The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-Development Services OR'l"lraql h.:'; II u4 .. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dept: Development Services Subject: Adopt Negative Declaration for Street Improvements of Art Townsend Drive and Otto Gericke Drive at the San Bernardino International Airport From: William Woolard, Interim Director Date: January 8, 2001 File No. 7.30-14 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: MCC Date: January 22, 2001 None Recommended Motion: That the Mayor and Common Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Street Improvements of Art Townsend Drive and Otto Gericke Drive at the San Bernardino International Ai~rt. rfl/~/~d William Woolard Contact person: T. Jarb Thaioeir. Senior Civil Engineer Phone: 384-5127 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Initial Study Ward: I FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/ A Source: (Acct. No.) Acct. Description: Finance: Council Notes Agenda Item No. I J I /J.~~{)/)J CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT Subiect: Adopt the Negative Declaration for Street Improvements of Art Townsend Drive and Otto Gericke Drive at the San Bernardino International Airport. Backl!round: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines dictate that the construction of a new roadway, or substantial improvements to an existing street such as lane widening, etc., require an environmental approval by the authorizing agency, An Initial Study was prepared for the project and reviewed by the Development/Environmental Review Committee (D/ERC) on December 21, 2000. Based on its review of the Initial Study, the D/ERC recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be prepared. The Initial Study was made available for public review from December 28, 2000 to January 16, 2001. No comments were received from members of the public or responsible agencies. At its meeting of January 18,2001, the D/ERC recommended that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Financial Imoact: There is no financial impact. Recommendation: That the Mayor and Common Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Street Improvements of Art Townsend Drive and Ono Gericke Drive at the San Bernardino International Airport. Exhibits: A B Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program EXHmIT "A" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO INITIAL STUDY FOR Public Works Street Improvement Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: The work to be done consists of widening existing Art Townsend Drive from 2 lanes to 4 lanes between Del Rosa Avenue and Otto Gericke Drive, and construction of Otto Gericke Drive from Art Townsend Drive to 3n1 Street, and construction of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights. The project is located south of 3'd Street and west of Del Rosa A venue at the San Bernardino International Airport. DATE: December 18,2000 PREPARED BY City of San Bernardino Development Services Department City of San Bernardino Development Service Department 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 (909) 384-5057 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the preparation of an Initial Study when a proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a governmental agency and is not exempt from CEQA. The purpose of the Initial Study is to determine whether or not a proposal, not exempt from CEQA, qualifies for a Negative Declaration or whether or not an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared. 1. Project Title: Street Improvements of Art Townsend Drive and Otto Gericke Drive at the San Bernardino International Airport 2. Lead Agency Name: Address: City of San Bernardino 300 North "0" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 3. Contact Person: Phone Number: T. Jarb Thaipejr, P,E. (909) 384-5127 4. Project Location (Address/Nearest cross-streets): Art Townsend Drive, Otto Gericke Drive West of Del Rosa Avenue and Soouth of3'd Street 5. Project Sponsor: Address: Inland Valley Development Agency 294 South Leland Norton Way, Suite #1, San Bernardino, CA 92408 6. General Plan Designation: 7. Description of Project (Describe the whole action involved, including, but not limited to, later phases of tbe project and any secondary, support, or off-site feature necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary): The work to be done consists, in general, of widening existing Art Townsend Drive from 2 lanes to 4 lanes, construct curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights between Del Rosa Avenue and Art Townsend Drive. Construct Otto Gericke Drive from Townsend Drive to 3,d Street. 8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: LOCATION North South East West LAND USE DESIGNATION Public Facility Vacant Street Commercial General LAND USE Park Recreation Bldg. Vacant Street Commercial 9. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, finance approval, or participation agreement): IS I CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. OLand Use and Planning o Population and Housing [gJ Earth Resources o Water [gJ Air Quality DTransportationJCirculation [gJ Biological Resources o Energy and Mineral Resources o Hazards o Noise o Mandatory Findings of Significance o Public Services o Utilities and Service Systems o Aesthetics o Cultural Resources o Recreation Determination. On the basis of this Initial Study, the City of San Bernardino, Environmental Review Committee finds: That the proposed project COULD NOT have significant effect on the environment, 0 and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the ~ environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, That the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 0 environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project ----r ~J.~ Signature (2.-(('6(0-0 Date -r. .JA.fI..~ '\i4A\l"cj(\, Printed Name IS 2 ! I ! ! i ~ . . il. ~, .~ 15 -. ~. Z 4 . ~ Iiiiiiiiiiil': ~ ~ ~ .~___~~!I~ -I ~ :w.,<llQ;" ! ..~~-r . i-I "f Oi b Zii: ___'~-~-!i ~i ~ ('Y."Xr..... c8 u . :.: z~ ii: ~ ~ a:! ~ ; Il.. III 0'" . .~ :: ~ ~ zf 9 ~ ~ cJ. !i! - ... .~ t:: I- ...i ~ ~ o "" >- i 5 on '"" u~ I '.< I ~ I I, '; i I I d .. ij ---..-'- 3^ HIO VSOH '130 ~- ~ll_ ~ooF-= __.,...,.oo'H\_ _',-l .. ~,.!f~_--I-- , --- ....,-. " " . -_-:- *' I, II Ii ..f ,lll I j g ."i ,i ;1 .1' Ii I' '.1' ~. -I.. "I I , it/' · '0'...1: VI I I I I I I I I ~.. ! ' .W > I , i., ,[ I' I' l'r f I I 1 I ...., ',I: r . iJ::,: ~ ,--,..1, ~ l :< II, : , ,'i ~ ' II 'I: ; I!:'., I" II: , ""I:;" i', ;! ! .x. " i . I . i I ..1 i"' .,1 IIU II'I ,II 11'1 ,I, III hll 1 Jilll!1 III'ili " 1" 1 I .c z CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Imnact Incornorated Impact No Imnact L LAND USE AND PLANNING. Will the proposal result in: a) A conflict with the land use as D D D ~ designated based on the review ofthe General Plan Land Use Plan/Zoning Districts Map? b) Development within an Airport District D D D ~ as identified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Land Use Zoning District Map? c) Development within Foothill Fire D 0 0 ~ Zones A & B, or C as identified on the Land Use Districts Zoning Map? d) Other? 0 0 0 ~ II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Will the proposal: a) Remove existing housing (including 0 0 0 ~ affordable housing) as verified by a site survey/evaluation? b) Create a significant demand for 0 0 0 ~ additional housing based on the proposed use and evaluation of project size? c) Induce substantial growth in an area 0 D 0 ~ either directly or indirectly (e,g., through projects in an undeveloped area or an extension of major infrastructure)? d) Other? 0 0 0 ~ IS 3 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant !moact Incoroorated Imoact No Imoact IlL EARTH RESOURCES: Will the proposal result in: a) Earth movement (cut and/or fill) on 0 0 0 [8J slopes of 15% or more based on information contained in the Preliminary Project Description Form No.D? b) Development and/or grading on a slope 0 0 0 [8J greater than 15% natural grade based on review of General Plan HMOD map? c) Erosion, dust or unstable soil 0 0 [8J 0 conditions from excavation, grading or fill? d) Development within the Alquist-Priolo 0 0 0 [8J Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0, Geologic & Seismic, Figure 47, of the City's General Plan? e) Modification of any unique geologic or 0 0 0 [8J physical feature based on field review? f) Development within areas defined as 0 0 0 [8J having high potential for water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0, Geologic & Seismic, Figure 53, of the City's General Plan? g) Modification of a channel, creek or 0 0 0 [8J river based on a field review or review of USGS Topographic Map ? h) Development within an area subject to 0 0 0 [8J landslides, mudslides, subsidence or other similar hazards as identified in Section 12,0, Geologic & Seismic, Figures 48,51,52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? IS 4 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incornorated Imnact No Impact i) Development within an area subject to D D D [8J liquefaction as shown in Section 12.0, Geologic & Seismic, Figure 48, of the City's General Plan? j) Other? D D D [8J IV, WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage D D D [8J patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff due to impermeable surfaces that cannot be mitigated by Public Works Standard Requirements to contain and convey runoff to approved storm drain based on review of the proposed site plan? b) Significant alteration in the course or D D D [8J flow of flood waters based on consultation with Public Works staff? c) Discharge into surface waters or any D D D [8J alteration of surface water quality based on requirements of Public Works to have runoff directed to approved storm drains? d) Changes in the quantity or quality of D D D [8J ground water? e) Exposure of people or property to D D D [8J flood hazards as identified in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number , and Section 16,0, Flooding, Figure 62, of the City's General Plan? f) Other? D D D [8J IS 5 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY PotentialJy PotentialJy Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Imoact Incomorated Imoact No Imoact V. AIR QUALITY. Will the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or