HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.E- Community Development
7.E
DOC ID: 1483
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Public Hearing
From: Margo Wheeler
MICC Meeting Date: 01/09/2012
Prepared by: Aron Liang, (909) 384-5057
Dept: Community Development
Ward(s): I
Subject:
A Proposal to ModifY CUP 97-01, Approved by the Planning Commission on May 20, 1997, to
Permit Development of a 20-Screen Theater Complex and 20,000 Sq. Ft. of Associated Retail
and Restaurant Uses at the Northwest Comer of 4Th and "E" Streets, in the CR-2, Commercial
Regional Land Use District. the Proposed Modification Would Provide for 6 Auditoriums in the
Existing 20-Auditorium Structure to be Re-Purposed to Provide 7,200 Sq. Ft. of Restaurant and
Retail Space and 3,600 Sq. Ft. of Additional Live Entertainment Area and Support Space for the
California Theater (CUP M 11-03).
Financial Impact:
Increased property tax and sales tax of an undetermined amount to accrue to the City.
Mayor to open the hearing. . .
Motion: Close hearing and approve Conditional Use Permit Modification No. 11-03 based
on the Findings of Fact contained in the Staff Report and subject to the Conditions
of Approval (Attachment C) as amended.
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
None
Ownerl Applicant:
San Bernardino Economic Development Corp.
201 North "E" Street, Ste. 301
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Representative:
Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLC
650 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 600
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Backl!round:
On December 14, 2011, the Planning Commission reviewed Conditional Use Permit
Modification No. 11-03 to modifY CUP 97-01 that would provide for 6 auditoriums in the
existing 20-screen auditorium structure to be re-purposed to provide 7,200 sq. ft. of restaurant
and retail space and 3,600 sq. ft. of additional live entertainment area and support space for the
California Theater. The project site is located at 450 North "E" Street in the CR-2, Commercial
Regional-Downtown land use district. A more detailed description and analysis of the proposed
project is attached in the December 14,2011, Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit I).
The Planning Commission requested that Attachment C (Conditions of Approval) be modified to
Updated: 1/4/2012 by Linda Sutherland
1- Packet Pg. 508
7.E
1483
require that lighting in the parking lot adjacent to the west of the subject site be intensified and
that security surveillance cameras be installed 24 hours a day, seven days per week.
After a lengthy discussion, the Planning Commission made a motion to approve CUP
Modification No. 11-03 on a vote of 7 - 2 at their meeting of December 14, 2011.
Commissionecs Eble, Coute, Durr, Heasley, Machen, Mulvihill and Rawls voted in support of
the motion and Commissioners Lopez and Jimenez voted against the motion.
The minutes of the Planning Commission Hearing December 14, 2011, are attached as Exhibit 2
for reference and are available from the City Clerk's office on CD for review.
The applicant filed three permit applications: Development Code Amendment No. II-II,
Development Agreement No. 11-02 and Conditional Use Permit Modification No. 11-03 on
November 29, 2011. All three applications are related permits. Pursuant to Development Code
Section 19.31.020, processing and environmental review of Development Code Amendment No.
11-11, Development Agreement No. 11-02, and CUP Modification No. 11-03 shall be
determined by the Mayor and Common Council.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance:
Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2009111089) which fully analyzed all potential impacts
related to approval of the Redevelopment Project Area Merged Area A, which including
development of a downtown theater district and development of restaurant and retail pads in
compliance with CEQA requirements and Section 19.20.030 (6) of the Development Code was
certified by the Community Development Commission on December 20,2010. Findings of Fact
and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were adopted in accordance with guidelines for
the implementation of CEQA as part of the EIR. The proposed development project which is the
subject of the development agreement is consistent with the Redevelopment Project Area
Merged Area A and the total buildable area described in the subject agreement area had been
previously analyzed as part of the EIR (SCH #2009111089). No additional building square
footage is proposed by the development agreement. No new environmental review is required.
EIR (SCH #2009111089) Section 2.1 Authority states: 'This EIR has been prepared as a
Program EIR in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, Which states the following:
A Program EIR may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large
Project and are related either: (l) Geographically, (2) As logical parts in the chain of
contemplated actions, (3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other
general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or (4) As individual activities
carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally
similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.
The Program EIR can provide the following advantages: (l) Provide an occasion for a more
exhaustive consideration of effects and alternative than would be practical in an EIR on an
individual action, (2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a
case-by-case analysis, (3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, (4)
Allow the Lead Agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide migration
measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic programs or
Updated: 1/4/2012 by Linda Sutherland
1- Packet Pg;'5~9~ I
7.E
1483
cumulative impacts, and (5) Allow reduction in paperwork.;
Additionally, Section 15168 (c) (2) states: "if the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no
new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can
approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the Program ErR, and no
new environmental document would be required." The proposed agreement allows for the re-
tenanting of a vacant theater complex on a commercial property in need of revitalization and
rehabilitation. No new square footage will be added to the existing 80,000 sq. ft. theater building.
The environmental documents for ErR (SCH #2009111089) and Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) for CUP No. 97-01 are available online at www.sbcitv.org <htto://www.sbcitv.org>.
Additionally, the disc containing the full recording of the December 14, 2011 Planning
Commission meeting is available to be picked up at the City Clerk's office or in the Community
Development Department for review.
Recommendation:
That the hearing be closed and Conditional Use Permit Modification No. 11-03 be approved
based on the Findings of Fact contained in the Staff Report and subject to the Conditions of
Approval (Attachment C) as amended.
Attachments:
Exhibit I: 12/14/11 Planning Commission Staff Report with all attachments:
Relevant Sections of the ErR (SCH #2009111089) distributed 12/14/11 (full
content on-line; see above)
Mitigated Negative Declaration for CUP No. 97-01 distributed 12/14/11 (full
disc available; see above)
Exhibit 2: Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Hearing 12/14/11
Supporting Documents:
Exhibit 1 -12.14.11 Planning Commission Staff Report
Exhibit I - Relevant Sections EIR (PDF)
Exhibit 1 - MND CUP97-01 (PDF)
Exhibit 2 - 12.14.11 Minutes (PDF)
(PDF)
Updated: 1/4/2012 by Linda Sutherland
I-packet "9;'510.1
7.E.a
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
~
~
'"
-
III
'"
..c:
to-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
CASE:
AGENDA ITEM:
HEARING DATE:
WARD:
Conditional Use Pennit Modification No. 11-03
4
December 14, 20 II
I
~
~
o
,
t-
O>
Q.
::l
~
M
o
,
~
~
l:
o
;;
III
"
t;::
;:;
o
:s
Q.
::l
(,)
OWNER/APPLICANT:
San Bemardino Economic Development Corporation
20 I North "E" Street, Ste. 30 I
San Bemardino, C A 9240 I
REQUEST & LOCATION:
M
00
...
~
A proposal to modify CUP 97-01, approved by the Planning Commission on May 20, 1997, to
permit developmcnt of a 20-screen theater complex and 20,000 sq. ft. of associated retail and
restaurant uses at the northwcst comer of 4'h and "E" Streets, in the CR-2, Commercial Regional
land use district. The proposed modification would provide lor 6 auditoriums in the existing 20-
auditorium structure to be re-purposed to provide 7,200 sq. n. ofrestaurant and retail space and
3,600 sq. ft. of additional live entertainment area and support space for the Calilornia Theater.
Main Street Overlay District
1::
o
Q,
'"
0<:
il:
III
-
III
l:
o
'iij
III
'E
E
o
(,)
CI
.!:
l:
l:
III
c::
Assessor Parccl Number(s): 0134-121-26
OVERLAYS:
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
~
~
...
~
N
~
.
~
-
;e
..c:
><
W
o No Signilicant Effects
o Exempt from CEQA,
o Negative Declaration
v' Utilize Certified EIR SCH #2009111089
o Approval
o Conditions
o Denial
o Continuance to:
.;.;
l:
'"
E
..c:
"
III
::::
<(
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
I Packet Pg; 511 I
7.E.a
CUP Modijicafiol1 No. 11-03
Ml!('/il1?; Dare: Decemher /4. 2011
Page:!
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests approval of a modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 97~01 under
authority of Development Code Section 19.36.080 to modify a previously approved 20~screen
theater complex and 20,000 sq. ft. of associated retail and restaurant uses to provide for 6
auditoriums in the existing 20~auditorium structure to be re~purposed to provide 7,200 sq. ft. of
restaurant and retail space and 3,600 sq. ft. of additional live entertainment area and support
space for the California Theater. The project site is located at the northwest comer of 4lh and "E"
Streets, in the CR~2, Commercial Regional land use district (Attachment A).
~
~
'"
-
..
'"
.s:
f-
The proposed moditication affects the tront portion of the theater building, modifying
approximately 10,800 sq. Ii. of the existing 80,000 sq. n. footprint theater complex to
accommodate restaurant uses and support uses for the adjacent California Theater (Attachment
B). The moditication will be for tenant improvements. The building footprint of 80,000 sq n.
will remain the same.
~
o
,
...
'"
a..
::l
~
'"
'"
~
~
SETTING & SITE CHARACTERISTICS
c
o
:;:::
..
()
~
"tl
o
:::;;
a..
::l
u
The project site is currently occupied by an existing 20~screen theater complex developed in
1998.
'"
co
..
~
LOCATION
Site
North
South
East
West
LAND USE
20~screen theater complex
Retail Multi~tenant commercial
Carousal Mall and Parking
Caltrans District 8 Facility
Retail Multi~tenant commercial
GENERAL PLAN
CR~2, Commercial Regional
CR~2, Commercial Regional
CR~2, Commercial Regional
CR~2, Commercial Regional
CR~2, Commercial Regional
1::
o
Co
'"
0::
lI:
..
-
en
c
o
'in
II)
'E
E
o
u
Cl
c
';:
c
..
ii:
Additionally, the project site is located in the Redevelopment Project Area Merged Area A.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOA)
An Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2009111089) was prepared and fully analyzed all
potential impacts related to approval of the Redevelopment Project Area Merged Area A, which
included activities to create a downtown theater district and development of restaurant and retail
pads in compliance with CEQA requirements and Section 19.20.030 (6) of the Development
Code. Findings of fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations were adopted in accordance
with guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. The proposed moditication is consistent with
the Redevelopment Project Area Merged Area A. The total modification area of approximately
10,800 sq. n. described in the subject CUP Modification had been previously analyzed as part of
the EIR (SCH #20091 I 1089), no additional environmental review is required.
~
~
-.i
~
N
~
,
~
-
;e
.s:
"
l1J
. May 20, 1997 ~ The Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
No. 97~01 to construct a 20~screen theater complex and three retail structures and
Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 15038 to subdivide 5.19 acres into 7 parcels to
.;.;
c
'"
E
.s:
()
..
~
BACKGROUND
I Packet ~g.. 512 I
7.E.a
CUP Modificatio/l No. 1l-03
kfee{ing Dale: Decemher 14. 20//
Page 3
accommodate the theater, retail buildings, public plaza and parking and adopted a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Repolting Program.
. July 21,1997 - The Mayor and Common Council upheld the Planning Commission's
action.
. July 10, 2000 - Certificate of occupancy issued for the 20-screen theater complex.
. December 20, 2010 - TIle Community Development Commission certified the
Environmental Impact Report (E[R / SClI ##200911 [089 / Resolution No.
CDC/2010-66).
. September 9,2011 - Tree Removal Permit No. 11-04 was issued to remove 22 palm
trees pursuant to Development Code Section ]9.28.090.
. October 13, 20 II - Engineering Permits Ell 00662, E 1100663, E 1100664 were
issued to accommodate modifications for on-site circulation, parking, path of travel
and ADA and Title 24 requircments for the existing plaza.
. November 29, 2011-CUP Modification No. 11-03 application was submitted.
~
.,
-
..
.,
J:
f-
PROJECT ANALYSIS
~
~
o
.
....
'"
D..
:J
~
..,
o
,
~
~
c:
o
'"
..
u
~
"tl
o
:;:
D..
:J
U
The proposal involves interior modilieation of an existing 20-screen theater complex that will be
consistent and compatible with the previous movie development and development standards of
the CR-2 land use district. The proposed project will revitalize an existing theater complex to
enhance economic development for the downtown area as well as providing employment
opportunities for local residents. The hours of operation are expected to vary trom early to late
evening during the week, at noon on the weekends, and possible weekday matinee operations,
seven days per week. The following site design analysis illustrates compatibility of the project
within the theater complex follows:
..,
co
'<t
~
Parkml.( & Loadinl.(
The project site proposed through the open engineering pelmits to provide 24 on-site parking
stalls. Additionally, there are existing shared parking facilities including five City District
Parking lots available to the project site: the parking structure for Caltrans located immediately
to the east, the City parking structure immediately to the south of City Hall, and the Carousel
Mall parking structure immediately to the south. Development Code requires a minimum of
1,028 parking spaces for the proposed CUP Modification and avai[able parking stalls exceeds
that standard with 3,108 stalls. Loading/unloading stalls are available on-site in the parking lot
abutting the project site to the west. The available parking stalls will allow the subject
modilieation building to be occupied by a wide variety of retail and restaurant uses.
1::
o
Q.
.,
~
II:
..
-
Ul
c:
o
'jjj
1/1
'E
E
o
u
Cl
c:
'2
c:
..
c:
Landscaoinc
The proposed landscaping will include 17 shade trees (24" box) and 34 palm trees, shrubs, vines,
ground cover and decorative hardscape. The theater complex provides 51"/c, (68,285 sq. ft.) of on-
site landscaping and decorative hardseape, exceeding Development Code requirements pursuant
to Chapter 19.28, Landscaping Standards.
Architecture
The architectural theme of the proposed multi-tenant building will be compatible with the
existing commercial buildings in the center and will comply with architectural design guidelines
pursuant to Development Code Chapter (G) 19.06.
~
~
..;
~
N
~
,
~
-
;e
J:
><
W
..,
c:
.,
E
J:
U
..
-
<
I. Pack(!t Pg. 513 I
CUP Modificatiof1 No. II-OJ
Meeting Date: December 14. JOII
Page 4
Site Planning Standards
The project contorms to all Development Code requirements, as shown in Table A.
TABLE A - DEVELOPMENT CODE & GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
CATEGORY PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT CODE GENERAL PLAN
Pemlitted Use J 0,800 sq. Il. Multi- Pennitted subject to
tenant and associate Conditional Use Penuit Consistent
uses Modification
Height 43 feet No detined Height Limit n/a
Setbacks
- Front Oto 10 feet o feet
- Side o feet o feet nla
- Street o feet o feet
- Rear o feet o feet
Landscape 51 'Yo (68,285 sq. Il) 15 % minimum nfa
17 shade trees and 34
oalm trees
Lot Coverage 55 % 100 % maximum n/a
Parking 3,108 stalls 1,028 stalls
(CUP 97-01)
The existlllg 20-screen complex requires I, J 50 parking stalls. The proposed 14-screen complex
with 6 auditoriums to be re-purposed with 7,200 sq. n. of restaurant and retail space and 3,600
sq. ft. of additional support space for the Califomia Theater requires 1,028 parking stalls.
TABLE B-COMPARISON ANALYSIS
CUP 97-01 I EXISTING:
. 80,000 sq. Il. buildmg footprint (Theater Complex)
· 20,000 sq. ft. of associated retail (future)
. 68,285 sq. Il. of landscaping
* 3, I 08 parking stalls
* 20-screen theater auditoriums
CUP M 11-031 PROPOSED:
* No change
* No Change
* No change
. 3,132 parking stalls
* 14-screen theater auditoriums
. 7,200 sq. ft. restaurant
. 3,600 sq. ft. entertainment space
7,E.a
~
Gl
-
to
Gl
J:
f-
~
o
,
....
Ol
ll.
~
~
M
o
,
~
~
l:
o
""
to
"
l;::
'5
o
:;:
ll.
~
U
M
co
....
::::.
t::
o
C.
Gl
a::
II:
to
-
'"
l:
o
'iij
1/1
'E
E
o
u
'"
l:
'2:
l:
to
c::
~
~
-i
~
N
~
,
~
-
:c
:i:
><
w
.;..:
l:
Gl
E
J:
"
to
~
11!a:c.ltllt Pg. 514 I
7.E.a
CUP Modijication No. II-OJ
A4ectillR Date: December 14, 20} I
Pa}{e5
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within, and would not impair the integrity and
character o(the suhjeuland use district and complies with all (~f'the applicahle provisions of the
Development Code.
~
.,
-
'"
.,
J:
I-
The proposed project is a conditionally permitted use under the Commercial Regional-
Downtown land use classification. The pruject is consistent and compatible within the existing
theater complex building. The proposed project complies with all specific standards enumerated
in Section 19.06.030(2) for multi-tenant commercial buildings, as well as other applicable
provisions of the Development Code, as illustrated in Table A of the statT report. Therefore, the
proposal would not impair the inteb'fity and character of the CR-2, Commercial Regional-
Downtown land use district.
~
~
o
.
...
Ol
c..
::l
~
M
c:;>
~
~
2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
"
o
'"
'"
u
<;::
'5
o
:;:
c..
::l
U
The proposed use is conditionally permitted in the CR-2 land use district and is consistent with a
number of General Plan policies and objectives. The Land Use Element (Table LU-2) lists the
intended uses for the CR-2 land use district, which permits a diversity of regional-serving uses in
the Downtown area including local and county governmental/administrative, cultural/historical
and entertainment, restaurants, supporting retail service and services. Land Use Policy 2.2.1
promotes compatibility between land uses and quality designs. The proposed project will be
compatible with the existing retail uses within the surrounding area. Land Use Goal 2.4
encourages revitalization of property to enhance the quality of life and economic vitality in the
city and Policy 4.10.1 utilizes all available redevelopment agency/City tools to revitalize and
enhance strategic areas of the City. The proposed moditication will contribute to the renewal of
economic vitality of the area. The proposed project will be consistent with these General Plan
goals and policies.
M
co
'<t
~
EIR, SOl #2009111089 and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MM/RP) for the
Redevelopment Project Area Merged Area A, which included activities 10 create a downtown
theater district and development of restaurant and retail pads in compliance with CEQA
requirements and Section 19.20.030 (6) of the Development Code was certified on December 20,
2010. Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations were adopted in
accordance with guidelines for the implementation ofCEQA. The subject CUP Modification No.
11-03 involves tenant improvements with identical building footprint to accommodate reslaurant
uses and support uses for the California Theater. The previously certified EIR analyzed all
potential impacts related to approval of the proposed Conditional Use Pern,it Moditication, In
compliance with CEQA requirements and Section 19.20.030 (6) of the Development Code.
1::
o
c.
.,
II::
II:
'"
-
III
"
o
'jjj
Ul
'E
E
o
U
01
"
'2
"
'"
;;:
3. Approval of a Condilional Use Permit jar the proposed use is in compliance with the
requirements of the California Environmelltal Quality Act (CEQA) and Sectioll 19.20.030(6) o(
the Development Code.
~
~
~
~
oJ
~
~
-
:a
:2
><
w
.;..;
"
.,
E
J:
U
'"
-
<1
1~~~(l'g. 515 I
7.E.a
CUP Afodijicalion No. II-Oj
Aketing Dale: December /4, ]0 II
Page 6
4. There will he no potentially signif/cant negative impacts upon environmental quality and
natural resourCes that could not he properly mitigated and monitored.
-
~
Ql
-
III
Ql
r.
....
The proposed modification will not have any significant negative impacts upon environmental
quality or natural resources. The project site is a vacant 20-screen theater complex surrounded by
urban development.
5. The location. size, design. and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible
with the existing wl/lluture land uses wi/hinthe general area in which the proposed use is to be
located and will not create significant noise, traff/c or other conditions or situations that may he
objectionahle or detrimental to other permilled uses in the vicini/y or adverse to the puhlic
interest, health. safety, convenience, or welfilre of the City.
-
~
o
,
...
'"
ll.
::l
!:!.
l"'l
c:;>
~
~
<::
o
:;::
III
U
-=
'5
o
::;:
ll.
::l
U
The proposed project is compatible with the existing and future land uses within the surrounding
area and will provide convenient commercial services for residents in the surrounding area. The
project will operate in a manner consistent with the Development Code and the conditions of
approval. Therefore, no land use conHict or adverse environmental impacts are anticipated to
rcsult from the proposed modification,
6. I1le suhjecI site is physically sui/ahleji)/.the I)'pe and densily/intensity of use heing proposed.
l"'l
co
'<t
=-
The project site is an cxisting vacant 20-screen theater complex already served by a lull range of
public services and utilities. Modifications to thc existing theater complex subject to the
Conditions of Approval will not be detrimental to public serviccs or public health and safety.
1::
o
Q,
Ql
a::
=
III
-
VI
<::
o
'w
..
'E
E
o
u
Cl
.E
<::
<::
III
c::
Thc proposed use will complement the existing rctail in the downtown area and the existing
structure complies with the development standards pertaining to setbacks, lot coverage, parking,
access, hcight, etc. as discussed in the staff report. The proposed moditication to CUP No. 97-01
would not increase the density/intensity of the project as previously approvcd. Theretore, the
subject site is physically suitable for the proposed densitylintensity of use.
7. There are adequate provisions lor puhlic access, waleI', sanitarion, and public utilities and
services 10 ensure that the proposed use would not he detrimental to puhlic health and safety.
CO,,"CLUSION
~
~
~
~
N
~
Approval of CUP Modification No. 11-03 will enhance the existing theater complex, and
satisfies all lindings of fact rcquired for approval of Conditional Use Permit Modification No.
11-03.
~
-
:;;
:E
><
w
RECOMMENDA nON
.;.;
<::
Ql
E
r.
u
III
~
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Pcrmit Modification
No. 11-03 based on the Findings of Fact contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
Conditions of Approval (Attachment C).
I Packet P!l; 516 I
7.E.a
CUP Mocliflcalioll No. 11-03
Meeting Dale: Dr!cf!mher /4. 20J I
Page 7
Respectfully Submitted,
[\1~.\
Aron Liang ,-
Senior Planner
,
~
'"
-
Cll
'"
.c
I-
Approved for Distribution:
~
~
o
,
.....
'"
l1.
::l
~
M
o
.
~
~
Attachment A - Location Map
Attachment B - Moditied Site Plan, CUP 97-01 Approved Site Plan, and Elevations
Attachment C - Conditions of Approval
Attachment D - CUP 97 and TPM 15308 Planning Commission Staff Report
c:
o
'"
Cll
"
<;::
'6
o
:!i
l1.
::l
U
'M. Margo Wheeler, AICP
Community Development Director
M
co
...
~
1::
o
Co
'"
a:
:a:::
Cll
-
Ul
c:
o
'ijj
'"
'E
E
o
u
Cl
c:
'c
c:
Cll
ii:
~
~
-i
~
N
~
.
~
-
:0
:;:
><
l1J
..
c:
'"
E
.c
"
..
~
I Packet Pg; 517 I
I 7.E.a I
II
ATTACHMENT A - ZONING MAP
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DIVISION
PROJECT: CUP Modification No. 11-03
LOCATION MAP
HEARING DATE: 12/19/2011
LJ
NORTH
II
. '., ,... ..>rf
u_,. 11111
I". .' I
Packet Pg. 518
-
~
.,
-
'"
.,
J:
I-
o
~
o
,
....
'"
c..
;:)
~
M
'9
~
~
c:
o
:;:::
'"
u
~
"tl
o
::;;
c..
;:)
(,)
M
co
....
:s.
1::
o
Co
.,
0::
II:
'"
-
en
c:
o
'ijj
lJ)
'E
E
o
(,)
Cl
.5
c:
c:
'"
a:
~
~
..
~
N
~
,
~
-
;g
J:
)(
W
.;.;
c:
.,
E
J:
U
'"
-
<
I
II
I 7.E.a I
I
ATTACHMENT A - AERIAL MAP
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DIVISION
PROJECT: CUP Modification 11-03
LOCATION MAP
HEARING DATE: 12/19/2011
1J
NORTH
I
~I
Packet Pg. 519
~
Q)
-
III
Q)
.<:
l-
.
~
o
.
...
'"
Q.
:l
~
'"
9
~
~
c
o
.,
III
"
<;:
'5
o
::;:
Q.
:l
U
'"
0>
...
:s
1::
o
Q.
Q)
c::
II:
III
-
<II
c
o
'iij
.!!l
E
E
o
u
OJ
c
c
C
III
ii:
~
~
...
~
N
~
.
~
-
:c
:2
><
w
.;.;
c
Q)
E
.<:
"
III
-
<
ATTACHMENT B
CUP Modification 11-03 I Site Plan
7.E.a
~ ~
a:
~ ~
~ 0
z
"
.,
w
"
....
w ....
w '"
a: -
Ii; '"
'"
I .r:;
.... l-
.
" .
Z ~
<( ~
W <>
!:; ~
:J 0')
0 c..
'" ::l
a:
w ~
~
W '"
I <>
.... .
~
~l
l: <
0
:;::;
'"
"
<;::
= :c
~, 0
L~"l :;;;
C~ c..
>- ::::l
0 U
::z: '"
DO
~
~
t::
0
Co
'"
l:t:
ll:
'"
-
tI)
l:
0
'iij
'"
'E
E
0
u
Cl
l:
'"
l:
'"
c:
~
~
.;
~
N
~
~
-
:;;
:;:
)(
W
.;..:
l:
'"
E
.r:;
"
'"
~ ~
15
~
~ 111\
CUP 97-01
Existing Site Plan
~~'E.a
.~:: I~!I? rb~ .;
-...- ~ ~~~~~~I (f)
I.
.
,
n
.
Vl
Z
o
~
<(
~i -l
I. ::>
I' m
~'~~~
.. t-
x
~
jf~ 2c
- ;:;:
z
o
t-
)jii"i" " <(
()
o
-l
"~~~~~ -"""i~" HI
Hm,.~~! a.! w~X! EI
'HI · ~th < i!~ ~
'I" ~~.. ~
~' - . I I , ·
:::-'"'-:'~-';';:' ! I < q
;. ~ '3- z
f a..!!' ,2 i
8 fl~ :ti
: ~i 1~
i i" ~ ~~i~
~~ -llu ~~~~:
~~ ~~o~~
m ~ .............JI-N
<
~_..:.. .....
~m m
~
~
~-~
,i].j-,"
l
x
~ .
Et).
!
jj~.
-.-1
:~~1ll
0:::
W
t-
<(
W",
Iz
~;s 1
"- .
0:::- .
<(<i~
t- U;,
(f)oo:~
<( ~;:
;:;:fiH
W"'"
z ,,'t
z",a
-w.
~ UCIl ~~
, z ~~
, Xc;(i
_~:_____..__wJJl. ~_
, -l
a..
I
o
N
,
i
~
....
(/)
:I:
I-
'"
-j
ii
h
i
?-
!!
!!
r
.;
!;
~
,,:,
"
ST'
'PabJsetJ"g. 521
~
Q)
-
ell
Q)
.l::
I-
,
~
o
.-:.
a>
B.
::>
~
M
9
~
~
c:
o
:;:;
ell
"
""
:;:;
o
:;;
B.
::>
u
M
co
....
::.
1::
o
c-
Q)
D::
:s::
.s
'"
c:
o
'ijj
III
'E
E
o
u
'"
c:
'2
c:
ell
0::
o
.
~
~
..;
'":
N
~
.
~
-
:E
:2
><
w
..
c:
Q)
E
.l::
"
ell
~
7.E.a
,,""~
l \ Ii I
-
~
Q)
-
CO
Q)
.s::;
f-
~
'i'
.....
en
Cl.
::l
~
M
'i'
~
~
C
o
:;:;
CO
U
l;::
'5
o
::;:
Cl.
::l
(,)
M
to
....
~
1::
o
Q.
