts to biological resotJrces would be less than significant. M M 1 M M M M 1 Couory or5an Beroardmo Land Lsc Servces Department SCR Na 1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA W'aur& Scwer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 318 1 ' 6.O GROWTH INDUCEMENT M 1 1 1 1 ' 6.0 GROVITH II\~UCE~IE\"T Section IS126?(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires discussion of the potential growth inducing impacts of proposed projects including, "[lte ways in which the proposed project could ' foster economic or population erowth, or the construction of additional housing either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this aze projects which would remove obstacles to population growth (i.e., a major expansion of a waste water treatment plant might, for example, allow more construction in service azeas), increases in population which may tax existine community service facilities that could cause significant environmental effects, and other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulativeh•." ' 6.1 Proposed Plan Amendments The proposed plan amendments would adopt County General Plan amendments and associated changes to the County Development Code and the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow the County to approve development in unincorporated IVDA Areas A and I utilizing sewer and water service from providers other than the City of Redlands. Under the current East Valley Loamy Comdor Specific Plan, the same level of development in the IVDA areas was planned for, but the Gage ability of the County to approve this same development with alternative sewer and water providers was not made clear. The proposed amendments include revisions intended to increase the options ' for the provision of water and wastewater services to the IVDA azea. The proposed plan amendments would not result in a substantial increase or change in the geogrnphical area subject to these amendments, general development standards such as those relating to the height or bulk of ' future development, or a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I. As such, the potential growth inducing impacts of the proposed plan amendments for the unincorporated areas of IVDA Areas A and I are limited to those relating to those associated with increasing the options for the provision of water and wastewater services. ' Increasing the options for the delivery of water and wastewater services has the potentia? to be growth inducing as development would be able to utilize the excess capacity available from a number of service providers rather than be limited to the capacity constraints of a single service provider. However, this impact is concluded to be less than significant because even though potential constraints on growth aze eased via the broadening of available options, development will ' ultimately be constrained by the collective capacity of the service systems. ' Couery of Sao Bereerdieo Laod Cse Sen~ices Dcpanmeol sCFL :~a 1999101123 Claus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnt EIR-Jurc 2001 ' Page 319 6.0 Grossth Inducement , 6.2 Infrastructure Facilities , Implementation of the revised project (i.e., Infrastructure Facilities Project) would provide gay needed water and sewer services to IVDA Areas A and I. As discussed in the unincorporated Areas u,a~-~ A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options Report and Sections 5.7.1 and 5.7.3 of this Final Subsequent EIR, Areas A and I currently have inadequate water and sewer services."= The revised , project (i.e.. Infrastructtue Facilities Project) would not provide water supph• or sewer services to Areas A and I beyond the projected demands of those azeas as estimated by the aforementioned , report as well as within the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan Final Em•ironmental Impact Report."' Further consultation with Counro agencies have concluded that since the water supph and wastewater treatment facilities aze designed and sized only to ' accommodate the demands imposed by development within IVDA Area A, including the Citrus Plaza project site, the potential growth inducing effects of the proposed facilities would not extend , beyond IVDA Area A. Therefore, the implementation of any of the proposed water supply and sewer services options would not directly result in growth inducing impacts. Similaz to the conclusion presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR no mitigation meastJres would be necessary because no significant growth inducing impacts would occur as a result of the implementation of the proposed project."' , 6.3 Citrus Plaza Site The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR concluded that development of Citrus Plaza would result in the veneration of up to 2,738 jobs that would indirectlc generate up to 318 new ' households. These new households would, thus, generate up to approximately 111 students. The ntunber of new students would not result in a significant impact because they could be , accommodated at existing facilities and/or school impact fees would provide morries to provide needed facilities. However, the previous analysis concluded that, due to current overcrowded conditions within the Redlands unified School District, cumulative impacts would be significant , unless mitigated. According to the previous analysis, cturent school impact fees would not be sufficient to develop new- school facilities that would be needed as a result of commercial development.15 ' r'' County of San Bernardino, /eland t alley Development .4genc}', Unincorporated .-Yeas A and I N'ater Supply and Sewerage Options, August 1999, p. a. 1J3 Inland 6'alleV Developmem AgencT, Inland {"alley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan Final Err ironmental ' Impact Report, June 1990. r" San Bernardino Counts' Planning Department, Draft E!R Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 9408208x, September 1996, p. 6.1-. rrs San Bernardino County Planning Department, Draft Environmental Impact Report Citrus Plea Regional A1all, State ' Clearinghouse h'o. 94082084, September 1996, p. 6-1 Couory~ of Saa Bvoard~no Land Use Sen~ins Department SCR \a 1999101121 ' Citnu Plea Reziorul MaIVIVDA Water B Sewer Scmces Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Pave 320 ' 6.0 Grouch inducement I- The revised Citrus Plaza Project would, similazly, result in the same number of iob j _:' _, opportunities, households, and students in the project vicinity. The types of jobs that would be created (i.e., retail) would be expected to be filled primarily by current area residents. However. the new employment opporttutities may cause some people to relocate to the area to be nearer to [heir jobs, thereby, creating some minor demand for additional housing in the area. Development of a relatively small amount of additional housing would be consistent with the goals of the IVDA Redevelopment Plan and the San Bernardino County General Plan update. Furthermore, as stated ' in Section ~.l 1, Socioeconomics, of this Final Subsequent EIR the in-migration of new employee- related households that may occur would have a de minimtts impact on the jobs/housing balance in comparison to the number of new employment oppomrnities that the Citrus Plaza development ' would generate. When the revised project and related projects aze analyzed together. they would contribute towazd the attainment of the countywide jobs/housing goal of l? jobs per dwelling unit. Although student enrollment would increase, development impact fees imposed by the local school ' districts pursuant to the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 (Senate Bill ~0) would compensate school districts for student enrollment impacts that result from development projects."` ' Therefore, the development of the Citrus Plaza site would not result in additional ~routh inducing impacts beyond those addressed in the previous analyses, such as the EIR prepazed for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, and the 199 EIR prepazed for the January 1996 approval of the Citrus Plaza site development. 1 ° Government Code Section 6996. ' Couory of Sao Bcraardioo Laod list Servi[es Department SCH. tia 1999101127 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIN VDA W stet d Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequern EIR- June 2001 Page 32I r ~ 1 1 1 ' 7.O ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTIONS ,. r 7.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION '_ 7.1 CEQA REQUIRE!~IENTS ' As required b}' the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 1~t?6.6 (a), an EIR shall describe a range of reasonable altematives to the project, or to the location of the project. which would feasibly ' attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider even conceivable altemative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable ' range of potentially feasible altematives that will foster informed decision-malting and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider altematives wfiich aze infeasible. The Lead Agency is responsible for selecting a range of project altematives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasotting for selecting those altematives. There is no explicit rule governing the nature or scope of the altematives to be discussed other than the tole of reason. Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project ' may have on the em•ironrtient, the discussion of altematives shall focus on altematives to the project or its location which aze capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these altemative would impede to some degree the attainment of the basic project objectives. or would be more costly. 7.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED As required b}' the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 1~L6.6 (c). an EIR should identify any altematives that were considered b}' the Lead Agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underh'ing the Lead Agency's determination. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate altematives from detailed consideration in an E[R are: (1) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives; (2) infeasibility; or (3) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts. ' 73 ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION The altematives analysis for the project considers a reasonable range of alternatives for each of the three project components. As such, separate altematives analyses have been developed for the proposed plan amendments, the proposed infrastructure options and the Citrus PIa7a project. As Couop~ or San Bermrdiao Land Gse Services Depanmeo[ SCR ~0 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA W~a[er& Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequen[ EIR-Jame 2001 Page 322 7-0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action separate analyses aze provided, the discussion of the altematives considered but rejected is pmvided , within the broader analysis discussion of altematives for each of the project's three components- 73.1 Proposed Plan Amendments During the cotuse of identifying potential altematives to the proposed plan amendments it , was concluded that the nature of the amendments (i.e.. increasing the options of providing infrastructtue facilities that include 4 different sewer options and t4 different water options to the ,~",,;;~ unincorporated aeeas within IVDA areas A and I) aze such that a standazd analysis of altematives cean9t would not be applicable. This conclusion was reached because the provision of infrastructtue facilities to the identified areas could only occur under the cturent regulatory environment or the , broadening of possibilities as reflected in the current project. As such, the only feasible altemative to the proposed plan amendments is the continuation of cturent regulatory practices. As this ' determination is consistent with the CEQA Guidelines definition of the No Project altemative, the only reasonable altemative to the proposed plan amendments would be the No Project Alternative. Under the No Project Alternative, no change in policies would occlu and as such, water and sewer , service would continue to be provided under existing conditions. Impacts relating to the delivery of water and sewer service would be less than significant. Notwithstanding. implementation of the No Project .Alternative would not meet the basic objectives of the project which include identifying options which meet the water and sewer demands , for development, within the portions of the IVDA project azea within unincorporated San Bernardino County that aze either unserved or deemed by the County of San Bemazdino as unnerved. and to supply water and sewer service to these unincorpornted areas by the County of San Bemazdino or another agency. Furthermore. as implementation of the proposed plan amendments do not result in any significant impacts, the No Project Alternative also does not create any ' advantage from an em irorvnental perspective as it would not substantially lessen a significant effect of the project. As the No Project Alternative is the onl}' altemative anahzed. it is also concluded to be the environmentally superior altemative. , 7.3.7. Infrastructure Facilities The analysis of infrastructure facilities preserved in Section ~.0 (Environmental Impacts and r Mitigation Meastues) included a total of 14 different options for the delivery of water service and four options for the delivery of sewer service. As such, a total of 18 different water and sewer ,n„~~ service options aze analyzed in this Subsequent EIR. In addition to these sources, the Citrus Plaza c"a"m project may receive water and sewer service from the City of Redlands. The certified 1995 Citrus ' Plaza Final EIR fully analyzed the em~irotrmental effects of this option for obtaining water and sewer service and as such, no further environmental analysis of this particulaz option is required. The standazd CEQA practice is to analyze a project which consists of a single proposal and then analyze options to that proposal in the context of an altematives analysis. In preparing an altematives analysis, CEQA requires that altematives be analyzed at a level of detail not as great as , Couon~ of San Bervardivo Laod Cse Senices Departmtot SCFL ~o. 1999101123 Civet Plara Reg~wal Mall/IVDA water & Sewer Servitcs Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 , Page 323 ' 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action the proposed project, but at a level of detail that will foster informed decision-malting and public participation. The analysis provided in Section ~.0 more than satisfies all CEQA requirements with regard to an altematives analysis since it evaluated 1 q different water optiotts and fora sewer options and ~^v inma:r. that all 18 of these options were analyzed at an equal level of detail. Furthermore, the 18 water and sewer options analyzed in this Final Subsequent EIR were developed as a result of an engineering I study that looked at an even greater number of altematives and concluded that the options included within this document represent more than a reasonable ranee of altematives for the delivery of water and sewer service. As such, it is concluded that the analysis of the proposed water and sewer ' options provided in Section ~.0 is sufficient and no further discussion of altematives is required, with the exception of a No Project Alternative. An analysis of the No Project Altemative is ' provided in the following paragraph. tinder the No Project Altemative, the provision of water and sewer service would continue ' to be provided under existing conditions. Impacts relating to the delicerv of water and sewer service would be less than sierrificant. ' Notwithstanding, implementation of the No Project :Utemative would not meet the basic objectives of the Infiastructure Facilities Project which include identifying options which meet the ,m "„~" water and sewer demands for development, within the portions of the IVDA project area within unincorporated San Bemazdino County that aze either unserved or deemed by the County of San Bemazdino as unserved, and to supply water and sewer service to these unincorporated azeas by the County of San Bemazdino of another agency. Furthermore, as implementation of the proposed infrastructure options, with the incorporation of proposed mitieation measures, do not result in any significant impacts, the No Project Altemative also does not create any advantage from an envirorunental perspective as it would not substantially lessen a significant effect of the project. 7.3.3 Citrus Plaza Site Several altematives for the Citrus Plaza Project were analyzed in the 199 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and the Citrus Plaza Supplemental EIR. Some of these previously considered altematives aze no longer being coruidered. These rejected altematives include the following: Retention of Existing Pazcel Configuration; Reduced-Intensity Development; Revised Phasing Plan; Water Supply Delivery Option; Wastewater Supply Delivery Option; and Altemative Sites. Retention of Existing Pazcel Configtuation and Revised Phasing Plan aze rejected as altematives because they aze considered infeasible. The Supplement to the Final Project EIR analyzed areduced-intensity development option as an altemative for the Citrus Plaza site. This ~„nh option is not evaluated as an altemative to the proposed project. In addition, the Supplement to the '~°,~ County of Sao Bernardino land l~se Senices Depanmeot SCK!Sv 19991011D Cimu Plaza Regional Ma1VIVDA Water & Seller Services Plan Final subsequent EIR-Jwie 200t ' Page 324 7,0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action Final EIR analyzed a water supply delivery option and a wastewater supplti~ delivery option a, altematives to the proposed project. These options are included as part of the current project "'a'°~ description, included ~+-ithin Section 3.0 of this document (e.g.. Sewer Options '?A and '_B and Water Supply Options 4A, 6A, 6A and 7A). Therefore, these options are not evaluated as altematives to the proposed project. ' Pttrstlant to Section 16126.60(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines. if the lead agency concludes that no feasible alternative locations exist, it must disclose the reasons for this conclusion. ' and should include the reasons in the EIR Alternative site locations are considered infeasible due to economic viabilin~ issues, unavailable infrastructure, and the project proponent would not be able to , reasonably acquire alternative sites. In addition, alternative sites would not meet the objectives of the Citrus Plaza project. The 1996 Citttls Plaza EIR listed the project objectives for development of the Citrus Plaza mall. Although those objectives aze different than the objectives for the project described in this Final Subsequent EIR for ease of reference the 1996 Citrus Plaza EIR objectives ~~~~"e , Cna~ge are listed below: • To create a regional commercial development incorporating a mix of retail, office and , service-oriented land uses. ' • To equitably' contribute to the provision of an azeawide circulation system to conveniently serve the needs of the general public while not over-btudening the local transportation system of the County of San Bernardino or the Ciry of Redlands. Emphasis will be placed upon pedestrian and circulation facilities within and adjacent to the project site to promote ease of access and traffic com~enience. To ensure compatibility with the surrounding land uses through the utilization of comprehensive land planning and special design features including landscaping, infrastructure, roads and architecture. • To equitably contribute to the expansion and~or extension of adequate public services ' and utilities in order to timely service the needs of the development while not burdening the delivery of these services and utilities. , To preserve and enhance the visual chazacteristics of the propertq, and to provide attractive view corridors from the freeway edges. ' • To create a wide variety of new employment opportunities within the region. , • To promote high quality development by creating an identifiable communin• chazacter, and adopting development standards and guidelines to ensure aesthetically pleasing design and maximum land use compatibility. County of San Btrmrdi•o L••d Lx Srrvices Dep•rtmeot SCR No. 199910117) Gtrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA blazer & Serer Servrces Plan Rnal Subsequent EIR-June ZOtll Page 325 ' 7.0 Alternatives to tnz Proposzd Acuon • To establish a design theme which unifies the project azea and provides a recognizable communit}' character in both architecture and landscaping. ' Pursuant to Section 1~L6.6(f) of the State CEQA Guidelines. the ranee of altematives required in an EIR is governed by a rule of reason that requires the EIR to set forth only those altematives necessan~ to permit a reasoned choice. The altematives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. Of those altematives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the Lead Agent}' determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project. The range of feasible altematives shall be selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaztingful public participation and informed decision- making. Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of altematives are site suitabilin~. economic viability, avallabiliq~ of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the altemative site. ' Several altematives were analyzed in the previous enivironmental documentation for the proposed project. Using these guidelines, the following criteria were used to select the project altematives for evaluation in this document: (1) be able to reduce at least one significant em'irorunental effect associated with the proposed project; (2) meet or partially meet the project objectives; and (3) be feasible. The following altematives were discussed in the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall EIR. That discussion is incorporated by reference. Accordingl}', the altematives considered in the previous environmental documentation for the proposed project, that are evaluated in this doctument include the following: No Project Altemative; and Development of an Altemative Land Use, which would include either a Corporate HeadgtJarters'Office Development, or a Stadium/AmphitheaterCornplex. ' 7.3.3.1 do Project Alternative 7.3.3.1.1 Description Pursuant to Section 1~L6.6(e)(I) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the specific altemative of No Project shall also be evaluated along with its impact. The purpose of describing and evaluating a No Project altemative is to allow decisionmakers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed Citrus Plaza project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. Under the No Project Altemative, the Citrus Plaza regional mall would not be developed. ~^x The No Project Altemative assttmes that no discretionary actions would occur within the Citrus Plaza project area wfiich are subject to CEQA review. Under this altemative, the project area is assumed to be retained in its existing condition. The Citrus Plaza project area has historically been used for agJculture and is currently a mixture of agriculture, vacant land, a few residences, a Cou•p~ of Sao Beruardi•o Land Lse Servites Department SCR ha 1999101123 Gtnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA blazer 8 Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-loot 2001 Page 326 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action church school and a monastery. Alternatively, should development occur, only those mirtistenai , activities allowable under existing land use policies would be anticipated. 7.3.3.1.2 Land Use , The No Project Alternative would result in no impacu to land use. The proposed Citrus az""~ Plaza project would result in a significant unavoidable adverse impact to land use. c"ant 7.3.3.1.3 Earth Resources ' The No Project Alternative would result in no impacts to earth resotuces. The Citrus Plaza proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to earth resottrces. after the incorporation of mitigation measures. , 7.3.3.1.4 Hydrology/Water Quality The No Project Alternative would result in no impacts to hydrology/water quality. The , proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacts to hydrology/water , quality, after the incorporation of mitigation measures. 7.3.3.1.5 Transportation/Circulation , The No Project Alternative would result in no impacts to transportation/circulation. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in a siertificant tmavoidable adverse impact to transportation/circulation. 7.3.3.1.6 Air Quality , The No Project Alternative would result in no impacts to air quality. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in a significant unavoidable adverse impacts to air quality. 7.3.3.1.7 Noise , The No Project Altetative would result in no noise impacts, although cumulative impacu ' would still be significant. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in a significant ctmulative unavoidable adverse noise impact. , Couory of Sau Bernardino Laud Use Stn'ites Department SCti Va 1999101123 Gnus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Waterd Sewer Sem«s Plan Final Subsequrnt ElR-June 2001 ' Page 327 ' 7.0 Altematis~es to the Proposed Action 7.3.3.1.8 Public Services and Utilities The No Project Alternative would result in no public sen ice and utilities impacu. The ro sed Citrl>_s Plaza roect would result in less than si ruficant im acts to ublic services and `'' i P Po P J € P P ir. a•e~ utilities, after the incorporation of mitigation measures. c"a~'- 7.3.3.1.9 Human Health ` The No Project Altemative would result in no impacu to human health. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacu to human health, after the incorporation of mitigation meastues. 7.3.3.1.10 Aesthetics The No Project Altemative would result in no impacts to aesthetics. The proposed Citrus ' Plaza project would result in less than significant impacu to aesthetics. after the incorporation of mitigation measures. ' 7.3.3.1.11 Cultural Resources The No Project Altemative would result in no impacts to culttral resources. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources, after the incorporation of mitigation meastues. 7.3.3.1.12 Socioeconomics The No Project Altemative would result in no impacu to socioeconomics. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacu to socioeconomics. 7.3.3.1.13 Biological Resources The No Project Altemative would result in no impacts to biological resources. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacts to biological resources, after the incorporation of mitigation measures. 7.3.3.1.14 Growth Inducement The No Project Altemative would not result in a growth inducing impact. The proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacu to growth inducement. Couon of San Bernardino Laod Gse Smices Department SCH. Nn 199910117) Cim~s Plaza Re__ional MaIVI VDA W ater d Sewcr Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 328 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 733.2 Development of an Alternative Land Oise -Corporate Headquarters/Office ' Development This Final Subsequent EIR anal}'zes the proposed project which consists of the following: ' ~~^ti (1) General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments related to land use, water and ~^,~,a~ec Dance wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Redevelopment Project Area; (2) Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for an unsen'ed portion of the IVDA Area; and (3) revisions to the Citrru Plaza Regional Mall Project. Under Development of an Altemative Land Use. the Code Amendments and Water and R'astewater Facilities Plan ~+ould still occur; however, instead of developing a regional shopping mall on the Citrus Plaza site. a corporate headquartersloffice development or stadiumiamphitheater would be developed. The potential , environmental impacts associated with the implementation of these two alternatives are discussed below. 7.3.3.2.1 Description For the Corporate Headquartets/Office Development Altemative, a total of_'?68.60~ squaze , feet of office-related use would be developed on the 13~y acre site under this alternative. This density represents a square foot increase of approximately X18.600 square feet over the proposed h ~"~" , Citrus Plaza project representing an increase in square footage of approximatey' 23 percent. Since it appears unlikely that a single corporate headquarters would encompass the entire , 12~t acre site, it is more reasonable to assume that the Citrus Plaza project area would be master , planned for office uses. This action would necessitate consolidation of all existing lot boundaries and resubdivision to create numerous developable parcels. For example, the entire Citrus Plaza project could be divided into four separate quadrants through the construction of an internal , roadway system bisecting the site in both anorth-south and east-west orientation. Each of the four resulting properties could then be fiuther subdivided into a variety of smaller lot sizes to accommodate office buildinss of different design and size. Entn' monuments would be provided at ' all internal intersections and each site would contain both separate ground-mounted and wall- mounted signage. Site clearance and development would occur as a single event and properties would be randomly mazketed within the overall Citrus Plaza project site. Full buildout would occru , within the time frame anticipated for the proposed Citrus Plaza project. Since the majority of the Citrus Plaza project site is not covered with impervious surfaces ' pending the subsequent development of pazcel-specific properties, it is assumed that full master planned infrastructtue improvements can be deferred or phased. Similarly, since Citrus Plaza project-specific traffic impacts will not materialize until later office development projects become operational, traffic mitigation improvemenu and costs can be phased throughout the development cycle. Couory of Sao Beraardmo land Use Services Departmrnt SCR Nn 1999101121 Cirrus Plaza Regional MaINVDA Wazerd Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequrnt ElR-June 2001 Page 329 7.0 Alterna[ives to thz Proposed Action t 7.3.3.2.2 Land Use The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would convert the Cittmis Plaza site to an wban setting containing an internal grid roadway system and landscaped pazkwa} mediums. Although Citrus Plaza project impacts upon land use would be reduced to less than 2;z ' significant levels with implementation of mitigation measwes. the loss of existing agricultural `"~"E resowces within the East Valley Corridor azea, resulting from the implementation of the East Valley ,, Corridor Specific Plan, would continue to produce a significant unavoidable adverse land use impact. Regazding land use consistency, a Corporate Headquarters/Office Development would be more consistent with existing industrial pazk uses, located along Lugonia Avenue, than the proposed Citrus Plaza shopping mall. Therefore, in relation to land use consistency, the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would result in a lesser impact than the proposed Citrus Plaza project. ' 7.3.3.2.3 Earth Resources ' The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would result in less than significant impacts to earth resowces (e.g., seismic groundshaking, ground rupture, and liquefaction), after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Environmental impacts for the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would be similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.2.4 Hydrology/Water Quality The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would result in less than significant impacts to hydrology/water quality (e.g., erosion and sedimentation, flooding, and surface and groundwater quality) afrer the incorporation of mitigation measwes. Environmental impacts for the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.2.5 Transportation/Circulation ,- Citrus Plaza-related and cumulative impacts upon key intersections and street segments can be mitigated below a level deemed to be significant; however, the regional freeway system will experience congestion both with and without this alternative. Based upon regional impacts anticipated on the I-]0 Freeway, futwe level of service (LOS) conditions have been determined to I be significant. 1 Couoly of San Bernardino Laod Use Services Dtpartmenl SCH. Na 1999101121 Ciaus Plaza Regional MaIVI VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Pale 330 t 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action The Corporate HeadgtJarters/Office Development Altemative would result in a greater , impact to the local transportation/circulation system, than the proposed Citrus Plaza project, dtuing w-^~ I the n.M. and P.IN. peak hotus, primazily resulting form increased worker commuting trips. c-~,E' 7.3.3.2.6 Air Quality Based upon the methodology and threshold standazds established b}' the South Coast Air Quality Manasement District (SCAQMD). air emissions during construction will exceed established threshold values for reactive organic compounds (ROC), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulates (PMio). Similazly, based primarily on Citrus Plaza-related traffic, anticipated air emissions during the operation of Citrus Plaza will exceed standazds for cazbon monoxide (CO), ROC, and NOx and thus would be a significant impact. Environmental im acts for the Co rate Head darters/Office P ~ q Development Altemative would be similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. ' 7.3.3.2.7 Noise Citrus Plaza noise impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant after the incorporation of mitigation measures. However, the proposed Citrus Plaza project will ' incrementally contribute to increased noise levels within the East Valley area of San Bernazdino County. As a result, cumulative noise impacts will remain significant. Environmental impacts for the Corporate HeadgtJarters/Office Development Alternative would be similaz to the proposed ' Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.2.8 Public Services and Utilities ' The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would result in less than ' significant impacts to public services and utilities (e.g.. water consumption, sewage generation, solid waste generation, fire and police sen•ices) after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Environmental impacts for the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Altemative would be , similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.2.9 Human Health The Corporate Headquazters/Office Development Altemative would result in less than , significant impacts to htunan health after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Environmental impacts for the Corporate HeadgtJartels/Office Development Altemative would be similaz to the proposed CItrILS Plaza project. County or Sao Bernardino Land Ux Services Department SCFL No. 1999101123 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA water85ewer Services Plan Fuul Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 331 7.0 Altema[ives to the Proposed Ac[ion t 7.3.3.2.10 Aesthetics Although both the Corporate Headquarters~Office Development Altemati~e and the proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in non-residential uses, the configuration of on-site ; development and the nature of on-site activities would be considerably different. In lieu of an ""Ce integrated and physically linked development plan. each of the resulting uses would be distinct and physically isolated from one another. Building forms. mass and exterior elevations would all be expected to differ substantially. As corporate headquarter offices, it can be assumed that buildings would be oriented toward the front of [he lot (e.g., to allow for wall-mounted signase) and front landscaping (e.g., including berming to screen pazking areas) would be emphasized. The Corporate HeadglJarters/Office Development Alternative and the proposed Citrus Plaza project would result in less than significant impacts to aesthetics, after the incorporation of mitigation measures. 7.3.3.2.11 Cultural Resources ' The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Envirorunental impacts for the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Alternative would be ' similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. ' 7.3.3.2.12 Socioeconomics The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to socioeconomics. Environmental impacts for the Corporate Headquarters/ Office Development Alternative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. Both the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Alternative and the proposed Citrus Plaza project would provide a large n[unber of new jobs in the project area. 7.3.3.2.13 Biological Resources The Corporate Headgtlarters/Office Development Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to biological resources after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Environmental impacts for the Corporate Headgtlarters/Office Development Alternative would be similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.2.14 Growth Inducement The Corpornte Headgtlarters/Office Development Alternative would result in less than significant growth inducing impacts. Both the Corpornte Headquarters/Office Development Alternative and the proposed Citrus Plaza project would allow for the development of water and County' of Sao Bernardino Laod Cse Services Department SCH. Na 1999101121 Citnu Plana Regional Ma1VIVDA W'azer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Pale 332 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed .Action , sewer infrastructure in an azea of unincorporated San Bemazdino County that is projected to have , substantial futtue urban growth. The Corporate Headquarters/Office Development Alternative would result in a greater ~~~;, ' impact to growth inducement than the proposed Citrus Plaza project. Professional positions aze ;~,,:~,~ ofren highly skilled, specialized, and well-compensated, requiring a degree of education and G ~19e proficiency which may not be readily available with the local labor pool. This alternative could potentially require the in-migration of white collar professionals from outside the Citrus Plaza project area. 7.3.3.3 Development of an Alternative Land Use-Stadium/Amphitheater 7.3.3.3.1 Description ' A number of communities aze examining or have recently approved smaller stadium complexes designed to accotmodate Class A California League or similaz level professional sports teams. For example: (1) in 1993, the City of Lake Elsinore approved a 6,000-seat baseball stadium, with related retail uses and pazking; (2) in May 1995, the City of San Bemazdino approved a 5,000 ' seat baseball stadium: and (3) the City of Riverside and the University of California, Riverside jointly prepazed a mazket feasibility study fora 7.500 to L'.000 seat venue for hockey, concerts and ice shows. Additionally. a booster group called Inland Empire Baseball is exploring the feasibility ' of developing a 40,000 to 50,000 seat stadium for a professional baseball team to be located in either Riverside or San Bemazdino County. For the Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative. it is assumed that a lazger single-sport stadium with seating capacity of approximately 45,000 seats could be developed on the Citrus Plaza site. To accommodate a 45.000 seat stadium, it is estimated that a stadium complex would require an azea of between 1-'0 and ?00 acres and require access and visibility from a minimum of tw•o freeways. The 135= acre Citrus Plaza site meets these minimum siting criteria. Although no design plans presently exist, the Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would consist of two major design elements. The first of these elements would be the staditJm itself. Typically, the stadilJm would be constructed in the center of the Citrus Plaza project site and require ~,,,,ry an azea of approximately 20 acres. Sturounding the facility, the remainder of the Citrus Plaza site~,~ ' would be allocated to pazking and internal access. Since no formal pazking standazds now exist for this land tlse, it is assumed that one pazking space would be required for every three to four fixed seats, with additional pazkirlg set-aside for employees. Assuming a 45,000 se;,t capacity, approximately 11,'_50 to 15,000 parking spaces would be required to accommodate the proposed use. Couun of Sao Beroardioo Laod Bsc Scrvica Dcpartmeat SCP.?~a 1999[01123 Citrus Plau Regional MaIVIVDA W'azerd Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequen[EIR-June 2001 , Paee 333 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed .Action 7.3.3.3.2 Land Use Although CIILILS Plaza project impacts upon land use would be reduced to less than~o-: significant levels with implementation of mitigation measures, the loss of existine agricultural Jar_e resources within the East Valley Corridor azea, resulting from the implementation of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, would continue to produce a significant unavoidable adverse land use impact. Em~ironmental impacts for the Stadium/Amphitheater Alterative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.3 Earth Resources The Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to earth resources (e.g., seismic groundshaking. ground rupture, and liquefaction). after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Em•ironmental impacts for the Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would be similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.4 Hydrology/Water Quatity The Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to hydrology/water quality (e.g.. erosion and sedimentation, flooding, and surface and groundwater quality) after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Environmental impacts for the Stadium/ Amphitheater Alternative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. a '7.3.3.3.5 Transportation/Circulation Citrus Plaza and cumulative impacts upon key intersections and street segments can be mitigated below a level deemed to be sierlificant: however, the regional freeway system will experience congestion both with and without this alternative. Based upon regional impacts anticipated on the I-10 Freeway, future level of service (LOS) conditions have been determined to be significant. Environmental impacts for the Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.6 Air Quality Based upon the methodology and threshold standazds established by the South Coast Air 1 Quality Management District (SCAQMD), air emissions during construction will exceed established threshold values for reactive organic compounds (ROC), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulates (PMIO). Similazly, based primarily on Citrus Plaza-related traffic, anticipated air emissions during the operation of Citrus Plaza will exceed standazds for cazbon monoxide (CO), ROC and NOx and thus would be a significant impact. The Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would result in less impacts to air quality than the proposed Citrus Plaza project. For the proposed Citrus Plaza project, Couon' or San Bernardino Land Cse Strvices Department SCFL Na 1999101123 Cimu Plaza Regional h1aIVIVDA Water 3 SeNer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 334 . 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action air quality emissions would occtu on a daily basis. For the Stadium/Amphitheater Altemative. air ~ quality emissions would occur less frequently. only when there are sporting events and;'or concerts. ='a" 7.3.3.3.7 Noise ~ Citrus Plaza noise impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant after the t incorporation of mitigation measures. However, the proposed Citrus Plaza project will incrementally contribute to increased noise levels within the East Valle}• area of San Bernardino ' County. As a result, cumulative noise impacts will remain significant. In comparison to the proposed Citrus Plaza project, the Stadium/Amphitheater Altemative would result in greater nighttime noise impacts to sensitive uses than the proposed Citrus Plaza project. due to noise generation from the sporting events and/or concerts held at night in the outdoor stadium. 7.3.3.3.8 Public Services and Utilities The Stadium/.4mphitheater Altemative would result in less than significant impacts to public services and utilities (e.g., water consumption, sewage generation. solid waste generation, fire and police services) after the incorporation of mitigation measures. Em•ironmental impacts for the , Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would be similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.9 Human Health The StadiumiAmphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to htunan health after the incorporntion of mitigation measures. Em•ironmental impacts for the Stadium/Amphitheater Altemative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.10 Aesthetics The Stadium;'Amphitheater Altemative would introduce two predominate visual elements onto the Citrus Plaza project site. A massive staditun will create a focus node and potentially appear disharmonious with other small-scale improvements which now exist in the Citrus Plaza project area. In addition, a substantial portion of the Citrus Plaza site will be allocated for parking tLSe, creating a potentially monotonotu design element devoid of visual character. It is assumed that the introduction of landscape feattues, such as a perimeter tree program and internal parking lot landscaping would minimize these impacts. The Staditun/Amphitheater Altemative would require the introduction of a night lighting system designed to rue direct distribution fltwdlights aimed at the playing surface. Since outdoor lighting is generally visible at distances beyond the boundaries of the facility, careful consideration must be given to the spillover of light on neighboring properties and to light added to the sky glow County of San Bernardino Laod Csc Services Dcpanment SCR Ka 1999101123 Cimis Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA w'aterd Sewer Servu:es Plan Final Subsequent ElR-Jwe 2001 Page 335 7.0 AI[ernatives to [he Proposed Action t effect. Unless effectively mitigated, the introduction of night lighting has the potential to result in excessive glaze or light spillage onto adjacent land uses and roadways above acceptable standards. The Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would result in less than sigttificant impacts to aesthetics. after the incorporntion of mitigation measures. In comparison to the proposed Citrus ~~^'~ o-i aaiec Plaza project, the Stadittm/Amphitheater Alternative would result in greater aesthetic impacts due to G~ the use of nighttime artificial lighting. 7.3.3.3.11 Cultural Resources The StadiumiAmphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources afrer the incorporation of mitigation measures. Em~ironmental impacts for the Stadium/Amphftheater Alternative would be similaz to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.12 Socioeconomics The Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to socioeconomics. Environmental impacts for the Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.13 Biological Resources The Stadium/Amphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to biological resources, afrer the incorporation of mitigation measures. Em~irotunental impacu for the Stadium~Amphitheater Alternative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 7.3.3.3.14 Growth Inducement ' The Stadium/.4mphitheater Alternative would result in less than significant impacts to growth inducement. Em~ironmental impacts for the Stadittm/Amphitheater .4ltemative would be similar to the proposed Citrus Plaza project. 1 73.3.4 Comparison A matrix comparing the significant environmental effects of the proposed Citrus Plaza L project and the alternatives to the proposed Citrus Plaza project is provided starting afrer the next page. This comparison results from incorporating by reference the comparison of the 199 Citrus Plaza project and the alternatives to that project, and not to the project analyzed in this Final Subsequent EIR. Couon of San Bernardino Land Csc Services Department SCH. ha 199910Ir2i Citnu Plaza Regional Ma1Vl VDA Water B Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 Page 336 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed .fiction 7.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative The environmentally superior atemative of all altematives considered would be the No ' Project Alternative. Pursuant to Section 1~126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines, if the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project alternative, the EIR shall also identif}• an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The analysis from Section 7.3-1. and the conclusions included in Table 7-1 support the conclusion that the Stadium!Amphitheater Altemative is environmentally superior to the Corporate Headquarters/Office Development , Alternative. This conclusion was reached due to the relative infrequency of use of the Staditun/Amphitheater Altemative. j Conory of San Beroardmo laud tse Servaes Depanmeot SCR tio.1999101173 Citrus Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA W'a[er & Sewer Serves Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 ' Page 337 7.0 AltemativestotheProposed.4c[ion Table 7-1 i~ ENVIRONMENTAL COMPARISON OF CITRUS PLAZA PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES w" ?anec „ra7-e Citra$ Environmental Playa No Corporate Headquarters/ Stadium/ Issue Project Project Office Development Amphitheater Land Use Significant No Sigtificant Impact: less impact than Significant Impact Impact vnpact Proposed Project -consistency with existing industrial park on Lugonia Avenue Earth Resources Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant Significant impact Hydrology% Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant WaterQualin Significant impact Transportation' Significant No Significant Impact; greater impact Siortificant Impact Circulation Impact impact than Proposed Project-greater impact to local transportation system during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. associated with worker commuting trips Air Quality Significant No Significant Impact Significant Impact: less impact Impact impact than Proposed Project-emissions would occur inGequently, only when there are sporting events and/or concerts Noise Significant No Significant Cumulative Impact Significant Cumulative Impact; Cumulative impact Beater impact than Proposed Impact Project - niehttime noise from sporting events and/or concerts Public Services Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant and Utilities Significant impact Human Health Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant Significant impact Aesthetics Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant; greater Significant impact impact than Proposed Project- nighttime artificial lighting for baseball games and concerts Cultural Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant Resources Significant impact Sceiceconomics Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant Significant impact Biological Less Than No Less Than Significant Less Than Significant Resources Significant impact County of San Btroardioo Land Ust Strvices Department SCR Nu 1999101I2i Citnu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA wazcr & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR -June 2001 ' Page 338 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action Table 7-I (Continued) ENVQ2ONMEIVTAL COMPARISON OF CITRUS PLAZA PROJECT AIVD ALTERNATIVES .,o,rc , n~catec Citrus Trance Environmental Plaza No Corporate Headquarters/ Stadium/ Issue Project Project ORceDevelopment Amphitheater Growth Less Than No Less Than Significant: greater Less Than Sigtificant Inducement Significant Impact impact than Proposed Project- available local labor pool may not be able to provide enough highly specialized white-collar professionals. thereby potentially requtrine the in-migration of employees from ouuide the project area E Couuq of Sao Bernardino Laod Gse Services Department SCFL Nw 1999101173 Gmu Plea Regional MaIVIVDA WazerBSewer Servitts Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 ' Page 339 r ' •' •,. H.O SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS i 8.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS I:1iPLEbIENTED 8.1 Proposed Plan Amendments Section 5.0 (Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) included herein. concludes that all environmental impacts aze less than significant after the incorporation of mitigation measures, and that the level of impact is such for many issues as to not require mitigation at all. 8.2 Infrastructure Facilities Section 5.0 (Em~ironmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) included herein, concludes that all enivironmental impacts, with the exception of air quality (as described below). aze less than significant after the incorporation of mitigation measures, and that implementation of many of the water and sewer options require a very limited level of mitigation. The air quality analysis concludes that the construction of a single wench (an azea estimated to be 30,000 squaze feet in azea) would result in a less than significant air quality impact. However, should these emissions occur concurrently with the construction of Citrus Plaza or if multiple wenches were under construction at the same time, the total combined emissions would exceed the SCAQMD's established thresholds and a significant construction air quality impact would occur. 1 8.3 Citrus Plaza Site Section 5.0 (Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) included herein, concludes that impacts to the following environmental issues can all be reduced to a less than significant level after the incorporation of mitigation measures: earth resources. hydrology/water quality, public services and utilities, human health, aesthetics, cultural resources, socioeconomics, biological resources, and growtlt inducement. This is consistent with the conclusion presented in the 1995 Civus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and related technical srudies completed for the proposed ~~~"~ Citrus Plaza project. cnx~ge Section 5.0 (Em•ironmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures) included herein, concludes that impacts to the following environmental issues cannot be reduced to ales-than-significant level after the incorporation of mitigation measures: land tJSe, transportation/circulation. air quality, and noise. This is consistent with the 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR and related technical srudies completed for the proposed project, with one exception. The 1995 Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Final EIR included solid waste as a significant unavoidable impact. Since the completion of the 1995 Final EIR, the San Timoteo Landfill has been expanded, and therefore proposed Citrus Counry~ of San Bernardino land Gsc Services Depanmcot SCIi Na 199910tI3 Cimu Plaza Regional Ma1Ul VDA Water & Serer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-loot ?001 Page 340 '. 8.0 Si~tificant Environmental Effects That Canno[ Be Avoided If The Project Is Implemen[ed Plaza project impacu on solid waste facilities would now be less than significant. Thus, no new ,y -:;. significant impacts are identified due to implementation of the proposed project. ~~'~ The following is a summary of unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the , development of the three components of the proposed project (i.e. Plan Amendments, Infrastructure Facilities, ClttlLS Plaza Project): Land Use. Although all project components would result in less than significant land use impact, the cumulative loss of existing aericultural resotuces within the East Valley Corridor azea would be a significant unavoidable adverse land use impact. 8~3 Transportation/Circulation. Citrus Plaza and cumulative impacts upon each of the key intersections and meet segments analyzed can be mitigated below a level deemed to be significant: however, the regional freeway system will experience congestion both with and without the ~^t, proposed Citrus Plaza project. Based upon regional impacu anticipated upon the I-10 Freeway, ~^~^a~a a~ future level of service (LOS) conditions have been detemlined to be significant. Air Quality. Based upon the methodology and threshold standards established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), air emissions associated with all options including subsurface pipelines would be less than sietrificant. However, if multiple pipeline segments were under construction simultaneously and/or the water and wastewater treatment facilities were constructed, a significant construction air quality impact would occur (i.e., NOS s-za emissions). Phases I and II of the Citrus Plaza project would result in significant construction impacts (i.e., NO, and PMIO emissions during Phase I construction: ROC. NO, and PMIO emissions during Phase II construction; and CO. ROC, N0~ and PMIo emissions if phases I and II aze constructed concurrently). Phase I and II of the Citrus Plaza project would result in significant construction impacts (i.e., CO, ROC and NOS emissions during Phase I and Phase II operations as well as during concuaent operation of Phases I and II).. Noise. Infrastructure facility construction as well as the construction and operntion of the Citrus Plaza project would result in noise impacts that would be reduced to a level that is less than significant after the incorporation of mitigation measures. However, operation of the proposed Citrus Plaza project will incrementally contribute to increased noise levels within the East Valley area of San Bernardino County. As a result, cumulative noise impacts will remain significant. County Imsad CAaSo L Couory~ of Sao Beroardioo Laud Usc Sen'iets Dtpattmmt SCH. tio. 1999101[21 Citnss Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA Water&Sewer Sen~ices Plan Final Subsequent ElR-June 2001 ' Paoe 341 . .,. I 9,O REPORT PREPARp,TYON t t 1 1 1 1 t 9.0 REPORT PREPARATION 9.I AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED State of California Paul Miller, County Service Area 38, California Department of Forestn• and Fire Protection. Michelle Scott. San Bernazdino Area Office, California Department of Highway Patrol. Captain M. L. Senna, Commander. San Bemazdino Area. California Department of Highway Patrol. ,~ Donnaye Palmer, California Integrated Waste Management Boazd. County of San Bernardino Sergeant Hagen, San Bemazdino County Sheriffs Department. Chris Jensen, Fire Prevention Supervisor, Community Safety Division. San Bemazdino County Fire Department. Terry Smith, Assistant Chief Operations. San Bemazdino Count<~ Fire Department. Cin~ of Redlands Phyllis Wright. City Manager's Office. City of Redlands. 9.2 REPORT PREPARATION PERSONNEL PCR Services Corporation Principal-In-Charge, Project Manager Bruce Lackow, Senior Vice President Couuty of Sao Bernurdioo Laad Csc Services Depanmrat SCH. Na 1999101121 Cirnu Plea Regional Ma1N VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequem EIR-June 2001 ' Page 342 9.0 Report Preparation Environmental Analysis ' John Arnau Marearet Shekell Paulette Wills Technical Consultants Transportation and Circulation Analysis Crain & Associates r r Couoh of San Bernardino Land Use Servces Depanment SCFL Na 1999101127 Cimu Plaza Regional MaIVIVDA blazer & Sewer Services Plan Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 343 1- !I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 10.0 REFERENCES I II I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10.0 REFERENCES . California Integrated Waste Management Board. California Waste Facilities. Sites & Operations Database. November 19. 1999. . City of Redlands. Municipal Code Section 2.62020(F) of Chapter 2.62 (Historic and Scenic Preservation). . County of San Bernardino. Department of Economic and Community Development. ] 999 Demographic Profile. . County of San Bernardino. Public Services Group. Land Use Services Department. San Bernardino CounT\' General Plan. adopted July 1989. revised May 1999. . County of San Bernardino. General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact RepOrt for the San Bernardino Coun!','. State Clearinghouse No. 88102411. May 1989. revised May 1999. . County of San Bernardino, Final Environmental Impact RepOrt for the San Bernardino CounT\' General Plan. State Clearinghouse No. 8810241 I, May 1989. . County of San Bernardino. Planning Department. Focused Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084. September 1996. . County of San Bernardino. Planning Department, Final Environmental Impact RepOrt Citrus Plaza Rel!ional Mall, State Clearinghouse No. 94082084. December 1995. . County of San Bernardino, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact RepOrt Citrus Plaza Rel!ional Mall. State Clearinghouse No. 94082084. September 1995. . County of San Bernardino. Regional Fire and Local Parks Development Impact Fee RepOrt for the CounT\' of San Bernardino. Californi'b April 199 I. . County of San Bernardino, Inland Valley Development Al!encY. UnincorpOrated Areas A and I Water Supply and Seweral!e Options, August 1999. . County of San Bernardino, Inland Valley Deyelopment Al!encv. Area A (Donut Hole) Impact of Water Supply Pumpinl! on Contaminant Mil!ration, August 1999. Count)' of San BtrDardiDo Lind he Stn"ict:S Department Ciaus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA W mer & Sewer Services Plan SCH.~.. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 344 10.0 References · Cowlly of San Bernardino, Land Management Department/Office of Planning in cooperation ",ith County Service Area 110. Final Environmental Impact RepOrt for East Vallev Corridor Specific Plan, October 1988. · Southern California Association of Governments, 1998 RTP Adopted Forecast. April 1998. · Southern California Association of Governments. Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. · United States Department of Agricultwe. Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survev of San Bernardino Countv Southwestern Part. Californi<l, January 1980. County oeSao Bernardino Laad (;st Mniccs DepartmcDt Citrus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA \ValeT & Sewer Services Plan SCIi No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - Jl.V1C 2001 Page 345 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 11.0 COMMENT S RECEIVED DURING PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE DRAFT SUBSEQ UENT EIR AND RESPONSES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE DR.\FT SUBSEQUENT EIR AND RESPONSES The Draft Subsequent EIR was circulated for public review on August 29. 2000. The public review period. during which interested agencies. organizations and members of the public were invited to submit written comments. was noticed and conducted in compliance \\ith CEQA Section 2109] and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15105 and 15087. The 45-day public review period ended on October 12.2000. During this public review period a total of]3 letters commenting on the Draft Subsequent EIR were submitted to the San Bernardino County. Land Use Services Department. Each of these letters was assigned a number from I to 13. The 13 letters and their reference numbers are as follows: I. State of California Governor' s Office of Planning and Research: September 6. 2000: 2. State of California. Governor's Office of Planning and Research: October 13. 2000: 3. State of California, Department of Transportation: October 10. 2000: 4. Local Agency Formation Commission, County of San Bernardino: September 29, 2000: 5. Southern California Association of Governments: October 2. 2000: 6. County of San Bernardino. Department of Public Works. Environmental Management Division: October 10. 2000: 7. County of San Bernardino. Fire Department; October 12. 2000: 8. City of Redlands: October 12. 2000: 9. McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enerson. LLP: October 11. 2000: 10. City of Riverside; October 2. 2000; 11. City of San Bernardino. Municipal Water Department; October 12. 2000: 12. The Gas Company; September 11, 2000: and 13. Dr. Gary Negin; October 5, 2000. The presentation of the comments and responses, which starts on the follo\\ing page, is organized in the follo\\mg manner. The comment letter as submitted to the San Bernardino County, Count)' of Sa 0 Bernardino Land [Sf Sen"ices DrputmrDt Citrus Plaza Regional MallIIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCIL ~.. 1999101123 Fmal Subsequent EIR - June 200 I Page 347 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequem EIR and Responses Land Use Services Department is provided first, \\ith the individual comments \\ithin the lener bracketed and nwnbered in the margin. The comment nwnber consists of the lener nwnber and the nwnber of. the comment \\ithin that letter. For example, the first comment in the first letter is nwnbered 1-1. The responses for the bracketed comments in a letter follow immediately after the letter. lbis structure is repeated for all of the 13 letters submitted to the San Bernardino County, Land Use Services Department. Counl)' of San Bernardino Land l;sr Stn'iccs Depanment Citrus Plaza Regional MalUIVDA Warer& Sewer Ser\'ices Plan SCIl No. 1999101113 Final Subsequent EIR - J~ 2001 Page 348 I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I @...... ,,' " . ~ Gray Davis GOVERNOR DATE: TO: RE: STATE OF CAliFORNIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse 8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT September 6, 2000 Terri Rahhal San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department 385 N. Arrowhead Ave 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 IVDA Area / Citrus Plaza Regional Mall SCH#: 1999101123 I:.. L '. \ ~~~ -~ * : ~ \.,"~ .i ~_ ..4;)' .~..~ Steve !\issen ACTI:-;G Dli[CTOi. This is to acknowledge that the State Clearinghouse has received your environmental document for state review. The review period assigned by the State Clearinghouse is: Review Start Date: Review End Date: August 29, 2000 October 12, 2000 We have distributed your document to the following agencies and departments: California Highway Patrol Caltrans, District 8 Caltrans, Division of Transportation Planning Department of Conservation Department ofFish and Game, Region 6 Department of Health Services Department of Housing and Community Development Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Water Resources Native American Heritage Commission Office of Historic Preservation Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8 Resources Agency State Lands Commission .j.. The State Clearinghouse will provide a closing letter with any state agency comments to your attention on the date following the close of the review period. Thank you for your participation in the State Clearinghouse review process. f]j 1400 TENTH STREET r.o. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 'IIWW.orR.CA.GOV!CLEAB.lNGHOUSE.HTML ...., ,.-... ~ " -.., r-I j'l ir~J ., I; IJ': H; " ,l~ i:J" . L. l~ ~ L..:"'l Li ' ~ r..;- I ill: SEP 1 2 2000 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO.1 State Clearinghouse 1-1 Comment noted. This comment does not relate to the adequacy of the EIR. therefore no further response is necessary. COUllt)' of SaD IRrllardino Land tsr Services Department CiD'US Plaza RegIonal MalVlVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCIL No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 349 I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I f)._..~. .-... / '\ , ,; . Gray Davis COVERNOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA .;e"~ ~~~ I*~~ ~.,~ .1 "."..~ Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse OClober 13, 2000 s Steve Nissen ACTINC, DII.ECl'Ol. Terri Rahhal San Bernardino County Land Use Services Depamnent 385 N. Arrowhead Ave 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Subject: IVDA Area / Citrus Plaza Regional Mall SCH#: 1999101123 Dear Terri Rahhal: The State Clearinghouse submitted tile above named Draft EIR to selected stale agencies for review. The review period closed on October 12, 2000, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This lelter acknowledges that you have complied with the Slate Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. 1- Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project, please refer to the ten-digit State .Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, T~~ Senior Planner, State Clearinghouse 00 l~@~UV~ lID OCT 1 7 2000 1400 TENTH STREET 1.0. BOX 300H SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 958u-30oH 916-oH5-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 WWW.01R.CA.GOV/CLEAIlNGHOUSE.HTML uocumem uetalls Report State Clearinghouse Data Base I --." I SCH# Project Tit/e Lead Agency 1999101123 IVDA Area / Citrus Plaza Regional Mall San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department Type EIR Draft EIR Description (1 ) General Plan Amendment re: land use, water and wastewater services, also repeal of a specific plan and incorporate relevant provisions in the General Plan and Development Code; (2) Facilities plan (water/wastewater) for project area +/-1,100 ac,; (3) revisions to previously approved Planned Development project: Cilrus Plaza Regional Mall on 125 ac, I Lead Agency Contact Name Terri Rahhal Agency San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department Phone 909-387-4124 Fax emai/ Address 385 N, Arrowhead Ave 3rd Floor City San Bernardino .State CA ZIp 92415-0182 I - , I i- I i I Project Location County San Bernardino City Redlands Reg/on Cross Streets ReI, To Lac. Maps Parcel No. Township 01S Range 03W Section 16,17 Base SBBM ,I I 1- I I Proximity to: Highways 1-10 & 1.210 Airports SBD Railways AT & SF Waterways Santa Ana River Schools Loma Linda Academy HS, Redlands HS, Orangewood HS, Lugonia Schoo Land Use Primarily vacant, except for an existing power plant and single residence. GP designaUons: IR (Regional Industrial) and East Valley Corridor Specific Plan CR (Regional Commercial), CG (General Commercial), SD (Special Development) and IR (Regional Industrial). Project Issues Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic.Historic; Drainage/Absorption; Economics/Jobs; Flood Plain/Flooding; Geologic/Seismic; Minerals; Noise; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services: Recreation/Parks; Schools/Universities; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading: Solid Waste; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic/Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply: Wildlife; Growth Inducing; Landuse; Cumulative Effects; Aesthetic/Visual I Date Received 08/29/2000 Start of Review 08/2912000 End of Review 10/12/2000 I I I I I I Reviewing Agencies Resources Agency; Department of Conservation; Department of Fish and.Game, Region 6: Office of Historic Preservation: Department of Parks and Recreation: Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Callrans, District 8: Callrans, Division of Transportation Planning; Department of Housing and Community Development: Department of Health Services; Slate Water Resources Control Board, Clean Water Program: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8: Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. I I I I, I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO.2 State Clearinghouse 2-1 Comment noted. This comment does not relate to the adequacy of the EIR. therefore no fiuther response is necessary. 2-2 Comment noted. This comment does not relate to the adequacy of the EIR. therefore no fiuther response is necessary. County orSan Bernardino Land lise Stn-ic" DepartmeDt Citrus Plaza Regional MalllIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCH. 11;0. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - JW1C 2001 Page 350 I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I IHI-DD 11:31 From-DEPT OF TRANS FLR SEVEN T-Oi4 P Cl/~: F-;;Z sT....Te OF CAUFOFl:~lA--eUSINE$S. T'RJvItSPO~TAiIO~ ANO nClJ$ll'liG "'-G5NCY GRAy OAv;S ~ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~~?~.. DISTRICT 8 464 W FouM Slreel. 6" Floor MS 726 San Bemard,no. CA 92401-1400 PHONE (909) 383-6327 FAX (909) 383-6890 @ October 10, 2000 PosH!" Fax Note 7671 08-SBd - 10 PM 28.30 - 30.00 T/- 08-SBd - 30 PM R32.34 - 33.16.../- Co 10.", .,.- <........ """"'" ('1 F... c:q~ Terri Rahhal Special Projects Planner County of San Bemardino Land Use Services Department, Planning Division 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue. First Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415 Dear Terri Rahhal: Draft Subsequent EIR Repeal of the EVCSP in Unincorporated Areas General Plan and Development Code Amendments State Clearinghouse Number 1999101123 West Citrus Plaza Reaional Mall Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Subsequent EIR for the proposed land use planning and utility plan changes to the area known as the "Doughnut Hole'. The entire "Doughnut Hole' area is located in the northwest portion of \ the 1-10/Rte 30 Interchange. This is an area of approximately 1,100 acres surrounded by lands previously incorporated within the City of Redlands. The Draft Subsequent EIR also addressed Changes to the proposed West Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. The West Citrus Plaza Regional Mall proposed development of a 1.85 million square foot regIonal mall Within a 125 acre area of the 1,100 acre' Doughnut Hole". Clearly an extensive amount of work has gone into the development documents that have been prepared to date. However, upon review of the traffic study work that was provided in the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report additional traffic analysis work needs to be completed prior to approval of the West Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. A traffic studY prepared in accordance with SAN BAG's Congestion Management Program (CMP), Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required. . The TIA would need to include an analysis of the West Citrus Regional Mall impact to thiS area at 'Project Opening-. Tne TIA would give a better picture of the likely traffic mitigation measure needS. A TIA would also provide a "fair share fee' to determine the extent of required project mitigation. It appears that this project is the largest immment new development In this area. A 'Project Opening' year analysis may Indicate that the appli~nt would need to do more than pnmanly pay "fair share fee' contributions as discussed in the Subsequent Draft EIR. Depending on the outcome of the 'Opening Year analysis the applicant may need to construct additional traffic mitigation measures. 1.. In-11-00 11 ,31 From-OEPT OF TRANS FLR SEVEN F-S;Z T-074 P OZl03 Doughnut Hole Planning Page 2 I I Dependent on build out phasing, the West Citrus Plaza Regional Mall may also need to] "-I construct future "phaSed Improllements". Also, some of the proposed mitigation measures would be to Caltrans facilities. Through the planning portion of the construction process Caltrans generally analyzes the expected L.evel of Serl/ice under various improvement scenanos for a 2D-year period after the anticipated completion date of a proposed improvement. ThiS is done for .Value Engineenng' purposes in which the extent and duration of a project relief of congestion is assessed. The Subsequent Draft EIR's updated the previous 1995 traffic stUdy to the year 1999. The forecast, however. was not extended further into the future. The updated traffic study still provided only a 2010 traffic forecast. This forecast is not suffiCient to assess future improvement needs. Given the scale of development. it appears that a 2025 Forecast would be appropriate to address traffic mitigation needs in this area. In addition to those traffic mitigation measures identified on Pages 170-177 of the Draft Subsequent EIR. other mitigation measures may also be appropriate based on a 2025 forecast. Our Freeway Operations Division has preliminarily identified certain mitigation measures that appear to be appropriate if development of the West Citrus Regional Mall and/or other large-scale development takes place in this area. These mitigation measures may be necessary to ensure that new development in this area does not cause peak hour traffic queUIng from freeway ramps to impact mixed flow Janes of the freeway mainlines In thiS area. Inclusion of these improvements in any "fair share fee" calculation may also be appropriate pending completion of a TIA for this area These mitigation measures are as follows: l 1) Add a 400 meter long auxiliary lane for the Westbound 1-10/Alabama Avenue off- 1 ramp Also, widen the ramp and add a third lane 125 meters in advance of the ramp I intersection with Alabama Avenue. .J 2) Widen the eastbound 1-10/Alabama Avenue off-ramp to add a third lane 125 meter 101 advance of the ramp intersection with Alabama Avenue. -1 3) Add a 300 meter long acceleration lane for the two northbound Rta-30/Saril Bemardino Avenue on-ramp. _I 4) Add a second lane to the eXiSting one lane northbound Rte-30/San Bemaroinol Avenue off-ramp . I . ~ 5} Aaa a second lane to the eXisting one lane southbound Rta-30/San Bernardino Off] ramp with a 400 meter long auxiliary lane. 6) Add a second lane to the existing one lane southbound Rta-30/San Bemardinol Avenue on-ramp and provide a 300 meter long acceleration lane. .... - I -:,1 I I I ~I I I I ~ 1 51 91 lOI I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I II I I I I 10-11-00 11:31 From-DEPT OF TRANS FLR SEVEN j-074 P 03/0, ,-ill Dougllnut Hole Planning Page 3 7) Add a second lane to the existing one lane westbOund 1-1D/California Street ofr--ramp -, with a 400 meter long auxiliary lane. Also widen the ramp to provide a third lane 125 ! \ \ meters in advance of the ramp intersection with California Strest. I ...... 8) Add a second lane to the existing one lane eastbOund 1-10/ California Street off-rampl _ with a 400 meter auxiliary lane Also, widen the ramp to provide a third lane 125 , \ i... meter in advance of the ramp intersection wittl California Street. d 9) Add a second lane to the eXisting one lane eastbOund 1-10/ California Street on -1 \? ~ ~ We reql.lest two copies of any future TlA's that are prepared as development proceed1 In this area. If you have questions concerning thiS Infonnation, please contact Mr. Mark 1'-' Roberts at (909) 383-4149. Sincerely, ~~ LINDA GRIMES, Chief Office of Forecasting/ IGRlCEOA Review C: FranK Haider, EncroaChment Permits Chung-Yuan Wen, EncroaChment Permits Bob Wirts, SAN BAG Doug Hogue, San Bernardino County Systems Planning Syed Raza, Freeway Operations 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent ErR and Responses LETTER NO.3 State of California Department of Transportation 3-1 The comment swnmarizes the project description and raises no issues under CEQA. thus no further response is necessary. This comment contains two factual errors that are corrected as follows. First. the "Area A" land on which the project is located has never been incorporated \\ithin the City of Redlands. Second. the project name is the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. not the West Citrus Plaza Regional Mall. 3-2 As requested by this comment. a San Bernardino Associated Governments ("SanBAG") Congestion Management Program (CMP1. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared for this project. That TIA. titled Com!estion Manal!ement Plan Traffic Impact Analvsis Report for Citrus Plaza Proiect" (the "Adopted TIA") was circulated to the affected jurisdictions (including Caltrans) and approved by SanBAG. The Adopted TIA fully analyzed the traffic impacts of the land uses proposed for the site as well as all cumulative development. To validate the continued adequacy of that analysis given recent grO\\th. an updated analysis was conducted in 1999. This analysis. contained in Appendix E. demonstrated that traffic gro\\th has been slower than was projected in the Adopted TIA. It also demonstrated that the assumed land-use intensification in the Adopted TIA was ,equal to or greater than the intensification which would result from the currently proposed related projects. A further review of the current related projects lists during the year 2000 re-affirmed this conclusion. Moreover. consultations were held between County and SanBAG staff. SanBAG confirmed that. once approved. a TIA remains valid unless the land-use intensity of a project is increased. There has been no increase in land-use intensity with this project. On this basis. and since an extensive review indicated that the cumulative analysis was still adequate. despite the fact that Caltrans is now forecasting to year 2025 for its value engineering purposes, the County has determined that the Adopted TIA was an appropriate basis for the Subsequent EIR transportation- related analyses. The Adopted TIA contains both the "Project Opening" and the long-term analyses requested by the comment. The Adopted TIA also calculates the project's fair share contributions. Based on these analyses. the County has developed a set of Count)." orSao Bernardino Laud Lsc Scn"jccs Department elOllS Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SClI. ~o. 1999101123 F mal Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 351 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequem EIR and Responses conditions of approval to assure that appropriate improvements are constructed by the project. and that fair share contributions are made to the overall improvement program. Moreover. with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. all direct and cumulative traffic impacts are fully mitigated. as discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4 below. and as a result the analysis already prepared demonstrates that no additional mitigation beyond that set forth in the Draft Subsequent EIR is required. 3-3 The Adopted TIA fully assesses all of the development anticipated to occur during the timeframe within which the project will be developed. It further extends that timeframe to the year 2010. Moreover. the Adopted TIA has been used in the County's regional planning documents since 1995. Analyzing impacts beyond that timeframe was not required by the CMP for the Adopted TIA and those impacts would not reasonably be related to the project. Therefore, while Caltrans may choose to conduct other, longer term studies for other purposes. including value engineering. the County has concluded that the year 2010 timeframe is more than adequate for assessing the traffic impacts of the project and the reasonably related projects and for devising the appropriate traffic mitigation measures. This conclusion is consistent with the last five years of regional planning documents. which have assumed the existing Adopted TIA for the project. and also is consistent with the approach of surrounding communities, including the City of Redlands, which in its recent traffic study for the Home Depot project included a cumulative traffic impact analysis to year 2010. The adequacy of the year 2010 analysis is further demonstrated by the fact that the Subsequent EIR uses the "List-of-Projects" approach to evaluation of cumulative impacts, pursuant to Section 15130(b)(1)(A) of the State CEQA Guidelines. To be sure it captured all relevant projects. the list of cumulative projects was updated twice for the Draft Subsequent EIR. to be sure to include every project on file with the City of Redlands. the City of San Bernardino, the City of Highland and the City of Loma Linda. as well as the County of San Bernardino that were in the study area. In addition. the Draft Subsequent EIR took the further and more conservative step of also including additional infill development based on SanBAG and SCAG growth projections, even where there were no reasonably foreseeable projects that would result in that infIiI growth. This extra step was conducted even though the project is not amending any of the policies regarding densities or land use designations in those build out plans. Using this "belt and suspenders" approach the Adopted TIA is not omy up-to-date but also a conservative estimate of the project's potential direct and cumulative traffic impacts. Careful review of all reasonably foreseeable projects on the project list demonstrated that none of the COUDty of San Btrnardino Land lsc Scnircs DcpartmcDI Claus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Wau:r & Sewer Sen'ices Plan SClL!IOo. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 200 I Page352 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses projects would contribute to cumulatively considerable traffic impacts past the year 2010. As a result, ther~ is no reason for preparing a study out to the year 2025 as requested in this comment. Finally, it is important to note that Caltrans reviewed the Adopted TlA and had no concerns or comments regarding its adequacy at the time of that review. 3-4 The Adopted TlA and Draft Subsequent EIR contain a very extensive traffic mitigation program for reducing to a level of less than significance all project traffic impacts. These measures also reduce to less than a level of significance all cumulative traffic impacts that could reasonably be anticipated to occur through project completion and beyond. For each of the recommended roadway improvement measures, the project percent responsibility has been determined. The additional measures cited by the comment were determined not to be needed to lessen project impacts or impacts due to other related projects through the year 2010 to below a level of significance. Since implementation of the mitigation measures proposed in the EIR will reduce direct and cumulative traffic impacts to below a level of significance, there is no requirement under CEQA for the project to provide the additional mitigation suggested by the comment. It should be noted that in assessing the percentage project responsibility, project trips were compared to total growth through the year 2010. In this way, all roadway improvements needed through the year 2010 are assigned to growth anticipated to occur within that timeframe. Additional land-use intensification projects which may, or may not. occur after the year 2010 are not assigned any responsibility for the mitigation measures in the Adopted TlA and EIR. It is anticipated that these potential long- term projects would instead be responsible for any funher roadway improvements needed beyond the year 2010, such as those potential measures cited by the comment. 3-5 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4. no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-6 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4, no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-7 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4, no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-8 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4, no additional mitigation measures COUDty orSao Bernardino laad list Scn"jccs Dcpanmcnl CilJ'US Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Willer & Sewer Scp..ices Plan SClL No. 1999101lZl Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page353 I I I I I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses are required for this project. 3-9 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4. no additional mitigation -measures are required for this project. 3-10 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4, no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-11 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4. no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-12 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4. no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-13 As discussed in Response to Comment No. 3-4, no additional mitigation measures are required for this project. 3-14 Request noted. As discussed in Responses to Comment Nos. 3-3 and 3-4, no additional TIAs are required for this project. Coun~' of SaD Bernardino Land t:se Stn'ic:es Department Onus Plaza Regional MallIIVDA \Vater & Sewer Scn'ices Plan SCH. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 354 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO DATE: 175 West Fifth Street. Second Floor San Bernardino. CA 92415-0490. (909) 387-5866. FAX (909) 387-5871 ~ . E-MAil: lafeo@lafeo.eo.san-bernacdlnoea.us ~ September 29, 2000 i~ _ /), LI (j) A ;J v'YjldI19?- lrd:kn.,f(;{ KATHLEEN ROLLlNGS-McD ALD, Deputy Executive Officer FROM: TO: TERRI RAHHAL, Special Projects Planner Land Use Services Department SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ON PROJECT COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE CITRUS PLAZA PROJECT AND EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN The Local Agency Formation Commission has received the Notice of Availability of the Subsequent EIR for the Citrus Plaza, et al project. A copy of this information has also been forwarded to the Commission's Environmental Consultant, Tom Dodson & Associates, who will also respond by separate correspondence. The thrust of the comments that follow relate to questions on the service provider choices identified in the document. Please note that LAFCO is currently processing an application (LAFCO 2867) that proposes to remove the territory of Area A from the sphere of influence of the City of Redlands. If the proposal meets the criteria identified in Government Code Section 56429, and the area is removed from the sphere, the City of Redlands will be unable to extend its municipal services within the area by contract with the property owners under the restrictions of Government Code Section 56133. \ 1. Section 3.1 - Project Location: The second paragraph indicates that that there are 11 subareas (A through K) shown on Figure 1-1; however, this figure identifies only 10 areas (A through J). There is no narrative description of these areas other than that included in Table 3-2. Area J as viewed on the map attached (as we believe that area generally appears on Figure 3-1), is the unincorporated Bryn Mawr area of the Ci~i of Lorna Linda sphere of influence, not railroad right-of-way as listed in Table 3-2. This area receives sewer service currently through a contract between the City of Loma Linda and the County. Area K, as we believe it to be defined, is the mini storage facility along Barton Road, not railroad right-of-way. The water and sewer providers to this site are unknown to LAFCO staff at this time. '2- Notice of Availability Citrus Plaza and IVDA project Areas September 25. 2000 Figure 3-1 appears to show that the island within the Loma Linda sphere of influence east of Mountain View, generally south of Redlands Blvd (generally known as the Petersen Tract) is a part of IVDA, but the report makes no mention of this area. It is our understanding from past considerations that this area receives its domestic water service from the City of Redlands and the area is on septic tanks. Should this area also be evaluated? This narrative, and the maps depicting the areas, defines the project to be considered as Area A as being 969 acres comprising the "Doughnut Hole". We believe that the whole area defined as the "Doughnut Hole" comprises approximately 1,104 acres. This discrepancy in area definition holds throughout the document. This difference may be attributable to the document's exclusion of the Route 30 lands and right-of-way since they do not have development potential. However, the need for services such as fire protection, paramedics, non-potable water for landscape purposes, law enforcement, etc. would be applicable to this area as they are currently addressed within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. 2. Section 3.3.2 - Proposed Infrastructure Systems, page 56: The narrative on page 56 outlines Area I. One reference not made in this discussion is that the annexation of this area to the City of Redlands has been approved by LAFCO. The proposal, LAFCO 28390, is currently under reconsideration at the request of Mountain View Power and will hopefully be resolved in January 2001. During the review process of this document, if this annexation were completed, the alternatives to serving the area would need to be modified to exclude the area. 3. Section 3.3.2.1 - Sewer Infrastructure (including Table 3-3): This narrative provides a discussion of the three sewer options to be considered for the area; however it does not describe the type of governance to develop the master plan for this service, as well as operate and maintain the sewer system contemplated. The policy language changes that are a part of the project indicate that it is contemplated that service provision may be 'provided to Areas A and I by a County Service Area, Community Services District, or private provider. It also appears from discussion in other areas, that there is a possibility that the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District may provide sewer and/or water service. In the past when the Municipal Water District has provided retail water service it was through an Improvement District of the District to create a separate entity to fund.and operate the system. 2 I I I 3 I I I If I I I I s I I I I "I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I NotIce of Availability Citrus Plaza and IVDA project Areas September 25. 2000 Since it appears that this document contemplates the creation of a new entity in some manner to perform the maintenance and operation functions for this service, such should be fully evaluated in the consideration. In the case of the C, formation of a new County Service Area or Community Services District, LAFCO would be the review body for that consideration and would hope to use your evaluation as a responsible agency in the future. 4. Section 5.0 - Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures; Subsection 5.7 - Public Services and Utilities; Subsection 5.7.4 Fire Protection (page 231 through 238): The indication in the narrative is that the California Division of Forestry provides 1 fire protection services through contract with CSA 38 and the County. This contract was terminated in July of 1999. CSA 38 is a part of the County fire structure that provides for its own fire personnel, equipment, and facilities. The mitigation measures identified within the report should address this change in circumstance from the previous environmental documentation as well. 5. Section 5.0 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures; Subsection 5.10 - Cultural Resources: Under "Field Reconnaissance" it indicates that there are two structures located g on the Citrus Plaza site. Both of these structures have been demolished following fires. To our knowledge the only features to potentially remain are the masonry flumes and the brick entrance gates to the structure formerly located at 27495 San Bernardino Avenue. The staff of the Local Agency Formation Commission thanks you for the opportunity to respond to this document. We would be happy to answer any questions regarding this correspondence or assist your office in the review of governmental entities and their l\ boundaries within this area. Please maintain the Local Agency Formation Commission on your mailing list for receipt of the final environmental document for this project. KRM/ cc: Tom Dodson & Associates Attachments 3 CA Codes (gov:56425-56429) The commission may waive the ,fee if it finds that the request can be considered and studied as part of the periodic review of spheres of influence required by Section 56425. In addition, the commission may waive the fee if it finds that payment would be detrimental to the public interest. . (g) The commission and executive officer may review and act on any request to amend a sphere of influence or urban service area concurrently with their review and determination on any related change of organization or reorganization. In case of a conflict between the provisions of this section and any other provisions of this part, the other provisions shall prevail. 56429. (a) Notwithstanding Sections 56427 and 56428, a petition for removal of territory from a sphere of influence determination may be brought pursuant to this section by landowners within the redevelopment project area referenced in subdivision (e) of Section 33492.41 of the Health and Safety Code, if, at the time the petition is submitted, the area for which the petition is being requested meets all of the following requirements: (1) Is unincorporated territory. (2) Contains at least 100 acres. (3) Is surrounded or substantially surrounded by incorporated territory. (4) Contains at least 100 acres zoned for commercial or industrial uses or is designated on the applicable county general plan for commercial or industrial uses. (b) On receipt of a petition signed by landowners owning at least 25 percent of the assessed value of the land within the affected territory, the "commission shall hear and consider oral or written testimony. (c) The petition shall be placed on the agenda of the commission in accordance with subdivision (b) of Section 56428. (d) The executive officer shall give notice of the hearing in accordance with Section 56427. (e) From the date of filing of the petition to the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall accept written positions from any owner of land in the unincorporated territory that is seeking removal from a city1s sphere of influence. (f) The petition to remove territory from a city's sphere of influence shall be granted and given immediate effect if the commission finds that written positions filed in favor of the petition and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the hearing represent landowners owning SO percent or more of the assessed value of the land within the affected territory. (g) No removal of territory from a city'S sphere of influence that is proposed by petition and adopted pursuant to this section shall be repealed or amended except by the petition and adoption procedure provided in subdivisions (a) to (f), inclusive. In all other respects, a removal of territory from a city's sphere of influence proposed by petition and adopted pursuant to this section shall have the same force and effect as any amendment to or removal of territory from a city's sphere of influence approved by the commission. No territory removed from a city's sphere of influence pursuant to this . section shall be annexed to that city, unless the territory is subsequently added to the sphere of influence of the city pursuant to the petition and adoption procedure provided in this section. (h) Pursuant to Section 56383, the commission may establish a Page 4 0 f .5 I I I I I I I I \0 I I I I I I I I I I http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-binldisplaycode?section=gov&group=5600 1-57000&file=56425. 9f29/00 I CA Codes (gov;56425-56429) Page 5 of 5 I I I schedule of fees for the costs of carrying out -this section. J (i) All proper expenses incurred in connection with removal of \0 territory from a city's sphere of influence pursuant to this section shall be paid by the proponents. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-binldisplaycode?seclion=gov&group=5600 1-57000&file=56425. 9/29/00 -._ -'0 - ~"'~j--& o . I ,0 10 "0 I '0 A & SF --~...-.. ffi < . o > REOI.ANOS REOLANOS RANCHO ~ o ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ > ~ 2 m < . o . PARK PARK PARK ffi . r. D ~ < ffi < > o . 2 CITRUS CITRUS ,".-,.-- '.... C'\?!" j~>,'. ". ;; '""" ',- z O' < > o . ..MQRey- ORANGE z m < > o > ...1..- BARTON z ~ ~ U o ~ o . ; m !)M,j r 3 i!, ;; o . -- -- >::,'. ,~.;;{t~1~f~~~"f/ I Woll......-O.;. !...., .:!;' .... ,":.' ,~--".;..;........ ~/~,.. ~_..__~Il.t .., ;.- . ~..~~.... .,,;">1-:" ~~.v~..~,-...<<T;- ,..~ ,:.:,/_---.) <'i,<:'7:"('~'/"" ',r..-~-..J"::' ::......- ,:'!..... .i-""i/:'" ....'" f ,-, ~ ---,.",. ~,.._..-.._-.!.iiu. ~~~~:;r; - ""'~ <(.t...-rl ...._....... ~l~-..:.... ,:~,:f:{'";:' ".___.-:.-..-;;;v._....J.l..~;., _':"7;~A"" __=~...;-..-, _--- .---;______~~ .-"'" .,.c:.: ~""T"_"---- ~---- i.~' C i r:o .~:' ~~~ '1 ~ I i i 1 ~ I I I - ..... I DOUGHNUT ! HOLE _u --. -.......... ....~ I I i ..- - - I -- u_ I .u I - ........ I i i ~ '. .' ~ ".::. .. '\, ,~~..~:--... ........ ~<l~"- ..... <llllot..........." .~~ :::. I ~ --.-;;r;.;:--~-__..! i 6 -.. i ~ ,.... -~ ! I I . -- ! - ... ~ n ~ w_ -- ~ I' I '" .- ... .- .- ... I ! ~-_......--- ""'" ..... i ... I ! I "-;0-;;; ..- ~ "~......... ----.;.;; ~ - - - -...... - j -- ! I I - -'tMTl - - ~ -'I,'. V' /,: ft CA Codes (gov:56100-56133) facilitate, an annexation of territory to another local agency that has initiated the change of organization or reorganization. This section does not, however, apply to any territory comprising real property owned by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. If the commission adopts a resolution approving such a change of organization or reorganization, the board of commissioners of the district may, within 15 days thereafter, adopt a resolution finding either that the proposed detachment mayor will not adversely affect the district's ability to efficiently provide its law enforcement services in the remainder of the district. The district shall, if it adopts a resolution, file a certified copy of its resolution with the local agency to which the affected territory is proposed to be annexed, the conducting authority, and the commission. If that. resolution finds that the proposed detachment may have an adverse financial effect, then the reorganization shall not become effective unless a majority of the voters voting at a special election of the district called for that purpose approve the detachment. The Broadmoor Police Protection District shall pay the costs of the election. For purposes of this section, it shall be conclusively presumed that any affected local agency which adopts a resolution under Section 56800 requesting a detachment of contiguous territory from the Broadmoor Police Protection District and which could have concurrently requested annexation of the affected territory, intends to do so. (b) The Legislature finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the following special circumstances: The Broadmoor Police Protection District consists primarily of suburban residential properties which have long enjoyed an urban level of police services. The threat of continued piecemeal detachments of territory from the district threatens its ability to continue providing that level of service on an economically efficient basis. (c) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2002, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted prior to January 1, 2002, deletes or extends that date. 56133. (a) A city or district may provide new or extended services by contract or agreement outside its jurisdictional boundaries only if it first requests and receives written approval from the commission in the affected county. (b) The commission may authorize a city or district to provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries but within its sphere of influence in anticipation af a later change of organization. (c) The cornmiss;an may authorize a city or district to provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries and outside its sphere of influence to respond to an existing or impending threat to the public health or safety of the residents of the affected territory if both of the following requirements are met: (1) The entity applying for the contract approval has provided the commission with documentation of a threat to the health and safety of the public or the affected residents. (2) The commission has notified any alternate service provider, including any water corporation as defined in Section 241 of the Page 17 0: ] S \1. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-binldisplaycode?section=gov&group=5600 1-57000&file=561 00. 9/19/00 CA Codes (gov:56100-56133) Public Utilities Code, or sewer system corporation as defined in Section 230.6 of the Public Utilities Code. that has filed a map and a statement of its service capabilities with the commission. (d) This section does not apply to contracts or agreements solely involving two or more public agencies. This section does not apply to contracts for the transfer of nonpotable or nontreated water. This section does not apply to contracts or agreements solely involving the provision of surplus water to agricultural lands and facilities, including, but not limited to, incidental residential structures, for projects that serve conservation purposes or that directly support agricultural industries. However, prior to extending surplus water service to any project that will support or induce development, the city or district shall first request and receive written approval from the commission in the affected county. This section does not apply to an extended service that a city or district was providing on January 1, 1994. This section does not apply to a local publicly owned electric utility, as defined by Section 9604 of the Public Utilities Code, providing electric services that do not involve the acquisition, construction, or installation of electric distribution facilities by the local publicly owned electric utility, outside of the utility's jurisdictional boundaries. Page IS of IS I I I I \'2.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-binldisplaycode?section=gov&group=5600 1-57000&file=561 OD. 9/19100 I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Language of 56133 effective January 1, 2001 56133. (a) A city or district may provide new or extended services by contract or agreement outside its jurisdictional boundaries only if it first requests and receives written approval from the commission in the affected county. (b) The commission may authorize a city or district to provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries but within its sphere of influence in anticipation of a later change of organization. (c) The commission may authorize a city or district to provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries and outside its sphere of influence to respond to an existing or impending threat to the public health or safety of the residents of \ 1- the affected territory if both of the following requirements are met: (1) The entity applying for the contract approval has provided the commission with documentation of a threat to the health and safety of the public or the affected residents. (2) The commission has notified any alternate service provider, including any water corporation as defined in Section 241 of the Public Utilities Code, or sewer system corporation as defined in Section 230.6 of the Public Utilities Code, that has filed a map and a statement of its service capabilities with the commission. (d) The executive officer, within 30 days of receipt of a request" for approval by a city or district of a contract to extend services outside its jurisdictional boundary, shall determine whether the request is complete and acceptable for filing or whether the request is incomplete. If a request is determined not to be complete, the executive officer shall immediately transmit that determination to the requester, specifying those parts of the request that are incomplete and the manner in which they can be made complete. When the request is deemed complete, the executive officer shall place the request on the agenda of the next commission meeting for which adequate notice can be given but not more than 90 days from the date that the request is deemed complete, unless the commission has delegated approval of those requests to the executive officer. The commission or executive officer shall approve, disapprove, or approve with conditions the contract for extended services. If the contract is disapproved or approved with conditions, the applicant may request reconsideration, citing the reasons for reconsideration. (e) This section does not apply to contracts or agreements solely involving two or more public agencies where the public service to be provided is an alternative to, or substitute for, public services already being provided by an existing public service provider and where the level of service to be provided is consistent with the level of service contemplated by the existing service provider. This section does not apply to contracts for the transfer of non potable or nontreated water. This section does not apply to contracts or agreements solely involving the provision of surplus water to agricultural lands and facilities, including, but not limited to, incidental residential structures, for projects that serve conservation purposes or that directly support agricultural industries. However, prior to extending surplus water service to any project that will support or induce development, the city or district shall first request and receive written approval from the commission in the affected county. This section does not apply to an extended service that a city or district was providing on January 1, 1994. This section does not apply to a local publicly owned - \1.- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ! I 1 1 I I I I 1 I_ I I 1 I I- I 1- l 1- electric utility, as defined by Section 9604 of the Public Utilities Code, providing electric services that do not involve the acquisition, construction, or installation of electric distribution facilities by the local publicly owned electric utility, outside of the utility's jurisdictional boundaries. \1- 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO.4 Local Agency Formation Commission/County of San Bernardino 4-1 Comment noted. After the date of this comment lener. on October 18. 2000. the territory of Area A was removed from the sphere of influence of the City of Redlands. This Final Subsequent EIR has been revised accordingly (see pages 55. 92, 94. 96, 98. 242 and 276). 4-2 Comment noted. Based on the legal descriptions provided of IVDA. both areas J and K appear to. be railroad right of ways as indicated in Table 3-2. The text in the Final Subsequent EIR has been corrected on Figures I -I and 3-1 and Table 3-2 to reflect the fact that there are I I subareas, A-K. 4-3 The area in question is ",ithin the boundaries of IVDA but is not considered by the County of San Bernardino to be unserved since the City of Redlands provides domestic water and sewer services through septic tanks. For this reason it was not included in the areas studied. 4-4 The 969-acre area excludes Caltrans and City of Redlands' land in Area A, and is the area covered by the infrastructure plan. The additional acreage has no need for water or sewer service. In addition, since the project for the purposes of this component of the EIR is the proposed infrastructure plan. and not the land use buildout of Area A, implementation of the Project as proposed would not have any impacts on police, fire and emergency services and any other similar land use based issue as these areas have no need for water and sewer service. 4-5 Comment noted. Water and sewer services could be provided by the City of San Bernardino; however. it also could be provided by the City of Redlands if annexation were completed. See also Response to Comment No. 8-9 regarding Mountainview Power. 4-6 Comment noted. To the extent a new entity is created, LAFCO approval may be required. However, it is not known, and cannot at this time be known, which of the three sewer options ultimately will be chosen. As a result, the EIR cannot state which of the identified entities would maintain and operate the sewer service. In addition, the selection of an operator for the facilities will not alter the environmental effects of the Project, which are adequately addressed in the Draft COUDf)" or 5.. Bernardino Land tSt Services Drpartmrnt CitJUS Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Wafer & Sewer ServiceS Plan SCH. Ii.. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 355 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J.O Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Subsequent EIR. Furthennore. the question of which of the identified entities ultimately wiII be responsible for operating and maintaining the sewer service is an administrative and fmancial one, and therefore is beyond the purview of CEQA. 4-7 Comment noted. The text of the Final Subsequent EIR (page 41 and 241) has been corrected to reflect the fact noted in the comment that the California Division of Forestry's contract to provide fire protection services to the proj~ct area was tenninated in July 1999. In addition. refer to the responses to the specific comments provided by the County Fire Department (see Comment Letter No.7). 4-8 Comment noted. The text of the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 99, 128. 148, 290 and 291) has been corrected to reflect the demolition of these structures. 4-9 Comment noted. 4-10 Comment noted. This comment simply attaches the text from the Government Code section referenced in Comment No. 4-1, and does not address the adequacy of the EIR. As a result, no further response is required. 4-11 Comment noted. This comment is simply the mapping of the Petersen tract referenced in Comment No. 4-3 and does not address the adequacy of the EIR. As a result. no further response is required. 4-12 Comment noted. This comment simply attaches the text from the Government Code section referenced in Comment No.4-I. and does not address the adequacy of the EIR. As a result. no 'further response is required. County urSin BtrnardiDO Land lSt Strviccs.Dcpartmtnt CittUS Plaza Regional MallIIVDA Waler &:. Sewer Services Plan SCII. No. ImIOIl13 Final Subsequent EIR -1WIC: 200t Page 356 I I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA I I ,. I ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS I Main Office 818 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Angeles. California I 90017"3435 I t (213) 2)6-1800 f(213) 236-1825 I www.scag.ca.gov Ofticcn: 'l'rnld~1I1 CoWlcilinembler fWn&.'e' Cuv of La. AIun"o. . ~;nl ".n I'r....dtlll Supert'IOOr ~y 0.",. Sin kmucllnO CO,,"rv . I :;.e.;ond V'~e ha,den, Co~n<:dmemlH, H.i knu.on. I.m ""pies . lmlJlflb..,e l'uI I'raIdall S"per\'UoO' l.J!'<~uooio.uy. !.mAn,..J... Counry lmperi&l Collllr, Tom v.-,.sq. lmpeNl Countl . Ol'f'tdDNllon.ElCellll'O I :.00 A.llfda eo..", YOOllnl! amh.....~ liltkt ;... ""rei"" C:owuy . a. Yuosl.oniy. I.m Allrms :ounty . Eilco.n Ans.u.. O..molld au . IIob .....tlen. M"""""",-' kuce I.urcws. Cern'.... c.torr-!.osl. klJ. H1J &.nuon. I.m ......d.,.. CAr.. OItlStWllCIl. Co.".. . I\obe" Bnln<;n. I 'l,<anneocl' LllIn Cud. 1..al; Anraa . Galt ~. ParilmOWU' JoMM~. s...n~au.u' ~IUI fotornro.l.OlIAnrel,.,,' M,dud Feuer. to. lt~'.,,<IlG.U~,I.mAnrJe.<'}ock,. CioldbetJ.l.osAnp!eo'!YyGr.bonst...l.onl1lucb .DftHudiJon.'bnIl<<'N"".~."", '""'rlel'N...HolQen,iDlAllrdcl'u-na I "Uey.1nlll~.r.."tb.McC.tth).eo....c,.. Uldy "hsci_u., !DO ^"'f9:0 . Suer'\' NutpI:>y, W'b.u:U.' hm o'Canaor, s..nu /ok>IIig ')enay VropeLl_loOi....ch.p.,;,ckhcheco.Lol.Allrleo .AJu'~lU.u..""l~"".llob"nzkt.~do "-each . k>...,c~ I'roa, "co "'~ . Mut "'dJ~. I 'o.......LosAnp""'.A.ocll.ord.......w..1D> "~ . ~ IIDIentll.oJ. a.rftnOo. . "w.:.n~ ........ CornplOft. J.lOdy Sooruuch.looAnrJes' ...uJT~bot.Allwnbn.S.....,.T~let.I', I"aw<iftl.l. joxIW.clu.Los""pOrs.R.........JICf1.u..Anpl~1 .o..nntlWiUhbunl.Col.lb&wI I VIp Q>ouKy' Chula Snudl. Chnp CowIe,. . na.eeJ.LoIA.l......lQ!O.~h..lIft.HlIAlltIi<<>" Ich.^"~.~'u..Eh.uba!lCowul. ~ow.o ~. J,uI Driw,. IWwpon luck' Cllhryn P"YOWl'. Ufwu. NIl"'" . R"clwd Duon. LKc, I <~'<nl....h,..o...r.t.!.I'.J""'.ShtrieyMc:CrKknI, .heom.ko~.1ru ...."""= Coufr: !lob ",",eo. "'~d~ Count~ . ., lnomdp. "'OW\Kl~ . ~ hrw, utMdroJ C", ......4rt.ru,..COl'OR.I.RottJ.obcn.. T~rn~..w . ~ WhIle. MOftrID \".dk, I I J<uaudi... CO....ry: Llllly D...... Sul llUdJllO COllllly' ..Il AluiAdr.. lluu:ho uno"r. .J....Iir~.T~lle hiIlu .o.vtd ii..OIlJ".........Foawu.l.ftAnn~,G...,.jT~".iC'l: . C..enJI. Nonoct_hrTy, Ouao Iillh. JuGilh v.&llft. ...."'......... I Nr.I c-.ry: Judy w.kcb. YamIr. Coumy . _O""-'k.So&ft~..,...GJ,ellka:rn. V~.TOAibtn,.PmH_ J.igenide eo....rr tr~ c-miWoa; '.JMn~HEmft INn eo...ry Tnuporu.cioa CommisIioa: 0....... Sunr.V..u.,. __. _R-'___"",-,,",,_ ....,."." 6 October 2, 2000 Ms. Terri Rahhal, Special Projects Planner County of San Bemardino Land Use Services Department, Advance Planning Division 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, Third Floor San Bemardino, CA 92415-0182 RE: Comments on the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas and revisions to the Citrus Plaza Mall Project - SCAG No. I 20000433 Dear Ms. Rahhal: Thank you for submitting the above referenced Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report to SCAG for review and comment. As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, SCAG assists cities, counties and other agencies in reviewing projects and plans for consistency with regional plans. It is recognized that the proposed Project considers the following: (1) repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (EVCSP) as tt pertains to the unincorporated areas of San Bemardino County; (2) General Plan and Development Code amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) redevelopment project area which incorporate respective provisions from the EVCSP; (3) Water and Wastewater Faciltties Plan for the two unserved or underserved portions of the IVDA area; and (4) revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project. SCAG staff has evaluated the Draft SEIR for consistency with the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. The Draft SEIR in Section 5.1 (Land Use), Table 5.1-2, includes discussions on the proposed Projects' consistency with SCAG policies and applicable regional plans, which were outlined in our November 3, 1999 letter on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for this \ Draft SEIR. The Draft SEIR cited SCAG policies and addressed the manner in which the proposed Project is consistent with applicable core policies and supportive of applicable ancillary policies. The Draft SEIR incorporated a side-by-side comparison of SCAG policies with a discussion of the consistency or support of the applicable policies with the proposed Project. This approach to discussing consistency or support of SCAG policies is commendable and we appreciate your efforts. Based on the infonnation provided in the Draft SEIR, we have no further comments. A description of the proposed Project was published in the September 1, 2000 Intergovemmental Review Report for public review and comment. If you have any questions, please contact Jeffrey Smtth, Senior.Planner, at (213) 236-1867. Thank you. SAel~ ~~ Syl.f: PATSAOURAS Interim Manager, Perfonnance Assessment and Implementation r::-', I D~ LnJ rc: (;':1 [S r '0" f2 'Iu ~l') :.r.; ~) i.J u. D '-' OCT 0 4 2000 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO.5 Southern California Association of Governments 5-1 Comment noted. Coun~' orSaa Bernardino Land tSf Scn'iccs Dcpartmcnl Citrus Plaza Reg.ional MallIIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCll. 1';0.1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 357 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DATE: I FROM: - I TO: I SUBJECT: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I INTEROFFICE MEMO PHONE: 387-8109 MAIL CODE: 0835 =- ":-~' ,-'c;uprry...........--... \~,~,,::;~ ,-;;;/" !,l{' .. , . ' , . ' ,,,~-,, octo~r 10, 2000 . 0.~ NARESH A A, P.E., Chief Department of Public Works. Environmental Mana!!ement Division @ , - -:\\to TERI RAHHAL, Special Projects Planner Land Use Services Department, Advanced Planning Division File ~ I O(ENV)/4.0 I ZONE 2 - IVDA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, REDLANDS AREA, COMMENTS Our Department has reviewed the above-referenced project and provides you with the following comments: Hydrolog)'/Water Quality. Our previous comments made on November 8, 1999 stilil 1- apply. . - .J 1. J" 2. It is assumed the cities involved will establish adequate provisions for intercepting and conducting the accumulated offsite drainage around or through the site in a manner that will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties. The completion of the Seven Oaks Dam will most likely alter the location of the 100-year floodplain. However, until the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps have been revised and approved, we recommend that the cities involved enforce the FEMA floodproofing regulations using the current Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Prior to any activity on District right of way, a permit will be required from l the District. Other improvements may be required which cannot be J't determined at this time. ) " j. Transportation/Circulation. The Citrus Plaza Traffic Impact Analysis's 1995 J $ Validation Study is not fina1. Therefore, comments on the EIR are deferred until the Validation is approved. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at X-78109. NY :FM:frn/lvDEARedveRedlands 00 :-::l --:;'\ r:: ... ...... -.., :1, ,,1.. ;5 Ii iVl IS Ls~Gu'U}i; ill] OCT 1 3 2000 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO.6 County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works 6-1 Comment noted. lbis comment simply references the County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works comments on the Notice of Preparation ("NOP"). which for the most part were the same comments that are repeated as items 1-3 in this comment letter. In addition to the comments repeated in this letter. the NOP comment letter noted that some portions of the Project Area may lie \\ithin the 100- year overflow of the Santa Ana River and questioned whether there would be additional traffic impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 EIR. The comment regarding the Santa Ana River is noted. The previous EIR's traffic analysis was updated and concluded that there were no new traffic impacts. as discussed in Responses to Comments Nos. 3-1 through 3-14. 6-2 Comment noted. A mitigation measure has been added to the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 23 and 162) which indicates that the County \\ill establish adequate provisions for intercepting, detaining, and conducting the accumulated off site drainage around or through the site in a manner that \\ill not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties as demonstrated by an approved storm drain plan. 6-3 Comment noted. 6-4 Comment noted. Any improvements that might be required have been discussed and analyzed in the Draft Subsequent EIR. 6-5 A year 2000 updated traffic study was prepared and therefore the comment's reference to the traffic study as being a 1995 study is inaccurate. The updated study is attached as Appendix E to the Final Subsequent EIR. To provide further clarification, the Adopted TIA was certified as adequate as part of the overall certification of the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR. Nornithstanding that certification, additional work was completed in 1999 and 2000 and at the request of the County's Department of Public Works, the County's Planning Division along with the Project's traffic consultant met with the County's Department of Public Works and confirmed the analysis presented within the 2000 updated traffic study. A new related projects list was compiled by reviewing the records of each relevant jurisdiction. Lists of current projects were obtained from City staff when available COUD~' orSao Bernardino Laud l'u Stn'iCC5 DcpartmtDl CitJUS Plaza Regional MalVlVDA Waler & Sewer Services Plan SCH.l\o. 1999101lZ3 Final SubsequentEIR-JwlC: 2001 Page 358 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review oflhe Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses and, when lists were not already compiled by City staff, the relevant planning department records were reviewed. The grov.th which would occur due to these related projectS was compared to the gro\\th assumed in the Adopted TIA. T rafiic volumes were also recounted in 1999 and the observed annual gro\\th was compared to the annual grov.th levels projected in the Adopted TIA. These comparisons confirmed that the grov.th rates assumed in the Adopted TIA exceed the actual current and likely future gro\\th rates. Count}. OrSaD BtrD.rdino LaDd lise Sen"itts DepanmtQI Citrus Plaza Regional MallllVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCIl. No. 1999101113 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 359 I I' COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY SAFETY DIVISION 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, Third Floor . San Bernardino, CA 92415.0179 - (909) 3B7.5372 . Fax (909) 387.4382 I . PETERR HILLS FIre Ch'e~ Coun::- Fife V','arae~ October 12, 2000 @) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION 385 NORTH ARROWHEAD A VENUE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92415-0182 ATTENTION: TERRI RAHHAL, SPECIAL PROJECTS PLANNER DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR FOR THE IVDA AREA PLAN AMENDMENTS, FACILITIES PLANS AND REVISIONS TO THE CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PROJECT SUBJECT: We have reviewed the above referenced Draft Subsequent EIR regarding Public Facilities - Fire Protection and Water System elements. Significant changes to the Fire Protection Defense and Emergency Medical Services Systems have changed since the 1995 Final Environmental Impact \ Study. It was also noted that the Draft Subsequent EIR does not accurately reflect those changes and therefore, would require, in our opinion, a complete study of Fire Protection facilities, staffing levels and patterns, equipment, and an analysis of appropriate funding mechanisms. This is supported by the following items: 1. The Fire Protection responsibility is now with the San Bernardino County Fire Department 1 '2... not the California Department of Forestry. 2. Significant changes to staffing levels and patterns within local, state and federal laws have J '3 changed. Staffing levels indicated within Draft Subsequent EIR are not consistent with existing staffing levels. 3. Automatic Aid Agreements no longer exist within this specific area with the City of \ '-f Redlands. ..J 4. The County of San Bernardino, Regional Fire and Local Parks Development Impact Fee] Report dated April 1991 has potentially significant economic cost difference in today's S market. 5. Neither the 1995 or Draft Subsequent EIR address the Emergency Medical Services (EMSj'l ~ component of the Fire Service. ~ WILlIAf.1 H. RANDOLPH CCl.:nty A:minj$tr:lti...c Officer Board C"f Supervisors KATHY A. DAV!S. .. .. . . .... .. First District DENNIS HANSBERGER ........ Third District JO~~ D. ~.':KELS . Second District FRED AGUIAR.. . . _ .. . .. .... Fourth District JE~RY EAVES................, Fifth District The aforementioned items hopefully allows you to recognize the need for a complete re-analysis of Section 5, Environmental Impact and Mitigation Measures, 5.7 Public Services and Utilities, 5.7.4 Fire Protection, and other appropriate sections of the Draft Subsequent ErR. I I I 6. Fire equipment (truck company) was mitigated out of the 1995 final ErR by the installatiOS of a Commercial Fire Sprinkler System. These systems are already required by the Uniform I Building Code and therefore, should not be used as a mitigation source. Funher, this does l not meet the current requirements of ISO (Insurance Service Office) for equipment (Fire Engines and Truck Companies). I 7, Projected fire flow requirements of 4000 GPM for 4 hours as set by the City of Redlands wa0 'i, calculated by different standards then the County of San Bernardino, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR FOR THE IVDA AREA PLAN AMENDMENTS, FACILITIES PLANS AND REVISIONS TO THE CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PROJECT October 19, 2000 Page 2 " q We would encourage you to meet with us at your earliest convenience to discuss these issues. Please contact this office at (909) 387-5371 to schedule an appointment. Yours for a Fire Safe Community, CL CHRIS JENSEN, ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL CJ:llm I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR JI1d Resoonses LETTER NO.7 County Fire Department 7-1 Information provided by the County Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. in a lener dated January 11. 1001 (Appendix 1). supplements and modifies the comments contained in this comment lener. As noted in its January 11.1001 !ener. the County Fire Department is satisfied that the Final Subsequent EIR adequately analyzes fue protection and emergency medical services to the project and complies \\1th County standards in all regards. The Final Subsequent EIR (page 146) has been revised to incorporate this information. Relevant changes based on this comment lener and the January 11. 100 I. lener have been incorporated into the Final Subsequent EIR via corrections and additions to that document as further referenced in Response to Comment Nos. 7-1 through 7-8.. 7-1 See January 11. 1001. lener from the County Fire Department. Office cf the Fire Marshal. The Final Subsequent EIR has been revised to reflect the statement in this comment that the fire protection responsibility is now with the San Bernardino County Fire Department. (See pages 41,141.141 and 148.) 7-3 See January 11, 1001. lener from the County Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. As noted in its January lener. the County Fire Department after further review has determined that staffing levels and panems can and have been resolved. As a result. staffing levels indicated \\ithin the Draft Subsequent EIR are consistent with existing staffing levels. (See page 141 of the Final Subsequent EIR.) 7-4 See January 11. 1001 lener from the County Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. The Final Subsequent EIR (page 141) has been revised to reflect the fact that service agreements and/or contracts are available with adjacent jurisdictions for the appropriate additional fire and medical emergency response that may be required. The County Fire Department has concluded that these agreements or contracts \\ill provide adequate staffmg and equipment to serve the Project area \\1th satisfactory fire protection services \\ithin required response times. 7-5 See January 11, 1001. lener from the County Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. As noted in this lener. the County Fire Department after further review has determined that the tax revenues that \\111 accrue to its department upon construction of Phase 1 of the project. as well as tax revenues that \\111 result from the eventual build out of Area A, along \\ith the fee referenced in the Final County ofSn Bernardino Land [Sf Scn'iccs Drp_nmtnl Ciaus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCH. No. 1999101123 Fmal Subsequcn. EIR-June 2001 Page 360 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Subsequent EIR. v.ill be adequate to pay for service to the project. asswning future development v.ithin Area A pays appropriate. proportionate fees for additional costs incurred in serving this area. The project is conditioned to pay appropriate. proportionate fees. (See pages 45. 246 and 248 of the Final Subsequent EIR.) 7-6 See January 12. 2001. letter from the County Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. As noted in this letter, the County Fire Department after funher review has determined that American Medical Response (AIvlR). which has a contractual relationship v.ith the County of San Bernardino for the purpose of providing emergency medical response services to various areas of the County. has the capacity to provide emergency medical services to Area A v. ithin required response times and therefore there is no potentially significant impact associated v.ith Emergency Medical Services (EMS). (See page 246 of the Final Subsequent EIR.) 7-7 See January 12, 2001. letter from the County Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. As noted in this letter. the County Fire Department has concluded that primary service to the project area can be provided from existing resources in combination \\ith automatic aid or mutual aid service agreements from adjacent City jurisdictions. With the fees and taxes to be received from the Citrus Plaza Development and later Area A developments. the County Fire Department has concluded that it v.ill have adequate funds to provide a response in both staffing and equipment in a manner that meets the Department's current requirements as well as that of the Insurance Service Office (ISO). (See page 246 of the Final Subsequent EIR.) 7-8 The San Bernardino County Fire Department determines fire flow based upon the Insurance Service Office (ISO) requirements and County Ordinance 3610. The ISO requirements. along v.ith the requirements of County Ordinance 3610. have been reviewed and it has been determined that 4.000 gallons per minute (GPM) and four hours of storage are more than sufficient for the project. (See page 244 of the Final Subsequent EIR.) 7-9 Based on the January 12. 2001. County Fire Department letter. those aspects of the analysis presented v.ithin Section 5.7.4. Fire Protection, of the Draft Subsequent EIR have been modified to reflect the information analyzed herein. CODDly ofS.a Bernardino Land Vse Scn'itcs Department Citrus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water & Sewer Sel'\:ices Plan SCH. J';o. ImlOll2J Final Subsequent EIR-JWlC 2001 Page361 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - ,. I I I" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ;:l.~~ OCT i 2 2DOD (lit!! of ~.d[and1 October 12, 2000 @ County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Department, Advance Planning Division 385 N. Arrowhead, Third Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Attn: Terri Rahhal: RE: Comments on Draft Subsequent EIR For Proposed General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Code Amendments for the IVDA Area and Associated Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan for Unserved IVDA Areas, and Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Dear Ms. Rahhal: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the "Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report" ("DSEIR") for the County of San Bernardino's repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and other associated actions referenced \ above. The City of Redlands has reviewed the document and hereby submits the following comments for your review. Key Points . The description of proposed infrastructure facilities is not detailed enough to allow this EIR to provide a project level review and clearance under CEQA. The analysis throughout the DSEIR is presented at a program level of detail, commensurate with the level of detail provided in the project L description and the preliminary plan level of this project component. The DSEIR needs to acknowledge this and to state that subsequent environmental review under CEQA will be required as the individual infrastructure projects are defined and proposed for construction. . . Cumulative Impact Assessment is Seriously Flawed. . Growth Inducing Impacts Assessment is Seriously Flawed. . Alternatives Analysis is Seriously Flawed. . Given the extensive revisions that are needed to resolve the many deficiencies identified in the DSEIR, the revised document should be recirculated for a minimum 45-day public review and comment period, so that all revisions can be examined for their adequacy. P.O. BOX 3005 . RED LANDS, CA 92373 * Ro.,.d<<t ~.are Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12, 2000 Page 2 Specific Comments on the DSEIR 1. Chapter 2.0 Summan', p. 13: The DSEIR indicates that the cumulative loss of agricultural resources would be significant, but on page 17, in Table 2-1 ') under Land Use, there is no mention of that unavoidable, significant adverse impact. This is an internal inconsistency that should be resolved in a revised DSEIR. 2. Chapter 3.0 Project Description: Descriptions of proposed water and sewer treatment facilities are too vague for project-level review and clearance at this stage of planning. The information presented is typical of the level of detail contained in a programmatic EIR and the DSEIR should be revised to either add sufficient detail concerning facilities locations and site improvements or note that subsequent environmental review under CEQA 't will be required at the time that specific project locations and features are identified. That will provide the County and the public with an opportunity to ensure that the actual projects conform to the environmental performance standards set forth in EVCSP, Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Project, and this DSEIR. 3. Chapter 3.0 Project Description: The DSEIR should be revised to include alternative Citrus Plaza site plans to illustrate how water and wastewater treatment facilities and associated truck access requirements would be S integrated into the approved development plan, so that potential conflicts with proposed uses, access, and local circulation patterns can be examined. 4. Table 3-2, Comments regarding Area" A" fail to indicate that the City of Redlands has adequate water and sewer service to meet the needs of this area. Also, comments regarding Area "I" fail to note that this area is to currently in the process of being annexed to the City of Redlands and when that process is complete, no County regulations would apply to Area "I." 5. Figure 3-2: Area ''I'' is mistakenly identified as Area" A." . J1 6. Section 3.3.2.3, Construction of Water and Sewer Pipelines: The discussion of pipeline excavation omits staging, stockpiling, storage and parking requirements that would also temporarily disrupt normal traffic and land use activities. This discussion also fails to describe any temporary traffic , control measures that may be required during construction of a water transmission pipeline within the State Route 30 right-of-way as part of Water Supply Option 2A. There is also no description of the construction requirements and environmental disruptions that would be involved during I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I~ I I I I Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12, 2000 Page 3 installation of the Phase II water and sewer improvements to service~ e. development beyond Citrus Plaza. J 7. Sections 3.3.? .2.3 and 3.3.2.2.4, p. 76: The description of Area I Regional and Local System omits any estimate of potential domestic water demand associated with potential future land uses. These sections also fail to note '\ that this area is currently in the process of being annexed to the City of Redlands or to describe water and sewer considerations when that process is complete, since no County regulations would apply to Area "I." 8. Related Proiects and Cumulative Impacts . Chapter 4.0 p. 83-84: This section is confusing and somewhat misleading, and presents an inadequate approach to the assessment of cumulative impacts. The DSEIR indicates that a "related projects" list was compiled for the purpose of this EIR relying upon the list developed for the Citrus Plaza EIR in 1995, and then presents a list of "CMP-Related Projects List - Study Year 2010," in Table 4-1. Unfortunately, the DSEIR does not explain the methodology in creating a year 2010 related projects list from that previous list. What assumptions were made? How does it differ from the list that appeared in the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR? Why is this list sufficient for the larger study area involved in the proposed project? \.0 . Referring to the list of related projects presented in the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR DSEIR Section 5.4, Transportation/Circulation, p. 169, in the 2nd paragraph, states: "These same related projects are used for the analysis of the proposed project's cumulative impacts....." This would be an invalid approach, since some of those projects have been built and are thus part of the current environmental baseline, others have been withdrawn or revised, and still other new projects have been proposed and are pending approvals. 1\ On the other hand, in the Appendix E discussion of how land use growth projections were assembled for the Traffic Validation Study, the first sentence on p. 10 says that "Land use growth from related projects in the City of Redlands, City of San Bernardino, City of Highland and City of Lorna Linda was also updated for this comparison." This statement appears to contradict the discussion in Section 4.0 and the statement on p. 169, referenced above. Furthermore, no contact person names or dates are provided and no references are cited to document the sources of this allegedly updated Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12, 2000 Page 4 related projects list. This DSEIR does not present a direct comparisou of the list of current related projects (1994) compiled for the Citrus \\ Plaza EIR, so the differences between these lists cannot be examined. . Upon closer examination, it appears that the same 1994 related projects list from the 1995 TIA was used. For example, in the 2nd paragraph on p. 10 of App. E, it is stated that"... the anticipated 1999 land use database was then calculated by multiplying each demographic variable growth rate by the five years between 1994 and 1999 and the results were added to the 1994 estimated land use values." This means that the 1999 "Current Projects Summary" shown in Table 3 of App. E is based on an arithmetical straight-line interpolation of the average annual growth rate based on the 1994 and projected year 2010 forecasts. If this is the case, then the 1999 related projects statistics presented in this DSEIR were not developed from updated files in the affected jurisdictions at all. The DSEIR should be revised to establish an up-to-date list of related projects in the traffic impact area, based on information concerning approved and pending projects on file at the affected jurisdictions' planning offices. · On p. 84, the DSEIR argues that the analysis done for 1995 EIR for Citrus Plaza is adequate for the minor revisions now proposed. This argument ignores the much larger land area involved in the proposed project versus the Citrus Plaza site alone, and does not attempt to \-; explain how the previous Citrus Plaza TIA would adequately address t ra'" affic im acts associated with this lar er area. The DSEIR also fails to discuss any changes in CMP methodology that have occurred since the Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza project was '''' certified and how those changes could affect the results of the traffic analysis as it pertains to this project. · Beyond the flaws cited above regarding the "related projects" list, the DSEIR assessment of cumulative impacts to public services and utilities systems cannot be adequately addressed through this list approach. As noted on p. 83 of the DSEIR, "The discussion... should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects \~ contribute rather than the attributes of other projects which do not contribute to the cumulative impact." With respect to cumulative impacts on public services and utilities systems, this assessment must consider potential effects throughout the entire affected service area of each affected service agency. A list of projects selected for their 1'L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft Subsequent En\'ironmental Impact Report Comments October J 2. 2000 Page 5 contributions to impacts on a traffic impact study area does not represent the full set of potential sources of cumulative impacts to water, sewer, storm drainage, fire protection, police protection, public schools, parks and recreation or other public services that are provided throughout a geographically defined service area. . There is no discussion in any part of the DSEIR that quantifies the development potential within the project area, along with associated total utilities and public services demands, and compares these demand projections to the growth and demand projections of the various utility and public service agencies who could be affected by this project, under the various water and sewer system options. The DSEIR should be revised to address cumulative impacts in this manner, particularly with respect to public services and utilities. For example, there is no discussion of potential cumulative impacts on the City of Riverside's water supplies or distribution network master plan, which would be affected under Water Supply Option 7. As another example, the DSEIR concludes that there wiII be no significant cumulative impact with respect to solid waste disposal service because the San Timoteo Canyon landfill has been expanded and the solid waste generation from the proposed project would be within the planned capacity of that landfilL This conclusion is totally unsupported by any quantitative analysis of the estimated solid waste generation throughout the project area, relative to projections of solid waste disposal from other areas that would also transport wastes to the San Timoteo Canyon LandfilL Furthermore, the cumulative impact analysis in other sections such as Earth Resources, Biological Resources, Land Use, etc., should be revised to provide a more specific assessment of the impacts to which all or a portion of the related projects would contribute. IS \(.. 9. Section 5.1 Land Use, pp. 106-107: The analysis of consistency with SCAG policies 3.05 and 3.09 is incomplete and misleading. This'analysis fails to note that provision of water and wastewater service to the IVDA area by the City of Redlands could be the most cost-effective way of using ex:sting infrastructure facilities to serve this area. Without some comparative cost/benefits analysis between the proposed water and sewer service options versus service by the City of Redlands, the analysis as presented is deficient. 10. Section 5.1 Land Use: p. 109, analysis of consistency with SCAG Policy 3.251 does not address the subject policy at alL The policy is focused on preparing " the labor force for the challenges of a changing regional economy. The " Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12, 2000 Page 6 analysis simply points out that the proposed general plan amendments would foster job opportunities by enabling implementation of previously adopted land use plans. This analysis fails to discuss any aspect of the proposed amendments which address the issue of labor force training. 11. Section 5.3 Hvdrologv I Water Ouality, p. 144, under Dewatering: 2nd Sentence says "... temporary dewatering during construction, where necessary, is not expected to involve minimal quantities of water... ..no significant impacts from dewatering are anticipated." If minimal quantities are not expected, then substantial quantities must be-so that should be quantified, locations where such substantial dewatering would occur should be identified, and implications on existing well operations should be analyzed. 12. Section 5.3 Hvdrologv I Water Oualitv p. 147-149: The analysis of potential impacts to "adjacent" wells resulting from operation of either of the two potential well fields associated with water supply options 1 and 2 is inadequate. There is no description of the number, location, owner, or purpose of any wells in the immediate vicinity of the two proposed well fields or any explanation of what the actual effects on nearby wells would be as a result of the proposed water supply options. This discussion fails to describe and explain the geophysical factors that preclude any significant drawdown impacts to nearby wells. 13. Section 5.3 Hvdrology I Water Ouality, p. 149, 1" paragraph: The assessment that neither well field alternative would be affected by TCE or perchlorate appears to conflict with the limits of the Redlands Plume, as illustrated on Figure 5.3-1. Fig. 5.3-1 shows the northern edge of the plume adjacent to the southwest corner of the proposed well zone for Water Option 1 much closer than 3,000 feet south of that proposed well zone, as noted on p. 149 of the DSEIR. The DSEIR should be revised to analyze potential migration of TCE and perchlorates into the horizontal and vertical capture zones of the Option 1 well field. 14. Section 5.1 Land Use, p.112, in Water Infrastructure section: erroneousl~ refers to the City of Redlands as a potential water supplier, rather than th~ J City of Riverside. 15. Section 5.1 Land Use pp. 116 to 117: This part of the DSEIR contains an inadequate evaluation of consistency with land use plans and policies regarding potential water supply and treatment facilities that could be located in the southeastern comer of the Citrus Plaza site: These types of 18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \q "2...0 2\ 2..2.. "2.", - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12. 2000 Page 7 facilities uses are allowed only as Conditionally Permitted Uses in the City of Redland' s Regional Commercial Zone standards, as set forth in the City's adopted version of the EVCSP. This should be noted in a re\.ised DSElR. If the proposed County GP As are retaining all existing land uses policies for the EVCSP, as stated, then the siting of water supply and treatment facilities within the Regional Commercial zone areas would also require approval of '2.,,/ a CUP in accordance with the County's land use standards for that zone. This discretionary approval requirement should be noted in a revised DESIR, and the project description should be expanded to include a Conditional Use Permit for each proposed site within the Regional Commercial Zone that is under consideration for construction of water storage and water and sewer treatment facilities. 16. Section 5.1 Land Use, p. 119: Text near the bottom of the page states: "Construction emissions associated with the proposed wa ter and wastewater treatment facilities... are incorporated into the construction emissions identified for the Citrus Plaza project, as these two facilities are located within that project site. Based on a review of the Citrus Plaza construction emissions, it is concluded that construction of the proposed water and wastewater treatment plants would result in levels of ROC, NOx and PM10 1.'4 emissions which are considered significant." However, the discussion of construction emissions associated with Citrus Plaza on pp. 194-195 omits any reference to emissions associated with construction of these facilities. The contribution of emissions associated with the water and wastewater treatment facilities construction activities is not identified within Table 5.5-7 and there is no reference to any part of the DSEIR where such calculations may be reviewed. Any assessment of air pollutant emissions associated with construction of the proposed water and sewer facilities should compare those emission levels with levels that would occur if services were provided by City of Redlands facilities, as currently planned. 17. Section 5.2.3.2.2 (Liquefaction), p. 130: The DSElR acknowledges that some of the major pipeline options could be subject to potentially significant liquefaction hazards, but fails to provide any alignment-specific information that would enable an informed assessment of the relative level of hazards affecting one option versus another. This is another example of a 1.. '5 programmatic-level of discussion of infrastructure impacts that defers analysis that would actually define the level of hazard present and the corresponding mitigation measures to a future study. The DSElR should bE' revised to include the results of a current geologic hazards analysis throughout the project study area, so that the specific locations of significant liquefaction and other geologic hazards can be identified and the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Repon Comments October 12. 2000 Page 8 'Z~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I consequences of building the various water and sewer facility options can be t "2 ') clearly examined. J 18. Section 5.2.3.2.8. pp. 132-133: The discussion of" Additional Issues Relating to the Construction of the Proposed Water and Treatment and Wastewater Treatment Facilities at the Citrus Plaza Site" apparently relies upon preliminary geotechnical investigations conducted several years ago as part of the envirorunental assessment for the Citrus Plaza project. If so, the information presented in these pages of the DSEIR cannot be considered adequate relative to water storage or water and sewer treatment facilities, since those types of facilities have different loading characteristics and are subject to more restrictive design standards relative to seismic safety, compared to a regional commercial land use. The DSEIR needs to be revised to provide greater specificity regarding the geotechnical constraints and design parameters that would affect construction water and wastewater facilities within the Citrus Plaza site, and also on other potential sites under consideration within project area" A." 19. Section 5.5 Air Quality. pp. 198-200: There is no discussion of the individual contributions of the proposed water and wastewater facilities to the "Project's" VMT or employee projections; it appears that only the totals associated with the Citrus Plaza project are represented here. This analysis should be revised to include the other elements of this project. 20. Section 5.7.1 Water Supply: Fails to address potential impacts on water supply resources and entitlements of the water agencies that are involved in one or more of the proposed water supply options. The conclusion that construction of the water infrastructure facilities would not, in and of itself, result in an increase in water demand is correct; however, it completely ignores the potential impacts that the project could have if water service comes from other than the City of Redlands, as previously planned. The DSEIR should be revised to quantitatively assess potential impacts on all other affected water agencies supplies and resources to det~rmine whether serving the subject project area would result in a previously unplanned level of demand and would require the acquisition of new water supply sources and/ or new entitlements. Also, the argument that this project would have a "de minimus" effect on cumulative water supply impacts because the proposed facilities would be designed to accommodate the increased growth within the project area is invalid. This argument ignores possible consequences on regional water supply sources, as discussed above. 2.e 2'1 2/ - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12. 2000 Page 9 21. Section 5.7.2 Sanitarv Sewers: Same proble . t comment with res Iv. Furthermore, the impact analysiS] ')\ Ignores the significance thresholds defined on p. 217. j 22. Section5.7.3.3.2. p.225. regarding construction solid waste impacts associated with Infrastructure Facilities: The DSEIR states: "All construction debris will be disposed of at local landfills." Apparently, this would include hazardous wastes, which are prohibited in local landfills. This approach to waste disposal conflicts with the mandates to local governments to reduce landfill disposal of solid wastes through source reduction, recycling or reuse methods, as specified in AB 939, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Despite this direct conflict with AB 939, the DSEIR concludes that construction waste disposal at local landfills would be less than significant. The DSEIR should be revised to incorporate solid waste reduction, recycling and reuse requirements into all construction phases of the proposed water and sewer facilities. 23. Section 5.7.3.3.2. p.225-226: The discussion of solid waste impacts associated with water and sewer facilities erroneously indicates that none of the water supply options would generate solid waste during long-term operations. This conclusion fails to recognize that the water treatment facilities that would be built in Area A for all water supply options would generate solid wastes, including hazardous wastes generated during the water treatment process. The DSEIR should be revised to address the solid waste impacts associated with future water treatment facilities within Area A. 24. Section 5.7.3.3.2 p. 225-226: Identifies disposal of sewage sludge from WTF included in Sewer Option 3 as potentially occurring at a private facility known as Synagro Regional Composting, located in Riverside County, but does not quantify the amount of sewage sludge that would be generated, compared to the capacity of the Synagro facility. This is necessary to determine whether disposal at that facility is feasible. The DSEIR should be revised to include this assessment. The other option identified for disposal of sewage sludge is to sell the material to a company that then applies the treated wastewater solids directly to crops for animal feed through spraying, spreading or direct injection or plowing. In either option, a substantial amount of truck traffic could be generated on a daily basis to transport the sewage sludge to a suitable disposal site. The air quality, noise, and traffic impacts that would occur with a sludge disposal options have not been examined. The DSEIR should be revised to address this potential impact, in quantitative terms. ;'0 Y1.. ;,') ~'t Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12. 2000 Page 10 25. Section 5.7.3.5.2. p. 229. 1 " mitig-ation measure for Sewer Option 3: This is an inadequate mitigation measure for a project-level EIR because it refers to preparation of a sludge management program at a future date, which prevents any assessment of the potential positive or negative benefits of such a program at this time. Without some definition of the sludge management program that is specific to this project component, it cannot be concluded that this impact has been sufficiently addressed for the purpose of providing environmental clearance for a water treatment plant project that has not yet been defined. 26. Section 5.7.3.6. p. 230: The DSEIR concludes that this project would not result in any unavoidable, significant impacts with respect to solid waste disposal. This conclusion is in direct conflict with previous conclusions concerning unavoidable, significant cumulative impacts from area-wide growth, as stated in the Final EIR for the EVCSP and the Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project. The DSElR should acknowledge this conflict and explain why a new finding of less than significant cumulative impacts is a ppropriate, or a revised finding of an unavoidable significant impact should be made. 27. Sections 5.7.4 and 5.7.5, Fire Protection and Law Enforcement. Both of these sections fail to address potential significant impacts that could occur if Area A is not annexed to Redlands and primary fire and law enforcement services continue to be provided by the County. The DSEIR notes that current County facilities and staffing are adequate for existing conditions, but fails to assess potential cumulative effects on levels of service resulting from development of the project area. The current ISO rating for fire protection services provided by the County is much lower than the rating if service is provided via the Redlands Fire Department. Emergency response times to the project area are currently averaging 15 minutes, well above the valley average. The nearest Redlands police station is onIy two miles from the project area, compared to seven miles from the nearest <::ounty Sheriff's station. The DSEIR should be revised to assess potential cumulative effects on fire protection and law enforcement levels of service due to development of the project area, to determine if the County would need to add staffing or construct new facilities to maintain adequate levels of service for these alread y stretched public services. This assessment should then be compared to levels of service impacts if the project area is annexed to Redlands and served by the Redlands police and fire departments. 3S" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 31., 37 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12. 2000 Page I I 28. Section 5.12.3.2. pp. 298-?99: This discussion omits any reference to thfl potential well field located immediately north of the Santa Ana River, as described for Water Supply Options 2A and 2B. Figure 5.12-1 does not show these potential wells. This section of the DSEIR needs to be revised to evaluate potential impacts to biological resources associated with development of a well field on the northern side of the Santa Ana River, as shown on Figure 3-7. Other sections of the DSElR should be examined to ensure that similar revisions are made, if necessary, to address potential impacts of the well field option on the northern side of the river. ,B 29. Section 5.12.4. p. 303: This is another example where the DSEIR presents ilie argument that since the project impacts have been mitigated to less than significant, then the project would have a de minimZls impact with respect to cumulative impacts. That argument is unsupported by an actual analysis that demonstrates that the type and severity of the overall cumulative impact would occur with or without the project, in which case, the project's effects would be negligible, would not materially affect the quality of the environment with respect to that cumulative impact and would thus be considered to have a de minimllS effect. Revisions should be made throughout the DSEIR to present better justified arguments for conclusions that the project would result in de minimus level cumulative impacts, or to modify the conclusions appropriately. 3'\ 30. Section 5.12.5.2. p.304. Mitigation Measures for the Santa Ana Wooly-star and the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat: The language is phrased in terms of recommendations, and uses the term" should" instead of "wilL U As written, these measures are inadequate because they do not represent commitments Llo to take any particular action to avoid harm to these species. Absent such commitments, it cannot be concluded that the project's potential impacts have been mitigated to less than significant. The DSEIR needs to be revised to incorporate verif e ommitments to measures to iti at' acts to these two species. Wherever the DSEIR contains similar advisory rather than l man a guage with respect to mitigation measures, those measures j '1 \ need to be revised and restated as commitments. 31. Chapter 6.0 Growth Inducement: This entire section is inadequate. In section 6.1, it is argued that growth-inducing effects of the proposed plan amendments would be less than significant because U . . . development would ultimately be constrained by the collective capacity of the service systems." While this statement is true, it does not provide any discussion of what 't2.. growth inducing effects could occur as a result of the proposed plan amendments or any analysis of whether those effects could be significant. Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12. 2000 Page 12 Section 6.1 needs to be revised to provide this analysis. Section 6.1 also fails to address potential growth inducing effects that could result from the precedent setting action involved in the proposed general plan amendments. If approved, these amendments could lead to similar proposals in other unincorporated areas that are within a nearby city's Sphere of Influence. These issues should be discussed in a revised DSEIR. In Section 6.2, the DSEIR argues that".. .implementation of any of the proposed water supply and sewer services options would not directly result in growth inducing impacts," because "County agencies have concluded that since the water supply and wastewater treatment facilities are designed and sized only to accommodate the demands imposed by development within IVDA Area A, including the Citrus Plaza project site, the potential growth inducing effects of the proposed facilities would not extend beyond IVDA Area A." This conclusion is misleading. A standard test of whether a project could have growth inducing impacts is whether it would provide infrastructure to areas that currently lack such infrastructure or where existing infrastructure facilities are inadequate and insufficient to support any additional development. The DSEIR states that the proposed water and sewer facilities would provide infrastructure that is currently lacking or undersized/incomplete. This ignores the ready availability of adequate water and sewer infrastructure that could be provided from City of Redlands facilities, in the immediate area. However, because the DSEIR indicates that this project would resolve existing infrastructure deficiencies in Area A, the . document should be revised to conclude that this project would directlv enable the development of the presently vacant lands in the project area, and is thus a growth inducing impact. This section of the DSEIR needs to be revised to discuss the growth inducing effects associated with the proposed water and sewer options. This analysis should include estimates of the development potential of the land that would benefit from the proposed improvements and an identification of the range and potential significance of potential effects on public services, noise, air quality and traffic that would result from development of the project area. Section 6.3 is confusing. It begins with a reference to a finding in the 1995 Final EIR for the previously approved Citrus Plaza project concerning significant cumulative impacts on the Redlands Unified School District, a public services issue, and follows that with a discussion of potential increases in local housing demand due to relocation of employee households into the project area. If there is a logical linkage between the first paragraph and the second, it is well hidden. On p. 308, the discussion goes on to examine the effect of Citrus Plaza job generation on the countywide jobs/housing LtL. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft Subsequent Envirorunental Impact Report Comments October 12, 2000 Page 13 balance. The analysis leaves a bit of mystery, however, indicating only that "When the revised project and related projects are analyzed together, they would contribute toward the attainment of the countywide jobs/housing goal of 1.2 jobs per dwelling unit." Unfortunately, the DSEIR does not identify this contribution as positive or negative and doesn't provide any quantification of the countywide jobs/ housing balance with and without this project and the related projects. Lacking that quantification, no conclusions regarding the jobs/housing balance effects of the proposed revisions to Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project can be drawn. Moreover, the DSEIR does not explain how an assessment of jobs/housing balance reveals anything about growth inducing effects. This strange discussion ends by noting that the development impact fees that must be paid to local school districts would compensate for impacts on those districts, and then announces that"... the development of the Citrus Plaza site would result in additional growth inducing impacts beyond those addressed in the previous analysis." There is nothing in this section of the DSEIR that provides any explanation of how/why this increased growth inducing effect would occur, or of what kinds of growth inducing effects would be increased. Section 6.3 needs to be completely revised to focus on how/why the proposed revisions to the Citrus Plaza project would or would not induce economic or population growth, including housing, directly or indirectly, in accordance with Section 15126.2( d) of the CEQA Guidelines. This discussion also needs to identify the range and potential significance of any growth inducing impacts that may be identified. 32. Section 7.3.1. Proposed Plan Amendments. p. 310: The DSEIR defines this alternative as continuation of the existing infrastructure conditions in the project area. This definition ignores the current General Plan policies and the previous approvals granted for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall, which encourage and even assume that water and sewer service to Area A would be provided by the City of Redlands. This "Existing Plans and Policies" Alternative is a required version of the No-Project Alternative, as specified in Section.15126.6(e)(3)(A) of the CEQA Guidelines. The DSEIR needs to be revised to compare the effects of the proposed plan amendments to the effects of the existing plans and policies, whereby the City of Redlands would provide water and sewer service to Area A. This analysis is necessary to comply with the aforementioned section of the CEQA Guidelines and to provide the public and the County decision-makers with a clear comparison of the environmental advantages and disadvantages between the existing infrastructure policies and the proposed revised policies. I.\-l.. 'B Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12,2000 Page 14 33. Section 7.3.2 Infrastructure Facilities. pp. 310-311: This section fails to compare the environmental advantages/disadvantages of the proposed water and sewer system options with those of the facilities that would be provided by the City of Redlands, pursuant to existing County and City of Redlands policies and previous approvals concerning the Citrus Plaza project. This comparison needs to be made with respect to impacts on water 4-l.f supplies and water entitlements for all potentially affected water service agencies, drawdown impacts on existing local wells, potential contamination from the Redlands Plume, and short-term air quality, noise and traffic impacts during construction of supply, distribution system and treatment facilities. A similar comparative assessment regarding existing and planned sewer facilities also needs to be made. A comparison of long-term impacts such as visual aesthetics, noise, traffic, and air quality associated with above ground infrastructure facilities also needs to be made. Section 7.3.2 needs to be completely revised as just described, in order to comply with Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A) of the CEQA Guidelines and to provide the public and the County decision-makers with a clear comparison of the envirorunental advantages and disadvantages between facilities provided by the City of Redlands versus proposed facilities provided by the County or other agencies. 34. Section 7.3.3 Citrus Plaza Site. p. 311-313: This section also describes and evaluates false alternatives. The Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project itself was previously approved and that approval is still in effect. The primary objective of the proposed changes to this project, as stated on Section 3.4, p. 79, is to provide water and sewer services to this project by some alternative to obtaining service from the City of Redlands. The project applicant is also requesting approval of a new development agreement by the County of San lt~ Bernardino that would correspond to the revisions to public services and infrastructure facilities that would serve the Citrus Plaza project. The onIy actual changes to the commercial center that are currently proposed are described in Section 3.4 of the DSEIR as three scenarios that are limited to different variations on the commercial center site plan, with respect to building locations and orientations, the boundary between Phase I and Phase II, and circulation patterns. Therefore, alternative regional mall projects or alternative regional mall locations do not need to be analyzed in this DSEIR. Simply repeating the alternatives analysis that was presented in the 1995 Final EIR for the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall project misses the point entirely and does not address the objectives or characteristics of what is currently proposed. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I In I I I I Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Comments October 12, 2000 Page 15 . Section 7.3.3 of the DSEIR needs to be completely rewritten to address an alternative to the proposed site plan revisions that would reduce one or more of the significant environmental effects of those revisions, which have not been identified anywhere in the DSEIR. This assessment would likely focus on reducing the environmental impacts resulting from the provision of water and sewer infrastructure to this site from sources other than the City of Redlands, particularly those adverse effects that would not occur if service were provided by the City of Redlands. L\-S" Based on the above comments, the City of Redlands believes that the revisions necessary to make the document adequate are sufficiently extensive that the revised document, when completed, should be recirculated for review and comment. We will look forward to your response. 'tb ~~k Jeffrey L. Shaw, AICP Community Development Director 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO.8 City of Redlands 8-1 Comment noted. 8-2 The EIR provides the level of detail required for a project level review: in contrast. this comment does not provide any specific information as to which part of the description of proposed water and sewer facilities it believes is "too vague" for such a level of review. The location. overall design. proposed size and methods of operation of all water and sewer facilities has been provided. The relevant information is found in the Draft Subsequent EIR, in Appendix G and other studies prepared by the applicant's engineer. Psomas. and reviewed and approved by the County and its staff. and in other documents on the water and sewer facilities. Proposed water and sewer alternatives are described and discussed in detail in Volume 2. Technical Appendices. Appendix G - Infrastructure Options Analysis of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. dated August 2000. Water and sewer demands, along with three sewer and seven water options to supply these services to the area. were developed. Each alternative was developed in detail to determine its technical feasibility. The comment's assertions of flaws in . the EIR's analysis of cumulative impacts. grov.th inducing impacts and alternatives merely summarizes what the comment letter claims are the key points raised in the balance of the lener. The follov.ing identifies which comments expand upon these points and references the reader to the responses provided therein: Cumulative Impact - Comment Nos. 8-10 through 8-16: Growth Inducing Impacts - Comment No. 8-42: and Alternatives - Comment Nos. 8-43 through 8-45. Because no extensive revisions are required based on these or other comments. and because no new significant information has been added to the Final Subsequent EIR which would deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment on substantial adverse project impacts or feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that may not be adopted. recirculation of the Draft Subsequent EIR is no~ required. 8-3 Due to a change of circumstances on the Citrus Plaza site, the site is no longer used for agricultural purposes due to death and removal of the citrus trees previously grown on the property. The text of the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 14, 33, 123, Count)' orSan Buoardiao Land tSt Sen.-jcts DtpanmtDt CilTUS Plaza Regional t\.talVlVDA \-"':ater & Sewer SerYlces Plan SCH.:>;.. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 362 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses 114. 110 and 341 has been revised accordingly.) This project will not :ltl'c.:: or change the prior decisions \\ith the adoption of the East Valley Corridor Sp~citic Plan and the Citrus Plaza approval - decisions which were made to allo\\ development of land previously used as agriculrure. Table 1-] has been revised in this Final Subsequent EIR to reflect this comment. 8-4 The EIR and its appendices provides more than adequate detail for a project level review. Proposed water and sewer alternatives are described and discussed not only in the body of the EIR but also in detail in Volume 1. Teclmical Appendices. Appendix G - Infrastrucrure Options Analysis of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. dated August 1000. Water and sewer demands for Area A were developed. along with three options to supply sewer and seven options to supply water to the area. Each alternative was developed in detail to determine its teclmical feasibility. 8-5 Under certain of the options evaluated in the EIR. a water storage facility capable of holding up to approximately I million gallons in order to store fire flow. as well as an associated pump station. ",ill be located on the Citrus Plaza site. This would be a lirnited facility for fire flow storage and would not be used as a water source. The text of the Final Subsequent EIR regarding water storage on the Citrus Plaza site has been revised for clarification (see pages 47. 77. 80. 85. 117. I 18. 111. 198.103 and 301). The location of this small water storage facility and associated pump station are shown on the site plans in the EIR on Figures 3-11 through 3-14. The water storage facility is sho\\n as a circle on the right-hand side of those site plans. adjacent to Spencer Street and immediately east of the proposed building. The associated pump station is sho\\n as a rectangle adjacent to the fire flow water storage facility. In addition. Appendix G discusses the storage facility and associated pump station in further detail. The truck access for such water facilities would be the same truck access to be used for deliveries to the retail stores within the Citrus Plaza site and as such would involve no issues of uses. access or changes on the local circulation patterns. The principal wastewater plant. Sewer Option 3 only. would be located along the east side of California Street north of San Bernardino A venue. The proposed land use is special development. The principal water facilities would be located east of Alabama, west of 1-2 I 0 and north of Palmetto. The proposed land use is Regional industrial. This wastewater plant would meet all discharge requirements. including tertiary treatment as well as demineralization. It would be designed and operated to comply with the permitting and water quality requirements and associated standards as imposed by the County Regional Water Quality Control Board as well as all applicable regulatory agencies. Access would be provided to the site from Counl')" of San BUDardino Land [Sf Stn"ites Otpartmtnl C.UUS Plaza Regional MallIlVDA v.:ater & Sewer $en'lces Plan SClL:".. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 363 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses California Avenue. which is designated a Major Anerial and prmides an interchange to the 1-10 Freeway. All driveways to and from the site would be required to conform to County standards in order to assure safe operations. The text of the Final Subsequent EIR regarding the wastewater treatment plant for Sewer Option 3 has been revised for clarification (see pages 80. 198 and 30 I). 8-6 First. it is important to note that Table 3-2 is not designed to provide information on the capacity of sewer and water facilities. or the state of plans for future annexation. In any event. see Response to Comment No. 8-17 regarding the City of Redlands' inability to serve Area A. The comment's statements regarding the fact that Area I is in the process of being annexed to the City of Redlands is noted. but that fact does not impact the adequacy of the EIR. As a point of information. subsequent to the submittal of the City of Redlands' comment lener on October 12. 2000. the annexation of Area I to the City of Red lands became effective Decembet 29. 2000.' 8-7 The comment is incorrect. Area I is correctly identified on Figure 3-2. 8-8 It is recognized that pipeline excavation would have staging, stock:piling, storage and parking requirements which would have the potential to temporarily disrupt normal traffic and land use activities. While this is the type of issue that generally is handled at the permining stage rather than in the CEQA document. nonetheless it is discussed in the Firtal Subsequent EIR, beginning at page 81. As discussed therein, plans shall be conditioned to address traffic control and possible effects on public and private property due to clearing, excavation and other pipeline construction activities, With normal and expected project management. pipeline excavation activities would have extremely limited impact. There are no unusual land use features or traffic flow considerations that would create difficulties for pipeline installation using normal management practices, In addition. the construction and therefore the impacts, if any, would be shon-term in duration and similar to other pipeline construction performed Countywide. Construction staging. stockpiling, storage and parking requirements and the temporary disruption to normal traffic flow and land use activities will be incorporated in detail in the fmal construction documents, These documents will be subsequently reviewed and permits issued by the appropriate agency responsible for the public right of ways, i,e" Caltrans, County of San Berrrardino ! Telephone conversation with Mr. James Roddy, Local Agency Formation CommISsion. COUluy of San Beroardino. January 16. 2001. Couaty orSln Brrnardino LaDd liSt Sen'icrs Departmenl Ciaus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA \~/a1er & Sewer SeI"o'ices Plan SCIl. :-io,l99910IlD Final Subsequent EIR - June: 2001 Page 364 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review oflhe Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Special District for Transportation. and the City of San Bernardino. Details of the Traffic Control Plan will be prepared in accordance with the Caltrans Manual of Traffic Control or the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook. depending on the jurisdiction with control of the right-of-way impacted. Construction staging and methodology will be in accordance with the County of San Bernardino Special Districts Department Standards for Sanitary Sewers. the Office of Special Districts County of San Bernardino, California Standards for Domestic Water Systems. The Green Book of Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the American Water Works Association Standards. Construction documents will be similar to those being used for construction of the water facilities in Oak Hills. County Service Area 70-1; Phelan and Pinion Hills. County Service Area 70-L. Pipelines and other facilities would be constructed as development takes place. Despite the fact that the construction will occur in phases. the EIR undenook a conservative analysis of the potential impacts by analyzing pipeline construction in stages. with each stage being completed in a trench that is 30.000 square feet in area (e.g.. a trench that is six feet deep, ten feet wide and 500 feet long) and the simultaneous construction of the water and wastewater treatment facilities under all Water Options and Sewer Option 3. respectively. 8-9 The comment does not indicate the "potential future land uses" to which it is referring. It is noted that the ov.ner of the Mountainview Power Facility in Area I has announced plans for future expansion which are currently undergoing review by the California Energy Commission. The Mountainview Power Company has filed an application v.ith the California Energy Commission (Application for Certification 00-AFC-2) to expand the electrical energy production capabilities of its existing site. With regard to water and sewer facilities their application indicates "Water requirements for the project are -1.655 gpm at full operation and will be supplied by a combination of sources. A minimum of 50% of requirements will be supplied through the use of secondary effluent from the City of Redlands Wastewater Treaunent Plant (WWTP). The other water supply sources for the plant v.ill be onsite groundwater derived from two existing wells located on the property site and from two new wells to be drilled on site that v.ill draw TCE contaminated water from the middle aquifer. The applicant has agreed not to use the high quality lower aquifer water in excess of their current usage except in an emergency. Mountainview Power proposes to install approximately 2.3 miles of new reclaimed water supply pipeline for the transport of secondary effluent. Wastewater discharge \\ill be sent through an existing 12-inch water pipeline and a proposed l.l 00 foot connector to the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) discharge line:' In addition, the applicant has been informed by the Regional Water Quality COUD~' or San Buaardino Laod l:K Stn'ic::cs Department Citrus Plaza Reg.ional Mall/IVOA Water & Sewer Services Plan SClI.:<Oo. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR-JWlC 2001 Page 365 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Control Board staff that the City of Redlands must obtain an amendment to its existing waste discharge requirements in order to allow the City of Redlands to provide the secondary effluent treatment from its wastewater treatment plant to Mountainview Power Company. Area I was annexed to the City of Redlands (see Response to Comment No. 8-6). The environmental impacts of the Mountainview Power Company expansion are evaluated in the California Energy Commission ("CEC") documents. Because these CEC environmental documents post-date the release of the Draft Subsequent EIR. the analyses contained in the CEC's documents could nor be included in the Draft Subsequent EIR, but have been incorporated by reference into the Final Subsequent EIR (see pages 80 and 81). 8-10 The 1995 analysis considered both specific proposed related projects and the total growth anticipated by the Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG). The higher of these two growth levels was then assumed. In order to assure that this growth level was still adequate, a review of the related projects was conducted in the year 1999. The relevant planning officials from the relevant jurisdictions were contacted. If the jurisdiction maintained a current projects lis!. that list was utilized. Otherwise, the 1995 list was updated using City records. This process was repeated in the year 2000. Comparisons of the current lists with the growth assumed in the Adopted TIA confirmed that the current related projects would not exceed the growth assumptions incorporated into the Adopted TIA. To further assure that the Adopted TIA adequately addressed growth, traffic volume counts were conducted in 1999. These counts show that growth in traffic has been occurring at a lower rate than was assumed in the Adopted TIA. The results of these comparisons are documented in Appendix E. Finally, the City of Redlands made a determination in its approval of the Pavillons project that there were no new projects. The updated 2000 related projects list is sufficient for the cumulative impacts analysis for traffic. The changes to the County's General Plan, the East Valley Specific Plan, and the County's Development Code do nor alter or affect in anyway the existing planned and designated land uses for any property, and therefore are not expected to have any impact on traffic levels. The various water and sewer facilities described in the various options have extremely limited or nonexistent traffic generation and are therefore nor expected to have any impact on traffic levels. The comparison of the assumed growth levels from the Adopted TIA and the related projects list demonstrate that the Adopted TIA assumes more than 5,000 more employees in the Northwest Redlands area than are accounted for by current related projects. This level of assumed excess growth will more than accommodate the approximately six employees and 30 to 35 daily Count)' orSan Bernardino laud l:sr Scn"jccs Drpanmrnl GUllS Plaza Regional MallllVDA Water & Sewer Servll:es Plan SCIL No.lmIOJ\23 Fmal SubscquentEIR-June 2001 Page 366 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review orthe Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses vehicle trips to and from the sewage and water treatment plants. 8-11 See Response to Comment No. 8-10. In addition. the list of related projects followed the procedures set forth in the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15I30(b)(1)(B). based on the nature of the resource in question. the location of the project. and the type of project. While the 1995 list of projects served as the base document from which to start. the complete list of projects was updated to reflect the projects with an application for approval pending at the time the notice of preparation was released for the Subsequent EIR. Moreover. the EIR took an even more conservative stance by counting not only all reasonably foreseeable projects in the appropriate geographic area. but also where the SCAG or SanBAG growth projection documents called for more growth than was envisioned by the projects on the. updated list. the EIR added infill development so that the SCAG and SanBAG growth projections also were taken into account. The appendix has been updated to reflect the contact person name and dates. A comparison of the related projects with the growth assumed and the Adopted TIA showed that more housing units and a higher level of employment was assumed in the Adopted TIA than would occur due to the related projects. Further. a review of traffic volumes has shown that traffic growth in the project study area has been slower than anticipated in the Adopted TIA. These analyses are documented in Appendix E. Section 4.0 of the Final Subsequent EIR has been revised (see pages 88. 90 and 177) to be consistent with the methodology as described in Appendix E. 8-12 See Responses to Comments Nos. 8-10 and 8-11 above regarding the methodology used to compile the list of projects. As stated above. the growth projected in the Adopted TIA exceeded the actual growth due to the current related projects. Moreover. by not only updating the list of projects for year 2000 but also adding infill development where the list of projects failed to account for the amount of growth anticipated in the SCAG and/or SanBAG growth projections. the Adopted TIA as updated for this EIR took a conservative view of impacts. 8- I3 The project land-use changes which could result in increased traffic generation are confmed to the Citrus Plaza site and are. in fact. the same land-use changes analyzed in the Adopted TIA. There has been no change in land use designations, just an identification of potential providers of water and sewer service to the project. As stated in Response to Comment No. 8-27. additional traffic trips estimated for the WWTP plant is 24 employee trips per day and a maximum of 14 additional truck trips per month for hauling of sludge and delivery of chlorine. Water facilities would result in approximately 4 employee trips per day and two truck trips for delivery of chlorine per month. As stated in Response to Comment COUDt~.. of San Bernudino Land list Mn'ic:cs Department Citrus Plaza RegIOnal MallllVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCll :-0..1999101113 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 367 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses No. 8-10. this limited number of employee and truck trips (approximately 30 [(\ 35 trips daily) is far less than the assumed excess growth of over 5.000 employees beyond all current related projects in the Northwest Redlands area. Consul ration with SanBAG staff has confmned that, absent any changes in the land-uses analyzed in the Adopted TIA. the County is not required to prepare a new TIA once a project has an adopted TIA. The method used to prepare the Adopted TIA was carefully reviewed and the County concluded that such methodology continues to provide an accurate estimate of the potential direct and cumulative traffic impacts. Therefore, the Adopted TIA is in full conformance with the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) and adequately addresses the long-range traffic impacts associated with Area A. See also Responses to Comments Nos. 3-2. 3-3 and 8-10. 8-14 The County and its experts in preparing the EIR carefully reviewed the revisions in CMP methodology that have occurred since the 1995 EIR for Citrus Plaza was cenified and analyzed how. if at all, those changes affected the results of the traffic analysis as it penains to this project. After this review. the County and its experts concluded there were no new impacts. The County as well as the applicant's traffic consultant continue to believe that the year 2000 updated Adopted TIA contains an accurate analysis of the project's potential traffic impacts, both direct and cumulative. They have reviewed the data extensively and have concluded that there are no new direct or cumulative impacts to traffic resulting from the project. 8-15 Regarding impacts to fire protection. see letter dated January 12. 2001. from the County of San Bernardino Fire Department, in which the department states that it is able to provide service to the project area within the requisite response times without a significant impact on its ability to serve other areas. As for water and sewer service, it is not expected that water or sewer service being provided by another agency will have an impact on water or sewer service on other ponions of that agency's service area. Both the IVDA and City of San Bernardino have indicated surplus water supply capacity to provide water service. The City of San Bernardino has high groundwater issues in parts of the City that have caused construction related problems. The City of San Bernardino as well as the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District have been reviewing options to lower the groundwater table in these areas. Water service by the City of San Bernardino would help mitigate the City's high groundwater problem by assisting in lowering the water tables in the affected areas. San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District is currently negotiating with the Orange County Water District to sell them surplus groundwater from Couot)' orSaa Bern.rdino Land list Stn'ices DtpanmtDI Cinus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water & Sewer Sen1lces Plan SCIBio. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 368 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review oflhe Draft Subsequent EIR Jnd Responses under the City of San Bernardino. SVMWD is a state water comractor and has surplus capacity available. which also could serve Area A. New facilities will be constructed which will bring water to Area A. This is true for Water Options 3. ... 5. 6 and 7. As for availability of sewer and water supply services. see the December 22. 2000 letter from the SBMWD in which the SBMWD states that it can provide sewer and water supply services to IVDA Areas A and I without any significant. unmitigable. adverse impacts to the environmem or to SBMWD's facilities or long-term planning efforts. See also Responses to Comments for Letter No. 11. With regards to sewerage. the City of San Bernardino has capacity available. which can be purchased. The City's Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant has a capacity of 33 mgd and is currently operating at approximately 26 mgd. The City is largely built out and is not expecting any .large increases in demand for wastewater treatment capacity. Tbis unused capacity is surplus at this time. Psomas. the applicant's engineer. has met v.ith the City of San Bernardino staff and has reviewed \\ith them the City's currem capacity and expected grov.th rates. Based on this review. it was determined that the City could accept the estimated 1.7 million gallons per day (mgd) anticipated from the project at its facility under an appropriate service agreement v.ithout affecting the City's ability to provide existing or expected future sewage rate grov.th. The same is true of capacity in the SA WP A SARI line. Providing sewerage service through these agencies \\ill not have an impact on other portions of their service areas. The Final Subsequent EIR (pages 60. 62 and 64) has been revised to incorporate this updated information regarding wastewater treatment capacity. In fact. it may have a positive impact by helping the agency more efficiently use its facilities and recoup facility capital investment. See also Response to Comment No. 8-16. 8-16 See Response to Comment No. 8-15. The comment is incorrect in its assertion that the potential water and sewer needs of Area A were not analyzed. The study by the applicant's engineer. Psomas. which is located in Appendix G to the Final Subsequent EIR. fully analyzed the potential water and sewer needs of Area A. Upon build out. the Appendix G Study calculated that the water supply need based on development potential of Area A would be 1.7 mgd for sewer and 1.973 mgd for water. Psomas then met \\ith each agency that was a potential service provider and analyzed that agency's ability to provide service to Area A. Moreover, refer to the letter from the City of Riverside dated December 26. 2000. There would be little. if any cumulative impacts to the City of Riverside distribution network. Option 7 only proposes a connection to the City of Riverside transmission pipeline. There could be impacts v.ith regard to supply. requiring an additional supply well. The construction of a water supply well and appurtenant facilities could be imposed as a Count~' or s.. Bcraardino Land t:sr Scn"ices Dcparamtnl emus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water &:. Sewer Sef"\'1ces Plan SCII. 1'0.1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 369 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR:md Responses condition for connection. thus eliminating any cumulative impact to the Cir: of Riverside. A quantitative evaluation of the San Timoteo Landfill was provided in the Draft Subsequent EIR. As indicated. the San Timoteo Landfill was recently expanded and has a remaining airspace capacity of approximately 2.8 million cubic yards with an anticipated closure date in the year 2016. The landfill has a permitted intake of 1.000 tons per day and an actual intake of approximately 402 tons per day. It has a permitted capacity of 309.000 tons per year. but in 1999 took in only 131.759 tons. v.ith a remaining capacity at the end of 1999 of 6.7 million tons. Thus. the San Timoteo Landfill has enough capacity to receive not only the additional 13.64 tons per day of solid waste that would be generated by Citrus Plaza. but also solid wastes generated by the cumulative development. The cumulative list" of projects was used to analyze cumulative impacts not only for traffic but for the other environmental issues for which there were potentially significant cumulative impacts as well. 8-17 Neither CEQA nor the SCAG policies require a cost benefit analysis to be performed. as this comment seems to imply. and therefore the absence of such an analysis does not make the EIR deficient in any respect. There are several problems v.ith the provision of water and wastewater service to the IVDA area by the City of Redlands. First, the provision of such services is prohibited by the City of Redlands' Measure U which states as follows: "No extension of City-provided utility services to areas outside the City limits shall occur until such areas are properly annexed to the City..." The only exception to this prohibition is for areas not contiguous to the City and for which the landov.ner agrees to a binding pre- annexation agreement. Because IVDA Area A has been removed from the Sphere of Influence of the City of Redlands. such area cannot be annexed into the City and the provision of public utilities to Area A as an unincorporated area is prohibited by the express provisions of Measure U. Second, the City of Redlands has not applied to the Local Agency Formation Commission for approval to provide services outside of its municipal boundaries. Third, there are several problems v.ith the existing capacity and facilities of the City of Redlands water and sewer infrastructure which would need to be addressed before the City would be physically capable of providing services to the IVDA area. The project's engineer has reviewed the City of Redlands Water and Sewer Master Plans, both completed in the laner part of 1998. In addition, we have also reviewed the Inland Valley Corridor Facility Specific Plan Engineer's Report dated July 1988. After careful review of these documents, they determined that the water and sewer infrastructure within Area A is inadequate and will require Coual)' ursin Bernardioo Laud [Sf Services Dtplrtmcal CitruS Plaza Regional MalllIVDA Waler & Sewer ServIces Plan SCH./'io. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 370 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review oflhe Draft Subsequent EIR anj Responses significant upgrading to meet the demands of the proposed future commercial and industrial land uses of Area A. The land use absorption used in both the water and sewer master plans indicate that less than 20% of the land within Area A. primarily along Lugonia berween Nevada Street and Highway 30 and along Highway 30 to just north of San Bernardino A venue would be developed by the year 2007. The remaining (more than 80%) of Area A would be developed berween year 2007 and 2020. This is important. indicating that the City of Redlands is not anticipating the majority of the water or sewer until after 2007. Water Svstem The existing water system infrastrUcture within Area A is only adequate to serve the current domestic water needs of several residences, a school and several small businesses and the City of Redlands wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The current infrastrUcture is inadequate to serve the proposed future land use within Area A. Currently Area A is served by rwo pressure zones. The 1350 zone serves the west rwo thirds and the 1570 zone serves the eastern one third. Laterals from a transmission main in Lugonia A venue travel into and serve selected parcels within Area A. These laterals are under sized for the future land uses. have dead ends. lack looping for reliability and cannot provide adequate fire protection for future development. Proposed Facilities The Water Master Plan proposes backbone water facilities for both the 1350 and 1570 pressure zones of Area A. The Master Plan recognizes the inadequacy of facilities within the 1350 and 1570 zones. With reference to the 1570 zone. the Master Plan states. .. ....projected demand and supply points for 1999 indicate significant stresses in this zone." It goes on to state for the 1350 zone, .... .significant additional transmission lines will be needed to provide water to this zone from higher zones." The Water Master Plan indicates a need for a 16-inch backbone water transmission line in San Bernardino Avenue from 1-210 to Nevada Street and then a 12-inch line from Nevada to California Street and a 12-inch line in California Street from San Bernardino A venue to Lugonia to support future development of Area A. In addition to this backbone transmission line an additional pipeline nerwork within Area A will be necessary to distribute water throughout the system and provide adequate drinking water and fire protection for Couat)' of SID Bernardino Laud [51' St'n'ices DC'partmtDI Ciuus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCH. No. 1999101123 Fanal Subsequent ElR-June 2001 Page 371 1].0 Comments Received During Public Review oflbe Draft Subsequent EIR and Respons<s the area. Both the East Valley Corridor Plan and the Water Master Plan recognize the need for additional storage to meet peaking and fIre flows. Storage has been proposed to be located near the City's Texas Avenue water facilities. This additional storage capacity currently has not been constructed. The City of Redlands water supply is currently at or near its maximum capacity. The California Department of Health Services (DOHS), 1998 Annual Drinking Water Inspection Report states: "With the recent shutdown of the Texas Street GAC plant (due to groundwater contamination with percWorate) the water system brings demands within close range of supply." The City"s 1998 water master plan recognizes the c~is by stating, "This contamination could affect the City's current maximum day demands now and in the future." The DOHS has indicated that in 1999 there were seven City of Redlands potable water production wells shutdown due to contamination. Sewer Infrastructure The City of Redlands WWTP is located at the northerly edge of Area A, adjacent to the Santa Ana River. All of the existing sewer infrastructure within Area A is transmining sewer flows from other parts of the City. All of these transmission trunks are at or near capacity. Sewer Master Plan Figure 5-3 identifies primary sewers exceeding city designed criteria at peak base wastewater flow. From this figure. it can be seen that the sewers in Nevada Street. within easements between Lugonia and Palmeno Avenue and along Palmeno Avenue all will be at or exceeding their design capacity by the year 2007. This is without the majority of Area A being developed. Additionally a portion of the sewer within easements was exceeding its design capacity in 1996. This is years before the City's projected development of Area A. Figure E-l of the Sewer Master Plan indicates the recommended wastewater collection system improvements and future extensions. All of the primary sewers crossing through Area A require improvements to meet future demands. Referring to Figure E-l, sewer P-2, by year 2007 will be at 141 % of capacity and is proposed to be replaced by a 3D-inch diameter sewer. P- 3 and P-7 in Alabama Street will be replaced and upsized to relieve over-capacity problems in the easement sewer. P-4 along San Bernardino Avenue will be paralleled to relieve over-capacity in that reach. P-ll along Nevada Street will be paralleled with a 24- COUOI)' orSan BunardiDo Land he Stn-iCfS Department Ciaus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water & Se.....er Services Plan SClI. So. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 372 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses inch sewer by the year 2020. The existing sewage pump station located at Mountain View A venue and San Bernardino A venue serves a part of the City that cannot gravity flow to the WWTP. Two PVC force mains (12- and 14-inch) in San Bernardino Avenue transport sewage from development outside Area A to the Nevada Street trUnk sewer. Wastewater Treatment Plant The existing WWTP has a design and pennined capacity of 9 million gallons per day (mgd). According to the Sewer Master Plan, the 1996 estimated average base wastewater flow was 6.3 mgd and is projected to increase by the year 2007 to 15 mgd and by year 2020 to 19 mgd. As indicated in the City's land use absorption, less than 20% of Area A is expected to be developed and contribute sewage by year 2007 with the majority of the area developed between year 2007 and 2020. It is difficult to believe that the WWTP current design capacity includes capacity for Area A. It is clear that the eXlstmg water and sewer infrastrUcture within Area A is inadequate for the proposed future land uses. This is addressed in both the City's Water and Sewer Master Plans with infrastrUcture being proposed commensurate with land use absorption and the planning period of year 2007. 2020 and 2030 (build out). 8-18 Providing job labor training does not effect a physical change on the environment and is the type of social impact which may be included in an EIR but is not mandatory, as set forth in Section 15131 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Therefore is not required to be discussed in the ElK In any event. from a land use perspective there is no conflict between the policy and the proposed General Plan amendment, the two are perfectly consistent with one another. Providing job opportunities to serve areas in need of jobs is consistent 'With a general policy of encouraging programs to train workers who come to work in such jobs. 8-19 The Draft Subsequent EIR contained a typographical error. The text has been changed in this Final Subsequent EIR, page 152, to read: "temporary dewatering during constrUction, where necessary, is not expected to involve substantial quantities of water... Because only minimaI amounts of water would be involved, no significant impacts from dewatering would occur. " Couary of San Bernardino laud tsc Scrvices Dtpartmcnt Citrus Plaza Regional MallllVDA Waler & Sewer Ser.'ices Plan SCIL No.l99'JIOIl23 Final SubseGuenl EIR-June 2001 Page 373 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequem EIR and Responses 8-20 The applicant's engineer. Psomas, prepared Appendix G. Infrastrucrure Options. which contains a detailed evaluation of the impacts and effect of pumping the proposed wells (Appendix II-H. Impact of Water Supply Pumping on Contaminant Migration. Counl)' of San Bernardino Inland Valley Development Agency Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options. Draft Subsequent EIR, Appendix G). The study identifies adjacent wells. thus the comment is in error. These adjacent wells are identified in Figure 1.2 and are included in the detailed groundwater model located in Appendix G. A detailed hydrologic analysis and groundwater model was developed to evaluate the impacts of pumping the proposed wells (page 14. "3.0 Pumping Impacts"). The hydrogeologic conditions are described in detail in Chapter 2. The regional as well as local geologic strucrure of the aquifers and groundwater flow conditions are described and used in the groundwater model. The study concludes at page 16 that the pumping would occur in the lower aquifer. stating that "the maximum water- level decline in the lower aquifer is about 24 feet, but the maximum water-level decline in the upper aquifer is less than 6 feet." As the study points oul. there will be little if any impact to adjacent wells. The City of Lorna Linda is currently using a similar strategy, extracting water from a deep well. from the lower aquifers below the plume and not effecting the plume. 8-21 The applicant's engineer, Psomas. prepared an analysis dealing with the so-<:alled "Redlands Plume." Figure 5.3-1 is a graphic interpretation of detailed maps of the plumes and slightly overstates the plumes' location with regard to the proposed well location zone. The text of the Draft Subsequent EIR is in error. Page 156 of the Final Subsequent EIR has been amended to read. "...more than 1500 feet west and..." As referenced in comment 8-12. detailed hydrologic modeling has been performed and studied both the horizontal and venical capture zones of the wells (Appendix II-H, Impact of Water Supply Pumping on Contaminant Migration, Counl)' of San Bernardino Inland Valley Development Agency Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options. Draft Subsequent EIR, Appendix G). The proposed wells will be deep and pumped from the lower aquifer. The study concludes that the proposed wells will not likely capture TCE or perchlorate contamination nor will pumping change the migration of the plumes. 8-22 The text of the Final Subsequent EIR (page 117) has been revised to reference "Redlands" instead of "Riverside" for Water Option 7 pursuant to this comment. 8-23 Under certain of the options evaluated in the EIR. a water storage facilil)' capable of holding up to approximately I million gallons per day in order to store fire flow. as well as an associated pump station, will be located on the Citrus Plaza site. This Count)' ofSao BeroardiDo Laud l;sr Srn'iccs Dcpartmeat Citrus Plaza Regional MallllVDA WaIer & Sewer Services Plan SCIl. So. 1999101123 Fmal Subsequent EJR-June 2001 Page 374 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Resronses would be a limited facility for fire flow storage and would not be used as J \\Jter source. The location of this small water storage facility and associated pump station are sho\\n on the site plans in the EIR on Figures 3-12 through 3-1-+. The water storage facility is sho\\TI as a circle on the right-hand side of those site plans. adjacent to Spencer Street and immediately east of the proposed building. The associated pump station is sho\\n as a rectangle adjacent to the fire flo\\ water storage facility. In addition. Appendix G discusses the storage facility and associated pump station in further detail. The truck access for such water facilities would be the same truck access to be used for deliveries to the retail stores \\ithin the Citrus Plaza site and as such would involve no issues of uses. access or changes on the local circulation patterns. In addition. the Draft Subsequent EIR at page 191 explains that the on-site water storage facility for fire flow water and the associated pump station would be built at the same time as the on-site buildings. The Final Subsequent EIR has been revised on page I II to reflect this comment's statement regarding listing of a conditional use permit as one of the approvals required for the Project. 8-24 See Response to Comment No. 8-5 and Response to Comment 8-23. A quantification of the air emissions resulting from the construction of the water treatment facility in the northeast comer of Area A (all Water Options) and the wastewater treatment facility in the northwest comer of Area A (Sewer Option 3) has been completed and incorporated into the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 198- 200 and 342). The principal source of construction emissions relates to the movement of earth and from construction equipment exhaust. It is estimated that construction of the water and wastewater treatment facilities would involve the movement of 14.000 cubic yards of dirt and that on-site earth mo\ement would balance (i.e.. there would be no importing or exporting of earth materials from the project site). Equipment required to construct these two facilities. assuming two contractors (one water and one sewer) are as follows: 2 - large back hoes 2 - standard size back hoes 2 - small bulldozers 2 - motor graders 2 - cranes COUAt)' ofSao Bernardino LaDd lIsr Srn"iccs Dcpartmenl Cinus Plaza Regional MallllVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCU. S..I999101123 FinaJ Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 375 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses 2 - skip loaders :2 - earth compactors I - boring and jacking machine 4 - 10 wheel dump trucks 4 - I I c ton stake trucks Total emissions from these activities would be less than the prescribed SCAQMD thresholds for all of the criteria pollutants analyzed. except for NO., As such. emissions associated \\1th the construction of the water and wastewater treatment facilities in Area A are considered to be less than significant relative to Co.. Ro.G. PMIO. and So,. while emissions of NO., would be significant. Should pipeline and treatment facility construction occur concurrently. emissions of CD. RDG. PMIO. . . and SO., would be less than significant. while emissions of NO., would be significant. 8-25 The U.S.G.S. published "Liquefaction Susceptibility in the San Bernardino Valley and Vicinity, Southern California - A Regional Eyaluation. 