D D [8J D contribute to an existing or proj ected air quality violation based on the thresholds in the SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook"? b) Expose sensitive receptors to D D D [8J pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or D D D [8J temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors based on D D D [8J information contained in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form? VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION, D D D [8J Could the proposal result in: a) A significant increase in traffic D D D [8J volumes on the roadways or intersections or an increase that is significantly greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? b) Alteration of present patterns of D D D [8J circulation? c) A disjointed pattern of roadway D D D [8J improvements? d) Impact to rail or air traffic? D D D [8J e) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or D D D [8J off-site based on the requirements in Chapter 19.24 of the Development Code? f) Increased safety hazards to vehicles, D D D [8J bicyclists or pedestrians? IS 6 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Imnact Incomorated Impact No Imnact g) Conflict with adopted policies 0 0 0 [8J supporting alternative transportation? h) Inadequate emergency access or access 0 0 0 [8J to nearby uses? i) Other? 0 0 0 [8J VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Could the proposal result in: a) Development within the Biological 0 0 0 [8J Resources Management Overlay, as identified in Section 10,0, Natural Resources, Figure 41, of the City's General Plan? b) Impacts to endangered, threatened or 0 0 0 [8J rate species or their habitat (including, but not limited to, plants, mammals, fish. insects and birds)? c) Impacts to the wildlife disbursal or 0 0 0 [8J migration corridors? d) Impacts to wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, 0 0 0 [8J riparian and vernal pool)? e) Removal of viable, mature trees based 0 0 [8J 0 on information contained in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form and verified by site survey/evaluation (6" or greater trunk diameter at 4' above the ground)? 1) Other? 0 0 0 [8J VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES, Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy 0 0 0 [8J conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a 0 0 0 [8J wasteful and inefficient manner? IS 7 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant lfioact Incomorated lfioact No lfioact c) Result in the loss of availability of a D D D r:8J known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? IX, HAZARDS. Will the proposal: a) Use, store, transport or dispose of D D D r:8J hazardous or toxic materials based on information contained in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form No. G(l) and G(2) (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b) Involve the release of hazardous D D D r:8J substances? c) Expose people to the potential D D D r:8J health/safety hazards? d) Other? D D D r:8J X, NOISE. Could the proposal result in: a) Development of housing, health care D D D r:8J facilities, schools, libraries, religious facilities or other noise sensitive uses in areas where existing or future noise levels exceed an Ldn of 65 dB (A) exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior as identified in Section 14.0, Noise, Figures 57 and 58, of the City's General Plan? IS 8 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Imoact Incomorated Imoact No Imoact b) Development of new or expansion of D D D l:8J existing industrial, commercial or other uses which generate noise levels above an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior that may affect areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities or other sensitive uses based On information in the Preliminary Environmental Description Form No, G(l) and evaluation of surrounding land uses No, C, and verified by site survey/evaluation? c) Other? D D D l:8J XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? D D D l:8J b) Medical aid? D D D l:8J c) Police protection? D D D l:8J d) Schools? D D D l:8J e) Parks or other recreational facilities? D D D l:8J f) Solid waste disposal? D D D l:8J g) Maintenance of public facilities, D D D l:8J including roads? h) Other governmental services? D D D l:8J XII. UTILITIES. Will the proposal, based On D D D D the responses of the responsible Agencies, Departments, or Utility Company, impact the following beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service or require the construction of new facilities? a) Natural gas? D D D l:8J IS 9 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact b) Electricity? D D D [8J c) Communications systems? D D D [8J d) Water distribution? D D D [8J e) Water treatment or sewer? D D D [8J f) Storm water drainage? D D D [8J g) Result in a disjointed partern of utility D D D [8J extensions based on review of existing patterns and proposed extensions? h) Other? D D D [8J XIII, AESTHETICS, a) Could the proposal result in the D D D [8J obstruction of any significant or important scenic view based on evaluation of the view shed verified by site