Q)
c::
lI:
CO
-
rn
c
o
.iij
f/)
.E
E
o
(,)
'"
c
.2
c
co
c:
~
"":
....
~
N
~
,
~
-
:.0
:2
><
w
.;.;
c
Q)
E
.s::;
u
co
-
::(
I...,packet Pg:522 I
7.E.a
A TT ACHMENT C
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION NO. 11-03
(MODIFICATION OF CUP NO. 97-0])
~
'"
-
'"
'"
J:
f-
1.
All development shall be in substantial confonnance to submittcd site plan and
elevations date stamped November 29, 20 II.
~
o
.
...
'"
0..
::l
~
M
'"
~
~
2.
Within two years of development approval, commencement of construction shall
have occurred or the permit/approval shall become null and void. In addition, if
after commencement of construction, work is discontinued for a period of one
year, then the pennit/approval shall become null and void. However, approval of
this application does not authorize commencement of construction. All necessary
permits must be obtained prior to commencement of specified construction
activities included in the Conditions of Approval.
c
o
:;:
'"
u
;;::
:;;
o
::;:
0..
::l
U
Expiration Date: December 14,2013
M
co
...
:::..
3
The review authority may, upon application bcing filed 30 days prior to the
cxpiration date and for good cause, grant a une-time extension not tu exceed 12
months. The review authority shall ensure that the projcct complies with all
current Development Code provisions.
t::
o
Q,
'"
a::
II:
'"
-
Vl
C
o
'w
"'
'E
E
o
u
'"
c
'"
c
'"
;;:
4.
In the event this approval is legally challenged, the City will promptly notify the
applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and will cooperate fully in the
defense of this matter. Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend, indemnify
and hold hannless the City of San Bernardino (City), the Economic Development
Agency of the City of San Bernardino (EDA), any departments, agencies,
dlvisiuns, boards ur commission of cither the City or EOA as well as
predeccssors, successors, assigns, agents, directors, elected officials, oflicers,
employees, representatives and attorneys of either the City or EDA li'om any
claim, action or proceeding against any of the foregoing persons or entities. The
applicant further agrees to reimburse the City of any costs and altome)'s' fees
which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action, but
such pal1icipation shall not relieve applicant of his or her obligation under this
condition.
~
-
:c
:2
><
L1J
~
~
...
~
N
~
The costs, salaries, and expenses of the City Attorney and employees of his oftice
shall he considered as "attorneys fees" for the purpose of this condition.
.;..;
c
'"
E
J:
U
'"
::::
<l:
As part of the consideration for issuing this permit, this condition shall remain in
effect if this Conditional Use Pelmit is rescinded or revoked, whether or not at the
request of applicant.
5. Moditication to the plan(s) shall be subject to the applicable provisions of the
Development Code Chapter 19.60, Minor Modifications,
I Packet Pg. 523 I
Comfit/oils of Approval
CUPM No. II-OJ
HearillK dale: 12/14/1 I
6.
This permit shall be subject to all the applicable provisions of the Development
Codc in Chapter 19.20, Property Devclopment Standards, and shall comply with
requirements of other permitting and rCb'lllatory agencies.
7.
Any exterior structural equipment, or utility transformers, boxes, ducts or meter
cabinets shall be architecturally screened by walls or structural elements, blending
with the building design, or screened by landscaping if placed on the ground.
8.
Any public telephones shall be located inside buildings and shall be fIxed for
outgoing calls only.
9.
The applicant shall be responsible for regular maintenance of the project site.
Vandalism, grafllti, trash and other debris shall be removed and cleaned up within
24 hours.
10.
All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient with the potential to lower or reduce
usage when businesses are closed and shall be shielded to confine lighting within
the site.
End ofCollditiolls of Approwtf -
7.E.a
~
~
CIl
-
Cll
CIl
J:
to-
~
o
,
....
a>
Q.
::l
~
M
o
,
~
~
l:
o
.,
Cll
U
""
:0
o
:;:
Q.
::l
U
M
ex>
..
~
1::
o
c.
CIl
a::
II:
Cll
-
III
l:
o
'iij
'"
'E
E
o
u
'"
.!:
l:
l:
Cll
a:
~
~
-i
~
N
~
~
-
;.g
J:
><
W
.;..:
l:
CIl
E
J:
U
Cll
-
<
I Pllck~t Pg. 52<4.1
}
I 7.E.a
ATTACHMENT 0
SUMl\1ARY
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
===============================================
AGENDA ITEM: 3
HEARING DATE: 5-20-97 ~
Gl
........'........__. ""," '~__~.' .........~......-.,..-..._.. ......-...... ....~_...........'....r~WARD.:.....-.......~..__.....--.-__IJ '.--_....._~~........_............- -m-
.s::
I-
,
CASE: Contitional Use Permit No. 97-01
Parcel Map No. 15038
.. ....
APPLICANT:
Jason Kamm
'. ,.MDA--SanBernardino-Associates",
300 Continental Blvd., Ste 360
EI Segundo, CA 90245
OWNER:
Economic Development Agency & Others
," ..,............,-.- .....201'Nortlt ..E"...Street......,.....-. ,I~_'''''. .~~._.... '.. _"0'.;" -",.
3rd Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92401-1507
-
~
o
,
....
Ol
11..
::::l
~
'"
q
~
~
"
=============================================== 0
'"
REQUEST I LOCATION - A request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 2G-screen theater rl
complex and three related retail structures. The request also includes a Parcel map to subdivide 5.19 ~
acres into 7 parcels to accommodate the theater complex and retail buildings. The site is located at the ~
northwest corner of 4th Street and "E" Street in the CR-2, Commercial Regional land use designation. II.
::::l
=============================================== 0
PROPERTY
ExISnNG
LAND USE
LAND USE
DESIGNATION
SUBJECT
NORTII
SOUTI!
EAST
WEST
Office. Retail & Public Parking
County Social Services (DPSS)
Parking Structure anel Mall
Superblock anel Parking Structure
California Theater, Technical
College and Public Parking
CR-2, Commercial Regional
CR-2, Commercial Regional
CR-2, Commercial Regional
CR-2, Commercial Regional
CR-2, Commercial Regional
GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC YES c FLOOD HAZARD YES c SEWERS: YES.
HAZARD ZONE: NO . ZONE: Zone X SOO NO . NO C
Yr
mGH FIRE HAZARD YES C AIRPORT YES C REDEVELOPMENT YES.
ZONE: NO . NOISE/CRASH NO . PROJECT AREA: NO 0
ZONE: Central City RDA
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
o Not Applicable
o Exempt
o No Significant
Effects
. Potential Effects,
Mitigating
Measures,
No E.I.R.
o E.I.R. wI Significant
Effects
. APPROVAL
. CONDmONS
o Significant Effects,
See Attached E.R.C.
Minutes
o DENIAL
o CONTINUANCE
TO:
'"
'"
...
~
t::
o
C.
Gl
0::
II:
..
-
<J)
"
o
'iij
OJ)
'E
E
o
o
'"
,E
"
"
..
ii:
~
~
~
~
N
~
,
~
-
:g
:c
><
w
.;.;
"
Gl
E
.s::
"
..
::::
<(
I Packet Pg. 525 I
)
)
Conditional Use Permit No. '97.{)1
Pareel Map No. 15038
Hearing Dale: 5-20-97
Page I
7.E.a I
REOUEST AND LOCATION
. .'__".' ..' ... .......... _ ....... '. ". .....~...~_...h... "--'''''' ........... ",.'. _~ -.__.".... ....
~
"
-
.._.....~..._-._..~,. ..~--. .,.-. ,-~,..,,,,,,,,~,,""...... co'
"
.l:
t-
o
The applicant requests the approval of a Conditional Use Permit under the authority of
Development Code Section 19.06.020(E)(2) to const.l1lct a 20-scr~n theater compl~x and three
related retail structures. The applicant also requ~sts the approval of a Parcel map to subdivide
5.19. acres into 7 parce.ls)0.~~911Jmodate th~ theater. complex and.retail building!.-_.. n' .,.-.~
'.'~'--- -..-..' ....-<>', . ....-..... .... - ,
The 5.19 acre site is located at the northwest comer of 4th Street and "E" Street in the CR-2,
Commercial Regional land use designation.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The theater complex is proposed to contain 20 theaters in a total of 115,000 square feet of
building space. The 20 theaters will provide an estimated 4,600 seats. The theater footprint will
encompass approximately 80,000 square feet and the structure will be two stories (43 feet in
height). The complex also includes three additional commercial retail structures totalling
approximately 20,000 square feet. It is anticipated that these retail structures will house
restaurants and other related retail shops. Conceptual signage, including a changeable copy sign,
is included with the proposal.
The theater and retail shops will be arranged around a central landscaped public plaza area that
will contain approximately 68,285 square feet. Parking for the facility will be provided in
surrounding public parking lots. It is anticipated that parking will also be available in the
parking structure currently under construction for Superblock.
Hours of operation for the facility will vary from early morning to late evening for retail
operations and from early to late evening for the movie theaters during the week. On weekends
the movie theater may open up as early as noon. In addition the theater may conduct weekday
matinee operations.
The parcel map will subdivide ten parcels totalling 5.19 acres into seven commercial parcels
ranging in size from 7,680 square feet in area to 110,882 square feet in area. The parcel map
is for the purpose of providing separate parcels for the theater, retail buildings, and public plaza,
and existing City parking.
SETI1NG/SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The site is located at the northwest comer of 4th Street and "E" Street. The site is relatively
flat with a 1-2 % slope to the south. The site is currently developed with the former Social
Security Office, a parking lot, and a music retail store and religious retail store. These structure
will be demolished in order to construct the theater complex and associated retail buildings.
Surrounding land uses include the California Theater and existing public parking to the west, 5th
Street and County Department of Social Services to the north, Superblock and associated parking
~
o
,.:.
'"
a. .'
:;:)
~
'"
<;>
~
~
c:
o
:;:;
'"
u
!E
."
o
:;;
a.
:;:)
u
'"
co
...
:s.
t::
o
Q.
"
c::
lI:
'"
-
t/)
c:
o
'iij
1/1
'E
E
o
u
Cl
c:
'c
c:
'"
c::
~
~
...
~
N
~
~
-
:a
:c
><
w
.;.;
c:
"
E
.l:
U
'"
~
I Packet Pg.. 526 I
)
)
Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01
Parcel Map No. 15038
Hearing Date: 5-20-97
Page 2
,I 7.E.a
-
~
'"
-
. " ...- .. - structure across '"EO'Street'on !lie Fast, -ario'Carciusd 'Mall ancf"pai:khlg-sfriiciiire' across' 4ti!..... ~_. ~
Street to the south. ~
BACKGROUND
. '"'' -' 'ceiir/ai'Citj. iarld7z'g'Place Co;";"i;si~~'"''
..... '.. : ............... . \'." ......', '-~.. '" ......,. ",- ... #. ~ ;..... ....
The theater complex is dependent upon existing public parking in the Downtown. This requires
a shared parking plan to be submitted to the Public Works Department for review by the Central
City Parking Place Commission and fmal approval of the parking plan by the Mayor and
Common Council.
The Shared Parking Plan was previously circulated to the Planning Commission as part of the
project Initial Study. The parking plan was presented to the Central City Parking Place
Commission on March 6, 1997. The Parking Place Commission recommended approval of the
Plan to the Mayor and Common Council at that meeting. The Shared Parking Plan has been
scheduled for review and approval by the Mayor and Common Council on May 19, 1997.
Development Review Comminee
The project was reviewed by the Development Review Committee and cleared onto Planning
Commission on April 24, 1997. The Public Works Department, Development Services
Division, Fire Department and Water Department have all provided Standard Requirements for
the proposal.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT (CEOA) STATUS
o The Initial Study was prepared by Tom Dodson and Associates, was independently
reviewed by staff, and presented to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on
March 13, 1997. The ERC proposed a Mitigated Negative Declaration. See Initial
Study, Attachment F.
o
The Initial Study was circulated to the State Office of Planning and Research, and was
made available for Public Review and Comment from March 19, 1997 to April 21, 1997.
Comments were received from the San Bernardino County Traffic Engineer and Dr.
James Mulvihill, California State University, San Bernardino. Responses to the
comments were prepared by Tom Dodson and Associates for the City and were
independently reviewed by staff. The comments and the City's responses to the
comments have been included as Attachment G.
o On April 24, 1997, the Environmental Review Committee, reviewed the comments and
responses, and finding them adequate and acceptable, recommended that the Planning
Commission adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.
-
~
o
,
....
a>
D..
:::l"
~
M
o
,
~
~
c:
o
:;::
'"
"
~
'0
o
:;;
D..
:::l
()
M
co
~
:!:.
1::
o
Q.
'"
D::
:e
'"
-
t/l
c:
o
'iij
'"
'E
E
o
()
'"
.!:
c:
c:
.!!!
D..
~
~
..
~
N
-
-
-
:c
:E
><
w
.;.;
c:
'"
E
.c:
"
'"
~
'k/If'
Packet Pg: 527
_." I 7.E.a I
- . coltio~ Use Permit No" 97~1
P=! Map No. 15038
Hearing Dale: 5-20-97
Page 3
)
~
o The Mitigation Monitoring ~~ Rej>Ortin~. ~o~"_ \V~ pre~ by" IOrn..P?4s~n,. n. " ~
""Teviewed"-b5r staff, and-defermIned to be adequate and acceptable. See MitIgatIon ~
Monitoring and Reporting Program, Atl:lchment H. f-;"
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
Con'i1itionarusePerniit"
. '.' '.... ....., .' ~. .....~
1. The proposed use is conditionally pennitted within, and would not impair the integrity
and character of the of the subject land use district and complies with all of the
applicable provisions of this Development Code.
Pursuant to Development Code Section 19.06.020(E)(2), theaters are pennitted in the CR-21and
use district subject to the approval of a conditional use pennit. The associated retail uses are
pennitted subject to a development pennit, but are part of the entertainment complex and are
in the conditional use pennit. The proposed complex complies with all applicable provisions of
the Development Code as shown in Attachment C.
Front setbacks are allowed at the ground level if the area is designed as a pedestrian plaza, as
per Section 19.19.040(3) of the Development Code. To qualify as a plaza it must be a minimum
of 10 feet deep and the width of the entire store front, include enhanced or textured paving, and
landscaping. The western most restaurant building facing 4th Street has been setback 10+ feet
and meets this criteria. The project has been conditioned to treat this area with enhanced paving
and landscaping. Development Code Section 19.19.040(l)(A) allows up to 50 percent of a
building face to be set back. The eastern most building facing 4th Street meets this criteria and
has included its setback portion into the pedestrian plaza associated with retail building on the
west.
The northern end of the theater along "E" Street is set back to accommodate a future retail area.
Until the retail is built, this area will be developed as a mini-pedestrian plaza with enhanced
paving and landscaping, consistent with that along 4th Street.
The complex and associated plazas will create a much needed public space in the downtown and
will complement the Superblock building and its associated public plaza across "E" Street to the
east. Hence, the proposal will improve and not impair the character of the CR-2 land use
district.
Conceptual identification signage and a changeable copy sign is included with the project. The
applicant proposes to place movie posters along the "E" Street side of the theater to help to
maintain the pedestrian orientation of the facility. A sign program for the complex will be
submitted to identify the specific signage including type, amount, location, size and design,
consistent with Development Code requirements.
~
<>
,.:.
'"
a.
:J
~
M
<>
.
~
~
l:
o
:;:;
..
u
;::
'5
o
::;:
a.
:J
l)
M
co
....
::::.
t:
o
Q.
CIl
0::
II:
..
-
rn
l:
o
"in
en
'E
E
o
l)
'"
l:
"2
l:
.!!!
Q.
~
~
..
~
N
~
,
~
-
:c
:c
><
w
.;..;
l:
CIl
E
.s:
u
..
-
~
I Packet Pg. 528 I
)
)
Conditional Use Permit No. 97.{)1
Parcel Map No. 15038
Hearing Date: 5-20-97
Page 4
2. The proposed use is consistent with the GeTy!ral flllf!..... _ _..". .._...
.. . '. .. _. .... _,. -,_. '. ""'._. .. '.' _A_'._' ....... '" . , .....'
.1 7.E.a
-c-
'"
-
IV ..
'"
.s:
I-
,
~
~
o
,
....
Ol
D..
:::l'
~
M
o
,
~
~
.....'-......._~4_............. ...... ,. ......_.
The proposal is consistent with General Plan Policy 1.3.3, which states:
"Allow for the development of region-serving hotel and convention, entertainment,
'" .cu1tural. and supporting uses,in areasdesignated.as:..., ....._......~......._ .... ........
a.
'Commercial Regional-Downtown (CR-2)' ,,,. "
The proposal is also consistent with General Plan Policy 1.16.31 which states:
"Encourage that buildings be located within twenty-five feet of the sidewalk, except for
setbacks to allow for outdoor dining, pedestrian-oriented plazas, courtyards and
landscaped areas provided that:
a.
the setback is not separated from the abutting sidewalks by walls, continuous
planters, or other barriers:
b. the set back is at or approximate to the elevation of the abutting sidewalks, except
where a distinctive and usable open space can be created which transitions
"smoothly" from the abutting sidewalk;
c. the setback is landscaped and incorporates pedestrian oriented amenities; and
d. no automobiles or trucks may be parked in this area. "
Review of the site plan (Attachment B-1) shows that the design of the proposal is consistent with
this policy.
3. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in compliance with
the requirements of the Califomia Environmental Quality Acr and Section 19.20.030(6)
of the Development Code.
As noted in the discussion on CEQA Status, an Initial Study was prepared and circulated for
public review and comment in compliance with CEQA. Mitigation measures have been
identified and are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. All mitigation
measures have been made project Conditions of Approval. All CEQA requirement have been
met.
4. There will be no potentially significant negative impacrs upon environmental quality and
lUlIUral resources that could not be properly mitigated and monitored.
As identified in the Initial Study, the project will not result in any potentially significant negative
impacts upon environmental quality and resources. All mitigation measures will be properly
monitored as identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment H).
t:
o
:;::;
IV
U
!!:
'tl
o
::;;
D..
:::l
U
M
co
'<I'
~
t:
o
c.
'"
~
II:
IV
-
rJl
t:
o
'iji
.!!!
E
E
o
u
Cl
t:
'"
t:
IV
c:
~
~
...
~
N
~
,
~
-
:0
.s:
x
W
.;.;
t:
'"
E
.s:
u
IV
-
<(
I' Packet Pg. 529 I
)
)
Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01
Pan:el Map No. 15038
Hearina Dale: 5-20-97
P.ge 5
5.
The location, size, design,. ant!. operqting characteristics...of the .proposed..use are
compatible with the existing and future land uses within the general area in which the
proposed use is to be locatcd and will not create significant noise, traffic or other
conditions or siruatiaroS that may be objectionable or detrimental to other penniued uses
in the vicinity or adverse to the public interest, health, sajety, convenience, or welfare
of the City..
The proposal is in compliance with all applicable Development Code Standards and is consistent
with the General Plan as noted elsewhere in this staff report. The proposal will not create any
significant noise, traffic, or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable as identified
in the project Initial Study. As such, the proposal will not be detrimental to other permitted uses
in the vicinity and will not create any situation adverse to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience or welfare of the City.
6. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being
proposed.
The site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of the project being proposed as
evidenced by project compliance with all applicable Development Code Standards.
7. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities
and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health
and safety.
All agencies responsible for reviewing access, and providing water, sanitation and other public
services have all had the opportunity to review the proposal, and none have indicated an inability
to serve the project. The proposal will not be detrimental to the public health and safety.
Parcel Map
1. The proposed map is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans.
The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan in that the map conforms to the standards
concerning distribution, location, and extent of uses covered by the General Plan as noted in the
discussion for Finding 112 for the Conditional Use Permit above. There are no applicable
specific plans.
2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision Is consistent with applicable
general and specific plans.
The proposed design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General
Plan as noted in the discussion for Finding 112 for the Conditional Use Permit above. There are
no applicable specific plans.
7.E.a
~
~
'"
-
...
'"
.c
I-
,
~
o
,
....
en
c..
:J
!2..
M
<;>
~
~
c:
o
:;::
..
o
~
'0
o
:;:
c..
:J
o
M
ClO
...
~
1::
o
c.
'"
D:
II::
..
-
rn
c:
o
'iij
.!!!
E
E
o
o
Cl
.E
c:
c:
..
;;:
~
~
~
~
N
~
~
-
;e
.c
><
l1J
.;..;
c:
'"
E
.c
o
..
-
:(
I Packet Pg..530 I
)
)
Conditional Use Permit No. 97"()1
Par.:el Map No. 15038
Hearing Dale: 5-20-97
Page 6
3.
The site is physically su.itab~e for the. type of dev!!lopment. ... .
The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that the iots created meet
the minimum iot standards specified by tne Development Code and summarized in Attachment
C.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
As noted in the discussion for Finding HI of the conditional use permit above, the proposal
complies with all applicable Development Code Standards and is physically suitable for the
proposed density of development.
5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat.
The subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage
or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as addressed in the Initial
Study.
6. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious
public health problems.
The subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems as
addressed in the project Initial Study.
7. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements,
acquired l1y the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the
proposed subdivision.
Several utility easement exist in the area where the theater is to be constructed. These easements
exist to provide utility services to the fonner social security building and the existing retail music
and religious facilities which are to be demolished. However, the design of the subdivision and
proposed improvements will not conflict with these easements since they will be abandoned or
relocated by the Public WorkslEngineering Department through processing of the Final Map.
CONCLUSION
The proposal meets all necessary Findings of Fact for approval of the Conditional Use Permit
and Tentative Parcel Map.
I 7.E.a
-;:-
"
-
lO.
"
.s::.
I-
,
~
~
o
,..:.
en
a.
:;).
~
M
c:;>
~
~
l:
o
:;::
lO
"
;;::
'5
o
:;:
a.
:;)
(,,)
M
co
'<t
=-
t::
o
0.
"
~
II:
lO
-
VI
l:
o
'in
f/)
'E
E
o
(,,)
'"
l:
';:
l:
.!l!
a.
~
~
~
~
N
~
~
-
:c
:;:
><
w
.;..;
l:
"
E
.s::.
"
lO
::::
c(
I Packefi:1!t.531 I
)
)
Condilicmal Use Permit No. 97.01
Parcel Map No. 15038
Hearina Date: 5-20-97
Pap 7
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission:
I. -Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Mitigatior. Monitoring and .
Reporting Program; and
2. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map 15038, based upon the
Findings of Fact contained in this Staff Report and subject to the Conditions of Approval
(Attachment D) and Standard Requirements (Attachment E).
Respectfully Submitted,
fffL#f
Director of Planning and Building Services
Jtidw./;~ tu!-
Michael R. Finn
Associate Planner
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D
Attachment E
Attachment F
Attachment G
Attachment H
Location Map
Site Plan (B-1), Parcel Map (B-2)
Floor Plan and Elevations are on f1le in the Planning and Building
Services Department
Development Code and General Plan Consistency Table
Conditions of Approval
Standard Requirements
Initial Study (forwarded to the Planning Commission March 19, 1997
under cover memo)
Initial Study Comments and Responses to Comments
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
I 7.E.a
~
~
.,
-
IV
.,
.<:
l-
.
~
o
.
.....
en
lL
::l
~
M
o
.
~
~
l:
o
:::;
IV
"
'"
'5
o
::E
c..
::l
o
M
0)
'Ot
~
t::
o
Q.
.,
~
II:
IV
-
VI
l:
o
'in
,!!!
E
E
o
o
Cl
l:
'2
l:
IV
c::
~
~
...
~
N
~
~
-
:c
:.E
><
w
+.:
l:
.,
E
.<:
"
IV
::::
<(
I.. Packet Pg. 53~ .1
7.E.a I
>>
ATTACHMENT A
)
,
r' AGENDA ""'l
ITEM #
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
LOCATION
-
~
Q)
-
",.
Q)
J:
t-
o
-
~
o
,.:.
'"
0..
=>
~
M
'9
~
~
"
o
:;::;
'"
u
l;::
:;;
o
::;;
0..
=>
(.)
...
HEARING DATE
M
co
~
~
t:
o
C-
Q)
0::
==
'"
-
VI
"
o
'iij
l/l
'E
E
o
(.)
Cl
"
'2
"
'"
ii:
~
~
..;
~
N
~
o
~
-
;e
J:
><
W
.;.;
"
Q)
E
J:
U
'"
:::
<t
Pl..AN-a.tt PAGltOfJt (.....
'.1111 I..)
, , . .
mI;l m ]5111..
.", i-m ~
.... i ,s
; - ~ .....
i r tl ~ ~,:3
. c~ it t I i
i.... wI iln~ iI
~uu;i Iliii !~fi~; ....
J : T J1'
l; : ,-
: --
'-
- .. - t'
- 'I
. ~
I
....
I ~
j wWW
! . .
! . -....-..: J f
-- . .-
i
Eel
~
."
-
'"
.,
..s::;
c....
i '
. ~
( 9
( :;;
_ a..
=>
!2.
..M
c9
, ~
,. ~
a "
g .2
c: ~
;::
'5
0
:;:
f5 a..
=>
I u
< ..
J M
LLl< co
...
::I:~ ~
....l!j 1::
I ~lI.l 0
.t' a.
I .....,1 ~
! ~ "I :::
I .:ll
! :21 i CIl
I ~iI "
I 0
olll. 'w
! '"
x~ 'E
LLllll E
~ 0
a. u
, Cl
0 .!:
N "
"
'"
ii:
~
~
.;
~
N
~
,
.
--=~~=-
-.,.~..
. . . J
.
ATTACHMENT B-1
!
a
EB
~
-
;e
.s::;
><
w
.;..:
"
.,
E
.s::;
u
~
. Packet Pg; !l~ .
......al.
~.II~z
a:". .za:o
_o.za:
"In" a:1II!!:
~ 'P" .. 11111 ~ I I I I ,'" :. I
1&1 . i II ~ U :.. il':', i1.'lij:J I , ~ I.
.... ..~ i'.-~ lit (&;". ..... .. "'I!ri ~'!n d~" .111 rill; H I.. 'l'lr--, ~h' ....
... ! _11.0 ~'i'G:.;m1 11'1,' I~ I ill I Ii ~
C ~ a ... 0 III I,' Ii 'LIliii I . . ' . .. . t 1I1'~ I 'dr.11 1
t- < 0 )0 I- : if i:!I!~"11 i ;; . i :. :. ~ :l:h:.1l :!:..:'
~::E; ~~~ ilii Ulil
... ~C::)CD :<a..1iI
.. ....... -.....() 8' . ~, ., ... _.' ..---. -$;~fl-' ~.'. --;'."..........-.... .'~"'" .-"... ..... .'.
una ',I d i
liI;1 IP!PII
U!I hili
IliII 1".11
l
ATrACiIJi.:ffiNr 'nn'
- ." -- --
I I l
,II i" I'
)
. '.
.. I.".",ro..
'u
"',-' ....-,
" . ,~.."'-"
it
II
t= - -""-............-
-"'im
" .
I I.'. J1
I I I I: ~~';.l
I .1 1'"'\ lil III I
II . '" '--:r-""" ~
,,! '_'.1.~'
. '1'
: I I (',..: i '
I___--:.+-~-.j.-;p'" _I
... :; ~ I : II .
'j : I. I J: I i
I .-.--!-- I
. I'
", 5' !: i. I "i I'.
... I", I. I
"'~;.
- ~...~ -:::.+-
"'''''' h
::aaul
I ..1
· ;IlPJIlI g I J
, n · If 'f"
.!I,IImB U!.I
I I I!''''''
I ! I' ! J.-.... ! II ~ 1 ! I
I.