1989." Within this document. the U.S.G.S. identified areas susceptible to liquefaction for a magnitude 6.75. 7.0. 8.0 earthquake on seyeral faults. including the San Andreas. Area A is outside (to the south) of the worst case (magnitude 8.0 San Andres fault). The only pipeline alignments susceptible to liquefaction are along San Bernardino A venue west of California and those crossing the Santa Ana River to the north. Dannage to buried pipelines from liquefaction is not expected to be as significant as to above ground structures. This was the case of the Northridge earthquake. The pipelines. trenching and bedding \\ill be designed specifically for the soil conditions encountered. The pipes "ill be of a flexible material "ith flexible joints \\ith appropriate aggregate bedding. The Ductile Iron Pipe Association (DIPA) suggests the use of restrained joints when significant differential settlement, including liquefaction. rnight occur. It is also possible to use expansion fittings like the EBAA Iron "Flex-Tend," at connection points to structures such as reservoirs. pump stations or well head. The National Clay Pipe Institute (NCPD indicates that the length of the pipe pieces and shape of the joint bells will allow for deflections to occur with no joint damage. They also pointed out that it is not a good idea to concrete encase the pipe COUDty ors.. Bernardino Land be StniftS Drpartmenl Ciuus Plaza RegionaJ MaIlIIVDA WaICr & Sewer Sen.-ic:es Plan SClI. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - JW1C 2001 Page 376 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequem EIR and Responses because the pipe will break where the concrete breaks. thus, it is bener to ha\~ a semi-flexible system. An example of Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) surviving an earthquake waS the Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles. There were changes in grade associated with the ground moving, but the pipe generally stayed intact and operable. There are a variety of constrUction methods available. such as those described above, to ensure that the pipelines will be constrUcted so as to deal with any liquefaction hazards. This information is incorporated in the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 136 and 137). 8-26 First, it is important to note that (1) none of the sites for the water or wastewater treatment plants are in a liquefaction zone, and (2) all proposed facilities can be engineered, as the mitigation measures are designed to assure. As for the on-site facilities. see Response to Comment No. 8-5. Geolol!ic Settiol! The applicant's engineers. Psomas, have analyzed the geologic sening. faults. and soils represented below and incorporated into the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 125- 127 and 130) and presented below. The County has also reviewed this analysis and concluded as follows. The San Bernardino Valley region is a broad. gently sloping lowland that flanks the southwest margin of the San Bernardino Mountains. The lowland is underlain by alluvial sediments eroded from bedrock in the adjacent uplands and washed by rivers and stearns into the valley region. where the sediment has accumulated in layers of gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Sediment accumulation has continued for several million years, during which time an ever-thickening blanket of sediment gradually has buried the original hill-and-valley topography of the San Bernardino Valley. Perris Hill and the Shandin Hills are vestiges of that original topography that have not yet been buried by the encroaching sediment. Deeper parts of the sedimentary fill are older and are well consolidated; near-surface sediments are younger and are only slightly consolidated. The relatively loose near-surface sediments potentially are susceptible to earthquake-induced liquefaction. and they are the focus of this analysis. Liquefaction is discussed in Response to Comment No. 8-25. None of the sites where liquefaction is a potential problem are located within Area A. Moreover, the proposed facilities can be engineered regardless of what is found and that is what the mitigation is intended to assure. Near-surface alluvial sediments of the San Bernardino Valley region accumulated in two depositional regimes: (1) alluvial fans that extend downslope from the mouths of mountain canyons and (2) river flood plains of the Santa Ana River and Counry ors.a Bcruardino Lind UK Scn-itcs Dcpanmcnt Onus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Waler &:. Sewer SeJ"\;ices Plan SClI. No. 1'J99101 123 Final Subsequent EIR - JW1C 2001 Page 377 Il.O Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequem EIR and Responses Cajon and Lytle Creeks. Although the alluvial-fan deposits tend to be coarser grained and more poorly sorted than the flood-plain deposits. both alluvial suite show considerable range in particle size from place to place in the San Bernardino Valley. Near the mountain front, the deposits consist of sand-bearing cobble and boulder gravel interstratified with layers of sand and gravely sand. Downstream from the mountain front, the gravelly sediment gradually becomes fmer grained. Where the alluvial-fan and flood-plain regimes meet in the vicinity of metropolitan San Bernardino. sand and silt ultimately predominate over subordinate layers of clay and pebbly gravel. Within both the alluvial-fan and flood-plain regimes, the latest cycle of river and stream development in many areas has led to channel downcuning that has left older parts of the sedimentary blanket standing above the level of the modem channels. Very young loose sediment is accumulating in the bonorns of the incised channels, while the higher standing sediments are inactive. are firmer and more compacted. and are developing pedogenic-soil profiles. This panern of downcuning and backfilling has occurred several times in the long history of the alluviated lowland. leading to a complex panern of surficial-geologic wlit - each representing a different depositional age and (or) a different sediment type. Faults The San Bernardino Valley region is the site of numerous faults. some of which are capable of generating large earthquakes. The major faults are strike-slip strUctures of the San Andreas family - faults that generate earthquakes when blocks on either side of the fault plan slide right-laterally past each other. These include the San Jacinto fault and the modem trace of the San Andreas fault. Many of the smaller faults are normal or reverse dip-slip faults that have evolved because of complications within the San Andreas fault system (Mani and others, 1985). Dip-slip faults generate earthquakes when blocks on either side of the fault plane slide up or down relative to each other. Reverse dip-slip faults include the Cucamonga fault along the base of the southeastern San Gabriel Mountains (Morton and Mani. 1987; Mani and others, 1982) and the San Gorgonio Pass fault zone (Mani and others, 1985). Normal dip-slip faults include the Crafton Hills fault complex (Mani and others, 1985) and other normal faults observed or inferred to occur in and around the San Bernardino Valley and San Bernardino Mountains (Mani and others, 1985; Weldon, 1985). There are no known active faults in Area A. Soils (oaor," orSaa Bernardioo Laad [St Stn"icn Drpanmrol CitrUS Plaza Regional MallI1VDA Waler & Sewer Services Plan SCIf. No. 1999101lD Final Subsequent EIR - June 200t Page 378 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review ofllie Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses The soils of Area A are generally classified as Hanford Series sandy loam. This nearly level soil is on valley floors and toe slopes of alluvial fans. Also included are small areas of Greenfield sandy loam and small scattered patches of soils that are loamy sand below depths of 40 inches. Runoff is slow and the hazard of erosion is slight if the soil is left unprotected. This soil is used for irrigated crops such as citrus and vegetable crops, small grains and pasture. Representative profile of Hanford sandy loam, about 100 feet south of Palmena Avenue and about one-fourth mile west of Nevada Avenue. NW1I4NEl/4SEl/4 sec. 17. T. 1 S., R.3.W.; San Bernardino base line and meridian: A 0 to 12 inches, pale-brown, sandy loam, brown when moist; massive; slightly hard, friable. non-sticky and non-plastic; many very fine and fine roots; many very fine and fine, tubular and interstitial pores; slightly acid, gradual, smooth boundary. C1 12 to 32 inches. pale-brown sandy loam, brown when moist; weak, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard. friable, non-sticky and non plastic; common very fine and fine roots; common, very fine and fine, interstitial and tubular pores; neutral; gradual. smooth boundary. C2 32 to 60 inches, very pale brown, sandy loam. brown when moist; massive; slightly hard. friable, non-sticky and non plastic; very few fine roots; few, very fine and fine. interstitial and tubular pores; neutral. The A horizon is pale brown, light brownish, gray or brown. Its texture is sandy loam or coarse sandy loam. The soil is generally massive but may have weak, fine or medium, granular or subangular blocky structure. Thickness ranges from 8 to 14 inches but is 12 inches in most places. The C horizon is pale brown. very pale brown, or light yellowish brown. Its texture is sandy loam, fine sandy loam or coarse sandy loam. Reaction ranges from slightly acidic to neutral but it may be mildly alkaline in some places. Some fine pebbles occur in a few places but generally do no exceed 5 percent by volume. Thin lenses of loam often occur. The following are engineering properties for this soil type. Psomas does not anticipate difficulties in following standard industry construction techniques as described on pages 132-133 of the Draft Subsequent EIR in the soils on the property as listed below. COUDt)' orsan Beraardioo Land Un Sen'icts Department Ciaus Plaza Regional MallllVDA \).,' atcr & Sewer Services Plan Setl. ~o. 1999101123 Final Subsequenl EIR - June 20011 Page 379 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Dmft Subs<quent EIR and R<spons<s ENGlNEERl1l.lG PROPERTIES ! H~~FORDS~~DYLO~I , , Property , : Degree any kind of limitation for: I Dwelling without basement ! Slight Septic tank absorption fields I Slight Shallow excavations I Slight Sanitar\ landfills I Severe-modemtelx maid oermeability i Deoth 10 bedrock or hardoan ! >5 feet I Classification: I Unified I SM AASHTO ! A-2 I Percentage less than 3 in. passin!! sieve: I No. 4 14.7mm) ~ JOO~, 0 No. 10 (2.0mm) 190-100", No. 40 (OA2mm) I 60 - 75'" No. 200 (0.074mml ! 20-3000 i Liquid Limits I Non-olastic Plastic in' Index I Non-niastic Permeability' I 2.0 - 6.0 inches rer hour PH : 6.1 - 7.8 nH units ner hour Shrink-Swell Potential I Low I 8-27 The WWTP when fully operating may require a total of four employees. Not all of these employees \\ ill be on site at anyone time and may be stationed at other County facilities. A total of 24 vehicle (carl pickup) trips per day are estimated. Sludge \\ill require hauling five to six times per month or a total of 10 to 11 truck trips per month. Liquid chlorine will require one delivery per month. Water facilities \vill be operated by existing County Special District employees and approximately four vehicle trips per day will be required. Liquid chlorine will require one delivery per month. As explained in Response to Comment No. 8-10_ the trips from this limited number of employees is far less than the assumed excess growth of over 5.000 employees beyond all current related projects in the Northwest Redlands area. Total daily emissions from all sources associated "ith the operation of the water and wastewater treatment facilities (i.e.. employee trips, material deliveryihauling and energy consumption) are as follows: (I) CO - 13 pounds, (1) RaG - 4 pounds. (3) NOx - 59 pounds. (4) PMIO - I pound. and SOx- I pound. These emission levels are well below the stated significance threshold and thus, impacts are concluded to be less than significant. This analysis has been incorporated in the Final Subsequent EIR (pages 100 and 10 I). 8-18 Currently and in the future, the City of Redlands could not provide adequate water COllnr,.- o(San Bernardino Laud l:Jir Srn'ict5 DrpartmtDI Citrus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCH. !Ii.. 1999JOII23 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 380 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - -,., I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent fIR and Responses service without drilling additional wells for developing additional water suppltes. This is clear from a review of their Water Master Plan. The City of San Bernardino, IVDA and the City of Riverside obtain the majority of their water supply from the Bunker Hill Groundwater Basin. The demands of the project are not expected to have a noticeable impact on the availability of groundwater from the Bunker Hill Basin and not result in an agency having to develop an additional water supply. The Bunker Hill Basin has an adequate supply. In fact. regional water agencies are negotiating the pumping and transfer of surplus Bunker H~ll water to Orange County to mitigate high water table problems due to overfilling of the basin in some areas. The Final Subsequent EIR (page 156) has been revised to incorporate this information on water supply. See also Response to Comment Nos. 8-15 through 8-17. 8-29 See Response to Comment No. 8-28. Because there are no changes to the Citrus Plaza square footage, and the water supply demand was thoroughly analyzed in the cenified 1995 EIR, there is no change in circumstance that would require reo analysis of the water supply resources as is requested by this comment. All that this Subsequent EIR is analyzing is the transfer among local supplies, which will have no effect at the wholesaling level because all of the wholesalers obtain their supplies from the same sources regardless. There are no significant consequences on regional water supply sources, as discussed above. and hence the conclusion of the EIR that the project would have a "de rninimus" impact on cumulative water supply because the proposed facilities would be designed to accommodate the increased growth within the project area is valid and appropriate. 8-30 See Response to Comment No. 8-15. 8-31 The impact analysis does not ignore the significance thresholds defmed on page 217 of the Draft Subsequent EIR. Under those thresholds. a project is deemed to have a significant impact if any of the following three events occur. First. the impact is significant if the services would increase demands on the capacity of local or regional wastewater collection or treatment services such that new or substantially expanded facilities are needed. The project's sanitary sewer services would use wastewater capacity that already exists and therefore would not create a significant impact under this threshold. Second, the impacts are significant if the sanitary sewer services would result in the substantial modification, relocation or closure of an active wastewater collection or treatment system. Again, the project would not trigger this significance threshold because it is building its own collection system. Third, the project's sewer services would not breach published national, State or local wastewater standards or regulations Count)' orSan Bernardino land liSt Sc:niic:cs DcpartmcDI Cit:rus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCIL llio. 1!l99101lZl Final Subsequent EIR-Junc 2001 Page381 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses relating to effluent discharge. maintenance or receiving water quality or protection of public water supplies. The project will obtain a permit for its discharge and will follow the conditions and requirements of that permit and therefore will by definition nO! breach applicable standards, as such a breach will be forbidden in the project permit. In contrast, other projects in the area are operating under existing permits and may not be in compliance with existing standards. For example, the City of Redlands is not in compliance with its Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan and does not treat to state tertiary water treatment standards. See also Responses to Comments Nos. 8-15 and 8-16. 8-32 Construction debris wastes are not hazardous wastes. Construction debris wastes consist of building material debris (concrete. wood. metals. drywall and cardboard) associated with the construction of buildings. Construction debris wastes are defmed as solid wastes in the California Code of Regulations. Title 14. Construction debris wastes are highly recyclable due to their relatively homogeneous nature (easy to separate) and because of their economic value. As a result. construction debris wastes are commonly recycled by building contractors. A.B. 939 requires cities and counties within the State of California to divert 50 percent of all solid wastes that would ordinarily be disposed at solid waste landfills. The project proponent would minimize the amount of construction debris waste and recycle as much concrete, wood. metals, drywall and cardboard as possible from the waste generated by project construction, in order to help the County meet it's A.B. 939 goals. In the unlikely event that any hazardous waste is discovered during construction, the material would be properly disposed at a hazardous waste landfIlL 8-33 See Response to Comment No. 8-32. The comment fails to note that AB 939 applies to jurisdictions. and not individual projects. It is at the discretion of the jurisdiction how to best apply and implement AB 939 at the project level. and there is no mandate in the state act prohibiting disposal of construction debris from a project at a local landfill. The County of San Bernardino does not !rack individual waste types. Water supply options all include disinfection and could include. if necessary, a TCE removal facility. No other water treatment is anticipated. The disinfection with liquid chlorine will not generate any solid waste. TCE treatment with GAC will generate waste carbon. Discussions with Calgon, the largest supplier of carbon, indicate that 120,000 Ibs. of carbon will need to be replaced approximately once each five to six years. All carbon will be recycled by Calgon or another supplier. The carbon will be handled in the same manner as it is handled by the City of San Bernardino. This infonnation has been incorporated in the Final Subsequent EIR and a mitigation measure has been added County orsln BtrDardino Land lsr Stnrices DepartmtDI CUJ'Us Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCH. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 200 I Page 382 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review oflhe Draft SubsequentEIR and Responses to the Final Subsequent EIR to ensure the safe handling of on-site hazardous materials from water treatment facilities (see pages 45. 235. 236. 267 and 271). No other solid waste will be generated from the water treatment facility with the exception of a very limited amount of solid waste that would be generated on a daily basis by employees of the water treatment facility. This would include such solid wastes as food waste. paper. cans. bonles. and plastic. As for the comment's statement that the Draft Subsequent EIR should be revised to incorporate solid waste reduction. recycling and reuse requirements into all construction phases of the proposed facilities. there is no requirement under CEQA that an impact which is not significant needs to be mitigated. There is no significant impact prior to mitigation for construction waste. therefore no mitigation is necessary. 8-34 The Synagro facility has a capacity of 500 tons of sludge per day. It is estimated that the Area A WWTP \\ill generate sludge on the order of 1.2 tons per day per and be hauled approximately once every four days or five to six times per month. Each trip \\ill average approximately five tons. Synagro has indicated that they have plenty of capacity and can easily receive five tons of sludge five to six times per month from the proposed WWTP. See also Response to Comment No. 8-33. 8-35 A detailed sludge management plan \\ill be developed in accordance \\ith implementation of the Waste Discharge requirements. The plan \\ill describe the proposed handling of sludge. which would generally consist of sludge storage and dewatering by a belt press or similar process on site and hauling and disposal at an approved private sludge handling facility such as the Synagro Regional Composting facility. Synagro has indicated that they have the capacity and are \\illing to receive the sludge. It is also important to note that the Regional Water Quality Control Board does not administer specific requirements regarding a sludge management plan. The comment fails to indicate what information is allegedly "missing" or needed from the sludge management plan to allow for any further analysis of impacts. See also Response to Comment 8-27 regarding impacts relative to air quality. Mitigation measures set forth in Section 5.6 of the Draft Subsequent EIR provide assurance that the noise levels attributable to the water treatment facility in the northeast comer of Area A (all Water Options) and the wastewater treatment facility in the northwest comer of Area A (Sewer Option 3) would comply \\ith all provisions of the County's noise ordir..lIlce. Such compliance would preclude a significant noise impact attributable to the operation of these facilities from occurring. 8-36 See Response to Comment No. 8-16 regarding available capacity at the San County ors.. Bcraardiao Laad [Sf Scn'iccs Dcpanmcnl CiD'US Plaza Regional MaJlIIVDA Water & Sewer SeJ"'r'ices Plan S<lfL~~199910112J Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 383 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Timoteo Landfill and Response to Comment No. 8-31 regarding construction debris wastes. The current project does not involve any change in the arnoW1t or rate of solid waste generation. beyond that already approved in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and the 1995 Citrus Plaza project appro\'al. 1\0 significant cumulative impacts to solid waste disposal would occur. 8-37 The Draft Subsequent EIR. Sections 5.7.4.3 and 5.7.5.3. respectively. analyzed impacts associated v. ith the provision of fire protection and law enforcement services by the COW1ty. In addition. information provided by the COW1ty Fire Department. Office of the Fire Marshal. in a letter dated January 11. 100 I states that San Bernardino Fire Department Stations 9 and 15 can provide initial response to the project and service agreements and/or contracts are available \\ith adjacent City jurisdictions to provide adequate staffing and equipment to serve the project area \\ ithin required response times. Dlis information has been incorporated into the Final Subsequent EIR as further detailed in Letter No.7. The COW1t)' Sheriffs Department did not provide comment on the Draft Subsequent EIR. As stated in Section 5.7.5.3.1. individual development projects that have the potential to effect police services would be subject to CEQA and appropriately addressed. Mitigation measures for project specific development would be similar to those proposed for the Citrus Plaza site, depending on intensity of proposed development and Sheriff Department recommendations. Based on current circumstances. the provision of fire and law enforcement services by the Cit). of Redlands is precluded. These circumstances include the follo\\ing: the City of Redlands Measure U which states that "no e:l.1ension of City-provided services outside the Cit)'limits shall occur W1til such area is annexed to the City...... IVDA Area A has been removed from the Sphere of Influence Area and therefore annexation cannot occur. and the City of Redlands has not applied to the Local Agency Formation Commission for approval to provide services outside of their municipal boW1daries. Also refer to Response to Comment No. 8-17. 8-38 The Final Subsequent EIR (pages 304. 308, 31 I. 311. 315. 316 and 318) has been revised to reflect this comment. As stated in Section 5.11.3.1 of the Final Subsequent EIR. biological surveys to document the presence/absence of sensitive biological resources on parcel(s) of land north of 5th Street, on the west and east sides of Church Avenue. to the 30 Freeway (the site for Water Supply Options 1A and 1B) were conducted on December 8. 1000 by Biologist Rick Riefuer and Environmental Planner Christine Dyer and on December 11. 1000 by Biologist Ken Halama. The study area is part of the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall/IVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan, and supplements the analysis provided in Section 5.11 and County orsu Bernardino Land lsc Stn'jcrs Drpartmtnl Cirrus Plaza Regional MaiL 1 VDA Water & Se....er SCI"\'ices Plan SCll So. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EfR -June 2001 Page 384 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Appendix H of the Draft Subsequent EIR. The area of the well site for Wat~r Options 2A and 2B lies in the northwestern comer of the USGS 7.5" RedJands Quadrangle, section 4, tov.nship I south, range 3 west lbis area is adjacent to the City Creek, bordered by the Santa Ana River to the south, development to the west and Highway 30 to the east, and ranges in elevation from approximately 1200 to 1240 feet above mean sea level (MSL), The portion of the proposed well site west of Church A venue has been recently disced, Ruderal Plant communities observed in this portion of the site included Black Mustard (Brassica nigra), Filaree (Erodium cicutarium), Annual bur-sage (Ambrosia acanrhicarpa), Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), Red broom (Bromes nibens), and Punture vine (Tribulus terrestris). Mowning doves (Zenaida macroura) were observed, but no sensitive species or nesting birds were found. The portion of the proposed well site east of Church A venue was highly disturbed, rocky to sandy loarns. and was mostly unvegetated. Ruderal plant communities observed included Annual bur-sage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa). Black mustard (Brassica nigra). Filaree (Erodium cicutarium), Red broom (Bromes rubens), rarely Jimson weed (Datura wrightii), Dove weed (Eremocarplls setigerus), Telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), lbistle (Salsola ssp.), Buckwheat (Eriogonllm fasciclllatllm ssp. Fasciclllatum) clumps and Wild oat (Avena ssp.). The soils were mostly barren with spoil piles, v.ith dirt and concrete. asphalt and trash. Mourning doves (Zenaida macroura) were observed. but no sensitive species or nesting birds were found. The off ramp from Highway 30, north of 5th and east of City Creek channel. is cleared. compacted dirt. disced and flat. and is characterized by Filaree (Erodium cicutarium). Telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora). Red broom (Bromus rubens). Annual bur-sage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa). Dove weed (Eremocarpus setigerus). and Black mustard (Brassica nigra). Sparse vegetation with gravel-loam soils. No sensitive species or nesting birds were found. and there was no scrub developmentation on lots. In the area in which the pipeline associated with the Option 2A and 2B wells might be constructed lies the San Bernardino County Flood Control area of City Creek. The creek channel of City Creek is characterized by a sandy/gravel bed with Mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), Giant reed grass (Arundo donax), Tarnmerisk, Willow (Salix ssp.), and alluvial scrub. Banks of the adjacent slopes characterized by dense Bud.:wheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum ssp. Fasciculatum), scale broom, Red broom (Bromus rubens), Filaree (Erodium cicutarium), Eucalyptus ssp., Mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), Annual bur-sage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), and Count)' ofSaa Bernardino Land tTsc Services DcpanmtDt Citrus Plaza Regional MalLflVDA Water & Sev.er ServIces Plan SCH.1"o.l99910112J Final Subsequent EIR-Junc: 2001 Page 385 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses Croton (Croton californicus). There are no environmental constraints on the upland property associated with the proposed wells. The pipeline associated \\ith the wells could ha\'e a potential impact if it were built by means of an open tunnel across the City Creek channel. City Creek is a blue line river channel about 300 to 400 feet \\ide and its tlood plain is channelized by riprap banks. At the time of the site visit on December 12. 2000. water was tlo\\ing \\ithin the tloodplain, but was confined to a small channel approximately six feet \\ide. As such. the creek is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The areas of the tlood plain that tlank the tlO\\ ing water lies \\ithin the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' proposed critical habitat for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Federal Register issued December 8, 2000). The San Bernardino kangaroo rat is listed as federally endangered. Numerous burrows were observed \\ithin the tlood plain. indicating that rodents are active in the area. In addition, areas along the edges of the tlood plain and immediately adjacent to the riprap channel walls support alluvial fan scrub. which is of highest priority to the California Department of Fish and Game. As discussed above. the wells to be built under Water Supply Options 2A and 2B would be built upland and would have no potential impacts to the City Creek flood plain and stream channel resulting. The only potential project impacts would arise if the pipeline associated \\ith the wells were built in the City Creek flood plain or stream channel. The potential impacts from construction of pipeline in the flood plain and/or stream channel can be avoided by constructing the pipeline in the existing Fifth Street bridge or micro-tunneling under the creek rather than making an open tunnel across the streambed. The project engineer. Psomas. has determined that the pipeline can be built on the bridge or, alternatively, by micro tunneling. The only potential impacts from constructing the pipeline in the bridge or by means of micro-tunneling would be caused if workers or equipment were located in the stream channel during the pipeline construction. and that potential impact can be avoided by prohibiting such use of the stream channel. Thus. to address potential impacts associated \\lth pipeline installation under Water Option 3C. 2A and 28. the follo\\lng mitigation measure is proposed: · Pipeline installation under Water Option No. 3C shall occur via microtunneling under the Santa Ana River and setting the construction sites in ruderal habitat above the riprap. Pipeline installation under Water Options 2A and 2B shall occur by the placement of the pipeline on the nearby existing roadway bridge in proximity of the well site or via microtunneling. COUOI)-. OrSID Bernardioo laod [Sf Services Dtp.rtmtol CiD'US Plaza Regional MalllJ'v'DA Waler & Se\\oer Sen'-Ices Plan SCIi So. 1999101123 Fmal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 386 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Resronses nus mitigation measure ensures that no potentially significant impacts lC\ bil)iog~ will occur due to construction of the wells or pipeline associated with Water Supply Options 2A and 2B. as set forth in the Final Subsequent EIR (see page 318) and in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reponing Program associated with that EIR. Those mitigation measures avoid all impacts to habitat and sensitive species \\ ithin the City Creek flood plain by requiring the pipeline to be constructed either by using the existing Fifth Street bridge or micro-tunneling under the creek bed. and by precluding workers and equipment from using the stream bed during construction of that pipeline. As a result. there are no substantial environmental impacts from Water Supply Option 21\ and 2B (either due to the wells or the associated pipeline) on biology. 8-39 \\bile the comment addresses the cumulative effects of the project. it is best to respond to the issues raised in this comment in the context of the project's three components (i.e.. plan amendments, iUfrastructure plan and minor revisions to the Citrus Plaza project). nus approach is concluded to be appropriate given the vel)' different nature of the impacts associated \\ith each of the project's three components. With regard to the plan amendments. impacts upon the physical environment are at the most de minimus since the plan amendments simply transfer development regulations from one planning document to another. In further suppon of this conclusion is the fact that the plan amendments do not change the type or density of land uses permined within the project area. The Final Subsequent EIR (page 243 and 253) has been revised to reflect this minor clarification. The infrastrucrure plan creates vel)' limited residual envirorunental impacts. in part due to the recommended mitigation measures and that most of the impacts that do occur, would have occurred if the infrastructure plan included in the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR was implemented. Thus, the contribution of the infrastructure plan to potential cumulative impacts was appropriately concluded in the Draft Subsequent EIR to be de minimus. The minor revisions to Citrus Plaza project are sufficiently minor so as to not cause any environmental impacts beyond those identified in the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR. thus supponing the conclusion in the Draft Subsequent EIR that the contribution to any cumulative impacts from this project component are de minimus. 8-40 Comment noted. Although the existing language with these mitigation measures is sufficient to demonstrate the required commitments, in response to the corrunent the word "should" has been changed to "shall." (See pages 50-51 and 318 of this Final Subsequent EIR). 8-41 Comment noted. Although the eXlstmg language used within the mitigation measures included within the Final Subsequent EIR is sufficient to demonstrate the Coual)' orSln Bernardino Lind Un Seniccs Drpartmnl Citrus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA Wmer & Sewer Services Plan SCIL j\;o. 1999101113 Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 387 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses required commitments. in response to the comment the suggested change has been incorporated into the Final Subsequent EIR. (See pages 22. 2-1. 25. 29. 30. 32. 40. 49.50.142, 161, 177, 179. 183-185.209. 239. 295. 3l7and318). 8-42 A change in the provider of sewer and water services, and other public services 10 the IVDA area is not expected to induce any growth beyond that already set forth in East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The General Plan and Development Code amendments are not growth inducing because they do not include any increases in land use density or intensity. The General Plan and Development Code Amendments could potentially induce growth to the extent that the amendments are increasing the options for the provision of water and sewer service which could allow development at a faster rate in comparison to what has occurred under current regulations. However. those impacts would at most be shon-term in nature since there is no change in the amount of development permined under build out conditions and that, under build out conditions. no significant impacts would occur. While it is conceivable that other unincorporated areas within a nearby city's Sphere of Influence could use the project's amendments as precedent, the direct causal effect suggested by the comment is n0t supponed by past experience. Furthermore, the merits of potential future actions, such as those suggested, would be evaluated on an individual basis by the County Board of Supervisors. As for the so-called "standard test" of growth inducing impacts. there is no such "standard test" recognized under CEQA. Furthermore. the logic assened in the comment is flawed because if the assenion were correct, every project that needs to make an improvement to any infrastructure system would automatically have a growth inducing impact, and that is not the intent or result under CEQA. CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. at Public Resources Code section 21100(b)(5) and 14 Cal. Code Regs section 15126(t), requires only that the EIR discuss the ways in which the proposed project could encourage growth, in general terms. See 14 Cal. Code Regs section 15126(f). Growth-inducing impacts usually cannot be forecast with any precision because of the number of variables involved, including the interest and ability of landowners in the area to develop their propenies, the nature of the developments that they might propose, and applicable local land-use regulations. Because the extent and type of development that may be induced by any panicular project cannot be specified in most cases, as is the case here, the EIR must provide only a general analysis rather than engaging in speculation in an anempt to quantify what cannot be accurately measured. See Responses to Comments Nos. 8-15, 8-17 and 9-7 regarding the ability of eoual)' of SID Bernardino Land Lsr Stn'icts DtpartmcDI Citrus Plaza Regional MaJLlIVDA Water & Sewer SCl"\'lces Plan SCll No. 1999101123 Fmal Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 388 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses agencies to provide water and sewer services. The requested additional analysi, i, not required or appropriate because the project is not changing land use density or intensity. Regarding the comments stating that Section 6.3 should be revised. the comment fails to recognize that Section 6.3 is a summary of the analysis presented in the 1995 EIR. Because the changes in the Citrus Plaza project itself are extremely minor. those changes would have no growth inducing impact and thereby the proposed changes do not alter the conclusions of the previously cenified EIR and hence no new analysis is required. 8-43 There are several problems with the provision of water and wastewater service to the IVDA area by the City of Redlands. First. the provision of such services is prohibited by the City of Redlands' Measure U which states as follows: "No extension of City-provided utility services to areas outside the City limits shall occur until such areas are properly annexed to the City..." The only exception to this prohibition is for areas not contiguous to the City and for which the landov.ner agrees to a binding pre -annexation agreement. Because IVDA Area A has been removed from the Sphere of Influence of the City of Redlands. such area cannot be annexed into the City and the provision of public utilities to Area A as an unincorporated area is prohibited by the express provisions of Measure U. Second, the City of Redlands has not applied to the Local Agency Formation Commission for approval to provide services outside of its municipal boundaries. lbird. there are several problems \\lith the existing capacity and facilities of the City of Redlands water and sewer infrastructure which would need to be addressed before the City would be physically capable of providing seryices to the IVDA area which are discussed in more detail in Response to Comment No. 8-17. The alternative of the City of Redlands providing services is included in the Final Subsequent EIR, and the prior analysis of the 1995 EIR as to impacts of the City providing services is incorporated by reference. and presented to the Board of Supervisors as another potential alternative. The alternative of the City of Redlands providing services. even if it were feasible. does not eliminate or ayoid any significant adverse envirorunental impacts. 8-44 See Response to Comment No. 8-43. There are no identified envirorunental advantages to the provision of services by the City of Redlands. Many alternatives to the provision of water and sewer services by the City of Redlands have been provided in the Draft Subsequent EIR. Chapter 7.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action of the Draft Subsequent EIR was developed in accordance with CEQA Guideline Section 15126.6(a), which states that an EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. and evaluate the Coual)' O(S.D BtrDlrdiao Llad l;se Scn'il:es Drpanmnl Citrus Plaza Regional Mall/IVDA Waler & Sewer Services Plan SCH. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page389 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider ewry conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that \\ill foster infonned decision-making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. 8-45 See Response to Comment No. 8-44. It is agreed that the Citrus Plaza project has already been approved and that this approval is still in effect. The EIR's analysis of the Citrus Plaza site is adequate and does not fail to identif)' any significant impacts of the proposed revisions to Citrus Plaza, simply because the revisions are so minor that no significant impacts occur as a result of those minor revisions. Moreover. the Citrus Plaza revisions do not result in any new significant impacts that were not identified in the 1995 EIR and, furthennore, as a result of changes in circumstances (e.g." the removal of agricultural uses on the Citrus Plaza site) the extent of significant impacts have been reduced since the cenification of the 1995 EIR. The comment is correct in that potential alternative uses of the Citrus Plaza site was provided for infonnation. but that such altematiw uses are not alternatives to the current project. Many alternatives to the provision of water and sewer services by the City of Redlands have been provided in the Draft Subsequent EIR. 8-46 Because no extensive revisions are required based on these or other comments. and because no new significant infonnation has been added to the Final Subsequent EIR which would deprive the public of a meaningful opponunity to comment on substantial adverse project impacts or feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that may be adopted. recirculation of the Draft Subsequent EIR is not required. Count)'" orSan Bernardino Lind be Stn"jus Dtpartmrnt CilJ'US Plaza Regional MalVlVDA Waxer & Sewer Seo;ices Plan SClt l"o. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 390 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I MCCUTCHEN MCCUTCHE~.IJOYLE. BROWN & E'iERSE'i. llP 8 October II, 2000 Direct: (925) 975-5382 jajones@"mdbe.com VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Our File No. 20118-000 I County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Department, Advance Planning Division 385 N. An'owhead Avenue, Third Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Ann: Terri Rahhal, Special Project Planner Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Re Repeal of East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, etc. Dear Ms. Rahhal: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the "Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report" ("DSEIR") for the County of San Bernardino's repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and associated actions. This firm represents the City of Redlands and submits these comments on the City's behalf. In so doing, we have attempted not to duplicate the comments submitted under separate cover by the City. \ Page Comment The DSEIR states that the "Subsequent EIR serves as a program EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Amendments." This statement raises two issues. First, the City is unaware of any CEQA provision authorizing a program EIR for General Plan and code amendments to be tiered, as this Subsequent EIR purports to be, off a Project EIR (in this case, the December 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR). CEQA calls for project EIRs to be tiered off program EIRs, not vice versa. The program EIR for the General Plan and code amendments should be a separate document from, and should precede, the project EIR for the Citrus Plaza Project. z Had the program EIR for the General Plan and code amendments been prepared separately, ~owever, it would have been obvious to the County that the program EIR has no content. Although it purports to be a program EIR for the General Plan and code amendments, the DSEIR does not in fact acknowledge the possibility that any of the General Plan or Development Code amendments might cause any environmental impacts. Instead, each chapter of the DSEIR repeats virtually verbatim the statement that the proposed plan amendments "would not result in a 3 A T TOR N E Y SAT. LAW 1333 N. California Blvd., Suite 210 P.O. Box V Walnut Creek, CA 94596-1270 Tel. (925) 937-8000 Fax (925) 975-5390 www.mccutchen.com San Francisco Los Angeles Walnut Creek Palo Alto Taipei 17, 33, 120, 201- 202 51 75 County of San Bernardino October II, 2000 Page 2 substantial increase or change in the geographical area included as the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or a substantial change in policies or :; guidelines applicable within Areas A and I," and therefore could not possibly calise any impact on the physical environment, so that analysis of physical changes to the environment must await particular projects. (See, e.g., DSEIR page 142.) In fact, as the courts have advised the County several times, the proposed plan amendments do constitute "a substantial change in policies or guidelines applicable to" the Donut Hole, and the impacts of those amendments must be analyzed under CEQA accordingly. See court opinions and orders attached at Tab A to this letter. The DSEIR pay slip service to analyzing the General Plan and code amendments; it nowhere addresses the true impacts of the County's decision to repudiate the coordinated planning effort embodied in the to-be-repealed East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. The DSEIR also asserts on page I that the DSEIR is "a project EIR for the infrastructure options and the development of the Citrus Plaza project." As is noted in the City's separate letter, and as is apparent from the comments below, the DSEIR If is by no means an adequate project-level EIR for the proposed infrastructure improvements. Until the infrastructure improvements have been adequately studied, the County cannot approve a revised Citrus Plaza project. The DSEIR includes one mitigation measure for significant and unavoidable impacts to agricultural resources. That mitigation measure requires the Phase II area of the Citrus Plaza project to remain in active agricultural use unless documentation shows that "continued agricultural use upon that area is either infeasible or, if feasible, demonstrating the project proponents' concerted attempts to locate suitable tenants for said use," (A similar mitigation measure is included to address significant and S unmitigable air quality impacts.) Elsewhere, however, the DSEIR repeatedly states that the Citrus Plaza site has already been "cleared" and "graded" and is no longer in agricultural use. See, e.g., pages 94, 205. The one mitigation measure for the significant agricultural resources impact is, therefore, illusory, and no other mitigation measures are discussed. The DSEIR repeatedly refers to Area A as "either unserved or de~med by the counJ of San Bernardino as underserved" with respect to water and sewer service. The lo DSEIR neither presents nor refers to any evidence in support of that conclusion, which is incorrect. Here and elsewhere, the DSEIR repeatedly re~ers to the "buildout of Area A," but ti:el DSEIR nowhere descnbes what development IS anticipated other than the Citrus 1 7 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I County of San Bernardino October 11,2000 Page 3 Plaza project and, therefore, nowhere describes the impacts ofrhe development thaI] 7 the new water and sewer options are intended to facilitate. ]03 The first full paragraph on page 103 purports to discuss the consistency of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan enacted in 1989 (which the County plans to repeal) with a newly revised "Policyl Action LU-9" that did not exist in 1989. The City does not understand the point of this exercise, but observes in any event that the statements regarding the City in the second and third sentences of this paragraph are inaccurate. ~ 105 The first full paragraph on page 105 is incomprehensible. The second full paragraph on page 105 includes the following statement: "The proposed plan amendments would not result in a change in land use, substantive increase or change in the geographical area included as the proposed project, or substantive change in policies or guidelines applicable within Areas A and I and ~ easements along the proposed pipeline routes." This statement is incorrect. As is set forth in the summary at pages 97 through lOa, the plan amendments wili allow private water and wastewater treatment facilities; will encourage, rather than discourage, leapfrog development ofsewer and wastewater facilities; and will reject the deference to city spheres of influence embodied in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. As the courts have noted, these changes are changes in land use and substantive changes in policies and guidelines that require environmental analysis. None of this is analyzed in the DSEIR. 106- 111 112 The plan amendments' encouragement of leapfrog development of sewer and wastewater facilities and duplication of city facilities is not, as the DSEIR asserts, consistent with SCAG RCPG policies 3.05, 3.09 and 11.08, all of which favor cost- ,,, efficient infrastructure construction, improved use of existing facilities, and well- planned wastewater facility development. The statement at the top of page 112, that further analysis of adjoining land uses J "would be necessary" to assess the potential impact of the new on-site facilities on \ \ those adjoining land uses, is correct. The DSEIR does not, however, provide that analysis. The statement at the bottom of page 112 that the infrastructure changes "would not result in a substantive increase or change in the geographic area of the proposed project, height or bulk of project components, or substantive change in the policies 0 guidelines applicable to projects within Areas A and I and easements along the \'2.. proposed pipeline routes" is incorrect. The infrastructure changes represent a substantial change in the geographic area and bulk of, and policies or guidelines County of San Bernardino October II, ~OOO Page 4 117 130, 135 160 applicable to, the Citrus Plaza project. Moreover, the infrastructure changes ha\'eJ \2. implications for the remainder of Area A that are nowhere addressed in the DSEIR. Page 117 states that a wastewater treatment plant "would be constructed within the westerly section of the approved Citrus Plaza Project boundaries." Figure 3-6, however, shows the wastewater treatment plant in the westerly section of Area A, well outside the boundaries of the Citrus Plaza Project. If Figure 3-6 is correct, the rest of this section makes no sense. Does the County propose two wastewater treatment plants, one of which is not described in Chapter 3? The liquefaction studies described on pages 130 and 135 will have to be comPletedJ before the potential for pipe rupture due to liquefaction, and associated 10.\- environmental impacts, can be analyzed. This should be done for a true project-level EIR on the infrastructure options. The DSEIR makes no effort to quantify the impacts on traffic of the County's plans for repeated demolition and construction in project area streets for the new sewer and IS" water lines necessitated by various infrastructure options. Therefore, the DSEIR makes no effort to compare these construction im acts to the t si ificance set forth on a e 158. Moreover, the DSEIR nowhere notes that the construction of duplicative sewer and water facilities implicates "the use of large \ \0 amounts of fuel, water, or energy," a significant impact under the significance thresholds listed on page 158. \"!> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 203- The noise analysis is incomplete and does not match the summary at pages 34-35. 211 The summary reports that the noise impacts from construction of new infrastructure will be significant and unavoidable. The noise analysis in Chapter 5.6, however, makes no effort to quantify noise impacts of the construction activities that are proposed to occur both in Area A and along the routes of the proposed pipelines. (The information provided, however, regarding the high ambient noise levels to \ l which high levels of construction noise would be added, certainly indicates that the impacts will be severe.) Nor does Chapter 5.6 make any effort to quantify the noise reductions achievable with mitigation measures. Chapter 5.6 also impennissibly defers mitigation for impacts on noise sensitive land uses, including Calvary Chapel and its schools, by requiring the developer to submit a plan at a later date. (See page 207.) Chapter 5.6 then concludes, on the basis of no evidence and contrary to the summary at pages 34-35, that with the inclusion of this deferred mitigation, "potential construction impacts are concluded to be less than significant." (See page 207.) With regard to noise from operation of the Citrus Plaza project, no evidence or 1\~ I I I I I I I I I lu I I I I I~ I I I I County of San Bernardino October II, 2000 Page 5 analysis is offered to support the DSEIR's conclusion at page 208 that the j \ 'b "incremental increases in noise levels would be less than significant." 217 The "Environmental Setting" section of Chapter 5.7.2 makes no mention of the CitY\ \'\ of Red lands' sewer line that crosses the Citrus Plaza site and the analysis does not J address the project's potential to damage the City's sewer line. 327 Chapter 8.1 implies that an environmental analysis ofthe Proposed Plan Amendments was conducted and that the analysis concluded "that all environmental impacts are less than significant after the incorporation of mitigation measures, and ~" that the level of impact is such for many issues as to not require mitigation at all." This is a misstatement of the DSEIR's approach to the Proposed Plan Amendments. As discussed above, the DSEIR does not analyze any impacts of the Proposed Plan Amendments, but rather makes the blanket announcement that those amendments, by definition, cause no impacts on the environment. As discussed above, this is incorrect. In summary, the DSEIR is not, as it claims, either a program EIR for General Plan and Development Code changes or a project EIR for infrastructure facilities necessary to a revised Citrus Plaza project. If the County wished to comply with CEQA, it would begin, as the courts have required, with an EIR examining the environmental impacts of plan changes repudiating coordinated planning in the County of San Bernardino and embracing leapfrog infrastructure development. If the County approved these plan changes despite the waste and environmental impacts involved, the County could then perform sufficient study to 2 \ describe the environmental impacts of various non-City of Redlands infrastructure options. The fact that the County has not prepared a proper EIR may stem from the fact that the County has already committed in court filings, prior to CEQA review, to approve County provision of services in the Donut Hole. See County court filing attached to this letter at Tab B, page 2. The County's repeated announcements that it has already decided to provide services to the Donut Hole render its CEQA process a sham and constitute a fundamental CEQA violation. Sincerely yours, q~ cr~ Julie Jones Enclosures J013191U . ,FAMILY COl.IKT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 .---.... " '- -' _. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 f'o-19 25 '97 9 :45 ----- F.O? 1 County of San Bernardino Superior Court 2 351 N_ Arrowhead Ave. San Bernardino. CA9241S-0240 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALlFOR,~lA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO CITY OF REDLANDS, 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) l ) ) CASE NO. SCV:: 4737 NOTICE OF DECiSION ON PETITION Fe R WRI OF MANDATE Petitioner, 13 vs, MAJESTIC REALTY COMPANY, RED LANDS VENTURES, Real Parties in Interest The above matter came on for hearing on August 4, 1997, the Hor..xabl I I I ,I I r !I I ~l.- :1 t I I I I I I I I Brown & Enersen, by Stephen L Kostka, and Marie A Cooper. and Daniel J. M ugh, City Attorney. Respondent appeared through County Counsej. Alan K Muks, y Paul F. Mordy. Deputy County Counsel. Real parties in interest appeared throug(. coun el Brown. Winfield & Ca('lZoneri, by Thomas F. Winfield, and Joshua C. Gottheim. To Ie ma er having been taken under submission, the court makes the following findings an j ord II/ III 1// /11 Rug 2S '97 9:46 PO:; . mw,ILY COURT SERVICES Fcx:9Cl938730SS . .~ I i.. I I I. I I I I I I I I I I ----- '-21 22 .. 23 I 24 25 I 26 27 I 28 I ~. 1 2 3 4 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ?--1-- 15 16 17 18 19 20 Petitioner brings this action for mandamus and injunctive relief. nd complaint it alleges three causes of action. Specifically, petitioner claims respond nt's action of November 19, 1996, whereby it approved an on-site water and ~'ewer syste for a project proposed by real parties in interest. v:olates respondent's General Plan, the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, and the California Environmental Quality Act. Accordi gly, petitioner asks this court to onder respondent to set aside its approv;~: of the 0 site facilities, vacate certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact RE port, and njoin and restrain respondent and real party in interest from taking any t.Jrther aeli n to implement the project. The parties to the action are the City of Redlands (City), County of 'San Bern (County), and Majestic Realty CompanylRedlands Venture (Majestic). The subject the action is a proposed regional mall called Citrus Plaza (Project), to be built C:1 approxi 1:<:4 acres of land located within the unincorporated area of the Cour ty. The I surrounded by City's incorporated territory and is within City's sphere 01' ;nfluence. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Tne East Valley Corridor (EVC) is largely undeveloped land that ft. ms the ga eway to the East San Bernardino Valley communities of San Bernardino, Colton, Grand T e ce, Lorna Linda, Redlands and Highland Portions of the EVC lie within the in.:. )rporated reas . . . of Redlands and Lorna Linda However, a substantial portion is within the unincorp rated --irea oftl1eCouhty, - As mentioned'above; this unincorporated land, often p:ferred to s the "donut hole: is surrounded by the City of Redlands and is within its spl' ~re of inti ence. Its use has predominantly been agricultural, but because of its proxirr ity to two major freeways; as well as its favorable topographic~lI features, it is considerec 3 prime 10 tion for "high quality commercial and industrial development" (AdministrativE; Record ( p.1676). In 1989, tI1e County, along with the cities of Redlands and Lorna L nda, dev oped a specific plan for the EVe pursuant to the provisions of Government Code 965450 th ugh 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 2 \!/ F~~ILY COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 . . . .~, Rug 25 '97 9:47 P.04 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 analyzed the City's water and sewer systems in existence at the time, a'ld proje ed the 9 . improvements and additions that would have to oca.Jr in order to adeq':..lately se e the 10 anticipated development Among the policies adopted in the EVCSP was that 11 would provide water and sewer service to development within its sphere )f influe 12 . Because preparation of the EVCSP was a project that could havo environ 13 consequences, an environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared ;)ursuant 14 California Environmental Quality Act (CECA): Following preparation ant: adoptio 15 EVCSP, each participating city and the County incorporated it into its r&pective 16 plan by ordinance. 17 In 1994, Majestic came to City with the proposed Citrus Mall project. City b gan to ~._-----_.._-- _________ n__..._ _._ 18 study the proposed project, including making preparations for an enviror'mental 19 pursuant to CEOA Jt was during this process that a growth control mearure wa 20 .. o~the-baiiot for"an"upcomingCii"ieiection. Fearing that passage of thl, measu cOuld --" ----z -nampeTtne-pTojed,-Majestic-withdrew-its-reqtlest-and -submitted it to County," . County" 22 conducted a full CEQA study and on January 9, 1996, certified a final Elf\ for the project, 23 along with approval of a preliminary development plan and a final development plan for 24 Phase I. It also approved on that date a preliminary development plan for Phase I, along 25 with a tentative parcel map. It adopted mitigation measures and conditic'lS of a proval.' 26 27 .--.. 1 2 3 65453. . The Plan (altematively referred to as EVCSP) had as its objective provisio!o~'~a well-planned communitY which will attract major businesses to the area in Jrder to I rovide a job base for the East Valley and strengthen the local economy. whllG ensuri 9 high- quality development through design guidelines and standards: (AR, id) The participating agencies recognized that such development was r.ampere by the lack of a "backbone infrastructure" sufficient to provide the area's projected w sewer needs. Accordingly, the EVeSp addressed this problem at considerable Ie gth. It 4 5 6 7 1 Because these actions of County went unchallenged, they became inal aft r April 9, 28 1996, and are not the subject of this lawsuit 3 I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I . FAMILY COURT SERVICES Fax:9893873055 Aug 25 '97 9:<:7 os - , .--- 7-'4- 1 These projee! approvals were conditioned on City providing wuter .an 2 hookups to the project, and the site ultimately being annexed into City. Thereafter, 3 began negotiations with City for these services. For reasons that are unclear, neg 4 broke down. City daims it was simply a matter of money. Majestic did not want to 5 development fees being discussed. Majestic's position, on the other hc.nd, is 6 became unreasonable and non-committal after Majestic approached it the :;econd ime..ln 7 the first place, Majestic contends City required the site be annexed to :.~ity bef re any 8 services would be provided.2 And secondly. although Majestic had approved for th project 9 from the County, City would not guarantee it would provide the requisite :;ervice even if 10 annexation ocaJrred. 11 The court does not find it necessary to decide which side is to blame for the 12 breakdown in order to reach its decision. SUffice it to say, Majestic c<'me up an 13 alternate plan for water and sewer services. This proposed altemative calle:d for th 14 of wells on-site to provide water to storage and treatment facilities, also on-:i"te. To 15 of the wastewater from the project, a sewage treatment plant would be cor structe ,again 16 on the project site. Mer constructing this system, it would be turned ov,.; to Co nty. 17 Majestic took its proposal to County for approval. On June 23 1996 County --.. .--._____..._,_.____ - _u__._____ 18 circulated a notice of supplemental EIR to study the proposed change. In Se tember, 19 County completed a draft focused supplement to the final EIR, and on No, embe 20 completed a final focused supplement to the final EIR. 21 Prior to commencement of the supPlemenfal-ElRprocess--Coonytla sated- 22 Improvement Zone EV-1 as a subdistrict of County Service Area 70. Eli.1 wa 23 specifically for the purpose of owning and operating the on-site water and sewe facilities - . 24 after they were constructed by Majestic. 25 26 ~ In support of this argument. Majestic points to the enactment of (Jcdinan 27 September, 1996, which provides that, absent a special exception, no CilI sewe service would be provided to unincorporated parcels contiguous to the City I. ntH su 28 are annexed to the City. 4 .F~~ILY COURT SERVICES rcx:9Q938730S5 -----., ~Jg 25 '97 9:47 F. OS ~ ~l- 1 On November 19, 1996, County conducted a public hearing and certif~ed th final 2 focused supplement to the final EIR as complying with CEQA Ii also ad pted 3 supplemental findings and a statement of overriding considerations; app 'oved a re ised 4 development plan as an EVCSP concept plan; and approved a revi.;ed prelim nary 5 development plan for the entire site to include the on-site facilities. 6 Included in the findings made by County were the following (AR, voU, pp.71- 3): 7 1. '(11 )...A/though the City of Red/ands maintains a 'comrr.unity sewe age 8 system' in the general proximity of the Project site, the City of Redlands' Ordinan 9 2301 prohibits the provision of sewer capacity to nonresidential properties located au 10 the City of Redlands' corporate limits unless annexed into the City of Redl 11 Annexation of the Project site to the City of Redlands is not now cont~mplated b the 12 Project proponent" 13 2. '(12)...Community sewer services are physically available in f .e vicinity f the 14 Project site and adequate treatment capaclty presently is available at the City of Re lands 15 Wastewater Treatment Facility; however, sewer connection for the Project has n been 16 reasonably available from the City of Redlands due to the fact that u-.,I Proje 17 located outside the corporate limits of the City of Redlands. Discussions cetween e City 18 of Redlands and the Project proponent have not resulted in a mul"Jally ag eeable 19 arrangement for sewer connection,' 20 3, '(13) Relative to Policy/Action WV!-5,[~ a community sewerage syst is not - ---21- - fedsonably available to the approved Project site: 22 4. "(15) ...Following adoption [of the EVCSP] the City of Rr:dlands has not 23 subsequently implemented those master plan improvements located irl the ar of the 24 Project site, as identified in the EVCSP, and has adopted policies ,'hich in ibit the 25 provision of public services to projects consistent with the EVCSP w:lich ar located 26 27 > Policy/Action WINS is part of County's General Plan which will be dis ;ussed 28 detail later, 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I Rug 25 '97 9:48 P_07 _ F~v,ILY COU~T S~KVICES Fax:9093873055 - ~ ---- -u~r I 22 I 23 24 I 25 26 I 27 28 I I ~- 1-1-- 1 outside the City of Redlands' corporate boundaries unless annexed to the City of Re lands_ 2 The approved project has been previously delennined by the County to bOo consist 3 the EVCSP. 4 ....In accordance with the above policy, the provision of water .Jnd wa services by the County is authorized when cities have been unable or unwilling to rovide services to projects located in unincorporated areas.. 5. "(b)...The County has concluded that the revised Project complies ith the goals, policies, and objectives contained pn the EVCSP]. The bases for this dete nation 5 6 7 8 9 10 are..: "(1 )...the EVCSP contains no prohibition which would pre::lude in ividual property owners or affected public agencies from fonnulating altemath'e infra cture delivery plans which fulfill the EVCSP's stated intent.: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 " " ..0.......... ......... .0.... ...... .......... _. ... .... .(4)...the EVCSP acknowledges that the master planned_ impro outlined therein are intended to serve as a guide to Mure development dedsions ecting later site-specific projects undertaken within the EVC area. This I: :llicy st tement acknowledges that adjustments and revisions are to be predicted an: antici ted as - . ----.. -- ...*-- - - - - - -. - development occurs. The EVCSP provides affected agencies with broad di aetion concerning infrastructure improvement requirements and obligations for l<-ter sit activities: It is-County's--approval-of-the-on-site-water-and -sewe~-facilities -that. City-o and is the basis of this lawsuit As mentioned above, City claims such action vio SP!rit and letter of the EVCSP and County's General Plan. _ In addition, it clai non- compliance with CEOA in several respects. County, and Majestic countEr that is totally consistent with the above plans, and that CEOA was satisfied. ISSUES The parties agree that the court must address five issues in this c<tse. 1. Was County's approval of the on-site facilities inconsistent v,.th the 6 FAMILY COURT SERVICES F2x:9~S3873055 ............, Rug 25 '97 9:48 f' 08 1 2, 3, Was County's approval of said system inconsistent with .its General Pan? Do the mitigation measures adopted as part of the EIR to the EVCSP r quire 2 3 use of a backbone infrastructure for all projects within City's sphere of in,iuence co ered 4 by the EVCSP? 5 4. Does the Supplemental EIR (SEIR) adequately evaluate frq environ ental 6 impacts of on-site water and sewer facilities and provide for approf..riate miti ation 7 measures? 8 5. . Does County's action amount to a change of policy concerning deli ery of 9 services to proposed projects within the scope of the EVCSP, and, if so, is anoth r EIR 10 n~eded to address the commutative impact, if any, this change wOI;Jd have n the 11 environment? 12 DISCUSSION 13 Consistency with EVeSp. 14 . City makes several arguments in support of its conclusion that COUIIty'S acti ns are 15 inconsistent with the EVeSp. It points out that the clear intent of the dra'ters of e plan 16 was to utilize and expand upon the existing facilities owned and operatt.-d by C' for all 17 development of land within itS sphere of influence. In reliance upon its rMies u 18 plan, City constructed water storage and transmission facilities, and'sE-w,ifga' 19 facilities at a cost of several million dollars. 20 In apparent recognition of this intent, County conditioned'its approv, II of the original . '21 project on water and sewer being' provided by-Gity~GiAts-o:.+that' ajesti 22 showcased its project as providing a major benefit In that It would 'de' 'elop b 23 infrastructure,'" (Memorandum in Support of Petition, p. 7, lines 14-15). tvi~)reove 24 ....found tbat one of the project's overriding benefits was that 'project im~ lement tion will 25 . '"The City of Redlancls has master planned, programmed and ;,onstru ad water 26 production and distnbution facilities as well as wastewater collection and t 'eatme t facilities 27 within those portions of the East Valley Corridor area identified within the cl'~ograp ic area of the City's Sphere of Influence. As C\ result, the City of Redlands is the 1: gical p rveyor of water service and has historically provided water and sanitary sew,- r servi to the 28 surrounding area: (AR, vol. XVIII, p. 5818). 7 ~1- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I - I I I .' . I I I I I- I I I I I I 1- l I FP~ILY CUURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 ------. A~9 25 '97 9:48 F.09 ~. 1 2 3 1-1..- facilitate the development of that backbone infrastructure system which has been de igned to accOmmodate the area wide development of the EVCSP area:" (Memorandum, supra atlines 16-18; ARXVI, p. 5225). County and Majestic argue that the provisions of the EVC$P cannot be inte reted 5 as strictly as City contends. They posit that the 'overarching goal' ct the pi is to ....promote and facilitate aesthetically pleasing job .and revenue-producing devel pm;mt [here, the Citrus Plaza regional mall] that responds to physical, envi,-onmen economic opportunities and constraints: (Respondent's and Real Parties' Memo in Opposition to Petition, p. 12, lines 13-15; AR VI, p.1713-1714).. Accordng to th m, the Board of Supervisors found the project, as revised, to be consistent with \his goa . Furthermore, the EVCSP is written in general terms, and nothing !nerein on-site package facilities of the type approved. The County's General PI ,which incarporates the provisions of the EVCSP, contains an exception to the prefer nee for utilization of community water and sewer systems, and that is where it .s unlik Iy such community systems will be installed. They contend that the Board Jf Su rvisors specifically found that sewer connections with City were not reasonab': avail ble and ,therefore the General Plan exception applies. County and Majestic claim that City has not lived up to its agreelnen! u der the EVCSP by adopting policies which inhibit the provision of services to the p"Oject ite, thus . n_ . 20 entitling County to find alternative ways to provide service. Since the COl'nty, th ough its 21 -- subClistncttv-1 ,-will actually be a- public purveyor of services, the re"jsed 22 consistent with all aspects of the EVCSP and General Plan as found t.y the 23 Supervisors. 24 Finally, they contend that even if the court construes the languag~ of th 25 and General Plan as strictly as City suggests, such an interpretation woulj amo nt to an 26 illegal divestment of County's right and dutY to regulate land use within its jliisdict n. The 27 interpretation advocated by City would, in effect, give City a veto power over 28 projects in the unincorporated area of County. 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 8 . FAMILY COURT S~RVICES Fc~:9093873055 ~ , 19 20 . .-21 22 23 24 25 26 28 Rug 25 '97 9:119 f'.10 1 2 3 1-1-- Because many of the arguments raised by the parties are similar in discussin the consistency of County's actions with both the EVCSP and the General Plein, the cou will discuss the two issues together. Before doing so, however. the court must tirst add res the standard of review. Petitioner argues that the actions of County are adjudicatory in nature. the by requiring the court to use the 'substantial evidence' tesl County and Majestic contend the actions are legislative in nature and subject to the broader 'arbitrary and capricious' s~ citing Yost v. Thomas (1984),36 C3 561. Unfortunately, the case authority on this issue is not as clear as the ,~"Ourt would ike. On the one hand. the cases do hold that the standard of review of an agency's ado of a specffic plan and its consistency with the general plan is the 'arbitrary and caprici test because such acts are legislative in nature. (See. e.g. Mitchell v. Cuun of 0 n e (1985), 165 CA3 1185). On the other hand. .....a variety of administrative land use decisions, including the granting of a variance, the granting of a use permit, an the approval of a subdivision map: have been classified as adjudicative, and ~hus revie able by the substantial evidence tesl' (Guardians of Turlock's InteQritv v. Turt.)ck Ci C unci I (1983), 149 CA3 584, 598). the court in Guardians of Turlock's Integrit), quoted went on to state that ....the decision as to whether a particular project is onsistent a general plan involves 'the application of standards...to individual parcel!.' which r nders that decisionadjudicaforY; and thus subject to th-e substantial evidence test on i dicial. 4 5 6 7 g 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1& 27 ieview:"-(1d:) ----____h. .._ The Turlock holding, though cflCta, seems to support Clly's argument' Theref e, the court will apply the substantial evidence test in reviewing County's actions vis a 's the EVCSP and General Plan. State law requires the adoption of a general plan by every city al ,d count in the state. (Government Code (hereinafter'GC') 365300; Lesher Communica~::lns of Walnut Creek (1990), 52 C3 531, 535). Once a general plan is ad/))ted, all ordinances must be oonsistent with that plan, and ....to be consistent mus be 'co 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . F~~ILY COURT SERVICES Fax:90938730S5 Rug 25 '97 P " il 0':49 -, ~'l-- I with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in such a pan.'" 2 (Lesher Communications v. Citv of Walnut Creel<. supra, at 536; GC 965860 (a)(ii)). The 3 general plan controls all development within a jurisdiction, and is the 'constitution r all 4 future developments" (Citizens of Goleta Vallev v. Board of Supervisors (1990), C3 5 553, 570). 6 Although not mandated, a legislative body, after adopting a general plan, may 7 prepare specific plans" ...for the systematic implementation of the general plan for II or 8 part of the area covered by the general plan: (GC 65450). "A specific plan shall in ude 9 a text and a diagram...which specify all of the following in detail: 10 (1) The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, . including open 11 space, within the area covered by the plan. 12 (2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major 13 components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drain;ge, solid ste 14 disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be locatecf within th area 15 covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in t1lJ plan. . 16 (3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, ard stand rds for 17 the conservation, development, and Utilization of natural resources, whel a appli 18 (4) A program of implementation measures including regulations, pr 19 pw/ic works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs 1), (2), 20 and (3). 21 - (5) The specific plan shall include a statement of-the -relatioRsl:lip-of-th pecific-- 22 plan to the general plan: (GC 65451). 23 If a specific plan is adopted it must be consistent with the general pian (GC ), 24 and 'no local public works project may be approved, no tentative -map c';parcel - apfor 25 which a tentative map was not required may be approved, and no zoning ordina ce may 26 be adopted or amended within an area covered by a specific plan unless it is 27 with the adopted specific plan: (GC 65455). 28 If I II! 10 FA>lILY COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 ~ Rug 25 '97 9:49 P.l? -. 1 , 2 ~Specific plans are exceptionally versatile tools for implementing general lans. 3 They carry out local general plans in any of three ways:...3) by bringing trJgether d 4 policies and regulations into a focused development scheme: (Office of Planni and 5 Research (OPR), Specific Plans in the Golden State, March 1989 edition, at page 6 contrast to a general plan with its generalized designations and communit'/-scale p !icies, 7 a specific plan must be implemented rather precisely. State law requires specific p 8 set forth detailed development criteria, standards, and implementation programs As a 9 consequence, there is little room for implementing measures to vary frei , an und rfying 10 specific plan's provisions: (OPR, Specific Plans in the Golden State, SUOra at 39 11 Tuming to the spo...cific plan in question, the partiCipants elected to prepare 12 in compliance with GC 65450 et seq, and intended it to be ....a guide for the gro 13 dl?'1elopment of the East Valley Corridor.' (AR VI, pp. 1676-1677). It was intended 14 pl~n ....incorporate nearfy all the l'8gUIations and development standards :.ifecting 15 of land within the Plan area, and refled the interests and concerns of the com 16 through these standards and regulations. Among the subjects address&: by the 17 Plan are...Iocation and capaCity of water supply, sewerage and storm water dr in~ge 18 facilities; and design guidelines and requirements for the planning area as a whole swell 19 as for specific development sites: (Id). 20 Recognizing that a major 'constraint" to development in the EVe was the acl< of -----~-1- ---stJfficient-infrastructure,and the costof.providing the-improvements ne:-:essary tallow 22 'intense planned development' the authors expressed that '{i]t is the intent of this Ian to 23 provide a means for installing these facilities, through a coordinated planr.ing effo which . - - - 24 includes engineering, financial planning and land use planning for the studl area: 25 p. 1690). The provisions of the EVCSP were considered 'minimum requirer '1ents.' 26 p. 1692). plan and ARVI, ARVI, 27 The fonnat of the EVCSP was to identify the purpose and intent 0' the pIa which 28 would be identified as the 'Plan Axiom.' The Axiom would be followed b.' "Goals wi1ich 11 2,-1-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FA."Hl.Y COURT SERVICES Fcx :9093873055 I ~ Rug 25 '97 9:49 ----- P.13 ! ~1--- 1 are general statements identifying land use strategies, and which are adoptee to achl ve 2 the intent stated in the Axiom. "Policies" were described as "more explic.it statement of 3 intention" and are derived from the Goals. .Objectives. were identified O1S "very spe mc 4 measures which will be adopted to carry out the...Policies: (ARVI, p. 17.3). 5 It is then pointed out that "[t)aken as a whole, the Axiom, Goals, Policies nd 6 Directives constitute the foundation for subsequent standards, regulations nd 7 commitments described in remaining Divisions, and represent the directi'tes and acti ns 8 which the Community, the County, and the Cities of Lorna Linda and Redlands h ve 9 deemed appropriate and necessary to guide the area's future developm~ nt" (Id). 10 In the area of "Community Services and Facilities' the stated \;oal was "[ )he 11 Specific Plan should provide for extension of public services in a logica' and functi naJ 12 manner to minimize impacts on service purveyors while maximizing areas that can 13 . accommodate development in a timely manner: The Policy adopted was "[ciompleme the 14 land use planning for the East Valley Corridor with comprehensive plans alld progr s for 15 utilities and publicfacHities. 16 To achieve this Policy, the following Objectives were adopted: 17 "(A) OBJECTrvE: Conduct planning and engineering of bacl<bc,ne faciliti s for 18 water distribution and sewerage systems concurrent with preparation of ~;pecific P n. 19 "(B) OBJECTIVE: Coordinate the phasing of new development in be Corrid r with --- 20 inStallation of public improvements in such a way as to allow for orderly site develo' ment 21 --and'minimize-cost: .-------- . 22 "(C) OBJECTIVE: Facilitate the coordination of local agenci:3s and 23 purveyors to implement the land use plan and phasing plan: (AR VI, p. :718). 24 nAn-additi~n~I-~ated Poiicywasto"ldjeyelop flnanCirig techniquo to pro 25 extension of infrastructure facilities in the project area: (Id). 26 The EVeSp also contains an extensive discussion of water and s (wer facil ties in 27 existence at the time of its preparation. "The area north of Lugonia Aven'l.e in the ity of 28 Redlands has no major water distribution facilities due to limited develop~,lent Ho ever, 12 FRl'1ILY COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 ----- Rug 25 '97 9:50 P.14 "2--'1.-- 1 both cities [Red lands and Loma Linda] have plans to eventually serve the en:ire areas 2 within their current city limits or spheres of influence when development occurs: ( R VI, 3 p. 1900). "To meet the current and Mure demands, the City of Redlands has cons cled 4 the new 12 mgd Horace P. Hinkley PJanL.The plant is located in Mentone about miles 5 east of the study area. (AR VI, p, 1901). 6 On the subject of water quality, it is discussed that the most pre>.ssing pr blems 7 center around high nitrates, TCE [trichloroethylene], and DBCP [dibromochloropr ane]. 8 But this was considered ....a short-term problem as the City has developed othe water 9 sources." (AR VI, p. 1905). 10 Several recommendations were made as to water supply, demands and fa 'lities. 11 As to supply, .[t]he primary objective in planning water facilities for the Eas: Valley C rridor 12 was to develop a storage and transmission system to meet Mure der"ands in cost 13 effective manner. Existing facilities, when appropriate, were utilized l- the plan to the 14 fullest extent possible: (AR VI, p. 1906). As to demands. ....[p]rojected ~/ater de 15 ultimate buildout of the planning area was estimated to average 10.66 m::lion gall ns per 16 day. The projecled need for increased storage capacity was estimated to be 22.9 million 17 g::::IIons: (Id). 18 Finally, on the subject of facilities the recommendation was to ....in ude a 19 transmission grid to distribute water to the entire project area at a minLnum of 0 psi... 20 Existing pipelines form the basis of system expansion. New pipelines a-3 to be a ded in 21 - principal streets and roads where rights-of-way are in the publicdomair:Lhll sto 22 be located outside of the project area boundaries due to topography of t'le area." 23 A similar analysis and discussion on the subject of sewers is containe 24 EVCSP. Again. the discussion is extensive as to existing facilitieS and orojeC{e- -needs. 25 when the EVC is built out Recognizing that the cities of Lama Linda anu Redlan shave 26 acknowledged the present inadequacy of the systems and the need f(l' expans 27 authors stated '[b]oth cities have existing master plans to extend se....."r servi 28 existing City limits and/or probable spheres of influence.' (AR VI, p. 19(:9). 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FAMILY COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 . .~ F>..J9 25 '97 9:50 P. 1'0 I '2--1..- 1 'For the long-term (e.g. beyond 5 to 10 years), substantial additio,1al ~paci will 2 be required to accommodate the anticipated growth in the service areas of both 3 including the growth in the East Valley Corridor. This is particularly true for the po 4 the study area served by the Redlands treatment plant' (AR VI, p. 1913). In stati 9 the 5 primary objective for sewage facilities. the authors conch.lde, '[t]he prinlary obje ive in 6 planning sewage facilities for the East Valley Corridor is to develop sewage col ection 7 facilities and treatment plant capacity to serve ultimate development of tl :e area i 8 effective manner. Existing facilities were used as the starting point to develop, ov r time. 9 a complete collection and transport system: (AR VI. pp. 1913-1914). 10 The recommended facilities called for a '...proposed collection system (ayo [that 11 would convey] all sewage flow to final collection points in each of the three sewag zones 12 (Lama Linda. Redlands West. and Redlands East). It is based on existing trunk ewers 13 and drainage paths. and on both existing and proposed road alignments: iAR VI, p. 1914). 14 The recommendation then goes into detail as to how this would be a=l nplished. 15 The EVCSP concludes with an 'Infrastructure Plan: In the introdu. ;lion the . uthors 16 recognize that the assessment of infrastructure needs is 'an integral pa.::" of the 17 They point out that over the estimated buildout period for the area (40 yeal s), infras cture 18 construclion must be coordinated with development in order to provide ad~quate 1 19 for financing and design. (AR VI, p. 1928). It was also noted in the introducti n that 20 economic conditions change and are not capable'oftotal prediction. ....[A]djustme ts and --n --reviSions wil1'be an-inherent part of the development and financing process. Sin these 22 adjustments and revisions may need to'oCOJrfrequently in order to resr-ond ade uately. 23 such changes should not be interpreted as requiring a Specific Plan Alnendme : (ld). - . 24 The Infra$tructure Plan then goes on to provide for recommended water !;upply an sewer 25 facilities for the area. 26 The court has quoted at length from the EVCSP to demonstrate 1',at the p parers 27 of the document obviously considered the subject of infrastructure tc: be criti I to its 28 preparation and implementation. A lack of 'backbone infrastructure" was [,elieved t be the ...-.., 14 FAMILY COURT S::RVICES Fax:9093873055 --....,. Rug ?5 '97 9:50 P,16 ~ ?//,- 1 biggest impediment to the type of development all concerned desired, Creation of su an 2 infrastructure was believed to be the answer to that constraint As the court rea s the 3 document, it is readily apparent that the authors contemplated a solution that en vi ioned 4 the cities of Loma Linda and Redlands expanding and extending their water and ewer 5 facilities to serve the portions of the EVC that develop within their respective sph 6 influence, Stand-alone, package facilities were not part of the plan. 7 County and Majestic argue that the statutory authority for specific plans, as " as 8 the EVCSP itself, provide for flexibility in the implementation of public fadlities. R erring 9 to the language in GC 65451 which calls for specific plans to include de,ailed pro isions 10 regarding 'proposed" distribution, location, and extent and intensity of m?jor com nents 11 of public and private sewage and water facilities, they argue that the Legislature anti ipated 12 less certainty and created more flexibility in the implementation of public f cHilies. 13 However, the court does not agree with this interpretation, 14 By its very nature, a specific plan is designed for the 'systematic in tPleme . 15 the general plan: (GC 65450), It must set forth detailed development crteria, st ndards. 16 and implementation programs. Certainly, the land uses contemplated in a ~pecific 17 proposed rather than actual. So too is the infrastructure needed to impleme:nt the 18 uses. However, the fact that a use and implementation are prospective does n 19 with a degree of flexibility that would allow an agency to disregard a p,opos 20 de~elopment and-implementation in revor'Of an alternative that was not contempla 21' - specific--plan.-:Thiswol1Id-b~-creaF-Violalion-of-the-statutor:y-l11ar:1date t1T3tall.pr ~ects be 22 consistent with the specific plan, 23 County and Majestic look to the language. of the EVeSp itself to sup rt their 24 argume~;'- Th~-~~i~tt~th~ term "~~~m~;~d~-i~' the Plan's descript::)n of s wer and 25 water improvements for build out of the planning area. They also look to th~ in oduction 26 to the Infrastructure Plan, which the court quoted above, and argue that the 'obvi us intent" 27 of the EVCSP Is to only recommend coordinated infrastructure facilities, no, man te them. 28 III III 15 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I F~1ILY COURT SERVICES Fax:90938730SS R~9 25 '97 9:5, P. :7 .tI\,1..- '\ v I 1 As City points ou~ the language in the introduction relates only te flexibility i the 2 phasing and financing of construction of the infrastructure. The authors of the EVCSP ully 3 recognized their responsibilities in the preparation of the Plan-particularly as it relat s to 4 infrastructure. In the introduction to 'Community Facilities: it is noted that '[sJtat law 5 requires that a specific plan shall include 'the proposed distribution, location, and 6 and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, 7 drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities propos.;!d to be I 8 within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described n the 9 plan.' (Citing GC 65451 (emphasis added)). Division 6 is included to cc,mply with State. 10 requirements for public facilities planning in the Specific Plan. This Divisio{, will sum arize 11 the existing facilities serving the planning area, as well as required improvements n eded 12 to serve proposed land uses under the Specific Plan. The final chapter con ins a 13 proposed phasing plan for required improvements." (AR VI, p. 1893). 14 From this language is found the true intent of the EVCSP, which was to p 15 backbone infrastructure to the planning area Again, the inescapable :.onclusio to be 16 drawn from reading the Plan is that the cities would provide necessary ...rater an sewer 17 services to development withIn their spheres of influence. Obviously, th;s was 18 and Majestic's initial conclusion as well. Throughout the application anr study 19 inclUding the final approval of the project in January, 1996, all parties a:l1templa ed that 20 City would extend its services to the project site. Only after negotiations withCi ""brOKe - .. . 21 . down did Majestic and County decide that an alternative totheEVCSP+pr~visi 22 permissible. 23 It should be noted that County officials recognized. the poter ,tial for 24 associated with the alternative proposal. In the Focused Supplement to th\! Final 25 pointed out that "[a] number of policies contained in the San Bemardino:ounty 26 Plan are potentially applicable to the Revised Project: (AR II, p. 419). ~ an 27 General Plan Policy/Action WA-9(c) provides for the develop men' of gu 281// 1// 16 r H,'ULT l-UU"U ~::'KV lLt.~ r ax: "093873055 \ ~J9 25 '97 9:51 ~ P 18 -z.,1.-- 1 ....restricting the creation of new, small, private water systems where an el(isti large 2 water system can more reliably serve the public interest.. (AR 1/, p. 462\. 3 County also recognized that by approving the revised project, it wuuld be n gating 4 its findings relative to the project approval in January. Accordingly, it made the ndings 5 quoted above-specifically, that water and sewer services were not reas'mably a ai/able 6 from City due to City's position that it would not provide such services te land 0 id~ its 7 incorporated area; and that a stand-alone package water and sewer system is co sistent g with the General Plan. and the EVCSP. 9 However, the court cannot find that these findings are supported by su antial 10 evidence. As mentioned, the clear purpose and intent of the EVeS? was fer City to rovide 1 I infrastructure services to the project site.s The Plan does not discuss or eontem 12 alternative that was proposed and approved in this case. County found in Novem er, and 13 argues now, that the EVCSP does not prohibit such alternative systems, therefore. it is not 14 inconsistent with the Plan. However, this argument ignores the purpose of speciti plans- IS namely, to establish in as much detail as possible, the land uses and mans of 16 implementing them within a given area. Simply because a plan does not ex lude all 17 possible alternatives does not negate its stated intent and allow an agency to pr ceed as 1 g it sees fit 19 Respondents next contend that the revised project is consistent vlith th 20 intent of the EVCSP-namely, to create an environment which would attra ~-t '- businesses to the area in order to provide a job base for the East Valley 22 strengthen the local economy, while ensuring high-quality development through fished 23 design guidelines and standards. The Citrus Plaza project would be such a deve --- -~ 24 Respondents argue that the Board of Supervisors found that becaUSf City 25 provide services until the site was annexed into its jurisdiction, and we 'uld no assure 26 27. · In fact in the Final Supplement to the Final EJR, under the 'No Prcject Alt mative: the Board concluded that "[i]mplementation of the Approved Project is fe" sible.' (AR I p. 28 126). , 17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FP.!1ILY COURT S~ICES Fax:909387305S P'-lg 25 '97 11:34 P.02 t,,~ 1 Majestic that v.:ith annexation the entitlements granted by County would be honor:d b City, 2 County was justified in disregarding the backbone infrastructure directives of the 3 in order for the project to go through. In other words, respondents appear to be sayin that, 4 in this particular case, the backbone infrastructure requirement of the EVCSP mu give 5 way to the higher purpose of the Plan mentioned above. 6 The. difficulty with this position is that the law does not allow one element 0 a plan 7 to be given preference over another. This was the holding in Sierra ebb v. . B ard Of 8 Suoervisors (1981),126 CA3 698, where a general plan provision gave preferen to the 9 land use element in the event there was a conflict with the open space and cons rvation 10 element The court held that ....the law requires zoning ordinances to be consist nt with 11 the county's general plan. and the general plan is required to be consistent withi itseH: 12 (Sierra Club v. Board of Suoervisors. supra at 703, (emphasis added)}. In th s case, 13 although we are talking about a specific plan, the rule would undoubtedly be same, 14 particularly since the EVCSP was. adopted as part of County's General Plan. 15 Finally,respondents argue that if the court finds the Board's actions in 16 with theEVCSP. and that the Project is subject to City providing the necessary ter and 17 sewer services, this would amount to an unlawful divestment of County's auth lity over 18 regulation of land use within its jurisdiction. Putting it another way, this would gi e City a 19 veto power over a decision that is County's to make. 20 The cO!Jrt agrees with City in that there is nothing unusual about the pro isions of 21 --the-EVCSP-,-that.subjecLdevelopment within a ci!i"s ~!:!ere of influence to an ea-wide , . ---- ----. 22 plan of infrastructure. There is no attempt to limit the legislative discretion of Mur Boards 23 of Supervisors by locking them into the current Specific or General Plans. Th attempt 24 here is to requlre-CountY-toaCtln a manner con.sistent with those plans; If it 0 longer- 25 wishes to be bound by them, then the remedy is to change them by amendmen 26 " I 27 III 28 III 1/1 III 1/1 1& 19 20 -21- 22 23 24 25 FAMILY COURT ~ICES Fax:9093873055 Rug 25 'Sir 10:23 t-'.Ul .i. ~ '. ~ I 4 water and sewer proposal is inconsistent with the EVCSP. Turning to the issue of consistency with the General Plan, the court note that because the EVCSP was incorporated by ordinance into County's General Plan, Co nty's actions would necessarily be inconsistent with the General Plan as well. Howev r, the 5 6 7 court will address some of the arguments raised by counsel on this issue. 8 As pointed out earlier, state law mandates that each city and COUl1ty prep adopt a general plan, and dictates the minimum contents of such a p'an. It m st be comprehensive, long-term, and address land uses and development poliCies for th 9 10 II county. (GC S65300 et seq.) The general plan controls all develop.l1ent . 12 jurisdiction and is the "constitution for all future development.' Citizens of Golet 13 v. Board of Suoervisors (1990), supra at 570). NI subsequent projects and zoning ordinances must be consistent with the general plan. her 0 14 15 Walnut Cree~ supra at 536). Consistency with a general plan may be four. d only specific development project will further the objectives and policies of the !;'eneral not obstruct their attainment. rCorona-Norco Unified School Dist. v. City ot Corona (1993), 16 17 18 17 CM 985, 994). A finding of consistency with a general plan must be vacated i, based on the evidence, a reasonable person could not have reached the same ".oncJus' n. (No Oil. Inc. v. City of Los Anoeles (1987), 196 CA3223, 243). 'County'sGeneral Plan recognizes a correlation between the inten~jty-oH and the amount of facilities and services needed to support such uses. (AR IX, Accordingly, the Plan provides for five levels of development intensity ranging G Although the court has used the substantial evidence test, it wou..:! make a similar finding based on the "arbitrary and capricious" test as well. The court can fir.d no ba is in the 26 record, other than mere conjecture, for the Board's conclusion that water ar;j sewe services are not reasonably available from City. Again, the court is not attemp'~ng to obe the 27 positions of the parties during negotiations, or in any way take a position ;n supp of one side over the other. This court is simply looking at the record before it to determine whether 28 County's finding is justified. No justification can be found from the record. 1!} I I I I I I I I I I I I I 18 19 20 I ----i1 22 I _. .__23_ I I I I 24 25 26 27 28 rP~I~Y COU2T S~RVICES Fax:9093S73055 Rug 25 '97 P Of 10:23 ~ 1 2 3 11..- v high density developments in urban areas, designated as Improvement Level 1.- to va 'low density developments in rural areas, designated as Improvement LevelS. :"'evel 1 re uires that water be provided by a water purveyor, and also requires sewers or septics. ( R IX, p. 2568). Development is not permitted under the Plan unless the minimlE:l infra cture requirements of the applicable Improvement Level are in place, or are r-Ianned to be in place. (AR IX, p.2575). The Plan's policy for water supply to Level 1 development, as mentioned, i by a water purveyor. In this case, County has contravened this policy by allowing the rilling of two new wells on the project site. County argues that there is technical ~mplian with this policy because the water will be provided by a water purveyor, nam(,ly EV-1 f CSA 70. However, this court has some difficulty accepting this argument wile it is uncontradicted that EV-1 was created specifically to allow Majestic to drill the Is and construct the package sewage system to avoid the previous requirement of .:onnecti n with City's services. Such an approach seems to evade the spirit of the Genv:aJ Plan. With respect to sewer service, the Plan states a preference fa conne ion to community sewerage systems, and requires connection to a community sewer except in areas where it is unlikely that community sewage systems will be- install IX, p.2482). County found that community sewer services were physically :vaila vicinity of the project site and adequate treatment capacity was availab\~ at th City of Red/ands Wastewater Treatment Facility. However, it was round that SONer co nection - was. nor~ieasonably available"-due to tne fact the site was outside City's carpor te limits, and negotiations between City and Majestic failed to produce an agree:nent or sewer connection. (AR I, p.72). .-...- ------ ----~--...- -- -- -- As discussed above, there is no evidence in the record supporting :,he fi ding that services were not reasonably available. But even if that were true, the Geroeral Ian does not recognize this as an exception to the requirement of connection to cc nmu ity sewer systems. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Jl 12 13 14 15 16 17 III III 20 FRMI~Y COURT SERVICES Fax:90938730SS ~" Rug 25 '97 10:23 P.03 ~1,. 1 City also points to the language in General Plan Policy LU-9. That poiicy pro ides 2 that "[b]ecause State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility to manage hmds within thejr 3 adopted spheres of influence, and because cities are usually best able to manage rban 4 growth through the provision of services, the County has a responsibility 10 coordin te its 5 land use policies with the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursu ~ plans, p Iicies 6 and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such stant:ards hav 7 agreed to and jointly adopted." 8 Policy LU-9 continues by providing "[i]n addition, the policies and standar s that 9 encourage annexation and the use of city standards within city spheres of influence ill be 10 considered: 11 a. Adopt joint regulations/plans, zoning studies, infrastructure support pi . and 12 other appropriate mechanisms." (AR IX, p.2584). 13 The EVCSP was devised pursuant to this Policy, and as discussed '<!arlier, th Plan 14 clearly contemplated the construction of a backbone infrastructure con mensura 15 development in the Plan area" with City providing the water and server servi to 16 development in the donut hole. 17 Respondents cite subsection "c" of the Policy which provides an :~xceptio 18 requirement of service connections for projects that are less than one mile <!Way fro 19 availability.7 This subsection reads in part, "[elxceptions (for package waste '.vater tr 20 plants, individual on-site and multiple owner septic systems, holl: 'ng tan , and 21 experimental-systems)-may-be-appr-oved-sl.lbject_to~eview-and .apprcv.:J..by. th 22 DEHS. the appropriate regional water quality control board, and the wast:water 23 (Id). However, the court would conclude that this exception is subject to ttu. more r strictive 24 - .--.---.----- ---.-- 25 7 It is not clear to tile court whether sewer serviCes from City are I;;ss tha one mile 26 from the project site. But for purposes of this discussion, the court will aSSL.me th to be the case. 27 I There is some suggestion that CSA 70, EV-1 is the "wastewater aficncy" eferred to in tilis subsection. Again, the court finds this position to run contrary to th ~ inte and spirit 28 of the General Plan for development in fL-1. areas. 21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FA~I~Y COJRT S~RV1CES F2X:9J938730SS I ~ I I 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Rug 25 '97 "O:2~ P. C~ 1 A~1.- provisions of the EVCSP, which, by it very nature, specifically controls developme. in tne 2 Eve. 3 Finally, City correctly points out that the PolicieS/Actions of the Ger l~ral Pia Lama LindalRedlands Land Use/Growth Management section call for "[ II new devt!lopment within the spheres of Loma Linda and Redlands respectively shall co Iy with the service requirements of the appropriate city. All new development shall necessary service commitments prior to approval: (AR IX, p. 2647). Coun Majestic's actions fail to meet these requirements: Effect of East Vallev Corridor Soecific Plan Mitiaation Measures. In preparing and adopting the EVCSP. it was determined that 51F:h acti n was a project within the meaning of CEQA, and that ".u[environmental] impacts will be roduced from the land use and developments proposed under its planning direction: (AR VII, p..1967). Accordingly, an EIR for the project was prepared in accordance wi CEQA requirements and procedures. As part of those requirements, feasible mitigation Wl.re adopted in order to reduce or eliminate ,the Plan's significant enviror:ment impacts. (Public Resources Code (hereinafter "PRC") 921081 (a)(1); 14 C,:1. Co e Regs. (hereinafter "Regs") 915091 (a)(3).AII projects were required to adhere '.0 the mitigation measures in the EIR.(ARVII, p1971). The mitigation measures adopted for water supply to developmen' withi the Plan area were to "[c]oordinate projected water demands within the project are~ with eqlands' and "Lama linda's existing and planned water supply. Implement phased-(;cm - , water facilities recommended in Specific Plan and use of reclaimed water: 1986). The mitigation measures for wastewater was to "[iJmplement phased of wastewater collection system as recommended in the Specific PI, n projected wastewater flows within the project area with capacity and planmd the Redlands and San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plants: (Id). These mitigation measures were discussed in greater detail in the FR. the water supply, it was acknowledged that o[i)n order to provide the requir cd 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 JJ 12 13 14 15 16 17 22 VII, p. -----21 22 23 ---..--.---.. 24 25 26 27 28 FP"":~L Y COURT SffiVICES FeX :9093873055 Rug 25 '97 10:24 f' 05 .~ 14 IS for its service area as well as for the East Valley Corridor, the City of Redlan s has constructed the Hinckley Water Treatment Plant to treat Santa Ana River and State reject , water...!t is proposed that Mill Creek and Santa Ana River waters be used to provi base supply to the East Valley Corridor with Well No. 34 and Mission Well utilized f r peak demands: (AR VII, pp. 2992-2093). Under the topic of distribution systems, the EIR contains the following la "The recommended major water facilities for the East Valley Corridor were sized meet the needs at ultimate development Various layouts were evaluated for selactio of the most cost effective system. The system...is consistent with the Redlands and Lorn Unda design standards. The water system can be constructed in phases LVith the is/ing facilities supplying initial development. "The proposed new water facilities are shown in Figure 8.10-2 and listed i 8.10-2. The transmission grid will distribute water to the entire proje.: t at a mi imum pressure of .40 psi on a maximum day for peak hours: (AR VII, p. 7. )93. (em hasis added)). Similar language Is found in the detailed discussion of mitigatio., measu wastewater collection, treatment and disposal. "Existing facilities were user! as the s rting point to develop, over time, a complete collection and transport system. . "The proposed collection system layouLis based on existing trllnk sewe and drainage paths, and on both existing and proposed road alignments: (J.o."'