survey/evaluation? b) Will the visual impact of the project D D D [8J create aesthetically offensive changes in the existing visual setting based on a site survey and evaluation of the proposed elevations? c) Create significant light or glare that D D D [8J could impact sensitive receptors? d) Other? D D D [8J XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES, Could the proposal result in: a) Development in a sensitive D D D [8J archaeological area as identified in Section 3.0, Historical. Figure 8, of the City's General Plan? IS 10 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incoroorated Imnact No Imnact b) The alteration or destruction of a D D D ~ prehistoric or historic archaeological site by development within an archaeological sensitive area as identified in Section 3,0, Historical, Figure 8, of the City's General Plan? c) Alteration or destruction of a historical D D D ~ site, structure or object as listed in the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey? d) Other? D D D ~ XV, RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood D D D ~ or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational D D D ~ opportunities? XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to D D D ~ degrade the quality ofthe environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to D D D ~ achieve short-term, to the disadvantage oflong-term, environmental goals? IS II CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Imoact Incorporated Imoact No Imoact c) Does the proj ect have impacts that are D D D ~ individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Does the project have environmental D D D ~ effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? IS 12 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY REFERENCES. The following references cited in the Initial Study are on file in the Development Services Department. I. City of San Bernardino General Plan. 2, City of San Bernardino General Plan Land Use Plan/Zoning Districts Map. 3, City of San Bernardino Development Code (Title 19 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code). 4. City of San Bernardino Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey. 5, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Map. 6, South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 7. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps, 8, Public Works Standard Requirements-water. 9. Public Works Standard Requirements-grading. DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIED CHECKLIST RESPONSES. (The following responses are numbered to correspond to checklist in the previous section,) III. EARTH RESOURCES c) Minor excavation necessary for street extension will be mitigated by Standard Public Works Grading Requirements to minimize dust pollution. V. AIR QUALITY a) Air quality is affected by both the rate and location of pollutant emiSSIOns and by meteorological conditions which influence movement and dispersal of pollutants, Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local topography, provide the link between air pollutants and air quality, The project is in the northeast portion on the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Orange County, and portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The SCAB is an area of 6,600 square miles bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto monntains to the north and east. The mountains which reach heights of up to 11,000 feet above sea level (msl), act to prevent airflow and thus the transport of air pollutants out of the basin. The San Bernardino Valley portion of the SCAB is designated non-attainment for nitrogen dioxide, sulfates, particular matter, and ozone. (a) SCAQMD adopted the Final 1994 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) revision in September 1994 and a draft 1997 update in August 1996 to establish a comprehensive control program to achieve program to achieve compliance with federal and state air quality standards for healthful air quality in the SCAB. The Final AQMP was adopted IS 13 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INITIAL STUDY by the AQMD Board in November 1996 and has since been approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARE). The AQMP policies serve as the framework for all control (permitting) efforts in the SCAB as enforced by the SCAQMD for stationary sources. CARE regulates mobile resources. Fugitive dust generated by construction activities during development and operation of the project would add to ambient PMIO levels but will not exceed SCAQMD threshold of 150lbs/day with mitigation. Implementation ofthe following mitigation measure will ensure impacts from fugitive dust generation during construction and operational activities will be less that significant and will aid the City in meeting General Plan Policies 10.1 0.2 and 10.10.4: Policy 10.10.2 Require dust abatement measures during grading and construction operations. Policy 10,10.4 Cooperate with the South Coast Air Quality Management District and incorporate pertinent local implementation provisions of the Air Quality Management Plan. Implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403 