'q
..: ;j
.,.ft'.
-- r_...
-y t!; ~'~: ;;:.. ;
-----..------
"
8!
WI:
...
-
I
I.
I.'
I' ·
, L i
.l!,'
I.' "
ilh
I~I!S
I~~~
~
..
Q)
-
'"
.~~I i':~
," '
.IJ ;:-
o
..:.
I'"
I'~'
.
~
. ~
"
o
l~
t)
~
"C
o
:;;
, " " a.
:J
U
M
IX)
..
:::..
t:
o
Q.
Q)
c::
lI:
'"
-
(/)
"
o
'iij
<II
"e
E
o
u
Cl
"
'"
"
'"
c::
~
~
...
~
N
~
,
~
-
:c
:;:
><
w
.;.;
"
Q)
E
J:
t)
'"
-
<
----
Packet Pg. 535
..r ....
'y
: )" ....-
Conditional Use Permit No: 97.{)!
PlUl:e1 Map No. 15038
Rearms Date: 5-20-97
Page 11
-.1
7.E.a
. .... " .... -~'.- .. -.,,' -' '. - ......-. ..-_.' .
..-....... .',
...._ ~.., .... _.a__..a.__...... ......~ ,_~_..........~- ....-_.. ..... ...~
~
~
Q)
-.
..
Q)
.s:
l-
.
ATTACHMENT C
DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Height 2 Story No defined
Stories (43 feet) Height Limit
Setbacks
Front o to 10 feet' o feet
Street Side o feet o feet
Landscaping 68285 square feet 20,250 square feet
(51 percent) (15 percent)
Lot Coverage 55 percent 100 percent
No defined
Height Limit
~
o
.
....
'"
D.. -
::::l
!2..
M
o
.
~
~
.... ,"."..'" Ca~~oty ..... ,.~......._.'.
Permitted Use
Development General
.._.Prooosal....... ._"'._..........~ .......,_..... Cooe .'1__.....~..._... ._...._.Plan.... .... t'..._.a..._-.....~.
20-plex Theater and Permitted subject to Permitted
Associate Retail Conditional Use Permit
< 25 feet
l:
o
;;
..
u
l;::
'5
o
:E
D..
::::l
U
< 25 feet
N/A
M
co
'<t
~
N/A
1::
o
Q.
Q)
II::
lI:::
..
-
1Il
l:
o
'0;
,!!!
E
E
o
u
'"
l:
'"
l:
..
ii:
~
~
..;
~
N
~
~
-
;e
.s:
"
W
.;..:
l:
Q)
E
.s:
u
..
-
:(
1 Pumwltlo Development Code Section 19.19.040(3), front setbacks ue allowed at the ground level if the uea
is designed u a pedestrian plaza. See discussiOll 011 Pap 3 of thia staff report.
If Pacl(lltpg.-536
..~ ~ _.,.
)
ro'
ConditiOnal Use'Permit No, 97:.01
Parcel Map No, 15038
Hearing Dale: 5-20-97
Page 12
7,E,al
'C'
"
-
.-. m.
J:
f-
.
~
~
o
,
....
Ol
l1.
::l'
~
M
o
.
~
~
........_ .. ".'._~k...",". ,'~"'.a...~.......... .... '.... '.... ..._.....~,..~~... ".;' ..._ ...,...................... :r..~-. ,,_ __.,.... .......... ..... ... ..... "'"." .~_..\~ .... " -~. ~..' ..... .'~"." .
"A,IT, AC,~ I? o.
- ~' ..
. "-"".' ....... ....... "" .-" .... -.. . "-. ,
CONDmONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01
and Parcel Map No. 15038
1. Within two years of development approval, the parcel map shall be recorded and
commencement of construction on improvements shall have occurred or the
permit/approval shall become null and void. In addition, if after commencement of
construction, work is discontinued for a period of one year, then the permit/approval
shall become null and void.
Project:
Expiration Date:
Conditional Use Permit No. 97-01 and Parcel Map No. 15038
May 20, 1999
2.
The review authority may, upon application being filed 30 days prior to the expiration
date and for good cause, grant one time extension not to exceed 12 months. The review
authority sha1l ensure that the project complies with all current Development Code
provisions.
3.
In the event that this approval is legally challenged, the City will promptly notify the
applicant of any claim or action and will cooperate fully in the defense of the matter.
Once notified, the applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its
officers, agents and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City of
San Bernardino. The applicant further agrees to reimburse the City of any costs and
attorneys' fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of such
action, but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his or her obligation under this
condition.
4.
Construction shall be in substantial conformance with the plan(s) approved by the
Director, Development Review Committee, Planning Commission or Mayor and
Common Council. Minor modification to the plan(s) shall be subject to approval by the
Director through a minor modification permit process. Any modification which exceeds
10% of the following allowable measurable design/site considerations shall require the
refIling of the original application and a subsequent hearing by the appropriate hearing
review authority if applicable.
a.
On-site circulation and parking, loading and landscaping;
b.
Placement and/or height of walls, fences and structures;
c. Reconfiguration of architectural features, including colors, and/or modification
of finished materials that do not alter or compromise the previously approved
theme; and,
"
o
:;:;
'"
u
~
"
o
:::;;
l1.
::l
o
M
co
..
:s
1::
o
c.
"
a::
II:
'"
-
<J)
"
o
'iji
III
'E
E
o
o
'"
"
'"
"
'"
ii:
~
~
..
~
N
~
,
~
-
:0
:;:
><
w
.;..;
"
"
E
J:
U
'"
~
I' PliCKilt'pg. 537 I
., .,........'...'0;:..........
~
Q)
A reductio!lin.!ien~ty()r intensity of iI. deve~opme.!1~ pr.oject,. ". -, ,,' _ --'., .... -'"", -m
J:
fo-
No vacant, relocate(!, altered, repaired or hereafter erected structure shall be occupied .
~
or no change of use of land or structure(s) shall be inaugurated, or no new business 9
....
commenced as authorized by this permit until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued ~
. by. the..Departmenl.~.-A. temporary. Certificate..of..Qccupancy .may-'be..issued- by- 'the' --~,_.. B "
Department subject to the conditions imposed on the use, provided that a deposit is filed ;::;-
with the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of the Certificate. The ~
deposit or security shall guarantee the faithful performance and completion of all terms, ";;
conditions and performance standards imposed on the intended use by this permit. ,g
'"
u
~
'0
o
:;:
0..
::::l
o
) ......
)
condiiionai u~ i>ermii N~~ 97.:01'
P:m:el Map No. 15038
Hearing Date: 5-20-97
Page 13
d.
5.
6.
This permit or approval is subject to all the applicable provisions of the Development
Code in effect at the time of approval. This includes Chapter 19.20 - Property
Development Standards, and includes: dust and dirt control during construction and
grading activities; emission control of fumes, vapors, gases and other forms of air
pollution; glare control; exterior lightning design and control; noise control; odor control;
screening; signs, off-street parking and off-street loading; and, vibration control.
Screening and sign regulations compliance are important considerations to the developer
because they will delay the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy until they are complied
with. Any exterior structural equipment, or utility transformers, boxes, ducts or meter
cabinets shall be architecturally screened by wall or structural element, blending with the
building design and include landscaping when on the ground.
7.
All mitigation measures identified by the project Initial Study and listed in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment H to this staff report) are incorporated
herein as project Conditions of Approval.
8.
The area identified as a future retail area along "E" Street at the northeast corner of the
theater building shall be developed as a mini-pedestrian plaza. This shall include
treatment with enhanced paving/textured concrete, and landscaping consistent with the
interior theater plaza in materials and design.
9.
The area of setback adjacent to the retail buildings along 4th Street has been permitted
for the purpose of creating a pedestrian plaza area along 4th Street. This area shall be
treated with enhance paving/textured concrete, and landscaping consistent with the
interior theater plaza in materials and design.
10. A sign program shall be submitted for the complex that includes the type, amount,
location, size and design consistent with Chapter 19.22 of the Development Code.
11. Demolition permits shall be obtained for the demolition and removal of the former social
security building and the music and religious retail buildings on the site.
7.E.a
'"
QC)
'<t
=-
1::
o
c.
Q)
~
II:
'"
~
tIl
c
o
'iij
1I)
'E
E
o
o
C>
c
c
c
'"
c::
~
~
..
~
N
~
,
~
~
:c
:;:
><
w
.;.:
c
Q)
E
J:
U
'"
::::
<l:
I. Packet Pg. 538 I
)"
. " )'
.1 7.E.a
Conditional Use Permit No. 97-<l1
Palce.l Map No. 15038
Hearing Date: 5-20-97
Page 14
12. No, tinal,pax:ce1 ~p, ~all be filed and .nobuilding permits sball be issued until !he '.,
Economic Development Agency or Developer has obtained title to all parcels comprising
the project site (APN's 134-131-01, 02, 06, 15, 16, 18; 134-121-12, 17, 19, and 20.
-;:-
ell
-
III
ell
J:
I-
,
a.
Public Works (Engineering) Department
~
o
,
t-
O>
D.
:J.
~
M
q
~
~
c:
o
.,
III
U
<;::
:;;
o
::;:
D.
:J
U
"' .."
13. 1bis permit or approval is subject to !he attached conditions or requirements of !he
...~._..., --__following City.Departments or. Divisions; ,.., .'~ ..----- ......,,,. ...,.",", ,'. ...- .."" ...... ..~...
b.
Building Services Division of !he Planning and Building Services Department
c.
Water Department
d.
Fire Department
e.
Parks and Recreation Department
M
co
'<t
::.
1::
o
C.
ell
0::
lI::
III
-
VI
c:
o
'iii
III
'E
E
o
u
Cl
c:
'2
c:
III
ii:
~
~
..
~
N
~
,
~
-
:c
:2
)(
w
.;.;
c:
ell
E
J:
U
III
::::
<C
I pacl(et'pg; 539 I
J 7.E.b
Relevant Sections ofthe EIR (SeD #2009111 lj~J
~~~ --,
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
Environmental Impact Report
. South Coast Air Quality Management District: 1) Recommendations regarding the
analysis of. potential air quality impacts from the proposed project that should be
included in the draft environmental impact report.
2.3
COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
2.3.1
PUBLIC REVIEW OF DRAFT EIR
The Draft EI R is subject to a 45-day review period by responsible and trustee agencies and
interested parties. In accordance with the provision of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15085(a) and
15087(a)(1), the Redevelopment Agency, serving as the Lead Agency: 1) publiShes a notice of
availability of a Draft EIR In newspapers of general circulation, which states that the Draft EIR
will be available for review at City of San Bernardino City Hall located at 300 N. "D" Street and
the Economic Development Agency located at 201 North "E" Street, Suite 301; and 2) prepares
and transmits a Notice of Completion (NOC) to the State Clearinghouse. Proof of publication is
available at the City of San Bernardino.
Any public agency or members of the public desiring to comment on the Draft EIR must submit
their comments in writing to the individual identified on the document's NOC prior to the end of
the public review period. Either during or following the close of the public review period. the
Redevelopment Committee will hold a regularly scheduled publiC meeting regarding the Draft
EIR. The public will be afforded the opportunity to orally comment on the Draft EIR at the publiC
meeting. Such comments shall be recorded and shall have the same standing and response
requirements as written comments provided during the public review period. Upon the close of
the public review period, the Lead Agency will then proceed to evaluate and prepare responses
to all relevant oral and written comments received from both citizens and public agencies during
the public review period.
2.3.2
FINAL EIR
The Final EfR will consist of the Draft EIR. revisions to the Draft EIR, responses to comments
addressing concerns raised by responsible agencies or reviewing parties. and the mitigation
monitoring program. After the Final EIR is completed and at least 10 days prior to its
certification, a copy of the responses to comments made by public agencies on the Draft EIR
will be provided to the respective agencies.
2.4 INTENDED USES OF THIS EIR
The Redevelopment Agency, as the Lead Agency for the proposed project. will use this
Program EIR in consideration of the proposed project. This document will provide
. . environmental information to several other agencies affected by the proposed project, or which
~are likely to have an interest in the proposed project. Various State and Federal agencies
ercise control over certain aspects of the study area. The various public, private, and political
agencies and jurisdictions with particular interest in the proposed project include, but are not
limited to, the following: .
'C'
G>
-
co
G>
J:
I-
,
~
~
'"
,
....
Ol
D..
=>
!2..
'"
c:;>
~
~
l:
o
:;:;
co
u
;;::
'5
o
:;:
D..
=>
()
'"
co
'<t
~
0::
iij
OIl
l:
o
:;:;
U
G>
Ul
-
l:
co
>
G>
jjj
0::
,
~
-
:E
:c
)(
w
...
l:
G>
E
J:
U
co
~
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
2-8
Introduction Ind ~ PacKet Pg. 540 I
c:
o
.,
'"
Both the Public Resources Code and the CEQA Guidelines discuss the use of "tiering" .g
environmental impact reports by lead agencies. Public Resources Code Section 21068.5 ~
defines "tiering" as; ~. :;;
"The coverage of general matters and environmental effects in an environmental impact repa ~ ]
prepared for a policy, plan, program or ordinance followed by narrower or site-specific~ ::l
environmental impact reports which incorporate by reference the discussion in any priOr" . :;:!:
environmental impact report and which concentrate on the environmental effects which: (a) are ;;
capable of being mitigated, or (b) were not analyzed as significant effects on the environment in w
the prior environmental impact report. " III
c:
o
.,
u
CIl
<Il
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
Environmental Impact Report
While potential impacts to the freeway mainline segments and ramps have been evaluated and
mitigation measures suggested to reduce impacts, improvements to the freeway system are the
responsibility of the existing regional transportation agencies and not the City of San
Bernardino. Without the authority to implement the mitigation measures, the impact to freeway
segments would remain significant and unavoidable, requiring a statement of overriding
considerations.
City of San Bernardino Municipal Code. The City's Municipal Code consists of all regulatory,
penal, and administrative ordinances of the City of San Bernardino. It is the method the City
uses to implement control and land uses, in accordance with applicable goals and policies. The
City of San Bernardino Development Code (Title 19 of the Municipal Code) identifies the
permitted land uses according to zoning category of particular parcels.
2.7
CEQA DOCUMENT TIERING
Tiering is a method to streamline EIR preparation by allowing a Lead Agency to focus on the
issues that are ripe for decision and exclude from consideration issues already decided or not
yet read for decisions (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15152 and 15385). The concept of tiering
anticipates a multi-tiered approach to preparing EIRs. The first-tier EIR covers general issues in
a broader program-oriented analysis, including important program resource and mitigation
commitments required to be implemented at the project-level. Subsequent tiers incorporate by
reference the general discussions from the broader document, concentrating on the issues
specific to the proposed action being evaluated (CEQA Guidelines Section 15152).
First-tier documents are usually Program EIRs, Master EIRs, General Plan EIRs, Staged EIRs,
Redevelopment Plan EIRs, or similar EIRs. Second-tier documents are typically Project EIRs,
Focused EIRs, and Mitigated Negative Declarations that evaluate the impacts of a single activity
undertaken to implement the plan, program, or policy.'
When an EIR has been prepared and certified for a program or plan consistent with CEQA's
tiering requirements, a Lead Agency for a later project pursuant to or consistent with the
program or plan should limit the EIR on the later project to effects that were not examined as
significant effects on the environment in the prior EIR. In those situations where a
programmatic document does not specifically address and analyze the impacts and mitigation
measures necessary for a project-level action, the project-level environmental review can be
streamlined by tiering from the program-level documents. Agencies are encouraged to tier their
Ibid.
7.E.b
'C'
CIl
-
'"
CIl
J:
f-
,
~
o
,
....
'"
D..
::l
~
'"
o
,
~
~
-
c:
'"
>
CIl
a;
0::
,
~
-
:c
:2
><
w
.;..;
c:
CIl
E
J:
U
'"
-
~
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
2.11
Introduction and Packet Pg. 541'"'
1In_ ..
;.. :~. .,l
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
Environmental Impact Report
Siln til'l'Dilrl inn
CEQA analysis to avoid repetition of issues and to focus on the issues for decision at each level
of review. Subsequent CEQA compliance involves either the preparation of an EIR or Negative
Declaration.
For purposes of tiering, significant environmental effects have been "adequately addressed" in
the first-tier document if the Lead Agency determines that the significant environmental effects:
. Have been mitigated or avoided as a result of the prior EIR and adopted findings in
connection with that prior EIR
· Have been examined at a sufficient detail in the prior EIR to enable those effects to be
mitigated or avoided by site-specific revisions, the imposition of conditions, or by other
means with the approval of the later project; and
f$>-'
~..:. -.~' ....... .
r ... ...
Cannot be mitigated to avoid or substantially lessen the significant impacts despite the
project proponent's willingness to accept all feasible mitigation measures, and the only
purpose of including analysis of such effects in another EIR would be to put the agency
in a position to adopt a statement of overriding considerations with respect to the effects.
In the case of this proposed project, a Final ErR was certified for the City of San Bernardino
General Plan in November 2005. The General Plan EIR analyzed the impacts associated with
implementation of the goals and policies contained in the City's General Plan that are intended
to gUide growth and development in the City.
The General Plan EIR is considered a first-tier EIR. The EIR for this proposed project is
considered a second-tier EIR. and the analysis in this EIR has: 1) incorporated by reference the
General Plan EIR and 2) will tier the analysis in this EIR to focus on impacts not previously
analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
The first-tier EIR (General Plan EIR) provided analysis for the topics of: Aesthetics; Air Quality;
Biological Resources; Cultural Resources; Geology and Soils; Hazards and Hazardous
Materials; Hydrology and Water Quality; Land Use and Planning; Mineral Resources; Noise;
Population and Housing; Public Services; Recreation; Transportation and Traffic; and Utilities
and Service Systems.
For purposes of this EIR, the General Plan EIR has adequately addressed the proposed
project's impacts related to Agricultural Resources and Mineral Resources. as the growth
anlicipated under the proposed project is consistent with and accounted for in the projected
growth anticipated under the General Plan. Topics to be tiered off the General Plan EIR in this
EIR (second-tier EIR) include Land Use; Population and Employment; Aesthetics; Traffic; Air
Quality/Greenhouse Gas; Noise; Geology and Seismic Hazards; Hydrology and Water Quality;
Hazards/Risk of Upset; Fire Protection; Police Protection; School Facilities; Parks and
Recreational Facilities; Water; Wastewater; Solid Waste; and Electricity and Natural Gas.
This second-tier EIR will be used by the Lead Agency (Redevelopment Agency) to evaluate the
proposed project's environmental impacts, and can be further used to modify, approve, or deny
the approval of the proposed project based on the analysis it provides.
7.E.b
~
"
-
..
"
J:
f-
,
-
o
..:.
'"
0..
:;)
~
(")
o
,
-
-
<:
o
:;::;
..
"
~
."
o
:;:
0..
:;)
U
(")
co
....
:::.
II::
W
III
<:
o
:;::;
"
"
'"
-
<:
..
>
"
a;
II::
,
-
-
:a
:E
><
w
.;..:
<:
"
E
J:
"
..
-
::(
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
Introduction and
Packl!!j'g.542
2-12
_.- '.
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
Environmental Impact Report
San RI'llIilr Ino
PROJECT AREA MERGER
CRL Section 33485 stales that "Mergers of project areas are desirable as a matter of public
policy if they result in substantial benefit to the public and if they contribute to the revitalization
of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of those areas and through increased
and improved housing opportunities in or near such areas." Furthermore, CRL Section 33486
states that project areas may be merged, without regard to contiguity of the areas, by the
amendment of each affected redevelopment plan as provided in CRL Section 33450, Before
adopting the ordinance amending each affected redevelopment plan, the Mayor and Common
Council must find, based on substantial evidence, that both of the following conditions exist:
1, Significant blight remains within one of the project areas being merged,
2, This blight cannot be eliminated without merging the project areas and the receipt of
property taxes,
3.6.3
PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE BLIGHT"
This section provides a description of the projects or programs proposed to eliminate the
remaining blight, how they will improve the conditions of blight, and the reasons why the
projects or programs cannot be completed without the Merger and Amendments,
While the Agency has been effective in eliminating blight through public facilities and
infrastructure improvements, site acquisition and clearance, and new construction and
rehabilitation projects, significant blight remains prevalent throughout Merged Area A, as
detailed in Section A of the Preliminary Report, The Agency will continue to carry out consistent
projects and programs in Merged Area A, but seeks to augment its financial capacity to continue
to implement a corridor-based approach to the elimination of blight. Rather than focusing on
piecemealed projects within individual Project Areas, the Agency's focus is to address blighting
conditions along key corridors in Merged Area A (e,g.. Waterman Avenue. Baseline Street,
Arrowhead Avenue, Hospitality Lane, Orange Show Road), and invest in the revitalization of the
City's "Downtown Core," The Downtown Core is generally bound by 6th Street to the north,
Waterman Avenue to the east, the 1-215 Freeway to the west, and Rialto Avenue to the south,
It encompasses the southern half of Central City North, almost all of Central City East and
Meadowbrook/Central City, and a northern portion of Central City South,
DOWNTOWN CORE VISION/ACTION PLAN
The Downtown Core is currently home to local, regional, state, and federal government centers
(e,g" City Hall, County administrative offices, Courthouse, IRS, Consulate General of Mexico),
~he San Bernardino Convention Center, an emerging Theater District, Carousel Mall,
educational and workforce development centers, a public transportation hub, Seccombe Lake,
ordable housing, and other new development projects, To cast a strategic vision for the
revitalization of the Downtown Core, the City and Agency recently completed the Downtown
Core Vision/Action Plan in summer 2009, which created a visual simulation of the Downtown
Core's redevelopment potential. Key elements of the Downtown Core Vision/Action Plan
.
Source: Prellminery Report, San Bemardino Merged Area A Merger & Amendments; April 5, 2010; prepared by
Rosenow Spevacek Group,
7.E.b
~
~
Gl
-
..
Gl
J:
I-
,
~
~
o
,
....
en
D..
:J
~
M
o
,
~
~
c
o
:;:
..
"
;;::
'5
o
:;;
D..
:J
o
M
to
'<t
::.
IX
iij
III
C
o
:;:
"
Gl
rn
-
c
..
>
Gl
Q;
IX
~
-
:c
:E
><
w
'-'
C
Gl
E
J:
"
..
-
:(
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
J: Packet Pg. 543
Project De ,
3-16
~,
'<;)'1- ,'.
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
Environmental Impact Report
7.E.b
include a new inter-governmental civic center complex, a courthouse building, a night-time.' .
entertainment Theater District with retail and restaurant uses, a transit village, Court Stre~et. . I
Square, a Main Street retail corridor, a new hotel to complement the Convention Center, arrt .
new Seccombe Lake and Meadowbrook Park residential and mixed-use development projects. . ~
-
..
. ..
The Downtown Core Vision/Action Plan casts a long-range revitalization strategy that will'. ~
require significant public-private investment and redevelopment tax increment financing to ~
assemble land for development, upgrade public infrastructure and utility systems to meet ~
increased service demands, create new parks and public transportation systems to serve future S;
residents and visitors, and build affordable housing to create a balanced community. The !5
catalyst projects and accompanying infrastructure improvements envisioned by the Downtown ~
Core Vision/Action Plan will eliminate blighting conditions by creating jobs, increasing income g
levels, assembling and redeveloping blighted properties, replacing aged infrastructure, i:
addressing incompatible uses, increasing properly values, remediatJng environmentally l:
o
contaminated sites, reducing office and retail vacancies, creating needed commercial facilities. :=
..
and addressing uses that contribute to the threat to the public health, safety, and welfare of .g
residents in Merged Area A. :c
o
:;:
C.
:J
(.)
The proposed Merger and Amendments will allow the Agency to leverage and pool tax
increment revenues from the affected Project Areas to implement the Downtown Core
Vision/Action Plan for the benefit of the entire Merged Area A. New tax increment revenues
generated from increased properly values resulting from properly revitalization can be invested
toward additional public improvements in the Downtown Core and other parts of Merged Area A.
The Agency estimates $75 million in project costs for implementation of the Downtown Core
Vision/Action Plan through the life of the Merged Plan. The proposed 1 a-year extensions of the
Central City North and Meadowbrook/Central City Project Areas are needed to: (1) allow
sufficient time for the Agency to implement the long-range objectives of the Downtown Core
Vision/Action Plan in those Project Areas, particularly given the current temperature of the real
estate market; and (2) create sufficient financing capacity in those Project Areas as
redevelopment proceeds to finance public facilities and infrastructure upgrades and facilitate
key catalytic development projects. The proposed increases in the Agency's limitations on tax
increment collection and bonded indebtedness will ensure that the Agency has sufficient
financing capacity to fund redevelopment activities throughout Merged Area A, including the
Downtown Core.
Given the current economic climate and troubling trends in the real estate market,
implementation of major programs like the Downtown Core Vision/Action Plan cannot
reasonably be expected to occur either by private enterprise or governmental action alone, but
only by leveraging the unique redevelopment powers and financing capabilities of the Agency to
create public-private enterprise activities. This is especially true now as the City struggles to
address its own general fund budgetary gap. With little to no new revenue streams availabie to
implement the Downtown Core Vision/Action Plan, the City will rely heavily on the Agency to
secure funding for next steps under the Plan. With increased financial responsibility to carry out
major projects and programs in Merged Area A, the proposed Merger and Amendments is
necessary to ensure the Agency has adequate financial capacity and tools to see these
revitalization activities through to successful completion.
'"
co
<t
~
l:t:
W
'"
l:
o
:=
u
..
'"
-
l:
..
>
..
Gi
l:t:
,
-
-
:c
:E
)(
l1J
..,
l:
..
E
.s:::
u
..
::::
<(
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
3.17
P[OJect Om P!~l<et Pg. 544
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
Environmental Impact Report
,~un H,'mar ,""
In total, the redevelopment potential within the Project Area is:
. 5,681,674 square feet of commercial (retail, general, office, lodging) uses
. 518,916 square feet of industrial uses
. 1,833 multi-family residential units
Table 3-5
Identified Near-Term Redevelopment Projects
Al:tlv/ly Description Project Areals)
Carousel Mill Redevelopment Project: Investigate possible new uses at Carousel Central City Projects
Mall as identified in the Downtown Core Vision/Action Plan, including a potential new
Qovemment center and urban retail and housing uses to complement existing retail.
Heritage Squire: Deveiop Court Street as the 'Heritege Square' District as identified Central City North
by the Downtown Core Vision/Action Plan.
Redevelopment of Former Military Flcillties: Enter into an agreement with a Central City Projects
developer for demolition/site clearance of fonner military facilities at Third Street and
Watennan Avenue for neighborl100d-supporting retail uses.
Seccombe Lake Village: Development of 12.5 acres of land into mixed use Central City Projects
development of high and low density residential and retail on the northeast comer of
Sierra Avenue and 5" Street
Arrowhead Credit Union Headquarters Campus: Continue 10 work with Arrowl1ead Central City Projects
Credit Union for nelocation of corporate facilities. Arrowhead Credit Union has acquired
undeveloped and dilapidated properties to the west of the above site to provide
additional space for a third building for the Arrowhead Central Credit Union Corporale
headQuarters campus site.
i Theater Distrll:t Implementation: Studies, improvements, and implementation Central City North
I activities to create a Downtown Thealer District and development of retaiVnestaurant
I pads.
sbX Implementation: Facilitate implementation of the sbX Bus Rapid Transit Project Central City North/ Central City
in the Downlown Core, including transit-oriented development and brown fields Projects! ALL
assessmenV remediation.
Intermodal Transit Station: Design and construction of an Intermedal Transit Station
located at the Southwest comer of Riallo and E Street on a vacant 4.5-acne parcel to
replace current bus transit mall along 4' Street.
sbX Translt-Ortented Development: Study and enter into development agreements
for transit-oriented develoDment proiects along the sbX line.
01'.....'.
, ',.
I' .,...
,'... ,
,
3,7
ASSUMPTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
As noted in Section 2.0, Introduction, a Program EIR has been prepared for the proposed
project, described above in Section 3.6, Proiect Characteristics. As such, this Program EIR has
reviewed the overall development potential for both vacant land and identified near-term
redevelopment projects; however, site-specific impacts with the near-term redevelopment
projects or specific capital improvement projects have not been reviewed.
7.E.b
~
~
Q)
-
III
Q)
..c:
I-
,
~
o
,
...
'"
n.
:l
~
M
o
,
~
~
l:
o
:;:;
III
U
l;::
:a
o
:;;
n.
:l
()
M
co
....
~
c::
iii
'"
l:
o
:;:;
u
Q)
en
-
l:
III
>
Q)
Qj
c::
~
-
:a
:c
><
lU
.;.;
l:
Q)
E
..c:
u
III
~
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
Project Des
3.22
San Bernardino Merged Area A - Merger and Amendments
'",'mom_1m,,,, R"""'p,
Subsequent individual development projects and/or capital improvement projects proposed.:..... .
within the City will be reviewed in the context of this Program EIR' and the General Plan EIR to '.' '.
determine if additional environmental documentation is required. If the subsequent project
would have site-sl!ecifiG-environm~ntaLeffElclLnoLai:t~!_essed in the Program EJR and/or
General Plan EIR, additional environmental review will be required. Where no new effects ami
no new miti9.!ltion m~asures areinj'olved, the subsequent project can be approved without
additlonarenvironmenta'-documentation. - Where an EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) is required for a subsequent project, the EIR or MND should implement the applicable
mitigation measures developed in the Program EIR, and focus its analysis on site-specific
issues not previously addressed.
3.8
PHASING
Individual improvement and redevelopment projects would occur in incremental phases over
time, based largely on economio considerations, financial feasibility, infrastructure
improvements, market demand, and other planning considerations. The phasing and exact
details of each project would be evaluated by the Agency on a case-by-case basis.
3.9 AGREEMENTS, PERMITS, AND APPROVALS
Following a determination that the Final EIR is adequate and certification of the Final EIR by the
Community Development Commission, a Notice of Determination (NOD) would be issued by the
Agency. In addition, adoption of the proposed San Bernardino Merged Area A Merger &
Amendments would be the responsibility of the Mayor and Common Council. Redevelopment
projects, to the extent not already analyzed in accordance with the proposed project, could be
subject to additional environmental review on an individual basis, in accordance with the
provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, as determined by the Agency.
7.E;b
)
';:"
Gl
-
'"
Gl
.<:
...
,
~
~
<>
,
....
en
c..
:;)
~
M
<;>
~
~
l:
o
::::
'"
u
'"
:;;
o
:;;
c..
:;)
()
M
00
'<t
~
0::
iii
III
l:
o
::::
u
Gl
Ul
-
l:
'"
>
Gl
a;
0::
,
~
-
;e
.<:
><
W
.;..;
l:
Gl
E
.<:
u
'"
-
4:
DRAFT. JUNE 2010
3-23
Project Dnl f'8cket Pg. 546 I
7.E.c
Mitigiated Negative Delcaration for CUP97-01
Discussion of En,'ironmental Enllualion lInd IIliti~alion lIIeasures
The following substantiation of /in dings in the Environmental Checklist Form follows Ihe same order ofpresentalion as found Ul
Section B of the Checklist. A short summaI)' oflhe environmental selling for Ihe resource is presented as background information
the substantialion discussion. References 10 the subslanlialing infonnalion are provided at the end of each lopic.
1. Earth Resources
Environmental Selling
'J
,
Ii
~
~
Cll
-
III
Cll
Topographically, the projecl sile is essenlially liat wilh a 1-2% slope 10 the soulh. The sile is underlain by alluvial sedimelll deposi ~
by runofl'from Ule San Bernardino Mounlains. Hislorically, Ihe projecl site, localed on the wesl side of"E" Slreel between Fourth a ..:...
Fifth Streets, has been occupied by slructures, bul Ol present severn I vacanl 10ls exist where Slructures have been demolished a c;
removed. Parking al'CllS Cover aboul 20% of Ihe exisling project sile and Ihree buildings wilh approximately 20,000 square fc :;;
enoomp:lSS the remainder. Based on a review of geologic lileralure, Ihe City General Plan and other documellls, the nearesl known fal 0..
is the San Jacinlo Faulllocaled about ~ 10 one mile west of Ihe project sileo No active faullS are occur in Ihe project area. The site 13
;':'1 subject to ground slUlking when an earthquake occurs in the region and mOre particularly on the lhree nearest faults: San Andreas, 51 ;;;
~. i Jacinto, and Cucamonga Faults. Figure 46 in lhe General Plan indi"1les Ihe site may be e.\'posed to maximum credible groUl ~
aoeelerntions of bel Ween .6g and .8g based on the assumed maximum credible e.1rthquakes on each of these Ihree faults. The Gener. ~
""'l Plan (Figures 48 and 51) indicates thatlhe project sile may be affecled by lwo geologic hazards; Iiquefaclion and subsidence. No OllIe g
1.1 geologic hazards are known to affecllhe project sile. 1;
W ~
'5
o
::!i
The e.'llClamounl of earth 1110''l:lncnl on Ihc Projecl sile has nOI yel been dClermined for Ihe SBEC Project. However, given th, ~
t)'pe of slruclures, no e.'lensive foundation work will be required 10 conslructthe four buildings and suppon facilities. It i, U
probable Ihatless than 500 cubic yards of cui and fill will Occur as part of Ihe gmding and compaction of the sile, Althougt .;;
a subslantial amount of soil material llIay be disturbed on Ihe project site as individual structure foundalions are conslructed, ~
the final grade \';11 be comparnb/e 10 thar which currenlly exists. AI the eomp/elion of grading. the site will remain essentially ~
flat ,,;UljUSl enough slope 10 provide for continued adequ.1le drninage of lhe property. No Sleep slopes will be crealed as a result c;
of the proposed grading activilies. Based on the existing slope of the property and lack of any potential for cltange in tOPOgraphy ...:.
m
and creation of sleep slopes on the property, the polenlial impacl from project grading is considered a nonsignificant impact. 0..
POlential wind and waler erosion arc addressed in subsequent sections of this documenl. TIle infonnalion provided in tllis 13
discussion was oblained from reviewing geologic /itemlure cited below, from a review of Ihe City Geneml Plan and Technical c
BaekgroWld Report. from a field inspeclion oflhe projecI sile. and frol1\ discussions wilh Ihe EDA and project developer. No ~
miligation is proposed or required.
Potenllallmpact
l.a.
"
,
\:~
[ I
Lb.
I.c.
The project site is not/ocmed \\;Ihin any Alquist-Priolo E.1Mhquake Faull Zone (ERZ) as illustrated on Figure 47 of the General
Plan. 11le n"'lrest ERZ appears 10 be underlain b)' Ihal for the San Jacinlo Faull SYSlem. localed approximately one mile wesl
ofllle project sile. The Glen Heleu Fault. which is known to be active. is buried and l1\a)' be localed aboul V, mile wesl of lhe
projecl sileo No polenlial for additional adverse impacts due 10 faull relaled ground mplure ha7.1rds is forecast 10 occur. No
mitigmlon is Proposed or required for the Proposed aCli,'it)'. The infonnalion pro,'ided in Ihis discussion was oblained from lhe
Cily of San Bernardino Gencral Plan. Tcchnical Background Report and Final Environlllenlallmpacl Report.
~
-
The projecl site has been hislorically graded and compncted. and is essentially flal. Overall slope oflhe land in this area is :c
:;:
approximalely 1-2% to the soulh. No slopes grealer than 15% exist atlhis sile. 11le information provided in this discussion "
was oblained fromlhe San Bernardino Soulh. U.S.G.S. 7.S' Topographic M.1p and a field inspection oflhe project sileo W
.;..;
C
"
E
J:
U
III
-
<
..1
I.d. No unique gcologic or ph)'si"11 fealures are known 10 occur wilhiulhe projecl boundarics. The project sile has been hislorically
dislwbcd and Ihe proposed SBEC projecl will nol aller .111)' geologic fcalure nol previOUSly dislurbed. Therefore, no polential
for adverse impaclto such features can occllr. The informalion provided in Ihis discussion was obtained from a field review
ofllle project sile and Ihe City' of San Bernardino Genernl Plan. Technic..1 Background Repon and Final Environmental Impact
Report.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 16
8/94
16
I Packetpg. 547 I
~.~~ I.e. .
,~,
. J..,
~;-'
i .
tg,
"
!
.
-,
LIt
7.E.c
The project site is not locmed in an area with defined high potenlial for wind or waler erosion. A field review of Ihe
indicates that it is essentially flal. TIle site and surrounding area are de\'eloped with structures and urban landscaping, Fin'
the project site exhibits no signs of erosion, Therefore, no potemial for significant erosion impact is forecast to occur,
information provided in Ihis discussion was obtained from a field review of Ihe projcct site and the City of San Bernarc
General Plan, Technical Background Report and Final Environmental Impact Report,
Lf
Based on a site field survey, the projcct sile does not contain an)' channels, creeks or rivers, A review of the topographic n
for tile project area shows that Ihe nearest channels arc L)'t1e Creek, about two miles west and soulh and Warm Creek, ab i
one mile to the ..'Sl. Therefore, no potenlial adverse impact to any channel, creek, or river will OCCur if the SBEC Projcc n;
implemented, The infonnnlion provided in this discussion was oblained from a field review and the grading plnn and a revi ~
of the Snn Bernardino South 7,5' Topographic Map, I-
~
~
o
Due to the shallow slope of the project sile '!lId surrounding area, no potential exists for landslides or mudslides to occur ons ,.:.
or to afTcctlhe property from ofTsite, However, the projcct sile is idenlified as being subject to potenlially significant grou ~
shaking from regional earthqunkes and as shown on Figure 48 of the General Plan, it is also identified as being subject :J
subsidence related to eilller ground shaking or lowering of the wnter tabk Based on Ihe present depth to ground water at II ~
location, more than 100 feet, the pOlential for subsidence is considered to be low, The Cily considers Ihese types of seism 9
hazards 10 be subject to standard engineering mitigation and not a significant adverse environmental impacl. However, :::
ensure the structural hazards rel<lled to ground shaking. subsidence. and liquefaction the following mitigation measure sh, l:
be implemented: ,g
'"
u
Pursuant to and in compliance with the City's ILilluef"ctiolJ Ordinance (MC-676), the all/llicant shall have ~
qualified geotechnienl professionnl (Engineering Geologist or Professional Engineer) prepare a geoteehnic, ~
study of the project site p,;or to completing the finnl design of the structures. As part of this geotechnical stud) lL
the IlOtential for ground sha'iing, subsidence nnd liquefnetion impncts sholl be im'estigated for this site and, i B
required, measu,'es to mitigate potentinl ground shaldng 'Ind liquefaction hazards shall be identified. Thi ..
in\'estignlion shall inelude an evnluntion of hi.torie water tnble Ic\'els and the role that a rising water table coulc ::l
play in potentinl for Iiquefnction. The applieant shnll implement those measures required to protect the :!
structures from significant ground shaliing, subsidence. nod Ii(Juefnction haznrus. For this Ilrojcct, reducet T""
helow a signifieant impact shall be based on n design lh:1t I"'otects life and minimizes damage to the struetures, c;>
....
en
lL
:J
U
C
Z
:;;
1.g.1
The infonnation pro\1ded in this discussion \lTIS obtained frOllllhe Cit)' Geneml Plan documents and lhe San Bernardino Valley
Waler Conservation District Annual Report.
As noted in the previous discussion, the project site nHl)' be exposed to high liquefaction susceptibilily, This is based on
historically high ground \lTIter lable and alluvial deposils \l'hieh could be conduci\'e 10 liquer.,ction. A review of current ground ~
water dma ("San Bernardino Vallc)' Wnter Conseryalion Districl Annual Engineering Investigalion and Report (7/92 _ 6/93)") :is
indicntes Ulatthe current elevation of ground \l'mer in the project nrea is 9-10 feel. The projecl sile is situated al approximately :2
x
1050 feel elevation, Based on the depth to ground water at this localion, Illore than 100 feel.lhe pOlential for liquefaction is w
very low, Mitigation Illeasure I.g, J \l'ill be implclllelllcd to ensure that human life and stmclures arc protected from extreme .g
h<l7...ards during fI m:~jor seismic C\-CIH. No addjliOl1.1lmitigalion is required. Q)
E
J:
U
'"
:i
The infonnation provided in this discussiou \l'as obtained fromlhe Cil,\' Genernl Plan documents and Ihe San Bernardino Valley
Waler Consen'ation Dislrict Annual Repon,
References
1.1 No other Earth Resource issnes ha\'e been identified Ihal would bc aITected or \l'ould aITeet the project
&rlllj;1'I0, E.J. and Spillli.T. T.E.. 1986. G.:olol!i.: ~1J.1'I oflh.: Salllll'nl:lrdilhl Oll:"trarll!k ~l;lr ]";0, J,.\ (Urology), Seal.: I:HO,OOO
Ci,)' ofS:mlkm.3rdino. 1989. in:J.t .1lI'iromn':lllallm a~1lh' 'l(Jr1 ('in' llf Kill Ik'marllill'l Cl..'ll.:mll' :111
Cily ofS.1n Lk'nurdino. 1989. Go:no:ral rl.'lI.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 17
8/94
] 7
I Packet P9'548
7.E.c
CilyofSan &rnomIino. 1988.
f~:1n ~:l j ("~ . Plaull a\ 'C'dlll'cn J~' oLlnd n" 1 .
O~ience SUpport Servicn,lnc.. 1993. San
:I ina VI, WlU~r on.wn'.3t"Cln Di~ri lnllal:'
\' i atinn.nd
7: 2.6'93.
United States Geological SUr\lC)', 1967, rhotol"e\ilCd 1980. San B~mardjl1o South QU3dnn81~. C3lifl'lmia. 7.$ Minute S.....ics (Topogr:lphic~
2. AIR RESOURCES
Environmental Selting
...,
Winds across tI,e project area control both the initial dilulion rale of 100111)' gencralcd nir pollutant emissions and their regionallrajectory.
In gcneral, ayerage wind speeds arc lower in the inland vnllc)'s th:1I1 along the eoasl because seas breezes are weaker by the lime they ~
TC.1ch the project aren. Wind speeds mensurcd nt Norton Air Force B:lsc oyer a 26-)'c.1f period averaged four miles per hour. Winds OCcur ii
from nil direelions, \\ilh more thnn 43% coming fromlhe WCSI. west soulhwest, or southwes!. Winds from this direction OCcur during :;:
the d.1Y. At night, lI,e wind flow pn"ern reverses, with nn olTshore flow genernlly coming from the cast or northens!. Night winds are .ll
slower limn d.1}1ime breezes offlhe occnn. Onshore breezes nre slrongest in summer and nighllime drainage winds arc stronger in winter
than in summer.
The e1i"",te omu: proposed project site in dO\ll11O\\11 San Bernardino is less nffected by Ihe moderaling effects oflhe Pacific Ocean than
nre coastal areas in Los Angeles and Orange counlies. Therefore, differences belween summer and winter temperatures ane more ~
e'wme. Average temperatures in and ne.1r San Bernardino rnnge from n minimum of 37 degrees F in January to an average maximum 9
....
of 97 degrees F in July. During a 91-year reporting period ending in 1980, annual rainfall at San Bernardino averaged 16.57 inches, en
c..
willI a maximum annual rainfall of 21.69 inches and a minimum of 7.36 inches. The project area receives slightly higher volumes of ::::l
rain due to the chnnge in topogrnphy. About 20 inches of rain [;1115011 the project area on rhe a\'ClilgC. 0
C
Z
::;;
~
~
"
-
'"
The Cil)' of San Bernardino is in the San Bernardino Count)' portion oflhe South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), a 6,600-square-mile a, ~
encompassing Orange Count)' and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Ril'erside, and San Bernardino Counties. Bounded b}' t I-
Pacific Ocean to the west and lhe San Gabriel, San Bernardino, ,md San Jacinto mountains to the nonh and east, its topography a, ~
climate make the SCAB particularly eonduc;,'e to the form:Hion and retention of air pollution. ~
en
c..
::::l
~
The slrength and location of a scmipennanenl, subtropical high pressure cell over the Pacific Ocean primarily controls the SCAB ~
climme. Climate is also affected by the moderating effects of differential heating belween the land area of California and the adjacc. i:
Pacific Ocean, Wann summers, mild winter, infrequent rainfall, moderate da}1ime onshore breezes, and moderate humidili< !:
characterize local climatic conditions. ,g
'"
o
Because of topographic features and distance Ii'omthe ocean, I'arious microclimntes exist wilhin the overall climate of the SCAB. Sine ~
tIre moderating marine influence d=s with distance from Ihe coast, montl,ly and annual spreads belween temperatures are greates ~
inland. Precipitation is highly variable 5e.1sonally. Snmmers arc often completely dry throughoulthe SCAB. There are frequent period: c..
OffOUT to five monlllS lrill, no rain. In "intcr, storm fronts (low pressure systems) periodically sweep across lhe Pacific Ocean bringin! a
rain. Ann",1l rainf.111 is lowest in the c0.1stal plain and inl,md vallc)'s, higher in the foothills, and highest in the surrounding mountains. ,.
M
co
...
=-
Meteorology
r-'
....
i-'
I
t.1
.
, ,
Predominant wind pallems arc broken by occasional winler Slorms and episodes of Soma Ana winds. The laller arc slrong nonhcrl)'
or nonheasterly dry winds tlml originale from Ihe desert or lhe Greal Basin, pri,,,"rily during September Ihrough March following the
pass.1gc of low pressure s)'stems. Highest wind speeds in the project [lrca OCcur [It this time when Ihe clockwise wind circulation in the
SYSlem produccs a nonh or northeast flow as Ihe air is pushcd soulhward ol'er the San Bern",dino Mountains and funneled through the
passes. Ol'er thc 26-yenr moniroring period m Norton Air Force Base. the al'erage of the highest gnst recorded each year was 57 miles
per hour. Santa Ana \\ind conditions occur about fivc to len limes pcr vear. wilh each OCCurrence lasling for a few hours 10 a few da}'s.
....
!:
"
E
.c:
o
'"
-
<(
LOOlli7.ed melcorologicnl conditions can creale "'cas of I,igh pollulanl concenll,Hions by hindering dispersal. Temper;llure i'lI'ersions,
which are temperatures that incrc;lSC "'lh altilude instC1d of deerc:lsing, h:IIHper dispersion by trapping air pollulallls in a Iimilcd volume
of airspace near Ihe ground. For example, the highest concelHr:Jlions of carbon monoxide occur during winter when temperature
inversions are lower and stronger (more resistant to dissipalion b)' ground healing).
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 18
8/94
18
I Packet Pg'!' 54,9 I
7.E.c
Formation of ltigh ozone concentrations requires adcqume sunshine, early morning stagnmion in source ar..,s, high surface temperatUJ
strong and Jow morning in\'ersions, greally restricled \'crtical mixing during the day, and da)1ime subsidence thm strengthens
inversion layer. Because of ozone's long formalion time in Ihe atmosphere, ozone concentrations are substantially a/Tected by WI
lransport patterns.
High nitrogen dioxide levels uSlmll)' OCCUr during the autumn or winler on da)'s with summer-like weather eondilions, bUI when sunli!
is nO! sufficienlly intense to fuel IIle photochemicnl re.1elions belwecn oxides of nitrogen and rcacti\'e organic compounds Ihat fonn OZOl
Particulate concentrations vary seasonally wilh Ihe summer months having high concentrations of secondarily-formed particulates d :.
to chemical interactions driven by intense sunlight, and \\inler inversions trapping primary emitted pnniculates. Violations of pnnicub 10
CIl
ambient air quality standards OCcur during all seasons, with the highesl concentrations in the summer. J:
I-
Ambient Air Qualil)'
1"";
-
~
o
,
...
Contaminant Icvels in air s.1mples are eompored to nmional and stme slandards, shown in Table I, to detennine ambient pollum: ~
concentrations. Air quality st.1nd.1rds are set by the U.S. Emiromnenlal Protection Ageney (EP A) and Ihe California Air Resources Bom a
(CARB) at levels to protect public health and welf.1fC wilh an adcqu.1le uwgin of safety. There are nalional and Slale standards for ozor ~
(0,), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO,), PM" (suspended particulate mailer 10 microns or less in diameter), sulfur dioxid 9
'.' (so,), and lead (Pb). TIIC Soulh Coast Air Qualily M:magemenl District (SCAQMD) also measures for compliance wilh Iwo other Slat ~
standards: sulfates and visibility. The federal EPA is presenlly in Ihe process of reviewing new ozone and particulate (2.5 micron g
diameter) stand.1I'ds, bul these st.1ndards are nOllikely to be approved and implemented during the review of this project so they will nc 'ji;
be considered in this anal}'sis. .!1
-
ii
Ozone (0,), a colorless toxic gas which forms in the almosphere through a photochemical reaction of reactive organic compounds aU( ~
nitrogen oxide, irritates the lungs and damages fonnation of ozoue. PM" is small particulale matter less Ihan 10 micrometers ir Q.
diameter. Caroon monoxide (CO) is a colorless gas which inlerferes with the transfer of o~)'gen to Ihe brain. Nilrogen dioxide (NO,: a
is a reddish-brown gas which can cause brealhing dimcuhies al high concentralions and which also contributes to the small particle,
M
thaI causes a greater health risk than larger particulate matter sillce tille particles more "'sil)' penelrate the defenses of Ihe human co
...
respiratory system and cause irrilation by themsel\'cs and in cOlllbin3lion wilh gases. :s
4,2.1.3 Regional Air Quality
1
~
o
,
...
'"
Q.
The SCAQMD samples ambienl air at monitoring slations in and around the Soulh Co.1St and Soulheast Desert Air Basins that are within ;:)
ilsjurisdiction. National and state slandards for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and PM" and stale standards for visibility ~
,. i are regularly exceeded in the SCAB. In 1993. thc peak ozonc reading in the SCAB was almosl three times Ihe National Ambient Air z
l.; Quality Slaad.1rd (NAAQS). TIle Los Angeles urban area cxceeds Ihis standard 1II0re freqllently Ihan any other area in IIle Unitcd States, :;:
alld also records the highest peak readings.
:",
. ,
LJ
~
-
;e
Stand.llds for carbon monoxide arc exceeded in more densely popnlaled Los Angeles and Orange countics, bUI not in Rivcrside and San J:
><
Bcnmrdino countics. Los Angeles County wns the only arc:1 in the nation which e.'\cecdcd lhe national nnnunl nitrogen dioxide standard, W
bUllhc SCAB ,,(]S dctcnnincd 10 be in compliancc "11h the federal nitrogen dioxide slnndnrd. i.e. Cittainment, in 1995. The slate nitrogen
dioxide one hour slal1d~lrd is exceeded in both Los Angeles .md Ornngc COLI lilies, The number of readings over the SI.He slnndard
fluctuates frol11 ycnr (0 )'c.lr, depending on \\'c,llhcr p:lllcrns,
..,
l:
CIl
E
J:
U
..
-
<(
PM'O leyels regularly exceed nationnl nod Slnlc stnnd:Jrds in Los Angclcs. Ri\'(~rsidc. and San B~rnD:rdino counties, :md stnte standards
in Orangc County. Sulfur dioxide and Jc:ld Ic\'cls in all areas of (he Basin tlrc below nBrionnl and Slate standard IimilS,
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 19
8/94
19
I Packet Pg. 550': I
7.E.c
4.2.1.4 Attainment Areas
",
j ;
,
The CARB divides lbe state inlo air basins, based upon similar meleorological conditions, The SCAQMD maintains monitoring stat
throughoutllle South Coast Air Basin and the ponions of the Southeast Desen Air Basin that it administers to record ambient level
regulated pollutants, If any monitoring stalion in an air basin records concenlralions of an air pollutant which exceed state or fed,
air quality standards. lbe enlire basin is genemll)' detennined to be a non-anainment area for that pollutan!. As long as no violatiol
an ambient air quality standard occurs, a basin is delermined 10 be in anainmenl. Carbon monoxide. a pollulant where highest ambi ~
~
air concentrations occur in the immediale vicinity of Ihe source of emissions, is now tre.1ted somewhat differently by the CAI oS!
designmion ofalt.1irunenl and non-anainment arc.1S for carbon monoxide are by sub'lrea, nOlair basin, in some cases. EPA and CA :ll
have desigmted Ule entire South Coast Air Basin, which includes all of Orange County and the non-desen ponions of Los Angeles. ~ t=
Bernardino and Riverside counties, as federal and stale non-allaimnent areas for ozone and fine p.1nieulale matter (PM,,). The Sc.
is in allainment with the federal nilrogen oxide standard bUI continues 10 violate the Slate standard. Both ozone and nitrogen diox ~
are regional pollutanls in that IIley are Crc.1ted when pollutanls combine in the almosphere at some distance from where they are initi: ~
emilted. PM" also fonns in the atmosphere through chemical reaelions \\'ilh olher pollutants, as well as occurring nmurally in very f ~
soil, man.made panicles, and sea spra)', ~
M
San Bernardino and Riverside counties arc designated as allainment areas for both slale and fedeml carbon monoxide standards. 01 ~
the Los Angeles and Orange County ponions of Ihe B:lsin are designated as federal and stale non-allainment areas for CO. Weath, ~
adjusted CO concentrations in the SCAB declined by 47% between 1976 and 1990, and are projected to decline fun her because of n, .~
CO standards on vehicles and use of o')'genated fuels in winter. The federal one-hour standard has not been exceeded anywhere in t m
Basin for more 1Il3fl five years, bUllhe more slringent slate-one hour slandard is occasionally exceeded and Ihe s~1te and federal eigl ~
hour standards are frequently ..xeeeded throughout Los Angeles and Orange cOllnties. Highest eoneentralions of CO and the me -g
exeeedances occurred in Lynwood in Los Angeles COllnly o\'er the past fi\'e years. ::;:
a.
::l
Local Air Quality u
, ,
'f
:.
4.2.1.6 Regulatory Setlillg
Pc.'1k pollut.nt coneentralions \"1)' from year 10 )'eor, dependillg on meteorologicnl conditions, Olone concentrations .nd numbers 0
cxcccdnnces have fluclualcd at the San Bernardino station over the pasllh'c years, ahhough the running 3\'cragc number of days ave
the state standard has decreased sllbstanti.Il)" over the fi\'e-)'eor period. As inlhe resl of the Basin, CO concentrations have declined ::
Nitrogen dioxide levels have remained nppro.'\imatcl)' the same. with some decline oyer 1989 levels. PM10 concentrations sho\\ ~
substantial decreases, but they lw\'c no! been adjusted for went her p:lllcrns and slIch conccnlralions c.1n vnry substantially because oj ~
wealher. W
.;.;
l:
CI)
E
.<:
"
..
-
<(
M
Ambient air quality in the project area is measured at Ihe SCAQMD monitoring slation located al 24302 San Bernardino Avenue, SOUl ~
#62 in the City of San Bem.1rdino. The San Bernardino stalion monitors ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, sulfate, tOI' :!::.
suspended particulates, and PM". Table 2 lists the air qll.lil)" rc.dings althe stalion from 1989 through 1993 for pollutanls for whie ~
the South Coast Air Basin Ims been design:Jlcd a federal non-all.lnmenl aren. Slate and national lead and sulfur dioxide standards wer ,.:.
met throughout the monitoring period, There is no longer. state or fedcrnl st.ndord for lotal suspended p.nicuJates (TSP), but th ~
mo.1sllred TSP concentralion is sllown for comparison to the PM" coneenlralions althe site. B
c
z
::;:
r'
! '
Ll
. ,
"';
"
The SCAQMD regulates stnlionar)' sOllrces of poll lit ion lhrollghoUI Ihe SCAB :lnd h.s ,"thoril)' ullder the Californi. Cle.n Air Act to
manage transportation activities as indirect (nollstntionary) sources. which Clee facilities that do not directly emit substantial amounts of
pollution but allrnet brge nllmbers of mobile sOllrces of pollution, Direct emissions from molor \'chicles arc regulated by the Californi.
Air Resoll rees Boord,
City of San Bernardino
Environmental lmpact Checklisl
Page 20
8/94
20
I.J~.ac<!iflt Pg. 551 I
7.E.c
TABLE I
Ambient Air Qualit~. Standards
r-,
California Federal
Air Pollutant Standard PriJllur\' Seeondan'
Ozone > 0.09 ppm, I -hr. .,'g > 0.12 PPIl1. I-hr. ",'g. 0./2 porn, l.hr. avg.
Carbon Monoxide "- 9.1 pplll, 8-hr. ",'g "- 9.5 ppm, 8-hr. avg ~ 9.5 pPIll, 8-hr. avg
> 20 ppm. I-hr. ",'g > 35 PDm, I-hr. ave > 35 DDm. I-hr. .vg.
Nitrogen Dioxide > 0.25 ppm, I-hr. avg > 0.053 ppm, ,mnual > 0.053 ppm, annual
avg. arg.
Sulfur Dioxide > .25 ppm I-hr. a"g 0.03 ppm, annual ""g. > 0.50 PPIll, 3-hr. avg.
~ 0.05 ppm, 24-hr. avg > 0.14 pPlll, 24-hr. avg.
wilh,,- 0.10 ozone or
wilh 24-hr. TSP,,- 100
ug/m3
Suspended avg; > 50 ughn', 24-hr. avg > 150 Ugllll', 24-hr. avg. > ISO uglm'.24-hr. avg.
>50 uglm' annual Particulate MaUer > 30 Ugllll' annual > 30 uglm' annn.11
(PM")
geomelric mcan Milhmclic mean arithmetic mean
Sulfates > 25 ug!m', 24-hr. avg
Lcad "- 1.5 uglm'. monlhl)' > 1.5 uglm', calendnr > 1.5 uglm'
avg. nuarler
Hvdrogen SuUide > 0.03 ppm, I-hr. avg.
Vinvl Chloride > 0.010 DOIlI, 24-hr. ;)\'g.
Visibilily-Reducing In sufficienl amount to
Panicles reduce prevailing
visibilit)' to less thau 10
miles [II relative humidify
less th:m 70%. I
obser\':Hion.
Nol.:: ppnl - parts ~ luilfion by "0111I11':
US/Ill' - microgrilnL1 per cubic 1ll.:I...r
::. "" greato:r than
::. ... ~e:l.lcr than or ~{lUa' 10 S<Jllrcc: South ('nasi Air Qu,lIilv ~fnn:lI!"'Il1...nll)islri"'1199J
~
~
CIl
-
'"
CIl
J:
I-
. '
~
~
o
,
....
'"
Q.
:::J
~
M
q
~
~
r:
i;
I'
, ,
"
o
:;::;
'"
"
~
"tl
o
:;;
Q.
:::J
U
c,
1
... :
M
CO
....
~
i
L:
~
q
....
'"
Q.
:::J
U
C
Z
:;;
('-!
~
-
:c
:E
><
w
L
r
Botll !lIe Cnlifomin nnd federal CIc.1n Air ACls ""I"ire dcsignaled agencies iuthc SCAB. which is the ualion's only "cxlreme" ozone non-
allainment aren. to prepare plans docllmenling actions to meel air qua iii)' standards. The SCAQMD and the Southern California
Association of Go\'emments (SCAG) arc the designatcd planning agencies. As rcquircd b)' the California Clean Air Act. the SCAQMD
rC\ised lhe Air Qn.llil)' Management Plan (AQMP) in 1996 10 ,.ddress measures needed 10 all,,;n federal and Slate standards. The 1997
AQMP also includes measures 10 red lice to.,ic emissiolls and compounds \l'hich contribute 10 global warming. Allainmen! of the federal
ozone S1nnci1rd \l'as projected for Ihe year 2010. a thrcc-)'C:IT e'tension from the allainmenl d,"e in Ihe 1989 AQMP. CARE appro\'ed
thc 1997 AQMP in JanillU)' 1997 \\ilh specific rcsemuions regarding reliance on flllllrc. as )'clundcfined. technologies to reach emission
reduction goals for ozone.
.;..:
"
CIl
E
J:
"
'"
-
<
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 21
8/94
21
I Packet Pg. 552:" I
h'
,
,
I
~, ,
;
'..;
7.E.c
The federal allainment deadlines in this region are 2010 for 07.one, 2000 for carbon monoxide, and 2001 for PM". The most rece,
adopted pl:ll1 Uk,t addressed fedeml requirements was adopted on March 17, 1989, and appro,'ed by U,e California Air Resources Bo
in August) 989, prior to adoption of the) 990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The) 997 AQMP was adopted in No\'ember 1996 an,
addresses proccduml requirements of the 1990 Amendments, as well as Ihe three.year re\'iew requiremeals of the California Clc.'n.
Act.
The dal., for this section ofUle document were abstrncted from the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the Santa Fe "A" Yard E
and the District's Rules and Regulations.
-;:-
G>
-
'"
G>
J:
I-
Porentia/lmpact
2...
The District's new CEQA Handbook contains a list of daily thresholds of potential significance for emissions and for the s; ~
~
(square footage) of specific commercial uses. The first step in an air quality impacl analysis is to compare the size of t 9
proposed facilities "ith these square footage thresholds (refer to Table 6-2 of the SCAQMD Handbook). For restaurants a l;;
movie theaters, the thresholds are 23,000 square feet and 30,000 square feet, respectively. Although the square footage ~
rest.1urants in Uus project is below Ihe threshold of significance, the combined square footage e.,ceeds the initial threshold a ~
shifts the evaluation into a detailed analysis of potential emissions. This analysis follows
Demolition
M
o
,
~
~
!:
o
:;::;
Emissions associated with demolition arc calculated using the emission factors in Table A9.9.H of the SCAQMD CEQ 1l
Handbook. TIle three slrueture consist of brick and wood frame struetures thai ha\'e a footprint of approximately 20.000 squa !E
feel All Ule structures proposed for demolition are onc storey in height. Assuming 200,000 cubic feet of building volume, th~ '8
days of demolition, the following demolition equipment (Table A9-8-A, one dozer, one front loader), hauling of demolilir :;:
wastes to a disposal site, and fi\'e employees, the total dcmolition emissioas pcr day are forecast to be : 30 Ibs/day PM", I ~
1bs/dHY CO, 3 Ibld,y ROC, and 24 Ibs/day NO,. The Handbook emission thresholds for construclion activities are: 550 Ibs/d, ~
CO, 75 Ibs/day ROC, 100 Ibs/da)' NO" and 150 Ibs/da)' PM". Calcnlated values for demolition emissions are provided i M
'"
Appendix A to Uus documellt. All ,-nlues [.,11 below Handbook thresholds and air quality impacts from this phase of the proje' ...
~
are not considered potentiHlly significant.,
~
o
Construction s;
0..
:::l
Emissions associated with grading and construction of the rctnil and movie structures were forecast using the mcthodolog U
ontlined in thc SCAQMD Handbook. The assulllptions nsed ill forccasling these emissions is onilincd ill Appendix A to thi ~
document. The daily emissions forecast 10 occur during construclion of Ihe proposed project are as follows. During gradin :;:
the PM" emissions arc forecaslto be 106 Ibs/day. Given the rccent adoption of revisions to Rule 40J which requires be! ~
3\ailable control tcchnolog)' for reduction of fugiti\'c dust. the :lelllal emissions arc likely to be belo\\' this volume. Regardlc~ ==
the PMJ!) emissions during gmding (nil below the Hnlldbook threshold. TOlal daily construction emissions (other than fugitiv ~
dust during grading) arc forecast to bc: 47 Ibs/day CO. 13 Ibs/day ROC. 711bs/dHY NO., JIbs/day SO." nnd 5lbs/day PM" rll
These daily emissions arc o\'crSl;ltcd bccnllsc p~l\'illg nCliyilics will not occur until structures arc nenring completion. AI ......
construction emission values fnll below the Handbook cmissiolllhrcsholds. Therefore. no significant nir qualily impacts an ~
forecast to occur during the COllslnlction phllse of Ihe project E
J:
"
'"
~
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 22
8/94
22
I . Pa.cket Pg. 553 I
7.E.c 1-
TABLE 2
Summar)' of Air Quality Data
San Bernardino Air Monitoring Station
i'
Pollutant Sfllndard~ 19H!.l 1990 1991 1991 1993
Ozone (OJ)
Slate Itandard (lohr.avg:>O.09PPlll)
Fcd.."f'lI1 st.mdard (l.hr.I\'g>O.12ppm)
Ma.ximum concentration .30 .29 .25 .18 .21
No. ofcbysslalc SUndardexcced..:d 159 129 127 141 132
No. of davs federal stambrd exCffi:led 115 7S 79 85 GS
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Slate standard (1-Iv.aVS>20ppm)
Fed<ral "andArd (I-hr..vg>o. 1 21'1'''')
State standard (8-hr.av&2.9.Jppm)
Fed<ral standlInI (8-hr..v~.Spp",)
Maximum COIlCallration I.hr. paiod II 9 8 7 7
Maximum concentration I.hr. p..-nod RI G.O 70 5.9 G.O
No. of d4)'S state I-hulOU1cbrd cxeet!d.:d 0 0 0 0 0
No. ord:aysr~ll-hutand:ard exC'~cd.:d 0 0 0 0 0
No. ofcbysstalc 8.hr.itand:ardcACetd~ 0 0 0 0 0
No. of days federal g.hr.s!;md:lrd exceed.:d 0 0 0 0 0
Nltro."n Dlolllle (NOJ
Slate st:mdard (J-hr.avg>O.2Sppm)
Federal sI.md4rd (0.0,'34 AAM in ppm)
AnnulI1 arillunetic mean .0409 .03'3 .0355 .03SG .037G
Milximunl 1.111". concentration .IR .20 .16 .13 .15
No. ofda)'Slf.1t.: 1.hr. standardexc~..:rl 0 0 0 0 0
% f.:-d.:rnl slnnd.,rd exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
TotAl Suspcndd Pal1lcwll'('S (fSP)
Maximum 24-1v. concenlr.'Ilion J27 2.9 215 217 139
62.7
0
SuspendN Par1lculllft'1 (PM I')
State sl:mdard (24-hr.avg>$O ug'l11J)
F.:do,lral standard (24-lv.avg>BO ug/mJ)
MaximuI1124-lv. concentration 271 2B 16J 1J(j
Pacenl5.1mples cxcl:eding sl:lIC sl.1nd:lrd 7.U ~8,J GR.3 GO
P~lll s..:uunll!S C.Xce.:-dillll fo:d('rn] lIit:lIld:ml ~, 1 J,) 1.7 0
AAM - AnnUli) Arillllllt'tk !\1('Uli [\.,\ - i\ol APllli~:lhll'
pplll - pUlis pt'r million IIg/11l1 - Illifl"o=l.nllllli pl'.. nlhi~ 1111'1<',.
Saun-c: Sou,h CO:l~1 AI,"Ouallh' ~f:lIJ:l!(,lllrll' J)i~lrkf ,\fr Qualil\'!);11:1 _ 19H9 II1I.0111/h 1993
-;:-
Q)
-
'"
Q)
J:
f-
I
~
~
o
.
....
Ol
D..
::::l
~
'"
q
~
~
<::
o
.,
'"
"
~
-0
o
:;;
D..
::::l
(.)
'"
00
...
=-
\1
~
o
,.:.
Ol
D..
::::l
(.)
C
Z
:;;
~
-
:s
:r:
><
w
.;.:
<::
Q)
E
J:
"
'"
~
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 23
8/94
Packet Pg; 554, I
23
7.E.c
OIlCmtions
Emissions associated with operations include mobile Source emissions and energy use (electricity and natural gas) emissi
The emission calculalions are shOlm in Appendix A. Mobile source emissions are based on trnfljc generalion estirn
pr0l1ded in U,e "Trnffic Impact Aru.l)'sis Report San Bernardino Entertainment Celller" aUlhored b)' Linscoll, Law & Greens)
Engineers and subsequent information obtained regarding lhe mix of vehicles accessing Ihe site. TOlal daily emissions
forecasl as follows: 29~ Ibs/da)' CO, 21Ibs/d.1)' ROC, 50 Ibs/da)' NO" and 15 Ibs/da)' ofPMIO. The onl)' pollutanl wI
appro.1ches the daily emission Ihresholds in Ihe Handbook is NO" where the threshold is 55 Ibs/da)' versus Ihe forecast 0,
ibs per of emissions per day.
s
Second, U'e entertainmelll complex is locmed directly adjacent 10 the dowlllown's major bus lransfer localion. As outlined
Ihe traffic study, almost all m:1jor bus roules converge allhis localion and provide a very good opportunity for local residen
to travel to Ule elllertainment complex on public lmnsir. Although no specific emission reduclion can be assigned to a progra
to attract movie gocrs on public transit, the following miligntion measure can contribute 10 overnl1 emission reductions:
~
~
"
-
'"
"
J:
The Handbook UlfCSholds were established as guidelines, not fixed values thaI when exceeded mandale a finding of signific f-;"
adverse imp.1ct and Ule necessil)' 10 prepare and EIl\1ronmental Impact Report (EIR). There are three factors Ihal further red ;=-
the importance of NO, emissions from the proposed projecr. First, attending a movie is a discretional)' !rip, not a required I ~
such as a work trip, For such lrips, it is assumed th,1t U,e Irip will occur whelher Ihis movie theater is conslrueled or nor. Th ~
Ihe 5,610 daily forecast trips for this projcctare nOI all assnmcd to be netlrips wilhin the SCAB. In Ihis case, several n ::l
theater complexes have been or arc ia Ihe process of being conslrucled wilhin the Inland Empire (Riverside, Ontario, a ~
Redlands). To the eXlent Ihat the proposed projecl draws local residents to Ihis sile inslead of Ihese other theater complex, 9
lhen the project could aeluall)' result in a nel emissions reduction wilhinlhe SCAB relative 10 Ihe existing silualion. It is r ;:
possible 10 quanlify the aelual emissions reduclions associaled wilh this silualion, bUI iL is potentially substantial. l:
o
:;:
'"
"
~
"tl
o
:;;
0..
::l
The thellterO)lernlo!"s shall wo!"k with Omnilrans 10 del'e1o)l em)llo)'ce and allendance Illlelmge(s) that )lrol'id ~
some benefit to attendees that ose )lublic fransit to tnn'el to tbe sile. Sueb Imel,ages could inelude reduced tick, :;l
)lriees, free goods, extended transfer bou!"s for bus licl..ts, or free bus tiel,eh. ~
2.'Ll
~
The Utird mtio"'1le for considering projecl emissions as not significanl is based on tbe urban redevelopment and jobs providec '?
by this projecl in Ihe eonlext oftl.e AQMP llnd Regionai Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) and Regional Mobility PIa, :;;
(RMP). TIle laller 111'0 documents were prepared by the Southern California AssOCi31ion of GOl'ernmenls and they are part 0, g;
Ihe air qualilY planning e/fort 10 reduce emissions sumcienll)' 10 bring Ihe SCAB inlO eomplinnee lI'ith fedeml and Slale ambielll 0
air qunlity s~1ndards. Although projecI NO", emissions arc beloll' the Handbock threshold of significance, the City conclude! ~
IIL11 U,esc air emissions sbould not be considered significant in the cumulati,'e, long-Ierm eontexl because the)' were consistenl :;;
wilh and furthered Ihe implementnlion of Ihe AQMP, RCPG nnd RMP, Fundnmentnlly, Ihe SCAQMD and SCAG hnl'e ~
projeeled thai ambienl air qualil)' standards lI'ill be met as long as fulure growth, including cOllllllereial development, occurs :E
within the growth and development framework outlined in these plans. The proposed project redevelops land wilhin the :.c
downtown panion of the City, provides nn cSlim:ltcd 200 flew jobs to enh.mee local jobs/housing bnlance, and provides good ~
opportunities for public transit use by employecs rind Illo,'ic nllcndccs The project also provides a high--quality. local ;.;
l:
cntcr1ainmcnt ,"cnuc Ihat elll C;lplllrc JC~lkagc ofmo\'ic p;Jtrons 10 new thc:lIcr complc....cs 111:11 arc locntcd at substantially greater Q)
distances, ~
"
'"
-
In suu1lna!}', Ihe proposed project will genernle mobile SOLlree emissions Ihat arc not forecnstlO e,,"eed SCAQMD CEQA <(
Handbook thresholds of significance for daily emissions, Furlher. after rel'iewing these emissions in lhe eonlexl of regional
planning guidelines. nel polential emissions, and polenlial public lransit ulilizalion, the Cily concludes Ihallhese emissions will
nol cause or contribule 10 significant degradmion of air quaht), illlhe SOUlh Coast Air B'''in o\'er Ihe short- or long-term,
A 1'C\1C1" ofse\'eml recent EIRs which included fUlure potential for CO hOlspot \'iolalions. indicales Ihallhe pOlelllial for such
hotspols to occur is below" sigllificlOllC1'C1. Gil'eUlllal CO emissions and \'iolalions arc being reduced wilhin the region, none
of Ihe intersections idenlified as being arrecled by Ihe proposed projecl arc forecast 10 exceed Ihe one- and eighl-hour CO
standards. No milig.llion is rC'ltlirl:d to address Ihis issue
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 24
8/94
24
I Pacl(e{ Pg. 555 I
7.E.c
2.b. No activitics. materials or chcmicals "ith odors Me proposed for use or implemenlalion althis projecl sileo Therefor.
pOlemial c.~sts for ad,'ersc odor impacls from Ihis project. The informalion supporting this conclusion is based on a rel'ie
Ihe acthities that will be conducted in Ihe mol'ie and retail slruclures. No chemicals or olher odor producing materials wi
used or affected by lhe proposed uses in the project Slruclures.
2.c. The project is not located "idun a high ",nd ha7.1rd area. No potential for adverse impact from exposure 10 high wind haz
exists. The infonnmion provided in Ihis discussion was oblaincd from the Cily of S~lI1 Bcrnilrdino General Plan.
References
-
~
'"
-
'"
'"
.c
f-
Cil)' of San U~mardjno. 1996.11113 de ler A :all Ex ;lI1sioJ F'n:ll iT \'irlJllrn~llla) hn 3('1 Re r1
City of San B.:mardino. 1994. Supcrhlod: Fin:!! EIl\'irOllll1enI.11Imll;\CI Ro:rJOI1,
WATER RESOURCES
~
Cl
.
...
'"
D..
::>
~
M
<;>
~
~
3.
Soulhem California Associ:l.!iollofGovmlIl1.:nts. J994. Re.l!ion:\l Comnrl!hCllSiw PI:!" :!lId GlIir;k
South Coast Air Qualify AfnnagCT1lml District. 1993. CEO..\. Air DU:t lit\' ~!:ln(thook.
South Coast Air Qu~lily ManQgelll~t District 1994/1997. Air Oua!ilv r<.bn:lc.:m.:nt PI:!n.
,-
r
,
3.c.
The potenlial for altering discharges inlo surface "'ltor will exist only during conslruction. Glhen\'ise. future surface runolT
will be from comp.1mble huildings and paved areas. Thc npplicnnl will comply wilh the Cily's Stormwaler Pre,'ention Program .;..;
t:
(SWPP) for Ihe grading componenl of Ihe pr~ject as requircd by exisling regulations. Implemenlation of nn SWPP for Ihe '"
projccl sile will ensure ilIa I runolT dnring conslrnelion docs nol C.1USC signilicanl waler qualily degradation. No miligalion ~
measure is required to ensUre Ihat this Plaa is submincd sinee II is a mandatory requiremenl by law, After Ihe project is ~
conslructed. the nmolTfromlhe prqjccl sile will be eqllil'alellt 10 IIlal fromlhe existing projecl site based on similar commereial :i
and parking uses. No pOlenli,ll for degm"alion of Inlier qualily is forecast to occur if Ihc projecl sile is developed wilh the
proposed relail and mOlie struClul'CS and uscs. No milig:ltion is required. The informalion in Ihis discussion WaS provided based
on amicII' oflhe regul:Hions requiring Nalional Pollul:ml Dischargc Elimill:llion Syslem conslruclion general pcrmits for storm
water discharges and a re,'iew of Ihe fUlure uses of Ihc projeCI site as delined by the applicant
t:
o
:;:
'"
"
<;::
'5
The project sile is presenlly dcveloped in urban uses and all areas are paved. compacled or covered with structures. Und ~
existing circumstances Ihc nmoff coemcient for Ihe project area is cSlimalcd 10 be bel ween 95-100%. The proposed projccI WI D..
uHimately resull in Ihe whole sile having a comparable runoff coefficient when the eXlensive landscaping is included. TI ::>
potential change in impermeable surface is negligible wilhin the 3.86 acre silc. RunolTfrom the site in Ihe fulure will remai ~
essentially dIe same and tile site nmolTwill be delivered 10 the downlown slorm drainage syslem which carries flows from t1, :;:
site in the strcel sections and subsurface drainage pipes. Thc direct of drainage will remain the same with the surface runo: :;!:
being delivered to the Lylle Creek Cllanncl soulh of Ihc Inland Cenlcr Mall. Just south of where Ihis drainage inlercepts th _
~
Lytle Creek Channel, L)11e Creek and IIle Sal1la Ana Ri,'cr merge just west of the 1.10 and 1-215 Inlerchange. No polential fo <;>
significant impacls in sile runolT are forecasl to occur and no mitigation is rcquired. The information in this discussion wa S;
oblained from a field re,'icw of the sile and a review of the San Bcrnardino South 7.5' Topographic Map. ~
U
Slonn nmoITfrom the projecl site will be direclcd 10 the e"isling drainage Syslcms localed wilhin the Slreels which bound th( ~
property. Tllis is the same drainage pallern which presenlly c.,iSls. No pOlentiallo change Ihe COurse or 1l0IV ofllood waters :;
has been identificd and no miligalion is reqnired. The information in Ihis discussion Was obtained from a field review oflhe ~
sile and a review of Ihe San Bernardino South 7.5' Topographic Map. '"
:e
.c
><
W
Envj,.onl11ental Sel/ingIProjecllmpac/
3.a.
~
3.b.
J.d. The proposed projccllws no polenli:lI to direelly ch:lJ1ge Ihe quality or quanlily of ground waler. The issue of waler consumption
is discussed under the \lnlcr supply subseclion of tlie Utililics section of Ihis Checklisl (Section II). Tile conelusion regarding
no direct cffecls on quantity and qualily of groundwaler is b:lscd on Ihe "eplh to ground waler allhe projecl sile (cstimated at
11I0re th:," 100 fcct beloll' thc grollnd slIrf:lce). Ihe nssllll1ed 100'Yo runolY of sllrfnce lI'aler froilllhe sile. :lnd Ihe lack of change
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 25
8/94
Pac~~t Pg. 556 I
25
7.E.c
in uses and l}pcs ofstructurcs once the projecI is compleled and in opernlion. In addition, no chemicals or other malerial
be brought to or used at the site tIml could cause fin)' cOlllaminntion of groundwater. The iafonnalion in this discussiOl S
provided based on a review oflhe sitc dcsigll and a review of future uses atlhe projecl site as defined by the applicant.
3.e.
A reviewoflhe sile and U,e flood hnz.,rd map in the Geneml Plan illdicales that the projecl sile is nol subjccI to se,'cre flo<><
Therefore, no significant polential for c'1X>sure of people or propeny to flood hazmds is identified for this project. No mitig~
is required. The infonnation prodded in this discussion is based on a field review oflhe site and review of the Genemll
Tcchnical Background Doeument and Gcneml Plan ElR.
3.f.
No other water resource issues hlll'e bccn idenlified Ihat would be affeeled by or would affecllhe proposed project.
~
~
..
-
..
..
~
I-
References
CilyofSan Ikmardino. 1929. Genu:!1 Plan.
City of San Bernardino. 1989. Fill:!1 F.11\'ironl1'~ll:tl fmo;tct R~rmr1 Cilv ofSanl3cnlll.rdillO G~"I1.:r.lJ PI,1ll
~
~
o
...:.
en
Q.
::::l
~
M
q
~
~
CityofSanlkrn4rdino. 198ft 'il OfSilll 'm:mlinoG~l~] Pl:mU d:ll,;o Tt'l.'hniclll Itld.: oundU ort
r
!
.
TIlompson Publishing Group. 1992. Slonnwnln- Pent};l t\f:ll1unl VOlllll1~ I and 2.
Stonnwlller Qua.lity Task Force. 1993. Cnlifomi:l Slem! "':Ill!( A~:\:I ~bl1al:!.:'m~"11 Pra~licc Httlldhook.
I:
s::
o
:;::;
..
<>
-=
'5
o
:;:
Q.
::::l
The project site 1"15 been co/1l'erted to muan uses and f<leililies and no nali"e or naluml ecosyslems remain wilhin or adjaecnllO the SBE U
project sileo Very limiled non-nmive landscaping can be found on Ihe projecl sile.
Environmental Setting
4.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Potentin/lmpact
M
00
...
~
4.a-d.
4...
The project site docs not cOnlain any maturc trecs Ilml willnccd to be rCll1oycd, No potcnlinl for adverse impact exists and n
mitigalion is required.
~
o
The project site docs not contain an)' ll:llurnl habilal and there is no polenlial for adversel)' impacting biological resources frol S;
implementing the proposed SBEC Project. No mitigmion is required. ~
U
o
z
:;:
r:
~
The infonnalion for this discussion is oblained rromafield surye)' and Ihe Gencral Plaa Nalural Resources Overlay, Figure 41 _
:c
:E
l/e/i.'rences ill
...
CilY OrS31l B~'J113rdjno. 1989. G.:'l1er~r I>LlJl.
CilY ofS:llIlkm:ardino. 1989. Filla' Em.ironrll\'lll:\lllIma....1 R":[)Or1 Cil\' OrSall Ikm;mtiu'l (kl1cr:\! J'bl1
..
s::
..
E
~
<>
..
~
City 0(S311 [kmardinu. 1988. City ofS,\l lJ.:nl.,rdin'l (kll..'r.1 I'LIl) [: dal.: T\.dllli..:allb....""rt>lIllJ H~
5, NOISE
f:.'npironmenta/ Setting
Tile project sile is locmed in the middle or dOllnlolln San BenJardino. II is a highl)' urban/oemion wilh significanl background or
ambicnt noise levels. Tile prima.:v source or the e.,isling ambient 1I0ise en"ironmenl is trnmc. According 10 dal:l cOlllained in the
Gener;d Plan Technical Background Repon (Table 6~) lramc lIoise at 1011 fcel frOllllhe celllerline or 50, Slreeland E Slrect ranges from
66-68 dBA, L~.. B<lsed on Iramc ,'olulI1es idcnlified in reCCIll sllldics. Ihis Icvel or ambienl noise is slill considered udeqll:ue for Ihe
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 26
8/94
26
I Packet Pg. 557 I
;
l
r
r
!Z
7.E.c I.
current noise selling in the project area. Note Ihat single noise events, such as trucks, demolilion equipmenl. police and fire \'el
sirens, 111.1)' exceal 90 dBA, but UlC composite (L..,) b:!ckground noise is still in the smne general range, i.e. 65.70 dBA. Givcn the
ofresidcntiaJ uses in the immcdincc vicinity of the proposed project, the nmbicm noise environment is not considered significant 31
projecl site.
Potentia/Impact
5.a. The proposed project docs nOI cont:!in any noise sensilive uses thai would be exposed to the ambient background sound I", 0:-
tI~,t could pose a significant constraint 10 Uleir development. No potential for significant impaclto new sensitive land uses ex $
and no mitigation is proposed. The infon1l:1tion provided in this discussion is based on a review of the proposed projecll: :g
uses and U,e background noise dara conlained in the General Plan. B:!ckground Technical Report, and Ihe General Plan E t:
,
5.b.
The nmjor access roules to Ihe projcct sile arc expecled 10 be the 1.215 Freeway, 2"' Street. 4 ~ Street,S'" Street, and 6'" Str 9
from U,e east and west, and E StJ'CCt, F Slrccl, D Street and Arrowhend Avenue from the north and south. Of these streels, 01 :;;
S. Street (west ofE Slrcct), 6'" Street, and Arrowhc.1d have noise sensilive residential uses adjaccnt to them. Based the trat ~
distribution in the trnflic slndy completed for the project. the polential exists to increase noise levels on the Slreets containi !:?.
residcnlial use by some amoualless U,an 3 decibels (considered significant in most jurisdiclions). Construction noise can ere: M
<>
a nuisance for residents on S. Slreet, between E and F Streets. This potential can be mitigated by implemenling the followi. ~
measures: ~
c:
o
:;::;
5,h.l Exterior eon'1ruction aelh'ilies invoh-ing noise I,,'odudng equipmenl .hall be restricted 10 the houn between 1l
a.m. and G p.m., except in tile c,'cnl or an eme"gene)'. ~
o
5.b.2 The applicant shall ensu,"C lhat all consll"clion equillmCnl be ol,eraled with mandated noise control equillmel ::;:
0-
(mumers or silencers). ::l
U
5.b.3 If noise eom"lainlo a,'e reeeh'cd r/"Om residenls, IIIc ""I,lic,ml shall instllll "onable noise reduction walls 0 M
co
bllrriers to atlennale sound levels to less than 3 dBA grealer than bad'ground sound le\'el. -t
~
Implementation of these measures can ensure thai no significant noise impacts will rc.ull from constructing the proposel 0
,
project. ~
0-
Pe='U1ent operation noise levels ,,;11 consist of those associalcd with relail commercial and movie patronage aClivities. TheS( G
activities arc eonsistenl with lhe background sound Ic,'els and lire nol forecast 10 generale e.'lcrior noise levels that equal 01 0
exceed the exiSling background noise Ic,'els Ihal arc domin;Jtcd b)' traffic. No miligation is required. ~
r
f
I
References
S.c. No OIlier noise impact issues ha,'e been identified ,hlll would be arreeled by or would alTcct the proposed project.
~
-
:0
:E
><
w
Cit)' ors:m &-mardino. 1989. 'in;!;1 En\'lruI11l1':1l1.,1 1m .1~1 R~ ml1 CilY ofS:J1l B~'mard;lll) O"lh.'r:d Plan
.;.;
c:
"
E
.s=
u
'"
-
<(
Cit}' ofS:!.n O.:'rnnrdino. 1989. O.:n.:rOlII'Ial1.
City of San lkmardino. 1988. Cil . ors:ltI n.:nMnlil1o <1"'11":'-311'1"11 l r 1(1011... T...,;IH1i~'aJ !lad.; 'f\)lllld RI.' Mrt.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 27
8/94
27
Id:>acket Pg. 558
7.E.c
G. LAND USE
Environmental Setting
The project site is located in tlle "Do"nto"n" ponicn of the Cit)' of San Bem.1fdino which has been given a Commercial Regional (CF
designation. TIle identified uses in the Geneml Plan Me government, professional, and eorpornte omces; hotel and convention facilit
entertainment; cultural/historic; supporting retail uses; reslaurants; and residential (market-rate and seniorleongregate care). ~
mandated FAR (Floor/Area Rntio) for comlllerci:J1 :Jnd omce nses is 3.0. The existing land uses in Ihe immediate area include re ~
~
comlllercial, government and professional omce, and service uses. .!
..
'"
Potential Impact ~
6.0. The proposed SBEe Project would establish a 20-lheater Illovie venue and relail eOllllllercial activities, including reslauran E;
These uses are consistenl with Ihe currenl Gener.ll PI:Jn designalion. The project will conform with the existing FAR of 3 ,..:.
Based on the consistenc)' of the proposcd land uses wilh the exisling land use designalion, tile SBEe Project will not caUS( ~
significant land use unpact. No miligntion is required. The infonn:Jlion provided in Ihis discussion is based on a review of t B
proposed project L1nd uses and the background bnd use dala contained in tile General Plan, Background Technical Report, al ;::;-
tile General Plan EIR. <;>
~
~
.
6.b.
c'
I
II 6.c.
The projecl site is nOllocated wilhin a FOOlhill Fire Zone nor is illoc:Jled within Ihe high wind hazmd area of the City. N
potential for conflicls with wildland fire 11OZ.1rds exisls and no mitigalion is required. The information provided in thi
discussion is b.1sed on a review oflhe background land lIse data conlained in Ihe General Plan. Background Technical Repon M
and the General Plan EIR and an area field survey. !;j!
~
The project site is nOllocated no." any airpon. nor is it located "'lhin an Airport Dislrict. No polential for conflicls with airpo g
uses exists and no mitigalion is required. The informalion provided in Ihis discussion is based on a review oflhe backgrour, 1ii
u
land use cL11a contained in the Geneml Plan, Background Tcehnical Report, and the General Plan EIR and an area field surve: '"
'5
o
::;:
0..
::::l
(,)
6.d. No olher land use impact issues have been idenlilied Ihal would be alTecled by or would alTecllhe proposed project.
~
o
,
....
Ol
0..
::::l
(,)
C
Z
::;:
References
City ofS.:1n Ikm:1rdino. 1989. 'ill;]l f:.11\'ironlll~'111.,11Jl1 net It~. 111 Cilv ofS:m B....martfil1o G~n.:rall't;m.
l.t
CityofSanD...-m3.rdino. 1989. G\'1I\'rnII'/;tn.
r,
CityofS:1l1 B.:m.ardino. 1988. Cit ofS:m n..'m:mlillll (j.:n...,.al I'Jan t! d;ll..... T.......hllk;tI fl.....:!,: 011 lid It... 1ft.
7.
MAN-MADE HAZARDS
~
-
;e
:.
><
W
A,wironmenlal Selling
Bascd on ;] review or existing uscs on the project sile. no JIliln-m:lde h:II'-1lrds feInted 10 hal...i1rdous nmlcrhlls or w:1Slcs was identified.
This conclusion is based on 01 l"Cview orlhe Phase I Em'ironmenla) SilC' Assessments for properties localed wilhin the project :lrca. The
sile conlnins no known currenl or hisloric underground SIOr:lgc ',Inks. ill1d illthou,gh lhe properties have been in use: since before 1900,
none oflhc historic uses were idcnlificd .15 releasing 11:IzardollS m:llcri;lIs onsilc.
.;.;
c:
'"
E
:.
u
..
t::
<(
Potel/lia/ impact
7.a. During construClion Ihe projoct will use petrolCUIll producls for fucl and lubricalion of construction cquipment. Miligation for
'HI)' accidental spills is pro\lded under issue 7.b.. bclow. The projcct consisls of occl!p,l'ing and Ulilizing retail commercial and
1I1001e sp.1CC. Common household c1C<lIlers and olher Hlainlellauce chemicals (such as ,1nllllonia. soll'enls. peslicides. Clc.) will
be used in Ihese Ihcilitics. but it is nol alllicipaled Ihallargc and/or contiuuous quanlilies of hazardous malcrinls will be ulilizcd
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 28
8/94
~acket Pg, 559
28
7.E.c
based on Ihe proposed uses, ConsequentJ)', no "'rge ancllor COnlinuous quantities of hazardous waSles will be generated
would pose a hazard to humans, BJ5Cd on the Iype of uses, no polenlial for significant use, slorage, Iransport or disposal of I
or ll3ZNdous mmerials \\il/ OCCUr, As nOled above, mitigation is proposed below to address accidenlal spills during construcl
The infonn31ion in this discussion is ob.nincd from a fCview oCthe allowable uses and aCliviries that might cause signifil
man.made haz..1rds in the future.
7.b. During construction one polenlial haulfd ma)' be cremed b)' construction aClivities. As part of conslruction activities, petrok
products will be delivered to the project site to supply construction equipment with fuel and lubricanls. TIte potential 'C'
contaminalion caused by accidental release of such chemic>!ls c:m be full)' mitigated b)' implemenling Ihe following mitigal .&
measure. ~
J:
f-
7.b,1 The applicant shall require all eontnlcto"s to control spills of I,etroleum products and, if such spills occur, 1
contaminated soil or other nUlh~l.i:l1 slJall be collected nnd/or treated and disposed of at a facilit). licensed: 0
contaminated soil. Records of spills and clean-ull efforts shall be relained b)' the developer or contractor a S;
made available to the Clt)' upon re(luest, !5
~
The information for this discussion is oblained from review of the proposed project land uses and construction aClivities, a M
an evaluation ofpotcnthll hnznrdous nClivilies associaled with the project. ~
~
!'l..'
,
7.c.
The potential health and s:lfety hazMds associated \\ilh construction acti,.ties have been oullined under issue 7.b.. The propos .~
uses of the project site, relail commercial and movie Iheater aClivitics, do nol have an)' polenlial to cause health and safe 1;;
hazards beyond those normally accompanying such uses. Prognuns are already in place to manage human safety witho ~
creating any signiticanl hcallh or safety haz.1rds. No signiticant hazmds are forecast from implemenling lhese uses and I -g
mitigalion is required. The infonnalion for this discussion is oblained from review of Ihe proposed project land uses ar ::;;
construction aelivilies, and an evaluation of polenlial haz.1rdous activitics associated I\'ilh thc project !5
(.)
l'
7.d. No other man-made haz.1rd issues have been idcnlilied Ihm I\'ould be alTccled or I\'ould affectlhe proposed project.
M
ex>
'OJ'
=-
References
Cil)'ofS:m lknll1rdino. 1989. in.11.1 yjronnk:'nl:tllm a.:l n~ rt CilV ofS,lI n.: TantillO (j~ll~-ral Plan.
~
o
,
r0-
O>
Do
::::l
(.)
C
Z
::;;
CilyafS.:tn lkm.::lrdino. 1989. G.:11~"m1 plall.
City oCS:an BCnlardino. 1988. ('il'" ofSanllcmardino O~no:r;)r Pbn thKlalc TcchllicaJ nackl!roLlnd Rcnort.
; ,
L; Ecologies tehf. Inc. 1997. h:l~ I Elwironrn.."lll:ll Sile: ~.~"'.""I1l""l( Ol1dUI."1.:tl ,,1452 N. "F." S r...... SarI 1:\ dillO Cl1lifilntia.
[00108i...'"$ LehT. Inc. 1997. Ph",~ f:n"irolllllcnlnl Sil.: A~..~..rt1C"1 ConduCl d:ll 470 :-.,.. ur." Slr..~1 San nCnI;lrdino Calilamia.
~
-
:c
:E
)(
w
Ecologies Lchr, In.:. 1997. Jlh:lSl:: I F.n\'irolllll':Tllal SilO: -\.~WS.'iJllffiL~lli1....q.!l.illO.~'iO 4" SIffiiLS..~n...Ik.D.!;\nliu!2......c:.11it.Q.rui_o~
L HDUONG ~
CI>
E
Enl'ironmenral Selling 1i
III
-
According to recent housing dOll;) sUllll11l1rizcd in Inland Business Ilwgazinc. home "'trues continue 10 drop and renl eslatc foreclosures <(
nre up 64% (12,000 unils) comp.1red to the firsltellmonths ill 1992. The o\'eralltrend in housillg is for more homes on the market than
can be absorbed b)' existing demand. Through October 1997 thc trend ill jobs for the Inland Empire (Ri\'erside nnd San Bernardino
COUllty), when seasonally adjusted. is up. I\'ith unemplo)'mclI( nol\' in tile 7.5% range. Based on these data. (he currenl housing
invcntory is assumed to e.,cced the demand nnd no impro\'emcllt ill demand is forccaslto OCcur inllle near term fulure.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 29
8/94
29
I Packetl?g';;560 I
7.E.c
Potential Impact
8.a. The proposed project \\iII not !em""e e.,isling honsing or redllee a\'ailoble hOllsing units \\"ithin the Cit)". II is arguable whe
IIle project \\111 increase demand for housing o\'er the short-tenll. The proposed project will provide jobs for an estimOled
persons. TIle net increase in home dcnmnd is forCcHst to be vel')' low for these persons since it is anticipated chat the majo
of jobs \\il1 be lo\\" income enll)' le,'d jobs and the projects \\"ill dra\\" upon the e"isling a,'ailable labor pool, No potcntial
significant impacllo hOllsing resourccs is forecast 10 oeCllr. Regardless, gh'en the substanlial nllmber of homes backlog,
on the market, Ihe potential demand for homes from full de\'elopmenl of this project is not forecast 10 be significant. ~ _
~
infomlation provided in this discllssion \\'as obtained from a revie\\" oflhe project size, General Plan, Technical BackgrOl $
Report. and the housing. commercial office space. and gener:ll business information provided in the Inland Business magazi ~
Janllor)" 1996 editioll. ~
S.b, No olher housing isslles hm'e been idenlificd that wOllld be affecled or would offeetlhe proposed projec!.
~
Cl
,
...
en
0..
:::l
~
M
q
~
~
References
City of San Ekmardino. 1989. Genmll Plnn.
City o(S:tn lkn'l3rdino. 1988. Cil 0 Sou O...mOlrdino 0,'11""'111 'Ian {' d:llo.' T...dll1il,.'al B.ld.;. fltllld It... n.
,
.
,
Vincour Publishing. January 1996. ''In];ll1d DusinessM,
I
l:
o
~
"
!E
"C
o
:;:
0..
The traffic dota used in preparing Ihe Geneml Plan and Geneml Plan EIR (summarized in Table 12 of the EIR) demonstrated that tli a
surrounding S1rcets operate at an acceptable le\'el of capacity, HO\\'e\'er. al buildolll ,'ollll11es the General Plan ElR forecast thai level .;;
of service and/or volume/capacily ratios on "E" Slreet and 5'" Slreel wOllld exceed the capacit)" of tllese Slreels, Regnrding oth, ~
tcansportnlionlcirculHtion matters. adcquillc public tmnsit cnpabilit)', provided by Omnilrans. exisls on Ihe surrounding street systcrr ~
Adequate pllblic parking for existing businesses witltin Ihe area cllrrenll)' exists on the projecl site on adjacent areas, The project sit ~
Cl
docs not provide any air or rail traffic service. ~
en
0..
As determined in the Linseoll, Lm\' & Greenspan lramc stud)'. all nine of Ihe affected interseclions arc currenll)" opera ling al a Le\'e a
ofSel\1CC (LOS) UL11 meets the City's slandards. LOS D dllring peak hour. A cop)' of the le.,t of this stud)' is pro,'ided as Appendix E c
of this docul11ent. Exhibits 4 and 5 of Append;', B sLnnn",rize Ihe e.,isting rO:ldwa\" conditions for roadw:l)'S and intersections. ~
Environmental Selling
9.
TRANSPORT A TION/ClRCULA nON
I
I.
Po/entia/impact
9.(1
~
-
:E
The traffic Sludy forecasts Ih:ll lite proposed project will generale an estil11ated 5.610 trips. When combined with background ~
traffic growth in 1999. lhe project will calise Immc flo\\" during lhe PM pc:lk hour to degrade, bur with one c.'~:ccption. no W
significnn! imp.1cl wilt OCCur b:lscd 011 comparison ,,-jtll Cily imp:)CI criteria (LOS D during pc.lk hour). The one exception. is i:;
the intersection of 5" and "E" Slreet wltere Ihe P~l peak hour t....mc fiow \I ill be reduced to an ILn:leccptabJc le\'el ofimpac!. ~
Mitigation is identified below which can diminale this significant impac!. By Ihc year 2002, Ihe projcct and cumnlative traffic 1i
imp"cts rCl11nin nonsignific<1nl. including IllC :i'h and "E" Street intersection with the nsslllllcd impro\'ements. To mitigate .!
impacts at this one imcrscclion. lhe following illlprm'CmCllJS Illtlsl be implemented: <(
9.:1.1 Rcstril)C the nOl1h and south Ic~s of .'r" Sf reet to ,Jro\'idc cxclush'c Icft.turn lalles and II shared th..ou~h-right
lane. To accommodate this iI1lIH'U\'CllIcnt. some of the cxi.lt:tiIlJ.t on.strcct ;anJ.:lttJ Ilarl,dn~ alon~ the C.lst and west
side of "E" Street willlH"ttJ (n he climil1all'd or COIIYCJ1l'('W parallcl p:l..kin~ SIHll'l'S.
hnplcmcnl:Hion of this Illeasure C<ln iJ1lpro\'c frame now nllllis iUlcrscclion 50 Ih:lIllo signilic,lnl dc!;IYS. using City critcrin,
nre experienccd.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page J 0
8/94
30
I Packet Pg. 561 I
9.e.
r
9.f,
1
9,g.
9.i.
Rcrl'r{,l1ce,~'
7.E.c
9.b.
The projecl will eliminale 235 parking spaces, bul proposes 10 rely upon shared use of the Superblock pnrking struClu
immedintely across Ihe streel. nnd otherolTsile pmking 10ls and struClures in the geneml ,'icinilY of Ihe projecl. A parking st.
has been completed for the project which delllonSlrntes Ihnt ils use of olTsile parking resources. primarily during evening a
weekend hou"" "ill be adequate 10 meellhe Cily De,'elopment Code requiremenls. A shared demand e"ists for 3,022 spa'
and Ihe area Ins a 10101 of 3, 108 spaces available, No signific..nt ad,'elllC p..rking imp'lcls nre forecasllo occur, The informmi
provided in this discussion wns obtained from tI re\'iew of fhe project descriplion, Development Code parking rcquircmcl
outlined in Article 3. Chapler 19.2~ of Ihe Code. and the pmking stud)' which is aUachcd as Appendi" 3.
9.c.
~
The public trnnsportnlion s:.'Slclll currently pro\'ides adcqmJtc service 10 the area, and if dCJl1nnd incrcHSCS. it can expand to me .!
the demand for transit services to the project sile. No pOlcnli:l1 for adverse impact is forccClSI to occur and no mitigation ~
required. The infornlation in provided in tllis discussion was oblained from lhe General Plan Technical Background Repe j!:
and EIR.
9.d,
-
~
o
The proposed projecl \\'ill nol ailer any presenl patterns of circulmion in Ihe downtown mea, It may result in shifting Ii :i;
locmion of movie patrons in the communit~.. bul the physical circulation pntlerns will not be altered. No signifiCc-1llt impac a.
10 e.xisting circulation patlerns is forecaslto OCcur nnd no mitigalion is required, The infonnalion provided for Ihis discussic 13
was oblained from a field review or the exisling eirculalion pallem and a review of available access 10 the projecl site afler ;:;-
~~~ ~
~
The project site is not 1001100 on or ncar any nlil or {lir lrallsportntion fHcililies. No :Jd\'crse impaCl is forecast to such facililic
if Ute SBEC Projccl is implemented. No mitigalion is required. The informalion provided in this discussion was obtaincd frOJ
a field review of the arc.. and a review of tile Geneml Plan and supporting documel1ls,
c:
o
'"
Cll
"
~
."
o
The project may creme road hClZc1rdS as n result orconstruclion {lclivilics. During conslmction, E Strccl. 5'''' Slreel and 4tJ' Slree :e
would be alTccled by construclion acti,'ilies. This crC:lIes Ihe polential for a short-Ierm increase in lramc ha7.1rds on these road ~
which will be adjacent to construclion activities, The following miligmion measures shall be implemenled by the applicant I, ()
reduce such potential hazmds below a significantle,'e!. M
co
...
The construdion cOlltrilctol' or .lllplkll111 shall Jll"()ddc adequate tr,arlic contl'ol resources (signing, protecth'l ~
dc\'ices, crossing dc\';ces, dctOIlI'~. na~llersons, etc,) fa maintain safe traffic flows 011 nil strects affected bj ~
construction acth.itics, If construction heneath ~I road is not completed b)' the end of the dn)'s work, tll( ~
contracto.'or "JlplicHnC Shlllll'lIslIrc Chat an ndrlluatc traffic "cccss I"Oufe exists to all areas wherc access exi.st~ ~
at thc time of constl1lctiOIl. G
C
Z
:;:
9.f.l
9.f.2
Traffic hnzards th:lt may nff'l'ct \"chic.:lcs, hk~'CJcs, or (H.'dcstrians shOll( be identified ;and controlled by the
contractor 01' applicant pdOl' to constl1lctioll nlld rl'sourccs made .I\'ailahlc to JlI'cl'cnt or minimize these hazards
during constl"Uction,
~
-
:c
The information provided in this discussion W;IS obl:lincd from a rc\'iew orlhe projecl descriplion and the local circulation ~
s)'stCIl1. W
.;.;
c:
"
E
..c:
"
Cll
-
<(
The proposed projcct "ill not aher [he existing p:lllern of rc;lds. No pOlcn!i:11 for ad\crsc impacl 10 road palterns is forecasllo
occur and no mitigntion is required.
No other IrllllSpOrl<ltionlcircul:Jliofl issues h:n'c been jdclllificd Ihal would be alTccled or would :IITCCl the proposed projCC1.
C11~- ors,llI D..::mardino. 19S9, :il1;l! J.:lI\'irul1lll~ru:11 111 :Id rk 1<)11 ('it,. l,rS;llllknunlilhl (J~'lh:ral Pbll.
(,il)' OrS.111 J1.'fll.:udillll. 1989, (j~'11o:r;11I'r;ln.
CilY ofSallllcrn:1rdino. 19SN. Cil\' of!t1l1Ikmanlin'l (i.:Il~'rall'l,1Il t 'fl\l.lk T.....hll1~.all b~.~ ~rulllllll~.:lhIl1
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 31
8/94
PacketJ'~; 562
31
7.E.c
10, PUBLIC SERVICES
Environmental Setting
a. Fire
Tbe City Fire DeJl'lI1ment m.1imains II fire Slalions spread strategically lhroughoullbe Cily. In addilion, Ibree California Departn
of Forestry (CDF) and one Cenlral Valley Fire Dislriel (CVFD) slalions arc located in close proximily 10 the City. City Fire Slalior
is loc:Iled approximately Y, mile from Ibe project sile on 3" Slreel, just cast of Sierra Way. Adequate resources are available to res!> $
to U,e project site in less Ihan the Ihree minute Ihreshold of signific,1nee idemified in the General Plan EIR. The Fire Department' :g
the Unifonn Fire Code. the Nalional Fire codes, and Ihe California Code of Regulations as Ihe basis for it's enforcemenl programs t:.
addition, Ule City l1.1s adopled more stringem fire regulations in arellS of building construction which requires lIulomalic fire sprinkl
in all ncw commercial buildings over 5,000 square feel in area.
)"
i
. ,
~
o
,
....
'"
0..
:J
U
The Genom! Plan ties future den1.1nd for police scniCCSlo gro\llh in populalion. Tbc proposed project is nol forecast to cause any dir ;:;-
increase in population as tile project is expected 10 dr",v upon Ihe exisling labor pooi for most oftbe 200 new jobs. The Departmenl q
~
striving to maintain a officer/populalion ratio of 1.7 officers per 1000 persons iu order 10 ensure adequate prolection. Wilh the Pol; ~
l:
Department located two blocks nonh and Ihe projeel area alrelldy on rouline pmrols, the response lime to Ihe project site should rem, 0
wirhin one minu[e response time. ~
u
l;::
;;
o
:;:
Educntiol1.11 facilities are provided by the San Beffi1rdino City Unified School Distriel whose boundaries encompass tbe projcct sile. TI !5
Genem! Plan identifies thai tile Dislnel facililies in 1988 will rellch 99% capacily for elementary schools. 83% for inlennediale school U
and 97% for bigh scbools. TIle School Dimiel bclollgS to Ihe State School Building Program which allocales monies for scbo, .;;
conslruclion. Assembly Bill 2926 was passed in September 1986 granting school districlS Ihe ability to levy developer fees On ne ~
construction at a rale of up 10 25 cenls per square fOOl for commercial developmenl. This fee has sinee been adjusted by legislation i ~
1992. When AB 2926 was passed Ihe iegisIalure detcnnined tbese fees provide adequme miligalion to lessen projeet impacts 10 a pail c;
Ihallhcy are not environmentally significanl. The City has established a miliglltion fee Ie,')' is e.'pected to be applied to the projeel.. ,.:.
'"
0..
:J
U
C
The projecl site docs not comain an)' pmk or recreation faeililies and docs not provide an)' recreational services. The closcst park to tho ~
projecl sile, Pioneer Park, is located aboul one block north 111 Ihe corner of 6~ and E Slreels. Seeeombe L.1ke Park, a Stale urba, ,
recrealion area islocaled three blocks eaSI of Ihe prQieet site. :
;.e
.s:
><
W
Emergency Medical Services Me prO,'idcd b~' Cily Fire Dcparllllcnllrnincd pcrSolll1cllhrough tile EMT-Pnramcdic program (see fire .g
above). The closest Iiospilals 10 Ihe sile arc SlIn Bernardino Community Hospilal. COUnl)' Hospilal (until it is relocaled) and SI. ~
Bernardine's HospilH!. All hospilalsare within a fi,'e 10 len minnte dri,'e from the projecl sile. E,iS!ing uses on the projeel sile ereale "l3
a small, unquanlifiable amoufll of demand for emergency medicll' lIid. ~
<(
c.
Schools
b.
Police
i J
it
d.
Parks and Recreation
r.
L.
"
e.
Medica/ Aid
f Solid Waste
Solid 'HIsle collccled from the projeel sile is presenlly disposed at landfills in the ellst ,'alley, eilher Colton, Mid-Valley or San Timoleo
Landlills. Ihat are opel1lted by the County. A small. bill unkno\l'n. volume of solid \l'aSle is genernled from the projecl site atlhis time.
The Callan L1ndlill is scheduled to closed \lithin the next five YC:Jrs, bul Mid- Vnlley and San Timoleo arc being permilled for more than
five-years, Ihe current plnuning horizon eSlablished b)' the California Inlegrated \Vnste Mnnagcment Bonrd for opcraling IlIndfills.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 32
8/94
32
I Pac'k~~pg, 563 I'
7.E.c
g. Olher
No other public service issues have been identified where n potcruinl environmental impact may occur.
POlenliolImpOCI
a. Fire
10.a.l
~
~
The proposed project \\ill replace some existing structurcs with new and substantially larger structures. The potential increa .l!l
in demand for lire protection services was addressed as pan of the cumulative demand forecast in the General Plan. Technic III
Background Repon. and Geneml Plan EIR. The project's contribution to cumulMive demand for fire protection services. ~ f3.
mitigate potential imp.1cts upon fire protection sen'ices and the Fire Depanment's ability to provide adequate levels of servie ~
lhe EDA shall implement the following measures: c;
.:.
en
D..
::;)
~
Require that the project construction meet the sl:lIIdards ,'cfereneed abo,'e related to tYI,e of eonstruetio
materials nnd installation or sJlrinldcrs during the re\'iew of plnnning, building, Rnd construction drawings.
10.a.2
10.a.3
The Dc.'eloper shall be I'esponsible for the instnllntion, maintenancc and enforcement of adequate access to a
facilities ror fire cquillmcnt within stnJctu."CS nod on the adjacent ro:u.hnl)'s.
M
The applicant shall ensure that adequate infrastructu.oe nnd water sUJJfJl)' l1rc a\'uilablc onsitc and IJcr Cil ~
standards to meet peal< fire noli' requio'CmelllS ,md thnt they lI'ill be ill phlce and operationall"ior 10 Oecullanc ~
of the new facilities. g
..
'"
u
~
'tl
o
::;;
D..
::;)
(,)
"
t
The information provided in this discussion was obtnincd from a review of the project description and the General Plan an
supporting documents.
b.
Police
M
CD
...
~
The net elfcct on police senioes froIll dC\'elopillg the SBEC Project should be nppro,illlately the s:ulle ns lhe current downtowl C;
demand because the uses are consistent (retail and enlcrrainmcnt) with existing or historic uses in lhe project area. Potentia ~
impacts on the site can be on-set b)' implementing (he following mitigation measure to minimize crime polential through design ~
::;)
(,)
C
Z
::;;
10.b.l
The alllllic"nl sh:lll confer with the Cillo Police DellllliIlleut 'lIld joinll)' de,'clop :l sel of recommendations for
enhancing public safet)' within the structures .1I1d in couI1~'ilnJ arC:ls. These rccommcndntions should address
both l)hJsical installation of cl"imc flrevention dCICITcnts, as well as .'ccommendations for patrolling schedules
and the recommendations shall hc implemcnted b)' the :lJlplir:.mt prior to finalizing building JlIans.
~
C.
Schools
-
:c
The informalion provided in this discussion \\'~lS oblnincd from;l rc\'icw orlhe project description and the General Plan and ~
supporting documenls. w
.;..;
l:
CI>
E
.c
u
'"
:::
<(
The proposed project is not forecasl to calise any direct increase in school [II1CJ1d.lIlcc. No indirect cITect is forecasllo OCcur
because the project will represenl an incrcase illjobs Ihat can be IIl1ed b)' the existing labor pool. The information provided in
this discussion wns obtained from a rcview orthe project description and thc General Plan "nd supponing documents,
d
Parks and Recreation
The proposed project will crc;lIc l:lloc<ltion for rcere.HioH aCli\'ilics, entertainlllenl. 10 occur, No new del1lillld for downtown park
and rccreation sen'ices is forcc:15llo occur rrom implementing the proposed project.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 33
8/94
3J
I Packet Pg. 564 I
t--C-'
I
, ,
1
i, '
r
I
i i
,
, ~
7.E.c I~
The Cil)' uses the Sbte Quimb)' Ael. as amended. the City Municipal Code for fees and land dediemions, and U,e City Caf
Improvement Program to establish standards and schedules for acquisition and development of new park or rehabiliblio
existing P:1OO and recre,uion and special Co1cilities, i,e, lot lOis, or wmer facilities such as fountains. Policy 9.1. 14 of the Gen,
Plan requires that new commercial dc\'clopmcnt provide open space facilities on-sile for passh-c and active recrcatior
contribute fees for the public development of such facilities. The proposed projeel contains a courtyard that ,,;11 provide
public gaUlerings and passive recre.1lion. No mitigntion is required. The inform.1lion pro,'ided in this discussion was obtai;
from a review of the project description and the General Plan and supporting doeumenls,
e.
Medical Aid
~
Q)
~
..
Q)
J:
The need for increased medic.11 aid services at the project site can be correlated to increased population in the region, but I I-
increased use of the project site. Based on a review of retail commercial and movie theater uses, only a few medical : ~
emergencies occur during office hours, Some unqu.1ntifiable, but small, increase in demand for emergeney medical service If 'i'
occur due to development of the proposed project. However, U,e impacts from a minor increase in demand as would be expect S;
from the SBEC complex is not identified as causing a significant efTeet on medical aid levels of service. No potential I !5
significant impact is forecast to afTcct this sen'ice, No miligntion is required. The information provided in this discussion" ~
obtained from a review of the project description and the General Plan and supporting documents, ~
~
~
j
Solid Waste
s::
o
:;::;
San Bernardino County utilizes n pcr capita anmml waste generation rale thnt docs not apply to commercial or industri ~
projCCl.S. Riverside County has defined waste generation based upon developed square foolage, and although the County of S, :g
Bernardino does not ealeulate waste generation in this manner, the use of the square footage forec.1st methodology seems be 0
suited for this project. Given the proximity of the site to Riverside Counl)' and similar types of population, it was judged th: ~
use of Riverside County data would be appropriate for making a forecast. ::l
(,)
Based upon a genenllion fi.ctor of I pound per day for each 100 square fect of building area, the proposed facility is forecasl t ~
genemte 1,350 Ibs of solid waste perda)' or about 210 tons of waste per )'ear, or about 1~5 cubic yards of waste based on I. :;:!:
tons per cubic )'ard whcn eompacled in the landfill. Based on Ihe Count)"s recent reductions in wasle generation (persona _
communication Jim Walsh, Noreal) alld the al'ailabilit)' of cap.1cit)' for land disposal at County landfills over Ihe nexl five yem., 9
no potential for significant impacls to the solid wasle syslem are forccast to occur. S;
ll.
::l
The demolition project will result in the one timc disposal of an eSlimaled 3,000 cubic )'ards of inert building material. Thi: (,)
can be disposed of at all)' one ofsel'e",1 inert "nsle dispOS.ll sites loealed ill the Inland Empire or at the Count)' landfills withou ~
exceeding the capaeit)' ofthc existing Ialldfills, :0
~
The City has de\'eloped a Source Reduction alld Recyelillg Element ill response 10 AS 939 which forecasts a 25% waste '"
diversion b)' 1995 and a greater than 50% di"ersioll by the year 2000. While del'elopmelll of the SBEC project will contribute ~
to the ongoing inCIe1SC in solid waste gcncrntion and lhcrcforc. contribute 10 the continued cumulati\'e exhaustion of available ~
I:mdfill cnpacity. the p:uticip:llion b~' indiddtt:ll businesses in Source reduction progmms will actually reduce tOlal wnste .;..;
delivered to landfills O\'cr lhe life of proposed d~\'clop11lCI1I, To ensure e(fccth'c p:lrticipntion of [ulllre de\'elopment in these ~
programs the following measure 511:111 be implemellted by facility Opcnllars. ~
u
..
~
<(
Ill. f.I
The upplicantlopel'atol'S ~hall WOt'I.. with the Cit~. Public Scn'ices Dcp,111mcnt to integrate its wnstc man;Jgemcnt
efforts with n IH"OJ,:raRl of n'cJclil1~ acti\'itic.'s b~' rcloc;ued office ;u:ti\'ities consistent with Cit)"s adopted Source
Reduetiun alld Rec)'cling EleIllelll, This 111'01:/':1111 sh:lll include the idenlilie:ltion of methods to reduce wastes
at the source and increase the yolumc or I"CC~'clilhlc II1lltcl"hlls thnt can be dclinrcd 10 marliets for reuse. Specific
tYllCS of Jlro~r~'ms include "'n!ite scgn.'~;Hi()1l (cardbOllrLl, phl!itic, mctals, etc.), dclh"cry of waste to the Cit)"s
Ill'Oposed Mllte';:lI, Rt'Co\'el')' F:ldlil)', alld deli\'Cr)' of compo'tllhle lII:1tc/'illl, to the Cil)"s l>rollOsed cOll1posting
fllCilil)",
Implementati01l oflhe abo\'e measure \l'il/minimize solid \l'aste general ion :Ind furthet reduce Ihe proposcd projeel's efTects on
the solid waste management s)'slem, The information prOl'ided in Ihis discussion was obl:lined fcom a rel'iew of the project
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 34
8/94
34
Packet Pg. 565
7.E.c
descriplion and the General Plan. Background Technical Report, General Plan EIR. Cil)' of San Bernardino Source Reducti
and Rocyeling Elemenl, Fia.,1 Drnfi, County of Riverside County Solid Wasle Manogement Plan and Counly of San Bernardi
San Bernardino Counly Solid Wasle Management Plan 1989-1990 Update, Preliminary Draft.
g. Other
No other public service infrastnleture is forecast to be impacted and no miligalion is required.
References
-;:-
"
-
..
"
J:
I-
Cil)' orSan (]..,.m.:udino. 19S9. Final Elwironm<:lll.,1 Jl11n;1~1 Rt'OOft.
CilyofSan lk.""3.rdillO, 1989. C.~"'ernl Pl;m.
-
~
o
,
r-
Ol
a.
::l
~
'"
o
,
~
~
City ofS:m Ikmardino. 1991. SOlIJ"C'C' R~dllctiol1 ~Ild R~\'clin2 E1...m.:-nl Fin;!] !)r.ltl
City of San Benlardino. 1988. Technic!!1 Fh::kerol1nd R<mon
r
County of Riven ide. 1989. Riven;ide Cmlnl'- Solid W"!'II~ Mnn:u!em<:IlII'I:Il1.
County of San Bernardino. 1989. San &"fI1:1rdino Coulltv Solid W:'I!\1o: ~hln:'llelll~"f11 PI:ul 1989-1990 Urxbl<: PrelimimHv Dr..fl.
11.
UTILITIES
c:
o
:;:::
..
U
'"
:;;
o
::;:
a.
::l
o
Environmental Setting
1
n.!.
Natural Gas
Naturnl gas is supplied to the projcct site by' The Gas Company. The existing buildings on the projecl sile consume small quantities o.
natural gas for space and wlllcr hcating, No information is availilble regarding the specific volume of gas used on the project site. ~
....
~
, .
Electricity
0.1.
~
o
,
r-
Electricity is supplied to the project site by Southern California Edison Company. The existing buildings on Ihe project site consume ~
SIl1.111 qu.1lltities of electricity for indoor and oUfdoor lighting No information is available regHrding the specific amount of electricity :J
used on the project site. 0
C
Z
::;:
,
,
,
l:
a.3.
/Vater
,
~
\V:ltcr scnice to the projcct is pro\'idcd by the City of San Bcrn:lrdino Waler Dcpnnment. It is the responsibility of the Cily to provide ~
wnter to development \\ithin it's scrdcc mea ifadeC]uatc wilter slIppJics arc j]\'aibble. No estimate is available on the current water usage :2
)(
Dllhe projeel sile. w
.;..:
c:
n../. Sewer Q)
E
J:
U
Sewer service 10 Il1is project is pro\'ided by the Cily of San Bernardino IValer Departmenl. II is Ihe responsibility of Ihe Clly 10 provide S
sewer service to dc\'Clopmcnt \\ithin it's service iUCH if adequate sC\\'f1gc treatmcnl cnpacity is m'ailablc. No informal ion is available on <(
the current \'olume of scwnge generated ill the project sile, M~ljor sewage tmnk mains nre IOC,llcd :Jdjilccnt to the project site to carr)'
wnSlewnler to the \raler reclamalion planl located atlhe southern end or Ihe City' ndjncenlto Ihe Sanw Ana River.
a.5. Other
No olher Ulilit)' issues ha\'e been identified Ihal would be affeeled or lI'ould aITecl the proposed project.
City of San Bernardino
Envifonmentallmpact Checklist
Page3 5
8/94
35
I. pacltet Pg. 566 I
7.E.c
Potential Impact
a.1. Natural Gas
Based on cL1ta provided by the project archilccl. the propesed struclures will consume an estimated 2,168,000 million BTU
year. The City General Plan and policies address reducing consumption of energy resources lhrough policy stalements contai.
in Chapler II. The project site is siluated o,'er a geolhennal resource which is al'ailable for use in slruclures at this local
and which prol'ides a unique opportunity to the applicant 10 ulilize this resource for space healing. The vast majority of 'i:'
natural gas consumption allhe sile is used to provide sp:Ioc heming, and lhe pelential exisls 10 ofTset the consumption of natu .El
..
gas resources, which are considered to be nonsignificant (as discussed below), Ihrough use of Ihe geothermal resources. '"
.r:.
mitigation measure is proposed below which is nol mandalory since the natural gas consumption is not considered significa ...
11...1
The dev'eloper sll:lll confer with the City Municipal Waler Department regllrding the abilily' to utilize lot
gcothermal resources for sl'nce he:lting nnd cooling, If judged fensible by the City and dev'eloper. the geotherm
reSOurce shall be dc\'(?lopcd nnd used at the site ns an cncq:.\' SOurce.
a.2.
-
~
o
,
....
'"
0..
:J
()
The California Energy Commission (CEC 1995) has rel'iewed energy resource "'ailabilil)' for California and determined lh ;:;;
nalural gas resources are availllble over Ihe ne.'t ten years when Ihe projecl will be developed. Based on adequacy. :!
commercially avnilable natural gns resources, Ihe propesed projecl will not cause n significanl adverse impact on tI -:;;
environment. No mitignlion is required. 0
.,
..
"
I;:::
'5
o
Based on data provided for retail SlnJCfure use of electricity, the proposed structures arc forecast (0 consume an estimate, ::E
2,000,000 kilowatt hours per year. The Cnlifornill Energy Commission (CEC 1995) has reviewed energy resouree 3vailabilil: g;
for California and delennined that ndcqume eleclricily resources nre avnilllble ov'er lhe ne'lten yenrs when Ihe projeel will bo ()
developed. Based on ndcquncy of commereially ayailable elcctrici!y resources, the proposed projeel will nol eause 3 significan '"
co
adverse impact on the environmcnl. No mitigntiol1 is required. "lilt
~
Electricity
.
G.3.
!Vater
l.
~
o
,
....
'"
The proposed project is forecnsllO eonsume nppro,imntely 13,500 gallons per day, or abolltl2.5 acre-feet per year, h.1sed on 0..
:J
313 operming days. The General PI:lI1 EIR prqjecled eumul:llil'e waler consumplion within the City al build-oul would raisc u
tOlal 1I'l1lerconsumplion from aOOul43.ooo acrc-feello 59,000 acre-fecI. Adequllte water supplies were identified in Ihe General C
z
Plan Em to easily mcctthis increased consumpliou of 16,582 acre fccllhrough build-ollt oflhe Cily. To \'erify Ihntlhe forcc.1sts :;
within the Em nee still ndeqllnte. the volume of produCliou for the whole Bunker Hill Basin was reviewed froll1 1988 through
~
1992. The data shows Ihat consumplion over Ihis period declined ench year from aboul 256,774 acre-feel in 1988. In 1992 _
:E
npproximatel)' 229.400 acre-feel of wIlier were produced from the Basin. Based on currenl dala. Ihe nppro,imate increase in :E
watcrconsumplion by 12.5 flcrc-fccl per year will not C<llISC fI signilic:lIlt impact on "'mer resources or waler supply to the project ><
w
site, Miligruion identified under the Fire issue nbo\'c requires that w,lter mnins be siled 10 provide adcqunte fire flows to lhe
project sileo No addiliolw!miliga\ion is reCJuired. The informrllion prO\'jdcd in this discussion was obtained from a review of
the project description. the General Plan ~Ind supporting dOClIlllclltS. and lhe W:ller Conscl"Y:llion Districts Annual Engineering
Investigation.
.;..;
c:
'"
E
.r:.
"
..
-
<(
G..t.
Sewer
The proposed project is forecast 10 g~nemle appro,imately 11.000 gallons of sewage per day. requiring Irenlment. The General
Plan Em projected cull1nhllive scwage flows ill City. bllild-out of I~.I MGD. This ~lIlnlllmive dell1nnd required the construction
of new alleVor upgraded "'Iste\\mer Irealment ;md collection f:lcililies which has been compleled. New connections 10 the sewer
system are required 10 pay n fee which fUllds fUll"e e'pansion ofllle regional wnstewmer reclamalion system. Adequale fees
are being prO\ided by del'clopmenllO fund Ihe required e'p:msiOIlS in a timely manner according 10 Ihe Cily SlafT. Adeqllale
trunk lines are available ndjaccnllo Ihe projecl sile as a rcsuli of Ihe Superblock del'elopmenllo deliver Ihe projecl'S sewage 10
lhe waler rcclaJl1il1ion plant No miligmion is required An eSlimaled 9.5 million gallons of e'cess tremmenl capacily' currenlly
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 36
8/94
36
I Packet Pg. 567' 1
7.E.c
exists at U,e Reclamation Plant. The paymenl of conneclion fees is a slandard requircmenl for new developmenl and docs
need \0 be made a miligation requirement. The information provided in this discussion was obtained from a review of
projeel description. Ihe General Plan and supporting documents. and discussion with the Cil)' Public Works and W,
Department SlaJI
b. All utilities are a,..ulable .11 tl.e project sile and no exlensions "ill be necessary 10 serve Ihe proposed project. No potential ex
to create a "disjointed' pallem OfUlililY c.'tensions. No mitigation is required. The infonnalion provided inlhis discussion,
obtained from a review oflhe projecI description and the Geneml Plan and snpporting documents.
References
-;:-
Q)
-
CIl
Q)
J:
to-
California Energy COflU11ission. 1995. E'~;:tricil\'
Cit)'ofStm Bernardino. 1989. Fin.:" En\'irollmO=llla! hllrlilct Ih:nOr1
12.
AESTHETICS
~
~
C>
,.:.
en
0..
::l
~
M
C>
,
~
~
City orsan Ik"m4rdino. 1989. Gcn~:l.1 P1:J11.
City ofSaJ1 Ikmardino. 1988. T~~hn;cll] nackszround R~,,"ort
53n B.."t11ardino Valley WaterConsr:J"\'ation District. 1993. Annual Enlio!in\'t'rill~ InV("lili2:lliol1 :lnd It':nol1 (7/92-6/9)),
te'
I
r ~
. ,
12..1
c:
o
:;::;
CIl
o
'"
::a
o
The projCCl sile is part of the "DolI'nlown" District as defined in Ihe City Geneml Plnn. This area conlains government, cultural, retal ~
commercial, office and a wide range of residenlial uses. According (0 lhe c\',llualion in (he General Phm. the design styles in th c..
Dowmo"" Dislrict vary subslamially, "as docs Ihe scale, landscaping qualit)', and site coverage from block to block. The General Pia, B
notes that the large office buildings in Ihe Central City/Civic Cenler area arc a mlljor landmark because of the concentralion oflargl ..
M
strucmres in tlus are.1. TIle Cit)' has idenlified Ihe Downtown District as subjecllo urban design guidelines eonlained in Ihe General PIal co
...
and the Main Streel Guidelines. Becausc oflhe large scale of Slructllres in lhe Downlown Districl, no major \.jews to lhe nonh and casl :!:.
the primary scenic views, are 3\'ailnble frol\1 streel le\'el. ~
C>
,
....
en
0..
::l
()
C
Z
~
The proposed projCCI lIill result in an inteusificalion of thc Downlown Districl as a major retail cenler and as a major galhering
place forentenaimncnl. The main stnlcturc will be only two slorc)'s in hcight which is comparable 10 the adjacent structures,
and sm.111 relmive to nc.1rb)' chic buildings and Ihe Superblock. Caltrans SlruClure. The Geneml Plan EIR recognized thatlhis
intcnsific.1tion would OCcur in Ihe Downlown Dislricl (See Visual discussion in Chapler 4.3.3) and concluded that this would ~
be a ocneficinJ impact to lhe project arcn. No scenic vicws from ground Ic\'cl will be ad\'crscly impacted by the proposed project. :5
Vicws from tJ1C c:dsting high risc buildings 10 the nortll and wcst not be allcred. No signific<lnl obslmclion of scenic vie\\'s is :.2
><
forecast to occur and no mitigation is required. The inform:Jtion provided in this discussion was obtained from a re\'icw of the w
projecl dcscription and thc General Plan and suppofling doclllncnls.
Environmental Setting
.
Project Impact
.._1
12.b
.;..;
c:
Q)
E
The City Gcnernl PInn and l\.-bin Street design gllidelines prescribe specific design guidelines for Slructures .md adjaecnt .s:::
o
slrcctscnpcs construelcd within lhc Downlown District The projccI ilrcil hns been in transition for Ihe past sevcral )'ears and B
aboul one-third of Ihe projccl site is presenll)' used for dowlllown parking space. The proposed project has Ihe pOlentialto ::(
contributc to posilh'c ch;lI1gcs in thc ilCSlhclic cJwraclcr of Ihe downtown area by cOIl\"crling low inlcnsil)' use plUking areas 10
high qualit)' buildings and il1lenorcourts. No mitigation is required. The informaliou pro,'ided in Ihis discussiou was obtained
from a re..iew oflhe project deseriplion. and the Gcneral Plan 'lI1d supporting documenls
12.c No olher aesthelic issues h",'e been ideutifieclllJ:H lI'ould be aITecled or would aITecllhe proposcd projceL
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 37
8/94
37
1-0\P'~et.pg. 568.1
7.E.c
References
City of San Bernardino. 1989. Firul F.:n\,'ironmerllnllrnn.1ct RfflOrt
Cia)' ofS3J1 &rn.vdino. 1989. General PI:tIl.
Cil)' of5:,," lkmardino. 1988. Technical R3d:2found RC'rXlfl
13. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Environmental Selling
~
.,
-
..
.,
.<:
f-
A 1'C\1eW oflhe Cily lustonc records indicmes lhal the Lier Music building and lhe Bible relail Slore arc nol identified as being histo:
slructures. 111e rcnuUnder ofUle project site l11s been e'1ensivcl}' gmded and developed over the past 100 years. However, due 10 knOl
fill across the street (as much as 10 fect deep) and more current del'elopmelll activities. including paving parking areas. no potenti
cultural resources are known 10 OCCur on the project sileo The California The:ller, a recognized historic monumenl, is localed adjaee
to the proposed project.
-
~
o
,
...
en
D..
::::l
~
'"
o
,
~
~
r'
!, Potenlia/Impact
t.
, ,
t
I
l3.a-<:. Construcuon of the proposed SBEC buildings has a lo\\' potential to cause significant impaclto possible prehistoric resourCl g
and Justonc resources. The reason for this is the pasl disturbance of the ground surface, including e~lensive fill, over Ihe "'" ~
hundred years. The 1}'JlC of structures proposed, ma~i mum of two store}'s and normal construclion, means Ihal foundalions ar <0::
not e,'peCtcd to e.xtend inlo areas where potential resource recOl'ery Can produce an}' meaningful data. However, it is possibl :g
that during installation of building foundalions. undiSlurbcd resources may be encountered. To address this issue, measure ::;:
will be implemenled to milig",e this potential adverse impacts. The following measures shall be implemented. ~
U
13,a.l
The alllllieant shaU retain a qualilied
disturbance ncth,itics aloe UndCI"Calicl1.
;lI"clmcologistlhistorhJl) who shall be onsitc when any subsurface ;..;
co
"l'
=-
.I
13.b.2
If any resources arc encountered in an undisturbed condition liS determined by the arehneologistlhi,torian, c;
con~1ruction in that area ,hall be halted unlil testl'ils elln be installed. An}' eulturlll resource, encountered as ~
en
a result of tile tcst pits shall be lU"oJ)cl'ly mitigntccJ through testing, collection, documcnt:.tion and curation. a..
::::l
U
C
z
::;:
~.
Based on the implelllentlllion of Ihese meilSllres. Ihe potential cultural resource impacts can be mitigated below a significant
level. The infonnntion prm'idcd inlhis discussion W:1S oblclincd from :I re\'iew of the project description. (he General Plan and
suppoJ1ing documents, and the Phase I ArehaeoJogieilllnl'eSligation Reporl prepared b)' Archaeological Consulting Services
ror the Superblock building across the Slreet..
Reftrences
~
-
:is
:;:
><
w
An;haeological Comuhing Scn.'icL'S 199). Ili~lnr;.. Pr.:S(,r\"illionllln::sli >;llinll" <11' 11l\~~ 29 Cil . OfS.1111I"I,udinl COlllll\' 0 'SrLn B'ntardino Califon ';,: 110.: Arcbi\'al ~
RL'SI.':m.:h PrOl!r:ulI Q)
E
Cil)' of San B""f11ardino. 1989. Fill,,' EIl\'ironl11~ll;lllllm:lL.t HL'Jlill1 "5
..
C;ly ofS,,, Boo",.!;"". t 989. (;,,,,,,1 PI"" ~
CilyofSan n"'f1I3.nJlno. 19SK Tl.'dlllk:1i Ba.:kl!rmllld 1~1.'l'M\11.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 38
8/94
Packet P9; 5.~~: r
38
7.E.c
14. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Tllc proposcd SBEC Project consiSls oflhc rcde\'clopmenl of a large portion of one block in Ihe City of San Bernardino's Down
Dislrict. Becausc this sile has been ulilized for urban Ilclivilies and fllcililies for marc than 100 )'cars, thc potential natural res(
imp.1els are considcred nonsignificant. The sitc has potenlial cultural rcsource values Ihalmay require a substantial effort to mit
below a significant Icvcl, and a moniloring program will be implemcnlcd to ensure that no cultural resources that remain withi
appropriate context will be damagcd or lost. The measnres 10 accomplish this mitigalion are included as a requirement of this Ir
Sludy, Certain urban scnices, such as fire, police and school sen'iccs will require some miligation 10 reduce impacls below a signifi 'i:'
levcl. These mcasures havc also bcen made a requiremenl in Ihis Inilial Study. Tramc impaclS Wcre detennined to bc miligable "*l
nonsignificant le\'el based on improvemenls at E and 5"' Streets. Air emissions associated with operation of the projecl were dClenn. ~
to be below a significant threshold le\'el and based on consistency wilh regional plans no shM- or long-term significant air qu: ':"
impacts arc forecast to OCCur, Based on Ihe data cOlllained in Illis Inilial Sludy, thc proposcd San Bcrnardino Enlcrtainment Cent' ;:-
not forecast to C'luse any significant ad\'crsc impncts. and the City proposes 10 adopt a Ncg~llivc Decl.mltion \\ilh mitigation measu q
...
'"
0-
::l
~
M
<;>
~
~
,
,
,
c
o
:;::;
'"
o
'"
'5
o
::;:
0-
::l
o
It
M
co
...
=-
I,.;
~
o
,
...
'"
0-
::l
o
o
z
::;:
~
-
:E
:2
)(
l1J
.;.;
c
'"
E
.s::
o
'"
-
<i
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 39
8/94
39
I Packet, Pg. 570 I
7.E.c I.
..
I V rn
/
-
I
, ,
. ,..
'" 'H
=> Ir~1
JOI sr y . I
OM \~':t:m'IH!N~~;;rrlu " J'lO ('j( _)~
I ~ Ii f..... , i' ..... I' ,r ,. "1'"
V I Y ~. ,'] T,,"~,'" ~i~;L' '~Z1"'",
" '" t- ',,' /1 ~,hrm",P"k ~o\~...;..~~
'" . "H~ -[R Hom,: ~,,~~: J.~i~~' :tf ;'H ~~-)~ i 7""::l1..! '~j' /j;f.~~~ ~~ . ~
:t:'iL{ 1" Id~ ..h&-f....~'Il""I~)i.1&. "'I~ ~ C1)
· 11 - ,tl s,,~,~ ~ 9", L jPiq'"n ., 1 ~.__., "'\.:/:'" ': ~!i .,,/ I, ....,.~ J:
I . J,HI. S<h.. Mem,., '" ..' .;,_..., ~:l-_"__-iO )1-
.,,, '" /' Cern. 1;"18104 :.-.:'1"r....: :;~;.f~ I . r1 ;.,
11''-- Y ~ ~ ~ - \iWf\ IA~9.,.J",":d""i" ~'(:~4 ;~,;~~~ool:/,Pi '. q
,:1'"'. I;,;....\~:~J, i / !. It'! ..,,~. : .' C ,.....
n '-'10,_ . .,. .'''' . ... 0')
- ,.~ :~~ ~~~~.. F : I--l(o.f\[C! ~U'. ........ lJ:llj/ '''-; W.l'l D..
" c.-' - ~ r . . "I:' :::J
sr . I. to 50 ;; BN I., "-.. '~t. Ar~j', U
.~h.p " :.:.:. ~I" u.." ,. ."./ . _
~ ;~- . ",:':':.:.:. r" e . ,. .'" ....., ".."", "'''-'=!E.., '. M
{-. 'Q ...... :=::;:;::: -~I~:~'- unl,., ~'/~;.1 9
'. - -','1- PROJECT :':'. / l~_ ....,,1', .:.: '-:l'l1M :... : ~
- , SITEI::..lB.!.! c "'10.. " " ~i~ N'.1!"';:~~J.i,f{W'.:-'~':;:' \1\0<' :' '';;
~ 0 '" . Z\$~~. .,( ,('1<." ;,~I"""'" ~c'''.''.L'~.:a,i''''':.! '. ." 10''''. ,g
;C:...Clll: 1.1 ~: .~l"--!'_Lr~" ",~~;~~;,,,y. :?~" '~,. ~'SUb'I,,:~J! oi~H~S~;; ':E'],t .. ':" ~
g;'~1I l' '~f. I \tj ~r:JlIt;;DJ[1j[:1' ~ ~;"'" 1~"~~n~:--~:~lCJ~~ I . ~
'\ 11), ~I'-' I~u;ii'-::<,~z:.-~ :\-.~jrrlr\.L fir . ~.,:'~."'...'n~ ~
f~ ~ I ~..... JI""~:;~II":; 'j~" j ''\'~~i~''''':'''i~' I :i;I,l.~ . 1/.. " .... o\. :-i:,.. ..
'j J~ j H . .' II},' \.:. I j 'I ,,, . : '~':;: '. I' ., ".' M
SI.itQI) "'lrl1eCr,k"' ."~ ":l Cl)11' YI: ". ~ '. i\ '?l; 'O'M'.~---"1 .....,:. '....-__.~..__ ClO
~,/yl(cll~~~r,{;! t!' t::;' ~ ' '1\ 1"1' "IP~-r"~'~",,{ " \F!.O!~t' :;,(-:.. ....~f-.~/:~~T ~
I~;'i,,(:- ,.{~. .-.-:: li'~ :8., t' '-'~}'~ 1- ,..... ["lI; ",' f~j'. '\;1_';' P: :1":"'-':~/-'-'-'-"1' ,'., I'fl ~ ,< C;
~cnr.(j(-I'" I ~ '.........c.>('::.:'r "'-)"~ ' ~ ~'l rt~ll~f' \-\' :.. ;1' .-: .. /I~' t.1l I
-::,l'\n...~ I ,.t -10 \"', :.J '.P.lt~:. n.:'" "I_.~./ : I.~~i.r~: ~
-"''l';;\~53~-- -J- V "n' T rl-\-i!'-~ :','. JI .... I'" ~". .'.F~ . " " : h;,~ co: D..
1h "- J ,. I' ~ 10 o..t.~ 'lJ I I . . h'" I . I . \~. '''\ :::J
-"" 1.....,l..-l.:U1b.lI. tKckcl"/ '" : , .,' K' 0 : ',' I ,.... ....... _... f\. ~I:,""
I '..:. J..'llll:'hSo:h r ~ \ I'~ ] . [iJ It., .111 . 'l. I ',' II _ " '. (.)
""~J, I Ie.::: t L tH',', 9'J I Sell "".. I-;:/I.....u 1It/, ...1', .AI.........
C
I I ..~\ 4"IElI.M"I,:::l'1 " . '1'''1 ..~.'Ol.l. I' ..... .r............ z
"l,_um.,; " "I'r'[I-'''I;;;,;;\\~.Y!i~'~l'o'''''~ I~'-'-I ..,.~.f3: ! 'A':,'. "1 'i"i',';:~:(:',::,::~'/:",:::':':':"! ::;:
t p---...-kJ I r 'JIiiiI.. _I )iJI'. t / ,J L_,~o;ooo:d\, . I.. . I I
ll!lf! ..)i-r'-1~-;"'1- '; /).rf: ~/~\'Il:;' to, ~'1:'O:"I......:,,:::.___n ,} J ,,' ---:--:-!..!: '''~~:''V':~':':,'':':.,:; :.":", ::
:' t::; ""1'.;;/1'", ':"':'~'11 '~'il '~""'Y';I. '; 1\,. .~.: '. I ! ,:""\'"' '" I,. .' ~',- :....' r'-'-'. :E
=~"J,"!I~~ ,:,.';,....,....f./:'. ';). 1~".~.7.1P.J~.\,' t. I' ~; r ":,:".::"'::}: ',i :E
..1 . .---.~ .,It;a (I" ~~~lUr' \, C",~.t'~,.:: I II.:-r'UCJrl I \. ':'"" ",' . n::"'.'.i . ,:,'" ><
" "J-I"'I~' 't'.. '. "__, - I' ~,. I' r ...,....' .
.. . '.',' ]:-.:' ~?'4k...,~s'",""k' ': " ; . I i'~ ". >I~ ," -:"". ,;, .! w
-.,. II I '"i" I (~c .;"II,,'.I.lt.:,' 1,'1',1 , ! .,:: I ',III 1~1.~, . ,,: ',' " ::., . ,'r , +.;
, 'c. - i'/\') "J .. ... , ' " .', "", ~ '.. ..' . '-..---.. l:
f.... '--':" ~ :' A.W: , }~. Lf ,J'--f1 ,'.,1 , C I' !. 1 i ':' i':,~: ",' ~Io~',:=:, :" .~' H'" cr..,k,lt ". :,:.-. CD
~':"'~'ill""I"I]") ,,1;~,.I/:11',II~ 't'f:-~;,-J ;: ,'f/Y "~'" " "j,.,:,g
ij L '1\ It <)"~' \//,j '<'.~,.. I ./:; _~I '~I__, .': ".,::. . ., !:,'" U
'~J_.i! \,n',,,. ,. /.' ;r;\. '.:';v' "'J "'11"/(; I;" I ~I: ! :'] :,')" '.,'. ,. ."Yo),'. '"
~ '~I"'I.-~. '1"7("01 G,.to, /rnI!J1.. I~ [-}','--" .1'10.1;" "'A., n:;" 1) 1 'hT ~
' 'l'~ '. "'/,1"01,:" tl~~ ,X):J ....J I- \.J ~;~.): Z:,: ('II ,:: ,J.'i
,\:,:, .. I'd'~ I,' '1',:-", ,. J.:,----.___ ,,,.,, .'. ..... '..' "'1..."..." ........... .," ..... . -\I"
,,:, \'<\i,\ :',' . 7,f'G;;':'~ ~;"'-I\'~IC''\:::, r'.:' 0, " if ~ !......::'\ .}c.g:".. -.:... ' . '.;.: .;. :...-';
,,' I,' .> " ,,:, "., 10" S",.oo' .-r, 1 I I' .','... r'\".'....:: .'. r'.
I! ,1",.,/...... /",,_, .llJ b ~", , ".' ;~._..."."'....., ';":',.;"
I, l...,,~,f '..,~l,~ r.... .'".'-/"';::. -_. ..,'.1_. I -:". ~I;' ':J,Oll . _,,, ....,
.'\.....
J'"
,c
,
,
= D dl.-
E"s
.
I::.....
-
L--
~
,
!-....
..
... :1-,
ill.
'(;,
i
.
"
~.
-
BAse LINE
P"I
~
y
Li: .
.
.
,
th St
POI
E c. to 5?1. ~
~I~' ...
,. / "
'/ ., I.'
r I
f-
I
,.r.
,
, .
--'
~.l
...;
, ,
" ,
.
u
Figul'c I:
REGIONAL LOCA TION
Tom Dodson & Associates
Environmental Consultants
II Source: USGS 7.5' Series Tapo. San Bernardino South Quadrangle
I ' Packet Pg. 571 I
TH ST
i~ [~ln~l~rnrr~' . .:'..~~~:~::::'~I~~' .. F~ ~ B i
! ~~ i '::,=,-:::r. ',11 i~, ~ f:! 'j ~ . I~ I.../~: H j! I
" '. ' , '~In ".~ ==.-.'--
.......... Il'lmum ~ S .:E"::.
. lL......,.... ~ ., _,_
~w I; " . ":1 ',. =a. . i . ",..~~TI=I:~~ ~
...... . ,. 'll ;~.: .'
'Jr I ,'. .
I .vllllr" I ", c . .
.._1. ..__
5TH 5T. !IDmSTH ST
-.. -.., .l;;l;.q .. r" . · R :~JR:im
i i ::C-' tl ; ~ ll!t~~
...... -.
" ,
f
.
Figure 2:
SITE MAP
Source: Cily of San Bernardino
Tom Dodson & Associates
Enviroruncntal Consultants
7.E.c
~
.,
-
IV
.,
J:
f-
,
~
-
o
,
....
'"
D.
:J
S?-
O'>
""
-
-
!:
o
:;:::
IV
U
-=
:c
o
::;;
D.
:J
o
0'>
co
...
:!:.
-
o
,
....
'"
D.
:J
o
C
z
::;;
-
-
:c
:c
><
w
.;..:
!:
.,
E
J:
U
IV
t::
<(
I Packet Pg,:Jl~ ..1
I
t
t
5TH ST
J
.
!
!
i
L..-..-..
,
'.I.CCUotf
Dl'''MIItwtl<f
,,-
.......
~,
" rAlH
I
t,
.
f--
<n
!J..
,
ltlSlN(; (~"OINI.
TI"(AIC.lI
.'
"'''''''1'''''(
....0..011'1(..
.'
4TH ST
rasrr< -..s S10l'
Figure 3:
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
Tom Dodson & Associates
Environmental COllSliltants
SOllrce: Slolllcnborough. Inc.
7.E.c
-;:-
.,
-
..
.,
J:
f-
~
~
~
.....
en
D..
::l
~
M
~
~
~
l:
o
:;::;
..
"
~
"C
o
:;:
D..
::l
U
M
co
....
:!:-
~
<>
..:.
en
D..
::l
U
C
Z
:;:
~
-
:s
:E
><
w
.;.;
l:
.,
E
J:
"
..
:t:
<C
I' 'packetpg. 573
o
B~ill~
~o~ m~
a.~" II;!
ti. oC
~cHiz!u
j:z~=Il.15
i!~.~~~
ffia ~ >-I-~
I- Zl:!CIl
<<'>0
<<.>
, I f
II IIJI'I
I . II ~ "I~
',I I ,I f I
i II,' f'llllill
II', ':~,i1
'1111' I f 1
I: ..!. 'I
I I r I C
I
Ii,; ,ih.l, ~
'" ",hli!11
~~ Ill! lum!. I"
,J!e ,u... ~
, ,
!j' II"
/!Ii dblJj
El'/"!!'
l'/! 1;11:
"'I:I~t
:11' '.Id
',ilIIl "I
.... "KIi
'I" -, ,;J
:11 Ii !l
:'1' -.:ij,.
'111 "Ii"
!/!IIR~.11
,."t' .,
,el"
,:iil p f!:!
i//il:'mi
i!IaH'rl9
11!,l
,. f,!., II
il dill
i" ,II
I mlll '"
';Jlllll I'i"
!' I' I 'I'f"
Ii/,ib" "Iill,""
, , :. r :..... , d II!! I
"" ~. ..
r.
, :
I;
ir= - .""-............., ----l:-
I f I i l~li[Jill!
j I.. I,,"e \ It II
I .. I, .. ....r- '1/
" \ I · .i"......! I
. ~ I I r .1i
CL '-- -~.' ~_~ I
, I S I I J I ,
ij f I "-..l : I k
. I .. I .. I . I- 'I!
I ll' t · I \ I" ii'
,I L~-=~-:f~l~ i
&. r- ~.,- 11 <l "_. -t-
[)
i:
.
, ,
i,
f..1
e:f
(I
I
,.
/ I'
I' I
I If I
I I'
I, hI)
,'i1! ,:
II n:
I!, ~!j
a! I
,; !
rf ,.
s. ·
~: &
:rr1lfR
IUrr..
II
ci
z
~
~
..J
~
U
t:(
P5
~
.....
f-
~
Z
~
f-
7.E.c
==
00
<")
'"
on
...
~
~
Q)
-
III
Q)
J:
I-
0
~
~
0
0
....
en
c..
:::>
!:?.
M
0
.
~
~
"
0
:;::;
III
U
<;::
:;;
0
::;:
c..
::l
0
M
co
...
~
~
0
0
....
en
c..
:::>
0
c
z
::;:
~
-
;e
J:
"
W
.;..;
"
Q)
E
J:
U
III
-
<(
,...
'"
'"
~
~
c;
c:
0
U
UJ
u
::E
<i
f!
'"
...
..
...
=
..,
~, Packet Pg. 574"
7.E.d
John Coute, Chair
Larry Heasley, Vice-Chair
Jim Mulvihill
Lance Durr
Andrew Machen
Amelia S. Lopez
James Eble
George Rawls
Dan C. Jimenez
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California 92418
Phone: (909) 384-5057/5071 . Fax: (909) 384-5080
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
*DRAFT
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 14, 2011
~
'"
-
'"
'"
.s:
t-
o
~
~
o
o
....
0>
c..
::::>
~
M
9
~
~
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-11
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 11-02
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION NO. 11-03 (CUP 97-01)
c
o
:w
'"
u
~
."
o
:;;
c..
::::>
(,)
M
co
...
~
en
'"
-
::>
c
:ij
~
~
..
~
N
~
,
N
-
:c
:;:
)(
l1J
.;.:
c
'"
E
.s:
u
'"
-
<C
Page 1 of7
12/14/2011
I Pl!SJc!t Pg. ~15 ,.
Chair Coute called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Vice-Chair Heasley led the flag salute.
Present: Commissioners Coute, DUff, Eble, Heasley, Jimenez, Lopez, Machen, Mulvihill and
Rawls. Absent: None. Staff present: M. Margo Wheeler, Community Development Director;
Henry Empeiio, Jr., Senior Deputy City Attorney; Aron Liang; Senior Planner and Lisa Sherrick,
Administrative Analyst II.
ADMINISTRATION OF OATH
Aron Liang administered the oath.
CONSENT AGENDA:
M. Margo Wheeler, Community Development Director, recommended the meeting minutes
of November 16,2011 for approval.
Commissioner Mulvihill made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Jimenez
seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: DUff, Eble, Heasley, Jimenez, Lopez and
Machen. Nays: None. Abstain: Coute. Absent: None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA
No comments.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chair Coute explained that the three public hearing items would be presented together
because they all involve the same project location.
2. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-11 - A proposal to amend Section
19.06.020 of the Development Code to delete the prior amendment approved by
Ordinance MC 1356 to limit the number of new movie theater screens permitted outside
the Main Street Overlay District. This prior amendment language would be replaced with
a limitation on new theater development on a city-wide basis, affecting new theaters not
otherwise exempted by a prior development agreement to 3,000 sq. ft. or less, with 200 or
fewer seats, and with no limit on the number of screens in any theater complex.
Environmental Recommendation:
Applicant:
Affected Area:
Exempt from CEQA - Sec. 15061(b)(3)
City of San Bernardino
City-wide
3. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 11-02 - A proposed agreement between the
City of San Bernardino and Regal Cinemas, Inc. for development of a 14-screen movie
theater in an existing structure located at 450 North "E" Street, in the City of San
Bernardino.
Page 2 of7
7.E.d
~
'"
-
..
'"
J:
f-
,
~
<:>
,
....
en
0-
::>
~
'"
9
~
~
s::
o
.,
..
"
<;::
:;;
o
:;
0-
::>
u
'"
co
..
=-
Ul
'"
-
::J
s::
:E
~
~
<i
~
N
~
N
-
;e
J:
)(
W
.;.;
s::
'"
E
J:
"
..
-
~
12/14/2011
I Packet Pg, 576
Environmental Recommendation:
Ownerl Applicant:
APN:
Ward:
Utilize Certified ErR SCH #2009111089
San Bernardino Economic Development Corp.
0134-121-26
I
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION NO. 11-03 (CUP 97-01) - A
proposal to modifY CUP 97-01, approved by the Planning Commission on May 20, 1997
to permit development of a 20-screen multi-plex theater and 20,000 sq. ft. of associated
retail and restaurant uses at the northwest comer of 4th and "E" Streets, in the CR-2,
Commercial Regional land use district. The proposed modification would provide for 6
auditoriums in the existing 20-auditorium structure to be re-purposed to provide 7,200 sq.
ft. of restaurant and retail space and 3,600 sq. ft. of additional live entertainment area and
support space for the California Theater.
Environmental Recommendation:
Ownerl Applicant:
APN:
Ward:
Utilize Certified ErR SCH #2009111089
San Bernardino Economic Development Corp.
0134-121-26
I
Aron Liang, Senior Planner, gave a brief presentation on the descriptions of all projects
including recommended motions.
Emil Marzullo, San Bernardino Economic Development Corp. Director, gave a presentation
on the history and background of the downtown theater.
Commissioner Jimenez said he would like more time to review the documents provided and
asked for a continuance on all three items.
Commissioner Mulvihill asked what the monthly cost was to maintain the empty theater.
Emil Marzullo said the monthly costs are approximately $60,000-70,000.
Patrick Morris, Mayor of San Bernardino, said the City would like the theater to open in the
summer and time was of the essence in moving the projects forward to meet that timeframe.
Judy Brewer, 5322 Newberry, spoke in favor of the projects on behalf of the San Bernardino
Symphony because the theater and restaurants will allow audience members and musicians a
place to gather before and after the concerts.
Philip Ugalde, 3180 Mayfield Avenue, spoke in favor of the projects because he would like to
visit businesses in San Bernardino rather than neighboring towns.
Matt Korner, 3091 N. Genevieve Street, spoke in favor of the projects and said the cost of
maintaining the empty building was too costly and the only way the downtown district could
rebuild was with the success of the theater.
Page30f7
7.E.d
~
~
'"
-
.,
'"
..c:
I-
,
~
o
,
...
en
D..
:::l
~
..,
c;>
~
~
t:
o
:;:;
.,
u
~
."
o
:;:
D..
:::l
U
..,
co
...
:s
'"
'"
-
::l
.!:
:;:
~
~
-i
~
N
~
N
-
;e
..c:
"
w
.;..:
t:
'"
E
..c:
u
.,
~
12114/2011
!'fpacket Pg. 577
Myra Elder, 3091 North Mountain View Avenue, spoke in favor of the projects because of the
jobs that would be brought to San Bernardino.
Mischa Tacchia, 2596 Lincoln Drive, spoke in favor of the projects and said his visits to the
California Theater lack a place to dine before the shows and said the jobs that will become
available to young residents of San Bernardino would be positive.
Debbie Ariola, 3120 North Genevieve Street, spoke in favor of the projects and said she would
like to visit a theater within San Bernardino.
Lamarr Sonny, 178 Glenfair Lane, spoke in favor of the projects and said he used to visit the
CinemaStar and would like to visit the Regal Cinemas and urged the recommendations for
approval to the Council to assist in moving the projects along.
Jasmine Suarez, 157 West Olive Street, spoke in favor of the projects on behalf of San
Bernardino High School students and said she wanted to help San Bernardino thrive
economically by becoming a patron of the Regal Cinemas.
Leonardo Jasso, 235 East 18th Street, spoke in favor of the projects and said he would like the
opportunity to visit the downtown area with friends in San Bernardino rather than having to drive
to another town.
Gustavo Alvarez, 2048 North Pershing Avenue, spoke in favor of the projects and said the
opening of the theater could bring potential for new development along most of the downtown
streets.
Jose Nievas, 2652 Del Rosa Avenue, spoke in favor of the projects and said the students of San
Bernardino high schools will have a local place to patron in the summer months when they are
out of school.
Estephannie Alvarez, 2048 North Pershing A venue, spoke in favor of the projects on behalf of
Marshall Elementary School and said families would be given an opportunity to watch a film in
downtown San Bernardino together.
Cynthia Perez, 238 East 16th Street, spoke in favor of the projects because the opening of the
theater will invite people from different ethnicities and cultures to come together in San
Bernardino.
James Smith, 1156 East 24th Street, spoke in favor of the projects and said the California
Theater is recognized throughout Southern California and would like for the Regal Cinemas to
assist the revitalization of San Bernardino.
Ariel Hollie, 5360 Dogwood Street, spoke in favor of the projects because she feels safer in San
Bernardino where she resides and would like to be able to visit friends.
Danielle Hobbs, 485 Edgerton Drive, spoke in favor of the projects and said she recently
Page 4 of7
7.E.d
~
~
<II
-
..
<II
J:
f-
.
~
~
c
..:.
'"
a.
:::l
~
M
C
.
~
~
c:
o
:;::;
..
u
<;::
'5
o
:;;
a.
:::l
u
M
co
..
::.
'"
<II
-
'"
.!:
:;;
~
~
..;
~
N
~
.
N
-
:c
:E
)(
w
.;..;
c:
<II
E
J:
U
..
:s::
<I:
12/14/2011
I Packet Pg. 578
performed at the Fox Theater and would like to perform at the California Theater and be able to
provide audience members a chance to watch a show and have a place to dine.
Casey Dailey, 144 East 3'd Street, spoke in favor of the projects on behalf of the
Meadbowbrook Park Loft Homeowners Association and said he resides in the downtown area
and would like to have more entertainment and dining options in the downtown district.
Erika Ruiz, 1423 West 2nd Street, spoke in favor of the projects on behalf of Inland
Congregation United for Change and said her family would visit the CinemaS tar and Carousel
Mall with her family as a child and would like to assist the City in revitalizing the downtown
district.
Vice-Chair Heasley thanked the residents of the City who came to speak.
Chair Coute encouraged the students in the audience to maintain their participation in local
government and thanked them for attending the meeting.
A member of the Commission asked what kind of security measures would be implemented at
the theater.
Emil Marzullo said security would be present inside and outside the building with the Police
Department continually visiting the theater. Mr. Marzullo said that surveillance cameras would
be installed in and outside of the theater in the parking areas and would be recording at all times.
Chair Coute said additional cameras should be placed in the parking lot and better lighting
should be installed in the parking lot and loitering should be discouraged.
Emil Marzullo said additional lighting is being researched and is planned to be installed as well
as new striping in the parking lot.
Commissioner Jimenez commended the San Bernardino Economic Development Corp. for a
job well done on trying to bring another theater to the downtown area but said he would still like
more time to review the documents before making a final recommendation.
Henry Empeiio, Senior Deputy City Attorney, pointed out issues on all three items that in his
opinion would require further information and recommended a continuance.
Emil Marzullo said he disagreed with most of the comments made by Mr. Empeiio and
explained why a decision on the project was crucial to open by the summer.
Tim Sabo, San Bernardino Economic Development Corp. Legal Representative, explained
why the recommendations in the Staff Reports for all three items were supported by the San
Bernardino Economic Development Corp. and gave a brief presentation on the documents
provided to the Commission.
Commissioner Lopez said she would like more explanation on this project allowing more time
Page 5 of?
7.E.d
~
'"
-
co
'"
.!:
f-
.
~
~
o
.
....
'"
ll.
::J
~
'"
o
.
~
~
l:
o
:;:
co
()
'"
'5
o
::;;
ll.
::J
U
'"
ex>
....
~
lD
'"
-
::l
.=
::;;
~
~
..
~
N
~
.
N
-
:is
:E
><
w
.;.:
l:
'"
E
.!:
o
co
-
<(
12/14/2011
I PackefPg~579
for all information to be presented and researched in a timely manner.
Tim Sabo said the City and Regal wanted the theater to open in time for the summer rush of
theater-goers and said that in order for the theater to be able to have all work completed by the
summer, the proposed items must be approved as soon as possible.
Henry Empefio disputed that he had been contacted by Mr. Sabo' s office regarding the proposed
items and requested a continuance to give time to the City Attorney's office to submit any
corrections and feedback to the staff reports.
Commissioner Jimenez asked if the City could be held liable at a later time regarding these
projects.
Henry Empefio said that a challenge could be brought forward at a later time saying due process
was not given regarding these items.
Vice-Chair Heasley asked what the probability was that a case could be brought forward
regarding these items.
Henry Empefio said the City could be sued using CEQA as a tool to stop the project.
M. Margo Wheeler, Community Development Director, gave a brief description on her
educational background and experience to explain her qualifications in making CEQA
recommendations.
Elizabeth Martin, San Bernardino Economic Development Corp. Legal Representative,
said if anyone was to challenge the CEQA findings they would have been present to make their
concerns on the record.
Henry Empefio said the CEQA objections could be made at the Mayor and Common Council
meeting.
Chair Coute called a recess at 8:39 p.m. Chair Coute called the meeting back to order at 8:43
p.m.
Commissioner Mulvihill made a motion to recommend that the Mayor and Common Council
approve Development Code Amendment No. II-II based on the Findings of Fact contained in
the Staff Report and that the Mayor and Common Council adopt an Ordinance approving
Development Code Amendment No. II-II and Development Agreement No. 11-02
concurrently. Commissioner Heasley seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Coute, Durr, Eble, Heasley, Lopez, Machen,
Mulvihill and Rawls. Nays: Jimenez: None. Absent: None.
Commissioner Mulvihill made a motion to recommend that the Mayor and Common Council
approve Development Agreement No. 11-02 and that the Mayor and Common Council adopt an
Page 6 of7
7.E.d
-
~
'"
-
'"
'"
.<:
f-
.
~
o
,:..
'"
Q.
:J
~
M
c;>
~
~
c:
o
:;::;
'"
"
'"
:;;
o
:;:
Q.
:J
U
M
<Xl
...
~
'"
'"
-
::l
c:
~
~
~
..t
~
N
~
.
N
-
:c
:c
><
l1J
..
c:
'"
E
.<:
"
'"
-
<(
12/14/2011
I Packet Pg:580
Ordinance approving Development Code Amendment No. II-II and Development Agreement
No. 11-02 concurrently. Commissioner Eble seconded the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Coute, Durr, Eble, Heasley, Machen, Mulvihill
and Rawls. Nays: Jimenez and Lopez. None. Absent: None.
Commissioner Mulvihill made a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit Modification No.
11-03 (CUP 97-01) based on the Findings of Fact contained in the staffreport and subject to the
Conditions of Approval (Attachment C), as amended. Commissioner Machen seconded the
motion.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Coute, Durr, Eble, Heasley, Machen, Mulvihill
and Rawls. Nays: Jimenez and Lopez. None. Absent: None.
Ms. Wheeler announced that the project would be presented to the Mayor and Common Council
on January 9,2012.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were none.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
The Director indicated that the matters would be discussed at a later meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Mulvihill made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Durr and unanimously
carried, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 8:53 p.m. The next regular meeting was
scheduled for Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, First Floor,
300 North "0" Street, San Bernardino, California.
Minutes Adopted by Planning Commissioners:
Date Approved:
Minutes Prepared by:
Melissa Thurman
Executive Assistant
Page 7 of?
7.E.d
~
"
-
'"
"
J:
f-
.
-
~
o
.
...
'"
D..
::l
~
M
o
.
~
~
c:
o
:;::;
'"
"
t;:::
:;;
o
::;;
D..
::l
U
M
co
oo:t
~
III
"
-
::J
c:
~
~
~
..;
~
N
~
N
-
:E
:c
)(
w
.;.;
c:
"
E
J:
"
'"
-
<(
12/14/2011
I Packet "9, 5!l1