< VII, p. (4). ---- Again; this iangllagefromthe Plan's E1Ris quoted at length to deme nstrate th t the plain language of the mitigation measures was to provide water and sewe: services 0 the Plan area through a backbone infrastructure provided by the cities in ~heir rasp ive ------ -...._- --- - - - -- . spheres of influence. County's findings, and Majestic's arguments now, t1.at the m on-site package water and sewer systems are consistent with the EVCSP c",d the a mitigation measures, are not supported by the evidence or the languag; of the r documents. County's action is contrary to the requirements of CEQA ttnt no ,pro be approved unless all feasible mitigation measures are complied with. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 23 2--?.- I : I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I. I I I I I. I I I I FR'1IL Y COURT SERVICES Fa~ :9093873055 RJg 25 '97 10:24 P.GS --- ] Does the Suoolemental Final EIR comolv with CEOA? 1-1-- . City argues that the Supplement Final EIR is deficient in that it fails to ade ualely address several environmental impacts that would result from the on-site p..::kage fa 'Iities. The court will address each of these claims separately. The standard of review of compliance with CEQA is the substantinl eviden e test (PRC 21168.5). The court must determine from the record whether there was a pre abuse of discretion. An abuse of discretion is established if the agency has not pro in the manner required by law or if the determination or decision is n\.lt suppo substantial evidence. (San Joaauin RaoturelWildlife Rescue Center v. Co n of Stanislaus (1994), 27 CA4 713, 721). Substantial evidence means "anough r levant information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair ;;~gument made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might al30 be ra chad: (R~gs 15384 (a)). Mere uncorroborated opinion or rumor does not consfjtute sub tantial evidence. The court does not pass upon the correctness of the EIR'~ enviro ental conclusions, but only upon its sufficiency as an informational document The cou does not weigh evidence in the administrative record, and may not set aside an ugency d cision on the ground that an opposite conclusion would have been equally or rr,:>re rees nable. (Laurel Heiohts Imorovement Assn. v. Recents of University of Californi>.! (1988), 47 C3 376, 392-393). . UnderCEeA-an.EIR-isi'ri!Sumed-adequate.-and-the.petitioner-i~..a.CE . action must prove otherwise. (AI Larson Boat Shoo. Inc. v. Board of Harbor Commis ioners (1993),18 CA4, 729, 740). The court does not pass upon the correctn.~s ofth EIR's environmental cond~si~n~--;-b~t only.upon itssUfflcieney as ~n-envTronm~ritardo ..menL (Laurel Heights I, supra at 392). An evaluation of the environmental effec~s of a p oposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviEwed in of what is reasonably feasible. (Regs, 15151). III III 2 ~ -' 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 24 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 -21 -- 22 23 24 25 26 m'1IL Y COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 -/ ~.. Rug 25 '97 10:25 P_07 Evaluation of wastewater discharQe into Santa Ana River '2--1.- 2 The subject of wastewater discharge from the project site was disa.Js$ed i the SEJR. 3 The focus of the analysis was the use of treated effluent for ree/amatio.l pu 4 irrigation on the site during Phase I and Phase II. Upon completion of pha e II, it was anticipated that the demand for reclaimed water on site would diminish and ny excess , would be discharged into a planned storm drain system to be constructed by M system would empty into the Santa Ana River. (AR II, pp. 502-503).8 This City points out that this is particularly significant in that the SEIR sf-Jo of chlorides, sodium, and total dissolved solids in the treated wastewat€!'- wil far exceed existing basin plan water quality objectives, (AR If, pp. 496 Ex. 7, and 506, Ex. 10). Given the 'limited assimilation capacity" of the Santa Ana River, the impact ((0 thi discharge should have been analyzed. County counters that the subject was addressed and thoroughly, an Iyzed, and mitigation measures were adopted which would require any effluent disc. 1a ed into the' installation and maintenance of grease traps at all food service facilitin;, disinfection or ultra violet light to disinfect eftluent), most called for com~1i storm drain to fully. comply with applicable regUlatory standards, ioe/udi Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) objectives. (AR I, pp'-7 0). While some of the mitigation measores called for specific measures to be imr 'Ie standards imposed by various regulatory agencies. Comments, ....any and all surface water discharge from the wastewater tre;, ent facilities ~ There is some question as to how much excess water would be di!i arged into the 27 system. Ex. 9 of the Focused .Supplement to the Final EIR suggests as IT;' as 213 of the total treated effluent would be discharged over the course of a year becaus€i Ie or no water 28 would be used for irrigation during the winter months. (AR II, p.504). 25 I I I I I I I I 'I II I I I I I I I FR~I~Y CaJRT SERVICES Fax:90933730SS "lug 25 '97 ~C) :25 P 03 1 2 1".l-- S), water 17 the final facilities' design.' (Id). 18 City argues that these mitigation measures improperly defer envirol :menta problem 19 solving until after project approval. However, such deferral is permissible vmere' commits 20 the agency to a realistic perfonnance standard, and does not allow the develop ent to go ! I --21 forward uiltif StriCt complitmte'With-regulatory standards have been satisfied This is 22 particularly true in heavily regulated areas such as hazardous waste. (SEt' Rio ! .. __ _ ._.23_ ., Bureau Center v~. Count~ ?~ So~ano (1992), 5 CA4 351, 380-3.81). By an.'.logy, 24 of water quality is also heavily regulated and would come within this n.;:e. Ci 25 shown how compliance with this measure would not render the imp:::lct in 26 Tnerefore, the court finds compliance with CEQA on this issue. will be subject to and in compliance With waste discharge requirements (WD reclamatio:1 requirements (WRRs), water quality certifications, and/or waste prohibitions as established by the RWQCB. As a result, all discharge will regional water quality objectives contained in the RWQCS's Water Qua":'ty Con rot Plan, Santa Ana River Basin (8) (Basin Plan). Since no surface water discharg Will be 3 4 5 6 7 authorized which fails to fulfill the intent of the Basin Plan, no adverso impa s upon biological resources are anticipated to occur as a result of P.evised Project Implementation: (AR I, pp. 233-234). In the same section, the subject of disinfection was discussed. reclaimed water from the wastewater treatment facilities will either be bit chlori ation or ultra violet light or a combination of the two. If effluent disinfection is by chlorin tion, the reclaimed water can be dechlorinated before discharge into the Ssnta Alternatively" it may be more cost effective to disinfect with ultra v;l'Iet lig t before discharging to the master planned storm 'drain. The Project proponent '. ;!ve [si ] not, as of yet, received discharge requirements to the Santa Ana River from the RWQ result, a final decision will be made after receiving WDRs from the RWQC a and s part of 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 gulation has not 27 11/ III III III 28 26 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 FRM~LY COURT SERVICES Fax:9Q93873055 Rug 25 '97 10:25 P.09 1 Discharae of effluent on landlaroundwater contamination 2 The court has more difficulty coming to the same conclusion on ':his iss 3 4 5 6 same problem exists as with discharge into the River-namely, the admittedly e amounts of sodium, chloride, and totally dissolved solids from the treated water. ssive standards imposed by regulatory agencies. response is essentially the same as well-namely, that all discharged water must m et rigid However, the only discussion in the SEIR relative to discharge onco the I nd is in 7 8 9 10 conjunction with irrigation. And in that regard the recommended mitigation mea ure was .Ulf required by the RWQCB through the permit process, blending of reela med ter with lower IDS water will be required to reduce the salinity, boron, and chloride conee trations in those waters used for on-site irrigation. Alternatively, landscape plants select approved Citrus Plaza project should be selected based upon their tolr.ranee 0 these for the constituef1ts: (AR I, p. 147). Not only does this not address the potential impact of such wate on the groundwater, but, as City points out, it does ~ot address such questions as \0 mere he lower TDSwaterwill come from, how much will be required, and wha~ ifany, imract th s excess blended water will have on th-e discharge into the Santa Ana River. As;;.., info ationa! document, the EIR is deficient on this subject of the project site, has been found in a plume that is contaminating thl! gro nd water ..- --- .---- . pumped by City and extends beneath the project site. (AR II, p. 639). An engineer's report recommended that on-site wells be located at. the n rth edge of the project site where it is believed the levels of TCE are lower. The S<lme r port also recommended that the wells be drilled into the deeper strata to minimize the :on of (",itrate and DBCP. This recommendation was made because the "[e]xpeJ ;ence f others 27 1- ~ .. I I- ii II I' I- I I I I, I I I I I, I I I I FAMILY COURT S~RVICES Fax:9093873055 ~ug 25 '97 10:10 1"'.1U ----, '2.-1...- 1 also indicate [sic] that TDS may be lower in the deeper strata. Very little mrof!Tlati 2 available on DBCP. We believe that the deeper the screens are set, the less like it will 3 encounter DBCP: (ld). 4 The above report made reference to a 1986 report that showed a .w.;1I detin d TCE 5 plume" that extends through the Section 21 area The SEIR also recogniz d that 6 Lockheed-Martin is presently conducting a study to determine the extent of ille plu e. City 7 requested that County study the issue of dispersion of contaminants that c..ould r It from 8 taking water from deeper strata through modeling and sampling from other wells. 9 declined to do so, stating thallt]he precise composition of groundwater beneath th 10 site, at different depths, will not be known until wells are drilled and water quality 11 (AR I, p. 229). Alternatively, County's response was that the project would use Ie s water 12 than the existing agricultural wells on the site, and no significant contamillation h d been 13 found in those shallower wells. (AR I, p. 228). 14 Since the SEIR recognized the possibIlity that the proposed wells may im act the 15 dispersion of the TCE contaminant plume (AR II, pAS8), it is perplexing h this 16 County found it unnecesscuy to study the prospect that the proposed V,3IlS co Id draw 17 contaminants toward the projeCt site or existing wells in the area. This is r: articul y so in 18 light of the Lockheed-Martin study. It appears to this court that the SEIR i~ inade uate as 19 an informational document on this very critical issue. 20 Odor impacts 21 The court is satisfied that the SEIR properly addressed the issue of odor mpacts, ' 22 and adopted appropriate mitigation measures to deal with them. 23 Do Actions of Cnuntv Amount to Policy Chance Reauirina a Subseauent, :JR? 24 City argues that the action of the Board in approving the stand-alar 1 >, on- te water 25 and sewer project not only deviates from the intent of the EVCSP and <? t neral Jan, but 26 amounts to a change in policy for both plans. Such a substantial change. requir s a new 27 environmental study of the impacts stand-alone facilities will have if de..~lopm nt in the 28 EVC is allowed to proceed in this manner. 28 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 --- --21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FAM~LY COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 ~-"". Rug 2S '97 10:26 . .~ P.11 1 2 . 11.--1 '1-- ! County and Majestic claim this is not a policy change and is consistent with oth I plans. They rely on their earlier arguments pertaining to the inconsistenl_Y issues. hey also dismiss City's claim that Mure development in the EVC will involve '.:m-site faci ities as speculative. For many of the same reasons given in finding County's actions to be inconsi tent with the EVCSP and County General Plan, the court finds these actions to be a ch f}ge in policy as well. County's apparent position throughout this modification process hClS been th t if a city makes it unfeasible to provide services to projects within it sphere of in:Juence, C unty is justified in deviating from the backbone infrastructure policy of the Pla,l and opti g for an on-site package facility in order to save the project. If this is so, thel~ switch in from community-based services to stand-alone services for each development within th Plan area is clearly a policy change and would require County to revisit thE: environ impacts associated therewith. County's argument that City's claim of a domino effect is speculative is con icted by the EIR statement that analysis of this Issue will be conducted on a pr:Jject-by basis, as each isolated facilitY is approved. Moreover, an attempt to rely on the pacific Plan's EIR fOf an analysis of cumulative impacts is impermissible. The Sp~;ific Pia's EIR was based on the presumption' that construction of infrastructure would OCC; If. (AR Vll, pp. 2094,2102). 3 4 5 6 7 -- --- -- ..- -. -- CONCLUSION' Because the court has found County's actions in approVing the modifica n of the Citrus Plaza project to be inconsistent with the EVCSP and County Ger:eral lan, and --- -- -- ---.------ - having further found that the Supplemental EIR did not adequately c'ddr environmental impacts as required by CEQA, and that a subsequent EfR WI '<lId e needed to address the cumulative effects of on-site, package (as opposed to comm', ,jty) water and sewer systems in the donut hole portion of the East Valley Corridor, the cc' Irt uld make the following orders: 29 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FRM~L Y COURT SERVICES Fax:9093873055 '-'\ Rug 25 'S7 10:26 P.12 ~. '2-1-- 1 1. The petition for writ of mandate is granted, and County is directed to ~ 2 and set aside its subsequent approvals of the Citrus Plaza project, specifically 3 approvals that pertain to allowing on-site, package water and sewer systems; 4 2. The petition for writ of mandate is granted, and County is directed to aca~e 5 and set aside is certification of the supplemental environmental impact report f r the 6 project; 7 3. County, its agents, employees, servants and all persons acting unde , or in 8 concert with County, are enjoined and restrained from taking action to authari e the 9 implementation of the Citrus Plaza project as modified, or issuing any permits 0 other 10 entitlements for development, construction or use or in furtherance of the project; 11 4. Real Party-in-Interest, its agents, employees, servants, and air person acting 12 under, or in concert with them, are enjoined and restrain~d from taking any action carry 13 out, or implement the Citrus Plaza project as modified, or any development con dion, 14 or use in furtherance of the project; 15 5. Petitioner shall recover its costs of suit 16 Petitioner shall prepare a statement of decision, if requested, and.j Jdgme 17 18 DATED: AUQust 25. 1997 19 20 J~~~------ Jut7 the Superior Court 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 F~ILY COURT SSRVICES Fax:9093873065 Rug 25 '97 10:26 P.1.:; /\ SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CENTRAL DISTRICT TIT1.E OF CASE (ABBREVIATED): CITY OF REDLANDS VS. COUNTY CASE NUMBER: SCV 34737 DECLARATION OF.SERVICE BY MAIL My business address is: Tnird Floor. Courthouse.351 North Arrowhead Avenue. San Bernardino. California 9241! 0240. I hereby declare that I am a citizen of the United States. over the .~e of , 8. em~loyed in the above-named county and not a party to nor intere.ted in thi. proceeding. On Auaust 25.1997 I depos~ed in tne Un' d States mail at San Bernardino, Califomia, a sealed envelope (postage prepaiell which contained a t:ue ccpy of the 2.ttac:hed: NAME OF DOCUMENT: NOTICE OF DECISION ON PETmON FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 1~ whi:h Was addressed as follows: Name and Address of Persons Served: Stephen L Kostka Marie A Cooper MoC<ltchen. Doyle. Brown & Enersen P.O. Box V Walnut Creek. CA 9459&-1270 Paul F. Mordy Deputy County Counsel 385 N. Arrowhead Ave., 4th Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0140 Daniel J. McHugh City Anorney City of Reclands 35 Cajon Stred Redl.nds. CA92373-1S0S Thomas F. Winfield Joshuc C. Gonheim Brown. Winfield & Can",ne,; 300 S. Grand Ave.. Ste. 1500 Los An~eJes. CA 90071-3125 . . At the time of mailing this notice there was regular communication between the place of mailing and the "ac (s) to which this notice wa. .ddressed. I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct DATED: ~lJJJ SUE WHITED Secretary Auoust2S, 1997 by: , / I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -- Rug D '9( ------- <:;':40 " Ul. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F~~ILY COU?-T SERVICES Fax:9093873055 11\ CKAMaERS oc ~t ~uptrior Q[;ourt SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 351 No::h AJrOWhGad Avenue S...., Bernardino, CA 924'5-02~ Ii- i3) 367-4() 2 FAX 1~J9i 357-30 5 FAX COVER SHEET DATE: Auoust 25,1997 PAGES (inc!. cover): 3? 9:15 am_ '1~ Daniel McHuQh (Fax 798-7503) stephen Kostka (Fax 510-975-5390) Paul Mordv (Fax 387-5462) Thomas Winfield (Fax 213-687-2149) TIME: TO: FROM: Sue Whited ------ ---:iiJaTClafSecretarV- PHONE #: (909) 387-4002 I COMMENTS: \1I McCUTCHEN, DOYLE, BROWN & ENERSEN, LLP STEPHEN L. KOSTKA, 57514 , MARIEA. COOPER, 114728 Post Office Box V Walnut Creek, California 94596-1270 Telephone: (510) 937-8000 DANIEL J. McHUGH, 112197 City Attorney City ofRedIands 35 Cajon Street P.O. Box 3005 Redlands, CA 92373-1505 Telephone: (909) 798-7595 ~, " 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ~, f2D fL t~@' ~ ~ D SEP 2 4 1997 By O._~ " 0 S --t..Y...\-:'.J.1'\.. I JIJ '; ,!-.. an Ber-a ~l.~:n, '..I ~ .., r~mc S ~....- ~ C 1J1'er;Q I' ~ \..> enlralO' r ..lun..:",,- =--- '''I~;Dr; .. OJI COUrt Attorneys for Petitioner and Plaintiff City of Redlands -,' --9_ I ::::'c'c 'D.~ I ,;;~m~-I ~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Exempt From Filing Fees Gov't Code ~ 6103 SUPERlOR COURT OF TIIE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO - CENTRAL DIVISION CITY OF REDLANDS, Petitioner and Plaintiff; v. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, Does I-X, Respondents and Defendants. MAJESTIC REAL Ty COMPANY, REDLANDS VEN11JR.E, Does XI-XX, Real Parties In Interest C'A972J:l0.00912011S-002 . JUOGM:1lT No, SCV 34737 , JUDGMENT AND ORDER G PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANn STAY AND PERMANENT INJUN ~'L- I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I'''.... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .,- _:l 26 27 28 0.972(10,009 ~7v- 1 2 3 4 TIlls matter came on for hearing on August 4, 1997, the Honorable J:J,,,Tles Edwards, judge, presiding. Petitioner City of Redlands appeared through its counsel, McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, by Stephen L. Kostka and Marie A. Cooper, and aniel J. McHugh, City Attorney. Respondent County of San Bernardino appeared through Coun Counsel, Alan K.. Marks, by Paul F. Mordy, Deputy County Counsel. Real Parties In Int rest Majestic Realty Company and Redlands Venture appeared through counsel Brown, W' Canzoneri, by Thomas F. Winfield and Joshua C. Gottheim. The matter having been uk n under' submission, the court having issued its Notice of Decision On Petition For Writ Of Man te, in which it made [mdings and orders, and no party having requested a Statement ofDecisio , 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED I. The petition for writ of mandate is granted, and County is directed 0 vacate and set aside its subsequent approvals of the Citrus Plaza project, specifically thos approvals that pertain to allowing on-site, package \'/ater and sewer systems. County is co=anded to make and file a return to this writ within 60 days after service, showing w at it f has done to comply with the writ; 2. The petition for writ of mandate is granted, and County is directed vacate and set aside its certification of the supplemental environmental impact report for e project. County is commanded to make and file a'return to this writ v,'ithin 60 days after rvlee, shov,wg what it has done to comply \;;th the writ; 3. County, its agents, employees, servants and all persons acting und ,or 1D concert v-ith County, .are enjoined and restrained from taking action to authorize the implementation of the Citrus Plaza project as modified, or issuing any permits or other entitlements for.dexelopment, construction or use or in furtherance of the project; 4. Real Parties In Interest, their agents, employees, servants, and all ersons acting under, or in concert with them, are enjoined and restrained from taking any actio to carry out, or implement the Citrus PJaza project as modified, or any development, constructio ,or use in furtherance of the project; 13 14 15 16 Ii 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 JUOGMEN"i '.,. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CA972~10.009 --. ff\ I I I -I ~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5. Petitioner shall recover its costs of suit, to be detennined pursuan! 0 a Cost memorandwn and any motion to tax costs; 6. The court reserves jurisdiction on the collateral issue of attorneys' The clerk of the court is directed to issue the writ of mandate forthwith. DATED: September _,1997. ~ ~ \~~1 St.\> ,. Ji',"=' .,....,~,;~,,~ _~~""- QJ;~.\;.-.J... , James A. Edwards Judge of the Superior Court / __ 0- .. .. _..._ ._ 3 JUDGMEt.'T ees. . ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NOT FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH DISTRICT DIVISION TWO STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF REDLA1\TDS, ) ) Plaintiff and Respondent, ) E021703 ) v. ) (Super.Ct.No. SCV-34737) ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDmO, ) ) TENTATIVE OPINION Defendant and Appellant; ) ) MAJESTIC REALTY COMPANY et at ) i' 1-~ ) Real Parties in Interest and Appellants. ) ) APPE.t>,L from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. James A Ed ards, Judge. Affirmed. Alan K. Marks, County Counsel, and Paul F. Mordy, Deputy County Couns 1, Brown, Winfield & Canzoneri, Inc., Thomas F. Winfield ill and Joshua C. Gotthe. for Appellants. I I I I I I I I ",1-- I I I I I I I I I I I I Daniel 1. McHu~ City Attorney, McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, 51 phen L. Kostka and Marie A, Cooper for Respondent On September 24, 1997, the trial court filed a judgment and order granting a petition for writ of mandate, a stay, and a permanent injunction, The writ directed County of San Bernardino (County) to set aside and vacate its approval of a re\ision 0 a project knOv.'D as the CilIUs Plaza project Under the re\ision, the County allowed th project to use on-site package water and sewer systems instead of municipal systems, The County was also directed to set aside its certification of the supplemental emironmental impact report for the project{CT 430} On November 13, 1997, the trial court denied motions for a new trial and to v ate the jud!!Illent The court noted that it had not decided issues of fact, but had only dec ded - , the legal issue of whether the County's various actions in this case were supported b substantial e\idence, {CT 729} It found no grounds for a new trial under Code of Ci Procedure sections 657, subdi\ision (4), and 663.{CT 729} The County and real parties in interest, Majestic Realty Company and Redlan s Venture (collectively, "Majestic"), appeal.{CT 730} THE PROJECT On January 9, 1996, the County approved the Citrus Plaza regional mall (the "project") and an associated environmental impact r~ort ("EIR"). {AR 4895-4896} project is a proposed shopping center development on 126 acres ofland located near e intersection of Interstate 10 and State Route 30.{AR 4903} The project location is in an 2 e I .. I I I. I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I unincorporated portion of the county which is surrounded by the City of Redlands., 1- , v.ithin the sphere of influence of the City of Redlands. {AR 4904} At that time, in 1995 and early 1996, it was contemplated that Majestic, the ov. er of the project, would negotiate an agreement v.ith the City of Redlands for water and sewer service to the development.I{AR 4908, 7237-7240, 7744-7745} Thus, the ori_. a] conditions of approval called for water and sewer service to be provided by the City 0 Redlands.{AR 4927, 4939} 1-1.- . Accordingly, the original EIR for the project provided that water and sewage facilities would be pro\ided by the City of Redlands.2{AR 58]8, 5845} It also provid that the project would have a significant effect upon the emironment if the City of Redlands was unable to provide an adequate water supply to the project,..{AR 5826} However, it concluded that there would be no significant effects on the environment if Redlands provided water for the project.{..o\R 5841} I L I The complete Citrus Plaza development plan, as of November 20, 1995, is containe in the anmini<:trative record ("AR") commencing at page 7003. r 2 Appellants point out that the environmental impact report also states, under the I heading "Issues to be Resolved": "As presently proposed, domestic water and sanitary se er : services will be provided to the project site by the City of Redlands. However, pending th annexation of the project site to the City ofRedlands, existing public policies preclude the provision of those services to areas beyond the corporate boundaries of the City. Should annexation of the project site to the City of Redlands not be pursued at this time, the City Redlands, the County of San Bernardino and the project proponent will be required to formulate an implementation strategy which will provide either the availability of internal COlDlty services pending the site's subsequent annexation or an effectuation strategy whie will authorize the City ofRedlands to extend its service area to encompass the project site." {AR 5520; AOB 6} ~ .) ~, Two mitigation measures relating to wastewater were identified: (]) implementation of a wastewater collection system as reco=ended in the speciiic plan; and (2) coordination of wastewater flows with planned expansion of Redlands an San Bernardino wastewater treatment plants. {AR 5855} The project is also within the area of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan {AR 4925} The County board of supervisors found that the project was consistent v.ith the general plan and v.ith the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan "because it complies 'th the adopted design standards and provides the appropriate public services."3 {AR 4 70; see also 4968} 1-1- Between January and November 1996, Majestic unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate with the City of Redlands to obtain a preannexation agreemenJ, a develop 7260-7274} Majestic claimed that the City of Redlands refused to provide water agreement, and an agreement to pro\ide water and sewer senices to the property.{. 17, sewer services to the property, citing a March 1996, vote by the Redlands City Co that required Majestic to annex to the City of Redlands before it would be offered ci services. {AR 35, 1028, 1369} [ '\ Seeking an alternative, Majestic sought to amend the previously approved pro ect so that Majestic could construct its own self-contained water and sewage treatment facilities and turn them over to the County for operation by the County under a newl [ 3 We note that the graphics presented at the January 9, 1996, board meeting stated t development of backbone infrastructure was one off our benefits of the project{AR 4918 4 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I ~. ) formed improvement zone of a county service area. {.-\R 18, 7757} The County appr ved , I the formation of the new improvement zone on Apri123, 1996.{.-\R 7770} The wate and u sewage provider for the project would therefore be changed from the City of Redlan s to County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV-I.{AR 48, 1615-1617} The County board of supervisors approved the revisions allowing the project have self-contained water and sewage systems on November 19, 1996.{AR 43} The County also found that the revised project complies with the goals, policies, and acti ns contained in the general and speciiic plans.4{AR 69, 72} 1-~ At that time, supplemental findings were made for a revised EIR which was prepared to discuss the environmental effects of these changes to the project{AR 45, -8} The supplement to the original EIR describes the alternate water supply}acilities as: 1) two new groundwater wells; (2) a new water storage reservoir; (3) pump station; (4) potable water distribution system; (5) standby generators; and (6) associated pipeIines.{AR 52} The new wastewater treatment facilities consist of (1) an on-site package treatment plant; (2) a pump house and generator building; (3) an effluent sto oe reservoir; and (4) associated pipeIines.{AR 52} 4 However, .on the consistency issue, the focused supplement to the final EIR states "A number of policies contained in the San Bernardino County General Plan are potentially applicable to the Revised Project The advisory and legislative bodies of the County will be required to consider those policies and determine the Revised Project's consistency therewith." {AR 419} Elsewhere, it Slates: "The ultimate determination of compliance these plans and policies is a policy decision of the County Board of Supervisors." {AR 4 The issue of consistency with the speciiic plan was not discussed in any detail. 5 '-.. 1"- I I Other relevant findings included the following: "AJthough the City of Redl nds maintains a 'co=unity sewerage system' in the general proximity of the Project s e, the City of RedJands' Ordinance No. 2301 prohibits the provision of sewer capacity to nonresidential properties located outside the City of RedJands' corporate limits un! ss annexed into the City of RedJands. Annexation of the Project site to the City of Rands is not now contemplated by the Project proponent." {AR 71} ~1.- The County also found that "sewer connection for the Project has not been reasonably available from the City of RedJands due to the fact that the Project site s located outside of the corporate limits of the City of RedJands. Discussions betwe n the City of RedJands and the Project proponent have not resulted in a mutually agreea Ie arrangement for sewer connection."{.A.R 72} f A further finding is made that "the City of RedJands . . . has adopted polici which inhibit the provision of public services to projects consistent 'with the [spec. c plan] which are located outside of the City of RedJands' corporate boundaries un! s annexed to the City of RedJands." {AR 72} Accordingly, a finding is made that" e provision of water and wastewater services by the County is authorized when citie have been unable or unwilling to provide services to projects located in unincorporated areas." {AR 72} In response to the supplemental environmental impact report, the City of R ands submitted detailed co=ents and asserted that the revisions were inconsistent wi general plan and the specific plan for the area.{AR 226} In addition, the mayor 0 the 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I / 7-~ The City of Redlands then filed this action, alleging that on-site water and se 'age treatment facilities are inconsistent with the County's general plan, and inconsistent ith the applicable specific plan.{CT 6-10} The petition also contends that the supplem t to the environmental impact report does not adequately evaluate the environmental im act of the change from municipal water and sewage treatment facilities to on-site water d sewage treatment facilities. {CT 10-12} TIIE TRIAL COURT'S DECISION In a lengthy and well-reasoned notice of decision, the trial court found: ~ true intent of the [specific plan) was to provide a backbone infrastructure to the pI o " 7 area"; (2) stand-alone package facilities were not part of the specific plan; (3) "the inescapable conclusion to be dra~\1l from reading the Plan is that the cities would p ovide necessary water and sewer services to development within their spheres of influenc "; (4) the project was therefore inconsistent with the general and specific plans; and (5) County's findings to the contrary are nOI supported by substantial evidence.{CT 48 -485, 487} The trial court further found that the mitigation measures in the oricinal 2-7..-- - - environmental impact report were intended "to provide water and sewer services to the Plan area through a backbone infrastructure provided by the cities in their respecti e spheres ofinfluence."{CT 491} The trial court also found that "County's action i contrary to the requirements of CEQA that no project be approved unless all feasi Ie ~ mitigation measures are complied with." {CT 491} Accordingly, the trial court co cluded that "the Supplemental EIR did not adequately address certain environmental imp cts as required by CEQ.<\., and that a subsequent EIR would be needed to address the c ulative effects of on-site, package (as opposed to community) water and sewer systems" the project area.{CT 497} The trial court therefore granted the petition for writ of mandate and issue a writ which commands the County' to set aside (1) its November 1996, approvals ofth project, including the approvals which allow on-site water and sewer systems; and (2) its certiiication of the supplemental environmental impact report for the modified project.{CT 430} 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1---- I '. I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ST AND.AJill OF REVIEW The trial court applied the substantial evidence standard of review in dete o ~ whether the County's actions were supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. {CT 729} It treated the determination of whether the Coun ' s November 1996, action was consistent v.ith the general plan and the applicable sp cific plan as a question oflaw. We agree with the trial court that the question of whether a project is consi ent v.ith the general and speciiic plans under Government Code section 65455 is prim y a question of law, and a failure to follow the law is sometimes characterized as an a discretion.s "The trial court's determination of questions of law is reviewed under an independent re\iew standard, in which we conduct an independent revie;v of those determinations. 'We are not bound by the trial court's stated reasons, if any, supp rting its ruling; we review the ruling, not its rationale.' [Citation.]" (Scott v. Common (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 684,689.)6 However, to the extent that disputed factual is ~v S We note, however, that the standard has been stated in different ways. In de whether a project was consistent with a general plan, our collea,,"Ues in the Third Dis t stated: "[The Board's] determination can be overturned only if the Board abused its discretion - that is, did not proceed legally, or if the determin"tion is not supported b findings, or if the findings are not supported by substantial evidence. [Citation.] As fi r this substantial evidence prong, it has been said that a detl'!m1in"tion of general plan cons' ncy will be reversed only it: based on the evidence before the local governing body, , . . . reasonable person could not have reached the same conclusion.' [Citation.)" (Famili s Unafraid to Uphold Rural etc. County v. Board of Supervisors (1998) 62 CaLApp.4 1332, 1338.) As noted below, the County's decision in this case fails under this standard: 6 The County and Majestic agree: "The underlying lawsuit was a mandamus pr ceeding raising purely legal issues. (Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995 9 Uootnote continued on at page] a " 9 -, involved, the consistency determination is reviewed under a substantial evidence standard. (San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of San Bernardi 0 (1984) 155 Cal.App.3d 738,750; see also Mitchell v. County of 0 range (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 1185, 1191-1192.) The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") issues are reviewed un er the standard we described in Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 135 "'In an action to set aside an agency's determination under [CEQA], the appropriat standard of review is determined by the nature of the proceeding below. . " [S]ec n 21168 "establishes the standard of review in administrative mandamus proceedings 1-1.-- under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5 while section 21168.5 "governs tradi 'onal mandamus actions" under Code of Civil Procedure section 1085. [Citation.] The rmer . / section applies to proceedings normally termed "quasi-adjudicative," "in which by awa hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken and discretion in determination of facts is vested in a public agency. . .." [Citations.] The latter se tion applies to all other actions taken pursuant to CEQA and generally encompasses "q 1- legislative" decisions made by a public agency. [Citations.]' [Citations.) rm The distinction, however, is rarely significant. In either case, the issue before the trial curtis whether the agency abused its discretion. Abuse of discretion is shoWD if (1) the a ncy [footnote continued from previoliS page] CaI.4th 559,572.) Accordingly, the standard of review on appeal is de novo, with Iio requirement that deference be given to the determination of the lower court. (Hill v. Ci Long Beach (1995) 33 CaIApp.4th 1684, 1687. . . ." {AOB 13} 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I '. I I has not proceeded in a m<,mner required by law, or (2) the determination is not suppa ed by substantial e\~dence. [Citations.] ... [fJ] On appeal, the appellate coun's 'task. . . IS the same as that of the trial court: that is, to re\~ew the agency's actions to determin whether the agency complied with procedures required by law.' [Citation.] The appellate coun re~ews the administrative record independently; the trial coun' s conclusions are not binding on it. [Citations.]" (Gentry, supra, at pp. 1374-1376.) THE CONSISTENCY REOUlREMENT 1l" "California statutory and case law mandate a strong consistency doctrine, whi requires that cities and counties adopt an adequate general plan and that all regulatory controls and development approvals (zoning and subdi~sion ordinances and actions) shall be consistent with such general plan." (I Longtin's, Cal. Land Use (2d ed. 1987 ~ f 2.40, p. 206,) Accordingly, a general plan must be internally consistent (Gov, Code, 65300.5'), a specific plan must be consistent with the general plan (s 65454) and loc public works projects and zoning must be consistent with the specific plan (~ 65455). "The consistency doctrine has been described as 'the linchpin of California's I d use and development laws; it is the principle which infused the concept of planned growth with the force oflaw.' [Citation.] Land-use decisions, including zoning chan es, of general law cities must be consistent ",ith the general plan.' [Citations.]" (Corona , Unless otherwise indicated, all further statutory references are to the Government Code. 11 Norco Unified School Dist. v. City a/Corona (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 985, 994, fn.. omitted. ) In other words, a general plan is a charter for future development (Lesher Communications, Inc. v. City o/Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 53 1,540), and a spec' c plan is intended for "the systematic implementation of the general plan for all or part of the area covered by the general plan." (s 65450.) The general and specific plans therefore further the legislative mandate that "it is the policy of the state to encourage .orderly growth and development which are essential to the social, fiscal, and economic well-being of the ~tate." (s 56001.) The specific plan '''. . . must contain standards and criteria by which development "ill proceed, and a program of implementation including regulations, p~ograms, public .works projects, and financing measures. [Citations.]''' (Chandis Securities Co. v. City 0 Dana Point (1996) 52 CalApp.4th 475,481.) Accordingly, "[n]o specific plan may be adopted or amended unless the proposed plan or amendment is consistent ",ith the general plan." (S65454.) Similarly, "[n]o local public works project may be approved. . . and no zoning ordinance may be adopted or amended within an area covered by a specific plan unless it is consistent with the adopted specific plan." (S 65455.) A specific plan must contain a detailed explanation of "[t]he proposed disnibutio location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essenti 12 I I I I I I I I I I 1~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I --------. facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan." (965451, subd. (a)(2).) In short, enforcement of a consistency requirement is the primary method of ensuring that land use decisions are made in accordance with the growth and develop ent principles stated in the general and specific plans. Failure to enforce a consistency requirement would negate the effectiveness of general and specific plans as land use d growth planning tools. Without such consistency, orderly growth and development would be impossible. THE SPECIFIC PLA.N ~1-- The East Valley Corridor Specific Plan ("Plan") was effective September 6, 1989. {AR 1662-1663} It was adopted as an ordinance by the County, the City of , Redlands, and the City ofLoma Linda.{AR 1664, 1666, 1667, I680} The Plan "incl des approximately 4300 acres located in the southeastern portion of the San Bernardino Valley, adjacent to Interstate 10 and Route 30 and generally between the cities of Redlands, Loma Linda and San Bernardino. The plan area includes portions of both Redlands and Loma Linda, as well as unincorporated area under the jurisdiction of S Bernardino County. The entire planning area is within the spheres of influence of Redlands and Loma Linda" {AR 1677} The introduction to the Plan states that the area, which includes the proposed Citrus Plaza, has long been considered "to be ideal for high quality commercial and a backbone infrastructure of sufficient capacity to accommodate projected traffic~ water sewer, utility and ser\ice needs."{..\R 1676} The introduction to the Plan also states: "The Plan has been adopted by local governments to provide a guide for the grov.'th and development of the East Valley Corridor. . .. It is intended that the Specific Plan. . . sha1l incorporate nearly all the regulations and development standards affecting the use land within the Plan area. . . . Among the subjects addressed by the Specific Plan are locations of various land uses; development standards for buildings and facilities. . . location and capacity of water supply, sewerage and stormwater drainage facilities . . . ."{AR 1676-1677} 7,'l.". The Plan includes a section entitled "Public Facilities," which "contains a public facilities plan designed to accommodate the long-range need for commlflity facilities services. A phasing plan for development of these facilities is also included." {AR 168 It eA:plains: "The major constraints to development of the Planning area are the costly infrastructure improvements needed to provide a backbone system of roads, water supp , sewage collection and treatment, and stormwater drainage. In most instances, existing systems are adequate to serve the existing developed portions of the planning area. However, intense planned development in the undeveloped areas will require signific t additional facilities. It is the intent of this Plan to provide a means for installing these facilities, through a coordinated planning effort which includes engineering, financial planning and land use planning for the study area." {AR 1690} 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I- I I I I ~ The Community Facilities section of the Plan summarizes "the existing fa:ilnie serving the planning area, as well as required improvements needed to serve proposed land uses under the Specific Plan." {A.R 1893} Water and sewage facilities are des crib d in terms of existing and recommended facilities. {A.R 1900-1915} The section on existing water facilities states that the project area has no major water distribution facilities due to limited development, but that the City of Redlands h s "plans to eventually serve the entire areaD 'within [its] current city limits or sphereD of infltience when development occurs."{A.R I900} It also states: "The City [of Redland ] has been intensively planning future water supply facilities since their 1981 Water Mas er Plan update. . .. [m To meet the current and future demands, the City of Redlands h constructed the new 12 mgd Horace P. Hinkley Plant, which treats Santa Ana River , water, as well as State Project water delivered through the SBVMWD facilities. The tv plant is located in Mentone about 3 miles east of the study area." {A.R I90I} Considering the water distribution system, the Plan states: "The basic water distribution system in the study area is currently more than adequate to serve existing development and agricultural uses. Intense planned development will require signific t additional potable water supply facilities within portions of the planning area. Additio al development of the groundwater and surface water resources, including the State Proj water, needs to be evaluated. . .. [m The most significant potential constraint to fu development is existing water quality problems, including high nitrates, TCE, and DB P. This is considered a short-term problem as the City has developed other water sources 15 I ----- ;...., In addition, the City may be installing well-head treatment and will be constructing wells." {AR I 905} Under the heading "Reco=ended Water Supply Facilities," the Plan states: 'The primary objective in planning water facilities for the East Valley Corridor was to de elop a storage and transmission system to meet furure demands in a cost effective manner Existing facilities, when appropriate, were utilized in the plan to the fullest extent possible. . .. [1iJ Recommended facilities include a transmission grid to distribute v. ter to the entire project area. . .. [f.] ~xisting pipelines form the basis of system expansion. . . ."{AR 1906} With regard to sewage facilities, the Plan describes existing facilities for the ities of Redlands and Loma Linda and states that "[b Joth cities have existing master plans 0 ~ e>.."tend sewer service within existing City limits and/or probable spheres of influence." {AR I 908} Under the heading "Recommended Sewage Facilities," the PI states: 'The primary objective in planning sewage facilities for the East Valley Corri or is to develop sewage collection facilities and treatment plant capacity to serve ultimat development of the area in a cost effective manner. Existing facilities were used as th starting point to develop, over time, a complete collection and transport system." {AR 1913-1914} After estimating total future daily sewage flows from the entire area, the 1--1.. 16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . , I I I. I I I I I I. I I I I I. I I I I Plan recommends a proposed collection system layout to convey the flows to collec . on points and then to treatment facilities8{AR 1914-1915} In a more general portion of the co=unity facilities plan, the Plan sets out infrastructure plan. Both parties cite its introduction: "An integral part of the Eas Valley Corridor Specific Plan is the assessment of infrastructure needs to support propos development, and the coordination of infrastructure improvements with developm nt implementation. . .. The anticipated 40-year build-out period for the Specific PI area will require that infrastructure construction is coordinated with development in or er to provide adequate lead time for financing and infrastructure design. [1!J The' plan outlined in this Chapter is meant to function as a guide to staff and decision akers in developing long-term and annual capital improvement plans and finaIJ.cial deci ions. It is recognized that future economic conditions are not totally predictable and that adjustments and revisions will be an inherent part of the development and fuianc g process. Since these adjustments and revisions may need to occur frequently in rder to respond adequately, such changes should not be interpreted as renuiring a Spec' c Plan Amendment"{AR 1928; AOB 21; RB 15-16} 1-l- 8 Our record also contains an engineer's report which is part of the specific pI 7380} It specifies in great detail the planning of a complete water system, and a se collection and transport system.{AR 7452-7462, 7485} Although variations to the recommended water and sewage plans are discussed, stand-alone facilities are not' an alternative.{AR 7463-7465, 7492-7497} 17 ^' The Plan then states an infrastructure improvement plan which re\iews the. infrastructure improvements needed to support development in the Plan area. {AR I 29} The Plan provides a specific list of water system improvements and new sewage fac 'ties needed to support development in the Plan area.9{AR 1935-1938} However, it als states: "It should be noted that the proposed infrastructure plan facilities is intende only as a general guideline, and is based on the assumption that development ",ill occur s described in the previous section. If development projects or patterns differ from e assumed sequence, then infrastructure improvements should be phased in a way th t v.ill support the actual development condition."10{AR 1931} THE GEJ\TER.,u PL..<\N &'L- The 1989 General Plan, as revised in 1991, was adopted pursual}i to sectio 65300 et seq. and it addresses the issues mandated in those sections.{AR 2232-2233} It provides a process for regularly amending and updating the plan to meet changin conditions and to coordinate the plan with various implementation mechanisms. { 2250-2252} 9 The EIR. for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan states: "The recommended major water facilities for the East Valley Corridor were sized to meet the nee4s at ultimate development Various layouts were evaluated for selection of the most cost effective stern. The system was developed based on computer simulation and is consistent with the R dIands and Loma Linda design standards. The water system can be constructed in phases wi the existing facilities supplying initial development" {AR 2093} 10 The staffreport for the November 19, ]996, board meeting discussed the issue of consistency with the general plan in some detail., but did not address the issue of cons ncy with the specific plan in any detail.{AR 467-468, 1472-]475} 18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The water section is primarily concerned with overdrafts from groundwater b sins, and it seeks to bring the hydrological system into balance.{.AR 2354} Accordingly, ne of the plan's goals is to "[a ]pprove new development conditioned on the availability f adequate and reliable water supplies and conveyance systems." {.AR 2355} Policies are provided to carry out these goals. Policy W A-3 states: "Because the development approval process may be dependent upon the location and size of water distribution facilities and the timing of their use, the responsible authority and the C ty shall: [~ a. Consider the effect of development proposals and whether or not they should include the phased construction of water production and distribution systems... ."{AR2356} ~'l,. Policy W A-5 provides: "Because long term local or regional area-wide . / commitments to water supply and distribution services are necessary for the orderly development of urban areas, the County shall: [~ a. Encourage new development to locate in those areas already served or capable of being served by an existing approv domestic water supply system, with priority given to those areas suitable for infill development" {AR 2357} Policy W A-9 states: "Because water supply and distribution systems must ens e water for both existing and future development, utilize water resourc;.es in accordance v,ith agreed management programs, and correct the depletion of the County's groundwater resources, the County and responsible authority will cooperate to ensure adequate and reliable water resources and: [f.) ... c. Develop guidelines restricting e 19 creation of new, small, private water systems where an existing large water system c more reliably serve the public interest."1I {AR 2360} With regard to infrastructure, the general plan states: "Many rapidly grov.ing areas of the County have found it difficult to e~:pand infrastructure fast enough to kee up with new development. Development places demands on all public services. It is desirable that the infrastructure for water, sewer, drainage and roads is in place befor urban development is permitted. The pace of growth can be controlled by limiting ca ital investment in these facilities. For example, new subdi\~sions are required to tie into trunk lines leading to sewage treatment plants. If treatment capacity of either sewer 0 water is insufficient, then development is not allowed. In some cases where treatment capacity is inadequate, private developers may be required to construct ,treatment plan to serve large developments. Because facilities require huge front-end capital 1- ~ expenditures, some form of municipal financing may be needed." {AR 2476} With regard to wastewater systems, the Plan contemplates approval of package wastewater plants in areas of the County where it is unJikely that community sewerag systems will be installed.{AR 2482} Policy WW-5 states: "Because community sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, connection to the community sewerage system shall e 11 The staffreport comments: "The system proposed will be publicly owned and operated by CSA70-EV-I and it is not a small privately owned water agency."{AR l473} The focused supplement to the final EIR discusses the compatibility of the project with goal at AR 462-463. . 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I required for any proposed development or subdi\ision ofland within a sewer or - sanitation district In areas where sewers are required by the appropriate [Regional \\ ater Quality Control Board] and a sewer or sanitation district does not exist, a district and appropriate assessments shall be established. Exceptions may be approved subject to re\iew and approval by the County DEHS, the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the wastewater agency (for Package Wastewater Treatment Plants indi\idual on-site and multiple owner systems, holding tanks, and e".-perimental systems)."12{AR 2482} The County is also required to cooperate with local authoriti to coordinate construction of wastewater treatment facilities.{AR 2482-2483} Finally, the land use portion of the general plan states the follo\\1ng policy: 1..1- "Because State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility to manage laltds within the' adopted spheres of influence, and because cities are usually best able to manage urban growth through the pro\ision of sernces, the County has a responsibility to coordinate its land use policies with the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursue plans, policie and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standards have b en agreed to and jointly adopted. . .. ['ilJ In addition, the policies and standards that encourage annexation and the use of city standards within city spheres of influence be considered: .. .. [1iJ c. Require service connections for projects that are less than ne 12 The staffreport comments: "A community sewer system is unavailable to the Ci Plaza due to the policies of the City ofRedlands."{AR 1473} The focused supplement to e final EIR discusses the compatibility of the project with this goal at AR 464-465. 21 individual on-site and multiple ov,T1er septic systems, holding tanks, and experiment mile away from sewer availability.. Exceptions (for package wastewater treatrnent-p] ts. systems) may be approved subject to review and approval by the County DEBS, the appropriate regional water quality control board, and the wastewater agency. rm d. Support city annexations/incorporations of urban designated lands. rm e. Recognize d implement growth control limits adopted by cities as they apply to spheres. . .. rm h Designate Sphere of Influence areas on the Land Use Maps as Special Planning Areas and utilize special city standards in these areas to the extent they are incorporated in plans adopted as described in subpolicy (a), above." 13 {..<\R 2584} 1-"1- , 13 The staff report comments: ''The adoption of the East Valley Corridor Specific PI was undertaken in irnpl=entation of this Policy/Action. While the existing water system f the City of Redlands could serve Citrus Plaza, the City of Redlands has been unwilling to make its system available to the project on an economically feasible basis. The County encouraged the applicant to consider annexation to the City of Redlands rather than to develop in the County. The applicant met with the appropriate officials of the City on numerous occasions but the City was unwilling to consider the provision of public services 0 Citrus Plaza except at rates substantially in excess of other jurisdictions providing similar services and without credit for the construction of master plan facilities by the applicant which would be funded by the same fees paid by the applicant Accordingly, the County h determined that the City of Redlands has refused to provide service to the project in accordance with the approved. Specific Plan. For this reason the County, subject to the revi and approval of the County DEBS and the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board, may serve as wastewater agency for Citrus Plaza and may grant lIll exception for the use of a package wastewater treatment plant to be owned and operated by the County. rID The provision of on-site water and sewer services is consistent with past policies of the County of San Bernardino "Where cities have refused to provide services to projects in unincorporated areas except following annexation to the city which would otherwise be the logical service provider."{AR 1474} The focused suppl=ent to the final EIR discusses the compatibility of the project wi this goal at AR 465-466. 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The general plan also contains specific provisions applicable to the East \' all ey Corridor Specific Plan. {.-\R 2644-2649} Those provisions specifically state: (]) '.All new development .within the spheres of Loma Linda and Redlands respectively shall comply v.'ith the service requirements of the appropriate city"; and (2) "All new development shall have the necessary service commitments prior to approval." {.-\R 2 47} ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES The City of RedJands supports the trial court's decision by arguing that appro 'al of self-contained water and sewage facilities is inconsistent with the general and spe ific plans. Its theory of the case rests on the proposition that "the County approved just e type of Balkanized, stand-alone water and sewer facilities that are the antithesis of e integrated, area-v.'ide, urban water and sewage systems specified by the ..specific PI Accordingly, the project modifications are inconsistent with the Specific Phin.."{RB 2} As the trial court put it: "[T]he preparers of the [Plan] obviously considered e subject of infrastructure to be critical to its preparation and implementation. A lack f 'backbone infrastructure' was believed to be the biggest impediment to the type of development all concerned desired. Creation of such an infrastructure was believed 0 be the answer to that constraint. As the court reads the document, it is readily apparent that the authors contemplated a solution that envisioned the cities of Loma Linda and RedJands expanding and extending their water and sewer facilities to serve the porri ns of the EVC that develop within their respective spheres of influence. Stand-alone, pa ge facilities were not part of the plan." {CT 482-483} 1-7., 23 Accordingly, the trial court concluded that "the true intent of the [Plan] was to pro\ide a backbone infrastrUcture to the planning area. Again, the inescapable conclus on to be drawn from reading the Plan is that the cities would provide necessary water and sewer services to development within their spheres of influence." {CT 484} In response to the inconsistency argument, the County and Majestic offer three arguments: (I) the Goveriunent Code provides flexibility in the implementation of pu lic facilities under a specific plan; (2) the Plan provides for flexibility in the implementati n of its recommended public facilities; and (3) the Plan interpretation proposed by the C of Redlands would constitute an unlawful delegation or usurpation of the County's I use planning powers. {AOB 20-30} 1.1-- The first argument rests on Government Code section 65451, suJ>division (a)(2) quoted above. Since the subsection refers to "proposed" facilities, the County argues at . "the Legislature anticipated less certainty and created more flexibility in the implementation of public facilities to serve development under a specific plan, as compared to the greater degree of rigidity applicable to land use and development standards."{AOB 20} The second argument rests on that portion of the Plan, quoted above, which all s for adjustments and revisions to proposed facilities in order to meet 'Changing economi conditions.{AR 1928; AOB 2l} The County and Majestic argue that "[t]he evident in ent of these Specific Plan provisions is to propose a recommended set of infrastructure facilities while leaving a significant degree of flexibility to the County to address the 24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ...,' I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I impact offuture conditions as they occur." {AOB 21} The County and MajesDc also argue that the project revision was consistent v.ith the specific and general plans bee it allowed the development of the property to go forward rather than being stopped b the City of Redland's refusal to provide services to the property without annexation. {AO 21} The third argument is that an interpretation of the Plan which would allow the ity of Redlands to control development in an unincorporated area of the County by simpl ' refusing to provide utility service would be contrary to the well-established principle at "[a] local legislative body cannot surrender or impair its delegated governmental pow r or that of successor legislative bodies either by ordinance or contract." (Alameda Coun Land Use Assn. v. City of Hayward (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1716, 1724.) In other wo ds, .' it argues that the Plan cannot handcuff it by preventing it from responding to chan_' g conditions, and that such an interpretation of the Plan must be avoided.{AOB 27-28 1-1-- DISCUSSION Initially, we agree with the County and Majestic that "[a] given project need ot be in perfect conformity with each and every general plan policy. [Citation.] To be consistent, a subdivision development must be 'compatible with' the objectives, po les, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan. [Citation.]" (Familie Unafraid to Uphold Rural etc. v. County Board of Supervisors, supra, 62 Cal.App.4 1332, 1336.) "As interpreted, this provision means that a subdivision map must be' 25 ~. agreement or harmony v.ith' the applicable plan. [Citations.]" (Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. Cizy of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 718.) "Respondents also argue that none of the policies on which appellant relies is mandatory, and that a given project need not be in perfect conformity v.ith each and very OCP [Oakland Comprehensive Plan) policy. We agree. Indeed, it is beyond cavil th t no project could completely satisfy every policy stated in the OCP, and that state law do s not impose such a.requirement. [Citations.] A general plan must try to acco=odat a ""ide range of competing interests - including those of developers, neighboring homeowners, prospective homebuyers, environmentalists, current and prospective '2-1...- business owners, jobseekers, taxpayers, and providers and recipients of all types of c ty_ pro\ided services -- and to present a clear and comprehensive set of prjnciples to de development decisions. Once a general plan is in place, it is the province of elected ity officials to examine the specifics of a proposed project to determine whether it woul be 'in harmony' with the policies stated in the plan. [Citation.) It is, emphatically, noz the role of the courts to micromanage these development decisions. Our function is s' ly to decide whether the city officials considered the applicable policies and the extent to which the proposed project conforms with those policies, whether the city officials ade appropriate findings on this issue, and whether those findings are supported by subs tial evidence. (Citations.]" (Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland, su 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 719-720.) 26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '" - . I I I. I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I While we agree '\\ith the County and Majestic that some flexibility in implementation of the general and specific plans is necessary, desirable, and contemplated by the plans themselves, it is also true, as the Sequoyah Hills case hold, that the elected officials must determine that the proposed project is consistent '\\ith, r in harmony with, the policies stated in the plan. (Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn v. Ciry afOakland, supra, 23 CaI.AppAth 704, no.) In this case, application of that stand must mean that the decision of the County board of supervisors to approve a modiE to the project which allows stand-alone water and sewage treatment facilities was a legally proper decision if the decision was consistent v.ith, or in harmony with, the general and specific plans.14 We agree v.ith the City of Redlands that any fair reading of the specific plan shows an obvious inconsistency between the specific plan, which calls for the "1-7...- 14 1broughout, the County and Majestic refer to findings made by the County that revised project, i.e., the change to stand-alone water and sewage treatment facilities, wo consistent with the general plan. {E.g. AOB 22} The primary citations are to the supple findings in the supplemental EIR. {AR 69, n} However, the response to comments in e final supplemental project EIR also states: "Since CEQA defines an EIR as an informati nal document and riot a policy document, it is the role of the County's advisory and decisio making bodies (and not the Department) to determine the Revised Project's consistency r. inconsistency with the policies outlined therein. Pending that determination, the Draft Supplemental Project EIR identified that issue as a potential 'areas of cbntroversy.'" { 247} According to the transcript of the board meeting at which the revised project was approved, the board did not focus on the issue of consistency and, altholl~h the issue mentioned by the director of the planning department, the board made no specific findin that regard, although a consistency finding is mentioned in the documents it approved at meeting.{AR 14-44, 72} The planning commission did not focus on the consistency issue{AR 1363-1407}, although the planning commission staffreported that itfound consistency.{AR 1375-1376, 1472-1474} 27 . /':\ development of infrastructure to serve the area to be developed, and the revised prejetL which allows one developer to avoid paying for infrastructure by providing its own independent facilities. To put the issue in terms used by a leading case, a finding of consistency'will be reversed only if a reasonable person could not have reached the s e conclusion as the legislative body. (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 223,243.) We believe that no reasonable person reading the general an specific plans could conclude that they are consistent with the project. While we recognize that the general and specific plans could conceivably be changed to fit the tl. project, "[tJhe tail does not wag the dog" and the plans must control over the project 5 (Lesher Communications, Inc. v. City afWalnut Creek, supra, 52 Cal.3d 531,541.) Without repeating the salient provisions of the specific plan quot,ed above, w note that, in its first paragraph, the specific plan states that it was designed to address th problem of a lack of development in the plan area because "development has been constrained. . . by the lack of a backbone infrastructure of sufficient capacity to acco=odate projected traffic, water, sewer, utility and service needs." {AR 1676} One purpose of the plan was to facilitate development by planning for the construction f water and sewer facilities in aD orderly manner. {..\R 1676} 15 Whi1e it is true mat the specific plan must be consistent with the general plan, . type of inconsistency is not present here. Here, it is the. revised project that is inconsistent 'th the general and specific plans. Accordingly, it is the project that is void, not the specific p We therefore reject the County's co!ltention that it is the inconsistent provisions of the specific plan that must be stricken.{AOB 28-29} 28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - , I I- I, I I I I I I. I I I. I I I I I I ~ The specific plan provides plans for water and sewer infrastructure to be eX!en d throughout the planning area as development occurs. It does not contemplate individu 1 water wells and sewer treatment facilities being installed by indi\~duallando'\\'ners. { 1900, 1913-1914} As the city points out, it has already constructed a water treatment plant sized to serve contemplated development in the plan area.{RB II; AR 1901} The plan pro~des that: "The primary objective in planning water facilities for the East Valley Corridor was to develop a storage and transmission system to meet futur demands in a cost effective manner."{AR 1906} The recommended facilities therefo e "include a transmission grid to distribute water to the entire project area. . . ." {AR 1 06} Similarly, the plan notes that the City of Redlands has an existing master plan 0 extend sewer service within its city limits and spheres of influence. {AR 1908} The / 1-1..- primary objective in the case of sewage facilities is to develop collection facilities an treatment plant capacity for the East Valley Corridor.{AR 1913} Stand-alone plants e not contemplated and it is ob~ous that e>..-tensive use of stand-alone plants would neg te the detailed facilities planning in the specific plan. This possibility is especially app ent when the infrastructure plan is considered.{AR 1928} The infrastructure plan is designed to coordinate development with facilities to serve that development.{AR 1928} Although, as discussed above, itpro~des for fu e changes and adjuStments needed to coordinate development and facilities planning, it does not sanction stand-alone facilities. {AR 1928-1931, 1935-1938} The County's approval of stano-alone facilities was totally inconsistent with the specific plan. 29 The County and Majestic contend stand-alone facilities were necessary in erder 10 carry out the development contemplated by the general and specific plans because the City of Redlands could not or would not provide services to the project without annexation. The County therefore contends that it is carrying out the objective of the general and specific plans, i.e., development of the project area, and that it is the City f Redlands that is disregarding the plans and preventing development.]6 Ibis argument neglects the fact that the property is surrounded by the City of Redlands, that the property is within the sphere of influence of the City of Redlands, d that annexation is logical. By making a sphere of influence determination, the Local Agency Formation Commission determined "[tJhe present and probable need for pub c facilities and services in the area" and "[tJhe present capacity of public facilities and '1.'- adequacy of public services which the agency provides or is authorized to provide." II 56425, subds. (2), (3).) Since the Local Agency Formation Commission has dete ed that the properly is within the sphere of influence of the City of Redlands, services 5 be provided by the City ofRedlands.]7 16 If Majestic thought the actions of the city were in violation of the general or spec' c plans it could have broll~ht its own action against the city. ] 7 A "sphere of influence" is "a plan for the probable physical boundaries and servic area of a local agency, as determined by [the Local Agency Formation Commission]." ( 56076.) In defining a sphere of influence, the commission must consider the present and future need for services in the area and the "present capacity of public facilities and adeq . cy of public services which the agency provides or is authorized to provide." (ll 56425, sub (a)(3).) 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The decision of the County to provide services through County Service Area 70 Improvement Zone EV -1, is directly contrary to the provisions of the general plan: "Because State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility to manage lands 'within their adopted spheres of influence, and because cities are usually best able to manage urban grov,'tb through the provision of services, the County has a responsibility to coordinate 'ts land use policies 'With the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursue plans, policie and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standards have b n agreed to and jointly adopted. [11) Until joint plans have been adopted, the County v, . exercise its authority to refer development applications to affected cities and may req development to conform to city development policies and standards whenever appropriate. [11) In addition, the policies and standards that encourage annexation and the . . use of city standards 'Within city spheres of influence will be considered: [11) a. Adopt joint regulations/plans whenever possible through the adoption of overlay districts, '2-1..- specific plans, zoning studies, infrastructure support plans, and other appropriate mechanisms. . .. [11) d. Support city annexations/incorporations of urban designated lands. [11) e. Recognize and implement growth control limits adopted by cities as they apply to spheres. .. ."{AR2584} In addition to the inconsistency 'With these provisions, the project modification t allow stand-alone 'facilities was inconsistent 'With another provision of the general plan. As the general plan states: "All new development 'Within the spheres of Loma Linda an Redlands, respectively shall comply with the service requirements of the appropriate 31 ... ~" city." {AR 2647} With regard to water, the general plan states: "Because water supp y and distribution systems must ensure water for both existing and future development, utilize water resources in accordance with agreed management programs, and correct e depletion of the County's groundwater resources, the County and responsible authori ' will cooperate to ensure adequate and reliable water resources and: '" [m c. Deve op guidelines restricting the creation of new, small, private water systems where an exis' g large water system can more reliably serve the public interest." {AR 2360} We therefore agree with the trial court and conclude that the approval of stan _ alone facilities in this situation is inconsistent with the general and specific plans. As noted above, the third argument of the County and Majestic is that the PI interpretation proposed by the City of Redlands would amount to an unlawful deleg .. or usurpation of the County's land use planning powers because it would allow the ofRedlands to control the timing of development of the property. {AOB 26} The Co ty contends that it, not Redlands, has the "power and obligation to enact legislation affe ting the lands 'I'<"ithin their respective jurisdictions." (Alameda County Land Use Assn. v. iry of Hayward , supra, 38 CaI.App.4th 1716, 1725.) We disagree. First, the speciiic plan is intended to allow the cities to coordina e the construction of infrastructure ("backbone") facilities with development. Second, e project area is wii:h.i.n the sphere of influence of the City of Redlands, thus giving the ity of Redlands the ability to plan facilities to serve the area which ",ill eventually be annexed to the city. Third, the specific plan provides procedures for its amendment{ l,..1-- 32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I IU I I I I I I I I I I I I I /f\ 1709} and there is no indication in the record here that amendment was pursued to_ conform the specific plan to the alleged requirements of the project. Although L!]e specific plan was adopted as an ordinance by the County and the Cities of Loma Lin a and RedJands, it can be amended by future legislative action. "A legislative body is generally not bound by the actions of its predecessors. Accordingly, it may amend zoning, general plan, and other provisions applicable to a property without incurrin liability." (Stubblefield Construction Co. v. City of San Bernardino (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 687, 711, tn. omitted.) In other words, the fact that the revised project s inconsistent V\ith the general and specific plans does not mean that those plans c amended at some future time. The local governments have not "contract[ed] away eir] right to exercise the police power in the future. [Citations.]" (Avco Community , Developers, Inc. v. South Coast Regional Com. (1976) 17 Ca1.3d 785, 800;Alame County Land Use Assn. v. City afHayward, supra, 38 CaI.App.4th 1716, 1724.) have merely adopted a plan to guide them in the development of facilities to serve '1'l, development in the plan area.I8 18 Similarly, the legality of the increasingly common use of development agreem ts pursuant to section 65864 et seq. has been questioned and it has been argued that the agreements are invalid because they may infringe on the government agency's right exercise its police powers in the future. (Curtin, Cal. Land Use Planning Law (13th 1993) p.238.) We express no opinion on the issue. 33 -, CEOA ISSUES The County and Majestic also contend that the trial coun erred in fmding tha the supplemental EIR failed to comply with CEQA, The trial coun found the supplemental EIR inadequate because it failed to pr perl)' evaluate the impact of the discharge of effluent on land and groundwater contamination.{CT 495} It also found that the actions of the County represented a change in policy for both the'general and specific plans which would require EIR 1.1..- consideration.{CT 496-497} On the latter issue, the County and Majestic filed a new trial motion based 0 a claim of newly discovered evidence, The new evidence was a 1992 Members' Settl ment Agreement and a 1992 Agency Settlement Aagreement.19 {CT 451,532,.537, 553} Since we have found a fatal inconsistency between the revised project and th general and specific plans, we do not need to consider these issues further. The iss e of CEQA compliance is moot in the light of our decision affirming the trial court's judgment. Th~ issue of whether there was a change in County policy or not is also oot, since the revised project was inconsistent with the existing general and specific pI 19 On October 7, 1998, the County and Majestic filed a request that this court tal: judicial notice of these two documents. By order filed December 2, 1998, this court re erved decision on the motion for consideration on appeal. Since the documents are already' the clerk's transcript, the motion for judicial notice is denied. However, the contents of th documents have been considered since the documents are part of our appellate record. 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~. DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. The City of Redlands is to recover its costs on appeaL ?,. 1-- NOT FOR PUBLICA TrON .' 35 22 23 24 25 26 ,---- 1 Daniell. McHugh (State Bar No.112197) City Attorney 2 Leslie E. Murad, II (State Bar No. 97221) Assistant City Attorney 3 City of Redlands P.O. Box 3005 4 Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 798-7595 EXEMPT FROM FEES GOVERNMENT CODE S 610 FILED-Central . SAN SUPERIOR COUR stnct eER~"'ROINO c "'TV AUG 3 0 20 By ~~ eg 5 Attorneys for Petitioner 6 City of Red lands =c:... Deputy 7 8 9 SUPERlOR COURT Of THE STATE OF CALIFOR..1'.l1A FOR THE COUNn' OF SA.N BER..~ARDINO 10 11 THE CIn' OF REDLA....NDS. a municipal corporation ) CASE NO. SCVSS 60116 ) ) CONSOLIDATED FOR HE G WITH ) CASE NOS: ) RCV42444 ) SCVSS 60160 ~'J ) SCVSS 60212 ) L . ___ ) I] PEREMPTO Y WRIT OF ) MANDATE ) The Honorable lames A. Ed ds, ) Judge Presiding ) Department 515 ) ) Hearing on Petition for Writ fMandate ) Held on May 24, 2000 ) Petition Filed; August 27, 19 9 ~ 12 Petitioner 13 v. 14 THE COUNTY OF SAN 15 BERNARDINO, a charter county; THE BOARD OF 16 SUPERVISORS OF THE COU},lY OF SAN BER.N"ARDINO; and DOES 1 17 through 20, inclusive 18 Respondents 19 20 21 TO RESPONDENTS COUNTI' OF SAN BERNARDINO AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO: Judgment having been entered in this action, ordering that peremptory . of mandate be issued from this Court; 27 28 YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED inunediately upon receipt of this 't to set aside 1:D1M37SS [PROPOSED] PER.EMJ>TORY WRIT OF MANDATE 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '.< ,', I I- I, I I- I I I I- I I I ! I 1- !I I I I 1 General Plan Amendment GP AlCWl-849N and your July 27, 1999 decision approvi 2 3 YOU ARE FURTHER COMMANDED not to readopt General Plan Arnendment PAlCWl- 4 849N, or any similar amendment(s) to the County's General Plan concerning planning, and use and 5 annexation policies that affect the areas of the County that are within the spheres of infl enceof any 6 incorporated city in the County without first preparing and considering an enviro ntal impact 7 report and fully complying with California Environmental Quality Act, Public Re urces Code 8 S21000, et seq. 9 10 11 12 13 YOU ARE FURTHER COMMANDED to make and file a retwn to this wri on or before ~7 /11e~J:i kerr.fMJ2.- , Clerk .:..~~ ~p tyClerk September 15, 2000, setting forth what you have done to comply. 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dated: 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I:D1MJ1S& .-'.' LET THE FOREGOING WRlT ISSUE: ~h AUG.30 2000 [PROPOSED] PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDhTE 2 r ... ~. 1 Daniel J. McHugh (State Bar No.1 12197) City Attorney 2 Leslie E. Murad, II (Staie Bar 1"'0. 97221) Assistant City Attorney 3 City of Redlands P.O. Box 3005 4 Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 798-7595 EXEMPT FROM FEES GOVERNMENT CODE 9 6103 . FILED-Central Distr" SU~ERIOR COURT Ie SAN BERNAROINO COUNTY Attorneys for Petitioner 6 City of Redlands AUG 30 2000 BY~~~ De CASE NO. SCVSS 60116 CONSOLIDATED FOR HE. G \V1r.ti CASE NOS: RCV42444 SCVSS 60160 SCVSS 60212 [I - -_.5J JUDGMENT G PErmON FOR WRIT OF 5 7 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SA."N" BERNARDINO 10 11 THE CITY OF REDLANDS. a municipal corporation ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THE COUNTY OF SAN) 15 BIDmARDINO, ) a charter cOUIlty; THE BOARD OF ) 16 SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ) SAN BERNARDINO; and DOES 1 ) 17 through 20, inclusive ) ) ) ) , J 12 Petitioner 13 v. 14 18 Respondents The Honorable James A. Edwar Judge Presiding Department S 15 Hearing on Petition for Writ of FIeld on May 24, 2000 19 20 Petition Filed: August 27,1999 21 ~~ 22 "The petition for writ of mandate filed by Petitioner City of Redlands was h d regularly 23 together with the petitions for writ of mandate filed by Petitioner City of Rancho C amonga and 24 Cities Pavilion Partners, LLC, in Department S 15 of the above-entitled Court, the Ho orable Judge 25 James A. Edwards, Judge Presiding, on May 24, 2000, pursuant to the stipulation and rder thereon 26 consolidating the cases for hearing and requiring. separate judgments. Daniel J. cHugb, City 27 Attorney of the City of Red lands appeared for the City of Red lands, Rochelle Brown of Richards, 28 Watson & Gershon appeared for the City of Rancho Cucamooga; Sherman 1. Stacey of Gaines & I:DJM\3757 [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT GRANTING prnnON POR WRIT OF MANDATE 1 I ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I~ I- I I I I- I I I I I- I I I I 1 Stacey appeared for Cities Pavilion Partners; and Robin C Cochran, Deputy County Co '1sel, 2 appeared for Respondents County of San Bernardino and Board of Supervisors of the County fSan 3 Bernardino (collectively the "County"). 4 5 The Court having received the Administrative Record in evidence, having consid ed the 6 pleadings and the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, having taken the maner under sub . ssion 7 and having issued its Notice of Decision on August 9, 2000, 8 9 10 HEREBY FINDS, ORDERS AND ADJUDGES as follows: t,' 11 1. The County's adoption of general plan amendment GPAlCW1-S49N, amend g the 12 County's land use, planning and annexation policies in the areas of the County that are wit in the 13 spheres of influence ofthe incorporated cities in the County (the "Amendment") is a project ubject 14 to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resow-ces Code 921000, et seq. ("CE A"). J5 J6 17 2. The project description in the Initial Study prepared for the Amendment is inaccur te and inadequate under CEQA because it describes substantial changes in policy as mere cJarifica ons of &~ ~ existing policy. Fw-ther, there llre;fufficient facts to support the finding in the Initial Study tlhe . Amendment will not have any sigr.ificant, adverse impacts on the environment. The gative IS 19 20 Declaration based on the Initial Study is, therefore, inadequate and fails to comply with 21 22 3. There is substantial evidence in the Administrative Record that the policy hanges 23 effected by the Amendment may have significant adverse impacts on.the environment. 24 under CEQA, an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") was required before the Cou could 25 properly consider adoption of the Amendment. 26 27 4. The petition for writ of mandate is granted and the Clerk shall issue a perempto writ of 28 mandate commanding the County to set aside the Amendment and prohibiting the Co 1:DJM\37S7 [pROPOSED] JUDGMENr G~NTlNG prnnoN FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 2 I I I- I, I I~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I u..ni.o\).f .Be WATKI~ SD DOCS\:20U$1.1Iw'7] A:"T~I\t......... I -~= ?~J~ ~AT~JM & WATKINS SO 619-6'--7419 (riED) 3.29' 00 13:30/ST..J3:28/NO. 4861979180 F J COUNTY COUNSEL FOR COUNIT OF SAN BERNARDINO 2 Alan K Marks (State Bar No.: 045597) 3 Rex Hinesley (State Bar No.: 105246) 385 N. Arrowhead AveIlUe, 41h Floor 4 San Bernardino, CA 92415-0140 5 Attorneys for Defendant TIlE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 6 LATIiAM & WATKINS 7 Christopher W. Garrett (Stale Bar No. 100764) 1,-) Amy G. Nefouse (State BarNo.: 159880) Allison C. Rosenstock (State Bar No.: 199887) 8 701 B Street, Suite 2100 9 San Diego, California 92101-8197 Telephone: (619) 236-1234 10 Facsimile: (619) 696-7419 11 Attorneys for Intervenor and Real Party in Interest REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE LLC 12 13 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF C.AUFORNlA COUNlY OF RIVERSIDE CENTRAL DISTRICT JUDICIAL DISTRlCT 14 15 16 17 TIrE CITY OF REDLANDS, - CASE NO. 293198 18 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT THE CO n'SAN 19 v. BERNARDINO AND RVENOR AJIo'D REAL )> ARlY IN 'ST 20 THE COlJNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, REDLANDS JOINT YEN LLC'S OPPOSITION TO PLA FTHE 21 Defendant. CITY OF REDLANDS' 1 OnON FOR SUMMARynmG 22 REDLANDS JOINT VENTURE LLC. DATE: April 12, 2000 23 TIME: 8:30 a.m. Intervenor and Real Party DEPT: 1 24 in Interest. TRIAL: June 12, 2000 25 JUDGE: Honornble Viet Miceli 26 AND ALL RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS. 27 28 t:R::l931911 COUN"TY A>m REDI.ANDS \'EmtJRE'S OPl'OSTTlOll TO lI.AlNTIYn MOTION ~Oll. SUMM,'lRY JUllGMF.I'T ~,.~~_,:;, &. WATKINS SD 619-6'-7419 (WED) 3.29' 00 13:30/S!:....J3:2SifiO 436!979:SC;: . INTRODUCTJON "v7 2 The City of Red lands (the "City") assens 1.l:1at the County of San Bern 3 (the "County") and Redlands Joint Venture LLC's ("Redlands Venture") respective cr ss- 4 complaints are not ripe, notwithstanding that the Citrus Plaza project (the "Project') i now 5 closer to being built than it was when the City flied its Second Amended Complaint ( e 6 'S.AC."). This sudden claim ofnomipeness suffers two fatal flaws. First, significan progress 7 has been made toward development of the Project such tbat the facts underlying the c oss- 8 complaints are sufficiently certain to enable a meaningful adjudication. Second, it is onsensical 9 for the City to base its claim of nonripeness on the fact that certain steps necessary fo 10 completion of the Project with COUDty supplied Services (i.e., the issuance of approv s and the 11 circulation of the draft EIR.) have Dot been completed, when those same steps also ha Dot been ]2 completed when the City filed its S.A.C. in June 1999 maintaining that the dispute ripe. 13 Today, as when the S.A.C. was filed, the County and Redlands Ven are 14 devoting time and money towards the development of a project which the City conte s begets a 15 breach of the CSA 110 Formation Agreement and a duplication of City provided seT 16 County and RedJands Venture filed their respective cross-complaint to obtain assur e that their 17 current activities would Dot in fa.c;t result in the breach of thc CSA 110 Formation A 18 duplication of services the City alleges, and that if the CSA 110 Formation Agreeme twas 19 interpreted as the City desires it would result in a violation of the Elections Code. It both a 20 tremendous waste of resources and contrary to prccedent to require the County llnd 21 Venture to actually breach the contract and provide duplicative services (not to men on the 22 impropriety of forcing criminal violations of the Elections Code) before this long-ru ning 23 dispute will be adjudicated. The City's abrupt and unsubstantiated claim of unripen ss is yet . 24 another baseless tactical ploy in its never-ending bag of tricks to forestall deveJopm t of the 25 Project and must not be indulged. 26 11111 27 /Jill 28 ~~7:-:'~:::.~_\4.~7i{!"~S SD_DOCS\20t'51.1 ~7] ,... "_'~. _..... I...... ~"": '''::".,. I CASENUM . 293/91 COtmTY AND UDLANl)S VEJ-11JRE'S OPPOsmoN TO fLAIN"IlF'P'S M(rnON FOR SUMMAKY JUOOI"d[N1' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :'~:'~ ~A.:":lAv. &. WATKiNS SD 619-6'-7419 I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L..nv.." a. W^"'INS SD_DOCS'(%OISSl.II"'''7J I ^-~~A:LA'" ::ioA.... r.-~;,., (WED) 329' 00 13:30/ST-13:28/NO. 4861979180 7 ARGUMENT 2 1. Tbe acts Underlvin Tbe Cross-Com laints Are SufficientlT Co crete To 3 Enable A Meaninl!ful Adiudication '1--' 4 The County's cross-complaint seeks a declaration that the provision 0 service to 5 the Project and the Donut Hole by Improvement Zone EV -1 does not constitute a b ch of the 6 CSA 110 Formation Agreement or beget a compensable duplication of services. Re 7 Venture's cross-complaint seeks a declaration that if the CSA 110 Formation Agree 8 interpreted as the City asserts it should be, with the result that tho: County is effective precluded 9 from providing services to the Donut Hole, the annexation election that would have t transpire 10 . if the Donut Hole were wer to receive the basic services at issue would be violative f the II Election..< Code. Both of the cross-complaints are ripe if the County is going to provi e services 12 to the Donut Hole. The City asserts that because development of the Project has not chieved 13 certain milestones the City self-servingly selected, the County has abandoned its plan 0 provide 14 such services. The City is wrong. 15 The County, at all tiines relevant, has been working diligently to make possible 16 I the provision of County services to the Donut Hole. Throughout the period at issue, e Project's. I i application has remained open and under review by the County. Declaration of Terri Rahhal OJ 3. J 8 The preparation of the Draft ElR is well underway. IlL at 14. To date, $28,573.75 0 the original 19 deposit 0[$114,295 bas been spent on the preparation of the Draft ElR. Id. at ~ 5. 21 work necessary for its completion and delays in obtaining engineering studies. Id. lit ,00 20 F.1R was nOI completed in the timetable originally forecast because of unanticipated 22 longer time~bJe in no way indieates an intent to abandon the Project. Id. To the co .,~ -~ October 18, 1999 the Notice Of Preparation ofLhe EIR was released to the public. I . at 11 6. It 24 is clear that development of the Project with County provided services, is imminent. No 25 additional facts are needed to adjudicate the cross-complaints. 26 Declaratory relief is propt:r on these concrete facts. California Code 2 27 Procedure ("C.C.P. ") Section 1060 makes plain that declaratory reliefis appropriate 28 CAS NU . 293191 COUNTY ANDREDI-^l'IIlS VENTURE'SOPI'Om1llNTO !'LA1NTIFF"S MOTION FOR SIJMMAll Y nJOOI4'NT ;j0'~ LAT~ &. WATKINS SD 619-6'-'7419 (WED) 329' 00 13:31/87 1 3: 28/1iO. ~36j979;30" C ] there has been any breach of the obligation" at issue. c.c.P. S 1060. Declaratory relief s proper 2 where rights under a contract are at issue. Bennet v. Hibernia Bank (l956) 47 Cal. 2d 5 0, 549- 3 540 ("It is the generdl rule that in an action for declaratory relief the complaint is suffici nt ifit 4 sets forth facts showing the existence of an actual controversy relating to the legal righ of the 5 respective parties under the contract and requests that the rights and duties be adjudged. ). 6 "Declaratory relief exists to enable a party to a contract to determine his rights and Iiabi ities 7 before he has incurred costs, and subjected himself to risks, which, ifhis view of those "ghts and & liabilities is in error. he would not have subjected himself" Rubin v. Tobberman (1964 226 Cat 9 App.2d 319, 325. In RubiA this rule was applied to allow declaratory relief to interpre a 10 contract requiring that a property-seller pay all costs in excess of one thousand dollars' curred ] I by the property-buyer for retaining walls or other retention featw-es required by buildin ' 12 authorities in conjunction with the buyer's COnstruction of a house on the property sold 13 though at the lime of the declaratory action it W/U not known whether plaintiff-buyer 14 build a house on the property or whether he would build a house that would trigger th provbiion J 5 at issue. Id. 16 Declaratory relief is also proper Outside of the contract arena. Declarat ry relief 17 lies where the failure to render a-decree would cause great hardship. For example in .c. J l! Cotton. Inc. v. Voss (I 995) 33 Cal. App. 4th 929, 94&. the Court held that declaratory lief was 19 proper where growers of a new breed of cotton challenged a regulation requiring the s aring of 20 all new breeds of cotton, explaining; 21 [A) person contemplating entering into such an endeavor would desire and is entitled to know whether any success achieved will be assumed into the public domain. That is a sufficient interest to establish ~'tll.Dding to challenge statutory and regulatory scheme and it is no answer to assert ...that the plaintiffs should be required to take their chances in obtaining favorable decision only after expending the time and money required to develop a new variety of cotton. 1.-7 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ld. Declaratory relief is also appropriate where an issue involves the public interest r is likely to recur. Pacific Le!!al Foundation v. California Coastal Commission (1982) 33 Cal. 3 158, 170; Breaux v Asricultural Labor Relations Board 1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 730 743-744. L>.-n:..." 8< W^TK"'~ SD_DOCS\201551.I(W91] .'\':"""~ATt,...W :i..t.\::J-~~ 3 l:AS~ NUMBER: ml,a COllNTY AND RWI.ANDS VENTlJRE'S OI'l'OS1lJON TO fLAi....'T1l'f'S MonoN rOil SlJMl.lARY JUl)(;Mf.NT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ":lOM LATHAM &. WATKINS SD 619-f'-7419 (WED) 329' 00 13:31/87 1328/);). 4S6:m~2:)? 9 declaratory relief is also proper when a public entity is accused of violating the law. A~ ode 2 County Land Use Assoc. v. City ofHavward (1995)38 Cal. App. 4'" 1716, 1723 (declar tory 3 relief proper in suit challenging the validity of a memorandum ofunderstandwg betwee ciLie. 4 and a county which allegedly restricted each entities' discretion over land use within the r 5 respective jurisdictions). ~) 6 Importantly, any doubt as to wh"tht:r ueclaratory rdicf is proper should e 7 resolved in favor of granting declaratory relief. Warren v. 'ser Foundation Health P (1975) 8 47 Cal. App. 3d 678, 683; Com an eline 9 Construction Co. (1971) 10 Cal. App. 3d 372, 377. . A complaint is sufficient if a decr 10 serve in a practical way to stabilize a dispute which otherwise may lead to disastrous or 11 defer the realization of the purpose of the contract." R I 12 etc. (J 950) 98 Cal. App.2d 539, 540. 13 The need for declaratory relief is particularly acute in this case. Denial f 14 declaratory relief with respect to Redland~ Venture's cross-complaint would force the 15 the residentS and landowners of the Donut Hole to engage in criminal violations of the 16 Code (punishable by up to three years imprisonment) if they vote in the annexation el 17 is inevitable if.the CSA 1 10 Fonnation Agreement is interpreted as the City alleges it I~ Ejections Code ~S18S21, 18522. It is immaterial that no annexation election is ClOTe 19 pending; if the CSA 11 0 Formation Agreement is interpreted as the City contends it sh uld be an 20 annexation election is a forgone conclusion because annexation will he the only way f4 21 Donut Hole to get the basic services needed for development. The City's position that edlands 22 Venture's cross-complaint is not ripe and the parties to the annexation election must w it until 23 they actually commit criminal acts to have their day in court is simply untenable, parti 24 where a right as important as the right to vote is implicated. 25 Similarly, with respect to the County's cross-complaint, the need for d 26 relief is clear. It hard to imagine many things of greater public interest than the ability to obtain 27 basic services like the water and sewage services at issue. Moreover, because the CS 28 1".'l'.A..... 8< WATKtI<S SD_DOCSI20aSSl.l [W91J A1'1'...iIIlI"E"t'IioATL,..... ....-= 4 CASE NI1MBER: 2,. I I COUNTY A.''D REDLA.>lDS VDl't'URE'S OPPOSl110N W PLAlNTIf'F" MOTION FOR <UMMARlf IUDGMJ:1o.7 I ~,-:c_,_v. & WATKINS SD 619-f-- 7419 , (WED) 329' 00 13:32/STJ3:28/liO 4851979180 P 10 Formation Agreement encompasses land beyond that at issue in this litigation, the Cou ty's 2 ability to provide services to land 'within the purview ofCSA 110 Formation Agreeme will 3 likely n:cur. Further, the outcome of this litigation will impact the County's land use pl ooiog 4 throughout the CSA 110 area and infom its decision making regarding future joint pIa mng 5 efforts throughout the County. Denial of declaratory relief in this case would be again the 6 weight of the authority and have disastrOus consequences, forcing the COUnty to waste taxpayer 7 money developing a project that the City bas spent four years crusading against and I surely 8 challenge again at a later date. ~ ~ 9 The case law cited by the City to support its claim ofnonopeness is' posite. 10 Both Selbv Realtv Co. v. City of San Buenaventura (1973) 10 CaJ. 3d 110 and Pacifi Lena! 11 Foundation v. California Coastal Commission (1982) 33 Ca!. 3d 158 address the pro rietyof 12 declaratory relief to challenges regulations. In both of those cases, declaratory relief as 13 improper because it would have entailed a probe into the general validity of the r 14 issue in a vacuum. They are fundamentally different from the instant case where th 15 law or regulation is not at issue and, accordingly, they have no impact here. The Ci s citation 16 to San Bernardino Public Emolovees Assoc. v. City of Fontana (1998) 67 Cal.App. 17 similarly unavailing. San Bernardino Public Emolovees Assoc. did not deal with d laratmy 18 relief at all. Rather, there, the court ofappeal held that it was premature for the . ] 9 have issued an order compelling the city to refrain from reducing or eliminating r 20 benefits where the city had done nothing more than agree to meet and confer regar ing the 21 benefits. Id. at 1226. No such order actually dictating conduct is at issue in this p rely 22 declaratory proceeding. Critically, the City does not cite to one case where, as her a party is 23 accused of breaching a contract or violating a law and declaratory relief was foun 24 111/1 25 II/!! 26 /1111 27 1/11/ 28 5 U\!H.A."'t A: WATKL';'~ SD_DOCS\:O!.s.H.IIW97l "TT~"'TI....... ......Cz:~ CASE NUMllI:Jt: 2731" COUNTY AND RD>I.ANDS VENTtIItE'S OPPOSJ) IOrf TO PLAINI1FI'i MOTION roa stD4NAllY JtJDGWENT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - il , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :!lOM LATHAM Ii WATKINS 3D 619-f~7419 (ViED) 329' 00 13:32/ST-13:L2/1;C ~S6:979:S: - .. 2. ~ The Facts Underlvinl! Deve[oDment OrTbe Proiect Were 1\0 !\Iore CoJcrete 2 - .C. And The Citv Must Have Thou..ht The 3 4 DisDute Was RiDe At That Time Aside from the fact the cross-complaints are factually ripe, the City's c1ai of 5 nonnpeness does not make sense. The City claims that the disputes at the heart of the cr 55- 6 complaints and the Ciry's own complaint are no longer ripe because the Project has not een 7 approved. City's Motion at I, 5-6. However, when the City filed its S.AC. in June] 99 there 8 also were no approvals for Counry provided services; the only such approvals having b n ~ rescinded in April 1999. The City CaJ1Ilot now contend that a Project must be approy 10 ripe. For the same reason, tbe City's resort to the noncompletion of the draft EIR and e II lawsuits surrounding the County's amendments to its general plan to evidence that the 12 not yet definite must also fail. City's Motion at I, 5-6. When the City filed its SAC. in June 13 1999 all that was known was that the County intended to provide service the the Don tHole. 14 The City cenainly felt the dispute was ripe at that time. City's Motion at 2-5. Even' the County 15 and Redlands Venture had not taken significant steps towards fulfilling that intent ( etailed 16 above), the City's sudden claim of nonripeness would be a direct contradiction of it earlier 17 position. Given the significant Q!'ogress made toward the County's provision of s . ces (through 18 Improvement Zone EV-l), the City's sudden change of heart is patently ludicrous. 19 CONCLUSION '"2-~ 20 For the foregoing reasons the County and Red1ands Venture respectfully r est that the 21 Court deny the City's motion for summary judgment and decide this case on the "ts before the 22 . parties waste more time and money developing the Project. 23 24 25 26 27 I 28 -..-^.;--~v. &; \""'''TKr~rD_DOCS~OISSl.lIWnl Ar.'~~.a.T""'. I 0-0."", 6 CASE NVMBER: ~31?f COUNTY AND REDLANDS VENrURE.. opPOsmON TO PUlImFn: MOTION FOR SUM'dAllY JUDGMENT 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Resoonses LETTER NO.9 McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Emersen 9-1 Comment noted. 9-:! Referencing the docwnent as a Subsequent EIR relates to a decision on the part of the County to characterize the docwnent in the context of the whole of the action as well as to be explicit with regard to the previous environmental analysis conducted for one of the project's three components. By no means does the Draft Subsequent EIR tier the General Plari and Development Code amendments off of the 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR.. as is suggested by this comment. This EIR independentlv analyzes all of the environmental effects of the proposed General Plan and Development Code amendments. In addition. the incorporation of docwnents by reference as is done on page:! of the Draft Subsequent EIR does not indicate or imply that the analysis of the General Plan and Development Code amendments is tiered off any previous environmental docwnents. Moreover. the EIR addresses three components. wherein the Plan Amendments and the infrastructure plan are actions not. previously evaluated under CEQA. while the revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project are the portions of the EIR which incorporates by reference the previous CEQA docwnent. There is no requirement under CEQA that the components of a project be split into separate environmental docwnents. in fact. the opposite is true. To do so would be to analyze the project in a piecemeal fashion. which CEQA does not allow. 9-3 The Plan Amendments are designed simply to re<odiJy existing regulations and there is no change in the way that the regulations guide development. Moreover. the evidence and analysis presented in the EIR demonstrates that shifting the location of the regulations (i.e.. from EVCSP to County documents) has no impact on the environment (see Draft Subsequent EIR Section 5.1 analysis of this issue under Land Use impacts). It is not that the Draft Subsequent EIR does not "acknowledge the possibility that any of the General Plan or Development Code amendments might cause environmental impacts"; rather. the EIR analyzes these impacts and concludes they have no effect on the environment. The EIR concludes in each section that the Plan Amendments would not have a significant impact because that is the conclusion based on the facts and the analysis. An EIR is not required to "make up" impacts where there are none, but to analyze potentially significant impacts and disclose whether they exist and. if they do, Counr)" of San BtrDardiao Laud lsr Sen"icts Departmcnl Citrus Plaza Regional MalllIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCII. So. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR-Junc 2001 Page 391 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent fIR and Resoonses whether or not they can be mitigated to below a level of significance. Because of the EIR's conclusion that the Plan Amendments do not have a significant impact on the environment, a negative declaration could have been prepared for the General Plan and Development Code Amendments. but to avoid piecemeal review of the project and its components instead the County choose to include the entire project in this EIR. The Plan Amendments do not represent a repudiation of past planning efforts; rather, they represent an effon to evolve those past planning efforts in a way that ensures that no protections are lost but rather than options and alternatives to those efforts are disclosed and analyzed. so that the best alternative can be selected. That disclosure and analysis of options and alternatives is the very hean of any planning process as well as a basic tenet of CEQA. As for the comment's assenion that the couns have stated that the plan amendments constitute a substantial change in policies or guidelines which require CEQA analysis, the County recognizes that the court opinion was rendered. and acknowledges that these amendments to the General Plan and repeal of the Specific Plan will be a change in County policies for the IVDA area, and the impacts of that change are addressed in this Subsequent EIR. The Draft Subsequent EIR does more than pay lip service to the amendments; rather, it thoroughly analyzes the physical impacts from the policy change. Economic and social effects of a project are not treated as significant effects on the environment See Cal. Code Regs. Section 15131 (a). Moreover, the impacts analyzed in an EIR must be related to a physical change. 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15358(b). 9-4 Comment noted. See Response to Comment Nos. 8-2 and 8-4. 9-5 The EIR provides the level of detail required for a project level review; in contrast, this comment does not provide any specific information as to which pan of the description of the proposed water and sewer facilities it believes is "too vague" for such a level of review. There is no agricultural land on the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall site; as a result, the referenced mitigation is not required and the Final Subsequent EIR has been revised to reflect that fact (see pages 14, 18, 33, 123, 124 and 210). With the removal of the mitigation measure regarding "continued agricultural use" of this now non-agricultural propeny, no mitigation is required because there is no significant impact. 9-6 The Draft Subsequent EIR recognizes that Area A is unserved or deemed to be underserved by the County of San Bernardino with respect to water and sewer COUDI)" ofSaa IkraudiDo Land Use Mn'ircs DcpanmcDt Ciuus Plaza Regional MalUIVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SClL 1'0. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 392 ] 1.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses services because of the fact that there is no infrasnuc\Ure in place to meet the demand for services attributable to development contemplated in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Appendix G of the Draft Subsequent EIR at Part I discusses this lack of infrasnucture. and notes that the conclusion that the area had inadequate or no water or sewer service was developed based on historical information from surrounding agencies as well as from current County zoning for the property. Table I-A of Appendix G swnmarizes each area studied and the services or lack thereof to that area. Moreover. the City of Redlands cannot serve Area A because the property is not ~ithin the City of Redlands' sphere of influence. The City of Redlands' Measure U states that: "No extension of City-provided utility services to areas outside the City limits shall occur until such areas are properly annexed to the City..." The only exception to this prohibition is for areas not contiguous to the City and for which the lando~ner agrees to a binding pre- annexation agreement. Because IVDA Area A has been removed from the Sphere of Influence of the City of Redlands. such area cannot be annexed into the City and the provision of public utilities to Area A as an unincorporated area is prohibited by the express provisions of Measure U. Second. the City of Redlands has not applied to the Local Agency Formation Commission for approval to provide services outside of its municipal boundaries. 9-7 Table I-D on page 7 of Appendix G. Infrasnucture Options Analysis. of the Draft Subsequent EIR identifies the acreage of the various land use designations within Area A as well as the estimated water demands and sewage flows attributable to the development of these areas. This data and resultant analyses are based on build out of Area A. These estimated water demands and sewer flows serve as the design parameters upon which the design of each water and sewer option have been engineered. Thus. all of the proposed water and sewer options are predicated upon serving land use build out within Area A. Accordingly. all of the analyses of the infrasnucture options presented in Section 5.0 and Appendix G of the Final Subsequent EIR are based on the build out of Area A. in addition to analyses of the infrasnucture demands attributable to the development of Phase I of the Citrus Plaza project. 9-8 As stated in the comment and further described on page 101 of the Draft Subsequent EIR, the purpose of the referenced analysis is to review the proposed amendment for consistency ~ith this policy of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and County Policy/Action LU-9 of the San Bernardino General Plan. This is to identifY plan inconsistencies that may result in a physical impact, which was determined not to result from the proposed General Plan Amendment. Rather, the existing provisions of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan conflicts with County Redevelopment goals to facilitate growth within IVDA areas. Although the project proposes to repeal the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as it applies to Areas A Couat}' of Sa a BcrDudiDo Land Lsc Scn'ic:cs Department Citrus Plaza RegionaJ MalIllVDA Water & Sewer Sel'\'lCeS Plan SCIl. j\;o. l'fflIOIl23 FinaJ Subsequent EJR - Jtme 2001 Page 393 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1\.0 Comments Received During Public Review oftlie Draft Subsequent fiR anj Responses and H. the dewlopment standards contained in the EVCSP would be inc01'Of:ltd into the County's General Plan. The text suggested in the comment as bein~ in error has been reviewed and based on the best available information is considered to be accurate. The City of Redlands has not implemented t\laster Pi:lIl improvements identified as necessary to provide water and wastewater service to IVDA Area A and also. under the provisions of Measure U. prohibits service to this unincorporated area. These existing limitations to service are further described under Response to Comment No. 8-17. Refer also to Response to Comment No. 8- 9 regarding furure water and wastewater service to IVDA Area I. 9-9 The referenced first paragraph states that consistency with Policy Action LU-1O has been achieved through review and comment by affected agencies of environmental documentation prepared for the Citrus Plaza Project. the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. and the proposed project. Since land use designations and mitigation measures evaluated for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and 1995 Citrus Plaza Final EIR and developed based on consultation 'With affected agencies are incorporated by reference in the proposed project no inconsistency would exist 'With this policy. Minor changes to the Final Subsequent EIR (page 110) have been made to provide additional clarification. The development of private water and wastewater treatment facilities would be consistent \v ith the current land use design of the site and the provision of these services through a private agency would not result in additional land use impacts. The project would not encourage leapfrog development of sewer and wastewater facilities to previously unserved areas but is in response to a deficiency identified in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to serve development proposed for IVDA Area A. The proposed change in the provision of water and wastewater service from the City of Redlands would not encourage additional development beyond Areas A and I. This change in wastewater and water service has been analyzed throughout the Draft Subsequent EIR. The County will continue to coordinate planning activities 'With cities 'Within Sphere of Influence areas; however. the County has the ultimate authority for administering development regulations within unincorporated areas. As for the comment that the courts have noted that the changes analyzed in the EIR are changes in land use and policy. see Response to Comment No. 9-3. As noted therein, the County agrees that this is a change in policy. and this EIR provides the environmental analysis. However, these changes do not encourage leapfrog development, nor do they increase or decrease the planned densities of development, or types of development already identified and analyzed in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, which was previously approved by the County as well as by the City of Red lands. Coun~' ofSao Bernardino land he Srn"ircs Department elOus Plaza RegIonal MalL'IVDA Water & Sewer Se["l,'icc:s Plan SClI. IIio. 1'l99101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 394 Il.O Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses 9-10 See Response to Comment No. 9-9 as to why this project is not Ieapfr,'i' development. SCAG reviewed the Draft Subsequent EIR and submined a comment lener (see Comment Lener No.5). Based on its review. SCAG concluded that the analysis presented in the Draft Subsequent EIR was commendable and that they had no comments "",ith regard to the technical analysis presented in the referenced portions of the Draft Subsequent EIR. 9- I I The quoted statement is taken out of context; the analysis which the comment asserts is missing is found in the three paragraphs following the statement quoted in the comment. on page 112 of the Draft Subsequent EIR. 9-12 There is no a substantial change in the geographic area of the proposed infrastructure plan. All that is changing is the shift from implementation of water and sewer options pursuant to the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan - a plan whose requirements currently preclude the implementation of water and sewer service, to a regulatory approach wherein water and sewer service can be implemented via various sewer and water options. As the infrastructure pipelines would be placed underground, this component of the Project would have no effect on height or bulk. In the case of the water and wastewater treatment facilities, these facilities are typically no more than 32 to 36 feet high and would be less than the permitted maximum height of 50 feet. Furthermore, there are no proposed changes to the geographic area, square footage or height and bulk of the Citrus Plaza project. 9-13 The Final Subsequent EIR (see pages 47, 111, 117-119, 122, 152, 198, 201, 234 and 301) has been revised to reflect the fact that the wastewater treatment plant is not part of the Citrus Plaza site. 9-14 Subsequent preparation of detailed geotechnical studies is not deferring the mitigation. The EIR mitigation measures appropriately require detailed investigations before construction, and not project approval. to assure the final design is sufficiently defmed to allow specific remedial measures to be incorporated into the construction standards. Furthermore, the impact discussion on page 130 of the Draft Subsequent EIR and the technical information contained in Appendix G of the Draft Subsequent EIR do not identify any liquefaction impacts which could not be avoided through standard engineering practices. In addition, refer to Response to Comment No. 8-26 for additional information regarding the potential liquefaction impacts on the proposed underground pipelines. Count)' orSaa Scraardino Laud LiSt Srrviecs DcpartmcDt Citrus Plaza Regional MalL1VDA Waler & Sewer Servlccs Plan SOL So. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 395 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - . . I I I I '. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses 9-15 It is recognized that pipeline excavation would have staging. stod:piling. storage and parking requirements which would have the potential to temporarily disrupt normal traffic and land use activities. The Draft Subsequent EIR discusses this issue beginning at page 76. As discussed therein. plans shall be conditioned to address traffic control and possible effects on public and private property due to clearing. excavation and other pipeline construction activities. With normal and expected project management. pipeline excavation activities would have extremely limited impact. There are no unusual land use features or traffic flow considerations that would create difficulties for pipeline installation using normal management practices. In addition, the construction and therefore the impacts. if any. would be shon-rerm in duration and similar to other pipeline construction performed Countywide. The significance thresholds referenced in the comment are thresholds for long-term impacts that are not applicable here. Construction staging, stockpiling, storage and parking requirements and the temporary disruption to normal traffic flow and land use activities will be incorporated in detail in the final construction documents. These documents will be subsequently reviewed and permits issued by the appropriate agency responsible for the public right of ways, i.e., Caltrans, County of San Bernardino Special District for Transponation, and the City of San Bernardino. Details of the Traffic Control Plan will be prepared in accordance with the Caltrans Manual of Traffic Control or the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook. depending on the jurisdiction with control of the right-of-way impacted. This summary of construction impacts due to pipeline excavation is included on pages 83 and 84 of this Final Subsequent EIR. Construction staging and methodology will be in accordance with the County of San Bernardino Special District Water and Sewer Design Standards, The Green Book of Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the American Water Works Association Standards. Construction documents will be similar to those being used for construction of the water facilities in Oak Hills, County Service Area 70-J; Phelan and Pinion Hills. County Service Area 70-L. Pipelines and other facilities would be constructed as development takes place; i.e., the underground utilities would be installed at the same time that the new streets within the Citrus Plaza sire as well as the balance of IVDA Area A are constructed. In addition, the infrastructure improvements would be constructed in two phases, most likely eight to 15 years apan, thus repeated demolition and construction which is suggested in this comment simply would not occur. Despite the fact that the construction will occur in phases, the EIR undenook a conservative analysis of the porential impacts by analyzing the facility construction COUDty ors.a Bernardino Land CSt Scn'icrs Dtpartmcnl Ciaus Plaza Regional MaJV1VDA W 31cr & Sewer Services Plan SCH. No. 1999101113 Fmal Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 396 I J.O Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses as if it all were built at the same time. See also Response to Comment No. 8-8. 9-16 None of the infrastructure facilities included within the infrastructure plan are duplicative. Their installation is simply staged to be commensurate with the anticipated demand at the time of installation. Also see Response to Comment No. 9-15 for additional information regarding infrastructure installation. Furthermore. as the infrastructure plan merely changes the provider of water and sewer service. the amount of energy required to construct the water and sewer improvements is unchanged with implementation of the Project. Thus. the infrastructure plan does not result in the use of large amounts of fuel. water. or energy and the conclusion of a less than significant impact relative to this significance threshold is valid. 9-17 The Final Subsequent EIR has been revised to correct the Summary Chart (Table 2-1) so that it states that impacts with mitigation are less than significant. The quantification of noise impacts from infrastructure construction and operation is addressed in the Final Subsequent EIR at pages 215-217. Estimated noise levels would be reduced by 10 to 15 dBA, or more to meet County Noise Ordinance Standards. with the implementation of the mitigation measures set forth in the Draft Subsequent EIR. The noise mitigation is not a deferral of mitigation, CEQA permits this type of prescriptive mitigation that is included in this analysis. Noise levels up to 65 dBA are considered acceptable under the County's Noise Element. and it is only if the noise exceeds the 65 dBA County standard that the noise level is considered significant. The mitigation measure referenced requires that exterior noise levels be mitigated through noise reduction technology such that the noise level does not exceed the 65 dBA standard. The developer \\ill be required to insure that noise sources meet County Noise Ordinance Standards. as is discussed on page 216 of the Final Subsequent EIR. A requirement that a project comply \\ith applicable environmental laws or regulations served as adequate mitigation of impacts. See Leonoff v. Monterey County Bd of Supen'isors, 222 CaI. App. 3d 1337, 1355 (1990); see also Perley v. Bd of Supm'isors. 137 CaI. App. 3d 424 (1982) (mitigated negative declaration upheld; it included compliance \\ith requirements of various environmental agencies among its mitigation measures). 9-18 The revisions to the Citrus Plaza project are limited to minor revisions to the site plan. The overall amount of development and its resultant trip generation and potential stationary noise sources are the same as those environmentally cleared in the certified 1995 Citrus Plaza EIR. As there are no changes in those aspects of the Project that affect the community noise environment, the revisions proposed would have a less than significant noise impact. 9-19 The Final Subsequent EIR (pages 226 and 228) has been revised to reference the COUDry orSn Beraudiao Land Use Stn'jc:cs DcpartmcDt Citrus Plaza Regional MallllVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCIl. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 397 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review oflhe Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses City of Redlands' sewer line. Development of the proposed Citrus Plaza project would not have an adv~rse effect on the City of Redlands' sewer line that crosses the Citrus Plaza site. Under no circumstances would buildings on the Citrus Plaza site be constructed above the subject sewer line. Development activities above the subject sewer line would be limited to parking and landscaping areas. Given this conunitment there would not be any impediments to access the subject sewer line in the event of the need for future maintenance. Thus, in no case would Citrus Plaza construction or operational activities adversely effect the subject sewer line. 9-20 See Response to Comment No. 9-3. 9-21 See Responses to Comments Nos. 9-2 through 9-4. The supposed pre-commitment was the Board of Supervisors' decision to authorize its staff to prepare and analyze a General Plan amendment for the Board of Supervisors to consider. The decision was to analyze and consider these changes, not to approve or disapprove them. 9-22 Comment noted. This comment is the attachment referenced in Comment No. 9- 3, and is addressed in Response to Comment No. 9-3. 9-23 Comment noted. This comment is the attachment referenced in Comment No. 9- 21. and is addressed in Response to Comment No. 9-21. County orS.a Beraardino Laud lise' Stn'jcfS Department Citrus Plaza Regional MalVlVDA Wa1er & Sewer Services Plan SOL No. 19991011D Final Subsequent EIR-JlIIIC2001 Page 398 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I ~ ..~ lV~ f\l~~S ~ ... ---'-. CITY OF RIVERSIDEPhone: (909)-826-578i Fax: (909)-826:2-198 File: Redlands - CIty of October 2, 2000 "People Serving People" e Ms. Terri Rahhal, Special Projects Planner County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Department, Planning Division 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, Third Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 RE: SCH. No. 94082084 - Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the East Valley Corridor Specific Plnn (ESCP) Dear Ms. Rahhal: Thank you for your letter dated August 28, 2000 regarding the availability of the Draft Subsequent EIR on the following four project components: . . Repeal of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. General Plan and Development Code amendments related to land use, water and wastewater services in the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA). Water and wastewater facilities plan for the unserved or under served portions of the IVDA Redevelopment Project Area. Revisions to the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall Project. \ . . County of San Bernardino certified the final supplemental EIR in November 1996. This draft subsequent EIR was prepared because the original project approvals were set aside by the Courts (page 2, ofthis draft EIR). Under the original approval of January 1996, the City of Redlands was to provide water and sewer services to the Citrus Plaza project (page 79). The primary revision for the Citrus Plaza project is to provide water and sewer services by an alternative method. County of S:m Bernardino acknowledges that the provision of water :J.."d wastewater services to the Citrus Plaza site is a potential area of controversy (page 14). City of Riverside was identified as a potential option (page 10) for bringing water and wastewater services to serve unincorporated IVDA areas and the Citrus Plaza project site. In particular, Option 7 of this draft subsequent EIR (page 72) identifies connection to the City of Riverside domestic transmission main (Waterman) as a potential source of water supply. Please be advised that neither z.. Riverside Public Utilities Department (Riverside), nor the Gage Canal Company is considering permitting connection to its water system as the primary source of domestic water for the referenced areas. As correctly indicated on page 65, Riverside City Council approval will be needed for connection and providing water supply. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 3900 MAIN S1REEI' . RM1lsmE, CAURlRNIA 92522 WAlER ENGINEEJuNo DMsrOll . (909) 782-5285 www.ci.riverside.ca.us oorn@rnowrn~\ OCT 0 3 2000 1.0 Ms. Terri Rahhal, Special Projects Planner County of San Bernardino Draft Subsequent EIR - East Valley-Corridor Specific Plan (ESCP) Page 2 of 2 Riverside produces a substantial portion of its drinking water supply from several wells located down gradient of that area. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, the project proponent intends to enter into agreement with the County of San Bernardino addressing the continuing use and/or management of the existing on-site groundwater wells (page 36). Riverside requests that the proposed agreement to include provision that groundwater wells that would no longer be used be properly abandoned in accordance with state and county regulations. Please contact Zahra Panahi at (909) 826-5612 if you have any questions. Very truly yours, CJ;Ju~uJ~ Dieter P. Wirtzfe1d Assistant Director - Water DPWlZPlBabs xc: David H. Wright Zahra Panahi I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I '. I I I I I I I I I I I I I In I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO. 10 City of Riverside 10-1 The comment summarizes the components of the Project and the intent of the current Subsequent EIR. This comment contains one factual error that should be corrected, however. The comment states that the original project approvals were set aside by the courts. This statement is not correct. The original approval occurred in January 1996 and still remains in effect. However, as the City of Redlands failed to enter into an agreement to serve the Project, a Supplemental EIR was prepared and certified. It is the Project revisions addressed within this Supplemental EIR - not the original January 1996 approvals - that were set aside by the courts. 10-2 Comment noted. See the letter from the City of Riverside dated December 26. 2000 (Appendix I). 10-3 The proposed agreement between the County of San Bernardino and the applicant to address the continuing use and/or management of existing on-site groundwater wells will include a provision .that groundwater wells that no longer would be used ""ill be properly abandoned in accordance ""ith state and county regulations. The Final Subsequent EIR (pages 38 and 225) has been revised to incorporate this language as part of required mitigation. Couar)" of San BtroMrdiDo Laud Lise Sen.-ius Dcpartmcnl Ciaus Plaza Regional Mall/lVDA Water & Sewer Services Plan Sell. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 2001 Page 399 - 10/12/00 17: 13 SBMWD ~ 93873223 NJ.29S "'- - I '. I CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT I I I B. WARR[N COCKE Pn:sident DER~^RL> C. KERSn General Mllnlo~tr STACEY R_ ALOSTAD1 Dqu.lly Gcncrnl Manag.:r JO~EPH f. STtJSKAL Director: EngineorinG C(WIiTnlClian-M;llnlcn:lnCC ROARI) 0..- WA T[R COMMISSIONERS Commiisioncn JUOI1H W. tfAlH.Y TONI C ALLlCOlT MARTIN A. ~^nc:" : JOtfN A. PERRY. P.r.. Director: Wllc:t ka:lamalion JOtil'l: r. MUllf'HY Dircclol of Fin:lncc October 1:2, :2000 8 ION K. TURNlrSEFD SaCcI)' rrognm Mana;c:r I I I Ms. Terri Rahhal Planning Division San Bernardino County Land Use Department 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 3~ Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Dear Ms. Rahhal: I I RE: CITY OF SAN BERNARD:!:NO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT I S COMMENTS ON DRA!'T SUBSEQUENT ENVIaoNMENTAL IMPACT lU:l'ORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS FOR THE IVDA AREA AND ASSOCIATED WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN FOR UNSERVED IVDA AREAS AND lU:VISIONS TO THE CITRUS PLAZA IUllGIONAL MALL PROJECT I I The City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department has reviewed the aforementioned document and offers the following comments and concerns: WASTEWATER SYSTEM I I I Option 1 - Sewer to City of San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plant (SBWTP): The SBWTP capacity was sized to meet the needs of the City of San Bernardino (City), Highland/East Valley Water District, Loma Linda and IVDA at full build out. Providing capacity the area studied in this report can cause acceleration of capital improvements at facilities that has not been accounted \ for in the study. I Using the Cit'y' s 18" trunk sewer line in San Bernardino Avenue for IVDA Areas A and I may reduce the City'S ability to serve the eastern part of the City when future growth occurs. Providing service to areas outside of the City'S defined service area will accelerate the need to expand the capacity of the City'S secondary wastewater facility and the RIX facility that is I I I 300 North "0" Street, San Bernardino, California 92418 P.O. Box 710, 92402 Phone: (909) 384-5141 FACSJMJLE NUMBERS: Adminutmtion: (909) 384.5215 enr;il1ccrins: (909) 38+5532 CUlJlnml;[ Scrvi": (909) 38....7211 Ca.rpotafe Yard.: (000) 3fl,4.S260 Water R.eclamatiM Plant: (000) 314-S2Sll 10/12/00 17: 13 SBMWD -? 93873223 NO.295 '. Ms. Terri Rahhal Page 2 October 12, 2000 jointly owned and funded by the cities of San Bernardino and1, Colton. :J Option 2A AND 2B - The Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) Ordinance No. 3 regulating the availability and use of the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor System (SARI) prohibits domestic wastewater or septic waste discharge into the SARI system except on a temporary basis (Class II Wastewater Discharge Permit) . This permit is only available on a temporary basis where no alternate method of disposal is reasonably available. Furthermore, Option 2B requires the dedicated use of a major 1- portion of the capacity in the City's 18" trunk line in San Bernardino Ave., which the City may not be willing to do. Option 2B would also require flow metering before the sewage flow enters the City's trunk line and prior to the flow being diverted for discharge into the SARI Line. Thus, neither Option 2A nor 2B are viable long-term solutions. WATER -1 Option 1 - Local Walla (Internal to IVDA Areas A and r): The twd proposed groundwater wells are in close proximity to the TCE and 3 perchlorate plumes as well as the Redlands wastewater percolation ponds. The supplied analysis/modeling does not address the impact of prolonged wet or dry hydrolo ic c cles with r result in tamination umes. dditionally, the lack of rec arge from the edlands perco ation ponds, in the event that Redlands is successful in developing its wastewater-recycling plan, has not been analyzed in conjuction with wet and dry h drolo ' e wo we S ocate n ptl.on may su ject to high Nitrate levels. This should be investigated more throughly before this option is selected. These wells will be subject to extensive testing requirements imposed by DOHS since the wells would be located where there are known contaminants. The cost for this level of testing is substantial but has not been factored into the Option 1 O&M costs. Option 2A and B - Local Wells (North of Santa Ana River): Nc0 b comments. -J Option 3A, BI and C rVDA Water Supply (Area 2 East Side Connecting at Well No. 11) I IVDA Area 1 has three active production wells 2A, 3, and 5 with a combined capacity of approximately 6400 gpm. Well 2A (2000gpm) is unusable because of TCE levels in excess of the DOHS MCL water from this well would have to be treated (GAC or Air Stripping) before it could be 7 used. Wells 3 and 5 show traces of TCE which would probably exceed the MCL if they were to be used at IVDA Area II (East Side) has one supply well (Well No. 11) that is currently capable J....:..:. q. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I s I " ~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10/12/00 17: 13 -,,-'; SBMWD ~ 93873223 r~::. 295 Ms. Terri Rahhal Page 3 October 12, 2000 of producing approximately 1000 GPM. This well has shown tracesu of TCE in the past and would probably see increased levels under l sustained full production condition. IVDA would need to add wellhead GAC or Air Stripping removal for TCE to fully utilize this well. Additional water can be supplied to Area 2 from the three wells in Area 1 through a booster station and 20" transmission main. Increased demand on the IVDA water system will almost certainly require some form of treatment for VOCs. This requirement for treatment has not been investigated or factored into the costs for water purchases from IVDA. If IVDA wells are used to meet the projected demand, it will diminish IVDAs resources available for future growth. The long-term impact of IVDA dedicating a significant portion of their available water production capacity to IVDA Areas A and I has not been addressed. The IVDA is certainly willing to work with the developer in exploring the possible use of IVDA sources of supply as long as the developer agrees to fund any impact costs that the IVDA will incur in providing water for the proposed development. 8 Option 4a and 4b - IVDA Water Supply (Area 1 East Side Connecting At Tippecanoe); While Options 4A and 4B connect at a different location in the IVDA system and use different transmission facilities, the issues of treatment and dedication of capacity are the same as encountered in 3A, 3B, and 3C. ~ Option Sa and 6a - City Of San Bernardino Water (Connecting at Tippecanoe And Waterman); The City can produce significant amount of water in the pressure zone serving the lower reaches of both Tippecanoe and Waterman Avenues. Previous system tests of the City's lower zone have demonstrated that an additional water outflow of 1500 gpm lowers pressure to marginal levels. To meet IVDA Areas A & I average inflow requirement of 1700 gpm would require the construction of a 20" transmission main from 10th and \0 Arrowhead down Arrowhead to Orange Show and Arrowhead and 16" transmission mains in orange Show east to Tippecanoe. The combined cost for the transmission main is approximately $2.5 million. In addition, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Board of Water Commissioners would have. to set a water cost rate and request the Mayor and City Council to authorize service outside the City limits. Option~ SB and 6B (City of San Bernardino Connecting to central1 Feeder), Options 5B and 6B impose the same demands on the City'S " lower zone transmission capabilities and would require the same transmission mains and approval process. Options 7A and 7B - Riverside Water: The City of Riverside is limited in the amount of water that it can produce from the Bunker Hill Basin. Riverside may not have sufficient production rights in Bunker Hill Basin to meet their own requirements and those of the IVDA Areas A and I The water Riverside produces from the Bunker Hill Basin contains perchlorate and other contaminants. Riverside blends its Bunker Hill water with other sources to meet DOHS water quality requirements. The water produced by Riverside from the Bunker Hill Basin may not meet I DOHS standards and would not be usable by the IVDA Areas A and I. Analysis of and responses to these additional issues and impacts] I pertaining to the wastewater and water alternatives presented in \~ the Draft Subsequent EIR should be addressed in the final EIR for the project. 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 Hl/12/00 17'13 NO . 29~, SBMWD ~ 93873223 Ms. Terri Rahhal Page 4 October 12, 2000 If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (909) 384-5091. WWB:tal cc: Stacey R. Aldstadt, Deputy General Manager W. William Bryden, Director, Water Utility John A. Perry, Director, Water Utility John P. Murphy, Director, Administration & Finance D:\@data\WPWin\Bill\Letters\EIRIVDAAreaSA~I.aoc .' I.T'__ 1 1 I I \ 1..1 I " ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses LETTER NO. 11 City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department 11-1 Comment noted. As described elsewhere. there are no growth inducing effects of this project. because it involves a change in service providers for a previously approved project and an area which has previously planned urban level of service under the long standing East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. There are no changes in planned land uses or development intensity associated with the actions analyzed in this EIR. The commentor submitted a follow-up letter dated December '27. '2000. which clarified their October 1'2,2000 letter (see Appendix I). 11-2 Comment noted. This is discussed in detail on page II, Volume 2. Technical Appendices, Appendix G - Infrastructure Options Analysis. SA WP A Ordinance 3 is also included in Appendix II-E. 11-3 The impacts of pumping in Option I are studied and discussed in detail in Appendix II-H, Impact of Water Supply Pumping on Contaminant Migration, County of San Bernardino Inland Valley Development Agency Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options ("Appendix G Study"). Draft Subsequent EIR, Appendix G. The impacts of both the volatile organic Chemicals ("VOCs") and the perchlorate plumes were thoroughly analyzed. The proposed wells "viII be deep and pumped from the lower aquifer. The study concludes that the proposed wells will not likely capture VOCs or perchlorate contamination nor \\ill pumping change the migration of the plumes. It is also proposed in the Draft Subsequent EIR to include VOC treatment (Appendix G. Table B-1) as a failsafe measure in the remote situation that VOCs are encountered. 11-4 The City of Redlands percolation ponds recharge the upper aquifer and are expected to remain in the upper aquifer and not have an impact on the proposed wells. This was also analyzed in the Appendix G Study. 11-5 Nitrates are not expected to be a problem with this option. Nitrates have not been a problem to entities who are pumping from the lower aquifer. 11-6 Comment noted. 11-7 Comment noted. The IVDA may have to add facilities to provide VOC and/or Couaty urSa. BtrDardiDO llud l:se Sen.'ices Department Claus Plaza Regional MalV1VDA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCIl No. 1999101113 Final Subsequent EIR - June 200t Page 400 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses perchlorate treaonen!, !be cost of which would be added 10 !be fees and/or charges imposed by !be IVDA for supplying water to IVDA Areas A and 1. 11-8 Commen! nOled. IVDA Areas A and I are pan of !be redevelopmen! area of !be IVDA. The IVDA has expressed interest in providing water 10 IVDA Areas A and 1. Subject to !be terms and conditions of !be existing license wi!b !be United States Air Force (un!il such license expires or is o!berwise terminated). !be IVDA is not restricted by any adjudication. The cost of any additional facilities required by !be IVDA 10 provide water to IVDA Areas A and I would be added 10 !be fees and/or charges imposed by !be IVDA for supplying water to IVDA Areas A and 1. The Final Subsequen! EIR (page 157) has been revised to incorporate this information regarding water supply. 11-9 Comment noted. See Response to Comment Nos. I I -7 and 11-8 above. 11-10 Commen! nOled. The cost of any additional facilities required by !be City of San Bernardino 10 provide water 10 IVDA Areas A and I would be added to !be fees and/or charges imposed by !be City for supplying water to IVDA Areas A and I. The approval requirements are understood and acknowledged in Appendix G of !be Draft Subsequent EIR. 11-11 Comment noted. See Response to Comment No. 11- I O. 11-12 Comment noted. 11-13 Commen! noted. See Response to Commen! Nos. 11-1 through 11-12 above. County orSaa Bernardino Land l'st Scn"ic:c5 Departmcnt Cinus Plaza Regional MalVIVDA \\'aler & Sewer Services Plan SCH. S.. 1999101123 Fmal Subsequent EIR-June 2001 Page 401 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I The Gas (ompany~ (5) September 11, 2000 Gas Co. Ref. No. 00-199 N8 County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Dept., Advance Planning Division 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, Third Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Attention: Terri Rahhal Re: EIR - Proposed project located on approximately 1 ;100 acres of unincorporated land northwest of the 1-1D/State Route 30 (future 1-210) interchange, City of Redlands. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above-referenced project. Please note that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, The Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action, which affects gas supply, or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearly Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. oo~@rnr SEP 1 4 Southern C.lifornia GIS Company 1931 LugrmiM At'm". R~J/andJ, CA Mailing 14.ddrr~: Bar 100J &dlands. C.4 92373-0306 \ ~[ID '1 !"': . .';j It;uil I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I b. Commercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. We have Demand Side Management programs available to commercial/industrial customers to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Commercial/Industrial Support Center at 1-800-GAS-2000. John DeWitt Technical Supervisor I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I MEMO FROM: Dr. Gary Negin G D h-/' ~ \~ -.L/ ---C:d/t:/ v ..L/Z-"Z-G /' - / ,- 0-/ ' /' ,)../.: cl--7Zblr.. //L,: <:'./;ZZ"6~i-C--?':-- ,/~<:./ - /'."'" . 1/ /f''--LC'.rz/~-Jz.. >a'/~A;a~/;'~('j, VU:i~./' 4~0';-~~ J-:2<,{~~A< e./Z'/a/ //7 {l-/~~~adL /~P~V.!-L':-~~;;r- \ ,.(j J/} '2.-?'-Z/C c:-....,2./2rU./l.'.::/c:4./~ j~~ykt~/t r-c'r'z~~ ..-//72C.-C/7/)~L>':Y- ~/ f5~7.dj/ 701rl/ ~~~ ~ -I~4V/(.A-~~.~r~ .~~/;~/ ;(:I!;://ZL~ rp:!dc- /Z4i7~~~ /j7'-Ct/ /t~~-C0~ - , ;&;;Z;~frZd~ /,h7/- rDJ R 0 P c "~ r~ IriI JQ lS tins U \:1 L5 tfu OCT 11 2000 ~; -':'. -~ -- , -;.., 325 S. LaSalle Street Redlands, California 92374 October 5,2000 Mr. James Roddy LAFCO th 175 W. 5 Street San Bernardino, California 92401 Dear Mr. Roddy, I would like to encourage you to postpone action on the request to remove the "doughnut hole" from Redlands' sphere of influence for at least 90 days. My understanding is that you have the legal authority to do so, that such action would still 1.. allow the developers of Citrus Plaza to continue planning, and that 90 additional days would not significantly delay the start of construction. Storm clouds hover over the property owners' request. First, Red1ands has filed suit and is challenging the constitutionality of AB 1544, a special-interest law that would drastically change land planning. If AB 1544 proves to be legal, developers will flood :, Sacramento with requests for similar legislation whenever they are unable to wring concessions and subsidies from cities. Perhaps Redlands'case will be decided, or preliminary clarification given, before more damage is done in other parts of California Second, Redlands is pursuing a legal challenge to the premature changes that the county made in the general plan last year. These changes stripped cities of crucial planning authority within their spheres of influence. The changes were made against the 't protests of nearly every city in the county and the Planning Commission. The changes altered policies that worked successfully for a decade, and which prevented the county from directly competing with cities for developments and tax dollars. If you approve the removal of the "doughnut hole," property owners will return to an uncertain future with the county. Redlands won this case in court, and an appeal is being heard. Third, the latest environmental impact report regarding the Citrus Plaza project is still in draft form. The public comment period will end on October 12th, only 6 days before you consider the property owners' request. More time will be needed for planners 5 to thoroughly analyze the input received, and to write a final report that addresses the draft's inadequacies. The final report may not be as appealing as the draft to property owners in the "doughnut hole," especially if it recommends additional mitigation measures. The draft is clearly inadequate in describing the cumulative impact of developments that might be built on the land that is not part of Citrus Plaza's Phase 1. Phase I only will use approximately 5 percent of the land in the "doughnut-hole." No (.. plans are currently on file with the county which detail future projects on the remaining 90 rcent of the land that is not part of Phase I or Phase II. In addition, the nature 0 potent! projects cou eas y c ge as the county cavalierly rezones. For example, the I I ?C. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Redlands Unified School District would be dramaticallv and adverselv affected if low- .i I income, high-density apartment complexes were allow;d in the "doughnut hole." ----' The draft suggests crucial mitigation measures. particularly in the areas of Transportation/Circulation, Fire Protection, and Law Enforcement. There is no g guarantee, however, that county supervisors will respect and approve all of these important measures in their eagerness to succeed in the greediest land grab in local history. Alternatives for providing water and wastewater infrastructure are described, but little attention is given as to the comparative practicality ofthe alternatives. Scant attention is paid to the relative costs of the alternatives, and to funding sources. Funding is the heart of my concern, and has been for seven years. Citrus Plaza could have been built years ago, especially when prospects for its success were more promising. Majestic Realty, however, was unwilling to pay the costs of doing business with Redlands. It is difficult to imagine that Majestic is more willing to pay the full costs of its project now, even if it is built in the county. Majestic and the United Doughnut ~ Hole Owners Association (UDHOPA) have indicated that they want direct subsidies, rebates, and taxpayer funding. Majestic, UDHOPA, and their supporters have greased the political wheels with generous campaign contributions to current members of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. Developers have hoodwinked supervisors into believing that a Target store, movie theater, two fast-food stands, and one gasoline station will be the engine that drives economic development. Supervisors are foolishly willing to put taxpayers at risk with a corporate welfare package that promises to be a colossal [mancial disaster. Current supervisors have visions of fortune dancing in their heads, while conveniently forgetting that nearly ever business decision they have made has Finally, a 90-day delay would extend past the election on November 7 that J :::e~::: :::::: :::l~oard of Supervisors. If the incumbents are remove:, there is \ 0 hope that a new majority will emerge that shows more business acumen, respect for taxpayers, and moral courage. Sincerely, ~~:1d~ f/&44'G . I Gary A. Negin, Ph.D. CC: Board of Supervisors, San Bernardino County Planning Department, San Bernardino County Redlands City Council The Press Enterorise The San Bernardino County Sun The Redlands Dailv Facts 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Draft Subsequent ErR and Responses LETTER NO. 13 Dr. Gary Negin 13-1 Comment noted. See Responses to Comments Nos. 13-2 through 13-10. 13-2 Comment noted. Upon preparation of the Final Subsequent EIR. the Cowlly \\ill hold public hearings before the Planning Commission and then \\ill seek certification of the Final Subsequent EIR and approval of the project by the Board of Supervisors. 13-3 Comment noted. lbis comment does not appear to relate to any environmental issue related to this EIR. The City of Redlands lawsuit in Sacramento Superior Court was dismissed on a demurrer, and the City of Redlands has stated that it \\ill not be appealing that decision. As noted elsewhere, the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") utilized the authority granted to LAFCO by AB 1544 to remove the Citrus Plaza site and Area A from the Sphere of Influence adopted by LAFCO for the City of Redlands. Upon preparation of the Final Subsequent EIR. the County ""ill hold public hearings before the Planning Commission and then\\ill seek certification of the Final Subsequent EIR and approval of the Project by the Board of Supervisors. 13-4 Comment noted. lbis comment does not appear to relate to any environmental issue related to this EIR. The comment appears to be referring to one of many lawsuits filed by the City of Redlands. lbis particular lawsuit referred to by the comment appears to be the lawsuit filed by the City of Redlands related to County- wide changes to County land use policies for lands within spheres of influence of incorporated cities. That land use policy change made last year by the County is separate from, and unrelated to. the proposed General Plan changes which are studied in this Subsequent EIR. In any event. the policies challenged by the City of Redlands are irrelevant to the Citrus Plaza project or to Area A, now that Area A is no longer within the City of Redlands sphere of influence. 13-5 The cotnrnent's characterization of the process is not correct. See Response to Comment No. 13-2. 13-6 An identification of the cumulative development analyzed in the Draft Subsequent EIR is addressed in two locations. An identification of specific cumulative County or SaD Bernardino land Cse Scn'ic:rs Dcpanmnl (ittUS Plaza Regional MaJlrlVDA Waler & Sewer Servil:es Plan SCH. No. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - June 200 I Page 403 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of lhe Draft Subsequent EIR and Responses development projects is presented in Section 4.0. Related Projects and Cumulati\~ Impacts. In addition to these individually identified projects. the analysis of infrastructure demand in IVDA Area A is based on build out of the land uses permined in IVDA Area A. This information is presented in Table I-D on page 7 of Appendix G. Infrastructure Options Analysis. of the Draft Subsequent ElR. 13-7 Any future development that seeks rezoning would be subject to environmental review. If the impacts of such future development are determined to be consistent with those analyzed in this EIR. then the issue will have been addressed by this EIR and no further analysis will be required so long as all applicable mitigation is implemented. If the impacts are greater than the impacts that were analyzed in this EIR. or if background conditions have changed substantially. then additional environmental review would be conducted and impacts identified therein would be mitigated to the extent deemed feasible by the County. 13-8 For projects that have significant impacts. a public agency must eliminate or reduce those significant environmental effects when it is feasible to do so. See CaI. Pub. Res. Code sections 21002-21002.1. 21081: 14 CaI. Code Regs sections 15021. 15043.15091. Vvbile the Board of Supervisors may reject mitigation measures that are determined to be infeasible. and may override any impacts that cannot feasibly be mitigated and approve the project they cannot. under CEQA. reject feasible mitigation measures that are required to reduce otherwise significant project impacts. The mitigation measures set forth in the Draft Subsequent EIR have been determined to be feasible and required to fully mitigate the otherwise significant project impacts; therefore. CEQA requires that if the Board of Supervisors decides to approve the project. it also must adopt the mitigation measures set out in the Draft Subsequent EIR. 13-9 Comment noted. Evaluating the economic merits of the alternatives is not a part of the CEQA process. CEQA focuses on the physical environmental effects of the various alternatives, which the EIR has done. An EIR is required to evaluate only the environmental impacts of a project; economic effects are not significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code I 21100. CEQA Guidelines I 1513I(a)). "Environment" is defmed as the physical conditions that exist within an area affected by a proposed project. including land. air, water, minerals, flora and fauna. noise. and objects of historic or aesthetic significance (Public Resources Code I 21060.5; CEQA Guidelines 115360). The impacts analyzed in an EIR must be "related to a physical change" (CEQA Guidelines I 15358(b)). Under these defInitions. a cost benefit analysis of all the alternatives is not required to be COUD~- orSan BeraardiDo Land tsc Srrvicrs DrpanmrDt Citrus Plaza RegIOnal MalVlVDA WaIcr & Sewer Services Plan SCll~.. 1999101123 Final Subsequent EIR - J1ft: 2001 Page 404 11.0 Comments Received During Public Review of the Dr:Ift Subsequem EIR and Responses evaluated in an EIR. 13-10 Comment noted. See Response to Comment No. 13-2. Couaty OrSID BUDlrdino Land l:Sf Su"icrs DepartmtDt Citrus Plaza Rcgtonal MaJVlVOA Water & Sewer Services Plan SCH. N..I99910IlD Final Subsequent EIR - June: 2001 Page 405 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSE~UENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ApPENDIX A NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP) I I I I: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I-- I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has not been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such, this Appendix as presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR, August 2000 remains valid. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ApPENDIX B NOTICE OF PREPARATION RESPONSES I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I lu I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has not been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such. this Appendix as presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR, August 2000 remains valid. - i I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX C MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM -- UPDATED I 'I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such, this Appendix supercedes that which was presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR, August 2000. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wi ",I :;1 ~ ~ '5 _ oS ;QS ~"S. c S 'i: Q ..u .. .. ::; "!i} ;;... " - " ... Co'" ",0. OJ =: Q '" i- ..: :: ... " "oS ..- " ~ -c " 0- .: .. !-~ ~ :;; ..: :z: :.; ~ ..., ~ :;,; z i- :z: ~ ..., c. '" :z: '" .. - ~-= .. II l! :l!! 05' &. Co'-_ Co:" = < a Q z ..: :.; z 'Q 5 "i " ... -=c -- .. '- :o~ :z: ~ ,., z ~ ..., :;; z ~ ::: .... :..: sa i- :;; .. :; Q '" ! c - .. '- " ~ :0 = oS i - ~ r; ... ... " " '" .. a: -= t: .. '" ~i ::! "" 51 u ..,1 :1 "'I ..' ~ 0_' ~i "', ~I ]I~II .::!- ;!.~I ':1 ~ =1..'- -:- g '5 ~ ~ v; iU >"00 = " 3"'5 ~ 0 C,J "'uo .~ __5:! '- i: o So. .9 ~ ~ o ~ ~ 'i: ~ E Q...~ eLl OJ . :l U '" :l :l . ::: ].~ U ~ c:; N 'g )2 ;:\ <l.:..C2_ '" " .2 E- o .~ E- o 'oe; '::;:" g 's "E >- ~'=:~ ~ ::; ::I tf.l QlJVl :..._= Co) t) ~t;~ .~~ ::: iU .~ -= '~.9 e ~ -g .c....oc:.'" 0..; ~ :J -: -:;::! VJ ti :J 10. "':I ..cu;~ "'::I~_~_C';-=..2 u .9: = ~ ~ .~ :; l": u.... _ ~ : .c-a..~e2=oo E- CIl~OCO:=~O>.c~"BC;u ~ ell ~ B 0 u ::; .g .~ U '2 .5 ~ .~ ~ "2' -g ~ ~ -a ~ ~ "fi € c; ti ::I Q. ~ .- .g c c:; 8 S 8- ''';:_ OJ ;:; -:$:! C ~ u := ... 0 ::: - .S: I.. t,; ~ ~ ~ 10. U .~ -: '-:=_ -g .~.9 S ~ - -= Q. !:!o~ 1..0 rno..co:cu'" 5 o ] :::I .;; ~"O ~::l ~ '5 c; ~ u....u;;O'OO::l c",-E oLlOC uClO'::j 0= I:.) U v; 0;; I:.) ,u ~ ': 0 >. ;>- ;,: .- u 'j;( .~ .c - c ~ '= ~ ~ 'u~>.uc;-CI"CI.=eo ~ ~ ] ~ ~ -e .~ s ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ >,'" ::I..c'".:"'l"g c i: ~-_ ("I ..c - c; 0 e .2!3.- c.. "C t":l '5>"'O'~ ~ a c.. ~!! c ~ ~"2 .... ~ c .!:! c "B 'E ;,: 0 c ~ E Q.i:-5 OO'-In lU 0 s-C'; = E <..e~O'::&.=_IUIn;':: ",oo~o'Oo!t~= 0 - 8.~~~ aii~~i~ ~ I 1 I i g '5 . " " . ~ " " ~ ~ ~12 :l U :;: :l ~ ~ :~ .:: " <..> .=~ u l0- g,o '" ~ ~.~ " . :l - ;;; 0 .~ "-l~O ~ "" -:~ j: '0 g, .9 ~.~ ... C:;-::l .S! :3 co; I ~.~ ~ ~ :a :l '_~ U "' CI': 20.5 ~ ~ u ~ ]~c;~ 'u ~ ~ <~;;c: ~" o .~ U ~ ~ 13 ;:; e- "'... " Ol) .;;; OJ "" ~ '': :l "" "" g il S .. "5. .5 '" ~ N OJ ~ a: ~ .~ c "E ~ In U .g .....2;~ ~ '0 .::: VI - ~ "'B 'io ~ ~ ~.~_co; '0 ~ .; .... 5.-= ~<"O co; C. ... IU 0 = ~co;o-=t.J"':2 ""Ol..;;. IU"'IU c~"'.c_". -::l co; _ ~ 0.. II.) ~ ... IU co; ; -= ~ In lU .... .... Q.'- V'J U ;> lU 0 ~~"O'E8-= c..'OCVlO.c ...::! ~ Q - - i~E~'~~ ... .- lU IU ~ c; .a Q. '0 'j; oI)--cn__ o-;;t..~""""" o 0 C ~ OJ ~ .0 " '" OJ 01) '00 _ tl .~ .. <::...9 ~ lU'= o .:: 'e' ~ c; N ~o c..~-S; "''ll & ~. ~ 0S0 ;;: .~ .; - ;:.:; g~:: '5 . " " . OJ Q - ~~'i:i " _.: .. :3 '0' o U ... U _"- '" " .i (5 .s"c; c-5ci. ... '" " .c (;j e ~8"c; ~~ OJ .:; IU ,,-5 .~ OJ " -= " E- .S! ~ C6 .;:;; "E &8 OJ OJ """,,. ~ ~ .9 'S -:: ... C"-= " lU U 'j: ~ ~ Co ::; ~o- s " .= ._ .g "0 0:2 'r; Co",Co ~8~ ::l ~ ... <: ~ - . :5 , , - "" <: == ,. ~ 0 s: " z - VI c.: .~! 0 c.. ."i ~ =' == ~ ::l =< <:i Z <: " z == ~ E z 0 ::; z "" ~ - ... <: ~ ::; ... ., ., = ;; ] .$! :::0 - 'a:; .. Q. '" c ;; ..!!l 'C ., ., u ~ > -= - ~ g =.... '5 ltlt: ~ 8.;E ;: ;:;; '" " ~ .~ .. :c == 5 ::; :; ., " Vi u " ... = .~ .,.$! C ..- ~ ~ ~ = 5 0 ~ - C " 1: - " .~ ... ., :; " > " '" .;: '" '" ~ Q. .~ 00 " '" '" ~ = .. " .'2 -= " :;s - !l Q. '" " " co al = .= 0 .= .!t .... 8. '" ., U .;! - ., '" ..... ;; ] .S:! (ii ~ ...c.. <: ., -;:; N .~ U .u ." '" :;;: '" = :;: 6' ... '" ... - ., ] ." - 'c -;:; " ., '" '" .... c '5 'a:; 1: ." U ::; ., " >. > .0 0 '" " '" " Vl 00 ;:;; f .. ~ ::E = .s - co ~ ~ 'G~ ~~~~>. ::-: :E' ....., .~ .... .~ a .5 ~ ~ g ~ >. ~ ~ ~ ';;j >~~-~I..=~ .5 '2 ~ ":c. 0 g c-: Il.) :::l Oil:: ....., .... Q:; "i "5 c:i 6 = l ~ ~ .~ ~.~ -: 'g 5 ~ == O~E3Ec.uU 'Or; ;"O~~~ ~-s ~ u 3':: -= - oo~=a:oo"'oS .5~=~~~- a..,r=CIl"5c ..~=o ~uC::lolJ~ C .5 .st...~.2'" ';';; a 0 ~ ~20E.g~~~ ~:- ~-5 E~-5 Il.)":::: C .....,..... 5 C'lS <,I) <; .;;;_ .2 ~ 0 '': C c ~ !:iccC'lSOU 'OiI.:..=.9 u .~.= E ~ 'i u 'Ii E .: C'lS u ::I .... fIJ E ~ ~ <: U'l ,::: ti Ul v.I'- .... 4":l _ I:: Il.) ._ ... c. rooi~g~~~-3.5 .~ '" ~ " ;:;; ;: .~ '" ~ :c i2 :; " u " Vl " I .~ -5 ~ ;: 0 " Q. 2 " 00 " = 0 " '5 " '" .;: '" ~ Q. .~ 00 " ~ " " " ~ ;:;; '" '" ~ ." ~ ~ .5 ':::; .~ <: '" 6' ... '-::; C .g ~_ .2 ~ >. .o'S"g ~ ~ in ~ C.i5 .. ... :: -;~ "2 C'; U 'i:: = c.. C 0 ., ~ ~ c.. ';; ~ = ., " " ~ '5 ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ., 8. .; ~ Q. 8 ::; .5 o:l~ 00 =- 'i ~ ..S! '" ~E " "-;:; ..c > f:- ':; ~g" '" ~ = " 5 ~ ..c ~ c] c-: := ~ - ~.2 " '" ~~ " ~ C'lS '0 ~ '" -'" '" :.a ti c ..c '" ., i:: c..'= C'lS E ~ LlJa.2 Ul'o"E ~ ~ .;s; :.a 01) u -S"C"Q ... .;: =: ~~E . ., .. .:: U :; "0 z ., .~ .OJ .. ... ., .. .. <:: .. .:: '" .. .:: = ~ll. &j :I"!liiR 850~ ~11 t .g~6 " OJ '" t; .~ 5 " '" ~ ---~ ~~~ -a,;;; '" = '" .- . " c..~ '" '" .9- ~ ~..c -51- r; 'i -;:;"" ~ " If.! .5 " 00 ~ ." ~ "" <: " 00_ '" " .5 2 '" .. ~..c CI '" . ~ >- " > = o '" 2 '" ..c = ::; "_-_;::CjE~ t,,) > ~ .~ '-'l ~ '-'l c::; ..c ..:;:;~~ c.. '-'l.g ~=~..g"'OE 1..0 c2 ~ ~ c ~'~.2 g 0 l= o a 1..0 .:: 0 'C;; "'0 u.~ ~ ~ e';;E;~~Q. ~"'o~r- g 0Ll '-'l Vi - _~- c~>.v _0 .~ (; c >. s;!= ., ." ~':'~.c >.0 ., ~= ~-g"E];~ (;o=~uCl}"'O~ 'E ~ ;:: ~ >. g .;;;_ _ - CI) ~ _.:. 1..0 ~ .~ ~ "'0 ~ ~.: _g -,-.E~O- .:.: ~ '0 >.] ~ .~.~ "0 -50 ~ ~ .~_ ~ 0 C";l ::3 __ =t:i-5E . I I I I I I I I I NI I I "" ';j ~ ~ ~ '" " -~ '" I .is ~ o ~ Vi 0: ~ c:; ~ c.. .. .= I vi~ >,c ~ '0 c ~ c.. E ~ ~ c..~ :.a ~ ~ " 00..c en ~ ~ ..: ~ '" .. c.. ~ ~ .. '" " ~ ..c -.: '5 E"'O 1..0 Q,) ~ 0 E c; CI} CI} ~ c;; .::_~_ ~ ~.s ~ I I I . I I I I .- . I I I I . 1- I I I I I I I I I WI .., --I -0. ", ~i Cl <:: ... '" =.s .i - - .. ~~ .- '" i:w > .. :;; - ~ l!! 1: &:f ~ == ::: ~ ~ ::: :J ... " "'-= Oll'; " " :5 - .. ... .. > , , - ... <: ::z:: "" ... ~ ... !: .. ... ~ :.: ~ ~ :.;: == '" :3-= .. " ~ l;"I ~ a: ="E'::. i5:::!: S < 8 ~ - z <: .. ... z Q2 ~ E z o :; z o ;: :..: "" E :0 - '; :: 'g~ ..cc 1:: Oi: :; .. > "'''"'2 ~ 1!! 1:':;; c:sB~ ~ '" ] - 'S - .. .. " ill .. :; " -= - .. .~ :: :; " " :: ~ .. " 0- .. .. ";j ~ ~ .. '" "2 "0 ~ ::: .. " .. - U -= ;; t: .. .- " :t .. .!! '" " ... .. .. " t: ~ =tn .. .. .. ..: c::l 2 v I ".= .- O"E:C ,.. ~ ~ ~ g IX ti >. ~_ Vl ~~5:;; _ _ 0 :J"" :::lVi,,:::O .g :: -5 '0 ~ ~ ~ ~ o~~ 'J: III ::l c.. .~ ..0 .. .!!- l!! ~= ='Q. <:0 >, ~ ;<l ,g u S(;n -- .. - .EO t: .. .- '" .. c.. .. ... .. " ;;; .q-S ~ ::i -;: .~ c:i E ::l ..c i: ::r ~ - ~ t5~fr ~~~O ~] u.gg <C;B:::: VlU;~~ .::! .5 0:; '" ,g ~ ~ ~ co:: _ lo.o t :: u.. I:': c.. = .... .c 01:1_"'0 :: 11'1 c 0 = CIJ =.- _ ~ E - '; III U; (; ~ ... CJ U'J C1J~&g~ ~ Vol 0.: ';; 0l)"'O C "'" ... c CJ 0 U U 'i: .;; !',J CI} c: 0 ._ >. .- ~..":c..,, := 6g-;~ ~Er.:g.:c c.::l g u .- :0 0'''2 ~ ~.'. ~ ~ =' t; ::i~ 3.;j ;;- iii U - .. c. ';; " .- 00 .g :: -5 '0 ~ .9 ~ ~ 1.0 ~ 3 ,_",g ~ '5 .:.a .0 .. ~ I~ ;<l .9 E. <:0 ~ .~ ;; .!! .. (": .~ .:is ~ ~ u ,,- .., :.s e cc o~c; 8&.2 .. ~:-." '" EO;; >. '':: 'E :;t ~.,g.g.5 0- u '=' 5E~..: ~ ~ ~ "'0 Vl '- III U ~eo:"'O "'E .';; -5i .- "E e """ if!.::: c.. '" " .. C; ~ .- ff.o III . 'E \000 ..,...!:j: -E ~ "3 ~ C; .~ .~ 00'- ~ uco.~c;... t~ .:2 e - -E 0 .... - 0.. C':S v; cSc.._o>. CIJ "3 C':S ~ Vj III E 2 lQ E ~ c ~8vi-g~e.~ f:-o CIJ oS::! Cl:I,~ ~= .. ':-_"':_: g;1 r:J U IU IU.-._ C ~ - .., E E '" ~ cu ~ 1-0 E >. ~ ..::. &= 0. ~~.9t;~.~~ .. c ~~ ~; " .; .~ a g i.: ... '" "'- "" ..: i= ~i 8- 8~~2 <Ow CQ:i :; l; .= ~ 0'"'2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ,. 0:: 5 ~_ . r./'j-:= ~:~ __5_> _ (:; 0 u ._ :::l.r.W:::lO .~ :: -5 "5 2!. ~ ~ ~ ._8 ; ~ a '5 c:.~ ~ .. a vi " ~ .S: =0. <:0 ~ ~ "; - ~~.~ I -.g=_ .C :; ..!S _ t: !l .0 .~ g ~ ~5E".g :a c;;~ ~.12 -5i E r; ~;;; .c ell IU C _ - Ul - ~ cu 0 ..:: .o__~ "OEo"C;Eo u ~ ~-55 ~ Q.. .:: ;>., 9 "0 '1:) >. ::l VJ C':J C U :; 8"="'5 cu r:J 5 - 's. ell VJ ~.i: ::: (,fJ u...S::! r:J Q.. u _~ >!__~c 0 VJ.2 ~~-5 .S::! ..s: r:J 0 -5 .c _ 00 ~ .- '0 tJ .~ = 0 ~ ~"Ou.=-5c ~ ;:! t 00.52 C 8. c; ~ .: ~ IU 0"0 00 VJ 1-0 VJ Ei-E ~& c ~ Q.. u.!:! U 0 .2 uutJ~o,-uQ. ~-E'''Bs..ot,,)o i- ~.5 ~ '- u.E i- 0'2"':10.0::000 ~ CI",I 5l g. Col r:J VJ ~ E 00;::0 ~'o~ E.;;;; cu (l (.) ....:.uu'-cuu~oo' .-="':Iou.o""" I I , g ]~~ cVi:; u ~.~ CQ = .... ~ v: ~uo 1: '" ~ .sg .. ~ ~ I " :5 u 'C '- c.. 0 ~u eM .:: "0 ~ " -'" 0<: ~M ::ace ~N I Ii 13 " Vl .. <:..c M .. .. c:l E N II,) = E 0 .. u > .. e"'O-o .6_.~ 5 ,.. ~ ]~~ '" - .. .[ ~ ii ~ I , i I i ~ I 1 M .. ~ ~ ~"E .~ .9'c ::; ~ _.-_!3~!lc .5 .:::;.e!J I.. c.. ~ c.. VJ 2t~5~.g ~ <~ r: u ~ _ U .g ~~ Vl-:::~ ~ ~ "'; u '0 g ~ .. .- ..,:;; u ';( .c '" - .:, .9 s.. ~ " .. 0- .- '" .. - " o 5"'= t; ~ os.. Co " S "" '" .. " :;; ~ ..~ Wi ",' .-, "'" =1 '" ~, ~ <1:' .. = c j-= - .. 5"'5. c :: 0:- = "W ~ :::: ~ ... < - - Co :J .. :3 -... i!!t: &.~ '" .. =: ::; <I: :=: .. c =-= ..'i c " -=c c- .. .. ... .. ~ '" .. o E: '" .. ~ 1l:: ? - '.' i '" .!! J:/.-= co ~ ~ ~='&. ...... =-=- = < 8 :::: z <I: '" .. z :=: - E ~ - ::; z - .. < E ::; . .. - =-= ...- = !l .cc ~1: ::;1~ .. 'i Q .Ill ~ = - ~ 0 '.~==.., X:5cr. '-'~:J ~g...JC: Cl::: ti ;;..., I vi CQ :: ...: 'ir. _~5ti:E OU')U~C1 :: .s - ~ .9 e ~ = b ~ ~ 'C ~ c...~ .:5 ...; .2 - 0' ~ .. ~ .. V) ~ if i co"":;:)'~ .0_ .~ =._. e -.~;:_ ;; i) ~ "':I ._ to) :v - = E'- == =: Ol) .E ~ Q. 'Oil - .;;; ='f:.)c.=fr~ en c.. \'C ILl .... "'0 .. o .. .. = ~ :E c -= - 1- - ~ -E ] oS 'g. ~o~ .!::: c.t)~ ~ " C 'Cr~ - '2 ~~~~o =z I..:e = oo~ ~ r.i ';::a :....~_ E~~~ c.l eo; ~ ,~ :- E- .. ~ _._ .... _ u -cEuer.; ~ ~ 0 ~ o ILl 0 ;;>> E o._~ ~ ~ oS .~ .~ ~ E-..c :.::c ~ go ~ ~ .~ ~ -5 ~':::.2 ~cc"B:~ \'C U E g c ~ 0";"'0 t: :>-~c . ;> ~ 0 0\ e:::: .... .2 u t: .. "- = .. Co '" ~ '" .. ... .. .. " t: " .. '" co .: .. ~rj 8~l:! :: ..::: """" .. .. ~ u Vl ~ 0 -c O::i ~ Vl u -5 E ~ ~ "- c "E..-;; 0 .. ii " c.. .. ~ u ~ ~ .~-= = 2 0 " 0.- - " .. >. ~ g ]c:~ ~:gg .... .:: .... ~ u ~_5;! :;;:"" ... ;> a c 0 c.. .9 a::s c; c."'O .~ = u l:.,g ~ .- - ~ 0:> 0 u .= 0'"2 ~ ~ 0:: 5 <Ii'" - - o~ , ~ u ti ~o V) ~ ~.; c ~ " ;;; 85 ~ :: -E '0 ~ oS: ~ ~ o~~ 'i: Vl ::l Q.. .~ ..0 .., 0' ~ .. ~ .. V) ~ ~ vi 2,ll "'0 .~ 5 .- ~ .- .... .~ ""::I B ~ ~ ..c-:,::.=oQO =' t E~fr~ ~ 0.. I:':l 1IJ I... "':I .. o __Si ~ t.~ 3; -ga.5"'5.:x_ ~B '0'.:: >.':: '0 ;:; g ~ ILl _ ~""E"S-o=E"":;:)~ c.. 15 U t.l - ~ ;t ::l '5 ;:!OVl ~';;;su.-_>!_"" - ~>. CJ~v; u ~~~:;~-5-::~ ~ ... iii ;; :; co:; _ ~ ~ .~ ... 2 0' i' ~ 9 !! Vi ... :Il ! E ~ g ~ 0 .! .~ -5 ~ 'u~I"I:I"I:>~-i:O .~E tf Q."O~;;>- Q.."O _"0 C,) _co~ ~E=~&B'5 .11) .::: C; - 0 8..:: ~ 0' E u ~ .~ .2 .2 B e 5 ~ ~ ~'u ~ ~ ~.~ ~ c.. en 9 .~ f-.:!"O"C:::~';~IIi"CC:; ... C 0 cu 'i: "0 - .~ .5:! ,,_ .... 0 CU_=::::I 0'- U :a ~ < '-' 'ii 0 '2 1"1: ~ c .- e C':,I ..c i,,) C '(j .= (j ~ C':,I e c -.: 0 .2 ~ ~ ~ fi [; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8. = ~ "0 .~ ~ 0" E = ~ o ~ '; ; g S"O c; ~"O_ o~;e~~~;~Ea , I , E .; ~ i. IO'Euo I' ~ " ,,-0 c=:: E v; V'J I <> >. U I ~~ ~.~ 3.;503 ~ :: .s '0 ~ 9 ~ ~ a~ ~ '; .~ .0 ~ I~ ! ! ~, IE 1'2 I ~ IV) I I'~ . 00:> ,': U I ~ 0 ~~ .:~ 'I~ " , " "" a ti i3: .s = '5- t; >. "2 >-..2 :s.. c:;.,::=.c~~ :it ~ r~ ~ IX-::: :!:! =' '-' ... r:: ~ >.3 ~ ~ ~=::::O<3" :~~~~~]E =....r.IlcnxE 'u -= = cu ;;;; 1"1: >,CU .-cE"- L:.. ";,;; :> v::; ... .: .: ;;>O\C':>.=: c.=uo\o__ 01"1: -CCEg EV'J-->,IU_ c:;c;.5.:~ g.~ ~ -s; "0 ~ ~ ~ ::: r-E~CQO.g.c ~ 1lJ'r; ti ... ~ a:l ;; ::::Ie> I:.) ... u ~EoC2C;oo ~~~S~g~ C':,I ~ .~ <: ~ u " ~UUt'l:OoCJ .:: .~ c 'Ci:l3: -s ='o"8~~~E I i ~ ~I " - a,5 v; :r. ~.'g = ~ ::: v; 03 '" - ~ O"E ~ - .:x t; "~ :;t'J- [3.;5 I I ... "; " -5 - g I" ;E .= E ~ " 0. " ell " " c::"O =:= ~ " .:!: .c ...; E o ~ " ~ ... V) ... ~ ~ .2 u . ~~ .55 ~ .. ,- 1<'5 ~ <> ;;; " ~ ~ "E :a e -= ~ g, ~ ~ c.,.. ;!! ;!:!"O::_ ~ ;:a O.S: "OE";:: foil U u ~ .S:! u e 0 2 t: ... ,- ';;; ra c ~ c fr.9 (J.,8oa E 0 ra E 1<"..0"2 ra ~"U a~..E~ .::: ~ : c;j t ~~~; '; "t:) .~ ~ :t: o!: u C':I * U ~ ra = I: CIl ... " ... ~ E 1: " _: ';ij 8 'E :.::: ~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :::: ~ <: I E: ;;l , . ... "" <: I =: .. - '" - it I - z ... ;- u =: I .l: ~ -= ~ .. =: ::; - Co <:: z I <: .. - Z ;: - I E z - - ... "" I z - - :..: .. J E ... "" I I I I I ... " '" " .. - .s .S ... - ti '" =. '" c S .:!l 'C '" " u -! .. -= ... " ::; "i € '" " ~:o. =: - '=.2 00.. " '" = E=~ " :: :=~5 ~ ~ = ::C'8. ~:t :: <: 8 - '"a 5 .,,; '" e ""= 'G:1: ~~ ;:; :::l ~ ;:; .;: v; o " .. = 5 ~ " .s i ~ ;! >.'= =~~ :C-=c .!:: ~.2 'ii~c; a... ;a ~ c ii ti ~_ E " .:; iU~"':l ~ U '0 ..: E :> ....... ~ t:: - ':; ~ ~ go'= :::r ... ._ ~ ~ ~ c;c. ;l 8. E ~ " r/') u E ~ ~ - e >. [i ;: g :: c..~ti C t cc ,,_uE~ " ~ :;"':l ~ u c C': .: cu ~ ~ 00 " ~ ~ .,.. Ol '" ~ ~.2 ~ Cl) ti - ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ :; ::1- ..... - '':: 0 -5 'E ~ _._,,=" c; ~ = " .9 ~ ~ " ~";j "'E < '" '" CI'l 'u -" " ~ " 'i: lI'I -5 ~ ";j~ "." .c " " .c " " "0:'= 5 ;l ;:; " E " ." "'.:; ';it; ~ " -= ~" ~ 2 t: :; ~= .... ~ .a ~ 'C.1; 10 .~ .. 0 " .... ..- ~ ~ t:~ .~ ~ - - .... ... -"ju ~ ." .:1: :::: " 'r::; l'"") " = '- .S "c. ;0 ti .. " .. ... ;l ~ .. "CIl ..:." e e - .. ~ ~ .... ~~.~ 'i: ~ -0 ~ ~ .E.5 5.[0 ::I ~ fr ~ cnUa..."O < '" :J[i,-~ fr3 g ~<~~ u ._t:'=~_ .,g E.. g ~ ;'";3.0 _ c'"g"'a ;.."O~ 0 Co) ~ g c !:! ~ 9 "'0 .~ E.. r; .Q g >. ]' =__g~~~CI'l~ g .Q~~9~.Q~ ~ _.Q::IEo~a...uccu~'"O~~_ .... ~ -::;I 1::: 1:.)= ~ o' C':l 0Cl.S! >. "'0 c.J C ;.. u o - u.- C a... ~e' -e C C c.J C':l C CI'l :::: - u - :: z 0.- u ::s ;: ~ c E...c" .~ "":Ie " _t: u ~ c .- C':l - 0 r/') C':l 0 C. U::l>'CI'l~o&~~~~Ucr/')~C':l~ "':l~'iig=~E~gEg~.~:~g~ - C':l : c cEo a... ~, IU 0 c.uo~u,-uc-5'E'~'i-5a...~~~ ~~i~5~]g~]Sg]~~]~~ .5 'C:; '0 ~ = 10.. 0 ca ~ E r- u C,I cu ~c~~';~ec~~E~1o.._2e~ - - e"::1o..1o..o~c~1o.. ~07iiE'" ;: ~ ._ 'E _ >oJ c.. _ 0() C ..s=:g .c = Q) "iii'Uj :t u .I c ~ V'} ~ ~ -5 c "0 '0 :: 0 .;: .9 , 0.. ~ U 5::100. CU(,.l~_ ~~~e~~~.~'~~~uc~~~~ .~ 0 ~ c.. Q, E - ~ ~ Q) ~ .5'- ; 0- 10..= -e ~~~_c 1o..a:stie=-Q)CJtip::~'" c..c:i"cu 0. - C ~ 'cu 8. o...c ::l ::: E Q) &Je 0 0 E ~ u~=~.... ~~"O-ClJti C':I .c ::I cu _ -::s ..: ClJ 0.. 25 ;- > ::I .9 cu >. 0: >. ~ E e ~ e ~.: E u 0 ~ E ';: c = c ~BC':I:t""'S~O"O~~EQ)~=C= -~.5~~~~~~~._8~'6888~ ~ ~ " '" >. " " -5 15 e ." '" .;: " Co '" ~"i & ","" ,- . 0]6 U' ", :;1 "'. ". =i ::. ...:: - " - = ! ~li 5 is. I:: = .. " l:lu .. '"' E :..: ? S .. ::; .. ... :g - 8,; ",=- .. == .. "" ...: == .. - '"' w ~ - = ".5i ..<; = " -::1:: =- .. .. ... .. .. o. W ~ =: '"' !:: ',' ;: '" ~ - ~-5 = a: = ~=,8, ...... =-=- = -< 8 :: z -< " ~ =: " ; z " w ::E z " w ;: :..: o. E .. "" . 'e 3 -g~ -=1:: - .. .. .. ,;~ .. 1i Q .!!l ~ -= .. .. '" = ! ,; = .5i - = -! :i ~ ~ " >> ~ - - .. ...,,::: :: V5 'Vi ~"":) ';;: 5onu~3 '" u .= 0'2 :;: - ~ t V'J'; ~ ~ .5 '0 1:L .s e.~ .~ ~:s: :i: .~ ..c " " ~ .~ CO = <Oii ~>.g ::.- ,.Q :.::: C....; <tl:= ::. S ~ :10._ ... c: - ::J .E~ ~:: :'I ':; ;!:; ::; v:l ..c .= Vi .!! (ij ;; "" E .~ .~ :: ';! '" a .S::! "" ..::! '0 :; .~ ;;;- .5 :.: .. '" ,.Q ';; ~ :; ~ ~"" '" 0 c..-S: " ="E ~ a '" " ~ ;:; Cl 3 .!! .... ~ ~ - ... " ."" f. .. .. " s: '" " .. C ... E " o U = .: 1i '; ... '" ~ s ... o =- i!! ;; ... !- " !:::. :::: ':i "I '". 51 "'" =' =, ..:1 .~ ~ '" .S:!i =1 ~I .s;~ C,J, ._ ::Si en ... ~:ti :;: ~ ~I'~ ., .. .. . -.- .:= ;r. -; -';; c~c3 ~ d5~~~ = .... '- ~ 0 ~ onu:;:':: " ;.! ~ g ~ '" .:!: .. .:: ,S""=' " .9 ~ :t: 0 ~ .~ ~ ,.., ~ i:O", ~ ell u'-.~ ~:~ .~ ~ := -= ~ :;:u::c:;c: .2 ;; '- .:= ~ " ~ C Vi ~ .=: ] ~ ~ ~ ..... to- c.. " '" " ~ ~ c .,; ';: ::J ~.= ":J ':;; ~u - " 00", 'Cij 0 CJ ';:: "" '" .3 2 ;;; :;5Qj -S;~;;.r,; u 0 ~"O '5c-.,g e llJ '5 (J e- c <tl :; " ftI U c; '=:"'.=: -< e : "';Sg - '" ~ :!l ,9 o ~ '" .~ .;;;- '" "il 0:; , '" '" ~s " .~ E~ '" " ;.! 0:; "" .;;; " ~ I I I .:= ~.~ ~",-: ~ fr ';; Q..o=: ~ E' ~ ,::! ::; = ~ Uo:;;: ~ u; ~ " ~ ~ <Il ~ .~ ~ - ;:: ~ '" ov 'C 0..0 " ~ :5: <;'l ~ .~ ~ E. uO = <:V5 ~ .S: ::J :E .~ .~ ~ ~ g ,... ~::J ::; ::J :..0 uo:< E '" '" ~ '~I' rJJ ... ." .~ ~I ~I ]1 VI "" .. ~.s .;;; .. "" '" ~ " '" c~ ~-; ~ :: 9 """ 2 ::J -g S- E ~ = ~ en .- 7' 'ii E E r; ~ '0':: ~ '" ;:! Q. ('":j E=~.g " - ~ ~.~ - ~ '" :>, " ~ :; '" u o :::- ~ "" " o ~ -::= ~ -5 S'.. ;>, i: - ;>, 2;g_"~"'::lg.c =.. "'-:; "" Co<': 0 v: ~ "E c .9 ~ t :J _ e.J 'Ei ..c:::r. .e. ~ .2 .~ ~ ~ .~' .::! 2 ~ v: ~ .z ::; - ... 0 ti ~"'::l U '" ._c -s .~ u "'5 ...2 -= o=~_ ,.. ::.J =: 100 U 3;: U U v: ~ c. E v: .~ ';j :J ;>, U U :J ~ "O-==-5"E..~iSl "'_~ b .:: ~ E ~-::= - ~ 0 ~.- 5~~~~E~ ~ ~ :J U % ::; ;:-: ~ .:-__0___ -. ~, .;::- ." o ~ -_-.- .~o = u" _~ p . -,.. .. - 0:;.;" :: ';;j VJ 0 ;>, ~'c (":l _ 'j;( -< ;>,~ 100 - N CI.l ,J:);:.. 0._ t'O ;.: _>. "0 "=.E ~s:: = u..:::! ... -= 'u - = u u.: VJ =- r::s ~ r::s Ioo..c ::s ;--2%jo-:.a=r--: U 00.= ~ '0 a u - E .~ '" E " '" '" U '::: r:: ... c...=: E ~ ~ " :!l 0:; : "- .:::! - ~~81 ~ ~v.1 :: ~I 0: 0 J;u:;: "'~ g 0 " '" iSl ~ ;;.:, .~ ~ g E ;:: ~ :; u B ~oO " " " c: ~ ~ .S: ~ a vO - '" <J3 ~ '" .S: Co) -:0 ~ 'Vi VJ C .~ ~ 8. g o ~ ~ 80:< = ;:; Ei " > o '" =- Ei - '.. ~ '" u; ~ ~-' ~ g " 0:; " " '5 2 :-go. c.S o '" "'c .... <; '" .=::: '" ~ Cj 'Vi =e:: 2.0 o ~ :s..r!: tic .. '" .~ E ~ " c.. .:: .. " -=g' I- ~ I I I I I I I I I "I I I I I I I I I I ... co = =.s ~1S e=- a:: 5 .- co tu > .. :E -;>-, ~t: 8o= ~=- " ... 5 co ._ ..;; = ... .. a:: = .- .= 1.0 ... .. > .. :l - = i... .. ... .. = =0'& IU: 5 <: 8 ... = co.s ]e _5 .. .. :E~ .. ;; Q '" ~ " - - '.. .;; Ci ... :- " !- '" '-' " <: Co " '-' '-' o ~ ... 'u " .. OIl <: e = 5 :E = .s - .. ~ :i ~ " .. ." ....~ g ~ ~~=E5 ;.I - ~ 2) ~ I E ~ ; ~ ~.~ ~U5~~ '" .. - _ ~ 0 "; ... III ~..c = Col 0 en = 2 a -; .. 0,01 CoI - _ " !:: E ;;, " t III :::I 'Vi "":l ... c.... (,,) .2 <=~>=~ i;~]~ ~:;]og = ....:: ("l ; = ..8 ' ... oS Vi U ~ ~ : [j :='~ ==-a~~ J3Z-6<o . ~ @)~ ';;;; ~ ... .. EJ: .s ::> . M ti==: ~ VJ :.s'~ <:-= -_!!:! ~ a .. " " .. ;> <: o c '6 ~ '" E .. :c .. OIl '" -= :t '" '" " .. ~ u. o M ct: '" _.l! --' 'E ~ g.~ E \; ~ ~ " c .. " Co iij~~ CI:I :; r:f " co ii r.Il CI:: .. ~ ." " '" <=J 0;: ~ ;; .- -= ;> .. .. <: ~ OIl ~ i a ~ ~ "l:i -= g ." 2 0; .. :; '5 <: ;> ~ E - g ~ " ;; '-'- 0 ~ E ~ '^ ";' -= .. '" .. :x: i5 .. .. :c .. ",en ... !- .. c -;: .. .. ~ '" .. ~ ~ .;; en -€ - '" c :f c -= .. ~ .. " is ." .. ~ ~ a .;; " :; -' l! .. "l:i 0 ." ;; ~ 1 ~ ~ '" .. 0. E ;> ;;, CiS .s <( 'v; E " ~ ." 0 U " C .. " .. ;> E .:: " a ;> '" ~ g ~ .. .r> E 0. ;> '" 0. ] = .. -g <( < .5 = ~ = .. " - ~ ciS "8..8 05 2 ~ co " 6 "iii .. " 1J <=J = ~ .. = ] :9 '" " ..l -;;; . . I ! , : I g .::! C '5 ~ 'v; ~ 'S..';; ~ :; ;; .. Ci ;: "- Q .. ;>-, '" '-' l:Q 5: ... <.: ~ ~ a is 0 '" ::: ~ en U !- .. ~ ~ 0 a .. " a ;., '" .~ '-' ~ .s ~ a ;: Co ~ " " 0 u '-' .;: ~ '-' "- 0 0 " N " i:i: .; " ~ .S! " ~ E. U 0 < .g '" -= .~ .~ :E E 'u) <.tl .: c ,S:! "E ~ g g r; g. u:x:<: ~ '5 .. = .. ;> co ... 0. = :; co :l! 'S l:Q t: .. '0' t :Jl ;:) .5 = ~ ~ :5 Co_ ,,- ::..2 - " '-' ..:: .. - .= ~ e ,0 0.- IV :: -= ~ - ;; '-' ... " .- .= " E <:T Co ~ .s <- o .. p~ -;;; .g ~ -;E .. . "'E. ~CI:I E .. o = .!:! U.r>~ .s '€ ] sa!! I.. 'Vi o-;~ ~~o .... on -= " " ;; ;> E .~ u . ~ C': g.,g "'S! 2 d c.. :; Co- co >. c...b E .0__ = = = ::l .; s"2 0 .. ~ :i /001 = ::: :E ... 9: .... - .... :.Ll - '" ... .8 ,:! ';: c. 0 '- .-' - "":I = t .E"'2 I: ";; l'f"l - eLl - ::I C =' :: 't: E .! So CI:It':~~].3 "0 5 "'0 t:: 12 OJ) =-0.2 g 5~ ~ -:::J U ea C =<'-"O-E~ ~~~~~--~ <50-4; ri c=Q!C':l-uc C =: Q.) ~ (Il 2.!l! ~ -= ~ 'Vi g."iii E =;~~"5c.3 ~~s~~i~ =.;-g'~2C; ~~.9~"itt-6 . U' .~I "0, =1 ~ =. Q fol .... < :;: S .. :;;; -;0., ;gt: 8." :c=- == .. = .,.s ..0; = " -c E- - .. ... .. ;> ::; < == ~ o == =- " ~ ~ o =- fol =: Q Z < " z i g Z o ::; z o 1= < ~ 1= i .. :l ~-= II al l! ~0'8. ... Jo _ =-=- a .. 1i Q .$ .! - ;; - .. .. .. a ::; j - II ,gp - :i !i'= ~ $I ILl :!! ~ iij ~ >.~~ e-;"o ~ O:.J:: ::::l -;:::: I'( 6 $i-gf36"~ ~12~E~g .. _....c.c :::l :.o..s= - -0 C':I j".S:! E = G.I eJ'::;: f"l"J=,!"':j..:!'E2 ~ ~ "0 ':; C':I 8 C: ;~i~i.s~ =Q,lr.luot-:::l ~~]=jO~ :G.le5>.o"5 5 ~ :::l ;> -= ';: ';; ...c.-<CVc <e::o ~.:t .,...!!=E'C .5a:"O~~"':j 'E~CCl:l=c . == :::l E ILl 5 ==ji..::-", tji~C::...:; =..cuas5 ct:'C;VJl;(,I) CIS =' :::l C _ ILl c;I) Z "'0 0 CI:l -= . " $I "'" ~~CI:l-ES-E E ~ ~ ~ ~ .= ~ s_"~ :::l = .;;.~ :.0 ~ ~ :: e 'C;; ~ - E ~ .9 t: ,- CI:l ... C.S ~ CI:l --= _ __ ;.coc~.5~g r-~.EP8~f..I 6~~~t=o Co) .J:: rd' (II ~ :; - - oJ '" 05o~c..~1: "",~::aE-a..,g iU _ O:::l - ~ :E~E= ot- ::10 ,-;.. co. Qb "j' Coc ODg'-="B E ~ .S CI:l ~ ..!t Y e ~ a = c:: "'0 lU >. 01) '= CI:l ::::l c: c: ~ ~ ~ .~ .8 is 6 ILl '5.~ -= ~ ~ ~gg-:ggiE u.. In ... CI:l CI'l ILl ._ ";2 ;>, a .. " ~ ;! .. ~ ~ :> <0 M go:: ~VJ .. " E .:; Il.lt=;-e; t:O ~.:: ~ ~ ~ 16 "':I ~ c; 5 5 @,O~ 'u;.s;: _ (,,1'="'0 E 6 1! g~Cl:: "c: "7 ~ .. =: .. g VJ C .~ ILl E "i-:5u. ";2 i5 o t: :..!.. f"") V) ]~~ -e ~ ';; ~ _ 0 - ~ 1: ;::: - o ~ s ~~1i ~ VJ e ~ ~.~ = -'" .. .. ,,-'" <<~ gE~ ::; :t '"0 .. - ~ = ~ ~ 0 .. >. ~ 8 ~ ~ ,,- "'Ocu ; C':I E ~ c;I) e t.L. t:: . c: .. " " C. "0 0;: 0;; Vi e ~ c. 121 - .. "oC ~ <.> - .. '" 2 ~S: = .. E"E o = 0 "0 O_;j ="'" 1:1I € E ~ ~ ~ ~-=Qo < ';: i5 " .! c.o :> g ,:: "~ .. -'< - = is <.> ..J Q. ~ . E "0.3 =0:: 5.!! :"'2 ~ ;; .. 0 "'-:3 o ~ .. 6~ l:""g ~ ~ t;j"'2 ;; "5..84) ~~l:: -=~~ ="0 .. ~";;: ~ " 0 = ~ ~ 0 t;jl~ .. ~ ;j : c._ .. E ;>, ... ..- 0=:5 . 1 " .. ... iii .. 'S ... ~ .. U "0 = .. .. = = .. :> < co = :;; ... .. = .. ell = " '" . I i I I I I I I I I -I I I I I I I I I I ----- I I I I I I :::: !: :..: I ? S :;; . . .~ Q .~ " - " ''is. , '" t:: S JIl i .. :> tu -! > 'S - .. I :;; .. ... i1!t: 8.:1: :!l =: ... c ...!l ..1ii c u -::C c- .. .. .. .. > .. :J :=-= " ~ ~ :lS"S'8. ""... ""ll. ! .!l ...", .it!! ~1: ::E~ .. .. " ! ::E ! J ~ "il " ;; i; > < ~ g r...:.e <8 a ~E .9~ 5 a ~ '" ~c o ~2:! -a '" c ..c OIl ~ .;;;; ~~~ coo c c7i 002.5::1 'S U :@EI.;;.o_" ;: ~ o c -a u 8 v ~ ~ ~~~ '$ ~ ~ ~ ~-; J ,,== -~ ~;:: :: s_ ~ t 'S: ;;. 0 2 < -= c.. .! 5 "':j g ~ a ~~!i ~ ..J...:~~ "C ~ 0 -= = ~ 5 C'lI.;;;; S ~ .. u ~c:d)12 _ ~ a VJEci3 .. ;:: '" ~.!!! :2_ .. !! c ~o..~ u - 6:.: -= C'lI ~ t': C U _ U 0 . .. :f5 "5 ~ i:~ ... >- ...-,:: .. - ~ 'i' t ~ ~ ! ~:b 10i:: =: '" u -= "a :; o .0 ...;;; C " '" " .. os :> .. c... ~ os: < e .S! c.. c I 0'" .... " 0 ...l=: . oj " c ... > <( '" 'c g, " ...l u ... " " .g .~_ 00' ::: 'S: 0- ... ~ __2<r.;b~< ~ c_ ~ ::) .:: ~ ~ ! E ....J ;, 0;: -a OS u6c~::)u > ~=~~ g .2 ~ ~ ~ ~ "a .~_.5 0 ~ 2 :; 5 ~ ~ cu ~g:2';;;; ~ ~ a " ..c (5 O.r=. u 5.2 tn ~u.=~1;;C) ~Eg.u~j ';.!~~.~E 1=3 ~ o~ S u ~ g:~~~~ ]S 1=313 jj._~U~ClI] ClI ~ s_" =!!..c o:OS U - t::: !~~&gg .. .. .. Iii ... .. ~ ~ .. c C .. I- ... c .. .. " c .. > < .. .. ~ " ...l . .~ o"':t= ~ .. s o ~ .,; ~ 0;;; 02] .g ~ .~ 1:: VI ~] g'j ~~tiu =u~J5 o E'" !!l ~ " ~ .~ U '"i' x u ""00::: .u '=' "S: ~ r- "> 2s'o2 '" OIl"" ...: 0.:: S ~ :~ fi c .=P:g "'0 .2 Vl t': .~ 1;; u C " E .- ~ ~ ~ ~ '5 ~ :: .2 C"'.= ClI U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0.."6 "~ ~ s ~ c I , .. .. .. Iii ~ '" .. .. I- ... c .. .. " c .. > < .. ';: o .. " ...l . '" ... c c 5 CoI ';j ~ ~ .5 C 1: - Vl.2 0 ~ ~.~ ~ I, - 'ii -= 'ii c c Qi~1=3o _~ ::.r=. u u a ell ~ E- .. '" " " ~ u - a = :2 r::: I 100 ;;. U - Oo-~ "C 0:: g .t: ;; iii .g ~ ~ .9 :a .~ ~u~] .... 'E c cu < ~.;;; a .. .. c 'i: ~.S!.g = .- v"S: ~~ ~ 0 ...J ~:.a d: . :: ~ :.: ~ E: => - "" <: :=: :;:I 0 Ii' - :;:I z 1= ul :=: ,,' 0 .-1 C. "" '" =i :=: "" "" ~ ~ - z <: :;:I z :2 0 ;- Z ~ - :!: z :;: ;- <: E :!: ... '" = = '" '" .- ~~ 5-a c :: .- '" tu ;> "' :E -... ~t: 8.:f: ~ :=: ... = ",oS ..;; = '" -= E- - .. ;- " ;> ~ ~ ,.Cl - ii .. i: = ~1S'8. is:=':: E 0( 8 - ... - "'oS "8-e -== 'ti .~ :E~ " - .. Q .r!l .. ;: ;; - " :'E r~'t;; ;> 'W d) 2 '1: ~ Q.~:::' C 0 :Q ~:: ~ .5 C;; .,g ~ ~ - ~ ::::I -= ~ -a c..::: .. - .~ = S~:O B .~"fi 5 ~ ~! co II!: ,_ 10. d) = c:: l5: :Q .i: e CI:-= - - Q. eo U -; E __01 .s ... .>' t2 ~ ~ .- ::t.l ~ - -g.!: E> ::;: :Q ~ ..c'" ..cQ.E3~ " .8 E 2 = - 2 ~e:'Ec:: ~ .!! g .!:! , ~~ ~.-~ _ ,. _t::i 0" ] = ~ S! - :;J ..,,_t::i E 0 ~ 0..... ::::I ~ ~ :E ~ ~.! .0 .... 1:: "E = 'ii CQ 0 0 9- ~~'O~~~ ~ ~-::J '- 'i '0 ~ a ~ ~ ~ 'i:-::J ;"- .~.~ ~ g ~tj~-9 -=E~e3 =euc.o ell ... -= VI U = d) ~ ~ .;f1 1: ~-;,;;s~a~o -~r:::-- c r.I'J - ci5 ~ .; i ~ .~ ! ~ -* .c c: ...._0_ - c. 0 9 E E:E .:: ell =: ~ ~ U == a w 'C . .g 'v; '5 6 >:::1"':: " " ~ 1'! .s ~ &.5 ~ " >>-= "'... E 0 "fo~ o - o 0 ~ 0 ..co&> - - ot:: ~ 0 _ c , - :2 ;; 0 012 - :: 5...:.. ~ 6 ~ 0 '0"- ." .. .0__ ~ ~ __ Pu ~ ;-5 6~~ :t ~ 12 - ::h GI r;s 13 ~ ::::l ~ ~..52 =g LI. "i ::: -; _ =c;~.9-g ..:.s.-;c.::I -.. - ~ 0 ~ .~ .5 e.e ",E-oc:t:: =~aog Cl:l ;; c ~ 0 ~~:2~~;; Ci5CfJ~-~~ elI.5 . ~ 'S: en ';; I ~ ~ 0 .~ ""!,.c coQ: E ~ E c.. ~ r.n @ 'iicaEHE-; u~a~.au . .s " 0; ;;; Li.l I ;: " .. <ii ~ .. 0&> .. < '" c .. '" ~ ""2 Vi c i :; ~ .2 ~]--~:g .r( ~ to; :t .9 ~ .E ~ ~ -0 _ -= 5 5 o " :> U ~ < . " -0 o :5 ] ~-g 5 :l:l U 15 ::I)'': ::: ~ .9 ~ '" t; l! ~ .~ ~-= 0'" o '" ~ .. -=~ ~ ~. !. '" "S I:':l Cij ti e; C III ~ t: = !! in .~ ]..s ~ ~ < E ;a E =3~g ;==-< ~ " 0 Q.:; 5 .5 e " " E C'lI ~ a 0 :=: .8 - .!: ":I ..= >. :::J c 1:: - go = 0 C i- o c 9 - ~ (i E .- ';j ::s ::::l ~ ;.J '"C - - ~oi:5 ....~.~ 5 rn =: ~ > c ~d:-ge.g ~ 1 .8 .~ ~ =~,€Vl:S ..l. <ii ~ ~ ~ . , r I 1 I I I I I I I I =1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I - I I I I, I I Q !il ,.. < - - I c. :J ::; I~ < :.: '" '"' - .., ~ I " Z Ui ~ - I ". i!:: ~i ~ G:i; :.: '" Q '" " :::; - >. ~t: 8.'" ",c. " == ... .. ..oS ..- .. !l "= c .. .- .- .. Eo- " > " :l - .. i" " " " .. =='8. ......- c..=. = < 8 - '= .2 "8'; .c~ 1::-.: ::;~ " ;; - - .!!l ~ -= - !:: " ~ :;:: .. oS - '" .~ - :i ~~ ::: ;:a !!_ ~ e ~ 61:1< ; 5 ~~.Bc <: ~ ~ ~ ~..$u~ ; >.~~ Ill:: ~ S ~ 0 0 ' E E ... E ~=1=3:_7 "O.!.= = -= ::l "'Sh = ,:!J g 'j: o ... .- ""0 ..c ~ c.. :::: -; 0 .! 5 ~ ~~:@ ;;Jo. > 'j: ~ <= 0 ";;:. 0 :=.<-.." "-I " '" ~ 0 u t;.~E:"i!ii =~~~~ .:.V3~C:ci5 . ':.) ~ ;> ..,:=! :"i! g 0 ~"E !j~..,~ a~ '" 0 - "';:; Ic;'l.l~-c t:~-;l ii_ f:: ~ ';; ~ E Ci5"O~~~.z =aB-;;;;~ j i.~ ; ~ "2 .9 .!~~E<~-g <:;~BE:i:El~ 'i~'s:! 1"0:; s ~ .5 ~ at C u "E -g ~ 'i: ~ ai ~ =6 ~ ~ .9 a .- ';~u;~~g~ ~;;P~"''5.8= S ..c i u -i:a~g~g ;-o.coooc _ c: -= ::s ..c _ QJ 'i cc _ ~ ~ 59 ~ cz:~~':u-o-= . g OJ ~~ E.~~ ::: ':.) .= "<::I 1;; .:g'Vi 0 l::. 3 l ~'" "-0 " - ~ ;:; ~..: o - ~ .: ~"O .- ... ... .~ ~ S- .g g :.0 u ",,-" '" .9 ~'Vi' ':; c or... ~ = il .~ ~ f ~~ - .9 ~'S""O :l) 0 H" 'Vi "'0 .!:! :; ~ ..::: "E :: .: ;= ~ .g 'ii~ :="0 '" " ::l ~ ~ 6 ~r.n "i iii " = 0" .2 a 1Q '-~ -~ '6 ~ ~ .,; " o .g ~ 'Vi ~~ E -;; ~~ crJ .~ '" ... ="0 .E ':; " E :;;: Co CD.9 5<"0 ~ .~ ~g. := ~ ... a ~ u <L.i 0 ~ a t- o ~ B ....... 0 .~ 1< S:! ~"'g s 9..$.~ g ;!l '0 >. ~ -e .2 u=E~~ c 9 co:! 0 CJ o .... ... U I- _~s--=:.o ~i"'.5="3 ~~~"~ g = 'i: ~ 1!j.I:l 0"'00--= E3~c..6 =' 0 E = ~~~~~ 'i: 0 ciS ~.o- "'... " ~ Q.I Q.I =' ClJ ~ .:: 0 ~ s ~ ~ o - 0 :; ct~a.Sl - .. " ~ Vi .. .. ::! .. = = " !- "" " '" ... " = " ;> <" :; ]i.8 8 ~ . . : ",.QCD ! ]t~ 'ii E c.. 1lol.3Q:;"'O =C:~~ ~ ~ ci5 &. 1lol"'O 0 g. : 5 ~ ~ is] g g " ..::: = _'l' E-:;~ ':I 0 'E :: VI QO 0 = ~ 6 :: ':I t':1 "is 0 ; "0 QO ~ ;a. c = "_ Q,J =' ,- E =.8~:= ~'€ Q.~ III 0 ti - "':I C"E"iS ; ~ :J So :s 'S: -"r;j ~J:i-5 . Q :: ~ ~ ;:l - "" -<: =: .. ~ '"' ~ ~ .. ~ z ~I E;; 0 ~ '.' ili - =: ~ '"' - , ~t: &~ :tl =: - = ".s ..10 = ... -::1: =- .- .. ... .. ;;. .. ~ 3-= ell U ~ ... .. " =~=- g;1l: g ~ u"'O..o g~ "C !i _ ';; = - ; ~ g_ 2 .- ~ u ;;.. cij c.. 0 3 ~ 5 0 .- vi = ,;:: u - ~ = .5 "E"'6".2~ ==:.2 8 '';:: "i.i u ~ f#l _Y-d.l.s "':l "E - d) = .:: ;U.E~~""=' --.-.!:!u~ ~OS.5E5 :z:: ifc..;:;. 0.3..=0 -:1-1:-: ,..0 ==~~~'S =: ::::; - 0 Q:iayiP12Vl ~-5~-~~ c;,; ..0:; d) .~~;~j] .. ~:.5-5-= 0 ~ a .- 0 ~ ~ a ~ i~ ~ g . -;j, " ~ 0"'2 .. " ~ >- -:.S:! " " -o,a ':; ..... e~ c.. " " .E -." .." " " '" " ~ 0 V I... "@:I ::D ~ v 5 ~ .,g Co.::; :: ~ ~E~>.~ :..... ::::; iU - iU ~I~6-S ..; -;;, c.. ~ ,,- .c:: .~ ... 0 I:=....:.e "'S! ::::; 1:":1 "E tg.!s~ ... .<0__ ]: C) en ~ c e =: :; -g ..! (,J 5~5"'S!.s .! ~ ..c g d) =~ ~~.~" :;( ':; d) o !:! :; - "= .... _ 0.5 :: = c.. - VI "ii .= = 0 -5 .!! ;i'i:as'g ~ So c "s ~ .~" = 'in ~ !:! E QU=_o.,..,"_ t:Eul...>_ d!~8~~~ . :2 :; :5 .5 ""0 .~ ~.g.= :> ';;; !- - ;;>> 0 ~ ;:: -8d:;:::n 'S; ti 'Vi ct~<~ lcii g a] ~.~ ~ r- 6 -< S ~ e .a -; .2 :;.~ ~ cue:: = == ~ t; a cU..="E .. (,J 5 en E 0 "2 _2, .<0 ~ == - 0 E- ~ = . .~ " 0- .. ... ~ .; " ~ .:2 ti c:; > ~ e~ .~ ~ __;1 '-" -0 ~ ;Jo-..5 ~.~ .. .." ~ ~ Is iU "~ o ~ ~u~~ 1.1. ~ so "2 c...!.. 'en eIJ _ (,) 5"c;; 5 E ~ ~ g g =~tr> ~ c.. ~ ii Q 6 !! c ..:. ~ -;:: Q, "2 ca"~ ! .. -;; OIl .: - ~ c 0 t - .- "'C ~ l'~ ~ 'EE~~ o = 01) iU ... =: 'in ~ . , o >. .. ~ .. .. .. ... "'" = " " :!! ~ .. ~ Q ..:. "'" = .. ~ Vi "E ~ . I I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I ... C> = S .S! ;tl 5-s. c = .- C> tu > " :;;; .- .... ~t: 8.::f '" " " 'Cs! .... = .. '::c .51: "";: '" .!l - ~-ii .. II = :l5;;o8. i5::!:: = < 8 ~ 'C 5 -g'; .ell:! 1:: "i: ::E;: " ;; Q ..!!l -! 'E - f:: .. ~ ::E j - .. 3P - ~ '" Si, "0; OJ gj 'E. 6 ~ '" ~ ~ to O.~ "'g >.-= a = -; c ~ ~ ~ ~.5 ~ '- "'2 ~ ':> 8 g ;; U gj :S '" .,; ; ~ g ~ 'r;; .!:!l '" OJ '" ":'~E -=9-e = C> - C'= ~ '% li - ii ~ ~ ~ -:9:.0' '" '" " ....= ~ I'~ " Co_ .2: E ~ = .. ell ~ a::'Vi Co 2 .. :.: . ,; 10 "" Co C> 8: " ..l. - - - ,.., " ;0 ... OJ ... ... -= =~ ~ ~ :::0 ~ "0; '" ~ '"Q. ':> 6 ; ~ " " ::I ;;"3 .. '" < = ~1 " Co :;'2 ...... U:.: . ,.., .. ::""0 !i t ~ 2 ~%ci5 = ~ ... l..c ':J :.~Q" 'i: !U 0 QoI ':.) <n .1.""0 S:!: J:i .~ .E ~ o!: '" :!:: 1 g ~ ~ E ; E .3 - .. ' QoI:::C:~ 1:-=:; '" = = " ::I ::I ::S ~ .. '" '" ... .. OJ 0'" ;0 . :J) ':.I j; ~ "':I - ~ ';; ;:! ~ :': ~ :; 0 ~:t:~~~ -_ii_~ ~ ~ ~ 1:: .e:; < c 0 I " - ':> = ~-a..96.s =EO~sP 5=u~6 ..(=0';-;; =.!!~~ti B-g.!~~ "0 :I E ~ ~ \,.) ~.3 QJ ~ -=U'J~~C ;; ~ "fo a e t; "'C "i: !aD 0 "... C "'C .= C cO C ~ 0 c;j ""0 6 8.. ~ .9 ~5.eti~ti ;~~'~~E 05a~~.E . I '0 'ti :J) ~2-= cniZ:3 ~ 6 s: ~ $:! .s "=E_ ; >-.6 t;=-g ~ 9 ~ c;j ~ ]i ~ ~ a c~:.c '" - " "" ~ E ~ :; QJ ::I~':; r::lI'l~ ~ 'l) ~ ~ ?: 0 ... "'::2: OJ OJ '":1:'90 -= ~ ~ ci!<!:<ii . ':> eoC " => ~ '-a .8 .2 'x -= Q. OJ ::I ~ ~ s: ::: -""0 ~~a -gj,'g"S! ::1 ~ :; g ] - u - "0 a "E ~ _ C> - '" = .g-=gp ';; 9 :.c C> - " a.s.!! B ~ ~ ~ ti .!! 'S: .~ ~ "0 e ... - C Q.c. ~6.9E ::0.0 - :;::I ::: .c ~ "'i' E 'g eo c:= o c"c;j.!! i M ':> = ::I C> ~ t: C> Z .... .. ;0 ~ ... '" .... =' '" ':> = .. ... = ::l " '" .. == . Q ~ :..: ~ - c. ;;;l . . - ... <= Cl: .. ... 0 f c ~ .. 1.1 =: " 0 ~ c. ~ ;; Cl: ~ Q Z <= .. ... z ;: g z 0 ::0 z 0 1= <= .. :: - ::0 'S = = '" .2 i =-a ~ E .- '" trJ ... " :E - >, let: '" '" "'c. ~ Cl: ... = ",.s ..;; = ... -=c = 'C - " ...... ~ .Ill ~ - if 5 ai = =='8. "'.. E '" c. '" <= U ~ '5 5 !le .cc - .- .. .. ::o~ .. 1i Q '" ~ - ;; - " .. = ! ::0 = .s - co ~ :E ~ ~ ~ i? E ! ~ '" 'E S ,g 'gj .. [ij ... '" ';: '" ol: ~ E co Cl: >, '" s .. .. ... '"' = , - E ~ " >, '" >, '" s .. .. .. '"' " -;: = .. '" e oQi, " .. > Cl: e '" '" :: o s:::.~ ~.:=: :a ..c i.'~ ~~o6 ~~12.g - ~ ~ = 50:": Viu;;;:': ...~ S< 0 " " ~ c:; :>, .~ ~ 2! 0': c; : t Q., o u B "i: l- v "-00 " N == ~ '" ~ .2 ~ a CO ,;,! <v; s '" .9: Il,,) ~ ;e ..,; - v. :..l ~ 6 'u o ~ ~ o QJ o.D 1.1"'< 'E S o ~ 1;; " " '" ~ '" '" < = " E .. .. ;; == ~ OIl .; ~ ~ -..!! . '" '" < 1 " ;: ;; > < " '" = co ... " '" '" E= ~ " .. " = '" f~ >'" <= 5 = '" co~ S in t ~ ;; 10 ==~ . I .. = = .. > <= s .. ;; ~ ~ = '" ::0 '" S! -B " ='" = = .. = <~ '" ~ ~ = 5 ~ 8,10 .So :g ...< . .!. .. .. .. Iii .~ i: ~ '; 1.1 '" - .. u E ~ "'- >", < '" s 2: u~ ;;'5 = s ';u - '" = '" =", "'", ::0< . " '" 10 '" '" < I -.: u .. Iii u .. = co .. o '" - i;'u S [ij u - t12 '- S = 10 "'-= . " Cl: .. '" s . u .. '" '" c..!! =5"E < S 1 0 --= .. " u " .. .. ~ Il,,) .c 5 ;:;'" .- '" ~< - , - ... u '" u " ..- -", '" - " s r,g E c;; o ~ . " '" 10 ..; '" '" '" " <- I] - = .. 10 ..~ .. - - " '" 1l ~'" .- '" ~ 0 "", .:: -::I =< ;;;l '" '" - '" - " ..- "'''' .. = ~ is .c,c - " .~ u '" S . u '" 10 '" '" < '" '" '" .. ... >, u '" - -.: '" u .. '" ~~ >'", .'"= c ~ = '" 10 >-= 0= ~ ;;;l s . " '" 10 '" '" <] ~ 6 ~~ "'... >,u U S . I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I ... " '" = e; = '" Q "'- =~ co- " ... l: :: '" .- '" i:u :! ... - c - " :E .- .... ~ 1: 8-::e :c =: ... = Q .: ..- = e oa 5: .= 1.0 ... " ... " :E1J e " =~ ~t <( ... = '" '" ]'; ..c~ 1:: .C ~~ :l = " = 8- ~ u e '" ~ ~ = .2 i - ~ -0 -0 <( I " '" = " ;> <( ..c ill ..c co :: '" - -0 .. " co c: t~ :;-0 '" 5 =;~ -0 '" = " :6 :t " " =: g . ;! :; -0 -0 < ~ !i ;~ t-=' :; ;; '" '" ell"" .. ;;; .Eo ~ .. " " - " '" >-0 ",-0 -< " " , " g Q,l :0: ;>- <-0 .c " '" " .. 0 ""-= .. '" :d I I I~ o ~ 2:;::; 0::: <: " u t "'''' . " ;; ? ;. -0 -< o.(l::::: E'~ .~ g ~ :~ uS:: 0 ,,~ ~ ~ 2 :Il E .~ .~ ~ E i: ~ " cU 'i: '- 0.. 0 ...." g ~ ...c ~~ " - e~ o ~ .. ~ ~ .~ .='5. CO - " <~ ~ " ;. ~ '::; '" ~ 2: ~ ~ ~ 0 0 .... - ~ .. 2: ~ 'S .E Ol) " 0 :; 0 "" .... .:: ~ " '" ~ ~ u'- ~ ~ -::~r.:: i:u~ Cl 'w = ~ ::l -0 '-, ilJ ~ = t.f'l ';;,. ~ c.. Q.(l iU 0 _ ~ ;!) ~ !.2 2P I: :i in .= .a~c:..gE~=___~ ::- 'P' ~ ~ -= ~ __ - ..::: ;.:: "0 .c c..o ~~.6 ~'- c ~ !- ~ .~ .9 ~.s c ;::: .... ::l;; ~ ~-=EOl.oc.o!:B go ';:) E .:: ~ ~ !: ~ ~ .: ~ < 'C:; I.... U .~ ~,g~;;~6..-5e ~ a ~ ~ ~ -;) .- 'O'--Uo~i-; .... c; "3.= .- 1.0 .c .Q.~c:;=,""g.'5- _'" -ouC"o" 0.... = 000::"1.0 U CG.lcn..:;~...>, "e O~ iUO-:: co ,_ g " oS <:" e .... 0..9 >. U ~ >.;, ~e~.ocn~tJ.o;,; .... Q..t: "0 - Q.. = . iLl --ootil;t)~CJ'oo < ~ ~.!:: .c .- co ""=' iLl .~=::l;;c_E-; o2eff.-.s,gg.... NQ.........Oc......_iii or. ~ -0 " ~_cu u ~ c '5 .S! .g ~ ~ ~ --::I ,2 ff~u Sh"'5~~ '-;:;~o~, ~,,_ I- ;:;: -S 0 C 0 ~ 'r:; % t:: .::! >. -..... 1.o.=c..o~I-z:;8.t:..9i)~ i ~ :. ~ .:- c ~ ~ = ~o= ~ ~ ~ ~.::! ~ o C u =: ~ 0 u ;2: '0 ._ _ '- U Q.I t: c; i ~ ~ ~ ~ % ': ~ ~ ~::. ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~_c.-E~~c~;;oEooo~ - ~ .:! ::: ~ ~ -= ~ t'=._"O C 8.5 ~~ oe c.:::: E ~ 0 'S: ~ ~ ~_:3 .~ 0.-= t'= :=: >.~_~.:=.c~ ,-" _o.B;;:.- _ :::: c c; 00 en :::: _ t'= c..:::: u - t'= - o c; E ~ ~ c; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,g ~ E "E ~ 8 & ~ ~ t'= -5 "Q .&:i S CIJ .... "0 ~ ~ c ... .... 0 t' E 'S: ~ ~ g -= ~ ~ ~ :; ~ E ~< ~~-g:g.~~ u ~ ~"8:gn ~j .~ _ ~ 0. t'= ._ "'C e "..c - :3 ;;:. "0._ .... .. .9 ~ ~ 8 ~ - ....8 C':l '0' u U' e .... .2 ..0 Co 0 () -c a .. .... .... =:g u C. "0 0.';: EU....O _OClo.encEOCIJE"O o "'0 c e "0 e CIJ u) ~ 0 -.t:: U' ~ ~ -= 0 ~.g C':l ~ Co -=.S:! 0 00 5 c; '- ~ CIJ::::I t'=co:I.... 'o::'_:::::c..c_coc .- O~.c 1:: 00'H~ 0 c .'C ~:1l"O e ~r;.nCio.8..e"OO C1J:;::: C':l.- _ CIJ r: g-,g<~ III o.ar-~ 0 o-5i'E8 8.~ ~ s-u-CCIJQ.ClJClJo.u;.g -&,- u~~og~~~-=~~.c:u~o~ Q ~ :.: Q Q., => , , - c <: =: " ~ - ~ " z - - u :.: 0 .~ Q., '" ... c =: ~ Q ~ Z <: .. - z =: ~ E z ~ - :; z g :.: ::: ~ :; ... .. '" - ~ c S '" i :; co S. " 1:= .1!l .- '" l:u ~ ;> - 'c - ... = "'-= ..0; = " "= 5 .= ... ... .. ;> '" .. -.::: :s - ii " il = :i:!""S'8, c..._ c.=. = -< 8 - '"5 5 :; ... co '" " :1: ..;: :;~ 0I'l :,) ~-3 8 ~~~~ M 8. ~ ~ .: .~ ~ ~ ~ --- .... ... ":l ... - 10. ~ .=~r;-s:o~-~ ..::ol:....Cl"Ji;o-ec..-:; iia ~~..c 2 s-g E Co) ~ ~ ~ .= c.. '0 "s .." ~.g .; C ~ € 2 E _~ c..g~=.gig8 E_=.522'c;j~-5~ ~:::o~ ~:s~o::. ~ c,; , IU C S - > ;;0- Ec..-....oo.50~ coco=.2u- -;;:0 OJ) .... In C U U ~ .: ~ 'C;;~~'-C;;.~~E;;a..l~ ~ 5"'~ ~ - ~:a E ~ [:: I C ":l In U QO U cc.- 0 ~~ 0 ~ ~ In C E_.~.... ~'5.8"ti ~ e~ ~= t:...21 C...._v.I c: - G.lcc-~-c..E :s ~ ;.,; '0 QO.c .5 cu -0 0 =' .~ '~"2 ~ _~ ~ E;:; ~ III '"'~... -~t HoSU ~~c'g:~_>..E>.. :; .52 0 CU.J:) - .... e _0 cu 0 U E -U>'CU3=o ~-;:::g == ":l "0 - ~...... 0 c. 0 - E u c := .~ .:::::: _ .... E ... E -0 0 ..Ecucu-O~':::o.uc.u~u .. ::; .- ... ifl'i: 8," ",Q., .. =: :: = ~ ~ = oS - '" ~ ~ ~ '" '" E ~ ~.2 0:; ~ ~e .. .. ~ ~ - .. u ~~ .= ....lIl: ~ t: -5i ~ " '" ~ 'i:; ~ :; o ... " > " .. ;.! E ~ e:i .s eg-g ":l ~ ~ ~ "(; u c.. ~ ~ .9: u ::: 0 I.. c:.J ";; ~ c.. .~ t:~E~-= ~-o;...~ ; ~.!2'u ~ .c 0tl0il'O =- Cl"JCcc,,"E..;: '- "S.:s g ... "r; -.!il_5';e,)~~ .c c.. -5 . Co) _ Vol Ii( >o- w ClO QJ ~ cu :c .~ c 0'- "'0 0 o .- - U E ....:'5!":: =.,g 0 0.>....]-- u 2 a ... OIJ ~ -5c..w>..5c =>..~-33C':l 0.&:1.::: 1-0 "0 1:10 '=e3.,g~.5 :S~t::-~:> -g ~ 0 ri" r:..2 oo..Uu .5 a ~.~ ~ 6 U'. :2 g.g~;:;g~ "3; "B g 1-0 1-0 'c:h ~ 0 0 ~ 1-0 ~ ~ .:; U 5 0...= g~=-::rl-ou"O~3 1-0 ~.: ~ ~ .~ r:: :> :: o >.=-2>..g= "E .~ ~ .~ 9 Co. ~ -= 8 o ~ = ~.~ u U .5tir::~~-=ti.=~ U;(r:E>'~"O_ ._ ." 'o~ ~. c.. .Q '- ~", .,. 'oJ,.. 0 -..:.:: '.!!_ .!! Q. ~ .: ~ "B "in ~ 0 - : ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 13 ~'u -; -= .~ 5 E ~ E .~ ..:.;: ..;:: :: ~ 'QO 0 ,::: "fl ~ 5 rJ:J:6~ U u O:,e Co.:t:'~ ~ctil-o.c.Q~E_r: ~::::Ir::::'-(,) .=>oCiJ= _ooo:c;::uo:u~_ l- t: =t.I c 3:: .: ... ~ r.f.l r: '-::::IC.S! r.f.la_~5 : ; .~ g is. ~ ~] E 'QO Q (,) 'i: "0 '5 0 ~ r.f.l 8 ~ :ct-r::__t.I r.f.l !'! E ~ ~ ri "'0 .e- ri" .9 "'" a.. C .=!: -= .- .~ u ~ "':l ;:; a.. - :.: ~~"fl~..2f--U~~ .='- >:t: u~ ~~e~ rt g'o j -= > 15...2 o..~ .~ U %~g ~ g .~ ~ ~.~ !:! P 0 .~ - -5"" ~ ~ 0 ~6-g .:: .. = u :> ~ c:; ~ ~ C ._ .....C';..:.;: '" E U - QJ f: Q:i.c~ e .!! '" ....c E .. ~ " co '" _ 1; .!! ~ :; ~ r.f.l ~~ -< .... . .. "" c > '" '5 ~.~ Q~~ I I , , , I I I I i I I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1- I 1.1 .. ::; = i- <1 ... " .. .i2 ~ :;. ;; <> u I- = " c 'r: " ;> " :;; 0;; ~ .. .. 8,= :ll=- == ::: ~ <: ~ ;;) ~ 'Q.s ..c; .. " -== .5 "C ~> :< <: =: ;; - -' ~ .. .. Z - :.: - ::: '.' ;: .. 3't = .. :!!"=- 5:~ <: ::: z <: .. .. ~ ... ::; E z - .. :< z g <: .. E ;;;: ~ 'OJ -g~ -=c ~'&: ;;;:~ .. .. - - '" ] '= .. '" ;: .. .. 8, ;; <> 1.1 .. .. " ~ ;;;: j - Cll .!P - :i '" " 'i:x ~ .;'_:;oJ ;:; ~ <,I) ~ ~ ~ ~~~ '%1 ~ E o 0 :> U E .2: E " .E ~~u~ '~"":l ~.~ Vl:;=~ .,,_,... ._ (Ill ~~otl ,,~ " u .... 0.. 0 ~ .!::'-....o( r.r.o~G.I v: :>. 0'-- 5:~~~ "i: ~ c ~~S8N I i ! =" .:: ~ .~ =.-..- -> - c: ~:5 " ~ :3~~~ :; !: "= V58~~ " " ~ :: -' !::_~ :; :.I":::: r_ .~,~ ~; '"' ~ r; ~ l... 0 g..:! .g ~- ~ ~ Q. _ 0 C'; --~ - ~ ~ .~ ~ CO ~ <Vi .~ .; :E .5 '%1.~ "E ~ g g[~ 1.1<:<< ~ .9 - .: ~ 12 'v; ~.S ?i ~'E]!.i c8eO~ ~:.: ~ .: 0 2 ~ - "B~2 .~ c.. ~ ~-< c:;c:=.,- E.~ 0 o r.I':l IU c .5.2: :; .i2 ~u o - ~ 0 -=.2u: '- CIl CI'l 0 o CI'l 00.5 ~ ~.5 IU .52 " ".:; u~3o ~2~- ~ "0 of4~~ .5 u - '._E_ Q.l .:e -= ..c ,::::>.- f- ?,j ~ .~ ~ '" ~ " > ." "" " 0/) .~ .. S E ~ ~ .::::.90 "?:uro;' ~~e::: .;;; t en N .5 >. " " ~ ~ ~ is:._9> c:;1:; :E; C - ~~ - gO' c; :; ~ '2 -=~ ,t 0 == oil 0 0 2 :'ll C -::: a... 0 >-.'~ ~ '.. 0 :> r= o-=eJ~< ~ = "=' .~ ~ g ~a;Q~~ ~-5i:i...."'O~ - 0 e 1';l f5 E ~"Oci5 c..c.:~ '~:::l ..... 8-u co= 0.0 c...5 e ~ ~ ~ .- .!"OEV) :;c;.::215E"ON Sl-5J<=,(.t.,~N ::- ii\ ~ . , :.J ~ e::: ;> :: Vl 'i: ~ >. -: .:: ~ -= l- " ,,~ " <> .:: ~ .~=. ~-= --.::! .:~ ~ -= ~.:: t:;Q..OO :J >-. CI) ,_= ~c~ ;; 0 t1u~~ ~ 'E .... ~~...=: ~ .. .~ ~ .9t: ~ " <>U ~o s " ~ .~ ;: CO .~ <'" '" u aN go &ll u ~ u _ os: i , " c .2 e..J :E .~ ~ ~ ~'g c Vi :J o U Ol) 1.1<:<< .. = :;;; .. ~ -E ~ ~c:: ~ .... > C,.l 8.. 2 E ti E: 9 '2 co " = "'8 u.~ ~~rl 'Vi'= "0 " Co ~ "0 ~ ~ ~..= .- .c CI) ~ E " r; co .... ~CN .~.; ~ ]_ is: " c ~ >. :J - - ~5~ ~ 0 CI) ~ 1.1 " ~ ..n (S c..c.... '" "0 o .~ ~ ~ ~ E ..= i-o 0 c.. Co." ..; .- Co ;::: S.J ':.I ao i::;n or. ':.I >. ti c: ~ 'S ;::. or. ViG5 .f " ~ ~ g. " ~ ~ ~_i: <.r. - .;!: .~ :;: ':; .D ...; ""=' .9 ti g E. E ~ 0 ~ 0 ti -'- " <5~ ..... ~ o o .:!::E or. :~ 0':= .0 " < E := ~u ti V'l .....r.J c.. .~ ;; " 0- .. < ~ e ~ ~ 'Ei ~ :>.. -= .~ .c VI .c U~2u~i3..;. ':.I :.l) ~ ;:: e .c '.-:_~ C':l ~ a:l ~ ;;; 0."0 _ ~ <.n 'E;: := Cl:I v ~ ::E'-;:::5-~'E-='; '_"',,>' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8" ~ ....v.c-.... ~ <ii := >-. III "0 .9- 0 ~ ~ 60'a~~5-~>-. rI'l e;.!:: ::.J ;_ 8. ~ v ~ 2t<:i ocag.= U g. ~ ~ ~ E.'~ ~ >.oU'lu~~o.~ ] :E U g .= ::: ~ ~ E : ~'5<ii>.OEOlU :_~t.:;;o~gg!12~ ~_~c;~'E_ee~ 'c;"O=o;::t~~o = i 00:::: ce c.. U co ...:::: '- _~-=O:=U'lu ~E"~o~"OCI)O~ :: :::s;;o.<C.ca]-= i 8._--~~~ 6 ~~1 ..::::.J -:: .; .~ 9 "0 ":-~: ~ ~ := u 0'" = E .~ _ ~ VI .~ ~ E :g :::l :: M 6 .- 0 U'l 0 0'" u _ N U .0 .c .5 Q.O f! t!: .: in 0:; " .~ t UI " :;1 ill :;; ~ .... Q = = Q ~lj eo. c: e - Q l::v ~ ~ .. r.l ... <( ~ ::" S .. :E - ~ I!! t: 8.:e ~ =: ::; <( =: '" ... ~ ... =: =- .... g Q .- .... = ... -c E- i= l:: ~ '" ... ~ ~ o =- r.l =: " !l :ai-Ii .. jj = :l:!"S'8. is::t :: <( 8 ~ .. z <( " z ;: E z '"" :; z '"" ::: ... <( " - .. ::; - 'Q 5 "8~ "'c - - " .. ::;~ .. - .. Q .!!l .. ;:: -= .. t = ~ ::; = oS - .. s - :i ~_: .s - ~ .. " tIl :::'c; c; :~ ~] ~ "u .~ ~ 19 ,C':I _ "ii ;;.. - E a.. ... -= 8. ~~ 'i r: c:a !! CIJ '- ~:1a a ~ d ::l .:P ; .~ ['2 "' >. ;:, :; t'O ::: ~..c ~ ~.~ .g .: ti .~ oc.~~v; ~ .~ ~ ~ :~ 6 0:: ~ 'g ';:j !oJ W'l ~ :a 0 Vl .9s~:_ Q'';:: 0 U E =E<[E ~2tu:::_~ co: 0 rJ':J .= - ,... "(;..: :.; 'u ::.. I- g,~ " i: rJ':J v: :.J ~.~ co ::: .. c: " - r: 0 .~ ",U:::l .g ;: ~c ~ " ... ell - g .: log :2 ";: "'";; I c...~.J:J ,...; ~ 6' .. " ;. " '" ~'3 ~ ~"E .~ ~ 'i: c; - - ~~ "'0.5 I';:: Q,) ~ ::: ~ ... C I- OJ) W'l ,.EO "00 ~";:; ~ ::l :: ~ u _ V') I:J i-o ~ r: . - ~:>.. .:2 ell- 3 ~ 0, .;:: :.J :: = ~ "8 '2 ~ '5 S ;;; "' ":! "u ~ 2~ E " " .. " " Q,) ~ :c " ..::g - ';; :!c: ;. s:: ~ ~ ~ en o;n ~ I:) ~ 0 _ ..0 Co ~ r: "2 ~ ~ ,... c:; ... ~ - .: ~ :~ 8 6 ~ 0"'0 ~ :i "0 0 o ~ iU "'0 _._ ~ I:) r- ell t- ~u t::': .~ -< 0 ~iUCC- N"'O_O ~:::l 'v; ':; ~ Vl E'"o.~ '- < = i..) t .~ VJ C. .g :.J ] U - >. "'0 = '- a.. :.J .- 0, ~ "'0 t) :>.. Q,).; ;t_" E E '- ~- ~ Co. ~ B ~ iU.... U ~ .~ -= ~ ~ 3CJ~~.c_" E ~ ~ 0 u ~ ,,~ ,. W'l .... "":l III ~ ~ ... \": ~ '; ~ v..,g [i:q .~ .,.,"- "" ~ o_,-=sr: u v: "'0 o CI:l il.l ~ ';u~~ = ~ ~ 8 .;:: III u .5 :2 -g -= :0 '" 8 c Q,) Q,) ; E ;:; :; " ..0 .. ..0 .,;(; .. " t.!E"B .- Q,) c:; ~-g-~ " :l g "- Co -' ~ ':J .... ::"0 i: ~ VJ ':J ~.~ c:l = .... S ir. J3uo .~ ;: -5<~ ~ 2 ~ ~ 5 g ~ "i: ell ::l c.. .~ .::. M .2 6' .. '"' ;. '"' '" 0:; :::l ~c::o: ~ ~ ,_:~ 0 ..5::l< " ::ru tn~::n - .. ~ - 0 0.(;:-::: E :t x 9~-:: ~:;: B 0 ~'513::E ..=!:EO <.I'J __ > < ~ e.ti U .= 1= ~ ~ -;l::,-iU ..= 3 c -5 g:: :: ~ ''':' ti ~-;l ~ c:; >. c:J .~ ~ VJ > ~~.;~ c:J IOU IlJ g g.~C<.I'J " " '" -..0;' c: _ '" E~ "E~ - '"'''- eu '~ C'a " .." :-;l~.c ~ 0 g :;('u ~ :: o U iU v-i ~ IlJ -= N co:..o 0 0:; -;l';j :::.. ~ ~o E:;n VJ ':J >'::::i c:l :: 'i: g ~ cnu3 ~ ;: .e '0 ~ B e ~ 6~~ 'i: cr. ::l c....~ ..0 ,...; ~ ~ 6' .. '"' ;. '"' '" "~ ~ " ~ ,2 >.00;) '- ~::: ~ o ~ g dfS -",,"_~ '"' 0 -- -::; .;;:; .... - .:; = ~ "5 ::r ~ ~ :;n~:::U .~ I "5 B I .. '"'" i ~ .... .... ~,....:o,,~ w~.a ;:....~o .:..:: ~~o~g o ~ -00;) .- l- - ~ .9 ~ u ~ .... ~ c:;-==oo ~cr.3g.,- _ ~ .... , 0 a u ~ .2 0 :5 ~ 0 OJ) E...o..o ~ ~ .- ~ ~ -=:! e U := .e ~ "E .::: .5 c.;:; S S:! .:: Vi J~ oo;)-=u~ ~.c co: ;:..:: C a... ~""O ~ ~ ::l ::::) C - 0 C'" 2 r: ~"'O ~ -5 :an cr. ""0 :::: ""0 .~ '2 '0 .... _.- > \Ci ~ ~ "B co: ("I l:C c.. E g i I I 1 Ii , '"' :::l ,~ ::! ":; ~ c:l ':J s; ~~ - = CI')';;:; ::: -;l';; c1iU~O c: "" -c ell" " .. 'i: E :0 5 :::l " " ~ .. " ::l .:2 g 0.. ~ '::0: E:~ u ~ E ~ co:: "g "E ~ <u..~:O:: ,~ 6" o >. .S ..0.." ~ .. C ~ .g i:: ~ ~ ~ Co ;; .5~8 .." "' u -uti"E~_ c:; ~ ~ ell -;l <.I'J C':l ~ toVicc:OU'::: C .= -;l ~:E ~ 6D :: u u c 0 ,_ ~ l- "C OJ) I:l:I co: 0 0 0 <.I'JOJ)_:=-r.n.9 -= =C:C_u ~~c: ~ '~g 'K ~ .., "_::..E8..~~.S!~t ~ oc..= eu Q..c 'Qh - c. CJJ g ~ V'l 0 ::l ~ __ = ._ .c l- :=-s ~~~~,~ 0 o ~'~ co: Q" C. :t ~ ~2l-o.",_c 2oo.OJ)CO:~ t:.; g '= ~ ~ 0 ~ ;s C'\S eE-=- ~ ~ C':lU--c~::::)-d't:i u5"E~:g-g~t -=:ccu -"'e; "~"c: .S: ~ -0 .1;;; g ~ ~ ti co: = ~ cu >_ ::::) 1:: <.I'J _ e C':l N _'::iUC':ll-O~- :;;; ~"'g""O ~ - ~";:: e 0 = ~ co: CIO .... OUiU-g~,Su~ E-CIO..o"ti~""O_O ,5 .s to'" U r---3~u~t!~-= M ""0 Vi..o U C':l 'is..Vi I I I I I i ! I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I ... .. " " .. ..- ;! e ... c E .- .. l:U :> .. :;; - ,., i!! 1: 8,'" ~;. Ill: ... " ..oS ..- " e -c E .- .- .. .. .. :> "' .. - :=-5 '" al - ~E'8, ...;. E ... .. .. 1; Cl .ill .5 - C - a- .. .. .. ~ ::E ~ - " ~ ~ :: - - ~ ~ ~ e; u .e .~ ~ ~ .~ c ~= .~ :~.~~~~u~~~ ~=~~2~~~~~~ ~5E~~~~i.~g ~:~~i-~~'~E~ '- ~ 'r; u ~ :: '0 -Q.":::u ~ 'Qh:: - U 0 U :g M .~ ~ E -0$:>__' ....t~uoo"CEC'=o " -SO-~C~olr.-"'Oo.lr. S.-uucc '"' _CcU'" 1.0 III 0 l..."'O 1:'00 I:':l E'o-~oosog~~o,",uCl'lou...:u~~~ gCl'l~5~ o'~_i~o~~~~O~~1:':l o.s . "' '."_ ~ .c -g "::,. - -u OIl u ::::.- ... Ill" :; '" _0"'0...-"'0 --~~ C ~~~ ~U~.- Co c'S-oCl'lCl'l~.-c-~ I:':l~-~-"'O :gl:':l el:':l~~-t~~~~~~~"'O.5~~~~~ .2C1'lI...:~~;gfr~~a~o_o5~~o.OCl'l'~ E"'o~~oo"'OooE"'OG;'~-_"'~"'l..u~ ...~~-o~~.~!~ou-uu~...~o~~~~ U 00 u "0 .c I- _ - > ... U .- 0 .s.:: "'0 u 1.0 "'0 l"C ~c 1..~-O'l"C"'O~oo~CI'l~~.- CCg u~ o=~~_~uuc_c~~"'O...9,Eol:':l~ ~~CI'l ~~oEo'-~.~~~~=a"'c~.~cc'2oec =.c_~o.8C1'l_-~1.o "'oo,_u~~~uo.~ w -o=_I:':lE~ou~~~Cu~-_.~ "'0 ~~~~-~..~O U - _o.5~.5~~u'~ ~n-~ c"'O_...u~ o_o~o. ~ ~~~= ~u ~~~ ~-~-~-~~Oy~_o._~ oo::::l~O~o<o;1'c;""l5:~ "2l~o." ;l<_~cn~... c~.~~!e e~~~~....~~t~~~co~~ .~~~~~.:_~ ~~~~i2~~.Y~~~-~~ ~ ~o~-N'E~_.~~>_-~~.~~~~~~ "'=' ~ e :r: U _ c ~ .... ... -; U d u: u; ~ :r: '9 c.. ~ .- u u y- -g~o~~~_c~>W::::l_ ~~]~.~~ ~ u_~u_~o~w'Y::::l~~ ~Q.-g 0_.;::: ::::l~~~~=y.~>c;=u ~-~o~.-te'~5 ~~~J~g~.~~:r:~~~~~E=~~Q.~C~ Ui .~! .., '" ~ '" <! ... " . ~.2 .2- - .. 5"3.. c S .. " tu :> Q ... ... <= ~ S .. :;; .. .... ~t: 8." ",=- .. =: , , - oi<. < =: ... " ".s ..- " e .1: ,,- .. .. ... .. . :> ,. - o =: =- " z - E- =: ~ ... =: '" Z < " z ;: '" E z '" - :;;: z g :..: " E ::; '" .!:: -= ... - - " II 1:1 :l;!=-8. "'''s '" =- " .. ! .. 1 - -= - .~- ~~ a ::I :;.... E:C~ :: :oJ ~ r: 0 .::c l: r.r.!:~ S ~ ~ v;Uc::i.... .~ "ij ~E .~ ~ o <;; " ~ C; .~ 2 E. uO - ~ <~ " ...." .&.:.a ~ ~ .9 ~ t:i ou ~:c rT.;:; ..5~ 9 :; :> U .. .. " a ::;: " .s ~ ~ . ~ ""' en ~~ C ~ ~ :.J.... "'0::1 '- .;: ~ '- ~ "'0 0 ..:. -u~.c::lo~_~EeJ~ e.J - ~ I:J l: C. :; ;;. .~ .~. ~ -5 .S: C :: 4) &. :s..E~C~ ~.5-=2 ilJ CJJ'u:': 0."C C ca -5 g .g ~ 5: ~ ; 'u 1:9 0'= 2 ~..:: -=- 00 ~.:2 ~gu"'Oca!"'j.s{l)(i ~=ilJl:J::I-"O-_ CJCIl.=-a;,jo~& 0..6::15:50="'00 c..ug"l'O ~-=QO ~ C .... .8 0 u X t':l .5 ~'uo o20-oc; ::;Q,lcE:3-:t~o c ~ 0 en v.I ""0 0 <( cu "'O~~5~.o,,",rn :E = ~ ~ t ~ ] ~ 1 ,g .~ ~ ~ .~ -2 .~ ! ] 8. ~ ~..cv;ogocaeoo- I:J cr. _ U ::: Co) "'0 ,;:.5 .:::! I- E'c I:J :; "'C Q,I c.. ~ Q,I ~ilJ::tio~Eu=e ~2e~~_,,{I)'~5.5.."B -= - '"'Oc~ 00 E E M .~"r; ~ coo NQ.C_..co.C.C'I;ICU g ~ :.a~ S ::I >> i::: c: ti ~ I:J >. '-:::: _ c::l E en';j; :; 5':;2":; ~u:;5 "ij ~2 '5 ~ C5 B " " " c: ~ ~ .~ ~ uO - " "< ~ o >. .: .c.., ~ ~ " " CO ;!2 .g "ij a ;a 8 -'" .... E :l 8 ~ ~ e " ;. E ~ a ~ e:i~ u .~ ~ c;~ -a.~ "'-'" " u . " ".c ~ 5 u u 6~ u 0 ~ ;. e< " '" :l .. -= -;;; -= '" '" c" '0 ~ ~5~ "''''- "3 -;;; 0\ 1= t'Q: N~~ g E :.a i: ~ 5 :s u on " o >'.: CQ c 5: ~ c:; g ~.;; "'U"-O .~ " -5'0& - ~.5 '- ~ ""::I- e :l 'i: ~':; c...~ .J:J N " s: ~ 2 .i GO - .. <~ i~c ---~ '0 ~ ;a ;S -.:::;:""_ :;.~ i: _.: u u ~ ~ ~ "5 ~ ;a ; -.r.I.=l - -.r.I ,., E :l o U -;2 ?oJ c:; :0 iU - CIl W ~..:.c .~_go~ ""::I_:TC:; '- '" 0 iU 0 ~ ::t. Vi S:! - ""::I C; -. ~ _."_ .~_ c c_ 0 C C ~ .~ ~ ~uo~51':l0ll;: ~'" U 0 "a .: '(i; ~ ~ Q..-.c c u u ~ ti.c iU ::=. ... cu >.."a ~ :::: u -= ~iU'~~eti::J >..= c U - :> en .c ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~. g Q_" J C;; CIl'- ::J ~ .. C' - ~ c ~ ~ g : ~ .g ~ 'u iU CIl .- .- .S:! ~ ~ ~ ~ 5g :0' ~ '=0 u " ~.. '" ~ ... '0 - .~ CQ :go.:;ti"'l~..:.gc . .2 -u : ::J C OIl ~ 0 ~ ~ -; iU :5 .= ~ c v c.CI:I ~ U'":!"l.c ~ ,,-~3 ~"';::: ~ ,.20 0 - _'oJ =: !! u ~ ~ .;;;; >.-5 u.... ...o.~..._'-"" III u'w N :=- U 0 0 == .... ~-=:::-cu~~oc .. 0 ;';'- >.. ~_ _ U .~ .5~--~~ 20= cOM::.9~"iii,,-=~ oOuuo_ "'0 ci 00.:..= I:':l :::: to: 0 ~ ~ MI':lCll"'l....._Q.U__ I I I I o c ~ ~ :.~ - - Q.';; I:':l ::J U .- E=-OO o >.. "'l u C:=-t:E c:; ~:;; e ",u...!- I I ...~ g 0 '" " ~ t; .~ .~ ~ .9 1:: ~ .. "U 'i: ..... "- 0 I ,., u " '" '" :l U U o I '" N '" c: ~ ~ .:2 ~E. GO ~ :;;::<;; I ~ " " .9: 0 - :c ..: ~_..~ ., .~ ~ :::: u '- 5.:::: o ell U o " on uc.:< I I '" ;:; .. ~ ;;; " o I ;l ~ u <= ~ '" :: I I ... N .~ o ~ -= u " .... '" I E " " E. o -;:; ;. " .., ,., .c .., .. ;:; " Q. ;;:; .S " :E .;;; " ~ " ~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I. I I =: ~ :.: I ;; S I :; ~ I == '" - 0 E: .. I - z - :.: u: '" "'I - I =- ~i :ol i == '" c. Z ~I ~ I .. - z - .., :; I t: z 0 - .... z I '" ::: ;.. :.: " I i: :; I- I I I I .. :> " __s .= :'.I ';'3. ~ E .~ Q ..W ;> " :E ~~ . .. &. .c" ",- .. == .. " ...s ..- " 5 .. I: s- - .. ... .. ;> " ==tt 5 " ==' ~~ -< .. " ...s )5 _I: ;"I";: ::o~ " = Q '" Oi i - ~ ::i-2 ~~]~:~ i: U :lQ ~l5 ~ ~'E.:: ;:.... =g2;:@2 c: 0 co: :::I _ ~ua:=Vj -:5~ .9 ~ c ~ " o :> d: .~ ~ 3 ] .~ ;: 3. .; a; " &. " s w ;:: " ~ .~ ~ co - " <~ o V') ;>., = 'o;~~ "';::' .... :-: ~ ;.2 E ::::.: ti ~ ..o:E 3._ :I '; ~ :; Vl .c .= en ~ :; c U f: .. ~ ::0 " .S - " .~ - ~ " " :E :: :g ';;j ~- ].s~ ~ ~ -g .~ S:!;: I.. ~-;n~2 ... " '" c~ ~"O .. > ~ 's.. 2 ~'2 C c.;: 8 ~-8"":1 C - r.J I:J .. ;;; t"J == -g E >. ~ Cl: 0 Oll- 00- ti ~ .5 ; ~~~= u g ~ c:; .!::2 c.. CI:l c E e.c IlJ '2 ~ -6 'u ~ 'S::; ~ E I:J .... .~.c Y 6 ~Oo>.'= So. g ~=a 0"0 CJ C ~-=~~8 " " :: '" = :: U '3 ;; .. .~ .. z u ... .,., i: =- "- ~ '" " :.. .. .. ~ .~ = '" .. - ~ g ""S' .. .. .:ill. .~ ~== $ .; >. i: t:C ~ ~ r.J >. r: - t:C E Vl 'i,ii .... 5 ~ ':; ~uc::3 .2 ;:; 01)= C .:: .- '" ~ c '" - Cl i::> ~ ~ :::l .2 ga~ .... 0.: ~.~ u ~ _ :; Cl: g"":l ~ <u..~O: o ,.,c .c:.:; '" ~ c " .::: E t;: 1:.1 3.~ ~ c:; -'" -E '" S .5 ~ ." ." IlJ a = ti o".il .;: en ~ c " .0 ~ ." ~ ~ .~ ~~;: (;j f"-o. 2:t '" .~ "'::l '0 :~ ~ ~ U ::E ~ " c < '" '5 ? .g "'.... " .... c a ~ t .;;; 8! ~ ~ ij :;;:: U'l Q.O ~ ~ '" " ..., .. = ~.cc::i ~ :; o W I I g .E :.a:= ~ ':; >. c co ~ ti ~"; CC=Vl:~ g 5 ~ ;:.- V'Juc::3 = .2 ;:; ~E 'C ~ '" 0 Cl " '" = .2 E- o ~ %l' ::I .9 -gc..~ .:: o.E :Q en U 3 .::~ ~ ..5._ ::: ~ g 12 _=-" <u.:; o ,.,= .c~ ~ ;:: .::: i: E~ c. "- ..5V5 ,.,:< ;:." ... " c.c. o c. ~ .- c.'" ::r :l " .. ~ :; -;; -;;-" -" '" '" '" " E = S:! 'Oil = = c.... '5 ~ ::r_ .. =;; o OJ "5 ~ '" .. .::c::: ~ ~ = '" 8 E 01) . <:.s ~ ~ 5 o ~ ~~~ ~ :; o U ~ g :::: ~ ~ c c5 ~ :: t >. "= 0 cc E en "Vi ~ "-:::J .:; ~u~o .2 ;:; 01)'" - ~ -E u; '" c Q 8 %l .2 is.. o ~ ;a = .2 g E. ~ "'0::: ~."u~ ":::E tii .5 ::: ~ '" <U]c: N '" = .2 E- o ,.,0 .D:.a ;a ~ ,2 ;:: E~ c. '" - - " -t/l ~ :; o U ~ 0 ... - c.... o " ~ '" c.- .5 '0 " " .0 :; ;;; -;; ~ -" .. '" c. E 2 ... c. C " .e- c '" .- go.. - ... .2 ~ u c :;, to ~ t: .... 1-0 r.tl U l..: =""-" 8 0 ~ OI)~ -<.: ~ -t ::> 0'" :q ~ ~ U' ..I :;: =1 ..' :;. <1 ... = = .~ i =-a .. ~ c = "i: I:) ..U ... '"' ~ :.: ? :5 I - "" ..: =' .. :is 'iij~ = .. &ce :l =' '" :; 5: ';.i ..-.; " .. ~C .51: E-~ '" - ~ :.: !: '-' i <II .. - - " i l:: a! :l:!"E'& g: =': E < 8 '"' Z ..: ... " =.S! ~ -" = .. -=c - .- .. .. ,,~ '" - z i E z ::; - "" z g :.: E ::0 .. -.; Q <II ~ "c - " ~ ~~ ~ ':; ~ i: c:l ~ e..I >. '::: ::5 c::l :: tf.) 'Vi "0 ~ '> ~uao .. .. " ; .. " " .S! - " .!P - ~ ~ '" ..= c; ~ " .2 ~ c; :0: ti-;; Q.<II o " it~ .::! -5 > > ~ " ~ .: <II = "0'15 a 5":: 00] ti .5 t':...: 'iii:o 2iU~ ~E,- = Q.- ~ 'E ~ ~ ::T _ '" " " Q., >. E ~ '= ~ ~ 'S .2 u Oll" - ~ .= Vi ~ = " 0 o .. ~ .~ u ... ~ ~ 0.: ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ '" g "3 ___'" <~~~o o >,= ..~ %l ~ .2 :: ~d5 ~= E~ ~ s ,0 '-' " '0 (/) :5 " "i: .... '2 12::; s'" 0-= -= Oll >.;':;:;: 1:- ~)! e a Q.>, ~ " '" -='C " a ~ " " E ~ " __U ~~ '" '" -= .. U ;;- i:'Q '" ~ >" " U l:: '5 " " -5..: i I I I I I ~ :;! .... ':; >.. ~ co - - ~ ~ ~V3 'Vi :: g ~:~ c1iU:::Cl .~ u ~2 'i: v; " = Q 8 " <II ~ = :::l .8 ::; ;: o:Il 25; ~ '-.~ ;;; ,.:.,_ri U - ~--aC:; '" g ~ :: <: t.o.. ::; c:: :a .2 - <5 o >,= .:::.~ .~ g ~ ~ ~ ~:: :; -=~8 ~ o .- ~ ~~ i~~~fr~ ~~~ I OG~~"!i~~~ I >.>.:J_c..>.~~ .- I- ~ >. ~ ;.:: ~ ~ U :t ~ .... 'ii '0' U .... :: e..I *~~.~.~ Q.t-.g ~ ~ _ .. :J t": t": U ., ti..E:a~-5..::=aCJ-5 c..-/U(I'J C=C"l-5 ~ ~ ~_ 8 ~ ~ ': .2 ~ .~ .... Vl "= 0 0 U .: E .~"O >..- ... "0 5 g,..:: .~ C'C 0 .g ]0 ~ 52 .~.: ~ -~-B~U="tiVl~ Cj 0 ~ 0 >..~ ~ ~.;; ,9 ~~~~ ~ =~~_~12 U .::- :::' - 0 Oil"O:c ;> a 2 s.-ti-oiicu_t.:cu; og."'giUEuc-.26 >.....cu~u-5~~uy >Q.>.'::g>'~~:=B ~ ~ ;; 0 ~ Ie... ~ _ ~ ';n, -=--='-"'",0-='"=. - I-occ"~o- :::o~_:'_::.Jc --u~ ....:-: 0..= e E ~ ~ o - 1jj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~Liiu~~Uju:S'o i I I I I I I i ""=l '8 fr ~ c..O ;: v.l ~ ~ ~.-g CQ = .... s .~ ~uo -5'0 " - ~ .... ~ o " .;: '" c.. .~ oo~ :e's '" ~ ~ " Oll C. ~ .~ gQ.~ .... 0 .:: ]:_~u~ ~ .s c; ~ .2 '~-= ;:a oc. <:..~c: .2 - ;; :> :;"- ~ ~ ~ 'g .[ -~-' ;:; " ~~ -= 2~.s~"B'o U "':j c; 0 2a~~.~~ Q,. >. a s.. 'E 0 .,g .s ~.:; 0 .... .... .... Q,. C"..c '- U :J c:J o ~..o c ~ 1jj .2 '3 ~Uj~u o_in2 ~ ~ c c;j .=_ I': ..::: is -=Q... .suc_ .:it i:'.2 0 r: E C ~ ~ .:P.g := r: .: r: ;;; U E ~ 2 >00-,- <-5"100 "':j _ '0 -5 '" C 0 = _ '0 E >. r:.~ C = 1-0 c.. 0 -~-o.::: <-gg~"" ~='.= ~ ~~~'3~ ;; uJO " '" ~< ~ o " .. ::l " = = ~ ~< ,90 0 c.= 1-0:0 " ~ ~ '" " E ~ " ."o:l = = '" '" i;'" ~~ o '3 "- ~ " .. '" .. .... 0 E _ " .. ::: c:J - .~ Q.o .- ~ " Q. ::T" "..= ~~ ;:; ~ Oll~ ,5 a ~'- ]: 0 " = ~ .2 =' C:;M~ E; .9 ~ " ;0 ~ C':l U o E c '" ~.S '0 = '" c .2- ~ i:'::l ~ e go e o ~ ::l Q. 0 <II .... E c ~ .9 ,S:! ,9'0 ti "1 c:; c 2:~-g ~ I ~ ~ 01) E ~"O ,:.::: ~ c 1-0 U ~ -5 -5 ~ c.. B Oil ::l o -5 -;:I ::.I ;J' ~ ~ ,...., :::: vr:; o ~_-g cc c .... ~ Vi ViCe ..~ -5 0 9 ~ ~ ;; o ::l d: ,1a Oll~ = - ~ '2 := i: .s 2! ~ " E ~ ~ .'2 :::0.. <0 ~ '0 OI)~'~ .: c r: ~ ~ : ~ .0 .~ 8.'~ =' c 0 :J V'l 0 .... "0 " ;; .. '': u ." " " ~"".::l<ll (; = 0 .~ ~ C':l g ~Jg~o U 0 C o en E ~ ::E ~ 1-0 ~ 2! :a c Q,J.: en:o 00. ~ .!! <II." 0.. 0 ~ ~ ~ '0 5 "'- c.E.= E 00"'0 0 ~_.... = f-!..c :00-; c:; ::I :3: .c f-! U & III f-" . .... '-..~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ -; ~ '= ~ ~c.~g _.'5 ~ E ...' l;T'= 0 ,.... Il.J C':l U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ui ... :;1 ~ -.:' ... " - Q 3- " =-a. t!: :: .- " :::(,J ~ ::: ~ :...: ~ => I :; -.: a: .. :E .; ~ - ... 8,'" ..=- " a: '" .., - - f - '= .s ..<; = " c .:~ ~~ .. .., ~ :.: ~ ~ a: .. ~ - -= y ~ B ~ = ::=,8, g;1l: s <: 8 ::: z <: ... = " " '8~ -=c <l- ::E~ ~ z a: - E z - - - "" z - !: :...: E :; " <; Q .. ] ~ - .. ... = ; .. ::E = oS - '" ~ - :i !!l :: ~ .. ~ '~ .: "" 00 ';;' " "" " .. "g ~ u :; v: t.= o .: 'oJ \..I ~ f;il 'u ....,;:: .2; -~ "il - ,,~ E " .9 ~ >. ': ... '" .. ...:: .. - ~ 1:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~..2 ~ .5 - .2 ~ ~ u ... ... " :::s ~ '"' 0 U11u:iE :5 ~ 5 ~ tn U') (J _ g "':I ';.) rr .~ ~ ~ t:V5"": ~ >. U co :: 'j: 5 .~ ';;UQ -:s'o .9 ~ o ~ ~ .; ... " E ~ ~ .~ <0 .. ~ ~ ~ -g .~ .~ :::.:a ..... a:: ~ c .E :: l-o .~ =,'~ _ v. tn~~.g ~ .2 ':;"- ':;~ " - 'g ~ o..2~;;' "" .. .~ ~ ;:) '~---' <r. C -,~_" - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~u-51:; !!. U o:.f.I tn._ .S::! 0 ~ ,:;l! -=.e ~~]~ ,...~ ~ r; ~ .~.s C;'~ 0 ~ ~ ..::::.c :; E-- >. 0 <.r. t~:~ ::; =' Il,) :> tn E- ;;;a-~Q.eg . 7U '5 C 0 ~ ~ ff 8 ~1 E .. " ~ :<1 :; .. ~ ;; OIl ,5 "" " ] ~ 3 ':; .:: .~ :: 2i .. ? ... ; ! ~.~ ! <0 ,:'!!_~ :!' .;::?-! ~ i - .... ~ ~ ': ~~~~: .~ g ::'~ "" " ~ ~ ~ ~ "3 ::5 .... <r. 0" is .S: r: u "''' .c VOl ~ ~ 'g :l " ~ .~ ~~ ... ::I':! I .~! ;;~-' x " ~I ~ '51 ~ 51 "" " "" " " u ... u .~ .... :.J ::; E_w x,..... _r.ir:; _"X >.::i S '5 o .!!: r.nv~ .e 0 " .... 5 o :5 ;E .~ .s ] .. -- .~ .~-g ~ i- :":; ~~"'O = .... e1 '@:,:i'v; .n;:i~.g ... ";;; ;; ~ :'!! OIl ';;; - " """" " .~ 8 " ... " :<1 ~ ;j 'u .9 " Co "" tn~ tn -g 'S: "'2 \'Oe~ c 0. ~ g .. ;; :;&> :ac:; 15.:: u .. .~ :: " Co I '...; I .S o "" u Co ~ ~o = v:l :.f: ~ ~.~ a:: = l- ::! ;; .;;uo ~o .s ~ .2 ~ .. ,.., .:!! Ol; e: ~ ':; &> .~ :: <> Co ... .. :l .. '" .. .s - ~"a ~ -,g",,- .;: ;:; ~ I ~ 1j .. - ::: t: ~ '00 " ';;; :; Co .." E ~ .g ~ :; " v ~ ~ " '" "" ~ " <:: " ... ~ " .. ~ ... .- - g = <:: " ." :: -;; .~ "'C ~ -;2~- ~ :; c 'g U<tlU U Co e: ~::: e.l :; e: ~ c. r: .~ ~ ~ o :z ,I ~ S ~ E ~ ~ E 8] co: ~ 0.0 ':..l ~ "'" c: .0 e ~ ~ $:!- ....~s ~](j; :l " ;; '" ~ ~ So 'a ~ u " ... " ...:: ::; :l ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ So U E__ 5 E :J 1Il U; ~ :; o U ~ ,:<1 ;; .. I I ~ I I~ ~ '8 ;;;- c.~ .." II': ~.-g e: ... ::! v. V3UO I I I I I~o .9 t: e: C ~ g: .ta ...; .~ o ... " :l " '" I I- Ii I:; '" .. .5 ~"O ~ 'E ~ .... "" ~ ~ c: = o.~ .~ c. ~ ~ ~"'C 1;.... 1Il ~.2.~ "0 - ~ c ~ =::; "a '~'E ~ S ~.~..:: 1Il ~ ~.5 e 2!.:; . Ill... ...:: .. -.- .. .~ "a .~ u :; ':.l r:<.Il-:: u.. .: "0 E ~ ~~] <> ~ :J ~ r-E.o ~ E .9 c:i ~ :l ... <> " ~ c:i ~ ~ .. M co: ~ "1':t: Ol; ,: :;2 ':; .= EE .:: U . e: .. ;: ~ .:: .. g ~ Q) SE .."" .. .. ..."" " " .. .. ~ ~ u c.. E ~ .:; - ~ :::r 0 "-J :oJ .:: c = .. o _ u '" !!l '" :: <> Co U ,:<1 g ~ >. .2 E E " - " x U ::; .::: ... ~ ti ... =..~ ... tr. III _~ c.~ e: ... I 5.Z v::~~ ! -5 - .9 ~ C ~ .;: V) Q., .:!! OIl " ~ ':; .:: .~ :: U Co ...; .9 E- o ... <> :l " '" '" N .. OIl " '0 ~ 12 .~ ~ 'E :-0 :oJ _ C E .S: 0.2,0 .g I:l(j c.. <.Il tn5~.g .~ .. ~ e: .~ :; .~ E' ~ ~ ~ S :.J~~u gB~-s ~ r: 5'~ "g ~ ~ "-I t.: .... ~ :E c; '2 .~ s.Ec.. g r: g g u.. >. e.> u cOO "-I QJ e.> "0'0 .... E Il) C ~ - :t u c r: Il);': 0 Il) .;; '0 0 ~ Il) Il)- .... .... Q.."'Q Il) 0 "-I Il) ,;.c"C~~ ~~~e~ a~~;~ ~;Q= 0 ~ ~ 'C;; 5";; '0 ;~u~c =: ;.; "- :.: - i5: ::l I :;: ...: =: .. ..., 0 =: :. .. ..., z - "- Wi :.: - .~i '::' ",,' ~ lil =: ~, - - Z ::. <i < .. ..., z i - E z - ..., - "" z - = :.: '. E ::;: ... " = = " " .- :::~ 5=- c e .- " tu ~ '!.s ~'i - " -c .5 i: ... .. " ~ '" ~ :: .l:JtjGJ e Q,l : :;;'5. ~:t 5 ...: 8 ... = " " '8~ ..cc lj .C :;:~ .. :Q ;;; '"' =t: &." "':. .. =: .. .. " ;I .. :;: = .Sl - " .'i!' - ~ .. " Q '" ~ "i5 - :.0 .g ~ "" - i- = .::- t:.:::o ~ z:::: ~>._c c: :: V5 .;::; c ;2 ""=' ';; ~ugo -50 " _ = OJ;I.~ 5~:O_ .- - r: ... ~.~ ~ 2!. " --;~ ~ :!l .2 c Co .~ <en ....~ 'E " ..5 VI ~"g 0. ~ c.n >, ~ ~ ~- ~ .= a ~ ~ o.Cl.... - 'i: e .; -5 ':: .... ~ ,,2 5 :J ~ :f .~ ~ "B ij-::;:t O-;:J,- :; ~o~ -~"E ~ - I;.) r: = - Vl Z; .- C i- c.. 1":,1 :0: ::l 0. .=> r: 0 .2.Cl ':~ "'0 - C C _ ~'g5g.gse "'0 ,g "5 ~.s. ~ ] 1.1 Vl '= ::J ~ -- ~ ';:: 0"= ..., r; t:: ~ C 1l.I'- C ~ 1;.)._ ....:.t ~ a... c..:I: ~ 0 r' 2 .;:: '= -.ac..12~u - - " "" u u c: ilJ ... =, ?-=>>.cv; ..._-....f-c .~ E '-".:: 0 = ~ u 's 8 '0 E ~ '0 o ~..: ilJ :-: c: 'g ~ ~ Ui u.~ !5 a:v_~~..:: <: ~.5 g, B ~ u 2..c 1":,1 ;>.- Vl ..,.; .- .: .c 1":,1 U '0 ...u~UQ-=" <:: .. ''''' i: :. .. ... ~ '" :> .. o u ~ e c ~ ::J ~ '- - "'::;:I ~~t- ~ ~'B '~:g .c <n U ,.2':~~.=~~ - := u c C. ~ ::l.... .:2 ~.- 0 il.l --5-:J3';7 .c g r: ilJ ~ ~ oll_ lS~o ::::IU~_-cr:'c;;~ 0_ -;:;; "0 1":,1 .E ",Q.= VI I;.) c-:.,.,~ _ 1IJ U ,_ N .= U '6 B" ~ ~ s: '; ~_~c, :lu '" '2 ~ C :': ~ ; E .:- c. - ~ VI .= co: 50 ~ ~ .g 'S ~ U Co. o -= _ r: - ~ 1lJ.5 :..._~ofg-g~-=1l.I - - CIS c_ o.!a C v. - _ 0 .2 c: .~ >. C ~ C u~c~o2.&J"ii~ 2"8..c ~ "0 c; c: 0': .2 u; ~cooo~c c: =__" 't -5 0= Q.. ~ ~ 8 - c.. ~.s ~ 8...9 b Co ::. " '" .. .. ;; ~ 1 ~ i: ~ U ~ -~ t::;I'J :r. ~ ~.~ c:l = lo..o ;2 Vi ~uo ~ " -:;: .e...e; .g-5~ o ~ c.. 'i: U 1:; c.. 2 _ ~ .2 2 ac ~ 0_;;; ~ <: ~ ~]s: :-::l :.lc ~ ~ c -= '" ,- - - ~ ,i!_ - >, .. "" - 5;::! ~ :::a:;E2-:::~ ~=Ooo"'OVl u~~2~ ~ ~ -= .~ ,S:! .~ ~c:00="'O~ c..~.~~~~ r.:.: 0 "'0 ~ .~ "B 0 lo..o -:l :II( ~ c.J ,0_ ~ ~ ~ =' ~ E 0 ~ - 'Ei~c-=go_ "'0 ~.: o ~ lo..o 0 c.J ~ g " .. ~ lo..o E e,) .?J~CQ _ c: c: ~ &~ o~ o E.. 0 .~ - >. lo..o c..~c..e ILS .0' g "'0 ~ E..U ~ -S o o~ <:: " .- " .. :. .. N ~ "",, ~ " " c: Q:i~.g ~ E ~ ;:; ,9 O"O.&J C':l OO~C':l_ a~_ >,;0 (": "'i: a; ~ ,,~ " ....:. Co ~ V.l 0 ~ ~~c: = c..::s ~ ~ 8 '" :> .. o I I I I - " ;:-" ~ ~ ~ c - :.J ~E :::: = I:': :> Co ;::; ~ QJ enUQ I I I~'o 9 ~ o r: "C Sl c.. .~ I ;:!l~ ~ Oi: ::: i: :> " ..c Co I ~ ,e s ac ~ 0=<;; ti -< ~ :; ""0 C'l:I ~;:;c: I ~ c: ,2 a o ;;;1 >, "" ~ .:: :> ~ ~] .0-5 ~E I 1 " 12 ;;; - ~ ~ :~ e == lo..o U " .::!..c: 1- I .c "'GaJ:; " - ~ ~ II 2Vil.:c ,~_ :: ,9 Eg~'5~ ~ "..c:'- ..c - ~ 0. .i: V.l Co 2 .S:! .~ ~ 00 0.-= "'C 3: C U ~ "'C 0 ~o>.=c: .; .0' E c: ~ ~ lo..o =' C lo..o _ 0.. 0 0 t.: ouu..:~ ~-sugo u ~..c "'0 ~ =0-00 ~~.9Q..o= ~ ..I:::: >. lo..o C':l 0- c.."'O ~ ~ 9 C ::s C':l 0_ lo..o ~ u; ~ ~ o~~~~ ..: - - c.. .2 ; ;S 5 ~ -c 0.." 0;; r-- ~ >. lo..o 0 ~ -::l .c c.."'C I I I I I ~p. 8~'-=' Ii :So I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U ,,: =' ~: ~ <: ... '" = .2 ~~ 5'3. cS .- '" t;.J > ::: ~ <: - . :l I - .... <: =: - - ~ .. :E ~..... =1: 8-" .,=- .. =: '! .s "0; = ... _c .5 ~ ... .. . > .. - ~ == - ::: :.l =: .. ~'t 1i .. ="S' ...... ...=- <: - - z <: ... = = .S "CO! '" ... .cc ~"C :;l~ ;; Z ;: E z :I ::0 z - ~ :..: - - - '" .. ;J Q ., ~ 'S - ., - = !I 8- S '" u " .::: .. ... :> ill .. ::0 a ~ - i ~ =- :5 >. -: - " .~ == e.~ u;;a $1 .. -= i=6 co" .: g' =." ... '" .. .. ~." '" .- " i; ., ... = ... .2 0 ., - - " ., " u ~ .~ C ._ 0 = - " " ... ~ ~~ ti ~ III ~ ~ i! .....0 c..s: ~ - ., ~ ~ ';C S! -;;Il.)":: r: .. ~ .. '" >, ... .. ": .. '" ~ :J rr - ~ ,....., ~ :i3":; -~ ~.~ = ... 5 .~ ~uo .eo 9 ~.~ 5~~ '_f <or. '_;1 .~ ~, s c: ~ 2 .~ uO' = <;;'j ~ ~'=' = ~ 'S; :: S"C'; ... ., :; E v; CI'J ::l:'= ~I , -I ~ ",I N' '" c:: ., " t: U ~ -5 ~ g s ., _ u .~ ~ ::! -5 5.'= o 2 :; - >- Vi .9 .g ~ ... - ;< ..... = .., '=' " ?;f~~ ..... CJ .g ~-=..o:.a <25l"i CIl ~ u S ." .. ... .; <:T ~ ~ .~ ;;; E =.~ c..g'E >, = '" g go E " ... .. ... "'e:> i3 v c u CJ t':l 0'0' V) iXl......._ -.:r 0 c. 0 .~ :: ... ... >,., .~ .~ "'- Co:': " = " " ." ~ f;l u -v. 15 ~ 5 ~_ E C :; g&.o C3 E U ;.. c.. ~ 2ti-= Q.CJ>, - '~.J::i .: i:: ~ ...... Il.) .: .<= " - <:T >,~ ... '" ., ~ E ~ ~ c Il.) Qj .52 c > c; .8 e e ...... Be.!: "'0'- ::: Il.) >.'- '2 ; ~ ~ 5 c ;; ., 8- "'0.: :J .~ "'0 ~ ti" ... ... Cl i: CI'J III Il.) >. U c:: E 'i: 5 .~ ti'iUO - ...... ;:;- 19=::; - " .9 ~ ~ ." '" .9 8 ': Q:=-= '" N c: ~ 2 .i cO' - .. <t"i5 ~ = .~ :; "9~ ;; . <.r. ~ ~ ;::; >, " ., c U t':l c; t':l CJ .. 5 >. .. ,. = 8 ." ... ... .~ " ... '0,3 .~~ ~ - -=" '" "= - __$1 ~u~ "'i! Bc;J;>.""'(; .~ <I) _ g 2 II ~Eg~c] -5 ~ ;-.~ 'E t ~..:.:E~~ >- '5 9 a'E ..: /.IJ go.E t .::., 0 o .... oQ..c tLO ~ r-- ~ 'i: (5 '.~_ ;; <1'd"'O.c c tI)>.~uell.) U QJ ~ =' a.. '2 > .- v.l 0 ._ >,c~"::IC.Sr.tl .0 0 '" C I:,) :: .::! "::I(,)"'~.c"::l iU cu 0 - a.. "'; "0 C >. :: 'u .S~;:.a.o~,;:: r::r a.. "::I 0 ~ ~c~::~'="B~ -< g g ~'s 2.~ ~ c..~ctv.g:= o-:2~~u6::lo ''If c.. QJ tI'J "0 (,) ~ r.n = ... '" =... _ = = .2 :.l 9 u U a.. :.J ; o c..:l .~ ~ VJ Q.. .: .~ 1:: .. .- = ... =- ., ~ .;:; .. lo. .. ... " 1:: " .: ., .. ..: = Q o.S:! v.s O"E ~ - .c::: ti <lie:> = 5~ ..; ~ - 5 ... " ;< .. Vl '" E .. g ~ .~ ~ ~ n ~ C ~~6 ~ = , > -5~ 9 r- C"'; a.. < C E o tI'J :l 0 'i: U 8 E Q., ~ 0 C :: C e en 0 ._ :;1'~ ] .u t E :':I C. QJ u.,Occ ~~~ ";uoS ~~ to .. - c; ;:; ;< E ~ .. ., ... '" ii ~ E '" o 0 '" ... - ~ "5rr c..o ~ ~ :; 'W ~ :; :,)""'" u=~ :>, ~ ;; - ....- " = ::.J i: " " Oc.. ? c.. .. -- .~ -= ~ -: :gj]~2 c..:I: on N ... ~ g!!-a a.. ~ =' ~~;;; ... -- o.~< E ;< eJ iU -0 E.<= 51 .. - ". ..>,= ~.o"ii ~ee.g 'OiU-6U "="'" >. "0 a.. _ '2 ..E 0. c; :l v.l U .c ...: 0 ~ Oil VJ oS cu. "'0 Ct.I .~ CJ QJ c..=.~ E.c.S2VJ:E .~ ~ .; .~ c; 'u ";C.C'-,-~ a.. CJ co C 0 iU 0 v.l VJ E 8.c~e~E ... .:; 'E ~ 8. OJ C~iU>..~~ ._..... V:I tI'J "0 _ :;l "0 CIl 2! :a ... " > '" c: ... UJ&:; ~ = = o .;;; .;;: o Wi .~i .", =1 .., gj <i 'lS = j~ - .. 5~ l:: - oi: S ..U ... :: i: :.: ~ ;;J I ::; < =: ,. - - - f .. :E '!a~ - .. &.:e rtl =: '53 co- = ~ -::c .51: !-~ ,. - z - - :.: ~ :.l =: :: z ..: " z ;: E z - - - ... z g :.: ::: t: ::; .. ~ = ..c~4,) co .. .. ~='&. g:~ ~ < W ... = =,2 '8"5 ;c GJ .~ :s~ .. ~ .l!l .!! - C - !: .. ;/ .. :s = ,2 - co JP - i .. .. .J:> " " "3 ~ c;.; 9 ~ :E " " ~ ." ~ E ~ g, E ... E OJ ... == " <;; ." ... > o - - ... c. OJ c. " '" ~ ~ " " .5 1'0 OJ Oj~ -::l 0 ...-::l OJ .. - !3 ~ c. 0:,) .~ CO-::l I a:l; :2_ ~._.~ I 0'"2 :> "5u- ;>_0..0 0:: t) ~ V"J C/'.l-: - - .,.. :: S :: :-:; - -"- O:/iC 0 " >! ~.~ [0'" :5 ~ ....; .~ o - ... " ... '" ~ o " " c ell ::; .: Vl EE"E .~ ~ 8 :; c f: ~ ~ ~ ';;; ~ o I.. .g Vl ,ell: ~"'-"E S -> ~ ~ 0 '0 .- -=',..;1, ~ ;;0- "5 .~ ~ .q_g 5'''~~~-Vl12 ~.~~~~ g-5 i:a <~.=~ ~-5'B Vl ~S:! ..:: c:= :~ -5 ~.~ ~ -:"B ..... >. cu ~ 'g ,g :; _ " .J:> <I: .;;_ u '"'::I .0 r= "':j r= :: ~.~.~ ~ .~ u"f:;:: >.=;;I:O~ c':;;] si:~ l;;.:;.. ~I E g" en ._ 'c; U 0 ~ ~ ~ c:;"''"'::I ~:i.c...... I ~""... _Q.Os::!o"g't: r:: c: ~ r.: ~ = a ~.:: .;'1 r.rJ CQ 'r::; >."" .. >. ~ = ... '"'::I .... .c = "0 - :-:: ... ~ ~~ ~5~ ~~.: ~ ~...oO(l'='"'::IQ. COea ;;l:J:)w=~.a~u"'Ci5: t"CI.5 .....: c..U o~= :> --....CI).5u:)~~ ;;O-C;':::'c= 0.0- = ... (; _'- "0 r.rJ '"'::I .. _~=tl::~=uu= V'l 000.":: 7;j (;j -= ~ u .; OIl ." " ;;; ~ '" " ... ~ - ~ ." ~ ~ " ~ U :lL E >. = :Q :: ':: 'Vi = ::'S: ~Cc:o ~'-; -5 - ... ~ >! ... ~ o " 'i: <.r. Q., .~ E ] ~ ';: :: g, ~ c: ~ ~ .~ ~ 'is. co !:! <~ ~ o u u ;;;- ::: -,--,,-, - ~ ~ ~ g -' ~ ~-' - OIl " '0 0 ~ u ~ ;; ;;.2 3 __;:! ...... ~ ~ I.. ~;~o -5 ~ g ij; G 0 "0 ;j ~._ ~ .: ~c..u~2~ = ~c.. u .- ~ ~ ~ ~ ... 0 CJ ~ -g-="Eue-5 rJ') - c::i ti r: I: - - CJ';: L..o " r::: .. g ct: ~ L.. ~ 0lI~ ""0 ~ g -:=1:01:"0 - .;;; I.. ~ :; .~ orJ')~I:"02 Cu 01:0 52 .0 ~ .- ~ U --0 0 ti iii e ~"CiJ = -v. c.. co:: ~ r: ti~o~";;;;c:: oc..SOOo "0' - v u ~ _ =:~!!~-o _., _ N ,_ u;.!:!.~-tio .c ~,,~ = _ = r::: _ E- c;- ~ -: e .:: .; C ~.; '0' ~ 'u ~ ~e~]Q.8~~ ... ;:; ... ,., ~ " 2 ~ ~ 0 12 .2 <;; tg .::: ;j .,,'" ... ~-5 ." ... OJ E c :; '" ~ o ::: ,S! ~ ;:; c: ;:; ''is. .E ~ c: ,S! U '" '" ... ~ o c. o !o. ~ ';: " U -::l ... "E'E' OJ c. ~ g~ ... 0Il~ ~ 0 ... .. - ~ ~~ " c. S!_ " ." - ~ :; ~ V ..r. :: - :.1 >..= ,... ';: ~ ~:~ ~u::o ~ -5'0 E ~ 5 g v; .;:: Vl I.. .c...:!! ~ ,., >! g..-= f:J E " " c:.. '" ~ 0:: ~ ~ .2 ::a co !:! <V5 .2 '- ti c C ." g 2 .~ ~ "5 " :;n S; ." - g ;fl Q().= ::: U; := :> " c. >, ~ 0 - " .Q -5 ti 0 -6-5~~ ~-(":l:::o_ -o"E-..g_c= ~~ u~:2 "'~c-5U~ ::I ~ ~ 0";; ::: a ~ eL..l.. 0 "O.~S~~...:: ~-5~g]~ :Oo.gr.ll-c= ~,~_-5 r:::~; o C':I E r::: .- ~ Q..~,Qc..~ -;: vi c.S: ~ c.o_ - iU .: 0 ::;> - Vi 0"- ;: 0 0 (.I (.I ~ C;; c..;;; (.I 0 U E I.. ~~~~8.~ - 0.0 u 25 ~ "'0 I.. C C Co. C 0 .g--acr:::.c ... u = L.. Q()_ o >.(.1 o..co...!!i .5~Sz?u:':o:-= I.. ...... 0 (.I E- -ocn"O'>'o"C M c L.. L.. (.I I.. C V) ~ t.: Q. ~ c.~ I I ! ! I I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ie I I Q ~ <= I ~ ::l I .. "'" .( I :=: '" - " - i' - I c z ::.: u: 0 I .~! C. :: :.l '" :=: c. Q ~, - z .(, .( I c ~ ... ::; - I t: z " - :< z I " E <= c I t: ::; I I I I I ... '" c - .s ~~ 5=- cE Oi: =' ..;.I .. .. :is .. .... Ie 1: 8.=,= "' .. :=: - '"5.S! ..- c ~ .. I:: .5 -.: 'i-~ "' .. - :=-5 .. u _ u .. - =='8. ... Jo - ...... " < '" ;.I ... " "'oS! '''OJ '" '" ':::1:: ~ .~ :;J~ .. OJ Q ..i!l .!! - Oc - .. .. ::I ~ :;J .1 - .. .'if' - ~ c .S: " u "2 c. e io: ~ u ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~::: :5 ~ c ::; 0:..1 VlUO .2 U 01)" ::: .:: .- "' ~ - " - o 8 " ~ " u " ~ ;;; "' ~ :~ .~ <cU:: ,., ~~ ~ ;! t: " Cl .~ u ;.! :;;-c - " .=en - '" " 'Q' .. c. "' ~ '" " ~ .. .. ::I " ::I .. - "' " ." .:; ~ '" eo> c ~ l~~ c::;; .S:! c g ,., '" u = tllJ:o::I .::: c ~ ~ c';: ti .S ~ .s c; ;2 '"=' 3: :-~!::! ~ ~ ~ "5 E ~ "S!~2 ;:a ~ ~ - ,., .. .S! :\1 c; ;; E ~ ii c; ~-5 ,. "' -;; :;:';: " ~~ .,; .. .S -;; ~"ll ~ <=_- r 8~ti II ~ .;; :; - ~ ,.,"2 % co;: ~ - c "" 5 ti ~ UClO ~~ B ~ ~ c o g ';: CI'l c.. .~ ~ 3 '::; .0 :a .9 Q. o " '"' " Q: ~ 2 .~ uO _ u <~ ~ 15 U ~l .~ .c;g " " en .c ~ " c c " E ,., -;; .~ "' -= " ~ ~ -6-- c ~ ~ E ~ ~ u :c ~ E " "' " u .... .: :;i.=;; s::~ ~ i:";l C ... ';: - - - .~ ;;j'~ "' " ~ s .. '" .. ~ ~ ~"S! ~ c: ;j ~ o <:: .. ~ c: .;; __;= 3: " ..,; ';; " - ~ == ~ - a.E "' ~ ~ " .c ~ o u '" ;; " "' .:a " 5 ~ " " c..u " c C .~ ~g. i::: S ....u - ~ o ;;..E = -s 8 2 .g .9 0= " " .... -a2 o:.soc;;ut' ;f~.E6~ c":I u ... ~~]~] ~ ~ ~ - E ~ ~ ~ E_ 1: a. - 0 u ~uo .~ 1: it g --;:! ;::;: '" ~ ~ ';: - Q.. 1:> -;; ~ it_:. ::: "' ..., "' "' = ~" o i3 =- 'a~ 'au !::! 0";20=0;; ~ ;; ti < ~ :::<3:;2:: :::N~;S: ~ ::: .~ ~ ~ t:: ~ ;; ~ -= E -:E " .~ ;2 .::. ....;; ~ ~:i!~~ ~ ti:.o~"'O ~ o..:.c,C o~... 5. ; .'"__ 3: .- 'g, c.. ::: - u .c C"; - >c ":I 8. CJ E .::: c foil .... .2i:!~~~~ g~_2.g_-:E tOe:;"'i ~ ~Q..c"'vo c - III =' 0 g ~ ;.!:: S - - - 0: !:fl~t::::..u .= .c ~ 0 50>';::-.'"= ~ ... .c c ..:l:~__ .9-gU:~$: .g ~" ""'=0 .~= ::: c.. ~ ~ _] ,~~ Vi'S U v=; E.:: r: a ~ '2 ;; ..:: :a .~ o ~ ~ ~ ~t:i.i:-= -58 ..., "'" .0.0 -= ~c:: E-;; E!:fl tl: .= " " .02- "' ~ -;;; ~ == .. 01)-", .- ~ "' " .g E " .c ... E= e.( " E ;:; c " c::.." E - E ... ;:: i: 8,.e8,. ,,-= " OEO I I I I I r- N E " ~ -= ,., .::: " ~ t:: ~.. u: .~I .." -, ~ <1 ... ~ = .i~ " =c.. ~ E .- Q tu > ~ - :;..: ;- <: ~ ::" S I ::;; <: =' .- ..., .~ ..., ~ " :c - ;., ~t: &.;=: l:l =' 'Q.i ..1ii = '" -= .51: ;-~ :; z .: c.: ~ .,.; =' '" :E-5 B ~ = =='&. ""..- ""ll. = <: 8 ~ Z <: ...= Q Q '= -g II := "i: ::;;~ .. ..., z =' ~ E z o ::;; z ~ E ~ .. E - ... " 1ii Q .!!l .! - " - " .. = a :E = .9 - j - 51 c '" E " '" .. oS .. .,.; it co ...l .~ ~ '"0 .~ '- = ;:; j;;:tn ~~ ;; .n0 " ~ -5 0 -' ~ ~ 6 g ~ "j;;: v. ':; c...~ ~ .~ :: OJ 0:.. '" ~ ~ '5 _ i:: OE. ~ 'oE. 0 ~ "0 V5 t ::: ti < \":I c:;~~"Os ~~~~C: ~ .9 E- o " ";; - .~ c; = .~ :: - ~ i: = 0 en u ~ C .:: = u " ~ i co '" :: ~ = .. u .., .. co ;:; " .- Q .. Q. .., - ~~ Oii=co:..l=\":I~ III .;:; ~"j;;: U .0 '- :::I ~[g~~ E>'~~~ .:: \":I g.=:! 'E B.!1:.a ~ :::I CoI ::::: u 0 u:'~C':c..:;: 1;l -" U 0 > ,,= c .~.- C " 0 M 0 ~ ~ =,= o:ia oog~~ ~ C 1.0.= ... C 0 u; 1-0 0- o ';;.j d B CoI t;';;8~-= 2 E CO;;; in o.S:!-5- S ~ ~_"O U'=Ul~g 00- i- .. .5 :::. 8 "B E =~..cEuoC C1"O~o[.= ~ ';: 1: ':; .: :;:; .5 .g ~ g' ~ '" ~ 'w " '"" " M = _OJ ;:; =c;; .:: '" co .:: C ;:; .. .- o .: i I ...: ~ .:: "E S:! ;:Ev; :: ~~ ;; ~ 0 "'U .e~ ~ ~ M C o ~ Vi .;: v. ,,_;: c.. .:!: '"' ~ c:: ...; =--'= v = U M o~ . - '" ~ - 5 ..9 '= l:C 5N M'" M ~ c:; u ~<:~ ;>,..,'" ~ = M au ~ o-tii <: N ... " ~s:: ~ .~ ~ 0' ~ o~ .-:::_" 0 .: ~ E 'j;;: M = -; & ~ tf.) 0 v: C -5. ~ is ~ M OJ 0:.. -:::~ '- .: - 'en "'2 u u ti .e ~ l~ .~.~ 5 "'B .e ~ ~~ ~ "0"0= U'l..g ';;: u .5 .a 'ra 0 2uoo-S o.~c.8u;l: ~:.; ''::: en :oJ..5 J:) III .~ ~ .::J >. _ i: f,I) U ~ :=..2 t; g:2 E iii 'ii ~ "0 (/) 'C ,q C g ~ .~ ,,0:.. .... u u ';: - BEt:]B-= ~~B:;~'o Uo.~~.~Vl .~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ .. o ().- C 0 - .",_" =e'N,-.g> "&"::'60=0 ~ ().--ug'E ':-COOC>M" - u C ,- Q., E"':: E..:!..,.~ sp'e-oo].:!~ ~;=cof-~~ i:: :.a ';: _~ S:! Vi :: ~~ :; ;:: 0 "'u -5C5 .2 IlJ =0 :.;; .. ~ :.::,_= 'E_ ~ o ~ ._ .. 'i: ~ .~ .E s....@ " " " c: ;a 2 .~ uO' - " <:~ o '"'0 ~:.a ~ M o ;:; .g i: ~~ "'"0 ~ :0: _ '" '"' E " o U B ~~ ~ ~.= ;:! '0 ~ .;;:= ~ In -;:;; ~ ~ o.(J'- ..:.'. r; ~ e.i.= r: g 5 c ~'E ~ ~ ;;; ._2 In ~ 1:.1 C ~~'_~u,,~" - - ~o~_ >. C '2 ~ C _ 'E ,S:! a 0 ~~8.'~~~ V),=g-~;-5 ~3oN~.2 ';;; '; ;::! _,_ In c~~Vi~t: o ~ 1lJ::S U c'u'o ~ ~ ?: .9 ~ :: IlJ "'0_ c; E ~ ~ ~ g; t E c::; C tl(I.~ 0. 0 :I ,- C > ouVJ:;~"O ~ =- ';:; 'i: ; ~ .= _ In Eo... ~ ~ 'C .c ~ o .g ,~ ~ 0 '3 :I ~.;::! '" -.g_ 'u 12 .. .c '" ..;:;::.2~ I I ! I i I ! I I I I I ~ ,~ i.: " g. I I I ~I I I '"' ~E .:..::: "':I c.~ C ,= ~ c.. E ';;; g. ~ c ~ ~ C IlJ ;:: In IlJ ~ -::I ~.~ ~ ~ ~:: .. ';;; c:J ~ "0 :.a ~ ~ ..::-:::: 0 _. CJ 1'..1-- ~ 'i:::";: ~.= :I .. c:J In 0'" C -::I ~ ~ >.';; ~ ~:E e =: c .- 0. Ioool ~ ?: u .. -'-u~ ~ 1lJ';; 0 u M ~ "'0 ,- IlJ ,- c'O V) :: ~~~~ t: IlJ ~ ~ "" c E IlJ .: ,9 'i: .;; U ,= 0... .5~~E V) 0. _ ._ I I 1 1 I I. I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I WI ~! ::;: ~ <' ... :> :;~ :::: ~ e s._ c "i: 5 "W ;> " ;; ..., - :: :: :.: ..., - :; I ::< <= =: ~ ..., i :.. " :;s .~ ~ - .. !. ." ",- " =: 'Q.i ~1i = " c -;: t->. ~ ~ :.: ..., ::: ~ =: ~ ~ -=-~ .. " - .!/.~ is - _ Co :. .. - Co=" " <( j :: z <= ... " .. :> ."i .. " '=c ~'i: ::;~ .. ~ ~ :=: ..., E z - ~ ::< z ..., 2: :.: '" E ::< ..!!l ~ :s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.:.'~ :z: ~:... ~ - -~>. ;.,.~ ~~ :; ~=:P..s:: :o;p ,-,__tn'-l .e - - " ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ ~ .E .~ ., " c:.. ,"" ~ ~ :: ~.;::.:: 'E.~ au = o"Oo-v;~ ~ r; ~ ~ ~ .2 ~~~ac:5 o! .~ - :; "';;: " .. = ::i " ::; " .. ;: .. JiP - ~ .~ c.., - ~ __~ -:S .~ -=~ -~- ~ - - --g -2~~Ir.~'''~ ~";;!>...~';n~ -~-u~=_-" "2 ;; ~ ~ ~ e g ~ ~=- ~ x >. Vi ';;) 'E -.. ..o:r$:!c>'- - - e:i Q.O ~ .8 c :;::= ~';;;:r, ~friii~~.g~.~ .c 0 ::: a u "0 ': .... ~ "':; '" S 6 ~ = i!.~ ~ _ ~ _ ::.J .... U o .;: ~ ~ !: .S! 12 ~ ';; g $:! Co. ~ :: ~ ~ g ~ :O:;';:Q"~,,~~>' ::s "'. ;;lo ,.:.., "";l t) c e :fl >. _ 'Vi 0.,,;;, u ._ .~ -;:: e ';; c ~ ~o is. -=~5:":~ '-' '0:1 -~u= ... 0 0 ., _ 0(1 C u...._-.e.J:;.;;;~ : g .g .q. ~ 0 s...g ::I 0:;..:::_0;0...."-1 .;:....~::s U'l en?i ~"5! c.. ~ i:.: c _ l.. - E~&.ce.l:.=o~ ,-,:.l,- c.e:-u;;:;;;; ~.:::c 0 o=-~"'::_"";l .~ ::;; ~ ":; >. i: :c ti ':J >. ":: := :: U; ';;j ,... 5 ~ ';; tn/;.lE3 -5 "5 ~ .2 o 00 ;;; !:i 3u=_~_2 .... a:.a's.: <Il .2 ::s == C .... c c: .1a .5 2!. -5 8 ~ .~ -g c.. ~ '- 0.:: 'E V'l U = 1:::; V3 U <~ '-~: .w ~ ~ 0:0 ~. 1: .~ ~ ::> ':J g,= :a ~ -'" ~ c::; '" ~ I ~ ~~1: .9 ~ ::: ~ ~' !j ~....-::I~,-~ 2 'Vi "'" .2 l"""", - __ - c.o CJ ::i ~ '32 ~:P;; ~~ :;~~~g"" QjJ = g .~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ v; i: ~ CJ ~ :; c (ij ~ ~ ] ~ i ~:=.' .~;;-5 .- ~ .... ~ z - ~ ~.g e:; ~_C':l ~.~ ~ C':l ~ - :::: 2 t: '0 (5 ~ 5 .;: 8. co: U I;; '.. ;;0- QlJ =- .J3 "~ .9 .... _ -= .5 0 '-.9 CJ = U 0 CJ ~ 0 ~~o CJ-;:::-e~ ._o~CJ2fl:*"__o....;::: U = = ~ '.. ;;. C':l.::- ~.!2=-_iifr&.~a ou-M>u ~U g-E"B:i~ ~ ~E-g ""O"'_=_>"_~CO: l!:: = = .- (U = CI)"'O en .. ._2 ~ :s "c..c .;: !:p;;' :; Eo- co: ~ ~ 0 -=.;: S:! 'C ~ "B.";l is.. ~ i: E U _ Q.. ~ Co.o ('; ('; co: >.0 0 .:: C':l C':l 0. ~ :: E '- :> ~ "'" " '" :; :,) " ~:.= cd: ~""': ~ ~ ~ E V; ~ ~.[ fr = ~ =~v .e :; .s "'" E ~ _ ~ u c ~ ~] ~ ~_i: ;:- :::~ - --~ :a ? .9 - '" uO - = <:;i ~ ~ ::; -9 > vs~ ~ '3 '_~~ C :: - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ i: ~::a u _ :,):c ~.::&::: ;:; " '"' .0 "'" ~ .~ :( ~ 5" ::; 0> " "'" .s ~ t: " c:.. " o ~ o CI) ~ 5-'~ G;; ....:.= u Q..'u ~ .~ u.;.: :; - .~ QQ.: ~ 2 .: -g 0..S:! g, NS:!O>( >.Q -= Q.. Il.) ~ f " 0> " 0- '0;;1; '"' E => o U .,g 25 - .- s] "'" 51 " " ~'" " . '" ~ QQ _CI)~ " .,; ~ ~.~ OIl:: :::: C:,.;,: .- ";l ~ EIl.)~ 0'" ^^ 0.'- C ~ 0 'u t: ~:.= 0'- 0 <.> U "" ~ ~ " '" ~ '5 ~ ~ E 'i:~ 5-5 0';; -.; - "., '" ~ ~ " u " " >...: ~= ;; I v_ .5 ... ~ :; ~ 0 ~ :> _ ;; u '-~~- " -= ~.; a-:.;.. ~ ~ ~ ~ c:; 0 -::i - ;=_ 0> S:EO ~ Q: ~ ; .2 ~ E- CO :; <V5 a- N '" " ,:; 00 ~ ~ "',;! ;;. ~ a '" . C':l :5 ~ 8 .9';;; U .;; ~ .;;: C':.... ; 0 I:': Q.. OJ :-n ~ .5 III :E -- - c E.s. 2~ S-"'B ~ Q..- ";l :; U g. ~ ..c ~~~o:;~ r;;Q~ac;o"O UC.c~~ oi:l.~ Co) CI)._ C':l .... 0 :it 'S g 'u @ c..~ 0 ~ s; C':l '- "'--- g co: ell V5cC'Q.....CO: c co: e 0 f'J'l -=.2.~Q.~~ u:;...._._u E.c o.t:-g ~ ~ '5 ~ "S..: ~ c...~ ;.. 0.. co: ~ ~"'C.cucco: <.>,"="'C-5';:~ .U." _ ._2 C ~ c; .... .- 0 0..-5 c:. \." ::: "0 .- ~ E 'S: .g ~ 0-0....'- l"""". .... c:J """ ~ '- \0 c.."'C ~ 0.. 0 UI "" ;;i III E: < ... := = 15 .9 ; 'is as. e = .- := t~ ;;. :: ~ =< ~ ~ ~ I - ... < =: " o =: c. - '!.= ..- = e -e .5 .;: ..~ " ~ .. =: o ... ~ =: "' .!I .c-= " ... ~ ... .. - =='8. 5::l: e < a ~ z < ... = := := -g~ .c~ lj .C ::e~ " z ;: ~ E z - -' ::; z o <: =< '" -' E ::; .. - " Q .i!I .! - = - .. :;;; ii!i=- = .. 8." :tJ'" =: ~ ;,; :;: .~ .. .. " ill .. ::e = .S! j - i ~ ~ ~_ -_"'_'" QO = U s:: ,,:i..'~ ~ .~ ~ ~.~ ~ E ~ C"oc.u;2.~.~ '" - _ c a:; - ~u:.J>~5 -...-::::uOOo _ .....~ ~, ~..... t:: ..:= 2 _ - - '"" 5 :I C. C .~ -= ~ :~OE:g~.g U:::_oo..c Q.~QO~_3:v.i ~€'~~~~8~ ~ooouo>"'':: u l.. ~ 3: 3: e ~ u l..;a~.Eoo5~ ..g .~.: ~ 5."5 0... OJ - 'y ...: .2 .:: ~ :c :E :r: ~ u... '; ';; - ~ ;:;!I ~ uc~_'"' u'O'o"''''''"'' ~:E a~~~ ~j .gs.."Ou..."O~o ;.a...~~o~..5~ - 0 0 E:= ~'c c = _ Q.._ <Il .... _ '''"':::1 0 :I = t) s::'~ ~aag-8.5uC; ;; ~ -= .. .. :I: .. '" E " - ... ~ := :: U -= " <: .~ := .. ... ~ ~ 'u " 1M .. .. := U ::c v = O"E :;: - cr ~ vi::C .. 3~ .~ ;g := >. ::::l~ >. I': :5 E r.n'Vi ;: ",=,'S; 0;0 ~o .9 ~ o ~ "i: III Q.. .~ ""~ c .: ;.; c '" ~ ~ .. ""0. g ';; o:i -N 0.." ~ - = :; ~;::i ~ - - ~'':: ~ .S ~ ::c .E --g ~ _ :I 1-0 _ r; -.r. e.o - v:l E' ;; :> U -;! ;,; --~ :: .~ '0 :J i: - "'0 r~~~~ ~v;-go; -__~~"'Oo ~ t .~ 5 o u ::: ~ ? .c~:C:l..e. r-'" cu_ "il_c;; o "" ~ <Il ~ ... _ a .~ ~ s = _ ti I': 0 u.9~:3:,~_ ~ (I') ~ E t.;.. :0: >....c:: c; c~a':E U'"O _ 0 IU ~ ~ ~ ~ i) Q.l E 0 t'I:J ClJ ~ ClQ.-.!:!-= r- ,0 C ~ - ... ~ u .5:.J !! i) "0 c; tC _ 10-0.!:! VJ ~ ~ ~ !! "'5 .S:! "'0 r.n.~ a... ~ $.~g8~~ ::c c :iE, U .5 0"0 0 ~ :> ::;.: ;;;>::t.:.. 0:: ti >. I c.ri'CE.......-: _ c :::I c,.';; ~ :: r~ ::..1._ .....Cl'JuO.:::l ~"5 .9 ~ ~ ;,; :> := 'i: '" ~ .~ ""~ .. - ~ .:= :: i: " " .0 "- ~ ::; .~ c:ci -N 0.." ~ ~ "< :;:N '" >. ~=..c"'::1 :.;..:: '" a... c.. SE ~ i ;E~ - :: ~ r35 ::2 .5 en 2 ~ " "" ~ .5 .." c .2 :; ~ .&:i 'U.o 'U QQ ~ ~ .c '" -=~ ~:e'E " :> ~ "'~~2 .:=:.= C':; .;._ .5 .~ ~.C] ~ o 12 ~._'! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " 0. ~5.c:", ~"'::1-a...~ r- .!;:: ~ :.l a... N -z;; a... 'i: eJ C': :::I 0 t;..c eJ ~ E ~E=~= .;;; .~ = ~ ~~~~.s .." .:: ,g o :: ~~ ~ 0 .." .. .. ..:: ~"il &~ 5.~ ri:i 8~6~ I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I gl I '"' c ;; o I I I I I I I I I '. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I UI ..' :;1 ~I Qi -<:1 ... Q = 5 .S -::~ 3e. c = .. Q tu > Q ~ :.: "'" - c. ;;l I - "'" -<: Q( " "'" - Q( c. .. :is -... i!!t: 8. If ~ = ... = Q.s ..- = ~ -::1: =- .- .. ... .. > .. '-' ~ Q,: o c. :.l Q( Q Z -<: .. :l 3-5 '" ... - ... .. - =~~8. ... E ... Q -.~ vi '=. :: v; :~ = 5"3;> o~ua3 -5~ ... - ~ :; ~ 'i: "- Q.. .~ '" " .i o ~ ... " ... '" ~ >. 2 ell .... .= '-::-""::' ~ .:.: ell ::: Co. $: c eJ:l'::: ... __. - !i 0 --. .= ~ co .E ~ Co. 5: =' E ;!l r; Ue V} Q,{).= en ;:; .. .- Q .: "' ~ '" '" ... " .. " ;:; " :: "' .. .. - ~ ... .. .. c:: 0l.I CIl ~ E] u ::I ~ ~ 0 L.. ::.. = ~ ;; ;:; -= ~.eo f:: "'l % .. 0 II) 0 u :E ~"2 .. .. :~] 6 .... Cl.()'= C 0 c E .c ii "::: ~ C;.2 ~ "' .... !! ~ "2 t 'i;j 25 c:a ~ j::; " :: o .~ ~ ~.c~ "' 10 ~r;.c 5 "' 100 ... S! \0 Cl.-= lmJ. !l, ~,,~ U,5U OLI .~ ~ E " ~ ~ .. "" c. - 10 .. .." 'i " ~ .." ;:! u C "' ~~ 5 10 10 - .....:: ~ - ~ '0 0 .::! i:: >..::.1 ~ :E ~ " " - 1-0 E! :Q ~ fi ~ ->.." .. " E 0 E O.c il.l ~-~ "'C .5 :; ~ ~ i- ... ._ 0 " - - .- "":::;I ~ t.I U :.a~~ I- C .:: ~ 'E ~ III ~ "'0 0 "_~. o E :Q ;; I... u 'u- t': 0 "i) :r: i:i!i .....:! ;; '" c:l .. w"E ~ 0'," ~ 5 ~ C::c:lU E .9 -c:l- -~u~;.~ ... 00'2 ..: o E.~ 0..0 ~ ~c:: fi" s '" " .S: E- O ~ .. " .. '" .. "' .. " "' ~ .~ 0 u"'5! .9 c:: ::; OLI ~ U "_~ o ~ u ';: ~~5~ ~ u 10 ;;; ~[ " 10 I... c~~ >. u .9 g.I-;:).c E g "'0 ~"O"":::;I ~ 0 o~ ~',u~ ~"'O .~ '0 _ .c ~ "'0 == :3:__~ u 2 :::. c I:':l -.- ""'" - cOw."" ;;>:': 0:: 0() C ;:: !:i c-: 0 = E _-".: oc-:-... ,..~ ~ g ~.sC::"'C~"'5!]t;.- ~ c i= .~ Q.l >. ~ g '5. ~ ~ t:: "0 ~ ::s ~ ' ~ ~ O(j ~ >.'~ 0 III IIlUS=!......1Il ..., ~-.-~u~ "_~_"'=' ;; ~ ~ .; ti.= ~ 3 .... _ - 0"0 ~ c"O c; 'u 0 ... 2 -;; ~.g ~; ~.~~~ ~:_~~~;~'~c; Ii; ::s '2 "2 ~ ~ ...c:: t': a ~ 5 ':: C:i:CO=~~'-e"'~ ~u" d:)Q:::iUO->. Q..>."':'c 0 Ef-~Q..CQ~c~f-C~ S~ c;~ ~ ~o~ t':'c;j~ ~ as t':'Q. ~~ ~; E>~__$:!~ E g-~ 0 f-_S-..c:o"- -=uti.~,:: ~ c "0 .~ U ] -B ~ ~ -B ~ ~ fi S e;!:~Q~f-;:;_ a o;:;~ ~Q.."B ~~....:."O'~e.."O~~ aE3 III C3 U C;~CC ~"Oi- ~ ~~ ~o ;;E"~'-'U!:l1:!~,,..,....~: =~ ,. ... iU ... C1 ... .; ~ ... _ ~ ... G]~~~~~~~~~~~i CQ g U .. O''E ~ ~ =: t c:l ~ " c~ " ,9 _ U 0 .e ~ ~ ~ " BEg a ~.~ i: 'i: :: I- C _," Q.. i.J.. c t': -::l.-, ~ ~ = 10 0 .: ai'a 0....., 0 0.." -. I: ti ~ c-= ~ .;:-<:.. :;>...., '" " .S: ~ ;;; 10 u -.2_ "g "E E a ~ a .0 .. 10 ~:I:U ~ '" -" '5 E -g e.J E ~ a e ~ c:; O(j-' ~ 0 ~ r-c:~ ~ OCc; :; ,9 C,) " ;;; 's !! u ~ '2 ~ ... ~Euii 5- -::l E 10 "0.0 ..u .. E"'=' C e.J I- .2 E ~ cu ii t'= E ..:I: ~ ~<~ .= ..::0 ~ u: t::i ~\ ~ :; - ';;;; o ti:~ uoo >> u " .. c. " u u o M 10 >>" .r.;.s "' ~ 8 g - .- ... co: U 0 ~. ... :> CQ ~c.. :; i::: ~ ;; ue c.. .: V) "' " ~~ >. III IlJ ~ ~.:: ~ ;; '5 ;;; 10 ;;.0 'i: ~ ~ ~ tn"c ;:: ~ 'C:; co:: >'oO"E-o ~.: ~ ; co: - :ll IIl]X_ .....:: It,) U ~...-=< ~ .. o c ~ ~ ~'~-g'c u 0 ~ 'C:; c u -0 ... collJllJf- oS .0 ,:: "0 d:) 50 ; g] Co! C "0 Ii; ~ .2 ~E~;;; o :ll III E 'ii ~!i ... :> 0 IlJ a ~ Q..';; .: .~ '" .0 .." .. C;5 ~u " '- -0 E 8 Wi ", ~I ", Co Co ...:, ... Q = .~ ~ .. = "a. ~ e "E: =' ..u .. - - :.;: .... <: :: s I - "" ..: =: ;.:l o ~ ~ ~~ = ... &:1:: "' .. :II: - "5.2 "0; = .. _c .: 1: ""~ '" '-' ~ .... :.: ~ ;.;; =: "' .!! - .=-5 ~ it = =='& ...... - ...=- = ..: 8 - z ...: ... = Q.S! ...- Q 5 .or:: ;:;1: ::;;~ ;.:l ~ =: - E z - '-' - "" z - E: <: '" E - "" .. - " Q ~ - -= - .. .. = ; ~ j - .!o - ::E Cl 0 l.i .s 0"2 ~ g IX ~ .. ",'" - c ov; ;; ..:>: ;_~ N >.= .2 -= ~ v. 5 ~-:E uoo ~o !2 ~ ~ c o g 'i: VJ Q.. .~ ~ ~ ] .~ :: ~ -""::lro-i ;!: :: o '.... 0 .~ cc .% 0:';:0 ~ ::: ~ :; co: ~ ~~~ .~ .g- ~ E- '0 ~~ ;r. ~ .= '":l vi :: t c: 0(,.:::: :-: c.J ~ - ==IIl'~~C: :e 'en :: := '.. ~ ::: ~ .... ..... Con ~ ::.. "";:l :: tIS "' ~~< Vi~ ~ ~ '5 EE ~ E r- Vl e-:: ~ " .. .. 0 ~ E"E~ at ~] ~ co= .... "' .c .. " > :>""0 ;;J- ~ u !Vl] eo~ eo " C 's] E ~ E eu~ ~ !- ,.,-;; c ~ e-:: i: .. OJ ~ > " .- .c"O ~ < " .s I 1 SS :>: I O'"E ,,_~, I:;:: := I'" 5 I~c:. 13 ~ ~ c ,.,- 0 -;:: ~ -;:;; :; fr:~ 800 o~ o .. >! ;;; " "' .:!l ,., g " - Co .- " c " - u ~ Oc.. -' ~ ~ g. ~ ~ I...: "0 ,,", ;!: :: :5 "'_ 0 .~ ~"E. 0"'0 ~"O ~ ~ ... ~ 3:~~ ~ ::; o W I 0:. 0 ';'; ;;....:::: :J .0;;;; -,;:p-:::l VOl.... .= "'0 - t: :-: ti = ~.s E :.J e-:: - u ::: Vl'~ ~:= .E'~5:o::SrE ~ ~ 'i.~.: ~ OJ ;; 'S 0"- _c_~ ~ ~ I "'~ ~ "'0 .~ ~ ~ ""::l 'i: ii :J ~ at] E ~.r: " .. ~.o ~~ :!l_ ~ ;;;; .~ 'i=ii~ .. - ~ - E-< ~ .. 0. o ~ 0. ,s OJ OIl " ~ " o .. "' :a ~ ~ ell .9 ~~ 'ti- C " r--"- .. OIl '" '" OIl .;;; ,., ~ w ;; "E~:E '" i: ..;::! C r:J >.,- 0 c::l <;:: .: ';;' ~ rr ';;: Vlw05 ~oc ::.l .::2 .9 ~ S c; g '_""i: ~ ::; .~ "'0 ~ c: ~ 2 .~ co - .. <<ii ,., .c "0 .. :i ~ X or. ;;:'00 ::: r:J ~ "0 "0 OJ :J<= " :Jg ~:::r " ~ .- .. ,.,.c :;5~ U .... - .;;; 0 oC_ ,.,~ -E. ~ .~ .. .. .0 ::: '" ~ ~ E .. ~ ~ ]~B Vl E c ~ ~ 8 .;; 2 .... ~ 0 0 ~ .S 3 c: C I.. <n ~ .9 2"E Q.. U'- t ~ ;;; c ~ .;0.9 ~ ~ ~ :':~ - ;:... 2 r-- .0 0. <:; .. '0' ~ C- .. N " 0: "' = ... u ~ '., :: .. 0. ;; ~ ~ . '" :: "' "E ~ :3 ~ .. >! a :5 ~ "E .= ~ 8 'Vi"2 ~ 0 ~ g '[ ~ 12 .E (/'J I.. IV ~ ~ '.'"_ 0 01) ':..I - (/'J :': - E _ 1-0 0 I.. .:: :': 9:''::.0 U '5 r.n :':- ~ _ ~ .:0 t 01) ~ = Vi 0. C - 0 ~ IV ~ ell I.. _ .c t': ::J 01).= I..OI.....c:::: 01) "'0 IV r:J .c ;:...;"E.c <n = N :5 '5 ell ~ ~ OI)..::.S:! 0"'0':: I1J .;; r:J -g .'::: .~ u E::i '? :': ~ ~ ,:: 8 .6_ ;::!::I ~ "'0 _ v.I ~ r:J ~ ~_ "':::I U t.: ~ :;::1 IV E 05 ti ::: 8 ~ 0.3 E I ~ 1'-2 I ~ I~ ;;; I'" ,so : ~ .9 :; i ~ ~ , '" N '" 2:: ~ ~ .9 .~ wO .~ 1< '" !i_ "'a IV - "' I 5 := us: "' '0 u o o ~ 0. "0 " .c .;!: :;:; '" u; .. -5 .~ <('013 ~.s~ ~ ;; ;...; 0 ::I ::: ..:.c :r E ~_~ " " 0."3 '0 ~:5 0 ~ c .... .. ~ .5 ~ r; ~ ~ "' o .. "' "' '" .. "' u '" a-;: a c .~ IV .. S -5 0 ~ E 'E o U 'r: - c.. .. "' '" ",.c r--c.. OJ~ I.. S L.::,:: ~"":" .~ - '", :; a.- o ':..I .:: woo ~.= ~ E ] ~ '" ~ o '" C..:-S ~ e c "':::I - :::: .9 ~ o ;; U It) I.. ~ 0 Vi .~ ~ ~.~ ~ -<.:: ~ ;; ~ ~ ] V5 'C VJ , ~ c f; E ".o~ c '" 0 8.< IV E 0\ 0 Co..,. 0. ti g: ~ .~ 0 Q.. o - .. a~-5 u';:: .... .c .5 a - " >.o~ .0 ~- ~ "0 Q.. ~ - " - gti~t 2 :': .: '; o="O~ ~ '" '" 'E 8 :; .~ u -;: 0 ell "'=' c ti C I1J 0 ::I 0 I.. ';; "'0 U IV ell C .c Vi ~ 0_ 'OoOU"O ~ a~ ; I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I ~ - ~ :.: ~ I ;;;; I :;;; ..: I =: .. ~ ~ ~ ~ .. I ~ z - - :.: Ui ~ ..' 1- .-' 0:1 '-' " i '" ~ ::: z .. oS ::: OJ :; 'll .. Q, ... c E 'i: :> '" " U ~ ;> ';; - " :;; -;i.... = t: 5.lf: '" " =: '5.i ell- = ~ '= c .51: f-~ '" .. - - = i...!t C"l ~ 5 ='S'... ...'"- ...ll. = -< 8 ... = :> .S! ~ ... I ... -: c ..; .. ;: 0 '" ::E .. ~ '" ;> .~ " '" ;; '" '" .. '" '" ~ j - 1- - i .~" 0 -... E c; ~ ...,"_ i ~5 ~ ~c~'~~a_ _>> -0 ~~~]~~ ~~~~ * ~ -._-. -="-~-- ~:~>... ~~ ~ ... _ _ >.J... 0 t.= ~ a ~ : E ~ ~ .~ __~~~~~~'6~~O!~~~~g~~t~ :J 0 - 0" C [,/'J u ri:; ::2 ~" ~ (": u .... .~ "'0 ;::! C ~ 'ij _1:; g 1-0 ~ U : ; '"0 ... - - 10..0 U - ~ _ .. oC "'-'.u-_~b._-=YS_"",~>~u_'"-c.. - .::;~ : 0> ~ ---0 ~ ': _0 ~ .., -'- __ : _.:.~~ ~C::::l ~'-=g:l.:""_o._ 'r; 0"'- S (,) 1-0 tl 0 -g .::! -e.: g .g ~ E E ~ 'il 5 5 E~~~uoo~~'~~~ff~::::lCguC~uE 8 ~ 8.'" .:=~ ~ 9 '[ .~ (;> C ~: ~ ~ ~ 2 ... :E! .9 0. 00 ~ "'" - ... _ _ 0 ':::; ~ ::I .::::: U ';; 0 >. E 9- _,,_ ::; ~E.~_2[,/'J"ooo -- "'0--'--'" _ ~-[,/'J[,/'J~_E~]~:~...o'~E~.:::::~~ o~...~c~-5~Hg~~:~:u]l~~~]~ ~~~-.2__~~~ ou~-"'" oou-o u -~~>.u "'Ou~->'-'~E::::l~.-~"'Ou'~~ '~[,/'J~;;c..o ~~-"'OEo'"O'_~~cc[,/'J= UU[,/'J ~~u2~c];8ue~~~~~~~ ~ g.;;; ~ .5 c E lU ~ 2 C ~ lU ~ c.. 10. 0 == i; S E CIl E'"_~--P=~ ~~~~-e~1o. CIl o~ _ ..._..._10.0 _~.~ c.. ot)~o ~~$_'"->o ~.~o~~_~~~_u~t)._~ _... (.l~ c..-OC,,2-lU CIlC':J~~ ~~:~~5i;a~~~'~~~o~~'~~.~[~ >CIl_~&~C~lU~~~~&=~=u~~Io.C':J 13 S g U lU ~ .~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ !! ~ & ~ g .~ 0 ~ e:; =: ~~ff~~uCll~~_- .~c~c..~e-uggQ ~~c~B~1o. <-]g~O~~c..lU c _-_'"_~~~E..~p~~-~CIlCllU~'-~lU=~;~ ~~~_'A' =CIl_M~UCIl~ClU ~ooco __. _,__~co=_._Q.,C':JCIl~~O_t)r.J=U I I I .2' ;; ~ VJc~~ I] ~ ~~ 5 s c VJ 'Vi UJ t ~ -0 .~ ~alU~i5 .e~ " : 2! o 5 'C .,. Q.. .~ ~ '" c: ~ ~ .2 ~ E- CO - .. -;;:cli .~ ~B :.oVJ ~ o o - U ~ E ~ ~ 0 OJ - ~c;-= ~ ~E""a t":I g..= ~ ~ UJ a en U ~ ~ VJ ~w:: E u ~ Co '" ." :> ~.. <l "0 ;;: > " o en .- -0=6"'2 -gUJiS ~.~ r.J 'g t: 15 ",.2 ~i;~ -oU';; a E '0 0.0 lU ~ ".::: - ,_ :; VJ ." 0 '" f tI) C ,",0;; -5~ ~g< 00 .= :os :: '" ~ ~ .. Oll C. Oll .B '" .;;: " ... o " _2 ;;: " S?>> .. '" ~ ~ -E~ o ell':' " - =00 -5 'i: ,g ~ ,,-:5 '" ...ell o " "S? '" .. e.~ 5.8. I I ! [ , ,.., ,.., 1.1' I ." ~: 0;;' =- ~ ... = = .e .s _0: 5=- a:: E 1: = ..1.1 ~ .l!l ~ -= - ~ ~ f- <: ~ ~ I - "" <: == .. ..., ~ ..., ~ .. :c "i~ - .. &." ~c. == '"5.i !C'a - u _I:: .5i: f-~ .. ..., ~ :.:: ~ '::" ~ == '" ~ == ..Qt:4oI " .. = ~='&. 8::1': i <: 8 ~ Z <: ca S 'g~ -=c !i1: ::;;~ ,. ..., z == '" E z - ..., - "" z @ :.: ,. E ::;; .. .. = Ifi .. ::;; <: oS i - ~ .. :; ~ - ~ ,10 ] i <: ;;; "E ~ C"" t; >. = C c: = .::: .;;; :; ::.;; '" " ;.::; Vi uE 0...1 ~ ;:; '" .e x ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~.1a ;: ~u::;:;:::: '" :; , ': c:l 0..", 0"", ~ " ::J ~ ~< ~'" -; .~ ~ ~ u '" -"'='--' ~]; ~ :: '" = .. W :: " .~ ;;- '" '" ";! B <:: .. "::> E ~ <:: " ~ :; .= >. ~c.. ~~~ " ~ ~_ "" u - ::: ~ 'i: 'S :t: ~t~ ~ ,- u '" ell CI'l ~ .9:! t 5 .= " yo-5 U:":l-::l " " " '" o Vl 0 E t: ;; c;;=-::l ue.S::! ~~~ t ~ ~ = Q,(j'- ~~1l '" ~t:i~ r-- .: Vi .. .. .: .:: !cn ;: '" " .. :s <:: " .:> i: C. '''' " ;; 0.. '" u u o '" '" :::- " E~~ ~ ~ 2 I:l "E .~ :~ [.5 o .~ .9 5.."'g ].sE " = ClO -5 ..: 1::'- -::l '2 '" " ""'" " ~ ~ ~ '" " '" CI'l ._ .c. ~ 5 0 "'" '" " 'S: ~ ~ E ~ :it c..g~ .9 c..- ell .5 !:! ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" ~.;; c;j 'I ;:; ~ .:= :; "1.1 t: "" ::J >. = 0 c: = .;:: ";;; :; :: ';; '" " ~us:o ~ u 0 __= u CJ srs - :: :; ~ - '" '_.E ~.~ i: ~ l;: C ." ~ '" " ;; 0.. '" u '" o '" o ~ " '" " '" '= :: ~ 'Co .E ~ ~_' ~ E ,- tl ~ -, :51 u' ';:1 .. .. = <:: '" ;: '" " .:: = - ";! ;; .~ -5 ~ e:; t " '" t;.;:~ '" " '" """, " "'" " .. '~,~ ~ l5..~;a CIl ';;j .9 ~ ~ '" "'.0 :~ is 'u .5 g CIl ~ 1->' c; Q. C':I C = i- ~ ~ CI'l ~ "'0 E '> ~ 8 c; >. ~ ... Cii ~ C.!:! I:lLl .t: t: ~ ell C .. rn 0 r=.= ao~"'N~- .5 == ~ .;::: _ "0 g..=C':Ica:>:.s <:,.I C':l ~ '2 CI'l eo:: ~ t.i ~ '= 5. E cQO~-oo :!2 .! ~ ~ .9 c..": .g ;:; ~ .. '" ~ B_ ~ !:! ... 'Vj "6 .E c c.. 0 c " ..,,12-5 _:E ~ ~ ~ 5 'u r..l 0 co: .:: ; "- C E ~ u e:; = E Q..:g a QQ ~ y c ._ ~:g~ ~o a .5 '" B ~ " ~ g ~ I' ~ ~ au ~ &S~ " :; " = ",1.1 '-~= .;;;; - -;; c:5 ~- .... :; o~ u:: c .9 ~ .9 7:i ~ .... ~ a '" 0.. = .~ Vl Vl Q.. =.~ '" " ,2 E. o ~ " '" " '" ~ '" ~ ?_~" .~ " -. -~~.:..- ~] -- ""5 _ "E ~_~ u ~ :l -';;;; - ~" " Vj;lOQQeIl g ~ ~ .~ .~ '-co:.9uC:: ~~~.2 ell "0 - u ',~_3~~~ o c 0 ';;;j 'r:; ~ ~ u::: ~ ' "0 u 0 L.t.. ~ ~ c - 0 c u-sa C.c 'C; :'9 ; U l'l:f Q. g E 0 0'- ~ ~-5.co'en o .c c ~ = ~-;;O ""' ,- .c ,"_' _ t ell C E~~a~ ~ E'en:E ~.~ ~ E ~-;;~g o u _ "'.2 ..0 E 2 0 r-~Q.u ~'i & "'.tiS i S~6 , i I ! '" " ;; , ti.: '" " " t: '" " 0"- I I I I I " ;e E. " '" ~ i!.. " ge ~~ ~ ~u I I ~ ,I III -5 ~ ~ -'c.. .9 ~ C': " oe.;~ 'i: S: C :'OJ Q..co:..::o. '" ~ C ell o 0 2 ': <:C ':::: CoN Cou 0"",0= t) ~ ~ <: :;<:~'g :=:Nt'-l:'OJ ~ o ~ ~'~ ,5"'" '" " en.!:: '" " " c. " " :: ~0CI0C1'- ._ CeO 0..'0..'- "0 l'l:f ~ "0 0 ~ ~ 1:3 .c ~"O-~ - " - " ..:::! .!: .g .~ Q:'-UOClO .0 ~.:-5 u.. 0 c; .: ,.. =: = ,-=- ~-~ Q.. OCI 0 at - " E y. ~'i ~ : E..9 >. 0: 6"~ -g G;; ~ Il.) en Got ~ -5 C': ~ Cl Il.) 0 - "'O~5 ~~~~ ii:.: c.. ~ 'fic;c;~ :'OJ .c.c C': LtJ ell V,I V,I = = g ..... CQ C': 0 r-"E.."E..N '" = ;: W :: " <:: .. '0' .. c. '" .S; '" " ~ .. .. :: -" <:: =Ci5 ;: '" " ~ <:: .. 'E' .. c. ~al &i' :.]i! ill 8~6:! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I - - ~ .... :..: I ? S I ~ ~ I c:c " - '"' =' - I '" '"' z 1= WI c:c I "I ~ 1 "" c:c - "" - <: z I ~ " ~ c:c 0 I !:: z 0 ~ I z 0 1= ~ I E - e. I I I I I .. ... " Ol = Q ~ .2 .s 'll - " 'a. .. C I C <II I 't: Ol ~ .. u ;> I "E I - , .. :E 'iii~ = .. c &." l:lll. 0 ";; =: ";; 0 ~ ... - ...2 .." = .. ~C =- .- .. :<l E- .. ;> .[ <II .. - :E - = ClI ~ ~ .. - = .S' &. .: .; "'''= ;;; "'ll. - .~ ~ .. " N U " a '" c: 0 M ... = .. .2 ] ;; .. c - 1: .. ~ .. ;> .. .. = ;I .. :E j 1m - :i ;;''''0 CI.) ;:... ,... c f: t ln ,... ~ ~ .~ .~ .?:>;~~_~s~~g - .- S 0 ~ - 'i: 2 "B .,5 ~ ~ I.. '- ;,,; "'::) "0 I- .... -:>._Z'::E~_Si E~o'ajo-~og._ ~ ~'c;~;;,:::~~.= ~.~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ "'0 U ~ ~.~t.: - ~~~.~ ,Q'''ii.c'~;;... rn s.~ :I ~ V,I Il"l co; -o.C"'E~.c .~ ::: -= .... 0 !! 0 __ - .9 co;~o3:=a..~t; ~ 0.. = u; - .- '- ..c] cu_uiU~C::C)12rnCQ ~~~~ ~~~:g2 ~:;~'~__~:;~!!f!c "01U::l~ E_;c.og c.:_- ~.c~.l5~ c co; .c Q(I C ~ a... .a >. 0 ~ QI).5 _ _ B 15 ..c g 'i;j o6c~co_,",~l;Ile .......C'lS Oal:~lU ;;-::-...o.if!'B Ql)c c a ~ c]o~,;::.5oc>.co oC ?~2"::":C3: ~ ~ ~ :; 0. 'Oi:l - U co; "0 ~~ ~5l.8J::.!L~c; " c:a iU rn Vl ~ co; ~ '5 ~ ~ 0 ~]]"O~':E~ =,;:'"5 ~~ 8,"0- 6~= 2u; oo;.,g E ~o.._c :: ~,g.~ ~~~ t- -c..... -.;:u e.o~ i3 _ "'0 -= Q.. .: _" c c c !! ~ CQ 0 = ..: l- =< 'i;j = c"'O C,) ;;; 0 -c..CJlU[Q..~vi E.9EEou,Q~ .~U,::u_o. = e ~ a:).: ~ co; "fi ';( C.C1=ucu~c;.;: __ IlJ"'OQ"O, ~r; 0.""_ c~.... -=CUco;t'lS.!2~~ ii Li: ~ 00.5 U II'J 0, "'0 rn :::lU~CIJ.':u"'C=c "'C -= ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ = t'3 E u = u ~ Q - ~ u ~ ,~ 0 'B .t] ,S ~ ~ ~ .:: "8 '00 c (g ;; E "'C .5 a ~ ~ 2t Cl. - _ ~ u.2 0 oo_~"tjUI.oU C:i ~ c.. ~ 0...:: ~ 2 ~ ~"" .: " c " " o..la u ,S! ~ ~ ~..9 .c ~ .. 0 ::l.c ~'" ~ ... ~ ~ = ... c; :; ~ '; ...~ ;s ~ ~ ... ~~ 8 ~ .: 0 <~ ...;~ ~~:-: c:; 'ij..s ~ .c ... ~,: '; .2 ii go 'C;~ '- p c - ~ 11 ~ =~~ c ... ;> o ~ 0 ... .. ~ ~ Co ::1CSc.. ~ C " .2 ~ =~ ] ~ >. 8.~ ~ o " OJ :s.. 2t .: 01)= ell = ;r ~ '-= ~ ";: ~ u 'C; ~ c:;cuu~ ~C,,~ ,~ ;: ... Co Wi .. ~i ~! - c.. <(, ... = " = .S ::: .. 1$"Q, ~E .- = tu > Q ~ ~ - - S I ::; <( =: .. ~ - - g: ~ ~~ " .. &.~ " .. =: '= ;- " 11 _I:: ,,- - .. . .. ...> .. ~ z <: i:l: :l c.. '.' ;: " oS! .=-= = ("l S!: r..l G.I 5 =='c. c..._ =..:.. a < W - Z <I: ... " =.5! ]~ tii: ~~ ,. ~ z ;: E z :l ::; z - :::: ... :.: ,. :::: = ::; .. -; "" - " ] ~ -= - t " ~ .. ~ " .5! - II .. ;::: ~ " .. ... .. " = " .. =: ';j ... .;: :; W .. ~ " " .. o ." " .. t: .. .- = ... c.. " ~ ... " ... .. ... " ~ "f ~~ " " ..:: " t: .. .- " .: '-' ;! " "'21: <: ~ ~~ " cn~ ~ :~ ;> 5:5 .~ --= .. ;: ~oS=?~ -.- .., ~ ~~ ._~ c; ~ E'" ~ ::l :-: I.. co:: v: I.. ....-= _.~ Q,Q"::: ~ '" ~ 2 'E.~ 'cae 2 O":j -V)~ ~ c; ~ <: ~ .9 3:~~~C:5 >. .c >. .. ;> :;." ~ ~.~ ." = :-,_~ t;.~ u- ~ '"'3.g ~ c.._ .9"0.9 - '-' - ?3 ~ b c..;>0- >.:;~ ~ '" ..= ~: a:ga " ~ .;; 's ~ ~ "" =c.& ~ g ~ ~:.a~ ._ r=._ " ~ " _ 00_ ~ C':l ?j .~\o-o .~ e 0 2 c....Co "'='2!'O "0 "E ~ C':l U 1j C CS B: ~ i.:Oc."Jc.. < 'zj 0'- 0 ~ Q..~ c.. o OJ - f;.) ~c..-=g.s ." ~ -;; " ::r " >. ..0 ." '-' 0:; " ";l :; '-' '-' ..0 -;; .~ .s;.9 >-..~ ~.c ~ ~ ~~ '-' 5 ~ <: 00 >'.: .... ~ = ':::;; :; = ':; o :-: ;;,-,0:5 , ." ~ ;: '-' '" 0:; ~2 'i: ~ " :; o " It) :a :; - .8 g ~ :!! I..oi:: ~ v: u.g ..::::~ en:a ~ :-: ,2 <~~~o .2 >. .. ;> ~ ~ ." - b5 ,::! c; ~ -'~'~ :-,-=. ::;.~.~ u= ,:, ~ 0. I '." '-' ~ ~ c " 0; " a ~:-~ '-' '. __9 ~ ~ _ :I'l C':: ~ ~ 'J:: - :a '_--=- c.. ~~ ~ ~ >-.~ g- o al "3 ~ ..... a ._ U <lJ ~ ~ :; S :0 = ,'_~' ~ '-' '.~-- -- :! -5_" ==..5 .2 S ~ :0 :I U (.l c: 'iij E g ~ = ,0 III ~ ~~- 15 ~ ::; "0 ~ U _ ~ ~ C':l l.o- U co: C':l ell U 0 C .... :I U .;: !! is. 00 -;; 5 o ~ o.:g i'; ~ .1a i5.. '- -= u OJ Co>.:. C >.~ti:= ell S a .~ e OJ .2 :oEo~c:a -.S Q.~='.~_ 0' i- !U ::: ~ r---5.fi,g~ ~ '-' ~ ;;; ~ '-' .;: = .~ " ~ c.. ~ " .., '" ;t: ~I ..' ..' -; ~ '" .. l:: " " " .. =: ';j ... .~ '0 :5 - " .; = .: " ~ .<:; il;-~ 211"1") -, - "" - "1'= ..- :51 a ~ ... '-' ~ ~ t ~ ~ '-' - ;; ;Q-:;:: t <.~ ~~ ",:;0 .2 >. '-' :: ::l .~ ~i >. ..0 '" ~ Q(j "E C,) C ~:EE~.,g .o~ii:::g ._""::l .... _ v;~-5u; " ~ =:0:1 V;c; - '- ~ c '0iJ :> ;: 0 <ii :::J 0 0 :.E 0 ~""::l"O E ~ u C 0 !U .cCilJ""::l:E,- Q) ~ .:: '0 co; !U :o~u~c~ .5,,_ ~ :. ":I .g !U .;;cc._-=_ "l _ cu c: ":I '- 0 ~~=~-ggC tIO c'c ~ v~~.~~: ~ ~ ~ C7~..9iU-..E" ~ .c 3 .S! .0 c.. iU C g~"l.o-E'=~ iUtU>" ::: VI.c_ E~-"Er;;gg !=:-~c:cu - C :::J:'= iU'~ Roo r: = iU .... VI ""':s '''- __~CUOC"'iUU ~-=cu-Et;> '-' ~ "E :; "" ... < ::oc.. ~ ;:.-., = := ~ .~ :~ ;:i;v::~ .., '-' - .~ :: gf ~.e: .~ '- c.. ~ = Q(j ~ ~ .- -= c:; ..:.: l.:.. tIO..c ;: vi .:: VI J; ~ 5 -~." ~ ,,~ ..2 ... ~ " .2 5 ~:; ~ .= ~ iU i~~ 0..0 :.r: E ... = :E ~ .5.B ~ ~ Z " 0; g g Q(j~ ~ - :': ... ~ '-' 00 c.. . I I , I I I 00 .= --;"t:I ":1._ C e.'2 c: Oll._ --; ." .. ;> " .c = " ;, c " ~ 'i:; iU " .. ." :: ." .. 0:; .. ;; ... oi .:: ;:; " ~ ~ -;; " '" ~ " " '-' .. en .. E ;; ..: iU VI U '" " ;> u .- a.. as ;; I I I I I I I I I ~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I , I : ~ :.: I ~ ~ I - "" <: I =: .. ~ ~ ~ i: I .. ~ ~ UI ::: ~ I ..' ::: .-, "0' :.; =1 =: ", =< ~ :;, Z <: <: I .. ~ ~ =: '" I E z ~ ~ ::;: I z :: ;.. :.: .. I E :< I I I I I , .. .. - = " = Q ~ oS .~ - I Oi .. , .. 15. c c .- = ..i!I ilu .! ;;- - "c - .. :E ~~ - .. 8." .,=- .. =: .. = 0.: 2P= - .. "~ C C .- "- .. . .. ""';;- .!! ...= =oS '85 -=c t: .C ,.~ .. .. = j = oS 1ii .!!' - ~ 3 ., " .. ., 01) - " .= ~ "E"O ~:; ~ 0 ... ~ -= ., ;;; t; ~ c '" ... .:: E u => '" = "E = ~c; "!i-: "0 " " - ~ iii "";J .5 :; =::2 " => "0 01) = " c ~ of ~ .~ .a ~~~ :0 ~ ~ ~ t; c ::) < ~ E .- ~ Z ,,_ 1..:::' ~... ~;> ~ :.0.: --"":l....~"":l= .2 ~ 2 ~ B'~ :! a~ "'E~.Q_ o -S ';; :;"E.;;- ~ L.. .... <:.I 0:'" 0 <:.I CU -.2 ... .... 10.. c; "":l ';;; _ -= -g .!::! :t5i5~E2E ... :.0': .:= '- Q.O'~ iO.l C U ~ ::: = ;> -g _ 2.= ~ ': i- ::: ~ u:i 0 o.:!! c ... c c: _ X Q.l .=-_ -" 0:': c:: :.J._ f..) '" ..: >. VI _E C 0 .E-Vi ..0 - ... ...,.. -. ... 0 --~ .!:! '; - - ~ ~ ,,- eo . N .- Vl c:: 0."":1 -..,.,l! .:: .~.- E c ~ _ ....=_ ;:.. '0 c.. co= _ '- I.. I.Il 'i: < c 0 '";jB"E~NO:>' c..U(;_~~'= ~OL.,~~~ ~~oc..~~ ;;; Vi 0:: ~ 0 'c.. a. " .~ ~ " > "0 ;:= < olJ E >'.: .Q c:l -= ... :r. C :; 2 'S:: ~ 0 r: 0'- cnvC: ~o g ~ - ;; o " .;: Vl c.. .~ cI:l.~ :.a _ '" - ~~ U .., " .2 15. o - " ;; ~ ,., ~ .9 "G " - ~ u ~ '': .~ ~ ;;; '00 o :; i:i5 ,., I":l g..( - ., '" :: olJ (';I .- >. Vi .:: c ._ .0 - '" - -::"_ ::: V'J ...., -- .~ ~ - ~ ~ :: .~ ..2 c.. '"" ~ >,g55 .2 ~ .= ~ E "i;"Euu~ .~~ S r:: c ~ i. E .9 E ':.) C ti ~ g ~ 'fi ~ ,Su.c='c III C":l 0 .... 0 .b~~~~ 5-'::8-:5 :;. ~ 8 01)- ... ';j -..5 ~ Cl:__.- ~~~.a"H I U..c "'0 ce ~ U III C = 8 ~ Cl:I U " ~ ~ ~ e fI.l ~ 0 ... E Cl:I u u 0 N C c..::: t,,) QCl -< ~" ~ " ."_0 ~ _5 .~ ~~g c.. c,.- L.o ...::: t":I2E'-uuCJo uL.oo'-ac;-5tJ ~ ~ ~ :g .~ ~ ~ ~~ ."_ =" 8.'0 tJ -5 - U ::l > ....Vi t":I 8 "0 C'::I c; a .;; == ] u ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ 25 :-5"gor;.S!-gueIl .~ ~ c. - .- i:i 'i: ~ ~ :~ 5: .8 ~ :~ ~ 8. ~ 'B i': co!:: ti 0 ::: C'::I _ QJ - ... t":I .;:; L.o is. Cl:I _ - _ u ong~oongc>u c on.2 0.0.5 == CJ 0 !::!: .- c - - ... ell "0 - - o .- u.= 0 C C ... Cl:I _ U ... ~ .~ R t":I _0 := '-u-'''-- 0 25 E ~ -;:;; 0 QJ ~ '2 > ~ ~'U~.ct":lOt":l .~~-5~i~5g U c~ C'o.c";:O .~ 2 ~ ; ~ ~ :; ';b 2 o-;:;;ti~~:::s~.9.c C c "0 'U U e t; 0 .= :E83;~-St":l:E~ " ~ ;; "0 > -~ s < .... .: - ci: ~'E.Vi ,... 5 2 .;; ~8c:o I~c .9 ~ C ~ .;: <J'l Q.. .~ 01)" c .: ;.s E " - - ... "Co u .., " .2 15. o - " ';; ~ ..... .., ,., ,,~ .:2 on ~ c 2 .~ ~ '2 o = U e ;;; '00 ~ a; 13 .~ 0 'U ....c'-E-~ a .!!! ~ ,,' c c; c.. = .=_.c C ::: QJ .2 en .52 is ~ _ U en CJ c;tJ.:::u2.~-5 .~ g "fi E -;:;; :E ~ ~~~g8u~ o tJ Go) cu Go) -; ] g g:o-s g:o g _ ell.... ._ _ '_':= ",," - ~ -..,.,~ "" 8.3!1-S- '- -.... "O.~ .~ ee8~~.g~e i;~~fi C ::.:: ~ 0 ti E ;j.9 <;1_ ,~ &.:: e '00 "G - ~ ,.,..: o..e 2 -0 cu~o- == C;" ....;:::. ell" ""'" .- C C _ ea 'E eo < .!a cu 8 E~~!:.->.u ~u'=~vr~5. =~ecn:c]cc (II C > QJ - ... fI.lt":lQJ.c~o-8 tr.lac;s''2.a t""l~>.=~Oy QCl_~._QJe.5 ] ... Q " " Q Q- -::1:i 5"5. cE .- Q ilc.J :> '" ~ ;- ~ Q 5 I ::0 ~ a: c o a: =- c ~ ;- a: o =- ~ a: .. :Q .- ... ~t: &~ :J a: ... " Q..5i - .... " " -c E- - .. E- .. :> .. ~-= i r.,) ~ " .. Q =='=.. 15:il: g ~ c.J ::: z ~ ... " Q..5i ...- Q .. ....!:! 1j~ :E~ '" - z Ii o t: z o ::0 z g :.: c E ::0 .. - .. Q ] - -= - .. .. " :a .. :E " ..5i 1ii .!P - ~ ~ g ~~ u .5--_0 II.) 0 .:: -a.::-; ~-CJa... e.2,O~o c.. ~ .~ u ~ 0 cO():: u- ~-=uccrn ~ ~ c :it >. ~VJ 0 ': ~ oc.....O .I:l.....=-=o - 0 U ] VJ 9 :.a ,2,0 1,1) v.I o.Q= -.: u-o- ~ 0.'- 6=l!a....~Ecu>.~c .=~ Vl..E > E.s'E ~.~ (.J .:: C\l)"O .~ 0 ::1;;0. ~ 'j: Ul C 0"0 U . U Q.) a... ~ OJ 'C 'i: .52 u :: ~ -= ~ ~ -5 .9 8. t -= .5:! "0 0 .~ .:a "'0 'co c: c. C U ~ C .::: -c 0- IUU-_ =: cu ::'2 .: '(:; 'C 0. ~ .... ~ cu 1,1) u - u 8. ... ._ ~ CU ::I C > II.) > -= t~~=uo~..c.2~ "'0 eel CI: m" 'g - cu 0lJ~ en C In .... "':1'- _ lU ::IC ",ocuo._.c rn'y o lU U -.= 0 .. 0 ... >..- U - C > - x =uCJ~;ocuo,;:;; ~2c-=atE-cuw .... i;j~ '5 u-.~.g.E:E 9 S-o.,g-=.~~ u e- ~ y II.) Oil Cfl co.:: 2 ... of t:c32sCS..2.c~&a c!iOI.o"'o;:::oull'J 8::1~-s~:S3:u.o:.a I ...... ~~ 0:; . ~ c..~ 8e. " ~.o ,.... ?-- ~ 5 C1j.:: ~ " ~ '" =>":::: ""::l5 :a !: , - - u .os :: u 5"0 v~ ~ g - ;; =c.. " ;::: ... .- " ~ 2~ ~ Vi ..oaJ ~::< v; s:; .E~ ~::< 0. c:.." ~.,;; "c... g 0 .E p -as - ~ " " o " WE ... - ag Oll" .:.:: - - .~.~ ;:: lU ~~ ....E ,12 9- E 5 .~u ~5 (": = ~B ';: 0 E'" ... - 0.': ;!J:a ~~~ ':; Vi g .l:l..... " "'E9~ a 5J E ~'i;j 8 ~Q)~ E~ c =.D>o l..- 0-- o 5..e ... ,- u=::: a ;:= ti ~ Vi ;> ~ - .~ 5~ 0'= a... -"... ...... ....- - 0- ... 'i: 8: ~ c..,,_ I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I <i -0 z ~ ~ I I I I I I, I I I I I I- I I I I 1 I I I 1- FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ApPENDIX D PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT S TO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE -- UPDATED I I I 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such, this Appendix supercedes that which was presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR. August 2000. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS SPECIFIC PLANS (p. I-F2-1) Specific Plans are unique sub-area plans that may be adopted by the County. They are a regulatory tool used to implement the General Plan. They include special financial, environmental, and developmental procedures. Each Specific Plan is a stand-alone regulatory document. Specific Plans have been prepared for CRiRs FliIlE, the Agua Mansa and IRS Ei:il~t \/:;11191' Csr:rigsFKaiser Commerce Center areas. COORDINATING LAND USE DECISIONS (p. I-F7-1) The General Plan applies to all agencies and departments of the County where their actions affect the use of land, and will be used in conformity reports on acquisition or disposal of public property. The County, the cities, special districts, state and federal agencies have the responsibility to coordinate land use planning. INCORPORA TED CITIES It is the policy of the County that the incorporated cities and the County should: . Coordinate land use planning. Coordination of land use planning means the sharing of information and opinions and providing an opportunity to comment on development proposals submitted to the County or incorporated cities. Coordination does not mean the provision of a veto power over the land use decisions of the agency with the authority to make them, nor does coordination require agreement between an incorporated city and the County when land use decisions are ultimately made. In the event of a disagreement between an incorporated city and the County, the incorporated cities shall have the final authority within their boundaries, and the County shall have the final authority within the unincorporated areas of the County. SECTION II - PLANNING ISSUES NATURAL RESOURCES - CUL TURAUPALEONTOLOGIC Goals (p. II-C2-2) Draft - December 21, 2000 1 C-12 Ensure. that management objectives for cultural resources avoid or minImiZe potential conflicts with traditional native American beliefs and concerns. Short of conducting detailed field inventories for all areas under jurisdiction of the County, the most predictable, consistent and economic means of ensuring that important cultural resources are not inadvertently destroyed by development is to map areas of known or expected sensitivity during the preparation of regional plans. Such sensitivity maps, termed Cultural Resource Overlays, not only identify specific areas in need of further study at the project level, they also identify those areas determined not to need any further consideration with respect to cultural resources. These maps are prepared based on recorded data on file at the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bemardino County Museum. Currently, six Planning Areas in the County have had Cultural Resource Overlays prepared. These are: Barstow, Bear Valley CgR=lR=lIolRitig~ I?lrilR, Cl:liRg FliIIE Sl'lllQifk I?lrilR, East Valley Corridor 1I1'l9QifiQ I?lrilR, Phelan Cg R=lR=l 101 R it:,' 1?1~r:l, Twentynine Palms CgR=lR=lIolRitj PI~R, and West Valley Foothills CgR=lR=lldr:lity PI~r:l. The fQ\,Ir:t99R other Planning Areas shown on the Land Use map have not had Cultural Resource Overlays prepared. NATURAL RESOURCES - WATER PolicieslActions (p. II-C4-3) WA-1 Because Federal, State, regional and local responsible water authorities are jointly responsible for developing, implementing and continuing to manage basin-wide water management plans for the continuous provision of potable water supplies, the following shall be implemented: a. RIlSS:!lRi;rg Except as otherwise provided herein, recognize the jurisdiction and authority of all agencies providing water service within the County with consideration given to the County's diverse geographic regions. b. Coordinate with all agencies providing water service and protection to achieve effective local and regional planning to: i) Promote cooperation and sharing of information. ii) Provide mutual assistance in regional projects. iii) Keep members informed of projects and activities. c. Upon request by the local responsible authority, and pursuant to State law, assist in the development and implementation of regional water resource management plans incorporating individual district plans that will: Draft - December 21, 2000 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i). Identify needs for recharge of overdrafted groundwater basins and proceed with plans for development and management. ii) Prioritize critical areas of basins in overdraft, sole source basins, or quality degradation problems. iii) Maintain or enhance natural water recharge characteristics. iv) Create recharge areas for overdrafted basins offsetting increased consumption attributable to new development. v) Cooperate with state water contract agencies in the purchase and distribution of State Water Project water. vi) Share information on supply and demand for water and projected service levels and capacities that can be utilized in Infrastructure Assessment models. d. Permit County Service Areas (CSA's), Community Service Districts (CSD's) or other public agencies to provide water service to the IVDA Area, which is designated for development in the General Plan, when no other responsible authority will provide water service on a timely and feasible basis, as determined by the Board of Supervisors in its sole discretion. WA-3 Because the development approval process may be dependent upon the location and size of water distribution facilities and the timing of their use, the responsible authority and the County shall: a. Consider the effect of development proposals and whether or not they should include the phased construction of water production and distribution systems. Hydrologic studies may be required as appropriate. b. The County DEHS will continue to show that adequate and reliable water supply is verified in conformance with responsibilities assigned by State law and the Cooperative Operating Agreement between County DEHS and State Department of Health. c. Utilize the Cooperative Operating Agreement between the State Department of Health and the County DEHS to monitor and provide information to the responsible authorities on a continual basis, compile annual reports on the capacity and condition of distribution systems, and develop contingency plans for water resource management. d. Develop a systematic, ongoing assessment of regional and local water supply needs and capabilities to serve planned land uses as defined in the General Plan. Draft - December 21, 2000 3 e. Coordinate with the State Department of Health, Public Water Supply Branch (San Bernardino), and obtain the annual reports of large public water systems Countywide as they become available. f. Monitor future development to ensure that sufficient local water supply or alternative imported water supplies can be provided. g. Cooperate with Special Districts (Board-governed and self-governed), independent water agencies and the cities, as applicable to a particular development, to assist in the planning and construction of new water supply and distribution facilities on the basis of the cities' and County's adopted growth forecasts. h. Cooperate to provide the consistency of water supply and distribution facilities with the Capital Improvement Programs of the County and other public agencies pursuant to Government Code Section 65403. WA-S Because long term local or regional area-wide commitments to water supply and distribution services are necessary for the orderly development of urban areas, the County shall: a. Encourage new development to locate in those areas already served or capable of being served by an existing approved domestic water supply system, with priority given to those areas suitable for infill development. b. Include water supply and distribution facilities as. one of the required services in the Improvement level (Il) system which is part of the General Plan and as designated on the Infrastructure Overlay Maps. c. In the IVDA Area, permit the use of CSA's, CSD's or other water service providers. WA-9 Because water supply and distribution systems must ensure water for both existing and future development, utilize water resources in accordance with agreed management programs, and correct the depletion of the County's groundwater resources, the County and responsible authority will cooperate to ensure adequate and reliable water resources and: a. Assist in the development of additional conveyance facilities and use of groundwater basins to store surplus surface or imported water. b. Assist local distribution systems to interconnect with regional and other local systems where feasible, to assist in maximizing use of local ground and surface water during droughts and emergencies. c. Og"glg~ Except in the IVDA Area, develop guidelines ~gl>tri~iR!I discouraging the creation of new, small, private water systems where an Draft - December 21, 2000 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I existing large water system can more reliably serve the public interest, as determined by the Board of Supervisors in their sole discretion. d. Assist in the development of alternative water systems in areas experiencing difficulty in obtaining timely or economical water service from existing potential suppliers, or water quality or quantity problems. d. Discourage new wells pumping one (1) acre-foot or less per year, other than those used for domestic purposes or those drilled by responsible authorities. MAN-MADE RESOURCES - WASTEWATER SYSTEMS Third Paragraph (p.II-D1-2) The location of public treatment facilities in both incorporated and unincorporated areas are shown on the General Plan Infrastructure Overlay maps, which are further discussed in Section II-D-6. Land Use/Growth Management. The County's public sewage treatment facilities, including those located in and serving incorporated city areas, are listed below. The listing includes ~proposed and current treatment facilities iR tRS '^ISi:t '.'alls1' p'1:aRRiRQ ar:92. istJ::t gf fRQ pr;g~g,gd b~i1itigt Ars u/itJ::tiR tl:l9 C'l:IiRS S:;IE;iR MWRisip21 '^'~tgr ~i1;;tRSt, iaR 21':"9:;1 9XP9r;iSRsiRQ r:;tpid Qr;:Qu'tR ~gr ftdr:tl:lsr iRfGrr+12tisR E;99 tR9 \^/:~u;t9u':atgr &sstisR IIf tRS iaskgI'QwR9 ^ ~~sRgix as of July 1989, and is not meant to prohibit construction of additional sewage treatment facilities as the County deems necessary, without further amendment of this General Plan. Policies/Actions WW-3 Because there are areas in the County where it is unlikely that community sewerage systems will be installed, PaskaSll Wastewater Treatment Plants (P'^'TPi:WTPs) may be approved by the appropriate RWQCB, the local wastewater/sewering authority (if any) and the County DEHS subject to the following: a. The proposed project site must be located in an area approved by the local wastewater/ sewering authority providing service to the project, DEHS and the appropriate RWQCB. b. P'^'TP WTP operators in charge of operation and maintenance shall be I State certified. c. In the IVDA Area, WTPs are permitted under all circumstances where such plants are approved and operated by any applicable County Service Area. Draft - December 21, 2000 5 Installation, maintenance and operation must meet DEHS, Office of Building and Safety, local wastewater/sewering authority and RWQCB standards. WW-5 Iig~il\lt:Q Except as otherwise provided herein, because community sewerage systems are the preferred method of wastewater collection, connection to the community sewerage system shall be required for any proposed development or subdivision of land within a sewer or sanitation district. In areas where sewers are required by the appropriate RWQCB and a sewer or sanitation district does not exist, a district and appropriate assessments shall be established. Exceptions may be approved subject to review and approval by the County DEHS, the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board and the wastewater agency (for Pil~kil~Q Wastewater Treatment Plants, individual onsite and multiple owner septic systems, holding tanks and experimental systems). WW-6 1i9Giill.lt:9 Except in the IVDA Area, because the development approval process may be dependent upon the location and size of wastewater facilities and the timing of their use, the County shall: a. Cooperate with the local wastewater/sewering authority to consider the effect of development proposals and whether or not they should include the phased construction of wastewater treatment facilities. b. Actively work with wastewater agencies to ensure planned capacity increases in locations where sewage facilities are approaching capacity. c. Monitor and provide information to the local wastewater/sewering authorities on a continual basis, compile annual reports on the capacity and condition of wastewater collection and treatment systems and develop contingency plans for sewage management. d. Develop a systematic ongoing assessment of regional and local wastewater facility needs and capabilities to serve planned land uses as defined in the General Plan. e. Cooperate with local wastewater/sewering authorities to monitor future development to ensure that development will proceed only when sufficient capacity or approved altemative wastewater treatment systems can be provided. f. Cooperate with Special Districts (Board-govemed, independent wastewater agencies) and the cities, as applicable to a particular development, to assist in the planning and construction of sewage collection and treatment facilities on the basis of the County's adopted growth forecast. g. Cooperate to provide the consistency of wastewater facilities with the Capital Improvement Programs of the County and other public agencies pursuant to Government Code Section 65403. Draft - December 21, 2000 6 I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I WW-9 Because long-term local or regional area-wide commitments to wastewater collection and treatment services are necessary for the orderly development of urban areas, the County shall: a. Include wastewater collection and treatment facilities as one of the required services in the Improvement Level (IL) system which is part of the General Plan and as designated on the Infrastructure Overlay Maps. b. Support the local wastewater/sewering authority in implementing wastewater collection and treatment facilities when and where required by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board and County DEHS. c. In the IVDA Area, permit the construction of a new WTP or connection to existing and/or proposed wastewater collection and treatment facilities rather than connection to nearby city wastewater collection and treatment facilities. WW-10 Because cooperation with the appropriate RWQCBs and local wastewater/ sewering authorities is necessary to implement their requirements for new development utilizing subsurface disposal systems, the County shall act in accordance with Memorandums of Understanding with the appropriate regional or local authorities. However, in the IVDA Area, the County will not do so because of the need to encourage timely development, eliminate blight, promote retention and addition of. employment opportunities and achieve County's regional goals for planning and development in this unincorporated redevelopment area and surrounding areas. MAN-MADE RESOURCES - LAND USE/GROWTH MANAGEMENT Issues/Sub-issues - Second Paragragh (p. II-D6-2) On April 4, 1988, the County established a Growth Management Task Force (GMTF) and charged it to develop a growth management plan (including implementation strategies) for the County. The short as well as long term actions that were considered by the Growth Management Task Force underscore optimum utilization of the County's natural and man- made resources. Some of the strategies considered by the GMTF and since that time include: 1. Directing growth to existing urban areas where needed services can readily be provided. 2. Discouraging extension of existing facilities or development of new ones in a leap-frog fashion, except where such facilities cannot be provided in a Draft - December 21, 2000 7 timely or feasible manner, as determined by the board of Supervisors in its sole discretion. 3. Ensuring that new development proceeds at a pace commensurate with the provision of services. 4. Encouraging annexation of lands within the sphere of influence of incorporated cities/towns, except in the IVDA Area because such annexation may not be consistent with overall regional planning decisions of the County, other cities and agencies. 5. Encouraging infilling of existing urban areas. Policies directed at these strategies ~have been developed and incorporated into this section. i. Official Land Use Districts (p. 11-06-7) The nineteen (19) land use districts previously used in the Community Plan areas and the twenty (20) zone districts applied in other unincorporated portions of the County have been consolidated in this General Plan into the following fellr:t99r:1 seventeen (~17) Official Land Use Districts: . Resource Conservation (RC) . Agriculture (AG) . Rural Living (RL) . Single Residential (RS) . Multiple Residential (RM) . Office Commercial (CO) . Neighborhood Commercial (CN) . Rural Commercial (CR) . Highwav Commercial (CH) . General Commercial (CG) . Service Commercial (CS) . Community Industrial (IC) . Regional Industrial (IR) . Institutional (IN) . Planned Development (PO) . Floodway (FW) . Specific Plan (SP) These fellr:t99r:1 seventeen Official Land Use Districts are applied only to privately owned lands in the County and not to the lands controlled by other jurisdictions. Lands that are controlled by other jurisdictions, including lands controlled by Federal and State agencies as well as incorporated cities are mapped to identify the public agencies that control Draft - December 21, 2000 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I them. Because the resolution of the digitized maps is forty (40) acres, some privately owned lands (generally less than forty (40) acres in area) may be coded as publicly controlled land in error. Such privately owned lands shall be assigned the Resource Conservation (RC) District or the least intensive Land Use District adjacent to them until an evaluation is conducted to determine the most appropriate land use designation for such lands. Land Use Planning in the Sphere oflnfluence (SOl) Areas (P. II-D6-44) The incorporated cities are often critical of the land use decisions made by the County in the sphere of influence areas. The cities' major concems are that: 1. Some of the land uses proposed by the County for the 501 areas are not compatible with, and are not logical extensions of the adjacent land uses within the cities' boundaries. 2. County development standards are perceived as relatively lax, depreciating the quality of the permitted development and adversely impacting the neighborhoods, including adjacent areas within the cities. 3. The review procedures employed by the County do not include urban design and architectural design considerations which are used by many cities. Section 65300 of the Califomia Government Code places a dual mandate on both cities and counties relating to land use planning within spheres of influence. ~For certain portions of the County, the land use policies adopted for the 501 areas are designed to generally encourage annexations or incorporations. In another portion of the County, specifically the IVDA Area, the County has a policy of neutrality as to annexation or incorporation, and they are neither encouraged nor discouraged. The County possesses final authority to regulate land use within all unincorporated areas, including those areas located in the cities' spheres of influence. However, in order to ensure orderly quality development with adequate public services (police, fire, etc.) the County will seek input from a city on the subject of any land use entitlement applied for within the city's sphere of influence prior to approving any such application. Goals D.60 Encourage cities to annex urban unincorporated areas within designated city spheres of influence and generally support annexations/incorporations of urban designated lands, except in the IVDA Area where these lands are desired to be maintained under County jurisdiction to further the goals and policies of the County. Draft - December 21, 2000 9 ~ D-61 Qg'(g/~ General/y, the Board of Supervisors has determined that aI/ of the cities in the County have engaged in a cooperative planning effort consistent with reaional goals of the County for development and planning in unincorporated areas and surrounding areas, and as a result it is appropriate for the County to develop a policy which encourages implementation of compatible development standards and public facilitieslinfrastructure for those lands located within the sphere of influence (SOl) of aI/ cities. In the IVDA Area, however, in order to promote and encourage timely development consistent with the goals of the County and other agencies for development and planning, it is appropriate for the County to develop a set of standards and facilities that aI/ow for development independent of the SOl cities if necessary, and for the County to maintain a policy of neutrality as to annexation of lands within the IVDA Area. D-62 Develop policies that promote and encourage timely development in the IVDA Area in order to eliminate blight, promote the retention of existing and the creation of additional employment opportunities, and further the reuse and redevelopment of the former Norton Air Force Base and other properties, including those within SOl areas, in close proximity thereto. PolicieslActions LU-9 Because State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility after annexation to manage lands within their adopted spheres of influence, the County has a responsibility to coordinate its land use policies with the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursue plans, policies and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standards have been agreed to and jointly adopted. The County has ultimate authority for all land use decisions for potential development within all unincorporated areas of the County, including those unincorporated areas which are placed in a city's sphere of influence by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The County will refer development applications to affected cities for comment, and may require development to conform to city development policies and standards whenever appropriate, as determined based on the goals and policies of the County General Plan. In certain situations, the County may determine that it is not appropriate for development to conform to city development policies and standards. For example, the County has determined that the County's regional goals and policies for planning and development in the Inland Valley Development Agency ("IVDA") Area require special attention and that the County should consider making land use decisions which may differ from SOl cities' plans for the same area, where this is appropriate. Accordingly, the County may chose to plan for the provision of urban services for the IVDA Area from public or private sources other than the SOl cities. such as a County Service Area or mutual water company. In addition, the following policies and standards that encourage annexation and the use of city standards within city spheres of influence will be considered: Draft - December 21, 2000 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I a. Adopt joint regulations/plans with cities when mutually acceptable. through the adoption of overlay districts, specific plans, zoning regulations and standards, infrastructure support plans and other appropriate mechanisms. b. Require service connections for projects that are less than one mile away from sewer availability. Exceptions (for ~JQka!ilQ waste water treatment plants, individual on-site and multiple owner septic systems, holding tanks, and experimental systems) may be approved by the County, the appropriate regional water quality control board, and the wastewater agency (if the project site is in its jurisdiction and sewer service is available, as defined in the UPC). Service connections under this policy may be provided by connections to a municipal sewer system, the sewer system of another regional agency, or a sewer system to be operated by a County Service District. c. Support city annexation/incorporation of urban designated lands, in general. Consider the merits of individual proposals based on community interest, the city's ability and commitment to develop and provide services, and consistency with the goals and policies of the County General Plan. d. Consider implementation of growth control limits adopted by cities as they apply to spheres, unless such limits conflict with the goals and policies of the County General Plan. e. Consider Joint Power Agreements (JPAs) with cities to allow for city or County development fees to be collected and distributed accordingly. f. Consider the nature and intensity of development in adjoining incorporated areas and review the City's pre-zoning, General Plan designations and infrastructure plans when establishing Improvement Levels and land use designations within a sphere of influence. g. Designate Sphere of Influence areas as Planning Areas in the General Plan and utilize special city standards in these areas to the extent they are consistent with the County General Plan and Development Code. LU-10 Because the County wants to minimize land use conflicts between the County and other agencies that have jurisdictional control over lands located within the County, and because the County wants to cooperate and coordinate with adjacent municipalities and other regional agencies to address regional problems such as traffic congestion, air pollution, water quality, waste management and job/housing imbalance, the following policies/actions shall be implemented: a. Review the master plans and/or general plans of affected agencies and consider the provisions of those plans in the implementation of the County Draft - December 21, 2000 11 General Plan. The County may consider and choose not to include city general plan policies for SOl areas that are within unincorporated areas within the IVDA, where necessary, to be consistent with the County and other agency plans for regional planning and development in the IVDA Area. b. Solicit comments from the military and other Federal and State agencies that control land in the County on projects which are proposed near their facilities, as described in sub-policy (d) below. c. Develop a procedure to assure that the County, the incorporated cities, and the various special districts refer major planning and land use proposals to all affected jurisdictions for review, comment and recommendation. d. Establish a "Review Area" around each state, military, or other Federal jurisdiction, and review development proposals or proposed General Plan amendments and revisions within the established Review Area with the appropriate agency. e. Work with State and Federal land management agencies to eliminate conflicts between public and private lands by reducing the checkerboard pattern of public/private ownership. f. Work with State and Federal land management agencies to ensure that large blocks of public land are not further subdivided or classified as Government Small Tracts, and to ensure that disposal of public lands shall be based on definite proposals for development consistent with the County General Plan. g. Work with State and Federal land management agencies to facilitate public/private land exchange to eliminate the need to cross public lands to reach privately owned lands. Such land, when exchanged or otherwise acquired from the State or Federal government, shall be automatically designated as a "Resource Conservation" (RC) Land Use District. However, if such land appears on a FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map or on a County Flood Hazard Map as being subject to severe flooding, it shall be automatically designated as a "Floodway" (FW) Land Use District. No General Plan Amendment is required unless the land is proposed to be changed to a land use designation other than RC or FW. h. Work with State and Federal land management agencies in the designation and protection of wilderness and restricted natural areas in the approval and management of recreation events and sites. I. Work with Indian tribes and State and Federal agencies in the development of plans for land within their jurisdictions. Draft - December 21, 2000 12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .. I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I J. Permit development adjacent to prisons and similar detention facilities only when compatible with the security needs of the facility and public safety is assured, and: i) Work closely with State and local officials responsible for administering these facilities when considering land use proposals on adjacent lands. ii) Discourage high-density residential uses on adjacent or nearby parcels. k. Work with the cities within San Bernardino County to reach consensus on regional planning and growth management issues utilizing joint forums and/or regional agencies such as SANBAG, as appropriate. I. Continue working toward a consensus on regional planning and growth management issues with surrounding counties through SANBAG, SCAG, MDAQMD and SCAQMD. m. Continue to work on specific projects to improve traffic flow, such as the Foothill Freeway (State Highway 30/1-210) extension project. iv. Infilling (p. II-D6-47) Infilling can be a means of protecting and enhancing older neighborhoods. It is also a way of maximizing the utilization of existing infrastructure facilities and of saving energy; the assumptions being that urban services are readily available in infill areas and in addition, these areas are in close proximity to places of employment. Infilling is an effective method of preserving land, water and other natural and man-made resources. Goal D.63 Adopt an incentive program to encourage projects which will intill existing I urbanized areas. SECTION III - REGIONAL AND SUB-REGIONAL PLANNING AREAS AND SPECIFIC PLANS EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (EV) (RSA 29) (p. III-B2-1) The East Valley (EV) sub-region which extends from the community of Bloomington on the West to Yucaipa on the East (see Map III-K), is currently experiencing tremendous Draft - December 21, 2000 13 growth pressures. One of the major constraints to future development in this sub-region is inadequate infrastructure facilities. Most of the communities are old and the existing infrastructure facilities which were sized for lower density development may become overburdened if the current growth trend in this sub-region continues. The East Valley sub-region contains &9"91'1 eight incorporated cities: Colton, Grand Terrace, Loma Linda, Highland. Redlands, Rialto~ ~San Bernardino and Yucaipa. Also, detailed plans were prepared and adopted for the following communities: Agua Mansa Specific Plan, Bloomington, East Loma LindalWest Redlands,. and Oak Glen. al'1g Y\,I\:aiFJ. Tt:19 eai:t \I:a1l9~' (I 1Q) C,miggr ~~9Qifl\: I?IJI'1 ii: i:QI:19g\,l19~ :ad9~ti91'1 ii tl:19 wmm9r 9f 1 QflQ, Jl'1g :a ~Iar:l ii: Q9ir:llil ~r9~ar9g fQr tl:19 eai:t Rggl:al'1g& (Cr:aft91'1) ar9a The spheres of influence of each of the incorporated cities. and areas within each of the 69"91'1 unincorporated communities mentioned above are considered individual planning areas. Draft - December 21, 2000 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Listed below are prefixes for each of the planning areas. These prefixes shall be applied in the applicable planning areas on the official General Plan maps. Planning Areas Prefix Planning Areas Prefix Bloomington BL Lorna Linda sphere LL Colton sphere CL Oak Glen OG Grand Terrace sphere GT Redlands sphere RD E. Lorna Linda~ ~EL Rialto sphere RT - Rgdl:arxldi; East Redlands ER San Bernardino sphere SB East Valley Corridor EC Yucaipa YU - Highland sphere HD Other areas in the East Valley not EV within any of the planning areas listed above Maps III-L through III-V represent the planning areas in the East Valley region. Following are profiles of each of the planning areas in the East Valley. Draft - December 21, 2000 15 East Lorna Linda/West Redlands Planning Area - (p. 111-82-26) Figure 111-18 Summary of East Loma LindaJWfli:t Rfld':ilRdi Planning Area General Location: East Valley (RSA 29) Specific Location: See Map III-U LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ACREAGE BUILD-OUT POTENTIAL Resources Conservation RC Agriculture AG Rural Living . RL Single Residential RS Multiple Residential RM Office Commercial CO Neighborhood Commercial CN General Commercial CG Service Commercial CS Community Industrial IC Regional Industrial IR Planned Development PD Institutional IN Floodway FW ~634 1 ,Qill <:1306 ~36 83 ~8 6 ~ Acreages in each land use district and the build-out potential of each district shall subsequently be computed. This data will be used to determine the absorption capacity of the area, and the amounts of services and facilities needed to support the population of the area. Draft - December 21, 2000 16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " , ~ HOOTON:" 'OOCE .:~~~__ I" nD 'J s H:BERNARD~~ ,........-... ,f.1 ~ . / , ,- L..., .__, ..,; I r \ l_.J \ " I ~ I .. " .. " ... UII"".OIIlO . 0 ~ ~ i .. .. .. I . i 10 _[DI."1II0' -, \EDLANDS LOMA LlHDA ,- . ~ != ",,, .. . . .. .. . I . ''''''011 . .. " , 30 '0 I .. .. I = I .1....0 I " I " " .. I ,--- . TIS T2S I . I R4W R3W I I . L._. . 00 I I NORTH MAP m-u eD' MILE,I .2.3." .S -sr:Au- :'~'f.- ~...... -."..~. ) I / SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN East Lorna Linda Planning Area '- I Draft - December 21, 2000 17 I i.... East Loma Linda.~"llEt Rlldl3Rdi Policies/Actions Natural Resources Open Space/Recreation/Scenic . The Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) trees are of historical and scenic value to the community and should be preserved. . R9'luir9 tR2t ~ir~yI2tig~. tgtsd~I-:~. 2~~9~C 19~2tig~~, Q9f:igR ~rit9~i2, 2rxl9 l:aj';lg Yi:9 [il~g"idg fQr the tr2R~[il12r=ltir;:JQ gr [ilr9~9P'2tie~ sf ttx19 '^'2~tx1ir::lgtgr,;)i2 rgSYtt2t 21gr,;)Q tl:19 fSI!9,ujr::tQ htrggh:: - i::u:t hidg C2Iifer;r;;ti2 Sitr99t, geP&'esr::t ^1'*l9P1Q 5tr;ggt 2Plg ttxl9 ~2Rt2 ^.R2 '^'2f:tx1 (19S treat). - ~'9f:t f:ide ~19\12Q2 ,tr9gt, t29PH99R ^1~9Rd ~trggt 2fxlQ tR9 ,2fxlt2 .^.Pl2 '.^'2f:\;l (2~~ tn?gt). - ~~u:t f:id9 ~19"292 5tr;ggt, ggpHe9rxl .^1r+t9rxlg 5trggt 2rxlg P21mgtte ^"9rxlY9 (111 tr91l\:) - Sigytl;;! hidg ^!I:;l9RS ^"9r;:}ye, bg~HS9R C':::tlifsrr;:Ji2 Strggt 2rxl9 ~19"2d2 Street (li5 tr99i:). - ~J9r;tR tidg ^.Imsrxld ^"9rxlye, 9St\\'99P1 C2lifgr,rxliA Street 2nd ~Jg\'Ad2 itrgst (ll t~99i:). - ~19r;tR ~id9 Sl2fxl agr,r;:J2r:ding .^:.'9RY9, S9t'u99rxl ~19"292 Strget 2rxl9 ^12bAmA ^"Qr;;tyg (eQ tr:9Sf:) - ~2yt~ f:idg Qli"9 ^\lQrxl~9, bg~ilgQr;;t C2lifgr,fxli2 Strggt 2nd ^12t22m2 ^\l9rxlY9 (127 tr991>) - ~J9rxtR f:idg QIi"9 ^\lQfxlY9, bat'ilgsr;;t C2lifGrRi:a 59tr;ggt 2r;;tQ ^IAbAmA ^\lQr;;tyS (220 tr;gst). - i961ttxl hide P21mett2 ,^.'.'9nY9, ggPA'ssr;:J C'2lifQrrxti2 Sltregt Arid ^12b2r+l2 .^'t~H:tYa (145 treat). - ~Igr;tl;;! hids PAlmette ^.'t9r;;tY9, gePilegr;;t C'2Iifgr,r;;ti2 Street 2r;:Jd ~Je\:rag2 Street (111/ tr9gi:) Draft - December 21, 2000 18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Man-made Resources Land Use/Growth Management ., . Permit residential development where services are readily available. Limit residential development along Interstate 10 and the State Highway 3011-210. Limit residential development in high hazard areas. . Small neighborhood convenience commercial centers should be developed along major access routes compatible with the policies of adjacent cities. . Restrict neighborhood centers to a minimum of one mile of each other or another commercial area. . All new development shall have the necessary service commitments or alternative method of providing such services prior to approval. . Actively, pursue all available funding for sidewalk improvements including County Capital Improvement Programs, State and Federal grant funds such as Community Development Block Grants for public improvements. Draft - December 21, 2000 19 East Valley Corridor Planning Area - (p. 111-82-30) . Figure 111-19 Summary of East Valley Corridor Planning Area General Location: East Valley (RSA 29) Specific Location: See Map III-V LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Resources Conservation RC Agriculture AG Rural Living RL Single Residential RS Multiple Residential RM Office Commercial CO Neighborhood Commercial CN Rural Commercial CR Highway Commercial CH General Commercial CG Service Commercial CS Community Industrial IC Regional Industrial IR Planned Development PD Institutional IN Floodway FW Specific Plan SP ACREAGE BUILD-OUT POTENTIAL 176 271 562 Acreages in each land use district and the build-out potential of each district shall subsequently be computed. This data will be used to determine the absorption capacity of the area, and the amounts of services and facilities needed to support the population of the area. Draft - December 21, 2000 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ",-' Tt"...' / I \ ~ i e <: -' ::: to? :;: u.' 0\ ~' U I \. i I LJii "I Al'I.UU. iD Sf ",,~ ~ ~ > :: " ~ I , i' , " 1'''" < '" (F SAN BERNAROINO COUNrr CENERAL PLAN East Valley Corridor Planning Area '- Draft - December 21, 2000 NORTH' ~ rtET coo' I%oa :!it. ') MAP III-V V "';CAL~' ''?'if!\~' ./ 21 I -.~ East Valley Corridor Goals The intent of the East Valley Corridor Planning Area is to promote and facilitate aesthetically pleasing job and revenue producing development that responds to physical, environmental, and economic opportunities and constraints. EC-1 Promote and facilitate high-quality commercial, industrial and residential development within the Corridor area. EC-2 Simplify and streamline the development review process while maintaining consistency with the General Plan. EC-3 Provide for extension of public services in a logical and functional manner to minimize impacts on service purveyors while maximizing areas that can accommodate development in a timely manner. EC-4 Design a comprehensive, functional and efficient circulation system of sufficient capacity to accommodate projected traffic demands at all phases of development, which is consistent with regional master transportation plans. EC-5 Adopt energy-efficient transportation strategies to implement State and County goals for reduced energy consumption and improved air quality. EC-6 Promote high quality development by protecting and enhancing existing amenities in the area, creating an identifiable community character, and adopting development standards and guidelines to ensure aesthetically pleasing design and maximum land use compatibility. EC-7 Create parks and open space areas which will meet the community's recreation needs in a meaningful way, and create areas which will enhance and add value to the community as a whole. East Valley Corridor Policies/Actions Land Use/Growth Management EC/LU-1 Maximize generation of employment opportunities in a region which has a significant imbalance of housing versus employment opportunities. a. Create compatible, cohesive enclaves where industry can locate and operate without the encroachment of other non-compatible urban uses. b. Attract a wide range of employment opportunities through promotion of the East Valley Corridor by various marketing strategies. Draft - December 21, 2000 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EC/LU-2 EC/LU-3 EC/LU-4 EC/LU-5 ",", c. Create a land use plan that is responsive to market demands by developing the Planned Development district. Facilitate locption in the project area of a wide range of commercial uses to serve the region, local industry, and residential neighborhoods. a. Allow the regional commercial uses at the intersection of Interstate 10 and Route 30. b. Provide for and recognize existing general commercial uses along Alabama Street. c. Provide for a variety of commercial uses within the Planned Development district. Support a limited amount of residential land use within the planning area. a. Recognize existing residential land uses and support their logical extension where services are available. b. Limit residential uses adjacent to freeways and within the 65 CNEL noise areas. c. Adopt design standards to protect residential uses from adjacent incompatible uses. Preserve existing viable agricultural activities as long as feasible while the area transitions to more intensive uses. a. In Planned Developments, encourage phasing of projects to preserve agricultural uses as long as possible. b. Permit continuation of agriculture in all land use districts as an interim use. Coordinate with responsible agencies and jurisdictions to ensure responsible development within the Planning Area. a. Facilitate growth in the industrial sector consistent with the SCAG- 82 directive to balance the provision of jobs and housing in the Inland Empire region and to provide employment for a wide range of individuals and income groups. b. Consistent with the regional Air Quality Management Plan. adopt performance standards to protect and improve air quality to attain State and Federal standards. Draft - December 21, 2000 23 EC/CS-1 EC/CS-2 EC/CS-2 ECITC-1 c. Protect regional groundwater resources in conformance with the 208 Waste Treatment Management Plan. Community Services and Facilities Complement the land use planning with comprehensive plans and programs for utilities and public facilities. a. Conduct planning and engineering of backbone facilities for water distribution and sewerage systems. b. Coordinate the phasing of new development with installation of public improvements in such a way as to allow for orderly site development and minimize cost. c. Facilitate the coordination of local agencies and service purveyors to implement the land use plan and phasing plan. Develop financing techniques to provide for extension of infrastructure facilities in the project area. a. Prepare an infrastructure financing plan to assess financing needs and alternatives. b. Identify funding methods which will facilitate the participation of all levels of government in providing funding for the required infrastructure. Develop opportunities for community-oriented services within the plan area. a. Permit child care facilities in any district subject to a Conditional Use Permit. Provide incentives for day care facilities within employment centers. Small family day care homes are exempt from these provisions. b. Provide for a variety of cultural and recreational uses to serve all age groups. Transportation Provide safe and convenient access and circulation to all development. a. Require all new development to meet mandatory standards for alignments, access control, rights-of-way, cross-sections, intersections, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, cul-de-sacs, driveway Draft - December 21, 2000 24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ECITC.2 ECITC.3 ECITC-4 ECITC-5 ECITC.6 widths and grades, right-of-way dedications and improvements, and handicap requirements. b. Provide sufficient highway and intersection capacities to maintain a minimum Level of Service "C". Design a system of major arterials to accommodate traffic volumes associated with projected land uses and densities throughout the Planning Area. a. Adopt a circulation plan with a system of arterial roadways, including secondary highways, major highways and six-lane arterials. b. Develop road standards for designated arterials. Protect the designed capacity of all arterials in the Planning Area. a. Through the design review process, require shared driveways where possible on highways and arterials. b. Prohibit direct driveway access from individual residences onto highways and arterials. Design a circulation system consistent with regional transportation planning. Coordinate with local, regional and state agencies to ensure that the circulation plan is compatible with and contributes to the effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Designate land uses so as to reduce the number and length of vehicle trips. a. Maximize local employment opportunities and the provIsion of services and shopping facilities through appropriate land use designations, to decrease commuter trips. b. Establish land use designations on the land use map for a range of residential densities in proximity to employment and commercial centers. Provide opportunities for alternative travel modes to supplement the private automobile. a. Require bus turn-outs and shelters in accordance with recommendations of public transit agencies. Draft - December 21 , 2000 25 EC/CD-1 EC/CD.2 EC/CD-3 . b. Cooperate with regional transportation efforts to identify and implement traffic management programs such as ride sharing and staggered work hours. c. Develop a comprehensive. convenient pedestrian circulation system linking private developments and public sidewalks. d. Design a trail system linking to regional trail systems for pedestrian. bicycle and equestrian use. Community Design Establish development standards to implement East Valley Corridor goals and policies. a. Adopt mandatory development standards and require that all projects meet minimum requirements in order to be consistent with this plan. b. Establish incentives to encourage development that more fully implements the goals and policies of the Planning Area. Establish design themes to unify the Planning Area and provide a recognizable community character within the area. a. Design streetscapes and intersections which are consistent throughout the Planning Area with regard to setbacks. plant materials. sidewalk and parkway treatment. and use of medians. b. Provide identifiable entryways into the area along the freeway system and major arterials. c. Preserve existing Mexican fan palm rows and extend palm row plantings along selected major arterials north of Interstate 10. Create a visually aesthetic appearance for the area from the freeways as well as from within the Planning Area. a. Require that negative views such as loading. service and refuse areas be screened from public view. b. Encourage use of ground-mounted equipment where possible. and require screening of roof-top equipment through use of wells. parapet walls and other architectural means. c. Adopt minimum landscaping requirements for parking areas and yard areas adjacent to public rights-of-way. Draft - December 21, 2000 26 I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EC/CD-4 EC/CD-5 d. Establish incentives to encourage prOVISion of visual amenities such as artwork, fountains, plazas, and increased landscaping. e. Preserve open space along specified scenic corridors by requiring increased setbacks for development. f. Through the development review process, ensure preservation of scenic vistas at various points throughout the area by discouraging continuous building facades along street and freeway frontages. g. Preserve positive views of unique historical or architectural features such as Edwards Mansion, the County Museum, and the Asistencia Mission. h. Adopt standards for lighting, fencing and signs to enhance overall community design. Encourage effective use of landscaping. a. Require use of recommended drought-tolerant plant species and automatic irrigation systems for landscaped areas to conserve water. b. Require use of landscape materials and designs which facilitate solar access and provide shade at appropriate seasons and times of day. c. Require prompt revegetation on newly graded areas to control erosion. d. Develop mandatory standards relative to tree type, size and spacing for streets, center medians, parkways, parking lots and trails. Ensure compatibility between adjacent land use types. Adopt standards to establish adequate buffers between industrial/commercial and adjacent residential uses through use of landscaping, grading, setbacks and/or walls. Open Space/Recreation/Scenic EC/OS-1 Enhance the beauty of the East Valley Corridor and the overall quality of life for users and residents of the area. a. Provide identifiable entryways into the area along the freeway system and major arterials. Draft - December 21. 2000 27 EC/OS-2 b. Create significant landscaped open space areas at the entry and exit points of the area. c. Identify significant arterials which should be enhanced through medians and/or landscaped parkways, and identify planting guidelines. d. Through the development review process. preserve view corridors to the Mexican Fan Palm rows, scenic streets and intersections, scenic focal points, and the surrounding mountains. e. Improve the landscaping of and views to and from both freeways. Plan for the development of additional recreational facilities within the Planning Area. a. Establish a linear park along the Santa Ana River bluff. b. Designate locations for trails throughout the Planning Area as linkages between open space areas, as well as along the Santa Ana River. c. Wherever possible, utilize existing public lands for parks. recreation and open space in order to minimize costs. d. Encourage the provision of recreational facilities by private developers on specific projects through use of a floor area ratio bonus incentive. Draft - December 21,2000 28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ......... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E. SPECIFIC PLANS (p. 111-E-1) Specific plans are prepared from time to time to provide systematic implementation of the general plan for distinct areas within the County or to provide special comprehensive planning studies for these areas. Specific plans establish their own unique regulations relative to land use, permitted uses, and development standards throughout the areas within each plan's boundaries. Listed below are prefixes for each of the specific plan areas in the County. These prefixes shall be applied to the applicable area on the official General Plan maps: Specific Plan Areas Prefix Specific Plan Areas Prefix Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor AM Iii:;u:t "JII\l~' C,miggr (11Q) &.c Kaiser Commerce Center KC Draft - December 21, 2000 29 (-. V' "". J (-. v "". p V(- "" '3~;~',~r.~.i;;i~ ( .~ ':"':,':.~~~~,:'" . ~.:~~~ ~ I . 7'~ '.'~ ,. -"'-, ' :~:>. :-..:_:: .. :01, :/~~~ ,'......l.:. 'I~~~ ',!f:'~ ..~ .'~:~ _...t>:..... l;'~ \~ . ...'"-. '~-k .'::~~ ~',-- .:/~ ,'-1;; ...._{~ '.'~: ;:~~: ..~ ;-7~~ _ ~:t '.'~ 'p~~ Legend r==l L..:..::..:::.. Specific Plan Area ..'~ . . . '-'~-'" .. .>- :::f;::~ ;~~'t~~~:-; ~~;~. ,~.' ,- . ....'... ti ~ (j' ;, . "-, -." '."'~ -"". Ontario i:;'- " " " c.: .., ':\,:(, !! b ~.....;. ;t!t. ~l "'_~SEO" ~ ~:f.;iJ ~ . ' "- ;,-, ~-' :i ~ w :> z ~ > a: a: w '" ~ :> '" SAN ,'~1(~ r NORTH MAP 111-888 eD -4'~l ~.;.I ~ SAN SERHAROINO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN Kaiser Commerce Center Specific Plan " Draft - December 21, 2000 SCALE- IIILE. - O' -;"00' 1,000' 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '''" "~<:'f', I , ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION IV - GLOSSARY . Glossary Items (p. IV-4 through IV-23) Community Sewerage System - A sewer system operated by a Responsible Authority. Inland Valley Development Agency ("IVDA") - A joint powers authority formed in 1990 pursuant to Health & Safety Code 933320.5 for the purpose of planning for the redevelopment of the Inland Valley Development Area, which includes the Norton Air Force Base and other areas, and to consider conversion of the Base into a civilian aviation facility. IVDA Area - Those unincorporated areas of the County that are located within the IVDA redevelopment plan area. P:a..k:agll Wastewater Treatment Plant - A wastewater treatment plant, !!jliRlirAII)' !;:A~riIblli sf t~9AtiR!!j 1,iiOg t9 JOO,QO !!jrilIl9RE ~lir dJ~'including package wastewater treatment plants, which is installed to provide wastewater treatment for small communities, developments, mobilehome parks, shopping centers, industrial/commercial developments and other similar uses, "'Rlirli 99R"liRti9Riill U'~tt9..'~tgr ~9Ilistigr;;l(tr9dtr::R9Rt L~/t:tgmL Are R9R9xiLh~r;;lt sr tOg ~o[tl~' tQ iRi:t:JII ~r;;lg "psrAto. Public Water Supply System - The source facilities and distribution system used to provide water to the public for human consumption and which has two (2) or more service connections or regularly serves an average of at least twenty-five (25) individuals daily, at least sixty (60) days per year. Responsible Authority - Special districts, water agencies, cities, County service areas, or private water purveyors overlying the property with jurisdiction to deliver water ~through a public water supply system, or to act as a sewering entity for developed property or properties. SARI Line - Santa Ana Regional Interceptor, which provides a means of intercepting and transporting high salt water and non-reclaimable wastewater to the Pacific Ocean. Sewer/Sewerage System - A system for collection, transportation and treatment of wastewater (may include wastewater treatment plants). Sewering Entity/Wastewater Agency - Any public agency which operates sewage collection and treatment facilities. Draft - December 21 , 2000 31 Water Purveyor - A domestic water supplier (also called Responsible Authority), which may include a Special District or County Service Area) serving developed property with a public water supply system. Drafl- December 21, 2000 32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 86.0105 Designations. (a) Regional, sub-regional or planning areas are established in conjunction with a land use district, and shall be designated on the appropriate land use district map. (b) The following symbols appear on the official land use or overlay maps to identify the various planning area districts: Planning Area Symbol (1) WEST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA28) WV Chino sphere CC Fontana sphere FT Montclair sphere MC Ontario sphere OT Rancho Cucamonga sphere RC Upland sphere UP West Valley Foothills WF (2) EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA29) EV Bloomington BL Colton sphere CL East Redlands ER East Lorna Linda EL East Valley Corridor EC Grand Terrace sphere GT Highland sphere HD Lorna Linda sphere LL .. b.9r+12 liRgA."Ng~t R9dIAA9~ b.R Oak Glen OG Redlands sphere RD Rialto sphere RT San Bernardino sphere SB ~~~ W Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-2 GENERAL PROVISIONS 8.06.01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Articles: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CHAPTER 3 . EAST VAllEY SUB.REGlON (RSA 29) Reserved. Bloomington Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. East loma linda Planning Area. East Valley Corridor Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. Reserved. Oak Glen Planning Area. Redlands Sphere Planning Area. Reserved. Reserved. Yucaipa Sphere Planning Area. Article 1. Reserved Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-9 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21 , 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-10 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I "..... (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Article 2. Bloomington Planning Area Section: 86.030205 Single Residential (BURS) District. 86.030205 Single Residential (BURS) District. Single Residential Devlopment Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 7.200 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 40% <: 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 interior lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) corner lot 70/100 minimun 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) See (1) below average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 I street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 Article 3. Reserved Article 4. Reserved Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-11 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-12 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '- (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) I I I I. I I I I II I I I I I I I. I I I I Article 5. East Loma Linda Planning Area Section: 86.030505 Single Residential (EURS) District. 86.030505 Single Residential (EURS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 6,000 lot size Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 0- 19,999 sq.ft. 50% 20,000 up to 1 acre 20% 1 acre or more 10% ;;, 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 lot size Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) < 20,000 60/60 20,000 or more 150 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) average 25 one side 20 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 15/20 street type: local 15 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-13 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Article 6. East Valley Corridor Planning Area Section: 86.030605 86.030610 86.030615 86.030620 86.030625 86.030630 General Provisions. General Commercial (EC/CG). Regional Industrial (EC/IR). Planned Development (EC/PD). Circulation Design Guidelines Site Design Standards and Guidelines 86.030605 General Provisions. The land use regulations of this code are modified as follows for the East Valley Corridor Planning Area. 86.030610 General Commercial (EC/CG). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the General Commercial and Regional Commercial Districts of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7, 1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and structures and appurtenances thereof. (2) Ir=I gr;ggr 19 Qr;;}f:yrg ~9r=Rl2liAr=I~g U(itR tl;l9 ~Xi9rxR, gg:alf: Ar=ld j2sli"i9i: gf tl:19 &ai:t \/aIl9!( Cgr~igsr ~j29gifjg PlaR, tl:19 The following uses shall be subject to a Conditional Use Perrnit~ ~it9 ;\.j2j2r:g"al. (At the discretion of the reviewing agency, review requirement may be met by Planning Commission review.) (A) Professional Services Physicians, surgeons, chiropractors, osteopathic physicians, dentists, oral surgeons, orthodontists, Attorneys and legal services Medical and dental laboratories Engineering, architectural and planning Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping Counseling (marriage and family) Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.1 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (B) Prescription pharmacy and optical services Business Services Advertisement, business and management Consulting Detective and protective services Stenographic, secretarial, clerical and mailing Collection agencies Blueprinting and photocopy Employment agencies (C) (D) Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS Financial Services Insurance carriers, agents, brokers Real estate developers and builders (office only) Title abstracting Real estate agents and brokers Commodity services Holding and investment services Banks. savings and loans, and credit unions Retail sale of goods: Groceries Meat, fish, seafood Bakeries Food caterers and delicatessens Liquor stores Drug stores and pharmacies Convenience markets Apparel Fur goods Newspapers and magazines Hardware Five and ten variety stores Confectioneries and ice cream Cosmetics and accessories Florist Auto parts (new retail) Gift shop Hobby and yarn shops Furniture and home furnishings Paint, varnish, lacquer Draperies. curtains, upholstery 6-14.2 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I ! I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .,'." ';"..-C'.i-':"'-"..~";;;'~ I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Interior decorating supplies Wall and floor coverings Appliances Dishes, china, glassware, metalware Lawn and garden equipment and supplies Home improvement centers Dry goods and notions Department and general merchandise stores Plumbing and heating equipment and supplies Swimming pools and spas Commercial nursery, retail Radio, TV, stereo Computers and accessories Jewelry, precious metals, coin and stamp dealers Records, tapes, videotapes Stationary and art supplies Office supplies and equipment Shoes Books (general, not adult-oriented) Toys. sport and athletic goods Photographic equipment and supplies Automobiles, motorcycles and other motor vehicles Boats Auto and motorcycle parts and accessories (new) Bicycles and parts Secondhand merchandise and thrift shops Antiques Pets Art galleries. print and frame shops (E) Provision of services to individuals and businesses: Laundering and dry-cleaning outlets Self-service laundries Beauty salons and barber shops Apparel repair, alterations and tailoring Shoe repair Suntan parlors Photographic studios and processors Small appliance repair Radio, TV and stereo repair Watch, clock and jewelry repair Furniture repair and reupholstery Bicycle repair Locksmith Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.3 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (F) (G) (H) Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS Teen Center Eating establishments (including service of alcoholic beverages) Personal storage facilities (mini-warehouses) Funeral parlors and mortuaries Vocational and trade schools Auto service stations and repair centers Pet grooming Veterinarians and animal hospitals Telephone exchanges Taxidermy Car washes Commercial repair garages for motor vehicles and equipment (including body and paint work) Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational Facilities: Motion picture theaters Live theaters (legitimate) Meeting halls (lodge and union) Arcades, pool halls, discotheques Nightclubs Recreation centers Gymnasiums, health and athletic clubs, figure salons Skating rinks (indoor) Drive-in theaters Bowling alley and miniature golf Transient Lodgings Hotels Motels Miscellaneous Services Private adoption agencies Libraries and reading rooms Welfare and charitable services Civic, social and fraternal associations Business associations Professional membership organizations Museums and galleries Community theaters 6-14.4 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (I) Repair and servicing of any article which is permitted to be sold in this District. (J) Other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing~ F~G"i9Q9 iR aQ"tiQR lillJ 01Jii. (K) Uses listed in Chapter 4 of Division 4 of this Title in accordance with the provisions of that chapteraQl>tiQr:1 li\lJ 014Q. (c) Regional Commercial Subarea: The area bounded by San Bernardino Avenue on the north, the Route 30 freeway on the east, Lugonia Avenue on the south and Alabama Street on the west shall be designated for regional commercial uses. Prior to any development within this area, a Planned Development application shall be submitted with each phase subject to final approval prior to issuance of permits. Permitted uses are as follows: (1) Uses permitted and as regulated in Subsection 86.030605(b) above. (2) Corporation headquarter offices (home or regional offices) (3) Hotel complexes (4) Conference and convention centers (5) Stadiums and amphitheaters (6) Entertainment centers (7) Regional mall (8) Other uses similar to the above listed uses if approved by the Plannin~ Commission at a public hearing. (d) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on tRg Q#QGti"Q 9;atQ gf tRi~ aFg;i~; PIJRSeptember 6, 1989 shall adhere to the ;aFFIi;;ablg rgsul;atigr:1~ gf tRQ Sg"Q~iRS jwrii:9i"tiGRprovisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1) Manufacturing and Industrial Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.5 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (2) Warehousing (except for mini-warehouses and storage of merchandise or products for retail sale on the premises) (3) Residential other than hotels and motels (4) Used car sales not in connection with new car sales (5) Recycling facilities and salvage yards (6) Truck terminals (7) Recreational vehicle parks (8) Impound and auto storage yard, automobile dismantling yard (9) Tire retreading (10) Billboards (e) Development Standards 86.030610 (EC/CG) GENERAL COMMERCIAL (EC/CG) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) See (2) below map suffix Minimum Lot Size (acres) will modify See (1) below Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) See (1) below Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) See (1) below Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) See (1) below Front Yard Setback (ft.) See (3) below 25 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (3) below 0 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (3) below 0 Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (3) below 25 See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. area/lot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.6 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I il I I I I I I I I I I I I (1) All lots shall have adequate width, depth and area to accommodate all required parking, setbacks, landscaping, toading, trash enclosures, and access requirements. (2) No maximum building height is established. Height limits shall be determined in accordance with Part 77 of the FAA regulations. Also refer to Floor Area Ratio provisions in Section 86.030630(h)(1 ). (3) Minimum building setbacks shall be as follows: (^) P:r9r;lt ~'A~g ~trg9t tigg ~':tIrd f6.) Side and rear yards 25 fget 2~ feet None except where adjoining residential district. (B) Where district abuts a street designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscaping requirements. (C) Where district abuts a residential district or residential portion of a Planned Development, see Section 86.030630(e)(3) for setback and landscape buffer requirements. (4) For requirements on landscaping, walls, access, parking, loading, trash enclosures, lighting and storage, the provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply. (5) The provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply to signs. In addition, the maximum area of any sign facing a residential district shall be 75 feet. (6) All accessways to a public street shall be located not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the intersection of any street lines, and shall be designed in a manner conducive to safe ingress and egress. Where practical, exits shall be located on a minor street. Frequency of accessways shall be at intervals of not less than one hundred (100) feet. ill Standards for automobile service stations: f6.) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.7 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i62 @2 19 {Q2 @ fl {Ql Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet Minimum lot width and depth shall be one hundred twenty (120) feet Site must abut and have access to a secondary highway or larger roadway, No more than half of the corners at anyone intersection shall be occupied by service stations, Parking Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title, No outdoor parking or storage of wrecked. dismantled. or inoperative vehicles permitted. Parked vehicles shall be limited to those directly associated with the business or awaiting service. No parking permitted in the comer cut- off area. Parking areas shall be screened as required under landscaping section of Section 86.030635. Landscaping ill. Except for driveway openings there shall be a landscaped planter area not less than five (5) feet in width extending along the entire street frontage. illl A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the remaining lot area shall be landscaped with not less than 50 percent of said landscaping provided along the interior property lines. i!!!l All planter areas shall be enclosed by six (6) inch high concrete curbs. i!YL A detailed landscaping plan indicating types and distribution of plantings shall be provided with the application. Walls A three (3) foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along all interior property lines. Said wall 6-14.7.1 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 f!:il \.!l 0- ~ ~ f!:& Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS shall be increased in height to not less than five (5) feet nor more than six (6) feet when the site is adjacent to a school, church, park, club, hospital, residential zone or use. The Planning Commission may require additional walls as determined necessary for proper development of the site. I II I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Rest Room All rest room entrances shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and street rights-of-way by some form of decorative wall or similar device. Customer pump areas shall be roofed. The roofs over the pump areas shall connect to the station or station roof forming one continuous roofed structure. Ridges and eaves may, under some conditions, be at different levels. Trash Storage All trash, refuse and used merchandise shall be stored in an area enclosed by solid walls or fences. Said area shall be located in the rear portion of the lot. Utilities All utilities on the site for direct service to the business shall be installed underground. Lighting All lighting elements on the exterior and interior of the structure shall be shielded from horizontal view except for sign lights or those especially designed for illumination of the parking lot. Equipment Rentals The outside storage of rental trailers, and similar equipment, may be permitted provided they are completely screened from public view and the use is specifically authorized in the Conditional Use Permit. Additional lot area over the required minimum in the 6-14.7.2 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 '~'7" ".,...,.' ',,' f.". -.,. ;l",--,"'"-' .'..._ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I amount of 200 square feet per rental unit shall be ' provided. .@l Standards for drive-through restaurants and services: ~ Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. @ Minimum lot width and depth dimensions shall be one hundred twenty (120) feet. 19 Site must abut and have access to a secondary highway or larger roadway. iQ1 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. @ Landscaping ill Except for driveway openings there shall be a landscaped planter area not less than ten (10) feet in width extending along the entire street frontage and not less than (5) feet in width along all interior property lines. illl A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the total site shall be landscaped. ill.!l. Landscaping guidelines and requirements of Section 86.030635 shall apply. fl Walls A three (3) foot high solid masonry wall shall be constructed along all interior property lines. The Planning Commission may require higher walls as determined necessary for proper development of the site and protection of adjacent property owners. {QL Frequency of Drive-Through Restaurants Due to the high traffic generation characteristics of drive- through restaurant facilities such uses shall not be located closer than 300 feet from each other. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.7.3 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 f!:!l f!l Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS Screening I , I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Drive-through aisles shall be completely screened from the view at public rights-at-way to a height equal to or greater than that at standard vehicular headlights. Screening shall be by use of walls, earth berms, landscaping or a combination thereat. A traffic study prepared by a qualified traffic engineer shall be submitted with the application. 6-14.7.4 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 86.030615 Regional Industrial (EC/JR). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the Regional Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7, 1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and all necessary structures and appurtenances thereof. (2) Ir;;} srdgr 1s QRi;:LsIr9 ~9m~li2R~s u'itt;, tf;lg ~xigm. gQ:alc :aRd ~gliQiQii gf tRQ eOilvt 'IOilllQ~' C'Q~rigQr ~~Q"iti.. "'IJR, tRQ The following uses shall be subject to a Conditional Use Permit-QI: ~itQ ^~~~"Oill. (At the discretion of the reviewing agency, review requirement may be met by Planning Commission review.) (A) Rg[g:Jr~~ :aRQ gg"glg~mgRt wtQt pgrt=Ritlgg iR tf::1g ('9mmgr~i:a1 IRgYct~i:a1 Qittr:i~t, :a~ Hetsg iR ~9~tj9R allJ QQ1Q (2)Research and Development Research laboratories, product development facilities, and testing laboratories and facilities, including: Biochemical Chemical Metallurgical Pharmaceutical X-ray Film and photographic Medical and dental Electrical Optical Mechanical. (B) ~~:aRYf:a~tbsfl:iRg liege permitteg iR t~g CgR:n;~gr~iAI IRdw~tri:a1 Oittri~, :at littsg irxl i9Stisr;:, E\J~.QQ1Q ~Manufacturing and Industrial Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing the following products: Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.8 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS (C) Apparel, drapery, upholstery, millinery, and related cloth and clothing items Furniture and fixtures, including office furniture. store fixtures, blinds and shades, furniture, shelving Paper products, including envelopes, bags, wallpaper, containers, pressed and molded pulp goods Publishing, including newspapers, business forms, typesetting, photoengraving, bookbinding, printing Chemicals, including pharmaceutical, botanical, soaps and detergents, chemical fertilizer, perfumes and cosmetics, candles and wax Fabricated plastic products Stone, clay and glass products, including plate glass, mirrors, dishes and earthenware, pottery, porcelain and china, fixtures and supplies. cut stone Fabricated metal products, including heating and air conditioning equipment, communication equipment, electrical equipment, plumbing fixtures, radio and TV equipment, appliances, wiring, cutlery and hand tools, fasteners, and similar equipment and supplies Professional and scientific goods, including measuring instruments, clocks and watches, optical goods, surgical and medical instruments, photographic equipment, engineering, scientific and research instruments, computers, orthopedic, prosthetic and surgical appliances, ophthalmic goods, and similar equipment and supplies Miscellaneous manufactured goods, including jewelry, lapidary, precious metals, toys, sporting goods, umbrellas, brushes, novelties. notions, silverware, pictures and frames, musical instruments, tobacco products, artist supplies and similar goods, Additional manufacturing and industrial uses, as follows: Prefabricated wooden buildings, veneer and plywood, and containers Fabricated rubber products Plastic, synthetic rubber and synthetic fibers 6-14.9 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Paints, varnishes, lacquers, enamels and allied products excluding boiling processes) Industrial chemicals Pesticides and agricultural chemicals Wholesale trade of durable and non-durable goods to commercial, industrial and professional business uses, including motor vehicles, sporting goods, electrical appliances, hardware, machinery and equipment for industry, construction, professional and service establishments Warehouse and distribution centers (D) Supportive service and commercial uses: Heavy equipment repair Welding and metal repair Electrical/electronic repair Restaurants operated for employees on the premises Child-care centers operated for employees on the premises Open space and recreation areas for employee use Business and research offices related to administration and operation of the penmitted industrial uses Equipment rental Parcel delivery Automobile service stations One (1) dwelling unit on the same parcel of land as a permitted use needing continual supervision, to be occupied exclusively by a superintendent or a caretaker and his family Commercial sales and service incidental to a principal permitted use Truck rental and leasing Motor freight terminals Truck terminals, storage, parking and repair Personal storage facilities (mini-warehouse) (E) Other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing~ fill'Q"id9d ir:l Sii9\:tiQr:lIiV~.Q1 ~!i. (c) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on tR9 tl#Gsti"Q dOlt9 gf Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.10 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , , cc - I '. - I tRiG a~gG:itiG: j;lIJR September 6, 1989 shall adhere to tl'1g Ji2i2li,3t2lg I I rQ~l.IliiltigRG sf tRIi ss"sFRiR~ jlJFiGdiQtisRthe provisions of Chapter 9 of - Division 4 of this Title. I I (1 ) Residential other than caretakers quarters. I. (2) Retail commercial or office uses as primary uses. I (3) Animal and poultry raising, slaughter or packing. (4) Auto wrecking. junk yards. salvage yards or recycling centers. I (5) Wholesale trade of commodities which may be incompatible with other uses permitted in this District, including but not I limited to fuel. scrap, ammunition. petroleum products or hazardous chemicals. I (6) Fur and hide curing or tanning. (e) Development Standards I TAQ dg"slg~R:1QRt GtaRdar:QG gf tRQ ~g~~g~iAI IRgy~tr=iAI i:)i~tri~t (~g'tigR ~lIa.Q~2Q) GRail a~~I~' ts all ~rg~sr:t;; iR tRs RQ~igRal I IRglJ~tr:iAI ~ittrist 86.030615 (ECIIR) REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL (EC/IR) DISTRICT I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 50 I map suffix 20.000 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) will modify See (1) below Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 50% I Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) N/A I Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) 100/150 Front Yard Setback (ft.) 25 I Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (2) below 0 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (2) below 0 I Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) 25 See Section I Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - fl. area/lot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Draft - December 21, 2000 6-14.11 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION I PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 - I ~ Minimum District Size (acres) (1) Minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. The requirement shall not be construed to prevent condominium-type developments which have smaller lot sizes as long as they have a mandatory owners association, and the land area under the jurisdiction of the association meets the minimum lot size requirements. (2) ~1iRiT+1w~ ~A~~91 "'jstf;:l tt;l211 be 9rxlQ t:lI~rx1grgg (1QQ) fast, 2rxl9 mirxlir:RYI*lI2Ar~gl gg~tt;.'\ tRAil be eRg RLdRSrgg uft~' (15Q) fegt (1) iYildiRQt :3RQ ttry~tyr;gt: ct;;JAII h:a"g A f::1gigl;lt net greAter thJrxl ~ft~: (50) fggt (4) 19t JreJ ~g\lgrAgg b~' bYildjRQ~ sr ttrLd~tYrgt cf;;1JII Ret gX~9gd ~ft:: (5g~/_) 1"9r\;9Rt gf tR9 tlltallgt arga. (~~) Minimum building setback lines shall be as follows: (A) f;rgRt ~'ar9 25 fggt ltt~ggt l:i99 ~'4r9 25 fQgt Interior side yard None required except adjacent to Rear yard residential district. (B) Where district abuts a street designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscape requirements. (e) Where district abuts a residential district or residential portion of a Planned Development, see Section 86.030630(e)(3) for setback and landscape buffer requirements. (~) For requirements on parking, landscaping, walls and fences, loading, lighting, storage and other design standards, the provisions of Section 86.030630 shall apply. (~) All lots shall have a minimum of sixty (60) feet of access on a dedicated and improved street. (i~) The provisions Section 86.030630 shall apply to signs. In addition, the maximum area of any sign facing a residential zone shall be seventy-five (75) square feet. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.12 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (~2) Any structure originally designed as a residence. or as an I accessory to a residence. shall not be used for any commercial or industrial purpose. (~D A commercial or industrial building shall not be constructed or established on the same lot together with an existing residential building. (~~) All buildings erected, constructed or established, shall be entirely new and complete structures designed for commercial or industrial purposes only. (~~) All uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building except as follows: (A) Off-street parking and loading areas. (B) Automobile service stations - all merchandise must be displayed within the building or under canopy cover. (e) The open storage of materials, products, and equipment when such storage is enclosed by a fence, wall, buildings or other means adequate to conceal such storage from view from adjoining property or the public street. However, this requirement shall not apply to the display of products or equipment offered for sale or rental, providing said display is maintained in a neat and orderly manner. (~10) New buildings or structures having exterior walls of sheet metal shall not be located closer than one hundred and fifty (150) feet from the property line along any freeway, major or secondary highway, or closer than one hundred (100) feet from the property line along any other dedicated street, except that said buildings or structures may be located closer to the street if any of the following conditions prevail: (A) The sheet metal comprises less than twenty-five (25%) percent of the exterior wall area of said building or structures, or (B) The sheet metal consists of panels with stainless steel, baked enamel or similar finish, or Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.13 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (C) Drafl- December 21 , 2000 PLANNING AREAS Said building or structure is concealed from view from the public street by walls, fences, landscaping, or other buildings or structures. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6-14.14 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 86.030620 Planned Development (EC/PD). (a) This district is intended to include all the permitted and prohibited land uses and all development standards of the Special Development District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan as adopted on August 7,1989. (b) Permitted Land Uses (1) The following uses are permitted as interim uses and do not require submittal of a Planned Development application: (A) Agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use, including orchards, groves, nurseries, field crops, tree crops, berry crops, bush crops, truck gardening and commercial flower growing, and all necessary structures and appurtenances thereof. (B) Single family dwelling units on parcels of twenty (20) acres or more. (2) The following uses are permitted subject to approval of a Planned Development application: (A) Uses permitted within the East Valley Corridor General Commercial sr CSR=lR=lsr"iaIIRQIol&tFial District. (B) Uses permitted within the East Valley Corridor Regional Industrial District as listed in Section 86.030615(b)(2)(A) and (B). eCl Retail sales of items havinQ 10nQ-term utility, to individuals and businesses: Automobile, new and used Automobile equipment Agricultural supplies and equipment Bicycle. boat and motorcycle Building material and hardware Camper and mobile home Electrical apparatus and equipment Furniture, appliances and carpeting Garden and farm supplies Interior decorating supplies Machinery, equipment and supplies Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.15 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Nurseries (no outdoor display of merchandise other than plants) Plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration equipment and supplies Office equipment Paint Pet and pet supply Radio, television and electronic equipment (D) Provision of services to individuals and businesses: Ambulance services Animal hospitals Auto rental Auto services, including repair of brakes, glass, mufflers and body work, provided no open service bays are visible from the public right-of-way Bus terminals and similar transit facilities Business and research offices related to the administration and operation of the permitted industrial uses Cleaning and dyeing plants, laundries, linen and towel service Equipment rental Furniture upholstery Ice manufacture, cold storage and frozen food lockers Mail order houses Motels and hotels Off-street parking Parcel delivery Pest control Printing, lithographing, publishing Public scales Public utility offices and service yards Radio and television broadcasting studios Repair of any item permitted to be sold in this district Restaurants, cafes, cafeterias, drive-in restaurants Restaurants operated for employees on the premises Retreading of tires Sign painting Trade union halls Van and storage, including mini-warehouse facilities (E) Recreation and Entertainment Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.16 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I- I Bowling lanes, skating rinks, sports arenas Cocktail lounges and bars Drive-in theaters (H) (I) (J) (K) (L) Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS (F) (G) Transportation, Communication and Utility Facilities: Airports and associated uses Electrical, gas, water and sewage transmission facilities Radio and television stations and towers Microwave communication towers and facilities Public Services: Hospitals, sanitariums, convalescent and rest homes Government protective functions and postal services Public works maintenance and storage yards Executive, legislative and judicial functions and offices Educational Services: Day Care Centers (public or private), primary, middle/junior high, and high schools Universities, colleges, junior colleges, and professional schools Vocational, trade, and special training schools Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational Facilities: Museums and art galleries Planetariums, aquariums, botanical gardens and zoos Historical and monument sites Convention facilities Parks, playgrounds, athletic fields Recreation and community centers Golf courses Arboretums, rose gardens, botanical gardens Flood control structures Hiking, bicycle, and equestrian paths and trails One (1) dwelling unit on the same parcel of land as a permitted use needing continual supervision, to be occupied exclusively by a caretaker and his family. 6-14.17 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (M) Other Uses Bl:lsiness, technical, trade or professional schools Clubs, lodges and similar organizations Govemment buildings Warehouses and distribution centers Wholesale trade of most consumer items, including motor vehicles, drugs, dry goods, apparel, groceries. building materials and paper products. (N) Other uses similar to the above listed uses, if approved by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. (a) t)t;Qt pgr;f,;littgg '\'itt;;Jir;:J tt;1g ^dmiRi~tr~ti\lg Pr;gf.g~t:i9R:41 Qi~trj~t (~) !Jf;:9t: ~gr,l+1it:tgd '''jt~ir;.') tRQ Pl.Iblis IR~titytigRAI Oittr,ist (Q) ll~gt psrl+1ittgg u'itRiR tR9 O~9R SI~~sg Qittr;ist. (3) Where determined to be appropriate by the reviewing agency, a special buffer area shall be established adjacent to existing single family residential homes which abut the \i(O'l/roiOlI Planned Development District, in order to ensure a logical transition of uses. The following uses will be permitted within this buffer area: (A) All uses permitted within \il/rotigr:l e:\I~ 111 Q itgR'lt J Jr:lr;I 9Subsections (1) and (2) above. (B) Uses permitted within the Countywide Single Residential District. (c) Prohibited Uses Establishment of the following uses IiEtl/9 ir:l \il/stier:l E)/~.QQ1a (b) t/:lrswg/:l ((0') is prohibited. Any expansion or alteration of such uses that were in existence on t/:ll/ sffsroti"s gJts \If t/:lit \ifO'sroitiro PIOlr:lSeptember 6. 1989 shall adhere to the J(O'fO'liroOlblg rggwlJti\lr:lt \If t/:ls gg':grr:lir:lg jwri&gisti\lr:lprovisions of Chapter 9 of Division 4 of this Title. (1) Any outdoor manufacturing or processing operation (2) Breweries. distilleries. wineries Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.18 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I, I I I I II I I I I I , I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I (a) (3) Contractors storage yards , I (4) Feed and grain yards i I I (5) Food processing, canning or packing (6) Animal and poultry raising, slaughter or packing (7) Stables and riding academies (8) Auto wrecking, junk yards, salvage yards, recycling centers (9) Wholesale trade of commodities which may be incompatible with other uses permitted in this district, including but not limited to agricultural products, lumber, concrete block, fuel, scrap, ammunition, and hazardous chemicals (10) Truck terminals (11 ) Recreational vehicle parks (12) Kennels and catteries (13) Manufacture of paint, oil, shellac, turpentine or varnish (14) Paper or pulp manufacture (15) Leather tanning and finishing (16) Billboards Development Standards C/PD) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (EC/PD) DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS For Interim Uses listed in Subsection 86.030620 (b)(1) I ucture Height (ft.) 35 map suffix Size (acres) will modify 20 Coverage (building coverage) N/A II ~ 10 acres Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres N/A Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) N/A mber 21, 2000 6-14.19 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION REAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 86.030620 (E Maximum Str Minimum Lot Maximum Lot Maximum Lot Minimum Lot Draft - Dece PLANNING A I I I I I e":i 111 g (a), I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I Front Yard Setback (ft.) See (1) below I ~- , ~~ , I' , Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) ! 20 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 'I Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) See (1) below 25 i See Section Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR - ft. area/lot area) 86.030630(h)(1 ) Minimum District Size (acres) N/A ill (2) (1 ) j;"gr iRtgril+l W~g[ 2~ li~t99 irxl ~g~tigfxl gguQlgpr;;tQrxtt tt2Rd:Jrgt LIre LIt fQI/gu,[O (^ ) ~1iRimYr:R 1st [i~g [t;:l~1I be P.'9Rt~f (2Q) :;I~rg[. (Q) (C) ~~axiJ+1lo1J+1 glolilgiR~ I:1si~f:tt ~l:1all QS tl:1ir:tj' fi"s (:ia) fsst. ~1iRimwl+l gYilGlfiR8 [gtb2l~k[' (I) ~r;gRt Y2Ir=d 'itr-ggt tidg ~'21r;d ~idg 21rxld f921r ~'21rg[ :Ii fQst :Ii fQst :lQ fQst (II) Where front or side street is designated as a Special Landscaped Street in Section 86.030625(g), see Section 86.030625(g) for setback and landscaping requirements. Development standards for Planned Development projects shall be based upon the approved development plan or use permit and conditions of approval attached to the plan by the reviewing agency. All Planned Developments shall adhere to the Community Design standards as outlined in Section 86.030630, and to the requirements for PO approval contained in Article 2 of Chapter 3 of Division 3 of this Title. Where the SO PO District is located adjacent to existing single family residential uses, special attention shall be paid to the development compatibility standards set forth in Section 86.030630( e). Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.20 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 86.030625 Circulation Design Guidelines o(a) A critical element of the illg~ifl~ P!JR East Valley Corridor Planning Area is the provision of an efficient and comprehensive circulation plan. In order for development to occur in an orderly and systematic manner, access into the study area must be improved and the circulation system within the study area must be adequate to accommodate traffic volumes generated by the project. (b) The intent of the planning area, in terms of circulation, is to provide an effective circulation system, establish a streetscape design that will enhance the character of the East Valley, and maintain consistency with current and future transportation planning efforts at the state, regional and local levels. (c) While most transportation in and around the study area is by private automobile, special consideration has been given to public transit, pedestrian access, and recreational trails. (d) Figure EC-1 illustrates the backbone circulation system proposed for the East Valley Corridor. TRQ \;irGulati\;lR lii~'liitlill+l ilii Jg\;llltgg alii a ~"r,tiSR sf t~g ~9RgrAI PIAR~ gf tl:1s CSYRt~' gf iAR agr~:argiRQ. tl:ls ~iP/ \;If b..lill+la b..iR9a, aR9 tRQ C'it~' \/f RgglaR91; Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.21 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 '.~ Figure EC-1 Draft - December 21 , 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.22 I I I I. I I I I I I- I I I I I I 1- lu !I (e) Circulation Plan (1) The major traffic routes through the study area are Interstate 10 (the San Bernardino Freeway) and State Route 30 (the Tennessee Freeway). The ~~Qsifls PlaREast Valley Corridor Planning Area provides for a network of six lane major arterial and four lane major and secondary highways in conjunction with collector streets to be constructed or improved within the area. This proposed circulation system will provide additional regional access to the area as well as build a backbone system for the proposed development. (2) The following roadways shall be designated as major arterials: California- Street from Palmetto Avenue to 1ia:;1I:f:9R RgadAlmond Avenue Alabama Street from the Santa Ana River to liaar:tQR ~Lugonia Avenue R9"I~Rg~ ~gLdlg\lAr;g fram tRe ~'g~t9rR ~IAR ggYRd:ary tQ P:uk ^"QRY9 San Bernardino Avenue from Hgwr:ltaiR \fiQv: ^"QRwQCalifornia Street to TQxaE ~tmQtRoute 30. (3) The following roadways shall be designated as major highways: Palmetto Avenue from California Street to Alabama Street Lugonia Avenue from ~1Qwr:ltaiR \fisw .1\.':QRwQNew Jersey Street to tRQ QaEtQrR r;llaR arQ<I ggwRd<lryRoute 30. i2lnSR ReAd frgm C':alif,QrRi2 ~trggt tg K2R~2t ~tr9gt ~191JRt2iR '(isla' .^.'.'QRLd9 fr:Qm R99!2R&h: a9YISu2rd ts ~2R 1ii9~2r:diR9 ^"9RU9 ^R9grt9R ~trggt from R9d12R9~ EaSY!9"2rd t9 I 1Q (4) The following roadways shall be designated as secondary highways: Nevada Street from San Bernardino Avenue to liaar:tQR ~Lugonia Avenue T9x2t itrggt from PAlmette ^"9RtH~ t9 tsytt;;)gr;n pl2R 2n~A b~adRd2"': PAlmette ^"9RY9 U-9r:R lbslg9Ri; ^"9Rbsl9 t9 C2lifsr;Ri2 itrggt (5) The following roadways shall be designated as collectors: Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.23 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 QIi':g ^"gr;;1l.19 U;Qm C'~limr;RiJ itrggt tt;' ^1~bJr;;RA ~trg9t Pioneer Avenue from .^lab:aI'R:a California Street to T9lC... itrgglRoute 30 Collector connecting Palmetto Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue, west of Nevada Street Collector connecting Palmetto Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue, east of Nevada Street Park ^'<9RW9 froQI'R CalifgrRia lJt~Qgt Ie RgglaRr.;!. Elgw!g'<:arr.;! C'itr;y~ ^"9r;;1l.19 fn~m C'AlifgrRi:a Strggt tt;' K:1nt:a~ Strggt (6) In instances where roadways are designated on the Circulation Plan where no road currently exists, the location and design standards, including the grade and alignment, will be determined by the reviewing authority at the time of submittal of design plans for the individual project. (f) Road Standards (1) Standards and specifications for transportation facilities and all work within the road rights-of-way shall conform to the County's Standards and Specifications Manual unless specifically modified herein. Typical sections of roads within the planning area are shown in Figures EC-2 through EC-6. (2) Right-of-way shall be required as shown on the i~g,ifis ~Planning Area Circulation map except in the following instances: (A) On California Street between Palmetto Avenue and Almond Avenue, the existing fan palm row shall be placed in a 22-foot landscaped median. To accommodate this median, the road right-ot-way shall be 126 feet instead of 120 feet on this stretch. (B) On Palmetto Avenue between California Street and the existing alignment of Nevada Street, the existing double row of fan palms will be placed in a 34-foot landscaped median. To accommodate this median, the road right-of- way shall be 106 feet instead of 104 feet on this stretch. (3) In order to accommodate medians and parkways landscaped with fan palm rows, sidewalks shall be placed outside of the right-of-way on the following streets. In these instances, the reviewing agency shall be granted a sidewalk easement for maintenance. Drafl- December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.24 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I Riiliill;;lI'Hj~ Eiiilloll.I"anj San Bernardino Avenue Alabama Street Palmetto Avenue between California Street and Nevada Street (4) Access control standards shall be as follows: (A) No direct driveway access from individual residences shall be permitted onto major arterials, major highways or secondary highways. (B) Intersections shall be placed a minimum of 400 feet centerline to centerline from freeway on and off ramps. (C) Offset intersections shall be a minimum of 300 feet centerline to centerline. (D) Access shall be controlled on major arterials and major highways to minimize curb cuts and facilitate the flow of traffic. Any new development or subdivision of land adjacent to these roadways shall be required to dedicate vehicular access rights, except where access points are shown on an approved Site Plan. Shared access and parking, and use of side streets for access, shall be required whenever possible. (E) All development proposals shall be designed so as to provide for a free flow of vehicles in and out of the site as well as for easy access to the various activity areas within each site. (F) Placement of access points into each site shall minimize interference with the off-site circulation system. (G) Where medians are located in the street fronting the site, driveways should be provided where median breaks occur. (H) Adequate prOVIsions shall be made for emergency vehicle access, with a minimum of two (2) points of ingress and egress provided to each site. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.25 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Figure EC-2 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.26 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .- -...... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure EC-3 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.27 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Figure EC-4 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) I' 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure EC-5 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.29 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 --- - ---- -- I Figure EC-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft - December 21, 2000 6-14.30 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION I PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (5) Intersection design shall conform to the following standa::s (A) Intersections less than 80 degrees shall not be permIrte: without special approval from the reviewing agency. The gO-degree angle is preferable. (B) If offset streets are to be c::mtinuous, they shall be curved to approach the intersection so as to effect a right-angle alignment. (C) At intersections where additional traffic lanes are indicated by traffic analysis, provision shall be made for requiring additional right-of-way and curb width within 300 feet of the intersection. (6) The following streets shall have landscaped center medians: Palmetto Avenue California Street, from Barton Road to Palmetto Avenue RssI2lRQ( is\zdls''2rd, f~gR' C'2lifsr;Ri2 Sltr9:t t9 ~Is'" Ysrk itrggt a2rxtSrx1 RS2S, frgr;;t Terr2~i~2 agl2sllg"~lI~d t~ K:~lr~t::u: itr,sst (7) No parking, except for emergency parking, shall be allowed on any street which has four or more lanes, (includes major arterials, major highways, and secondary highways). (8) Cul-de-sac standards shall be as follows: (A) Cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum paved radius of 40 feet. (B) Length of cul-de-sac shall not exceed 600 feet. (g) Private streets shall be constructed in accordance with approved Planned Development Standards. (g) Special Landscaped Streets The dominant design element for the East Valley Corridor Planning Area will consist of unified streetscape themes to be established throughout the planning area, incorporating consistency of setbacks, street planting, berming, walls and sidewalks. In order to establish this consistency, major arterials within the planning area have been designated as Special Landscaped Streets, with specific design guidelines developed for each one. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.31 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 A key element of the streetscape design, providing a dramatic and recognizable image for the area, will be a continuation of the eXisting grid pattern of Washingtonia Robusta palms (Mexican fan palms), both north and south of Interstate 10. Understory plantings of canopy type street trees, shrubs and groundcover will provide shade, color and a more human scale to the streetscape. The landscape design and plant palette for each major street is intended to be consistent throughout the planning area. Properties which abut any of the streets listed below must landscape the area adjacent to the roadway as provided in Subsections 86.030625(g)(1) through (5). The only improvements which may encroach into this landscaped area are driveway entrances, sidewalks, planters, fences or walls not to exceed three and a half (3- 1/2) feet in height. Parking areas adjacent to roadways are subject to the landscape requirements of Section 86.030630(i). Specific design and/or plant materials may be modified at the discretion of the approving agency when there is a conflict with the location of public utilities. Development applications requesting a deviation from specific design standards or plant materials shall clearly identify what conflict exists with public utilities, what specific standards apply, and how the conflict will be resolved. The approving agency may modify adopted design or plant material requirements when a demonstrated conflict with public utilities exists that cannot be resolved without deviating from adopted standards. Special Landscaped Streets within the East Valley Corridor area include the following: San Bernardino Avenue Alabama Street California Street Palmetto Avenue, between California and Alabama Streets Lugonia Avenue (1) SAN BERNARDINO AVENUE San Bernardino Avenue is designated as a major arterial and is a major east-west thoroughfare connecting the cities of Redlands and San Bernardino. The predominant designated land use adjacent to this street is i~gt>iaIPlanned Development, with some RQQig~JI a~Q General Commercial adjacent to the Tennessee freeway. Most of the area around Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.32 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I . . . I I I I I. I . I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I San Bemardino Avenue is presently undeveloped. witn c:a~ge groves and field crops the major uses in this area. The Inter.! of the landscape guidelines for San Bemardino Avenue is to extend the palm row landscape element, enhance the identity of the East Valley Corridor on a major roadway. and create an aesthetic buffer between the street and planned commercial and industrial uses. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet. Sidewalk Six (6') foot straight sidewalk, eight (8') feet from back of curb. Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees New planting of single row of Washingtonia robusta on each side of roadway between curb and sidewalk, planted forty (40') feet on center. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted in landscaped setback area on regular spacing, in triangular pattern with palm rows. Salvage and relocate existing mature palms as roadway is widened. (2) ALABAMA STREET Alabama Street, which parallels the Tennessee freeway to the west, is designated as a major arterial. Alabama connects Redlands to the community of Highland, and serves as the only arterial access into this portion of the planning area from the north. The existing crossing of Alabama over the Santa Ana River Wash is a causeway which is subject to inundation and washing out. The Circulation Plan calls for construction of a bridge at this location, to make this crossing all-weather. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.33 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.34 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . , Land use designations along Alabama include a wide ~ix 0' uses from north to south, including Commercial. Industrial. and Planned Development. HloIltir;lls RSi>i9sr:lti:al, Ar:l3 ^ "';;;1'r:lIt:":'. Pffilffili>l>ifilr:lAI. The portion of Alabama i>9Io1tt;J north of Lugonia is :;I1r;g:;lg~' gs"slgpsd urit!;;1 :1 \l2r;i9t~' gf ~gmmg~s:i21 ytQi:. \H~jIQ trx,9 R9r:tAgm r;l1lr;:tisR ic agricultural., so Tl:ig Qfil"fillsr;lfilQ r;lfil'1isl'l i. ~2rxt:i:aIl~' I:aR9(~:af2gd Utitt;, ttrggt ~~ (g9rxJ9"211~' ~:al~ ';2tigti9~) ,li''!; tlolt:f. iYilgi~g f;9+~2~kf: 2Irg:ag~' 9(t:ablitf;:)g9 i~ +!qg 9Q\f912;29g ~9~iQn ii1rfil ~Clliilti"gl~' r:liilfrs"'. "'Ailfil the opportunity to create a wider. I more spacious landscaped area exists north of Interstate 1 O. The intent of the landscape guidelines for Alabama Street is to create a unified appearance along the street throughout the planning area despite varying land uses, while recognizing existing development and building on established landscape treatment. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet south of 1-10, 30 feet north of 1.10. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks behind palm planting area. Groundplane Berms or other screening required where parking areas are visible from right-of-way. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf or groundcover. Street Trees Single row of Washingtonia robusta, planted fory (40') feet on center; understory of Platanus acerifolia, regularly spaced in triangular pattern with palms. I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (3) CALIFORNIA STREET Califomia Street is designated as a major arterial and provi:::es a major gateway into the planning area from Interstate 10. both to the north and the south. North of 1-10. the predominant land use designation is ali/g,iillPlanned Development and the area is undeveloped above Lugonia. South of 1-10. Multiple Residential is the only land use designation. adjacent to California Street iRiOlygg r+1wltiIil1i< ~ilr+1il,' r9i:i;;JgRt'ill :aRg s9r;;lmgr"'i:a1, 2~d fl?Srxti'H~E; gf tt;;l9 :ar92 Llrs AI~929~' 99' 'sIS;29g. The landscape guidelines for California Street emphasize the importance of this roadway in establishing the identity of the East Valley Corridor. due to its high visibility from the freeway. anticipated traffic volume. planned link to a regional trail system. and central location. Because of these factors. a wide landscaped median and parkways are planned for the portion of California north of 1-10, where no existing development will be affected. South of 1-10. the median will be reduced in size and the trail system will be routed onto Citrus Avenue. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30' feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 30' feet. . Where trail system is not adjacent to roadway. setbacks may be a minimum of 25 feet but must average 30 feet. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks adjacent to curb. Bike Trail Class I bike path on east side of California Street between Palmetto Avenue and R9glilRgi: ElliluI9":argLugonia Avenue (per Section 86.030625(m). Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Berms encouraged on parkways. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.35 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Groundcover Within Public Right-of"Way I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ., -~ Turf Street Trees New planting of single row of Washingtonia robusta on each side of roadway adjacent to curb, planted forty (40') feet on center. Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted in landscaped setback area on regular spacing, in triangular pattem with palm rows. Median North of Interstate 10, phase median into roadway north of Lugonia Avenue. Between Almond Avenue and Palmetto Avenue, retain existing row of Washingtonia robusta in median. Use occasional understory groupings of crape myrtle. Use river rock in median noses. (4) PALMETTO AVENUE, between California and Alabama Streets Palmetto Avenue is designated as a major highway between California Street and Alabama Street. It will serve to carry traffic between those two major arterials, and to provide access to the adjacent land designated for Regional Industrial and \t~Ii'~i:;!IPlanned Development. Two existing rows of Washingtonia robusta, planted approximately 22 feet apart, extend along Palmetto between California Street and Nevada Street. It is the intent of the landscape guidelines to maintain consistency with the design concepts for Califomia Street, and to preserve and extend the existing palm rows on Palmetto Avenue. Setbacks Building Setback line (from property line) 30' feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 30' feet. 'Where trail system is not adjacent to roadway, setbacks may be a minimum of 25 feet but must average 30 feet. Sidewalks Six (6') foot sidewalks adjacent to curb. Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.36 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I ..i. __ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Bike Trail Class I bike path on north side of Palmetto Avenue (per section 86.030625(m). Groundplane Berms or other screening required adjacent to parking areas. Groundcover within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees Camphor trees (Cinnamomum camphora) planted thirty (30') feet on center. Median Between California Street and (existing) Nevada Street, place double palm row in 34-foot median. Between Nevada Street and Alabama Street, plant new row of Washingtonia Robusta palm trees thirty (30') feet on center in triangular pattern with camphor trees on parkways. Use occasional understory groupings of crape myrtle. Use river rock in median noses. (5) LUGONIA AVENUE Lugonia Avenue is designated as a major highway and parallels Interstate 10 to the north. Land use designations adjacent to Lugonia include General Commercial and, lll"lilsiJIPlanned Development :;lJ'Id RggiQI'IJI CIilr.:Rr.:Rgrsial. An existing landscape element developed on Lugonia is the citrus grove adjacent to Edwards Mansion, a primary focal point on this .street. The intent of the landscape guidelines on Lugonia Avenue is to create a spacious, uncluttered "greenbelt" appearance conducive to business park development. Setbacks Building setback line (from property line) 30 feet. Parking setback line (from property line) 15 feet. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.37 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.38 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I II I I I Sidewalks Meandering sidewalk, six (6') foot width, minimum of three (3') feet from back of curb, per Section 86.030625(1)(1) and (3). Groundplane Berms or other screening required where parking areas are visible from right-of-way. Groundcover Within Public Right-of-Way Turf Street Trees Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) and Liquidambar styriciflua planted with random spacing or in grove effect, to provide varied streetscape with view windows, at the equivalent of one tree per thirty (30') linear feet of frontage. (h) Special Landscape Requirements for Other Streets (1) In addition to existing palm rows along Special Landscaped Streets. as outlined in Section 86.030625(g), the following streets within the planning area have rows of Washingtonia robusta and Washingtonia filifera located adjacent to the roadway: ~Pioneer Avenue Almond Avenue Citrus Avenue Nevada Street (2) These trees shall be preserved or relocated in accordance with the guidelines contained in Section 86.030630(m) gf tl:18 ijO'9Gifrs Plilr:i. Relocated trees shall be used to enhance or ex1end palm rows designated on Special Landscaped Streets or to enhance Special Landscaped Intersections. (i) Setbacks at Intersections (1) As part of the streetscape design component of the i"8"i~s ~Planning Area, intersections shall be designed to provide a I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I unified character throughout the planning area. Intersec!i::Jns shall be classified as follows: (A) Primary intersections: Alabama Street and Palmetto Avenue Alabama Street and Lugonia Avenue C'AlifQrr;;Ji~ itr:99t A~g It.lQ9J;:li2 ^"Sr;:JYQ (b) Secondary intersections: San Bernardino Avenue and Nevada Street San Bernardino Avenue at Tennessee Freeway (State Route 30) (2) Building setbacks from intersections shall be defined by a line in a horizontal plane, taken at a forty-five (45) degree angle, connecting the property lines. On primary intersections, this line shall be drawn 50 feet from the intersection of the property lines or prolongation of such lines; on secondary intersections, 35 feet. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.39 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 RIGHT-OF-WAY , .. .... I I I I I ""'..-. PRIMARY INTERSECTION RIGHT-OF-WAY SECONDARY INTERSECTIOI RIGHT-OF-WAY 3 ' ~ ., RIGHT-OF-WAY 35' ., Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.40 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8,06.03 I I I I I I I I Figure EC-7 SETBACKS AT SPECIAL LANDSCAPED INTERSECTIONS I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I '. I (3) A clear sight area shall be established at all intersections of public or private streets within the planning area. This area .shall be defined by a line in a horizontal plane. taken at a forty- five (45) degree angle. connecting two points twenty.five (25) feet from the intersection of property lines or the prolongation of such lines. The maximum height of visual barriers, including but not limited to signs. vegetation. fences and walls. shall not exceed thirty-six (36) inches above the top of the curb or forty- four (44) inches above the surface of the street. RIGHT.OF-WAY - RIGHT-OF-WAY -.-- I 25. Figure EC-S SETBACK FOR CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE U) Planting and Design Concepts for Special Landscaped Intersections (1) The design of enhanced comer treatments at key intersections will vary between primary and secondary classifications. but will be developed to retain a similar character which will further establish a sense of continuity throughout the planning area. The design of these corner treatments shall include a combination of masonry walls. ballards. enriched paving, and plant materials which will coordinate with the proposed streetscape planting. yet create a specific focal element. Draft - December 21. 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.41 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8_06.03 (3) Conceptual drawings of how Primary and Secondary Intersections might be constructed are shown on Figures EC-9 and EC-10 respectively. The actual configuration of each designated intersection may differ slightly to provide for integration into the adjacent site design; provided, however, that the primary plant and building materials and design concepts as contained in this Section are adhered to in the intersection design. I The dominant plant materials or Special Landscaped I Intersection shall be Washingtonia Robusta Palms along with a flowering accent tree to provide human scale and color; shrub or groundcover planting and/or flowering ground cover. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6-14.42 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 - '. ~ (2) Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS I - . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure EC.9 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.43 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 -,... Figure EC-10 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.44 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) I 8.06.03 I I .," .. I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (k) Landscape Concepts for Freeways (1) Planting guidelines along the freeways shall be consistent with other landscape guidelines established for the 5,r-i~- ~Planning Area in order to enhance the continuity of landscape design and improve freeway views from both on and off the roadway. (2) Required setbacks adjacent to freeways shall be established as follows: (A) A minimum 25 feet of landscaped area shall be established adjacent to all freeway rights-of-way. (B) Within the S~g~iJIPlanned Development District. this landscaped area may be reduced to 15 feet in width if approved by the reviewing agency under the following conditions: (I) The freeway is elevated, with steep slopes adjacent to the right-of-way. (II) An additional 10 feet of landscaping shall be provided on-site so as to be visible from the freeway. (III) A 25 foot building setback shall be maintained; parking may be permitted if enhanced with canopy-type trees. (C) All buildings shall be setback an average of fifty (50) feet from all Caltrans property lines, unless the reviewing authority finds that such a setback would severely constrain the reasonable use of a parcel due to its configuration or location. (3) The plant palette for freeway landscaping shall include the following: (A) Trees Washingtonia Robusta, 10 foot trunk @ 40 feet on center. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.45 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (B) Shrubs (all 1 gallon minimum @ 8 feet on centen Dodonaea Viscosa Leptospermum Scoparium Nerium Oleander Photinia Fraseri Tecomaria Capensis Raphiolepis Indica Pyracantha Species (C) Groundcover Hedera Helix Lantana Species (4) Within the Caltrans right-of-way, upgraded landscaping installed by property owners shall be coordinated with Caltrans. A 30 foot setback shall be maintained between the edge of the travel lane and any tree planting. The property owner shall bond for maintenance of the plant materials as required by Caltrans. (5) Conceptual renderings of freeway planting guidelines are shown in Figure EC-11. Draft - December 21.2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.46 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I - ,...... I I -- I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS Figure EC-11 6-14.47 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (A) The sidewalk system shall provide for a safe, continuous pedestrian circulation and access system to all parts of the development. Pedestrian access shall be provided from public streets and parking lots to building entries, and walkways provided on-site shall connect with those off-site. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' ',.. (I) Pedestrian Circulation and Open Space (1) Sidewalks shall be required on all public streets within the planning area. Sidewalks shall be constructed of concrete. with a minimum clear width of five (5) feet. Any sidewalk constructed adjacent to curb shall be a minimum of six (6) feet wide. Any sidewalk constructed within two and one half (2 1/2) feet of back of curb shall join to back of curb. Sidewalk shall be three (3) feet away from curb face except at curb returns and bus stops. (2) Additional sidewalks may be required during the design review stage of development processing. The following design standards shall apply in the determination of sidewalk locations: (B) The sidewalk system shall connect to pedestrian trails through the open-space areas. (3) The following standards shall apply to meandering sidewalks: (A) Radii for curved sidewalk shall be between 200 and 600 feet. (B) All radii shall be staggered. (C) Maximum sidewalk grade shall not exceed 8.33% regardless of street grade. (4) Curb cuts for handicapped access shall be provided on all roadways as required by State law. (5) Bus turnouts and bus shelters may be required during the design-review stage of development processing. These facilities shall be designed to maximize security features and shall be located in proximity to both traffic signals and pedestrian crosswalks, so as to provide for ease of ingress for buses and ease of access for pedestrians. Bus stops shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet in length. Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.48 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I .' ....~... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (6) Building configuration and placement shall provide for pedestrian courtyards, plazas, or open spaces between and or adjacent to buildings. (7) The design of pedestrian plazas or courtyards shall provide shaded seating areas with attractive landscaping and should include water features, public art, kiosks, and covered walkways. (8) Benches, light standards, trash receptacles, and other street furniture shall be provided in an attractive and comfortable setting and shall be designed to enhance the appearance and function of a site and open space areas. (m) Trails System (1) There is an opportunity in the East Valley Corridor to establish a trail system which will link up with regional trail systems to provide for both an energy efficient alternative to the automobile, and for recreational use within the planning area. (2) Figure EC-12 illustrates the trail system proposed for the planning area. The proposed facilities include: (A) Commuter bikeways which are parallel to major roads and provide the most direct route for the work trip. (B) Recreational pedestrian paths and bikeways which may or may not be adjacent to a roadway, are generally located in open space or landscaped areas and serve to provide the local pedestrian and bicycle circulation network. (3) There shall be two classes of bikeways in the East Valley Corridor: (A) Class I Bikeway (Bike Paths) - are facilities with exclusive rights-of-way, separated from other vehicular rights-of-way, with cross flows by motorists minimized, serving the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. Drafl- December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.49 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 ,_ m___ -~ Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS Figure EC-12 6-14.50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) I 8.06.03 I I - -. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (B) Class II Bikeway (Bike Paths) - are bicycle lanes for preferential use by bicycles established witnir the paved area of highways and designated by specific lines of demarcation between the areas reserved for bicycles and lanes to be occupied by motor vehicles. (4) The following standards shall apply to Class I Bikeways: (A) Bicycle paths shall be two-way routes. (B) The minimum paved width for a two-way bike path shall be 8 feet. A minimum 2-foot wide graded area shall be provided adjacent to the pavement. (See Figure ~EC- .!l) (C) A minimum 2-foot horizontal clearance to obstructions shall be provided adjacent to the pavement. (D) The vertical clearance to obstructions across the clear width of the path shall be a minimum of 8 feet. (E) Bike paths closer than 5 feet from the edge of a highway shall include a physical divider such as fencing, berms, trees or shrubbery to prevent bicyclists from encroaching onto the highway. (5) The following standards shall apply to Class" Bikeways: (A) Bike lanes shall be one-way facilities. (B) Where required, bike lanes shall occupy the emergency parking lane along major arterials, major highways and secondary highways, with widths of 8 to 10 feet. Painted demarcation lines shall define the bicycle lane, with appropriate freestanding and pavement signs. (See street cross-sections under transportation standards.) (6) Bikeways shall be constructed in accordance with the California Highway Design Manual, Bikeway Planning and Design. (7) Drainage inlet grates, manhole covers, driveways, etc., on bikeways should be designed and installed in a manner that provides an adequate surface for bicyclists. Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.51 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Figure EC-13 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.52 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) I 8.06.03 I I- .. . . I I I I I . . I I I I I I I I (8) Uniform signs, markings. and traffic control devi:::es are mandatory and shall confonm to the requirements 0: S:ate :a.... (9) Pedestrian and bicycle pathways which are not associated with roadways shall be located to take advantage of attractive natural drainage areas whenever possible; landscaping and lighting shall be provided to create an attractive environment in the area of pedestrian and bike pathways to encourage their use. (10) All bike and pedestrian pathways shall have adequate lighting and signing to provide for the safety of the users. (11) At-grade trail crossings shall be provided for at signalized intersections wherever possible. (12) Bike storage facilities shall be provided in commercial and mixed use areas. (n) Parks and Open Space The specific demand on location of parks and open space can not be determined until the land uses established within the a[OQsialPlanned Development District have been determined. Implementation of park and open space provision, construction and maintenance shall be determined by the County gf a9J:1 iQ~J:la~li1iJ:lg, tt;,\l ~it~' gf RgglaJ:lg~ aJ:lg tt;,Q (,it~' gf I.g~a b.iJ:lga through implementation of ordinances and procedures JdQl'ltgg tl~' \lJSt;, JggJ:l.~(. 86.030630 Site Design Standards and Guidelines. (a) Parking Requirements (1) Adequate parking requirements and standards shall be provided on-site for each use within the Planning Area in accordance with the requirements contained in Chapter 6 of Division 7 of this Title. (2) Parking structures shall be permitted within the plan area; exterior design shall be architecturally compatible with main building. Parking structure should merge with or extend from main building rather than be an isolated structure. Autos should be screened to a height of 3'6" to 4' on each level, and the space remaining above the screening element, up to the ceiling Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.53 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Square Feet of Building Space (Gross Floor Area) I of the next floor, shall remain open and unobstructed. Facades I should be multi-textured or have other architectural relief. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Loading Spaces Required (b) Loading Areas (1 ) All hospitals, institutions, hotels, commercial and industrial uses shall provide loading spaces not less than ten (10) feet in width, twenty (20) feet in length and fourteen (14) feet in height as follows: Commercial Buildings 3,000 - 15,001 - 45,001 - 75,001 - 105,001 - 15,000 45,000 75,000 105,000 and over 1 2 3 4 5 Industrial Buildings 3,500 - 40,000 40,001 - 80,000 80,001 - 120,000 120,001 - 160,000 160,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Hospitals and Instituitions 3,000 - 20,000 20,001 - 50,000 50,001 - 80,000 80,001 - 110,000 110,001 - and over 1 2 3 4 5 Hotels and Office Buildings 3,000 - 50,000 50,001 - 100,000 100, 001 - and over 1 2 3 (2) All loading facilities and maneuvering areas shall be located on- site with the use. (3) Sites shall be designed so that parking areas are separate from loading areas. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.54 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (4) Adequate space shall be provided for stacking of '.'S-:S5 waiting to load or unload, out of the public rignt-of-w3' ane parking areas. (5) Backing of trucks from public right-of-way onto site for loading shall be allowed only at the ends of cul-de-sac streets. (6) No loading facilities shall be located at the front of the structure; loading facilities shall be permitted only in the rear and interior side yard areas. (7) Aisle width to loading docks shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet width exclusive of truck parking area. (8) Loading facilities shall be adequately screened from the public view by use of walling, landscaping or building design. (9) Minimum aisle width adjacent to loading areas shall be sixteen (16) feet one way and twenty-six (26) feet for two way. (10) On structures within view of freeways, loading areas should be oriented away from public view from the freeway and from oncoming traffic along freeways. For example, structures located on the ~gl..ltl:i west side of Il'ltgr.t:;;tg 1QRoute 30 should have loading areas located on the ~south side of the building. (11) Loading area shall be designed as an integral part of the building's architecture. (12) Concrete pads shall be required at all loading bays. (c) Site Lighting (1) Lighting shall be required on all new development for the purpose of providing illumination to ensure public safety and security. Lighting fixtures shall be functional, coordinated and visually attractive. Lighting shall be required at the following locations: (A) Pedestrian walkways and plazas. (B) Building entries, driveway entries and parking Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.55 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 -' (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) (C) I Htazardous hlocllatbions. IS I u,'tChtahs, Chang, es 10f gral de and I s airways, s a e we -, WI ower- eve supp emental lighting or additional overhead units. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Lights shall be placed so as not to cause glare or excessive light spillage on neighboring sites. All parking lot and driveway lighting shall provide uniform illumination at a minimum level of 0.5 foot candle, All light fixtures are to be concealed source fixtures except for pedestrian-oriented accent lights. Security lighting fixtures are not to project above the fences or roof line of the building and are to be shielded. The shields shall be painted to match the surface to which they are attached. Security lighting fixtures are not to be substituted for parking lot or walkway lighting fixtures and are restricted to lighting only loading and storage locations, or other similar service areas. Exterior wall-mounted floodlights are expressly prohibited except for security lighting in areas as noted above. All illuminated signs are to be internally illuminated. Lighting of building faces is permitted. The design of all lighting fixtures and their structural support shall be architecturally compatible with the surrounding buildings. Walkway lighting fixtures shall have an overall height not to exceed twelve (12) feet. Parking lot fixtures shall have an overall height not to exceed thirty (30) feet or the height of adjacent buildings, whichever is less. When walkway lighting is provided primarily by low fixtures, there shall be sufficient peripheral lighting to illuminate the immediate surroundings to ensure public safety. Shatter-proof coverings are recommended on low-level fixtures. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.56 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I '. I I I i I I I I I I I I I (d) Site Utilities (1) Utility easements shall be required as needed through tne development review process. (2) All existing and new utilities of 12KV or less within the project and along adjacent major arterials shall be installed underground. Where possible, all overhead lines greater than 12KV shall be placed along the rear property line, away from arterial highways. (3) All ground-mounted utility appurtenances. including but not limited to telephone pedestals, utility meters. irrigation system back-flow preventors, and transformers, shall be located behind the building setback line where possible, and shall be adequately screened through the use or combination of concrete or masonry walls. berming, and landscape materials. (e) Compatibility Standards (1) Where a iJ;9lOiiil Planned Development area abuts a residential district, an orderly transition of uses and building types should be established as follows: (A) There should not be a drastic and abrupt building scale change; the transition from residential to more intensive building types should be gradual, in order to prevent massive structures from dominating and intruding upon neighborhoods. Smaller buildings should be located near the residential area, with the largest buildings farther away. (B) Land uses should transition gradually from residential to more intensive uses. In placing uses within these transitional areas, consideration should be given to traffic generation, truck traffic, hours of operation, noise, light and glare, and other characteristics which might impact adjacent residential neighborhoods. (C') ~~gs:i~1 ~2~hidgr2tigfxl lA'ill t2g gi"9r,;, 19 tt;;lg PIJrxlrxlSd Qs"SlgpmQRt EiR\fglg~g ir+lmgGti:at91~' \\,g~t gf tt;;ls 9xii;:tiRg !SRgtt;.1 gf K:arSR St~ggt g9pu9SR lYQ9r:li:a ^"QRY9 JRd ~:aR agr,r;!:ar;di~g ^"QRtH? irxl ~r;g"igiRg fgr y[g[ JRd blJildiJ:1S t~'J;9~ SIOlR=lp1:ltiblg ",jtl:1 tl:19 9xibtiJ:1S biRSI9 fiiR=lily r9[idst::lti:a1 dg"glg~r;:r;t9Rt t9 tl':l9 92Ct PI:ar;H~g&1 Draft - December 21. 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.57 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.58 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I -, gg\l9IS~T*'Igr;qt i~ tfx1i~ ArsA mA~f i~slbd99 :all bJ~~r ~:~""""':~ u'jt~i~ t~~ $!;) di~trist 9XS9pt far tt;;}g~g bd~2~ ",:.....:... +hg C'grnmgrsi:a' Irxtgyttr,i:a! Qit:tr;i:+ A~d ~L1~' 21l:~ j'l...I"....J tiJ:lglg fAr;:RiI~' n?tidgr;qti21 b1t9E: fa 6?fx1hbdn~ ~2x;m' 'm ~QT*I~2tibilitj' 'Iliff;) 2 mir;:Jil*lblm dit;:Rd~tigrxl t6? t!;;!~ 9xit;:ting rstigsr:1li::;l! R6liSl:!ggl'l:lggg (2) Every use of land or building shall operate in conformity with the following performance standards: (A) Vibrations: Every use shall be so operated that maximum ground vibration generated is not perceptible without instruments at any point in the boundary of the district in which the use is located. (B) Noise: Everyuse shall be so operated that the maximum volume of sound or noise generated does not exceed sixty-five (65) decibels from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and forty-five (45) decibels from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. in areas which abut residential land uses. Measurement of maximum sound or noise volume can be taken at any point on the lot line of the lot on which the use is located. (C) Odor: Every use shall be so operated that no offensive or objectionable odor is perceptible at any point on the boundary of the district in which the use is located. (D) Smoke: Every use shall be so operated that no smoke from any source shall be emitted of a greater density described in No. 2 on the Ringelmann Chart as published by the United States Bureau of Mines. (E) Toxic Gases: Every use shall be so operated that there is no emission of toxic, noxious or corrosive fumes of gases. (F) Emissions: Every use shall be so operated that there is no emission of dirt, dust, fly ash, and other forms of particulate matter. (G) Radiation: Every use shall be so operated that there is no dangerous amount of radioactive emissions. I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (H) Glare and Heat: Any operation producing intense ~:are or heat shall be conducted in a manner as to effectively screen the glare from view at any point on the lot line of the lot in which the use is located and to dissipate the heat so that it is not perceptible without instruments at any point on the lot line of the lot on which the use is located. (I) Hazardous Materials: Every use shall be consistent with the provisions of the San Bernardino County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. ('3) \^'~grg ~lgiQRbsrt;tggd ~gmmgr~i:dl sr ^dmi~ittrati"g' ~~gfgchig~AI gii;tri~tt gr LsICSt; :abLdt rsr:iggr;;ttiLlI gictri~tc Qr rqtigSrxltiJI ~grxtigrxlt gf Pl:ar~u;uad Qs"glg~mgr;lti:. tgtb:a~kt A~d &ll~#grirxlr!J c~:all 1$9 Qct:ablitRSd :at fells'Hr" (^) ^.gj:a~gJ;tt t9 ~9ti99Rti:a1 fj:arsslo (I) ~Jg gYildiR!] P~GFg~sd fQr Rsi!]RggrRggd ~gmmgr:si:al gr ~rgf9ttigRAI g~Sg liltS tRAil ~g "gR"tr:1.l~9d Ill". II:101J:! fQr;:t~' (10) fggt frIlRl OIR~' :adj9jrxliRQ P~~grxt~' rg~gmmgRdgd fQr rotidsRti:a1 IJRd w.g iR tl:19 II pg r;:ifl " PIOIR gr PIOIRR9d Qs"slspmsRt (II) ^ S9RtirxlY9Lslt "it LsI:a I ~Sr9gR gf 2 miRimwr=R U'idtt::l gf tllR (10) fllllt ,,1:1..11 gg r:t:1JiJ:!tiiliJ:!lld 0I&!jOlC9Rt Is JII iRt~ri9r prspgrxt~' liR9t \"~i~R :abyt rstidsr:tti:al 19tt Slsrgsr:liRS m:a~' be j2rQuiggg b~' r+l92Rt gf fQr;;l~gt, gg~S~Jti"9 m2h2rxlr/ "'2I1t, bQr;:mt;:, SR:;U;:lS9t;: i~ glg":atisr;;l, :a~d/9r r;?IJrxtt r+t:atsri2It \^'Rgrg ty~~ t6:rQQrxlirxlg t;;t:at bss~ Iilrs"idsg Srxl tf::tg rst;:igsr;;lti:al (!&is sf tt;ts? ~r;glilgr;t~' Iirxt9, tt;li( r9'1yir9msRt r;;1:a~' bs r-99Y6:99 gr w2i"gg t?~' the rs"is'"'ifxlQ 2gSr;;l~~' (18) ^ dj2~9fxlt t9 r;gtigg~ti:al ttrggt- QwildiJ:!S~ &;1:10111 gll at Ig..~t fgr:tj' (10) fggl fr2Rl tRIl yltim:atg riSt;:)t sf "':a~' lirxtg 21srxlQ 2rxl~' tfrggt :itn~ttirxtQ J n?tidgr;;lti:al :ar;s:a, "'itt;;t tJ;qs SX6:9~tigrxt fRAt tt~Y6:tyr;gt gf 19t[ tf::t:arxl t'''g~t~' (2Q) fest i~ t.:lgiQf::tt r;:R2~' 9Rsrs:ast:l iRts tR9 rg~1Jirgd t9tt?2~k :ar-S2 r::l9 T*l2rS tf::t:arxl ~f:t99R (15) fQgt :ar::ld r;:R:a~' 6:s\t~n Rfi' r:;lgr;g tR2R f;jft~' (~Q) ~gr6:gRt gf tRS n~qlzslirgd tetb26:k :areA. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.59 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft- December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.60 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I ;....< (~) Where General Commercial or Industrial uses or distncts abu: residential districts or residential portions of Planned Developments, setbacks and buffering shall be establtsned as follows: (A) Adjacent to residential parcel: No building proposed for commercial/industrial use shall be constructed less than forty (40) feet from any adjoining property recommended for residential land use in or contiguous to the lipllo:itio: Pliilr:lPlanning Area or Planned Development. (B) Adjacent to residential street: Buildings shall be at least forty (40) feet from the ultimate right-of-way line along any street abutting a residential area, with the exception that structures of less than twenty (20) feet in height may encroach into the required setback area no more than fifteen (15) feet and may cover no more than fifty (50) percent of the required setback area. (C) No building shall be constructed to a height greater than its distance from any adjoining property recommended for residential land use QA-in or contiguous to the Spllo:itis Pliilr:lPlanning Area or Planned Development, unless the reviewing agency finds that approval of a waiver of this requirement will not adversely affect adjacent property. In no case shall industrial or commercial structures be so tall as to block natural sunlight from adjacent residential yards. (D) A landscaped area not less than thirty-five (35) feet in width shall be provided between a commercial or industrial structure and a residential district. Within this landscaped area a continuous visual screen of a minimum width of ten (10) feet shall be maintained adjacent to all interior property lines which abut residential lots. Screening may be provided by means of fences, decorative masonry walls, berms, changes in elevation, and/or plant materials. Where such screening has been provided on the residential side of the property line, this requirement may be reduced or waived by the reviewing agency. I .- - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (5) '^'RgrS i~igR~g J;(gtg:dr~~ P:ark Mt9t :abyt rg[iggrxlti~! QjE:~"''''.''', Qetlliil\;kQ iilR\;!IlIolf:fiil~iR!i QRiillllle s~tiillllibRg\;! iilQ fOlIlQ"'.: (.^.) ^ 9jJSQr;;1t t" rscigsrxttiJI ~Jrssl' ~Ie llwil\;!iR:ij prepsQe\;! fGr lllJcir:ls..'ir:l\;!wctriiilllJcs QRiillll?g CQr:l.tJ:1.lcts\;! Is~~ tR:;IR fift~' (~g) foist f~G~ iilR>' iil\;!jliliRiR!i prlilpeR~' rS\;g~~sR\;!S\;! flilr rlilci\;!sRtiiilllrilR\;!I.I.e (a) ^djJ~gr1t ts ~S[igSRti:a1 ttrQgt i~ildir;;lB[ tt;:}211 bg At IS2t! fif:t~' (5Q) fsst fr2m t~9 ylti~:atQ J:iSrxtt gf "'21~' liRe :;IlaRQ :aR~' :at?l2dttiRg :a r;gtidsr;:tti2l1 :arSJ (C') '~Ig b~i1difx1g sr [t~stbdrg ct,:,211 9XS99g W'9fx1t~' f;iug (~2) fegt iR t=lsigt.:lt, :u: ms:;ttyr;sg tram tap? sf s~n:b. 19~2tgd wit!::tiR aRe RlaIRgrSg (120) fegt gf :a r9[idgRtj211~' g9[iQrxl2lt9g ArGaLl, Sf tRiJ;t~' title (35) fegt iR t;;lSigRt if I.-Siilte\;! ~ere tRAR eRe RWRii1rsii1 ARol tift>' (1 ~g) fQQtllut 19[t tt=l2lr:l tt;,r;gg RYrxldrgg (3QQ) fest f~gm 2 rgtidgRti2l1l~' 9SE>iQR2It99 :areA (Q) ^ 12Ifx1d[~21~9g :areA rxtst Ig[t tt=l2lrxl t~irxt~' fJ"9 (15) fsst i~ \Hiett;;! ~t:tAII b9 li'rs"i&hie bgR"s9~ :3R~' ~t~~tYrg :aRg :;1 rQtid&rRtiLlI gi(tri~t \^'itt:liR tt:tir; I:aR,h:~:3pgd :ar9J :a ~gJ;ltiRUdglJC . 'iclJLlI r;~rSgR gf LI miRimwm "'igt~ gf tOR (1 Q) fegt c~:;I11 b9 1+t2iRt2ir:lsg :;Idj:a~9Rt is 211 iRtSF:jgr prgpo~~' lir;:!9C 'rRi~R 2t?Udt rg~idgRti21 Igt~ i~rssRi~!J m2~' be prg\'igsd b~J m22Rt gf fgRs9~, gQb:9r:ati"g m2c9Rn,,' "'2I1t, bgr;r~J:U;:, ~t';;tARg9t iR sle"2tigr,;" 2Rg'gr 1i'12Rt m2tgri21~. '^'1xl9rs ~bd~!xl E;~rSgRiRg R2( b99R prs"jggg 9R tRg retidsRti21 [idg gf 1R9 li'r;g~grxt~' lirxl9, tRit rS'lyjrsm9Rt m::ay be regbd~g9 2r '"'2ti"gg b~' tt~s rg\lig~"iRg 2Q9R~~'. (~) Outdoor storage areas, loading areas or refuse collection facilities shall be located no less than sixty (60) feet from any adjoining property zoned or used for residential land uses, Any materials stored adjacent to residential areas shall be totally screened by the wall or landscape screen provided, (G~) Additional landscaping, block walls, or increased setbacks may be required through the development review proces~ to ensure land use compatibility, Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14,61 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06,03 ! , - .. . (f) (~2) . An acoustical analysis shall be required for new singie or .. multiple family residential development proposed adJacen! to freeways, highways, arterials. rail lines. and under flight pa!hs. . The analysis shall indicate the existing and proposed CNEL's (Community Noise Equivalency Levels) on the site. and the method(s) by which the noise is to be controlled or reduced to I no more than 65 dB within the exterior living space, and 45 dB within the interior living space of the project. . . I I I . I . I . . . . . . Refuse Areas All waste materials shall be stored in an enclosed area and shall be accessible to service vehicles. Wastes which might cause fumes or dust, or which constitute a fire hazard, or which may be edible by, or otherwise be attractive to, rodents or insects shall be stored only in closed containers in required enclosures. A six (6) foot high masonry wall shall be constructed around all refuse collection areas. Trash enclosures shall have solid wood or metal doors. Refuse collection areas shall not be constructed between the frontage street and the building line, or adjacent to or visible from freeways. (g) Screening, Fences and Walls All loading areas, mechanical equipment, outside storage, refuse areas, or other uses as determined by the reviewing agency shall be screened if located within seventy (70) feet of a front property line. Any fence or wall that is constructed on a lot that contains an on-site slope shall be constructed at the top of the uphill side of such a slope. No fence or wall and no landscaping which obstructs visibility shall be permitted within the corner cut-off areas defined in Section 86.03063(i). A six (6) foot high fence or wall shall be constructed along the perimeter of all areas considered by the reviewing agency to be dangerous to public health and safety. A six (6) foot high solid Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (4) 6-14.62 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I ,.., -~- .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I fence or wall shall be constructed around all open s;xage areas. (5) Open fences not to exceed four (4) feet in height shall be permitted within a required front yard area. For purposes of this section an open fence shall mean those types that are composed of wire mesh or wrought iron capable of admitting at least 90 percent of light. (6) Solid fences and walls not to exceed six (6) feet in height shall be permitted along side and rear property lines except that no solid fence or wall exceeding three (3) feet in height shall be located within any required front yard area. (7) Open fences as defined in f'l:;lr:;l~~:;I,,1;1 (2) sf tl:1i~ i:s(;;tisRsubsection (5) above that are over six (6) feet in height may be located in the rear half of the lot subject to a finding by the reviewing agency that such a fence will not constitute a nuisance to abutting property owners. Such fences up to sixteen (16) feet in height located within the buildable rear yard area of a lot and not less than ten (10) feet from any property line are exempt from the requirement. (8) All required screening from public view within the Industrial and Commercial Land Use designations or such uses within a Planned Development, such as storage spaces, loading docks, and equipment, shall be architecturally integrated with the surrounding building design through the use of concrete, masonry, or other similar materials. Solid walls within the buildable lot area shall not exceed a height of eight (8) feet from the highest finished grade. If the height of the wall is not sufficient, appropriate landscaping shall be required to screen the required areas from the freeway. (9) Fencing up to a height of six (6) feet may be permitted within any streetside setback area when there is a demonstrated need for security as determined by the reviewing agency. All security fences which are within the streetside setback shall be constructed of wrought iron or similar materials with respect to quality and durability, shall transmit 90% light, and shall not obstruct views of landscaping. No chain link or barbed wire is allowed. Security fencing shall not create a sight distance problem for motorists entering or exiting the site. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.63 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21 , 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.64 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (h) Architectural Guidelines (1) Floor Area Ratios provide unique design flexibility in determining whether a low building covering most of a lot is beneficial or whether a taller building covering a small portion of the lot is appropriate. Maximum Floor Area Ratios (FAR) for any use within the iJilllQjfiQ Plar:1Planning Area area shall be established as follows: (NOTE: Floor Area Ratio is determined by dividing total gross leasable area in square feet by total lot area in square feet. For example, a 20,000 square foot building on a 40,000 square foot lot yields a Floor Area Ratio of .5). (A) Office buildings: .6 of the total lot area. (B) Retail/Commercial buildings: .25 of the total lot area. (C) Regional mall: .4 of the total lot area. (D) Industrial buildings: .8 of the total lot area. (2) Floor Area Ratio Bonuses The maximum floor area ratio may be increased as shown below. The total bonus shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the permitted FAR. For example, an office building with a permitted FAR of .6 may be increased in floor area to a maximum FAR of .9 if several of the following amenities are provided. The permitted FAR bonus shall be determined by the reviewing jurisdiction, based upon its determination of the significance of amenities provided on the site. (A) Buildings providing structured parking: Bonus not to exceed twenty (20%) percent FAR. (B) Buildings providing amenity areas such as pedestrian . arcades or plazas with significant visual features: Bonus not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the permitted FAR. Any amenity area for which a bonus is granted must comply with the following criteria: (I) The area must be in addition to that necessary to meet landscaping, park and setback requirements. I . , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (II) Minimum size: The ar-ea must contain a ~!~::71~~ of 4,000 square feet. (III) Location: All amenity areas must be adjacent to. and approximately level with. a public street. The difference in grade between the amenity area and the street shall not be more than three (3) feet although this requirement is not intended to prevent: mounding or terracing of landscaping within the amenity area. (IV) Visibility: The interior of the amenity area shall be visible from the street for security purposes. (V) Seating: One linear foot of bench or seating shall be provided for every 40 square foot of amenity area. Seating may be in the form of ledges. (VI) Sunlight pattems: The amenity area shall be able to receive direct sunlight on at least 30% of the surface area from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. between the spring and fall equinox. (VII) Design and landscaping: At least one major element, such as artwork or water, shall be included in the amenity area. The dominant landscape elements shall be trees and turf. The amount of impervious surface should not exceed 40% of the amenity area unless unique design considerations are offered. Where artwork is used, minimum cost of public art shall be one (1%) percent of the overall cost of the project as stated on the building permit. (e) Additional landscaping, lakes, golf course or other open space amenities: Bonus not to exceed twenty (20) percent of the permitted FAR. (D) Transportation management plan, including car and van pooling, flexible work scheduling, etc.: Bonus not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the permitted FAR. (E) Supportive uses within office and industrial buildings which provide services to employees, such as cafeterias, lounges, recreational areas, or child care facilities, may Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.65 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I be determined to be exempt from maximum fioor area I ratio requirements. Determination of whether a proposed use qualifies for this exemption shall be made by the reviewing agency. This exemption may be granted only if I the property owner enters into an agreement with the agency ensuring that such area remains in the exempt I use. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (3) The following guidelines shall apply to site design: (A) (B) Developments should be designed to maximize any existing views of mountain ranges, open space, palm rows, or other view amenities. Building placement should vary to include both parallel and skewed angles to the street plane in order to provide diversity and discourage continuous building facades along street frontage. (4) The following guidelines shall apply to building design: (A) (B) (C) (D) Building construction and design shall be used to create a structure with equally attractive sides of high quality, rather than placing all emphasis on the front elevation of the structure. Architectural facade treatments will be required on all portions of the building(s) exposed to public views. Extra treatment may be given to the street frontages as long as the basic facade treatments are carried around the structure. Any accessory buildings and enclosures, whether attached to or detached from the main building, shall be of similar compatible design and materials as the main building. Large, continuous surface treatments of a single material shall be minimized. Changes in texture, relief or materials, and use of decorative features such as planters, varied roof lines, decorative windows and accent panel treatment should be encouraged. Pre-engineered metal buildings with corrugated exteriors are prohibited and other predominantly painted metal facade treatments are strongly discouraged. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.66 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I ..... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (5) Multiple Residential Site Design Guidelines (A) Buildings shall be designed in discrete units not In one massive structure, with a non-linear facade along the street frontage. (B) Sloping roofs of varying heights are encouraged. (C) Site design shall include covered, internal parking areas, internal courtyards. and multiple entry points. (D) Design elements shall include providing extensive open space and landscape buffering between buildings; variation in building elevations and configurations between buildings and variations in building heights; use of different building materials or combinations of different materials; and contrasting color schemes between projects. (E) Recreational facilities shall be located and/or designed so as not to create nuisance to surrounding units or to impact adjacent properties. Sufficient setbacks. landscaping and berming between recreation facilities and surrounding units shall be provided to minimize noise and visual conflicts. (F) Roofing materials shall be concrete. tile or other imitation shake material. (6) Rooftop Treatment (A) Buildings shall be designed so that the architecture of the building adequately screens rooftop equipment from taller surrounding structures as well as residential uses by use of rooftop wells. parapet walls. or other means. Where possible. ground-mounted equipment shall be used in lieu of roof-mounted equipment. (B) All roof mounted equipment. including but not limited to ducts. fans and vents. must be painted to match the roof color. (C) Rooftop solar collectors. skylights and other potentially reflective elements shall be designed and installed so as to prevent glare and obstruction of views from Draft - December 21. 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.67 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.68 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I surrounding uses and structures. If equipment projects above building mass, it shall be screened with an enclosure which is compatible with the building design. (D) Rooftop radio, TV and microwave antennae and towers are prohibited unless approved by the Planning Commission. (E) Where large, flat rooftops are located near taller surrounding structures, they shall be designed and landscaped to be visually attractive. The use of colored gravel (earthtones, arranged in patterns) and/or planter boxes is encouraged for this purpose. (i) Landscaping Guidelines Landscaping is of primary importance to the establishment of the design character of the East Valley Corridor. The landscape guidelines are intended to promote the establishment of compatible and continuous landscape development to enhance and unify the East Valley Corridor. Specifically, the guidelines are intended to enhance and preserve the existing site character, to minimize the adverse visual and environmental impacts of large buildings and paved areas, to promote the conservation of water, and to provide micro-climate control for energy conservation where possible. (1) The Landscape Plan required for submission by the applicant should exhibit a design concept. Plant materials should be used in a logical, orderly manner, helping to define spaces and complement adjacent architecture. (2) Landscape designs should be coordinated between the areas of a development. However, all areas within a project need not be identical. Different landscape themes may be utilized in larger developments to distinguish spaces from one another, yet these themes should be consistent with a unifying concept which establishes a cohesive design throughout the project. (3) In addition to the selection and distribution of plant materials, landscape plans should incorporate various site furnishings and features. Lighting, seating, paving, fountains, etc., should be considered integral components of the landscape plan and therefore included in the overall landscape concept. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (4) The scale and character of the landscape materials te :Je selected should be appropriate to the site and/or archltec:;,;,e Large-scale buildings or projects require large-scale landscaping treatments. (5) Existing landscaping elements, such as mature trees, should be incorporated into landscape plans. Specimen trees or groupings of existing trees can provide a new development with immediate character. They should be viewed as design determinants. (6) Landscaping incorporated into the building design through trellises, arbors, planters, atriums, etc., is encouraged and can often enhance the quality of a building. (7) The plant palette should be relatively limited and applied in groupings of similar species rather than a few plants of many different species planted together. The use of water conserving plantings, such as California natives and drought tolerant trees, shrubs and turfs is encouraged. A list of suggested drought resistant plant materials is included in Table EC-3. (8) Live plant materials should be used in all landscaped areas. The use of gravel, colored rock, bark and other similar materials are not acceptable as a sole ground cover material. (These materials may be used, however, in place of paving materials in functional activity areas such as patios or rear entry walks, or as groundcover for up to twenty percent (20%) of the total landscaped area). (9) New plant materials should be supplied in a variety of container sizes: for shrubs - five gallon sizes, and for trees - fifteen gallon containers. are preferred. The use of larger specimen trees is encouraged. (10) Irrigation is required for all landscaped areas. Automatic systems are required. Plants should be watered and maintained on a regular basis. Irrigation systems should be designed so as not to overspray walks, buildings, fences, etc. The use of water conserving systems such as drip irrigation or moisture sensors for shrubs and tree planting is encouraged. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.69 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 ,..,~. (11 ) I Landscape installation, in accordance with the approve::: clan. I must occur prior to building occupancy. Where a develap"ent occurs in phases, all landscaping for each phase must be installed prior to occupancy of that phase. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I OJ Outdoor Sales All uses shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building, except as follows: (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (k) Off-street parking and loading areas; Automobile service station; New and used auto sales; Plants and vegetation associated with nurseries; Open storage of materials and products and equipment when such storage is enclosed by a fence; wall, building or other means adequate to conceal such storage from view from adjoining property or the public street; Restaurant - Outdoor dining area Landscape Requirements for Parking Area (1 ) The following standards shall apply to parking areas adjacent to roadways or exposed to public view from freeways, roadways or adjacent parcels: (A) Landscaped berms, or a combination of berms, landscaping and/or wall treatments of sufficient height to substantially screen parking areas, shall be provided between parking area and right-of-way. (8) All double row parking spaces shall be separated by a five (5) foot wide planter or by planter boxes. Planters shall be enclosed by a six (6) inch continuous poured in place concrete curb. (e) Trees with a trunk height of not less than six (6) feet shall be installed in the planters at each end of an aisle, at three (3) space intervals throughout the lot, and at twenty (20) foot intervals along the periphery of the lot. Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.70 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Within parking lot areas, trees may be c1usterec in groups to achieve a more natural setting provided tne total number meets the previous planting requirements (D) At least fifty percent (50%) of the trees shall be an evergreen variety and shall be evenly distributed throughout the lot. (E) Planter areas shall flowering shrubs. encouraged. also contain ground cover and/or Drought tolerant planting is (F) Where automobile bumpers overhang landscaped planters, two (2) feet of clear area unobstructed by trees or shrubs shall be provided for overhang. (G) In large parking lots, parking areas shall be broken up into sections containing no more than 200 vehicles, with landscaped buffer areas at least eight (8) feet in width established between sections. (H) A landscaped island shall be provided for every twenty (20) parking spaces. (I) Landscaped islands, planters and landscaping together shall total at least percent of the total parking lot area. peripheral seven (7) (2) Where parking areas are located adjacent to residential districts, they shall be separated therefrom by a decorative solid masonry wall six (6) feet in height, provided said wall shall not exceed three (3) feet in height where it is in the front yard area of an abutting residential use or district. (3) Where parking areas are completely screened from public view by building placement or a combination of walling and landscaped buffers, landscaping requirements within the parking lot may be reduced at the discretion of the reviewing agency. (4) Pedestrian walkways shall be provided within parking lots to destination points. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.71 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Industrial uses 15% Commercial uses 20% ,~ig~:;:2 Rg~gAr~i;:1 PArk Qibtrib:t I Ib~C 2Qo~ Residential uses 35% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I (5) When a unified landscape plan is proposed for a project site In excess often (10) acres, that complies with the requirements of Section 86.030630(1) the project site may be exempt from the requirements of Section 86.030630(e)(1) at the discretion of the reviewing agency. (I) Other Site Landscaping Provisions (1) A minimum portion of the site shall be landscaped. No landscaped area having a width of less than five (5') feet shall be considered in the minimum landscaping requirement. This minimum landscaping requirement will be established as follows: (2) In addition to required landscaping, landscaping may be provided in lieu of ten (10%) percent of the total number of parking spaces required. provided the landscaping is arranged such that parking may be installed at a later date if such a demand arises. and further provided, that the owner agrees to provide such parking at the request of the reviewing agency. (3) Variation of landscape coverage may be permitted for individual parcels within planned developments when the development as a whole meets the required coverage and the plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the ~F/esif:i\; PI:ar:lPlanning Area. (4) The goals and policies of the ~Jile\;if:i\; Plrill'lPlanning Area provide for the creation of significant landscaped open space areas at the entry and exit points of the East Valley Corridor. The following requirements are intended to meet these objectives: (A) Special open space edge treatments shall be provided along lr::tt9r~tat9 1Q f.r:gm ~1t;JbdrxltAirxl \lig')' .^\lg~yg tQ Crillifg~l'Ii:a litre"l, :ar;J9 4lgr:l~ State Route 30 from the Santa Ana River to San Bernardino Avenue. (B) The open space edge treatments shall incorporate landscaping and associated design elements for areas visible from the freeway. These elements may include Draft - December 21,2000 6-14.72 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I ~ - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I open lawn areas, canopy trees within parking a,eas. lakes, fountains, open stages and amphitheaters. a:1 in public places, citrus groves, and similar open space areas. (C) A building setback ot 100-feet shall be maintained trom the freeway right-ot-way line within these special open space edge treatment areas, unless the reviewing authority finds that such a setback would severely constrain the reasonable use of a parcel due to its configuration or location, in which case altemative open space treatments may be determined appropriate. (D) In creating this open space edge treatment. credit may be given towards, the minimum percent ot landscaping required within the development, as specified in ~ tt:1il: i\f;;ti~R subsection (1) above. (5) The landscaped area requirement may be reduced by a maximum of five (5) percentage points where public art is to be displayed in a setting which enhances pedestrian spaces and building architecture. Minimum cost of public art shall be one (1 %) percent of the overall cost of the project as stated on the building permit. (m) Planting Guidelines (1) Parkways (A) General Provisions (I) Existing parkways in the public right-ot-way should be preserved and maintained. In areas where they are absent, a parkway (six to eight teet) should be established adjacent to the street curb. (II) In addition to required street trees, all parkways should be planted with a low growing turf grass or ground cover which shall be maintained regularly so as not to impede pedestrian movement across it. (III) Existing mature street trees in the parkways should be protected and maintained. Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.73 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS (B) (III) (IV) (V) (I) I I Required street trees on Special Landsca~ed I Streets are to be consistent throughout the planning area. Existing parkway trees. other than the designated street tree, should be replaced I over time with the designated street tree. For landscape concepts and required planting materials. on Special Landscaped Streets, see I Section 86.030625(g). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Street Trees (II) Required street trees shall exhibit longevity. cleanliness, disease and insect resistance, and adaptability to local soils and climate. Suggested street trees are listed in Table EC-1. Street trees shall be planted not less than: - 25 feet back of beginning of curb returns at intersections. 10 feet from lamp standards. 10 feet from fire hydrants. 10 feet from meters. 10 feet from underground utilities. Street trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1" trunk diameter measured 12" above the base and minimum container size of fifteen (15) gallon. Palm trees shall have a minimum brown trunk height of ten (10) feet. Street trees in residential areas shall be planted as follows: (i) Lot'unit on cul-de-sac - 1 tree per street frontage. (ii) Interior lot'unit -- 2 trees per street frontage. (iii) Corner lot'unit - 1 tree per 30 feet of street frontage or portion thereof. 6-14.74 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS (C) (VI) In commercial and industrial areas, street :-ees shall be planted at the equivalent of one I i tree per thirty (30') feet of frontage. Palm Tree Planting and Maintenance Guidelines The following guidelines are provided to assist in new planting and transplanting of large palm trees in the planning area, including Washingtonia robusta (Mexican fan palm) and Washingtonia filifera (California fan palm). (I) Care should be taken in excavating, planting, or working near existing utilities or irrigation systems. Developer should check existing utility drawings and as-built plans for existing utility and irrigation locations. (II) New palms to be planted in the area should be grown under climatic conditions similar to the East Valley Corridor area. All palms selected for planting should be inspected for health, vigor, and overall form. (III) Planting of palms should not begin until May 1 nor after October 1 . (IV) Defronding and Tying: (i) In preparing palm trees for relocation, all dead fronds should be removed and the entire trunk skinned clean to the height of the green fronds. Care should be taken to prevent injury to the trunk of the tree, Green fronds below a horizontal position shall be neatly cut off, leaving a 4" stub. (ii) All remaining fronds above horizontal should be lifted up and tied together in two locations around the crown in an upright position. Due caution should be taken not to bind or injure the crown. A lightweight cotton rope or cord, not less than 1/4" diameter, should be used in tying up the fronds; wire should not be used. After tying, the tips of the fronds should be 6-14.75 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS (VI) 'hedged-off' above the crown a~~r~x- imately 1/4 to 1/2 of the frond lengtn. Defronding and tying work should De completed prior to digging the rootball. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (V) Digging the Rootball: (i) When digging out the rootball, no excavation should be done closer than 24" to the trunk at ground level and the excavation should extend below the major root system to a minimum depth of six (6) feet. The bottom of the rootball should be cut off square and perpendicular to the trunk below the major root system. Under no conditions should the contractor cut down the size of the rootball in width or depth. (ii) Care should be taken not to free-fall, drag, roll or abuse the tree or put a strain on the crown at any time. A protective device should be used around the trunk of the tree while lifting and relocating so as not to scar or skin the trunk in any way. This device should consist of either a rubber or leather sling made out of timbers sufficiently sized to withstand the cable/choker pressure. At no time should trees be balled out and laid on the ground with rootball left exposed to direct sunlight and air. The rootball should be kept moist and shaded at all times. (iii) Palms should not be stockpiled for replanting. Planting of Palms (i) Excavation for planting should include the stripping and stacking of all acceptable topsoil encountered within the areas to be excavated for the tree holes. (ii) All excavated holes should have vertical sides with roughened surfaces and should 6-14.76 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Drafl- December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS be of a size that is twice the dlame:e- an::: 24" minimum to 4' maximum deeDe- In t:le ground than they originally stood (iii) Center palm in pit or trench; align with existing palms. (iv) Set palm plumb and hold rigidly in position until soil has been tamped firmly around ball or roots. (v) Palms should be backfilled with equal parts of specified backfill and native soil thoroughly mixed together. (vi) Root growth stimulant should be applied when the backfilling is between half to two- thirds up the rootball. Application rate should be one (1) quart for trees less than thirty (30) feet in height, two (2) quarts for trees thirty (30) feet and larger in height. Stimulant should be poured full strength equally distributed around the rootball, and water jetted into the backfill. (VII) Palm Backfill Soil The import planting soil can consist of either fine sand or loamy sand textured soil and silt clay content of this soil shall not exceed 20% by weight with a minimum 95% passing the 2.0 millimeter sieve. The sodium absorption ratio (SAR) should not exceed 6 and the electrical conductivity (ECe) of the saturation extract of this soil should exceed 3.0 milliosmol per centimeter at 25 centigrade. The boron content of this soil should be no greater then 1 PPM as measured on the saturation extract. (VIII) Fertilizer (i) Root Growth Stimulant: Stimulant should be Vitamin B-1 as manufactured by Cal- liquid, Cooke, Chican, Ortho, or equivalent. 6-14.77 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.78 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (ii) Fertilizer should not be used at time 0; planting. After 4 months. use a light application of 20-10-5 approximately 1/2 lb. nitrogen per tree cultivated into the soil. (IX) Tree irrigation should be monitored by use of irrometers, installed according to manufacturer's specifications, with two irrometers per tree. (X) Following planting work, all remaining excavation shall be backfilled and compacted. Burying of debris in holes should not be permitted. Excess soil and debris from the relocation work should be disposed of. Plant materials disturbed by excavating, planting, or replanting should be replaced. (XI) Maintenance should include weekly water management to include soil probing and observation of soil moisture sensing devices and palm tree pruning. Pruning should be done with reciprocal saws (chain saws should not be allowed). Saw blades should be sterilized between each tree with 50% household bleach and 50% water for ten minutes. Pruning should be done to maintain a neat appearance. (2) Site Landscaping (A) Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to structures, either singly or in grove effect, at the equivalent of one (1) tree per thirty (30) linear feet of building area. (8) Site landscaping should be used to define entrances and walkways, to screen parking and loading areas, for micro-climate control, and to enhance views of the site from inside building. (C) Wall expanses should be protected from graffiti by adjacent plantings of shrubs or vines. (D) Suggested accent trees providing seasonal variation and color are listed in Table EC-2. I -- ~ . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (E) Seasonal plantings of colorful flowers are en:o~ra;J~: t::J accent entrances and walkways. (3) All landscaped areas shall be served by a total coverage. automated irrigation system. Where appropr;ate. drip Irrigation shall be encouraged. (4) Graded areas proposed for development in a later phase shall be planted with annual grasses and shall be maintained in a weed-free condition until development occurs, if said phase will not begin construction within six (6) months of completion of previous phase. (n) Landscape Maintenance (1) Property owners are responsible for the installation and maintenance for landscaping on their on-site landscaped area and the contiguous planted right-of-way, except where landscaping in the public right-of-way is maintained by a Landscape Maintenance District. (2) Any damage to the landscaping and irrigation systems shall be corrected within thirty (30) days from date of damage. (3) Any replacement landscaping within the street setback must be replaced with plant materials that are equal to the size, form and species of the adjacent existing plant materials. (4) All trees and plant material, when established, shall be trimmed so that they shall not encroach upon the sidewalk or street so as to impede or interfere with vehicle or pedestrian traffic, or obstruct the illumination from any streetlight to the street or sidewalk. (5) In residential tracts, the developer shall guarantee street trees for a minimum of one year after acceptance of the tract and until 80% of the units are occupied. Maintenance of all trees shall become the responsibility of the homeowner upon occupancy. (6) All plantings shall be maintained in healthy growing condition. Fertilization, cultivation and pruning are to be carried out on a regular basis. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.79 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 .~... '. (7) (8) (9) (10) I Dead or dying plants shall be removed and replaced as qUickly I as possible (30 days maximum except where seasonal conditions prohibit). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I All plantings are to be irrigated as often as necessary to maintain healthy growing conditions. Irrigation systems are to be kept in proper working condition. Adjustment, repair and cleaning are to be done on a regular basis. Tree guys, stakes, etc., shall be adjusted on a regular basis to maintain neat appearance and to prevent damage to trees. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.80 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I ...... '.~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE EC.1 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPIiC'17IC PI.. ^ ~IPLANNING AREA BOTANICAL NAME LIST OF RECOMMENDED STREET TREES COMMON NAME Albizia julibrissin Cinnamomum camphora Cupaniopsis anacardioides Eucalyptus sideroxylon Jacaranda acutifolia Koelreuteria bipinnata Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar styraciflua "Palo Alto" Liquidambar styraciflua "Burgundy" Liriodendron tulipifera Magnolia grandiflora "Majestic Beauty" Melaleuca quinquenervia Pinus canariensis Pinus halepensis Pistacia chinensis Platanus acerifolia Prunus cerasifera "Atropropurea" Schinus terebinthifolius Washingtonia filifera Washingtonia robusta Silk Tree Camphor Tree Carrot Wood Tree Red Iron Bark Jacaranda Chinese Flame Tree Crape Myrtle Sweet Gum Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Southern Magnolia Cajeput Tree Canary Island Pine Aleppo Pine Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree Purple Leaf Plum Brazilian Pepper California Fan Palm Mexican Fan Palm NOTE: Additional trees may be used subject to approval. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.81 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE EC-2 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PI..^~JPLANNING AREA LIST OF RECOMMENDED ACCENT TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Albizia julibrissin Alnus rhombifolia Arecastrum romanzoffianum Brachychiton acerifolius Brachychiton populneus Cupaniopsis anacardioides Eucalyptus citriodora Eucalyptus nicholii Eucalyptus polyanthemos Eucalyptus rudis Eucalyptus sideroxylon Ficus nitida Geijera parviflora Jacaranda mimosifolia Koelreuteria bipinnata Lagerstroemia indica Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Orange Tree Pinus canariensis Pinus eldarica Pinus halepensis Pinus roxburghii Pistaccia chinensis Platanus acerifolia Podocarpus gracilior Prunus cerasifera Schinus terebinthifolius Tristania conferta Silk Tree White Alder Queen Palm Flame Tree Deodar Cedar Carrot Wood Tree Lemon-Scented Gum Peppermint Gum Silver Dollar Gum Desert Gum Red Ironbark Indian Laurel Fig Australian Willow Jacaranda Chinese Flame Tree Crape Myrtle Sweet Gum Tulip Tree Canary Island Pine Mondell Pine Aleppo Pine Roxburg Pine Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree Fern Pine Purple Leaf Plum Brazilian Pepper Brisbane Box NOTE: Additional trees may be used subject to approval. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.82 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I ~~ .. I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE EC-3 EAST VALLEY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PL.A~IPLANNING AREA SUGGESTED DROUGHT-RESISTANT PLANT MATERIALS LIST FOR LANDSCAPED AREAS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FOLIAGE PLANTS Agapanthus Arbutus unedo Centaurea gymnocarpa Dodonaea viscosa Elaeagnus Ilex species Leptospermum scoparium Ligustrum "Texanum" Photinia fraseri Pittosporum Raphiolepis indica Rhamnus alaternus Rhus ovata Vibumum species Xylosma congestum Strawberry Tree Dusty Miller Hopseed Bush Italian Buckthom Sugar Bush FLOWERING PLANTS Callistemon citrinus Cassia artemisioides Cistus Coreopsi'S verticillata Fremontodendron Lantana Lavandula Nerium oleander Plumbago auriculata Lemon Bottlebrush Feathery Cassia Rockrose Flannel Bush Lavender Oleander Cape Plumbago VINES Bougainvillea Campsis Solanum jasminoides Tecomaria capensis Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.83 Trumpet Creeper Potato Vine Cape Honeysuckle EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BOTANICAL NAME TABLE EC.3 (Continued) . COMMON NAME GROUND COVERS Baccharis pilularis Ceanothus Cotoneaster Gazania Grevillea Hypericum calycinum Rosmarinus officinalis Santolina chamaecyparissus Coyote Bush Wild Lilac Creeping St. Johnswort Rosemary Lavender Cotton (0) Site Grading (1) Effective site grading can be utilized to enhance the architecture, screen parking and loading areas and help provide for privacy or adjoining areas. (A) Earth berms adjacent to public rights-of-way shall be constructed to a smooth, rounded, continuous natural contour, with slope not to exceed 3:1. Construction of berms shall not interfere with normal drainage of water anywhere on the site. (B) Industrial or commercial sites located adjacent to residential areas should not be at a higher grade than residential uses. (2) All sites shall drain adequately to off-site collectors without interfering with adjacent properties. All site grading shall be designed to provide positive drainage without leaving standby water. (3) No cut or fill slopes of any type shall be steeper than 3:1, with smooth vertical transitions. Where space limitations demand, terracing with approved retaining walls shall be utilized. (4) Where retaining walls are required, they shall be of a material compatible with the building architecture. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.84 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 - -l I~ i I I Ie I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I (5) Berms, channels, swales, etc., shall be graded in such a vvay as to be an integral part of the grading and paved surface designed with smooth vertical transitions between changes in slope. (6) Adequate diking of outdoor storage areas shall be provided where any chemicals or other substances used or kept on site present any potential risks downstream from the site. (7) All site grading shall be designed to meet the following standards: Planting areas 2% Maximum Slope 3:1 (33%) Minimum Slope Parking lot pavement (1% with P.C.C. flow lines) 2% 4% Driveways, access drives 2% (.6% with P.C.C. flow lines) 2% 6% Pedestrian plazas 1% 2% Pedestrian walkways 1% 8% (p) Construction Phase Requirements (1) In order to minimize soil erosion by water and wind, practical combinations of the following procedures shall be used: (A) The permanent landscaping shall be installed within 60 days after substantial completion of the structural improvements on a lot. (B) Erosion control measures shall be required for imported fill subject to erosion, on construction projects over six months duration. (2) The developer is responsible for ascertaining the location of underground utilities and for protecting them during construction. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.85 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 (6) (q) (3) I All construction storage and equipment yards shall be loca!ed I on the site in a manner to minimize their impact on adjacen: properties and public streets. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (4) Construction sites shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All trash shall be kept in enclosed containers and removed frequently. (5) Construction access shall be coordinated with and approved by the reviewing authority. Special care shall be taken to protect existing pavements and landscaping from damage. Dirt and mud shall be removed promptly from adjacent streets and sidewalks. At the end of the construction period, by phase, the developer shall submit to the reviewing authority reproducible copies of record drawings (as-built) showing the actual locations of all underground utilities and irrigation systems. Maintenance All owners or occupants of property shall maintain all buildings, drives, parking lots, or other structures located upon said property in good and sufficient repair and shall keep such premises painted, windows glazed, paving swept and otherwise maintain the property in an aesthetically pleasing manner. Any structure, driveway or parking lot surface which is damaged by the elements, vehicles, fire or any other cause shall be repaired as promptly as the extent of damage will permit. Grounds shall be maintained in a safe, clean and neat condition free of rubbish and weeds. Roads and pavements shall be kept true to line and grade in good repair. Drainage ditches shall be kept clean of any obstacles. The provisions of RsojlJr:lgc ~i8r:1 ('ggS Chapter 7 of Division 7 of this Title shall apply to development within the Cf'lRSrS gf iRtlygf4~g 2f tt:lg Cit~; gf R9dl:~II~g~ Tha ~rg\ti~igrxlt Qf tR9 b..9m:a I..ir:lg:o Ei!Jr:I SggS i:Riilll af'lrol~' t9 gS"s!gl"r:RSr:lt '\'itRir:l tl:ls crol:lsrg gf ir:lfllolsr:lss sf tRS C'it:,' gf I..Sr:R:il b.ir:lQiilPlanning Area. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS (1 ) (2) (3) (r) Signs (1 ) 6-14.86 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 - I '.0:.... I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I (2) Developments subject to an approved Planned Develo;:>ment may specify the sign standards for that development of any modifications to adopted sign standards within the Planned Development text. Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.87 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.88 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ .,a,..... (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Article 10. Oak Glen Planning Area ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR OAK GLEN P r----- i I , "'., I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Article 7. Reserved Article 8. Reserved Article 9. Reserved Section: 86.031005 Single Residential (OG/RS) District. 86.031005 Single Residential (OG/RS) District. Single Residential Development Standards DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS I Maximum Structure Height (ft) Minimum Lot Size (acres) map suffix will modify I Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) I Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) Front Yard Setback (ft.) Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) I Street Side Setbacks (ft.) Front Yard Setback (ft) Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) I Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) Street Side Setbacks (ft) Draft - December 21.2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.89 i , , ! , , I 35 I 2.5 I 20% res 1:4 res 1:3 200/200 I 30 20 20 30 ARK SUBDIVSION 15 5 15 15 ALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 ?: 10 ac "10 ac EAST V Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.90 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Article 11. Redlands Sphere Planning Area Section: 86.031105 General Provisions. 86.031105 General Provisions. In accordance with California Government Code (9 66474.4[b)). the Board of Supervisors has made the finding that parcels smaller than ten (10) acres in size within Agricultural Preserves and designated RL (Rural Living) in the Redlands Sphere Planning Area can sustain agricultural uses permitted under Land Conservation Contracts, provided the Planning Agency makes the following additional findings prior to the approval any proposed subdivision: (a) The subdivision is compatible with and would not adversely effect the existing agricultural uses or support services within the preserve. (b) The subdivision will not serve to encourage land uses which will conflict with commercial agricultural uses. (c) The proposed subdivision has no lots less than five (5) acres in area unless such lots are within a planned development or are for "well lot" purposes. The average lot size of all lots within a planned development subdivision is not less than five (5) acres. Article 12. Reserved Article 13. Reserved Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.91 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 Draft - December 21, 2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-14.92 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Article 14. Yucaipa Planning Area Section: 86.031405 Single Residential (YU/RS) District. 86.031410 Multiple Residential (YU/RM) District. 86.031405 Single Residential (YUlRS) District. Single Residential Development Standards I I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ii , I I Maximum Structure Height (ft.) I 35 I Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) map suffix will modify 6.000 Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) 50% " 10 acres 1:4 Maximum Lot Dimensions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres 1:3 intenor lot 60/100 Minimum Lot Dimensions (width/depth in ft.) corner lot 70/100 minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) average 25 one side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) , 20 I street type: local I 15 . Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 Draft - December 21, 2000 6-14.93 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) 8.06.03 I 86.031410 Multiple Residential (YUlRM) District. I Multiple Residential (RM) District Development Standards I ;1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS , il I i Maximum Structure Height (ft.) 35 I I ! single unit per lot ! 6,000 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft) I 2 Units or more per lot 10.000 I I i i Maximum Lot Coverage (building coverage) I 55% i , I I ~ 10 acres I 1:4 i I Maximum Lot DimenSions (width to depth ratio) < 10 acres I 1:3 ; I Minimum Lot DimenSions (width/depth in ft.) j Interior lot 60/100 I corner lot 70/100 I minimum 22 Front Yard Setback (ft.) average 25 one Side 10 Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) other sides 5 I Rear Yard Setbacks (ft.) 20 I street type: local 15 I Street Side Yard Setbacks (ft.) collector or wider 25 I I I I I I I I Draft - December 21, 2000 6-14.94 EAST VALLEY SUB-REGION PLANNING AREAS (RSA 29) I 8.06.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Chapter 10 SPECIFIC PLANS Sections: 86.1005 Designations. 86.1005 Designations. (a) Specific plans are adopted by the Board of Supervisors and shall be shown on the appropriate land use district map with a Specific Plan (SP) Land Use District designation. (b) The following symbols appear as a prefix on the official land use maps to identify the various specific plan areas: Specific. Plan Area Agua Mansa i:3tt \ 'AlIg~' C'"rr;jggr (I 1 Q) Kaiser Commerce Center Symbol AM ~(' KC Draft - December 21,2000 PLANNING AREAS 6-47 SPECIFIC PLANS 8.06.10 II I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I 1- I_- I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX E TRAFFIC VALIDATION STUDY -- UPDATED I ,...-. I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix is an update to that which was presented in the Draft Subsequent EIR, August 2000. As such, this Appendix is in addition to that which was presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR. August 2000. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Prepared for: Prepared by: CITRUS PLAZA TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS VALIDATION STUDY MAJESTIC REALTY CO. Crain & Associates 2007 Sawtelle Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90025 (310) 473 - 6508 December 2000 I ...... I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction........................................................................................................... 1 Land Use Growth .................................................................................................. 3 Existing Traffic Conditions .................................................................................... 7 Summary......................................................................... ..................................... 9 APPENDIX A - Current (2000) Related Projects APPENDIX B - TIA Land Use Assumptions APPENDIX C - Level of Service Calculation Worksheets LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1 2 3 4 5 PaQe Current Related Projects Summary ................................................. 4 TIA Land Use Growth Assumptions (Year 2000 to 2010) ................ 5 Remaining TIA Land Use Growth .................................................... 6 Actual and Projected Traffic Growth ................................................ 8 Actual and Project Traffic Conditions............................................... 8 I '..- "". 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ I INTRODUCTION This report is an analysis of the sufficiency of the Citrus Plaza Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), dated August 1995, for current decisions concerning the project. This very comprehensive analysis was prepared following the guidelines of the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) and approved by the County of San Bernardino and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SanBAG). The TIA was also used as the basis for the relevant portions of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The approved TIA document analyzed project and cumulative traffic impacts through the year 2010. At the time the TIA was prepared, the project was expected to have a "first phase" built within a year of project approval. Due to legal delays, that first phase has not yet been constructed. However, the project would still be constructed well within the period extending through the year 2010 for which traffic impacts were analyzed. Prior to accepting the analysis adopted in 1995 as adequate for current decisions, it was suggested that the assumed level of growth in the TIA be reviewed against current growth patterns. In April 2000, an analysis was conducted comparing the existing traffic volumes to the 1994 traffic levels. The study also compared the existing land use growth to the assumed land use growth in the TIA. The validation study showed that the projection of traffic conditions contained in the approved TIA was conservative in comparison to the existing traffic growth. Since April 2000, changes to the land use growth are anticipated as several projects have either been proposed or dropped since that time. Thus, this report compares the current level of approved and proposed land use intensification to the assumed land use growth in the TIA. This comparison will be used to determine the adequacy of the 1 ,-tV ~"" projections of traffic conditions contained in the approved TIA given the recent grmvth patterns in the study area. In addition, a recent ground count was also conducted at four study intersections. These traffic counts were used to detennine the current traffic growth rate and compared to the projected growth from the TIA. 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ".... . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LAND USE GROWTH Land use growth from related projects in the City of Redlands. City of San Bernardino, City of Highland and City of Lorna Linda was updated for this comparison. The updated related project list for each jurisdiction is shown in Appendix A. This appendix contains a summary of all of the projects currently on file with these cities. In order to provide a more detailed look at growth patterns, the related projects in the City of Redlands were subdivided into four regions (Northeast Quadrant, Northwest Quadrant, Southwest Quadrant and Southeast Quadrant) while related projects from the more remote areas comprised by the City of Highland. City of Lorna Linda and City of San Bernardino were grouped using their City boundaries. A summary of the related projects land use growth by area is shown in Table 1. Land use data from the 1995 TIA were also separated using the same areas as were used to subdivide the current related projects. The data contained in the 1995 TIA are shown in Appendix B. TIA land use growth projections by the subareas for the years 2000 to 2010 was calculated based on a linear interpolation using the existing (1994) and future (2010) land use data from Appendix B. In order to conduct this linear extrapolation, each subarea was separately considered. First, the total growth for the subarea was established by subtracting the 1994 land use estimates from the 2010 land use forecasts. Next, this growth was divided by the sixteen years between 1994 and 2010 in order to determine an annual growth rate for each demographic variable in each subarea. The anticipated 2000 land use database was then calculated by multiplying each demographic variable growth rate by the six years between 1994 and 2000 and the results were added to the 1994 estimated land use values. The remaining growth 3 I " .. Table 1 I Current Related Projects Summary I Single Multiple Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total I Quadrant (units) (units) Employees Employees Employees Northwest Redlands 0 0 0 38 38 I Quadrant Southwest Redlands 0 0 0 0 0 I Quadrant Northeast Redlands 51 0 449 0 449 I Quadrant Southeast Redlands 345 532 812 1,011 1,823 I Quadrant City of Highland 1,598 0 36 0 36 I City of Loma Linda 500 0 1,945 684 2,629 City of San Bernardino 3.057 ---.Q 130 890 1,020 I Total 5,551 532 3,372 2,623 5,995 I I I I I I I I 4 I I -- ~ ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I represents the amount of land use growth estimated in the TIA for the 2000 to 2010 period. A summary of the TIA land use growth assumed for the remaining ten years is shown in Table 2. Table 2 TIA Land Use Growth Assumption (Years 2000 to 2010) Single Multiple Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total Quadrant {unitsl {unitsl Employees Employees Employe, Northwest Redlands Quadrant 1 6 3,134 1,999 5,13: Southwest Redlands Quadrant 3 3 1,061 4,895 5,95( Northeast Redlands Quadrant 282 225 314 938 1,25: Southeast Redlands Quadrant 1,013 2,883 2,894 6,236 9,13' City of Highland 3.554 1,188 659 3,575 4,23- City of Loma Linda 914 1,783 954 3,153 4,10' City of San Bemardino 5.920 7.373 7.288 19.035 26.32 Total 11,687 13,461 16,304 39,831 56,13, Table 3 shows the residual growth assumed in the TIA for the next ten years, but which is not accounted for by the current related projects. This comparison of the related projects summarized in Table 1 with the TIA land use growth summarized in Table 2 shows that the current land use growth trend is well below the la.ld use growth trend assumed in the Citrus Plaza TIA model, with the exception of the growth in the number of retail employees in the northeast Redlands quadrant and in the City of Loma Linda. However, the growth in the total number of employees is greater in the TIA than the existing growth trend. Overall, the related projects land use growth in number of employees and total dwelling units is approximately 11 percent and 24 percent of the land use growth assumed in the model, respectively. Thus, the future traffic projections are more than adequate to accommodate the currently proposed related projects. 5 Table 3 Remaining TIA land Use Growth* " Single Multiple Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Quadrant (units) (units) Emplovees Emplovees Northwest Redlands Quadrant 1 6 3,134 1,961 Southwest Redlands Quadrant 3 3 1,061 4,895 Northeast Redlands Quadrant 231 225 (135) 938 Southeast Redlands Quadrant 668 2,351 2,082 5,225 City of Highland 1,956 1,188 623 3,575 City of Lorna Linda 414 1,783 (991) 2,469 City of San Bernardino 2.863 7.373 7.158 18.145 Total 6,136 12,929 12,932 37,208 Remaining (unaccounted for) Growth Percent 53% 96% 79% 93% 'TIA Land Use Growth Minus Updated Related Projects Growth 6 I I I Total ~ 5._5 5'1: 7,i7 4.18 1.478 d 50,140 810 I I I I I I I I I I I I >:>,. . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ I EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS As a response to City comments on the ground count comparison for the Citrus Plaza Project, recent manual counts at the locations listed below were conducted to again validate the findings from the 1999 validation study. o Alabama Street north of San Bernardino Avenue o Alabama Street north of Lugonia Avenue o SR-30 Westbound on-ramp o SR-30 Westbound off-ramp o SR-30 Eastbound on-ramp o SR-30 Eastbound off-ramp For this analysis, four intersections were .evaluated. While current counts were available for the above locations, some turning movement volumes at the four intersections had to be factored up from 1999 to 2000. An annual growth factor for each intersection was calculated based on the recent growth rate from 1994 to 1999. Using these existing (2000) traffic volumes, the intersection volume to capacity ratio and level of service were calculated at the four study intersections. The traffic conditions and projected traffic growth are summarized in Tables 4 and 5. According to the summary table, the level of service for the four intersections is currently the same or better than the projected future 'Without Project" LOS from the TIA. In addition, the existing traffic growth continues to be below the projected growth from the TIA and EIR. Thus, the TIA remains consistent with current traffic growth conditions. 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ I Q)~ 0 0 0 0 c . - ~ <0 ..... <0 0 CJO) c~ lD OJ I'- N (/l; ..... N I'- I'- C 111 (1)1 Q) . ..... ..... I ... 0'- t) 0 Q)O I'- lD ..... ~ ._~O LL U =..... lD CD lD I'- ~:E..J '-0 <0 N ..... ..... 'tl ON . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... - 0 I 8-m ~ CJ_ l..'l 0 V CO Q)~ ~ ~ ~ OQ)Cl 0 0 0 e .....00 ..... C'? 0 ..... CJO) N ~ 0 lD ..... cO) 0... lD CD OJ ..... No.. I Q)..... V ... . <I:;UI ~O OJ V N 0 lD lD lD V ~O- lD CO ..... CO .- g I'- lD C'? N .:::> ci 0 ..... 0 ON V ..... - I (/l ~ c 0 (/l (1)1 ; CJ cO CO 0 U CO I Cl .2..J 0 CO ..... C'? ..... ~:g m ... OJ V V OJ 0.. 0 N <0. I'- :SS.!l! 0 C'? N N N V lD OJ ..... I ..... (/l (/lU Cl ..... N ..... ..... 0 C .- 0 (/IN 0 >e .::: ; WO - Q) OUI :t E (/l :s O_ lD lD N ..... I 0 ::I C C N> C'? CD lD lD ... 0 Cl -0 0 0 0 0 0; U CJ >.- CJ := 'tl C C CD ..... I'- ..... := I 111 00 ..... C'? N V (/l (1)1 ... ;U lD V ~ <0. 111 Co ~~ ..... ... CO U t) CO CJo ..... ..... ..... ~ .2..J Cl'tl Q)o Itl'tl ~ -Q) l!!o Q)Cl ~-g m I .0- ,SN -- la~ ,QCJ O)Ola C laQ) ~.- ~.- .....u- '<t 0 N ..... 0 0 <I: Cl ..... N N ..... ... 0.. (/l ... -co - 0.. c ~.- I 'tl 'tl - ::I .!!lUI c 0 c '<t ..... <0 OJ la ..... <0 N I'- 111 >e- C'? LO U '<t I'- OJ w> lD LO ~ ..... ~ V. OJ V <0 111 0 0 0 0 ::I 0) ..... ..... ..... ::I I - CJ 0) - CJ <I: ..... <I: - I CI) ..; O. ell CI) C'? E 0 ell I , ell C'? E 0 cd ..Q . ell ell (/l (/l ai C'? <I: c 0 cd ..Q C , Q) 0 co 0 > (/l > (fj cd ; Q) C'? <( I <( cd c. <( c. . Q) ; E E CJ > (fj > '" CJ 0 0 0 Q) Cl <( cd c. <( c. cd Q) .!; ..; c co .!; ell ::I (/l 0 E E Q) (/l CI) :CO:: 0:: c ... 0 0 ... 'E 'E (I) Q) c U5 .!; co .!; co ::I Cl co "':t: - > - '00:: 0:: c I - co ~O co - <( C '0 'E Q) c c E c 0 ... "':t: ... ... , ... , co co ~O co :t: > c Q) co Q) C Q) C .~ C la C E c 0 <( 0 la CO ..Q COO CO 0 c 0 Cl ... ell ... . ... , ; Q) co ... (I) (I) C Q) c: .~ CJ ... C <( Cco C 0 ; <( CO ..Q COO co 0 C I Q) <I: co co_ ell CO Ol CJ ell 0 - ::J Q) - C <( Cco C CIl - CI) cd Cl)en en z ....J CJ ell co Ol ... CJ CIl Q) en ell_ co - ::J Q) Q) ... cd en en en z ....J - . Q) 0 C 0 N - ..... C'? I'- C ... I ... 0.. 0.. ..... N C'? ,..: I - I ,....... I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUMMARY The Citrus Plaza TIA model utilized a very conservative approach for projecting traffic growth. The actual growth in traffic volumes has been well below that projected in the traffic study. Further, the land use growth from the currently proposed related projects is less than half that assumed in the TIA for employment sites and less than one-sixth that assumed for residential uses. Thus, future growth will be well within the TIA projections. As a result, the TIA can still be relied upon as an adequate and, in fact, very conservative projection of future traffic conditions. The mitigation measures developed based on those on the projections are also more than adequate. Therefore. there is no need to update the TIA at this time. 9 I I I I I I I ,I I I I I 'I I I I I I I APPENDIX A Current (2000) Related Projects I CilnIs Plaza Project Related Projects Summary .- '" .~, Single Multiple I Description Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total {unitsl (unitsl Employees Employees Emplovees City of Hiahlands 41 Lot Subdivision 41 0 0 0 0 I 326 Lot Subdivision 326 0 0 0 0 162 Lot Subdivision 162 0 0 0 0 8 Lot Subdivision 8 0 0 0 0 I 72 Lot Subdivision 72 0 0 0 0 8 Lot Subdivision 8 0 0 0 0 65 Lot Subdivision 65 0 0 0 0 I 46 Lot Subdivision 46 0 0 0 0 27 Lot Subdivision 27 0 0 0 0 67 LO! SuDdlVlSlon 67 0 0 0 0 37 Lot Subdivision 37 0 0 0 0 I 39 Lot Subdivision 39 0 0 0 0 213 Lot Subdivision 213 0 0 0 0 83 Lot Subdivision 83 0 0 0 0 I 265 Lot Subdivision 265 0 0 0 0 139 Lot Subdivision 139 0 0 0 0 Pharmacy( 1.~re srte) 0 0 36 0 36 I I City at Loma Linda 66 Single Family Residential Development 66 0 0 0 0 11 Lot Subdivision 11 0 0 0 0 I I 58 Lot Subdivision 58 0 0 0 0 44 University Community Homes 44 0 0 0 0 Duplex of 8,741 sf Concepcion Apartments 10 0 0 0 0 18,600 sf Harley-Davidson Sales & Service 0 0 41 0 41 I 26 unrt Condo project 26 0 0 0 0 11,000 sf story Geoscience Research Building 0 0 0 44 44 114 Single Family Residence 114 0 0 0 0 I 97,086 sf Industnal Builidng of 0 0 0 146 146 108 Single Family Residence (Phasing Plan) 108 0 0 0 0 379,565 sf Regional Shoping Center 0 0 835 0 835 20 Unrt Apartment wi existing 8 unrt complex 20 0 0 0 0 I 5 Single Family Homes 5 0 0 0 0 4 Unrts Medical Building 0 0 144 0 144 38 single residents wi 4 models 38 0 0 0 0 I 16,648 sf Rite Aid 0 0 37 0 37 2,100 sf Rebuild gas station 0 0 5 0 5 2 Island 76 Gas Station 0 0 6 0 6 54,600 s.t. Social care and skilled nursing facility 0 0 38 44 82 I 3,050 sf Drive-through Restaurant 0 0 7 0 7 32,000 sf Filipino Church 0 0 0 3 3 336,720 sf Mini StorageIRV Storage/Car Wash. sefVIce 0 0 0 421 421 I 11,200 sf Residential Care Facility 0 0 0 11 11 9,775 sf Residential Care Facility 0 0 0 10 10 5,000 sf Senior CrtiZen Center 0 0 0 5 5 1,399 sf Fast food restaurant wi drive-thru 0 0 3 0 3 I 4,740 sf Church 0 0 0 0 0 495 sf Small Collection recycling facility 0 0 1 0 1 Lewis Homes I 10.000 sf Drive-thru Restaurant 0 0 22 0 22 367,000 sf Commercial 0 0 807 0 807 I I . '. CItrUs Plaza Project Relllted Projects Summ8f}' Single Multiple DescriDtlon Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non~etai/ Total lunltsl lunltsl Em olovees Em olovees Em olovees City of San Bernardino 35,000 s.f. Office Building 0 0 0 140 140 21,780 sf Used Car Sales 0 0 3 0 3 10,000 sf Indoor Swap Meet 0 0 22 0 22 16,300 sf Church 0 0 0 2 2 7,000 sl Vocational School 0 0 0 7 7 37,830 sf Mu~j.Tenant Retail Center 0 0 83 0 83 2,868 sf Faslfood Restaurant wi Drive Thnu 0 0 6 0 6 359 Single-Family Res.dent.al Development 359 0 0 0 0 1,316 f.:ngle-Fam,!y Res.dentlal Development 1316 0 0 0 0 1,315 Sln91e-Famlly Res.dent.al Development 1316 0 0 0 0 Fr..ght Tnucking T erm.nal 0 0 0 653 653 2.832 sf Warehouse Addrtion 0 0 0 88 88 2,000 sf Adu~ Cabaret 0 0 4 0 4 5,000 sf Retail Building 0 0 11 0 11 66 Single-Family Residential Tract 66 0 0 0 0 Northeast Redlands Quadrant 131,848 sf Home improvement Center 0 0 290 0 290 18 Single Family Homes 18 0 0 0 0 33 Lot Single Family Subdivision 33 0 0 0 0 Timberlake Development Cities/Pavilion Theater IS-screen MOVie Theater (77,860 sf) 0 0 117 0 117 9,000 sf Restaurants 0 0 20 0 20 9,940 sf Retail 0 0 22 0 22 Northwest Red/ands Quadrant 12,560 sf Office Suildlng 0 0 0 38 38 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I Citrus Plaza Project Rel8ted Projects SummM)/ Single Multiple DescriDtion Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Tollll (unltsl (unitsl EmDlovees EmaloYees Emolovees Southeast Redlands Quadrant 15,819 sf Warehouse-industrial Building 0 0 0 24 24 135,197 sf Lowe's Home Improvement Center 0 0 297 0 297 3,036 sf expansion of Redlands First Chiropractic 0 0 11 0 11 38,634 sf Industrial Center 0 0 0 58 58 9,410 sf expansion of Office complex 0 0 0 38 38 15,819 sf Warehouse-industrial Building 0 0 0 24 24 15,982 sf Warehouse-industrial Building 0 0 0 24 24 72,000 sf Office Building 0 0 0 288 288 5,00~ sf Hollywood Video 0 0 11 0 11 2,619 sf Restaurant wI Drive Thru 9,212 sf Restaurant wI Drive Thru 0 0 20 0 20 57,052 sf expansion of University of Redlands 0 0 0 57 57 11,079 sf Church 0 0 0 1 1 62 unit Senior Citizen Apartment 0 62 0 0 0 37O-unil Senior Care Facility 0 370 0 0 0 1,508 sf Chapel Annex (University of Redlands) 0 0 0 2 2 84,114 sf Senior Care Facility 0 0 0 84 84 89,884 sf Senior Assisted Living Alzheimer's Facility 0 0 0 90 90 5,697 sf Alzheimer's Facility 0 0 0 6 6 4,798 sf Church expansion 0 0 101 183 284 40 Lot Single Family Subdivision 40 0 74 134 208 58 Residential Lot Subdivision 58 0 0 0 0 10 Single-Famlly Momes 10 0 0 0 0 36 Residential Lot Subdivision 36 0 0 0 0 13 Single-Family Homes 13 0 0 0 0 28 Residential Lot Subdivision 11 0 0 0 0 31 Residential Lot Subdivision 31 0 0 0 0 159 Single-Family Homes 31 0 0 0 0 62 Residential Lot Subdivision 62 0 0 0 0 24 Residential Lot Subdivision 24 0 0 0 0 16 Single-Family Lots 16 0 0 0 0 13 Single-Family Lots 13 0 0 0 0 16 unit Apartment Complex 0 16 0 0 0 84 unit Apartment Complex 0 84 0 0 0 135,197 sf Lowe's Home Improvement Center 0 0 297 0 297 Southwest Redlands Quadrant None Note: Northeast Redlands quadrant bounded by SR-30, 1-10, Santa Ana River and Church Street, Northwest Redlands quadrant bounded by SR-30, 1-10, Califomia Street and Santa Ana River, Southwest Redlands qUadrant bounded by Califomia Stree~ 1-10, Mountain View Avenue and Santa Ana River, Southeast Redlands quadrant bounded by the San Bemardino/Riverside County Line, 1-10, Church Street, Cities of RedlandslHighland boundary, Wabash Avenue, Cities of RedlandslYucalpa boundary. I I I . I I I !I I I il I II I I I I I I I I. I APPENDIX B TIA Land-Use Assumptions - I CITRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMP110NS - TIA LAND USE DATA (1994) I Single Multiple 1- Model ' Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total Zone (units) (units) Emclovees Emclovees Emclovees I Citv of Hiahland 1811 524 689 49 1.245 1,294 1812 690 415 179 454 633 I 1813 550 476 42 485 527 1820 642 86 33 50 83 1821 966 114 149 460 609 I 1822 508 90 61 229 290 1823 586 230 20 153 173 1824 567 329 43 343 386 I 1825 661 61 28 215 243 1826 4 1 1n 1,417 1,594 1847 840 40 5 48 53 I 1848 952 101 2 21 23 1849 1,008 49 1 15 16 1850 517 51 4 36 40 1851 252 46 1 14 15 I 1852 129 12 4 35 39 1853 7 0 18 184 182 1854 13 Q Q Q Q I Total 9,416 2. 790 816 5,384 6,200 I Citv of Loma Unda 1805 483 1,257 115 1,575 1,690 I 1806 608 129 125 1,975 2,100 1831 180 9 194 162 356 1833 102 401 0 4 4 I 1840 711 668 56 823 879 1841 211 1.721 63 918 981 1842 589 346 49 718 767 1843 308 810 83 1,210 1,293 I 1844 879 329 ~ 358 383 Total 4,071 5,670 710 7,743 8,453 I I I I I CITRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMPTIONS I T1A LAND USE DATA (1914) . . I Slngle Multiple Model Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-RetaU Total Zone (units) (units) Emolovees EmDlovees EmDlovees I City of San Bernardino I 1700 300 150 11 73 84 1701 0 0 20 1,234 1 ,254 I 1702 44 17 3 104 107 1703 238 50 6 190 196 1704 1,500 460 23 732 755 1705 205 376 344 953 1 ,297 I 1706 675 907 1 30 31 1707 734 168 8 269 2n 1708 1 . 0 75 505 580 I 1711 146 1,022 28 25 53 1713 5 6 45 303 348 1714 832 142 56 347 403 I 1715 1,091 454 235 2,324 2,559 1716 829 284 100 982 1,082 1717 468 276 34 327 361 I 1718 991 200 55 286 341 1719 799 186 168 875 1,043 1720 1,119 280 112 375 487 I 1721 1,631 244 75 254 329 1722 379 2S 0 1 1 1723 158 30 123 600 723 1724 157 178 92 452 S44 I 1725 408 98 113 553 666 1726 443 387 143 700 843 1736 418 131 307 627 934 I 1737 5 0 116 236 352 1738 194 79 445 847 1,292 1749 608 1,022 116 322 438 I 1750 1,032 89 53 145 198 1751 904 648 15 40 55 1752 651 736 43 121 164 I 1753 572 834 742 858 1,600 1754 1,007 75 60 68 128 1755 515 18 90 104 194 I 1756 439 1,124 114 296 410 1757 1,136 86 57 149 206 1758 898 171 266 690 956 1759 487 102 205 344 549 I 1760 762 315 300 505 805 1761 344 209 304 901 1,205 1762 685 859 418 1,239 1,657 I 1763 267 447 221 913 1,134 1764 601 1,146 210 869 1,079 1765 816 215 57 391 448 I 1766 290 184 37 2S8 295 1767 625 204 62 758 820 1768 414 454 464 652 1,116 I I CITRUS PlAZA BR ASSUMPTIONS nA LAND USE DATA (1994) - . I Single Multiple Model Dwelling Dwelling Retail No~etail Total Zone (units) (units) Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees I on 1769 586 782 811 1,142 1,953 lnO 93 963 880 4,045 4,925 I lnl 2 28 798 3,668 4,466 ln2 148 462 103 3,342 3.445 ln3 218 557 70 2.282 2,352 I ln4 10 18 436 978 1,414 lns 240 185 8n 1,967 2.844 ln6 0 41 666 1,218 1,884 I 1m 22 1 1,340 2.447 3.787 ln8 101 10 247 447 694 ln9 0 1 n3 1,416 2.189 I 1781 350 18 515 290 805 1782 132 53 3 16 19 1783 994 260 0 0 0 1784 1,166 218 88 488 576 I 1785 898 932 327 529 856 1786 632 101 133 215 348 1787 224 1,435 558 904 1,462 I 1788 788 244 83 119 202 1789 309 62 36 53 89 1790 503 801 205 1,061 1,266 I 1791 688 375 335 1,734 2.069 1792 697 736 185 958 1,143 1793 890 251 18 76 94 I 1794 493 395 173 419 592 1795 259 495 138 263 401 1796 270 9 123 298 421 I 1797 499 164 70 138 208 1798 628 1,529 48 394 442 1799 279 158 329 326 655 1800 207 227 97 815 912 I 1801 127 41 81 460 541 1802 186 31 20 118 138 1803 53 61 368 1,902 2.270 I 1804 103 550 124 1,719 1,843 1807 860 50 1 0 1 1808 561 528 263 317 580 I 1809 689 217 213 261 474 1810 360 811 35 827 862 1814 0 0 0 25 25 I 1815 0 0 0 0 0 1816 665 38 53 207 260 1817 982 317 24 93 117 1818 4 952 2 20 22 I 1819 318 1,017 152 280 432 1829 265 47 204 1,152 1,356 1830 617 468 23 133 156 I 1846 397 51 Q Q Q Total 45,336 31,578 18,600 63.389 81,989 I CITRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMPTIONS I ~ TIA LAND USE DATA (11M) I Single Multiple Model . Dwelling . Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Tatal I Zone (units) (units) Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees Northeast Redlands Quadrant I 1855 331 8 0 0 0 1857 396 121 6 34 40 I 1858 473 109 63 0 63 2468 198 60 3 17 20 2469 118 27 27 208 235 I 2483 Q Q 36 ill 247 Total 1,516 325 135 470 60S I Northwest Redlands Quadrant 1828 2 1 26 67 93 I 1834 2 0 0 1 1 1835 0 0 0 0 0 I 2467 0 0 0 0 0 2474 2 0 1 3 4 2475 1 0 7 21 28 2476 1 0 6 17 23 I 24n 0 0 0 0 0 2484 1 0 6 17 23 2485 Q Q Q 44 ~ I Total 9 1 46 170 216 Southwest Redlands Quadrant I 1827 6 0 175 393 568 I 1832 ! Q 187 309 496 Total 14 0 362 702 1,064 I I I I I I I CITRUS PlAZA E1R ASSUMPTIONS .. . T1A LAND USE DATA (1894) I Single Multiple Model Dwelling Dwelling RetaU Non-Retaif Total I Zone . (units) (units) Emotovees Emotovees Emolovees I Southeast Redlands Quadrant 1836 1 7 173 227 400 1837 23 107 129 334 483 I 1838 10 1 95 232 327 1839 0 0 198 4S2 680 1859 35 7 150 347 497 I 1861 104 719 213 3.086 3.299 1862 53 18 539 1.788 2,327 1863 896 1.247 40 658 698 I 1864 681 102 24 388 412 1865 693 884 244 1,164 1,408 1866 585 309 166 791 957 I 1867 472 26 62 157 219 1868 641 27 23 58 81 1876 754 41 96 296 392 I 1877 278 1 0 1 1 1878 565 403 186 569 755 1879 700 14 30 459 489 1880 544 1 3 50 53 I 1881 769 2 16 236 252 1882 247 3 39 90 129 2470 35 7 150 347 497 I 2473 104 719 852 707 1,559 2478 1 5 427 336 763 2479 1 7 142 345 487 I 2480 23 0 0 0 0 2481 29 2 63 169 232 2482 57 1,005 229 387 616 I 1856 515 4 0 0 0 1860 109 597 250 0 250 1869 303 45 141 118 259 1870 11 0 0 0 0 I 1871 980 69 0 0 0 1872 551 459 111 989 1.100 1873 279 1,759 106 1,456 1,562 I 1874 1,148 4 41 151 192 1875 977 115 95 350 445 2471 435 171 83 77 160 I 2472 Q 85 Q 693 693 Total 13.609 8.972 5,116 17.538 22.654 I I - I CITRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMPTIONS I TlA LAND USE DATA (2010) Single Multiple I Model Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total ~ (unitsl (unitsl Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees I City of Hiahland 1811 565 808 136 1,354 1.490 I 1812 n6 492 223 532 755 1813 619 697 111 1,063 1,174 I 1820 729 222 55 198 253 1821 966 1n 149 590 739 1822 526 125 385 967 1,352 1823 586 257 42 310 352 I 1824 572 430 106 788 894 1825 879 197 133 973 1,106 1826 4 2 336 2,478 2,814 I 1847 1,376 176 49 286 335 1848 3,299 453 8 79 87 1849 1.526 204 37 394 431 I 1850 1.229 206 6 65 71 1851 1,219 206 6 65 71 1852 204 37 26 275 301 I 1853 14 1 63 687 750 1854 13 Q Q Q Q Total 15.102 4,690 1,871 11,104 12,975 I City of Lorna Unda I 1805 483 1,603 163 1,822 1,985 1806 1,359 465 137 2.018 2,155 1831 180 26 385 336 721 I 1833 102 472 118 789 907 1840 743 1,044 79 1.090 1.169 1841 247 1,992 844 1,2n 2.121 I 1842 605 393 174 813 987 1843 519 1,n3 284 3,901 4,185 1844 1.296 755 53 742 795 I Total 5,534 8,523 2,237 12.788 15,025 I I I I I I ClTRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMPTIONS TIA LAND USE DATA (2010) .... '" I Single Multiple Model Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total Zone (units) (units) Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees I City of San Bernardino I 1700 1,035 629 170 S43 713 1701 0 0 194 1.978 2.172 1702 159 75 89 439 508 I 1703 900 208 28 206 234 1704 2.405 1,131 150 1,159 1.309 1705 663 376 401 957 1,358 I 1706 675 1.0n 11 183 194 1707 981 400 17 271 288 1708 1 0 251 1,848 2.099 I 1711 306 1.034 253 242 495 1713 23 29 129 942 1,071 1714 890 284 88 840 728 I 1715 1,171 881 332 2.615 2.947 1716 829 284 145 1,141 1.286 1717 496 428 50 393 443 1718 1,058 319 100 416 516 I 1719 799 307 236 976 1.212 1720 1,182 448 232 859 891 1n1 1.890 454 87 354 441 I 1722 854 100 9 28 37 1723 158 50 216 1.000 1.216 1724 157 208 103 457 560 I 1725 458 176 165 n9 894 1726 443 435 156 700 856 1736 418 172 404 630 1,034 I 1737 5 1 140 236 376 1738 507 325 1,082 1,508 2,590 1749 650 1.469 159 394 553 1750 1,044 366 68 178 246 I 1751 1,034 1,067 37 109 146 1752 651 929 49 121 170 1753 612 n4 742 1,024 1,766 I 1754 1,007 155 60 78 138 1755 515 61 90 122 212 1756 1.262 2.222 143 324 467 I 1757 1.192 86 63 149 212 1758 960 171 345 781 1,126 1759 487 149 224 344 568 I 1760 762 391 330 505 835 1761 344 293 341 901 1,242 1762 685 874 469 1,239 1,708 1763 267 498 258 913 1,171 I 1764 601 1,221 245 869 1,114 1765 816 341 83 446 529 1766 290 184 48 258 306 I 1767 625 269 80 758 838 1768 414 576 515 652 1,167 I . I CITRUS PLAZA SR ASSUMPTlONS nA lAND USE DATA (2010) -~ I Single Multiple Model Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total Zone . (units) (units) Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees I 1769 586 810 881 1.558 2.439 1770 93 963 1.522 4.045 5,567 1771 2 39 1.010 3.668 4.678 I 1772 148 468 149 3.348 3.497 1773 218 608 138 3.090 3.228 1774 10 18 571 1.439 2.010 I 1775 240 217 901 2.270 3.171 1776 0 41 2.018 1.218 3.236 1m 22 6 1.809 2.538 4.347 I 1778 101 29 586 824 1.410 1779 1 1 1.578 2.598 4.176 1781 532 75 818 438 1,256 1782 144 62 3 16 19 I 1783 994 367 0 0 0 1784 1.166 373 105 488 593 1785 934 1.189 357 529 886 I 1786 632 155 142 215 357 1787 227 1,587 622 904 1.526 1788 788 320 87 119 206 I 1789 309 92 38 53 91 1790 503 848 221 1.061 1.282 1791 690 493 381 1.806 2.187 I 1792 697 953 211 999 1.210 1793 914 397 32 141 173 1794 627 563 192 436 628 I 1795 303 886 177 364 541 1796 657 43 241 550 791 1797 610 239 83 168 251 1798 810 1.725 102 624 726 I 1799 279 194 741 1,255 1.996 1800 234 620 195 1.399 1.594 1801 127 54 222 1,175 1.397 I 1802 186 59 118 626 744 1803 53 66 741 3.763 4.504 1804 118 566 208 2,498 2.706 I 1807 1,030 204 1 0 1 1808 561 651 263 366 629 1809 669 299 213 318 531 I 1810 405 1.124 86 901 987 1814 35 72 6 9,495 9.501 1815 0 0 2.184 1,830 4.014 1816 850 115 75 310 385 I 1817 1,519 as5 72 302 374 1818 6 964 9 62 71 1819 359 1,225 196 567 763 I 1829 274 95 364 1,922 2.286 1830 1.053 886 25 133 158 1846 1.791 231 Q 1 1 I Total 54,808 43,374 30,261 93.845 124,106 I I CITRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMPTIONS -'~ - TIA LAND USE DATA (2010) I Single Multiple Model Dwelling Dwelling RetalI Non-Retail Total I Zone (units) (units) Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees Northeast Redlands Quadrant I 1855 716 125 0 28 28 1857 440 219 109 34 143 1858 473 186 297 0 297 I 2468 220 109 55 730 785 2469 118 46 127 951 1,078 2483 Q Q 49 m m I Total 1,967 685 637 1,971 2,608 I Northwest Redlands Quadrant 1828 2 2 99 293 392 I 1834 2 1 10 28 36 1835 0 0 1,000 0 1,000 2467 0 0 2,700 0 2,700 I 2474 2 1 24 80 84 2475 1 1 172 430 802 2476 1 1 137 344 481 24IT. 2 3 544 1,198 1,742 I 2484 1 2 80 243 323 2485 Q Q ~ IT.4 1.068 Total 11 11 5,060 3,368 8.428 I Southwest Redlands Quadrant I 1827 6 1 783 1.854 2,617 1832 II 1 1.m 8.680 7.9IT. I Total 19 4 2,080 8,534 10,594 I I I I I I CITRUS PLAZA E1R ASSUMPnONS I TIA LAND USE DATA (2010) Single Multiple I Model Dwelling Dwelling Retail Non-Retail Total Zone (units) (units) Emolovees Emolovees Emolovees I Southeast Redlands Quadrant 1836 1 7 2:72 584 856 I 1837 155 350 261 750 1,011 1838 10 1 504 1,096 1,600 1839 0 0 550 1,179 1,729 I 1859 35 8 266 598 864 1861 104 n8 434 4,887 5,:;21 1862 53 29 660 1,859 2,519 I 1863 923 1,303 43 712 755 1864 681 381 24 400 424 1865 693 1,119 280 1,184 1,444 I 1866 585 333 191 791 982 1867 472 88 62 176 238 1868 641 85 23 64 87 I 1876 791 222 159 352 511 18n 660 145 16 35 51 1878 592 447 301 664 965 I 1879 897 136 34 463 497 1880 S44 66 5 73 78 1881 769 99 29 400 429 1882 247 33 39 96 135 I 2470 35 8 266 598 864 2473 104 n8 1,734 1 ,222 2,956 2478 1 5 427 864 1.291 I 2479 1 7 413 887 1,300 2480 418 729 60 190 250 2481 260 558 336 731 1,067 I 2482 78 1,691 366 786 1,152 1856 515 n 4 19 23 1860 109 721 341 0 341 I 1869 344 114 309 464 n3 1870 91 13 2 5 7 1871 980 220 188 421 609 I 1872 551 575 687 1,862 2,549 1873 330 1,759 169 1,597 1,766 1874 1,148 145 55 151 206 I 1875 9n 246 123 350 473 2471 435 206 114 103 217 2472 Q 103 Q 923 923 Total 15,230 13,585 9,747 27.516 37,263 I I I I - I ~. - I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I -- I I I - I APPENDIX C Level of Service Calculation Worksheets I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CAPSSI COMI?REHENSIVE ANALYSIS I?ROGRAK FOR A SINGLE SIGNALIZED ~ON . EXISI'ING ( 2000) SOLt1I'ION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME San Bernardino Av & Alabama St P . M Peak Hour 12-14-00 FLN: pDOOexd Scenan 0 1 Movelllent Phase 1 - 10 Phase ' Phase .3 - Phase 4 - Phase 5 - Phase 6 - sees ~e=s 10 sees 22 secs o secs o secs I I Critical MvIl1t-.. Peak 15 Vol -vph Saturation -vph Lost time -sec Relative Sat 'X' Ettective Gr-sec Move Time -sec Min/Ped Tillle-sec prog Factor PAF AvDelayjveh -sec Level ot Service Av. 'Q' j lane veh Veh Stopping % Do Veh Clear 7 .... 354 3600 0.00 0.33 22 22 22 1.00 12 B- 2 74 YES Em' EBL X EJ3R SBT 5BL SBR WBT WBL X 14 Shrd WBR X NBT NBL NER X X X .... 31 1700 2.00 0.15 8 10 10 1.00 19 C+ o 89 YES 156 Shrd X X X X X X 113 1700 2.00 0.53 8 10 10 1.00 22 C- 2 94 YES 256 3600 0.00 0.33 22 22 22 1.00 12 B- 2 74 YES Whole Intersection - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 14 Level ot Service = B- Cri tical Movell1ents - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 14 Level ot Service = B- " " - Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 0.35 .... 133 1700 2.00 0.63 8 10 10 1.00 24 C- 2 95 YES 51 Shrd 255 3600 0.00 0.23 22 22 22 1.00 11 B- 2 71 YES .... 39 1700 2.00 0.18 8 10 10 1.00 19 C+ 1 90 YES 32 Shrd 82 3600 0.00 0.08 22 22 22 1.00 11 B- 1 67 YES Required Cycle Length is 64 seconds (All Minimum tillles are satistied) . CAPSSI (Release 11) - Based on Delay Methodology Per 1985 Highway Capaci ty Manual San Bernardino Av & SR-30 SB Ram P.H Peak Hour I 12-14-00 I I FLN'~.- Scenar: 01 . .r ".. CAPSSI COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR A SINGLE SIGNALIZED INTER.Sa::TION - EXISTING (2000) SOLtn'ION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME Movement EST E8L EBR SET SBL SEll. WET WE!. WBR NET NBL t Phase 1 - 10 sees X X Phase 2 - 43 sees X X X X Phase 3 - 21 sees X X I Phase 4 - 21 sees X X X Phase 5 - o sees Phase 6 - o sees L I I Critical Mvmt--- .... .... .... .... Peak 15 Vol -vph 600 34 10 147 255 164 128 10 90 10 10 11 Saturation -vph 1800 1700 1800 3600 1700 1800 1800 1700 1800 1800 1700 Lost time -see 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Relative Sat 'X' 0.77 0.24 0.01 0.20 0.75 0.46 0.16 0.07 0.12 0.03 0.03 ot Efteetive Gr-see 41 8 41 19 19 19 41 8 41 19 19 Move Time -see 43 10 43 21 21 21 43 10 43 21 21 21 Min/Ped Time-see 26 10 26 21 10 21 26 10 26 21 10 1.1 prog Factor PAr 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AvOelay/veh -see 21 31 12 24 33 26 13 30 12 23 23 23 Level ot Service C- D B- C- D D+- B- D B- C- C- I Av. 'Q' / lane veh 9 1 0 2 5 3 2 0 1 0 0 Veh Stopping " 85 93 57 83 94 88 61 92 60 80 80 Do Veh Clear ? YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES I- Whole Interseetion - Weighted Av Delay (see) = 23 Level of Service = C- Critical Movement.s - Weighted Av Delay (see) = 25 Level of Service = D+- I " " - Int.ersect.ion CapaCit.y Utilizat.ion (ICU) = 0.65 Required Cycle Length is 95 seconds (All Minimum t.imes are satistied) I - CAPSSI (Release 11) - Based on Delay Het.hodOlogy Per 1985 Highway Capacity Hanual I I I I I - I - .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CAPSSI COMPRDlE1lSIVE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR A SINGLE SIGNALIZED Dl'lnlSEX:TION " EXISI'ING(2000} SOLl!I'ION USING ~UIRED CYCLE TIME San Bernardino Av & SR-30 NB Ram Hovement Phase 1 - 13 sees Phase 2 - 27 secs Phase 3 - 12 secs Phase 4 - 21 secs Phase 5 - 0 sees Phase 6 - 0 secs I I Critical Hvmt-"" Peak :5 Vol -vph Saturation -vph Lost time -see Relative Sat 'X' EtfeetiveGr-sec Hove Time -see Hin/Ped Time-see prog Factor PAF AvDelay/veh -see Level of Service Av. 'Q' / lane veh Veh Stopping " Do Veh Clear ? .... 468 3600 2.00 0.45 25 27 27 1.00 14 B- 4 78 YES EBT EEL X EBR X x .... 186 1700 2.00 0.73 11 13 10 1.00 29 0+- 3 95 YES 91 Shrd 17 1800 2.00 0.06 19 21 21 1.00 15 C+ o 75 YES Whole Intersection Critical Hovements " 'f SBI' SEt SBR P.H Peak Hour WBI' WBL X 130 Shrd WEB. X ::-14-00 FLN: pnOOexc ScenarIo 3 NET NBL NBR X x X X x X x 17 1700 2.00 0.07 11 13 10 1.00 20 C- O 86 YES .... 362 3600 2.00 0.40 19 21 21 1.00 17 C+ 3 83 YES 10 1700 2.00 0.04 10 12 10 1.00 21 C- O 87 YES 12 Shrd .... 159 1700 2.00 0.68 10 12 10 1.00 28 0+- 3 95 YES 12 Shrd 176 3600 2.00 0.25 25 27 27 1.00 13 B- 2 72 YES - Weighted Av Delay (see) = 18 Level of Service = C+ - Weighted Av Delay (see) = 19 Level of Service = C+ - Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 0.52 RequIred Cycle Length Is 73 seconds (All MlnllllUlll times are satisfied) " CAPSSI (Release 11) - Based on Delay Methodology Per 1985 Highway capacity Manual I I FLN: pnooe:c SCenarlO( -- CAP S S I COHPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR A SINGLE SIGNALIZED ~ON " EXISl'ING ( 2000) SOLl1I'ION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME Lugonla Av & Alabama St P.M Peak Hour Movement EBT EEL EER SET sm. SBR WET WBL WE!( NET NBL Phase 1 - 22 secs X X X X X X Phase 2 - 10 sees X X Phase 3 - 19 3ecs X X X Phase 4 - o secs Phase 5 - o sees Phase 6 - o secs I I Critical Hvmt-"" .... ...- ...- Peak 15 Vol -vph 222 35 42 390 70 17 102 144 37 403 22 Saturation -vph 1200 Shrd 1800 3600 1700 Shrd 1100 Shrd Shrd 3600 1700 Lost time -see 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Relative Sat 'X' 0.55 0.06 0.34 0.26 0.66 0.47 0.08 Etfective Gr-sec 20 20 17 8 20 17 8 Move Time -see 22 22 19 10 22 19 10 Min/Ped Time-see 22 22 19 10 22 19 10 Prog Factor PM 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AvOelay/veh -see 10 7 10 14 12 10 14 Level of Service B- B+ B+ B- B- B- B- Av. 'Q' / lane veh 2 0 2 1 2 3 0 Veh Stopping " 77 62 75 88 82 79 85 Do Veh Clear ? YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Whole Intersection - Weighted Av Delay (see) = 11 Level of Service = B- Critical Movements - Weighted Av Delay (see) = 11 Level of Service = B- " " - Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 0.51 Required Cycle Length Is 51 seconds (All MlnilllUlll times are satiSfied) " CAPSSI (Release 11) - Based on Delay Methodology Per 1985 Highway capacity Manual 12-14J ,. X . r- sf =. =, =- I I I I I I I I I -.-...... I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I _ I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX F AIR QUALITY DATA -- UPDATED - I " '" c I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such, this Appendix supercedes that which was presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR. August ::WOO. I ".", I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Reprint of Valid Quantitative Analyses from the Citrus Plaza Regional Mall EIR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 5.5 AIR QUALITY " Exhibit 57 TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT EMISSION FACTORS . (pounds per hour) Type CO ROC NOx SOx PM,o Scrapers 1.25 0.27 3.84 0.46 0.41 Water Trucks 0.675 0.15 1.70 0.143 0.14 Loaders 0.572 0.23 1.9 0.182 0.17 Motor 0.151 0.039 0.713 0.086 0.061 Graders Trucks (Offroad) 1 1.8 0.19 4.17 0.45 0.26 Although no "trucks (offroad)" have been identified by the project proponent, the incorporation of this additional vehicle type is intended to ensure that the resulting analysis considers both haul vehicles and other truck types which may be temporarily on-site during the construction period. Source: SCAQMD, CEOA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-8-A, p. A9-82. 5.5-18 Citrus Plaza Project 4667/DEIR SECTION 5.5 AIR aUALlTY Exhibit 58 CONSTRUCTION' EaUIPMENT EXHAUST EMISSIONS' (pounds per day) Equipment Type Quantity CO ROC NOx SOx PM,o Phase I (Power Center) Scrapers 6 75.00 16.20 230.4 27.60 24.60 Water Trucks 2 13.50 3.00 34.00 2.86 2.80 Loaders 1 5.72 2.30 19.00 1.82 1.70 Motor Graders 1 1.51 0.39 7.13 0.86 0.61 Trucks (Offroad) 1 18.00 1.90 41. 70 4.50 2.60 Phase I Total 11 113.73 23.79 332.23 37.64 32.31 Phase II (Regional Malll Scrapers 12 150.00 32.40 460.80 55.20 49.20 Water Trucks 4 27.00 6.00 68.00 5.72 5.60 Loaders 2 11.44 4.60 38.00 3.64 3.40 Motor Graders 2 3.02 0.78 14.26 1.72 1.22 Trucks (Offroadl 2 36.00 3.80 83.40 9.00 5.20 Phase II Total 22 227.46 47.58 664.46 75.28 64.62 Phases I and Phase' Scrapers 18 225.00 48.60 691.20 82.80 73.80 Water Trucks 6 40.50 9.00 102.00 8.58 8.40 Loaders 3 17.16 6.90 57.00 5.46 5.10 Motor Graders 3 4.54 1.17 21.39 2.28 1.83 Truck (Offroadl 3 54.00 5.70 125.10 13.50 7.80 All Phases Total 33 341.19 71.37 996.69 112.92 96.93 , Assuming ten hour work days and 100 percent equipment operation. Phase I (Power Center) and Phase II (Regional Mall) construction activities will not occur concurrently; therefore. the Phase I and II scenario presented herein is provided only for informational purposes and does not reflect either the actual or predicted emission characteristics which will manifest from project implementation. Source: Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated Citrus Plaza Project 4667/DEIR 5.5-19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .... .., I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 5.5 AIR QUALITY Exhibit 61 EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS DUE TO THE USE OF CLEANERS, PAINTS AND SOL VENTS E = A+B Where: E = Emissions from the type of coating used. A = Daily ROC from coating material = [G x C) ... OJ Where: o = Number of days required to coat the surface G = Volatile organic content of the material /2.08 pounds per gallon) C = Total gallons of coating required for the project = ([(F I K) x HI ... [{1 - (G Ill} - {J + X}}) ... L Where: F = Area to be coated H = Dry film thickness 10.005 inches) I = Density of the reducer (7.36 pounds per gallon) J = Water fraction 10.0 for non-mitigated emissions) X = Exempt solvent volume fraction 10.0) K = Coverage rate in square feet with 1 mil thickness per gallon of solids 11,604 square feet) L = Transfer efficiency 10.65 for high volume low pressure spray) o = Number of days required to coat the surface B = Daily ROC from clean-up material used to clean equipment, surfaces. etc. = [(C x M x N x P) ... OJ Where: C = Total gallons of coatings required for the project = ([(F ... K) x HI ... Ul - G ... I} - {J + X}]) ... L M = Clean-up solvent fraction (0.05) N = Coating material system factor 10.0 for water-based materiall P = Density of the clean-up solvent /7.36 pounds per gallon) o = Number of days required to coat the surface Assuming that 1 gallon can coat 1,604 square feet with 1 mil. of coating and 5 mils. are applied: 3.7M sQ. ft.'" 1 ,604 sq.ft./mil. = 2,307 gal. of solids/mil.x5 mils. = 1 1,534 gal. of solids required The selected coating has a ROC content of 2.08 pounds per gallon. Citrus Plaza Project 466710EIR 5.5-27 SECTION 5.5 AIR QUALITY Exhibit 61 (Continued) EV APORA TIVE EMISSION DUE TO THE USE OF CLEANERS. PAINTS AND SOLVENTS The volume of coating - the volume of solvent = the volume of solids, water, and exempt solvent: 1 - (2.08 - 7.36) = 0.7174 11 ,534 ~ 0.7174 = 16,078 gallons of coatings Based on a transfer efficiency of 0.65 percent: 16,078 -;- 0.65 = 24,735 gallons of coating are required ROCs from coatings: 2.08 x 24,735 = 51,449 pounds of ROC will be released If it is assumed that the initial construction will take place over a 6-month period and Phase /I would take 12 months to complete, an estimated 6 months of this time (total) will be involved in coating operations: 51,449 pounds of ROC I (6 months -;- 30 days per month) = 286 pounds of ROC per day To this value the ROC emissions from clean-up are added, Five percent of the volume of coatings applied is projected for clean-up: 16,078 x 0.05 x 7.36 = 5,917 pounds for the project 5,917 -;- (6 months -;- 30 days per monthl = 33 pounds per day The total amount of ROCs to be released on a daily basis during coating operations: 286 ... 33 = 319 pounds per day Source: Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated 5.5-28 Citrus Plaza Project 4667/DEIR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 5.5 AIR QUALITY Exhibit 62 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION-RELATED PM,o EMISSIONS FROM FUGITIVE DUST Source-Related Estimated PM,o Source Type Estimations Emission Factor Emissions' (Ibs/day) Phase I (Power Center) Graded Surfaces 4.7 acres/day 26.4 Ibs/acre/day' . 124.08 Dirt/Debris Pushing 7 pieces of equipment 5.12 Ibs/hour' 358.61 Operations operating 10 hours/day Demolition -- -- -. Phase I Total 482.69 Phase II (Regional Malll Graded Surfaces 7.7 acres/day 26.4 Ibs/acre/day 203.28 Dirt/Debris Pushing 14 pieces of 5.1 2 Ibs/hour 716.80 Operations equipment operating 10 hours/day Demolition 27,000 cubic feet 0.00042 Ibs/cubic foot' 11.34 Phase II Total 931.42 Phase I and Phase II' Graded Surfaces 327.36 Dirt/Debris Pushing Operations 1,075.4 , Demolition ' 1.34 All Phases Total 1.414.' , , Without mitigation. SCAQMD, CEOA Air Qua/ity Handbook, Table A9-9, p. A9-93. SCAOMD, CEOA Air Qua/ity Handbook, Table A9-9-F, p. A9-'00; assuming a silt content of 6.5 percent and a moisture content of 2.3 percent as referenced in Geotechnical Feasibility Study for Proposed Citrus Plaza - Redlands, San Bernardino County, California (Kleinfelder, September', 1994>. pp. 4 and 5, incorporated herein by reference. SCAOMD, CEOA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-9, p. A9.92. Phase I (Power Center) and Phase II (Regional Mall) construction activities will not occur concurrently; therefore, the Phase I and II scenario presented herein is provided only for informational purposes and does not reflect either the actual or predicted emission characteristics which will manifest from project implementation. , 3 . Source; Ultra systems Environmental Incorporated Citrus Plaza Project 4667/DEIR 5.5-31 SECTION 5.5 AIR OUALlTY ~~ - Exhibit 64 ESTIMA TED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS FROM OFF-SITE ELECTRICAL GENERATION (pounds per megawatt-hour) Estimated EstImated Emission Emissions Emissions Air Pollutant Factor' (Ibslyear) (Ibs/dayl Phase I (8.131 megawatt-hourslyear) CO 0.20 1,626,20 4.46 - ROC 0.01 81.31 0.22 - NOx 1.15 9.35C.65 25.62 SOx 0.12 975.72 2.67 PM,o 0.04 325.24 0.89 Phase 1/ (18,262.5 megawatt-hourslyear) CO 0.20 3,652.50 10.01 ROC 0.01 182.63 0.50 NOx 1.15 21,001.88 57.54 SOx 0.12 2,191.50 6.00 PM,o 0.04 730.50 2.00 Phases I and Phase II (26,393.5 megawatt-hourslyear) CO 5,278.70 14.46 ROC 263.94 0.72 NOx 30,352.53 83.16 SOx 3,167.22 8.68 PM,o 1,055.74 2.89 SCAOMD, CEOA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-1 1-8, p. A9-114. Source: Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated 5.5.34 Citrus Plaza Project 4667IDEIR - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .....-... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 5.5 AIR QUAUTY Exhibit 65 ESTIMATED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS FROM ON-SITE USE OF NATURAL GAS (pounds per million cubic feet) Estimated Estimated Emission Emissions Emissions Air Pollutant Factor' (Ibs/month) (Ibs/day) Phase I (1.45 million cubic feet per month) CO 20.0 29.00 0.97 ROC 5.3 7.69 0.26 NOx 120.0 174.00 5.80 SOx Negligible -- -- PM,o 0.2 0.29 0.01 Phase II (4.01 million cubic feet per month) CO 20.0 80.20 2.67 ROC 5.3 21.25 0.71 NOx 120.0 481.20 16.04 SOx Negligible -- -- PM,o 0.2 0.80 0.027 Phases I and Phase II (5.46 million cubic feet per month) CO 109.20 3.64 ROC 28.94 0.96 NOx 655.20 21.84 SOx - - PM,o 1.09 0.04 SCAQMD, CEOA Air Qua/iry Handbook. Table A9-12-8. p. A9-117. Source: Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated Citrus Plaza Project 4667/DEIR 5.5-35 - I 4. I IP I .~. i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Updated Quantitative Analyses i- II ---.. I I -c I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Quantitative Analysis of Infrastructure Pipeline Construction Emissions - I .. . I Infrastructure Pipeline Construction I Off-highway Trucks Scraper Crane Backhoe Tracked loader Fork Lift-50 HP Fork Lift - 175 HP Tracked tractor Wheeled loader Roller Motor grader Wheeled dozer Miscellaneous I I I I I Off-highway Trucks Scraper Crane Backhoe Tracked loader Fork Lift-50 HP Fork Lift- 175 HP Tracked tractor Wheeled loader Roller Motor grader Wheeled dozer Miscellaneous Total I I I I I I I I I I I 5126120004:30 PM Emission Factor (Ibs/hour) CO ROC Nox PM10 Sox 1.8 0.19 4.17 0.26 045 1.25 0.27 3.84 0.41 046 1.746 0.582 4462 0.291 0.388 0.572 0.23 19 0.17 0.182 0.201 0.095 0.83 0.059 0.076 018 0.053 0441 0.031 0 0.52 017 1.54 0.093 0 0.35 0.12 1.26 0.112 014 0.572 0.23 1.9 0.17 0182 0.3 0.065 0.87 005 0.067 0.151 0.039 0.713 0.061 0.086 0.675 0.15 17 0.14 0.143 0.675 0.150 1.700 0.140 0.143 Vehicle Hours/day Emissions (Ibs/day) 0 10.0 - - - - - 0 10.0 - - - - - 0 10.0 - - - - - 2 10.0 11.4 4.6 38.0 3.4 3.6 2 10.0 4.0 19 166 1.2 1.5 0 10.0 - - - - - 0 10.0 - - - - - 0 10.0 - - - - - 0 10.0 - - - - - 0 10.0 - - - - - 2 10.0 30 08 14.3 1.2 1.7 0 10.0 - - - - - 1 10.0 68 15 170 14 1.4 25.23 678 85.86 7.2 8.31 Ctirus Plaza Site Prep Emlsslons4.xls Equipment Infrastructure Pipeline Construction sn. P...~ration Emilsions Gnlding Grading Area (aaes) Square lengln 1ft) Grading Area (sqft) Grader Speed Impn) Grader equation (lb PM10NMT) Average grader width (feet) Passes MIles traveled removing tODsoil Graaers removing topsoil tOlal emiSSions {Ibs 1 Uncontrolled grader PM1Q total (lbsl Control efficiency ConloUed grader PM1 0 emissions tOlal ObS) Acres worked per month Duratron Imonths) Days worked per month Controlled grader PM10 emissions (IbsJday) Hours of operation per day Controlled grader PM10 emiSSIons (Ibslhr) Excavation Drop Equation Emissions from Soil Cut/Fill Loadmg/Unload'"9 of material fSOil) IOta truCKS Particle sIZe multiplier ldlmenslonless} Mean wind speed /mph) Moisture content f%} 5011 removed (cubiC feet) 5011 denSity (lbs/ft3) EmISSIon Factor (tbltonl Soil removed (tons) Loading EmiSSions Total (Ibs PM1 0) Unloading Emissions Total (Ibs PM10) Control effidency Duration of Site Preparation (months) Days worked per month Hauling EmiSSions (PM10fdayl Hours Of operallon per day Controllea graoer PM10 emissions (Ibsftlrl 5:25::000 1001 AM 0.2 100.000 10.000 10 3.06 AP42. rabie ".9.2 12 Caterpillar Performance HandbOOIl.. Edition 24 4 0.63 1.93 1.93 50% 0.97 459 0.05 26 0.743 10 0.074303 0.35 AP42. section 13.2.4-3 3 15 30000 11'1 CY 100 0.00003 AP42. sec. 13.2.4. eqn. 1 1.500 0.05 005 50% 005 26 008 10 o 007923 CIIru5 Plaza Site Prep EmISSIOtls4 Slle Prep I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Quantitative Analysis of Citrus Plaza Off-Site Construction Emissions I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EmlllSlonflctor Em'5$lO!"lllClOr!rom Itle CARB emiSSIOn factor mooel EMF~::7F NOli ",;':'I~~I m.",.leil RaG D,umal Rnl'" Saiki ,,"Olll P"'10: " " "i OC "I cc 0; :C' EIft'UJons(lbslday) MAll DI~ Ut Q~l!r o lO1a1 NumDerol Haul 1np5 (Matln'IS Transport) PerOt Numtler Tn, VOT ofTns Len ~ ;) o ~~ 324 025 0 025 0 H.uITru~kEm'UlonF,eto' CO ROO DIUrnal mJmi'e mlmill mlve'" 1:26 20:- l00'i<HCO 100'll>COld SIaI'lS RUling mlVehl NOli I I='M10 mlmile m/mile' "3S ~ 45 Salk No. PM10 " 00 O' 00 Haul Trutk Eml$Slons (Ibsldly) Total CO RaG D,urnal , " 00 0 C O' 00 OfM'l19"",ayTI\lCl<s Scraper Crane Sac.noe 5krlllOllSer FOrlll.lft.50HP FOI1<LJft.175"1P Trai:l\edll'lctor 'AtlMledloaolr RollertComllletor MOIOr91'll0l' Vwh....oooz.r M,scell.meows EmllSronFaclllf Ibslhourl CO ROC No. PM10 50. U '" 417 026 "5 125 02. '" '" ". 1746 OSS;: 4462 0291 0388 osn OZ, " e17 0182 0201 0095 '83 0059 0076 ". OC53 "" 0031 0 '" o ~.,. '" 0093 0 035 o 1~ ~ ~6 0.' ,~ 0" C5:'2 '" '0 o 1~ o 18~ OJ 0065 087' 005 0067 0151 0039 0:13 00"' "" 0675 :15 " '" 0143 ClS7'5' 0'50 'cOC 0140 0'43 ....'hlel. Hoursld. EmISSIons IbsICl. IT ~O "'~T 1~ - 30G;: 18 ~ 324 90 9C ,., 1:'5 803 ,. '0 9: ;::-6 6:' 5~ 4 6' 602 :1 ~O ~ E I .- 14 ~ " " c, S0 I ~ I ac 1 I -, j I 9:. I :1 "c 5' "I .".,. '9 .- ;1 OS <, , '28 -, " ac '" 1 . " .. . i 90 5" ., .~ ~ " i --- 0< 40:- "~" -00 ~'3 9 ::,,9: Ofl.rllgl'lwil,Truc~s Scrilper Cra.... Ba~r1oe S.IIl:oaCler FOri< ..111.50,;;> 1'0.......,11. P5 H'" "'rac~ea tractor W..e,eaIOaa., RolleriComllllc:or MOlorgraaer '^"ee,eccozer l.4'sceilanllOus 70lai BuiJdlngConSlruellonE"unlons ProJ'Cl 1'..;lIII.llE""'SS10"S ;:",oloveeEmlSs:ons r;auITruc. !:m.ss,ons:los.aa, Ccnstn.CI.onec",omenl TOllll ProJec:t [IDsldllY) SC':"QMD Dally ':"l'IresMICl D,flerence S,gn,flcant"' co ROG '0. PM10 SO. I :: o~ I 5~ "1 0 " ". COl 4: 5" " " " " SJ9 99 " "I ,. '00 "'0 '50 H: :35, ". 151\ I~~ ~G ~;:::' YES '..:0 "0 :: 57 P~ ~ '3Q' S,1t I='reoarallon C,trus ConSlrVctIOn EmISSIons - I 1 I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I WWTP Ind Water Facilities S,le P~~ratlon Emissions S,~e lioUl;!S, SOZt,5qtl) Cutinl TOlal WDlume moiled ICY) To~ GradIng CuI Volume lCY) VOIumeFllleG(yd3) s,n Conllrlt 1%. "'e~WlNIspeed(mpP11 MQlSlure tonlenl I'\;:) Gra<l'Ing DuratIOn Imontl'lSl WOrt;OIY~monll'l GrlIdln\l VOlume (CYJoay) Tota; Imoor. VOlume (Cy~ Imper. IIDtume'CY!OaYi Hlu!Tnos ..ou'~Oly 114716 49971.200 a2S 14.DOO " 000 14.000 . .. 1S 300 22' 207 '4000 (balilnl;e(l on Slle, 207 '3,ors,te, . D01erEmlSs.ons MO,$1Ufeeontenl(%) W',gmol:',nHlnaledllo"oay' Contro:Etflc,enC"1 Dozer Em'SSlO/'lS IltlSihrl Doze' Operauons IhrJoay' Do:erEm'IS,onSllbS/d.y) 8ullOl;ll,n\lEauatJon "P42Tlbl,119.1 1S S60,OCC 5CF', 647' eo 29'0 HlulTI'\lCkS c.Oitllu'lgi\Jnloadongolmlllenallso,lI,ntOlruo;s PartiCle SIZe muttlllher IDlmens.onless; Ai=42 SeCllo" 1324.3 MOISlur8 conlflnt 1'701 035 1S Emlss.>onFactorilDltoll1 OA"'42.Sect'or'I1324 Ion 1 5011rlmovedilonsl ..oaa,~ Em,ulOns Total 1I0s PM10' UnlOad'ln\l Em,u'ons Totalllbs PM10\ Conlro.effiClel'lcy Duration 0' S,te ",rep,ara~cn imOntl'1s) Days work!'d per mcnt!'1 Haultn9 Em'UlOfls (PM1011;lIy' Controlled Hauling Emis.,cns (PM10Idly) 0000063 " eoo 1.20 1.20 50~, 3000 4:25 00< 0.0177 EllClvllorEmlssions Cate~ter320 CyCleT,meIMlnuIIS) DlslanCe Iteet)ICycle CyCleslSO,..,'nule rlour IOtst.ll'lelltravelledim'lesl/rlOY' D<stlmcelravelledim,les)!l;lay IOUIPU! '~t:3.,oa~ Exc.avalor Ope'allon (rlrs:oa~; ILoildlngEmlsslons , . Mean\l\.',neSoeeolmp"l ru' MO'Slur, Conte.,t 1%'vVTi LOs olPM10:Tor'l 01 Malenal Loaoeo Volume Exc;.avatec lyd3, To"s 0' MIlenal Exc;.avaleo C::mtrol e:tf,c,'''C~ UnloadmgEm,ss,onsl!bslday) 023 05 21739 002 0," 20;'41 9 035 " 53E.05 ;:Ci 2eC SO', 0.009 UnloilOlrlllEmissions , iMeanW'''d5De'drmCr'li!u' IMolslure Conleflt (%'NT, LtlsC!I>Ml0,1"onO! Matenal Loaaed Jolume Exc;.a~aleo lyo31 TonsotMllenalbc;.avateo Conlrol EffiClenC)' UnloldlngEm.ssionsjlbl1dilyl 035 .. 53E-05 2G~ '" :;0'" 0,009 EmOlnc;.a! lon-nula from l,P.4:2 COmP'lal'On Of Ar' ",oulllanl Em'SSlon "'actorS 13 :2 4 i:.mJSSlonFactor'ltl~ton; :xi 00321\lu,5,e.o 13,'IM:2,exp' 4" 150,1 ""atenalS assumed 10 we.gr, 2700 Itls'yd3. Cater;llllar Performance t-oandOOOM EO'I,on 24 I I 1993 :257 Ofv' 21301 5". Pr.carallOn C,tII.ls ConStrud,on EmISsIOns Contro' Effic,ency Numoe'01 Graoers Graa"'gEm,sslonsllbs:aayl. 50',: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I S,te Preparabon CIII'llS Construction EmiSSIOns I TransportabOfl on Unpaved Roads scraoe'Full MOisture Content I%WT: F'al'tlCle Site MuIDpl,e. for PM10 iKi SJltContent(%,^'l(S, Mean ven,cIe WeIgh! !TonS) (W) ItlsofPM10NMT ContmlEffiClllncy lblofPM101day " 2~ 75 "3 '01 80% 0.037 11) ErnQrncallomll.l!a II'Dm AP-42. Comptliilllon of Air POllulant EmiSSIon Faaors 1322.2 (2) EmISSIOn Faaor Ilb~MT'~IK15 '121"alwi31"b)IIMiO 21"c ExcayatorEmiuions ~umMl"otLo.JIdl!~ Excavator EmiSSIons 0.06 2 '" GrallmgEmlSllons soeea IMPH, Graalnll Em,n>ons IItls.'\IUTI OperallO" Hour51oay O1s/ance Tra....lled Im,le5loaYI 0765 !!3% 90 3750 28SS LoaGer EmISSIons CAT 950F Senes II LOiiIoer Cycle TI!TlIl fMlnulesi o.stancelfeelJ/Cycle Cyc;les:50 mll'lute Mur Olslancetnweilea,m,le5imOUr O,slanCet...ii1yelled(mlles)'oay Outpul1yd31iday ....oLJrsoloperallOnperday C5 50 "0 0S.47C 8523 2:17 9 Loading EmIssIons lFilll , Mean'Nind5lleeolmph)lul MOIslureContentl%'l.T, ltIsol~1C,TonofMatenalLoaoed VOlurne Filled (yd3) Tons o! Malena, E~ca...aled ConlrOiEffiClency Unloading EmiSSIons (lbsJday) C35 " " C 14000 111900 50% 0.$98 Emp<nca! formula ITem AP-42 Comp,latlOn 01 A" POI'utant EmiSSIOn Factors 1324 Eml5SlOnFactor(IOSIIOnl"'~i 00321',u.5,exp 1 3, IM:2,exp' 4, 5011 matenalS assumed 10 W8,g!'1 2700 Ibs,~o3. Calercllliil' Per10rmance HanoOOO~ Ed'llon 24 1993 Tral'l:.portatlonon UnpayeoRoaos Mo,stufll Content 1%'IITl PaniCle s,ze M"II,pl,erlor PM10 0<.,:1; S,ItConlentf%iMl(Si[2! . . Mean \tefl!Cle We'gn! iTons\ t::, 'IOSOli='M1CNMT Control EffiCIency Ibsof PM101day :;:E 75 , C ~ €os,:: 1716 11, Emp,,,c.a' formula frOrT' :.='.~:;: :omOtlal'O~ 0' :." Oollular: E..-,ss,o'" FaCIe's "3::::: 12 E""5s,o~ Fac:or IIOsVMT,:.~,s ~2"a;",,3',.'tlqM.C 2": Loader Em,SSlons Ifllumbe'OfLoade~ ILoaderEmlSSlons OozerEm,ss'Ofls(lbIJdilyj '''taut Truck Emlss'ons GracterEmlSlIOflS E,;cilvatorEmlssions Total EmlSSlol'ls tbs/da 231 ~ :2 2;": 0:;2 2e5S C12 62S4 ConstructIon Employee Tl'lp$ Emc'oyees fII....."berofTnpsper.en'cle Tr:pDlslance Average vefllCle R,oersn,p Tota,TnDS Tnc ...engtnta~en from Tatlle,oS.5.: [3- :23 102; " SEa.:, Air QUiillr~ HanODOO~ ; 1 9S:: ':"OMC :2 S"'P,," 2131C1 1-'-- r~' I' I I I In I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - .!A~, : C 'O~ :WED) :5 2S ~A;:;~ , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT 80AIUl OPWATIlR CO.....'i"'ONIlRS 8eRNARD C. KllRSl!Y 00umI Mo_ STACEY R. AUlSTADT Ilcpury Geoml ......,., W. WILLIAN BRYDEN, P.B Dmclar, W..... Udbtj lOHN A. PBRRY, P.B. Dlr<c1Ir. Wiler RtcIImal10n JOHN P. MURPHY DIrec1lIr, Adminillnllon" Fino"", JON re. TURNIPSI!I!I> Sarelr I'ro8nm Mula.... 8. .". ARllIlN CXlCICI! PIaIdaIl r,,_. lit" J. . lUDITII W. 8ATI'IlY TONI c~, '1carT WIIRTIH A. WllTICH NORIHB ~ MILLER December 27, 2000 Terri Rahhal Planning Division San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue Third Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 RE: Additional Comments of the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Regarding Draft Subsequent EIR Re IVDA Services and Other Items Dear Ms. Rahhal: On December 22, 2000 I County's responses to referenced above. sent you a letter, Which had attached the our comments to the Draft Subsequent ErR Attached is a copy of revised responses that we would like substituted for the responses attached to the December 22, 2000 letter. The revision in the attached responses appears in comment 11-1, which more fully addresses our original comments about growth inducing effects. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (909) 384-5091. " Bernard General I!.:. .i BCI<:als Enclosure J' rt () " l..., ,_ ,: oJ _ ,J 300 North "D" SIrect. Su Bernardino. California 92418 P.O. Bolt 710,92402 Phone: (909) 384-5141 PACSIMJUi NUMBERS: A-"suallon: (909) 384-521' s,..neorma: <'09) 384-"32 CuIuxner 5crvi<:r. (909) 384. nil CaIpora1c Y- (909) 384-5260 WIIOt llcIanwIoo PIml: (lI09) 384-5251 ':A~ : G . 0: (w::::)) : S 2:; ?AC=: ~ ~ "" U"'. DIlAn' /2/27/00 Municipal Water Department 1 J -I Conunc:nt noted. As described elsewhere, there are no growth indueing effects of this project, because it involves a ch8llge in service providers for a previously approved project and In lU'ea which has prllViously planned urban level of aervice under the long standing East Valley Conidor Specific Plan. Ther-e are no changes in planned land uses or development intensity associated with the actions analyzed in this EIR. 11-2 Comment noted. This is discussed in detail on page I J, Volume 2, Teclmical Appendices, Appendix G - Infr88tructurc Options Analysis. SA WP A Ordinancc 3 is also included in Appendix U-E. 11-3 The impacts ofpumpiDg in Option 1 are stUdied and discussed in detail in Appendix D-H, Impact of Water Supply Pumping on ConlAm;na'\t Migration. County of San Bernardino Inland VaDcy Development Ageney Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options ("Appendix G Study"). DElR, Appendix G. The impacu or both the VOC and perchlorate plumes Were thoroughly analyzed. The proposed wells will be deep and pumped from the lower aquifer. The study concludes that the proposed wells will not likely capture VOC or perchlorate contamination nor will pumping change the migration of the plumes. It is also proposed in the DEIR to include VOC treatment (Appendix G, Table B-1) as a failsafe measure in the remote siluation that VOC is encountered. I 1-4 The Cily of Redlands percolation ponds recharge the upper aquifer and arc cltpccled to remain in the upper aquifer and not have an impact on /he proposed wells. This was also analyzed in Ihe Appendix G Study. I I -5 Nitrates are not expected to be a problem with Ibis option. Nitrates have nol been a problem to pumpers of the lower aquifer, 11-6 Comment nOled. I 1-7 Commonl noted. The IVDA may have to add facilities to provide VOC andlor perchlorate treatment, the cost of which would be added to the fees and/or charges imposcd by the IVDA for Supplying water to IVDA Arllas "A" and "1." 11-8 Comment noted. IVDA Areas "Ak and "I" arc part of the redevelopment area of /he IVDA. The IVDA has expressed interest in providing water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I." Subject to the teons and conditions orlbe existing license with the United Stlltes Air Force (until such license expires or is olhezwise Imninated), /he NDA is not restricted by any adjudication. The cost of any additional facilities required by /he IVDA to provide water to IVDA Areas "A" and "f' Would be added to the fees and/or charges imposed by the IVDA for supplying water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I." IINTIIFSIDA T A \ Wl'\R200 tlOO5lDOCUME/IITSICounty fIR IRCIpcmscs 10 sa WI.er COmmc:n1l2.doc 12127/00 11:17 ...'" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .~.- 1,/" - I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I I I I --- -.......... --,. -...."", _". .,uu"" ~ '-lIll',. San BernardIno InternatIonal Airport and Trade Center December 22, 2000 ~"_.__.~ { ~\ \. ..# '..'!P-" Ms. Teai Rahbal PllIlIDing Division San BODIIIldino County Land Use Services Departmcnt 385 N. Arrowhead Av~ Third Floor San BernardiDo, CA 92415-0182 RE: SUPPLYING WATER TO IVDAAREAS "A" AND "I" Dear Ms. RahhaJ: My staff bas Nrthcr reviewed and lUUIlyzcd the: Draft EIR. following the County of San Bernardino's receipt of the City of San Bcmardino Municipal Water Dcpllltment's letter dated October 12, 2000. Based on my staff's input, I have prepaled this letter setting forth the current situation regarding the IVDA supplyins water to IVDA.Area:s "A" and "f' identified in the County of San Bernardino Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR''). The Draft EIR. covcrs, amoas other thmas, options for providina water and sewer sctVicc to portions of the IVDA redevelopment lira. In particular, the Dm1\ EIR studies the ability of the IVDA to provide WIller supply to IVDA Areas "A" and "I" as Water Supply OptiOlL'l 3A, 3B and 3C in the Draft EIR. The IVDA operates the water system on the former Norton Air Force BlISe under a license agreement with the Umtcd States Air Force aDd is subject to the liCCllSC'S terms and conditions which have been reviewed with AppliCllDt. At this time, there is adequate water supply in the lVDA water systcm to IlUpply the requirements of lVDA Areas "A" and "I" in accordance with Water Supply Options 3A, 3B and 3C set forth in the Draft IDR Supplying water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I" should not adversely impact the IVDA's supply of water to otbt:r uses within the "IVDA Water Service Area," as described in the IVDA Redevelopment Plan. Also, there are no identified water quality problems arising from supplying water to IVDA Areas "A" and '1" that cannot be adequately addressed to comply with existing lllWs. Further, the IVDA bcli~es that supplyini water to IVDA Areas "A" and 'T' does not involve any lIDIDitigable, significant. adverse enviromnental impacts. AddiliOJl811y, the COUl!.ty's responses to the commems about the IVDA water supply lll8de in the October 12,2000 Icner from tbe City of San Bernardino MWdcipal Water Department have satisfactorily addressed those Comments. I\lVDAOIIlVOAIWOIlDD0C\2000\TMHlDccIHonloon EIR It_.. OOI..cIo<. 12I22JOO 12:39~ s. ~ Noncn WIly, SuIte., . San Bemanllno, CA 112<108.o1S1 ' (8Oll) 982"'00 . FAX (909) 3824108 _OIDdalrport.com . 1lIIp:IIwww.lbdllrport.com A PROJECT OFTHE INlAND VALl.EY oevaOPMENT AGENCY AND SAN BEftN4F1D1NO IrorrEANATIONAL. AIRPORT AIJTHORlTY _~AK ~O . 01 (W~D) :5:25 ./ 14:0S FAX 11011 IIECH ~A:::~ S _::. ij] 003 3U 0203 Ms. Tcni Rahhal Pase 2 December 22, 2000 . Since'the JVDA's mimon is to faciliwe the redevelopment of the areas located within its jurisdiction, the IVDA seeks to encourage development within IVDA Area "A" lIS contemplated by the County of San Bernardino and the lVDA Redevelopment Plan. ~ you are undoubtedly aWllre. the property owners within lVDA Area "A" have: repeatedly sought to obtain water supply and sewer services from the City of Redlands, which has re&,ed or isnorcd these requests to eaable the development of lVDA Area "A." In addition, the properties included within IVDA Area "A" are presently unable to receive water supply and/or sewer services from the City ofRedlands because of. among other reasons, growth contl'Ollimiutions set fonh in that City's Measure U initiative that prohibits the City of Rcdlands from providilli water or sewer services to IVDA Area "A" because that area is outside the sphere of influence IlDd municipal boundaries of RedJands. For these reasons, and consistent with the IVDA's Settlement Agreement with R.edlands. the IVDA desires to llSSist and cooperate with the County of SllI1 Bernardino to provide Cor such W8!llr supply and/or sewer servi~ from alternative sources, lIS stUdied in the Draft ElR. I have insttueted my staff to work closely with and assist County staff in implementing any futwe plans for such alternative water supply llDd/or sewer services. Ifyo\l would like to discuss this matter. please contact me. Sincerely. ~~ T. Milford Harrison F..xcClUive Director - I\lVDAOIIIVDAIWOlU>D0C\2000\1'MHIDW.H1IIriIoo E1R ~ OOlLdaa tH3PM 12122illO I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I 1- ':A~ :0 . 0'1 (W:::Dl :.S 25 ?AG:=: ~ . ~ j~ r:,. pf : "~~,, ~'" . CITY OF RIVERSIDE Riverside tdb:II ;ijjr "People Serving , People" I . December 26, 2000 '99' Terri RahhaI San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department, Planning Division 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, Third Floor San Bernardino, California 92415-0182 Re: SCH No. 94082084 - Draft Subsequent EIR Dear Ms. Rahhal, This leuer is sent to supplement and clarify the earlier comments of the Riverside Public Utilities Department dated October 2, 2000. As indicated in the earlier letter from our Utilities Department, any provision of water from the City of Riverside's domestic transmission main (Waterman) would require the approval of both the Riverside Public Utilities Board and ultimately our City Council. As you can appreciate, this decision is a discretionary act of our Council and is not automatically required as a result of any decision made by the County of San Bernardino on the above referenced EIR. Any favorable decision by our City Council would be predicated on the appropriate payment of "fair share" costs for any modifications to our existing infrastructure. . The above, in conjunction with Mr. Wirtzfeld's letter of October 2, 2000, constitute our final comments to the Draft EIR. I believe the County of San Bernardino has accurately evaluated all potential environmental impacts associated with the water and sewer in the Draft EIR. The County is to be commended for preparing a well thought out and extensive analysis of potential options. Thanlc you for the opportunity to provide these further comments. If you should have any questions regarding the contents of this letter. please feel free to give me a call at 826-5554. Yours truly. I :. ,. i I I l ... ! ...~~ ) 1..... '-' ~~~- ~~ C. Wales:-P.E. Assistant City Manager-Development [ .... '" r. ". -'\ ~.'J L J .......'" OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 3900 MAIN STREET. 1lJV9SIDE, CAUFORNlA 92522 . (909) 826-5553 www.cLri....xtc.ca.u. I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I ~AN 10 . 01 (WE::;) !S 27 ?A'::;:: :: erri Rahhal December 22, 2000 Page 3 of 3 -------------------------- i Regarding Options 7a and 'b, after further reviewing the work prepared by PSomas for this option, we believe the City of RiverSide is the best entity to address the feasibility of this ; option. We have been informed that the City of Riverside has .: resPOnded to our concerns regarding this option under separate tover. We greatly appreciate the chance to review and concur with the attach responses to our prior comments regarding the provision of water and sewer service to IVOA Areas A and I. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (909) 384-5091. Sincerely yours, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT BCI<:als Enclosure . 0: :w~:); :5 27 ",.,-,:" ..........- DRAFT 12122/00 " ,I 11-1 11-2 11-3 11-4 11-5 11-6 11-7 11-8 11-9 11-10 MUDicipal Water Department Comment noted. Text has been added to the EIR to incorpol'llte the points raised in the comment regarding the growth inducing analysis, Comment noted. This is discussed in detail on page II, Volume 2, Technical Appendices, Appendix G - Infrastructure Options Analysis. SA WP A Ordinance 3 is also included in Appendix D-E, The impacts of pumping in Option I are studied and discussed in detail in Appendix n-H, Impact of Water Supply Pumping on Contaminant Migration, County of San Bernardino Inland Valley Development Agency Unincorporated Areas A and I Water Supply and Sewerage Options ("Appendix G Study"), DEIR, Appendix Q, The impacts of both the VOC and perchlorate plumes were thoroughly analYZed, The proposed wells will be deep and pumped from the lower aquifer. The study concludes that the proposed wells will not likely capture VOC or perchlorate contamination nor will pumping change the migration of the plumes. It Is IIlso DroDosed in the DEIR to indude VOC IItmen A endix G Table 8-1 ns fnil afe mensure in th remo situation that VOC is encountered. The City of Red lands percolation ponds recharge the upper aquifer and are expected to remain in the Upper aquifer and not have an impact on the proposed wells. This Was also analyzed in the Appendix G Study. Nitrates are not expected to be a problem with this option, Nitrates have not been a problem to pumpers of the lower aquifer. Comment noted. Comment noted, The IVDA may have to add facilities to provide VOC and/or perchlorate treatment, the cost of which would be added to the fees and/or charges imposed by the IVDA for supplying water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I," Comment noted, IVDA Areas "A" and "I" are part of the redevelopment area of the IVDA. The IVDA has expressed interest in providing water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I." Subject to the terms and conditions of the existing license with the United States Air Force (until such license expires or is otherwise terminated). the IVDA is not restricted by any adjudication. The cost of any additional facilities required by the IVDA to provide water to IVDA Areas "A" and 'T' would be added to the fees and/or charges imposed by the IVDA for supplying water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I." Comment noted. See responses to comments 7 and 8 above. Comment noted, The cost of any additional facilities required by the City of San C:IWlN'DoWS1lEMPlR..pollses 10 5B Waler COltll1lellls.doc 12122A:lO 2:/1 PM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JA~:::: '01 (WED) :5:26 :=A::;=: - ~ ~ DRAFT 12127/00 11-9 Comment noted. See responses 10 connuenls 7 and 8 above. 11.10 Comment noted. The cost of lIllY additional facilitie5 required by the City of SlIll Bernardino 10 provide water to IVDA Areas "A" and "r' would be added to the fees and/or charges imposed by lb. City for supplying water 10 IVDA Areas "A" and "1." The approval requirements arc undeRtoad and ac1cnowledged in Appendix G oflhe DEIR. 11-11 Comment nored. See response 10 comment 11-10. 11-12 Commenr noted. 1\-13 Commenl noled. See responses to conunents 11.1 through 11-12 above. liNT I \l'$\DA T AIWPlIUOO 11OO'IDOCUMENTS\County 1!/R,\R'lpOn... to S8 Water COl1lmCnts2.do< 12I27~ 11:174M ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APp ENDIX I CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED DURING PREPARATION OF THE FINAL SUBSEQ UENT EIR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has not been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such, this Appendix as presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR, August :2000 remains valid. - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APp ENDlX H BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ********* NOTE ********* The following Appendix has not been altered as a result of modifications to the Draft Subsequent. EIR. As such, this Appendix as presented in Volume II of the Draft Subsequent EIR, August 2000 remains valid. II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDIX G INFRASTRUCTURE OPTIONS ANALYSIS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Operational Motor Vehicle Emission Factors Phase I CO ROG NOx SOx PM Emission Factor (11.12J (gram/mile) 21.35 1.14 1.00 0.06 0.01 Phase 11 CO ROG NOx SOx PM 17.66 0.79 0.89 0.06 0.01 111 Assuming 80% cold start and 20% hot start 12J Assuming an average speed of 34 mph for CO and NOx, 39 mph for ROG and 30 mph for particulates Emissions Phase I CO ROG NOx SOx PM Emissionsl1J (Ibs/day) 1,881.55 667.61 236.34 14.95 3.59 Phase II CO ROG NOx SOx PM 4,754.47 2,036.30 703.93 55.45 13.33 111 Assuming regional shopping center with 13,781 trips for Phase I and 51,102 trips for Phase 11 5/25/199911:49AM Citrus Plaza Emfac and Urbemis Revised Changes made to the default values I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The user has turned off the construction emissions default switch. The user has turned off the area source emissions default switch. The passby option switch has been changed The operational emissions mitigation switch has been changed The default light duty truck fleet mix percentages or fuel/technology classes ve been modified The default winter temperature has been modified The default summer temperature has been modified - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Quantitative Analysis of Citrus Plaza Regional Operational Emissions I Changes made to the default values I I I The user has turned off the construction emissions default switch. The user has turned off the area source emissions default switch. The passby option switch has been changed The operational emissions mitigation switch has been changed The default medium heavy duty truck fleet mix percentages or fuel/technology clc sses have been modified The default winter temperature has been modified The default summer temperature has been modified The default urban trip lengths have been modified The default rural trip lengths have been modified I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'Fr.'avei Conditions Residential Commercial Home- Home- Home- Work Shop Other Commute Non-Wo~k Custorr-o, Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 42.2 42.2 ,") - ":1~.~ Rural Trip Length (miles) 11. 5 4.9 6.0 42.2 42.2 42.: Trip Speeds (mph) 35 40 40 40 40 40 % of Trips - Residential 20.0 37.0 43.0 "- of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 0 General light industry 0.0 0.0 100.0 General light industry ROG 0.44 NOx 0.80 CO 5.77 PM10 0.21 .. .. I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I UNMITIGATED EMISSIONS TOTAL EMISSIONS (lbs/day) ROG 0.44 NOx 0.80 CO 5.77 PM10 0.21 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. - I I I I changes made to the default values The user has turned off the construction emissions default switch. The user has turned off the area source emissions default switch. The passby option switch has been changed The operational emissions mitigation switch has been changed The default light duty truck fleet mix percentages or fuel/technology classes ",. ve been modified The default winter temperature has been modified The default summer temperature has been modified I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I File Name: Project Name: Project Location: URBEMIS 7G: Version 3.1 cithtrk1.URB Citrus Plaza - Haul Trucks WWTP & WT South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) DETAILED REPORT (Pounds/Day - Summer) OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 1995 EMFAC Version: EMFAC7G (10/96) Temperature (F): 85 Season: Summer Summary of Land Uses: Unit Type General light industry Vehicle Assumptions: Fleet Mix: Vehicle Type Light Duty Autos Light Duty Trucks Medium Duty Trucks Lite-Heavy Duty Trucks Med.-Heavy Duty Trucks Heavy-Heavy Trucks Urban Buses Motorcycles Trip Rate 1.00 trips / 1000 sq. ft. Percent Type 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non-Catalyst 1.16 0.13 1. 44 19.56 19 .56 100.00 Size Total Trips 4.00 4.00 Catalyst 98.58 99.54 98.56 40.00 40.00 % all fuels Diesel 0.26 0.33 40.44 40.44 100.00 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ., I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Travel Conditions Residential Home- Home- Home- Work Shop Other Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 Rural Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 Trip Speeds (mph) 35 40 40 % of Trips - Residential 20.0 37.0 43.0 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) General light industry Commercial Commute Non-Wo:-l: CustOIT:-:::: 10.3 5.5 " , 10.3 5.5 5.' 40 40 40 100.0 0.0 O.C General light industry ROG 1. 55 NOx 0.80 CO 6.79 I PMIO C.33 '. PMIO 0.33 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I UNMITIGATED EMISSIONS TOTAL EMISSIONS (lbs/day) ROG 1. 55 NOx 0.80 CO 6.79 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I WWTP and Water Facilities Regional Operational Emissions (Ibs/day) Employees Haul Trucks Total CO 6.79 5.77 1256 ROG 1.55 0.44 1.99 NOx 0.8 0.8 1.6 PM10 0.33 0.21 0.54 2/13/012:12 PM regional 'MNTP emissions2Sheet1 " '. . URBEMIS 7G: Version 3.1 File Name: Project Name: Project Location: CITEMPI.URB Citrus Plaza - employees WWTP & WT South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) DETAILED REPORT (Pounds/Day - Summer) OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 1995 EMFAC Version: EMFAC7G (10/96) Temperature (F): 85 Season: Summer Summary of Land Uses: Unit Type General light industry Vehicle Assumptions: Fleet Mix: Vehicle Type Light Duty Autos Light Duty Trucks Medium Duty Trucks Lite-Heavy Duty Trucks Med.-Heavy Duty Trucks Heavy-Heavy Trucks Urban Buses Motorcycles Trip Rate 1.00 trips / 1000 sq. ft. Percent Type 70.00 30.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non-Catalyst 1.16 0.13 1.44 19.56 19.56 100.00 Size Total Trips 28.00 28.00 Catalyst 98.58 99.54 98.56 40.00 40.00 % all fuels Diesel 0.26 0.33 40.44 40.44 100.00 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Quantitative Analysis of Infrastructure Plan Operation of Wastewater and Water Treatment Facilities Regional Emissions I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Conl~on Emptov--ln,. ,-,... NurnDerOf Tnpsper "'.I'lICle TnpOlsl4lnce A~ Vel'llde RlOetSl'ltp 10tal1np5 " '" '" , '" Emiuion Factor EmlulOl'llaaor from Ihe CARe errllRlotI fadOl' model EMFAC7F ErnlssiClr'lsllDlJoaV} Togl 232 PM 512611999 1995 ConItlUCllOn WOIUB Constnlctlon EmployH Tnp!. Employees Numtlerof Tnpsper \ffI1'IoCle TnpOlstanca A\ffIrageVen.cleR,oel'$hop Total Tnps '" 2;4 "9 , '" Emission Flctor EmlSSlOl'l factor fTtIm 1M CARB emiSSIOn factor m!)del EMFAC7F Em,nionsllbtJclly) o No> ,,, SOlk "I Total 5:2511999233 PM ,,, Constructlon WOrkers 1997 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Construction Haul Truck Emission Factors Phase I CO ROG NOx SOx PM Emission Factor 111 (gram/mile) 818 1.99 11.74 0.33 2.26 Phase II CO ROG NOx SOx PM 803 1.9 11.02 0.32 1.86 1'1 Assuming an average speed of 34 mph for CO and NOx, 39 mph for ROG and 30 mph for particulates VMT (miles/day) 2500 Emissions Phase I CO ROG NOx SOx PM Emissions (Ibs/day) 45.04 10.96 64.65 1.82 1244 Phase II CO ROG NOx SOx PM 44.22 10.46 60.68 1.76 10.24 5/25/1999 11 :43 AM Citrus Plaza Emfac and Urbemis Revised Haul Trucks Phase II CO ROG NOx SOx PM 17.66 0.79 0.89 0.06 0.01 I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I Construction workers Comparison I Conslnuction Worker Trave/ Motor Vehicle Emission Factons Phase I CO ROG NOx SOx PM Emission Factor [11.[2/ (gramlmi/e) 21.35 1.14 1.00 0.06 0.01 [11 Assuming 80% cold start and 20% hot start [21 Assuming an average speed of 34 mph for CO and NOx, 39 mph for ROG and 30 mph for particulates Emissions Phase I CO ROG NOx SOx PM Emissions (Ibs/day) 147.08 7.79 7.51 0.41 0.07 Phase II CO ROG NOx SOx PM 326 04 16.17 16.43 1.01 0.18 5/26/1999 2:33 PM - II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Quantitative Analysis of Infrastructure Plan Construction of Wastewater and Water Treatment Facilities - 1 1 I I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Scrapers Removing Topsoil Emission Factor (Iblton) Scraper depth cut (ft) Volume removed (ft3) Soil density (lbslft3) Soil moved (tons) Control efficiency Duration of Site Preparation (months) Days worked per month Total uncontrolled emissions (Ibs PM1 0) Controlled scraper PM10 emissions (Ibs/day) Hours of operation per day Controlled scraper PM10 emissions (Ibs/hr) Travel on Unpaved Roads Panide size mulitplier (dimensionless) Silt content of road surface ('fa) Mean vehicle speed (mph) Average grader width (feet) Mean vehicle weight (tons) Mean number of wheels No. of days of precip. Emission Factor (Ib PM10NMT) Haul trucK VMT Total truck transport PM10 Control Efficiency Duration of Site Preparation (monthS) Days worked per month Transport Emissions Total (PM10/day) Hours of operation per day Transport emissions total (PM10Ihr) Total Site Prep Emissions (Ibslday) Total Site Prep Emissions (Ibs/hr) Total Site Prep EmiSSions (Ibslhrlsqft) Total Site Prep Emissions (g/seam2) 5125/2000 1001 AM 0.058 3 30.000.00 100 1.500.00 50% 0.05 26 67.00 33.46 10 3.35 0.36 AP42, section 13.2.2-3 8 AP42. Table 13.2.2-1 10 11.5 Caterpillar Performance Handbook. Edition 24 for 631E CAT 48 Caterpillar Performance Handbook, Edition 24 for 631E CAT 4 CECA Air Quality Handbook (1993. AQMD) 40 2.927 0.16 0.48 80% AP42, section 13.2.2-10 0.05 26 0.07 10 0.007 34.36 3.44 3.436E-04 4.664E-04 CtlrUS Plaza Site Prep EmlS$lOl'llo4 Sile Prep 1-. JAK.;O ~ 01 (WE:>) 15,27 ....:.,.:::',:'/).'11 DRAFT 12122100 I' F -- ./ I I I I I I I~ I 1 I I I. I I I I ~.~G:: : ~ Bernardino to provide water to IVDA Areas "A" and "f' would be added to the fees andlor charges imposed by the City for supplying water to IVDA Areas "A" and "I." The approval requirements are understood and acknowledged in Appendix G of the DEIR. lI-lJ Comment noted, See response to comment 11-10. JI-12 Comment noted. 11-13 Comment noted. See responses to comments I I-I through 11-12 above. C:IWINDOWSlTEMPlReoponse, 10 S8 Wiler Coo_II.doc 12I22lOO 2:11 PM _'A~ ::) :WE:n : S 26 :=A:;::: ~ - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT BOARD OF WATIlR COMMlSSlONI!RS B. WARIUlN COCKB ........ "'_1......1 . JUDI1'H W. BAlTBY 1ONlCAU.ICOTT NA2TIN A. MATICfl NORIN!! L IooIILL!!Il III!IlNARD C. KERSEY CloIwaI _.... STACEY R. AU>SrADT Dcpary GeDml _.... W. WlLLlAMBRYDBN. P.E DitoaIr. W_ Udllty JOHN A. PERRY. PE DtrocICl': Water Reclanoon JOHN P. MURPHY DIn:ctor. A~doII. FlDo= ION IC. TURHIPSI!IiD Safely Pqnm Mana,... December 22, 2000 Terri Rahhal Planning Division San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue Third Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182 Reference: Additional Comments of City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Regarding Draft Subsequent EIR Re IVDA Services And Other Items Dear Ms. Rahhal: Since our letter of October 12, 2000, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department ("SBMWDn) has met with the applicant to review, and have conducted a review, of the County's responses to our comments to the Draft EIR referenced above. A copy of these responses is attached to this letter for ease of reference. Based on this additional review, the SBMWD fully concurs with, and has no reservation regarding, the Countr,'S responses to our prior comments set forth in our October 12 h letter. Based on these responses, the SBMWD believes that it has the ability to provide to IVDA Areas "An and "I" sewer (as contemplated in Wastewater System Option 1) and water supply services (as contemplated in Water Supply Options Sa, 6a, 5b and 6b) without any significant, unmitigable, adverse impacts to the environment or to our facilities or long term planning efforts from any of the options requiring involvement by the SSMWD, provided that the fOllowing three conditions are met: (1) users of these SerVices agree (through a County special district) to provide their appropriate fair share of the capital and operating costs of providing these services through the use of these faCilities; (2) approval is granted by the Board of Water Commissioners; and (3) approval is granted by the Mayor and City 300 North "0" Sueel, San Benw-dillO. California 92418 P.O. Box 710. 92402 Phone: (909) 384-SI41 FACSIMDJl NUMIII!IlS: ~ (909) 314-5215 IqberiIJl: C9(9) 314-5532" ..~. Smlce, (lI(l9) 314-721 J CarponIe YII1II: (lI(l9) 314-521iO WafCt' 1locIama1loo PIaDc: C9(9) 314-5m ':A'K :C . O! (WED) ~S 26 -.-::":;;l~;'" '~-"iPj'~'o .. 'Ceo::.';' erri Rahhal . , December 22, 2000 Page 2 of 3 .-.....~.:. / I , -----------~-------------- Council of San Bernardino. Our prior comments were principally based on the concern that the SBMWD would be asked to provide these water and sewer services without such an appropriate "fair ;share" agreement. . With respect to Options 3A, Band C in the Draft ErR, which involv.e provision of water supply services by the rVDA to IVDA Areas "A" and "I", the SBMWD believes that, subject to the attached responses to comments, and (i) the terms, conditions and the termination rights of the Air Force contained in the existing License Agreement from the Air Force to the rVDA, and (ii) the terms and conditions of disposition to be contained in the final water system transfer document from the Air Force to the IVDA, the rVDA has the ability to provide these water supply services without any significant, unmitigable, adverse impacts to the environment or to IVDA's facilities or long term planning efforts from any of the options requiring involvement by the IVDA, provided that the following two conditions are met: (1) an appropriate "fair share" agreement is reached between users of these services and the IVDA, and (2) the approval of the IVDA Board is obtained. Regarding disposal in the SARI line operated by the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority ("SAWPA") as contemplated under Options 2A and 2B of the Draft EIR, the SBMWD aCknowledges that SAWPA may approve the use of the SARI line as described in Options 2A and 28, if the SAWPA decided to take action to approve this use and the appropriate hfair share" agreement with the SBMWD (for transmission services) were to exist. Concerning Water Supply Option 1 involving -"Local Wells," we have been provided with additional information involVing these proposed groundwater wells and their expected construction and placement by the technical consultant that performed the detailed water SUPply analysis for the Draft EIR, namely PSomas. This additional information has addressed our Concerns on this matter. We are satisfied that these wells have been adequately planned with respect to the VOC and perChlorate plumes, as well as the City of Redlands' wastewater percolation ponds. Based on this infOrmation, we also believe that the possible future wastewater recycling plan of the City of Redlands, which may reduce recharge from the percolation ponds, will not affect the production ability of these wells. After reviewing the work done by Psomas, we believe the appropriate investigation has already been done to confirm that these Local Wells will not be subject to high nitrate levels. ~ter reviewing with psomas the cost estimates done by Psomas, we are comfortable that the County and the applicant understand that there may be additional costs for DOHS testing that may be necessary in connection with the implementation of Water Supply Option 1. - I I I I I I I I I! I I I I I I I I I I I 01,'12:2001 17:29 FAX 909 384 0203 I' f! I Ii I, I; )UNTY FIRE DEPARtMENT MECB [4] 002 CDum OF SAN BBlIlARDINO '-ICE DF THE FIRE MARS/lAI. I'" Ilonn Arrownead A.enue, Second Floor'. San Bernardino. CA 92415-0153 , 387-3200 . fax (909) 387-4323 I I I I I I II II I I I I I I PETER R. /011 LLS Fire Chief County Fire Wardlln January 12, 2001 I COUNTY OF SAN B~ARDlNO LAND USE SERVICES DEPARTMENT ADVANCE p~ DIVISION 385 NORTHARRO~ AVENUE SAN BERN'ARDINO'ifA 92415.0182 SUBJECT: DRAFil SUBSEQUENT Em FOR THE IVDA AREA PLAN ~MENTS. FACILITIES PLA.~S AND REVISIONS TO THE CITR1 PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PROJEcr This letter is in supple~t to, and modification of, our previous correspondence dated October 12. 2000. Subjequent to that letter. our Department has had an opportUnity to obtain further information from the Applicant and to further review resources of our Department available to serve the PtojecL Accordingly, the issues raised in our October 12, 2000 letter have , resolution available as! follows, with each paragraph below corresponding to the paragraph set I forth in our October l;r 2000 letter: 1. Applicant is aware that fire protection responSibility now rests with the San Bernardino County Fire ~t and will modify the EIR accordingly. 2. Upon funher re~w, we have determined that staffing levels and patterns can be resolved by serving the PJ19poscd project as follows: S!lIl Bernardino County Fire Deparunent Srations 9 and 2f.: can provide initial response to the project. Service agreements and/or con!I3Cts are aV#ahle with adjacent City jurisdictions for the appropriate additional flre and medical ~gency response. We have concluded that these agreements or conrracts will provide ~te staffing and equipment to serve the project area with sarisfactory fire protection se:tVir within required response times. 3, With re~ard to arrangements for automatic aid with Redlands, as stated above the automatic aid and or mutuaj aid ~ements or contracts are available with adjacent jurisdictions as described in P~aph 2 above, 4. The Department has reviewed projected revenues associated with the project upon construction of fbase 1 of the Ciuus Plaza Project, as well as revenues that will result from the eventual b~d om of the Donut Hole. Those revenues. along with the fee referenced in the ErR, are ade~Wlte to support fIre emergency response service to the Project. This analysis assumef thar future development within the Donut Hole will pay, through development ~eements. appropriate, proportionate, fees for additional costs incUIred in serving this area. ' j I w ,',,' '., :<',".:O~'_nl - -' ."'"; '...""1 ~; ~:- I', ~~, iJ ,:.: I '1 ~.: 1 !""I'. .{ :"I4'I.'~ ':'f'I.':"'~ ','., Z.U;':'Irh'+~",H' '. i=ii..; Or.::;ljn ::;..:\/I~~;. !."....,~~.~~":r~;f, .... 7),ird tJ~;i;I~1 Foal"(lUI:1';-.::r " ::~ :: ~-;;'":-. '-,:." ~:;':c:r:l~ ':',o..-Jt~; U'n:~'J ~:n"-::::; " ~!,"\.rD ";':':_!~r': I Z:-O/::C":. :L~r# - " J~;.'. ; ': t, I (!";', x::!': !~:.i C:>!iS Z6t7L8t ~::9! ::cz.~r'~~~ 01/12,'200117:29 FAX 909 384 0203 !lEeR ~003 II , CITRUS PLAZA REGIONAL MALL PROJECT Janllary lZ, 2001 : i Page 2 PSB;llm cc: Majesties John Mirau 'I , ZCO/ZCC ',; :"6f# Ii ':.:~:: :::::~ c~s:s Z~rjLgt ~1:9: :~cz.z~.~~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .' f , - ' , 233 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 130 Santa Monica, CA 90401 TEL 310.451.4488 FAX 310.451.5279 EMAIL info@pcrnet.com ~ One Venture Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92618 TEe 949.753.7001 , FAX 949.753,7002 EMAIL info@pcrnet.com I I I I I I I "I "I I I I I I' I I I I ] . VAN BLARCOM LEIBOLD MCCLENDON & MANN JOHN G. McCLENDON john@cEQA.com RECEIVf:Q-Cm ClEHK 23422 MILL CREEK DRIvE, SUITE 105 . LA~~, CALIFORNIA 92653 'OZ TOOli~57l:'6J~'FAX 949.457.6305 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION October 24, 2002 VIA UNITED STA TES MAIL Ms. Rachel G. Clark, C.M.C. ~ City Clerk % OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK City of San Bernardino P.O. Box 1318 San Bernardino, California 92402 Re: Notice of Commencement of Legal Action Dear Ms. Clark: Please take notice that The Redlands Association intends to commence an action against the City of San Bernardino and its Municipal Water Department to set aside the City's decision to approve provide sewer service to County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone EV -I with regard to an unincorporated area surrounded by the City of Redlands and commonly called "the Donut Hole." The litigation will allege (among other things) the City's violation ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines for Implementing CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000, et seq.). This written notice is provided pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21167.5. Very truly yours, VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.c. By. John G. McClendon _T"' fYJ......d-- ~~--. (/, . . .~ ~~k~ ~ . /3. ~I c.17at4 . Q>3::h;'~ 3::~;;;Z > .... 0 tl:l Z '" .... .. z z " > g 8 z ;:: ol Ii' p 0 Ii' .. .. (J .. .,. .. 0 ~:-OO~3:: ::l 9~ 0'" - tl:ltl:lo"Tj::<;l ~o-:+-:Q~ - =s>!rJi""'=r ~ ~ \..1 (ll - ....1--" m_ O."" - S. - tl:l 0 Cl 00 <> "Tj " - .0 3~(") (") ~ l'O - ~ ~m~ - ::l . 0' 0 Q (") 3 ""'I" - ~" -< 3:: - '" " - '" (")0 IV 1'1 .1>0 tt:I - f3 ~g. - (") " - ~ - - ....to> ,. '-' o ... C to> Z to> ,. :::: ;r:: ~ ~ 1;; n - '" n::: ,. " !: ~ 0 o '" '" -< z '" ;; ~ '" C to> :; ~ '" '-' ~ o '" i= II> "'C o en ~ III rt1 """lI, ~c :;:< C<>~ ;:;;:; ..................... ,