and standard construction practices during all operations capable of generating fugitive dust, will include but not be limited to the use of best available control measures, including: 1) Water active grading areas and staging areas at least twice daily as needed; 2) Ensure spray bars on all processing equipment are in good operating condition; 3) Apply water or soil stabilizers to form crust in inactive construction areas and unpaved work areas; 4) Suspend grading activities when wind gusts exceed 25 mph; 5) Sweep public paved roads ifvisible soil material is carried offsite; 6) Enforce on site speed limits on paved surfaces to 15 mph; and 7) Discontiuue constructiou activities during Stage 1 smog episodes. VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES e) A Report on Existing Trees within the Limits of Construction, dated December 15, 2000, by Mr. Matthew Tsugawa, Registered Landscape Architect with the firm of Hernandez, Kroone & Associates recommend that none of the existing trees be saved or transplanted. This report will be reviewed and verified by City's Arborist. These are to total of29 trees that will be removed. These trees, of which many are volunteers, are mostly growing in deteriorated asphalt concrete pavement areas, Those that are still living have not been maintained or irrigated for several years and display surface rooting, asymmetrical branching structure and unbalanced canopies. None are considered good candidates for transplanting. As part of the second phase to the Street Improvement project, a total of 106 - 24" box trees, 1097 - 5 gallon shrubs and 1019 - I gallon shrubs will be planted in the parkway. IS 14 EXHIBIT "B" STREET IMPROVEMENTS OF ART TOWNSEND DRIVE AND OTTO GERICKE DRIVE AT THE SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT MITIGATION MONITORINGIREPORTING PROGRAM This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared to implement the mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study for the Street Improvements of Art Townsend Drive and Otto Gericke Drive at the San Bernardino International Airport. This program has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and City of San Bernardino CEQA Guidelines. CEQA Section 21081.6 requires adoption of a monitoring and/or reporting program for those measures or conditions imposed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment. The law states that the monitoring or reporting program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contains the following elements: 1. The mitigation measures are recorded with the action and procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The program lists the mitigation measures contained within the Initial Study. 2. A procedure for compliance and verification has been outlined for each mandatory mitigation action, This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported, 3. The program contains a separate Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Record for each action. On each of these record sheets, the pertinent actions and dates will be logged, and copies of permits, correspondence or other data relevant will be retained by the City of San Bernardino. 4, The program is designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. If changes are made, new monitoring compliance procedures and records will be developed and incorporated into the program, The individual measures and accompanying monitoring/reporting actions follow. They are numbered in the same sequence as presented in the Initial Study. MITIGATION MEASURES AIR QUALITY Implementation ofSCAQMD Rule 403 and standard construction practices during all operations capable of generating fugitive dust, will include but not be limited to the use of best available control measures, including: I) Water active grading areas and staging areas at least twice daily as needed; 2) Ensure spray bars on all processing equipment are in good operating condition; 3) Apply water or soil stabilizers to form crust in inactive construction areas and unpaved work areas; 4) Suspend grading activities when wind gusts exceed 25 mph; 5) Sweep public paved roads if visible soil material is carried off site; 6) Enforce on site speed limits on paved surfaces to 15 mph; and 7) Discontinue construction activities during Stage I smog episodes. IMPLEMENT A TION AND VERIFICATION Public Works staff shall provide the project contractor with a copy of the air quality mitigation measure. COMPLIANCE RECORD When Required: The verification shall be completed prior to conunencement of street improvement activities. WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY: DATE PREPARED: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES As part of the second phase to the Street Improvement project, a total of 106 - 24' box trees, 1097 - 5 gallon shrubs and 1019 - 1 gallon shrubs will be planted in the parkway. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Public Works staff shall incorporate these items in the plans for the second phase to the Street Improvement project. COMPLIANCE RECORD When Required: Prior to going to bid for construction. WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY: DATE PREPARED: