HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-5257
RESOLUTION NO. r;?57
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CERTIFYING THE COMPLETION OF A FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
MT. VERNON CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City
of San Bernardino (the "Community Development Commission") has
prepared an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the
Redevelopment Plan for the Mt. Vernon Corridor (the "Project
Area") Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
Sections 21000, rt gg. ["CEQA"]), the Guidelines for
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14
California Administrative Code Sections 15000, ~ ~., [the
"State EIR Guidelines"]), and procedures adopted by the Mayor
and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino ("Common
Council") relating to environmental evaluation of public and
private projects, and
~~'
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission transmitted
for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and
thereafter, in accordance with the State EIR Guidelines,
forwarded the Draft ErR to the State Clearinghouse for
distribution to those agencies which have jurisdiction by law
with respect to the ~roject and to other interested persons and
agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies;
and
-'~
WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies
inviting comments on the Draft EIR was published in accordance
with the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and
supplemented to adopt changes suggested, to incorporate
comments received and the Community Development Commission's
response to said comments and, as so revised and supplemented,
a Final ErR has been submitted to the Common Council as a part
of the Report to the Common Council, as supplemented,
pertaining to the Mt. Vernon Corridor Redevelopment Plan (the
"Redevelopment Plan"); and
,..-
WHEREAS, a joint public hearing was held by the Community
Development Commission and the Common Council on June 11, 1990,
on the Redevelopment Plan and the Final ErR relating thereto,
following notic@ duly and regularly given as required by law,
and all interested persons expressing a desire to comment
thereon or object thereto have been heard, and the Final ErR
and all comments and responses thereto having been considered;
and
,.
""-'
WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, as
revised and supplemented, made a part of the Community
Development Commission's Report on the Redevelopment Plan, as
supplemented, and incorporating all comments received and the
response of the Community Development Commission and the Common
Council thereto as of the date hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The Community Development Commission hereby
certifies that the Final EIR for the Project has been completed
in compliance with CEQA, the State EIR Guidelines and local
procedures adopted by the Common Council pursuant thereto, and
that the Community Development Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in the Final EIR.
SECTION 2: The Community Development Commission has
evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons
who have reviewed the Draft EIR.
'--
SECTION 3: The Community Development Commission hereby
makes the written findings set forth in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated by reference herein for each of the
significant effects set forth in Exhibit "A", and further
approves the Findings of Fact set forth in Exhibit "A". Based
on such Findings of Fact, the Community Development Commission
hereby finds that significant environmental effects have been
reduced to an acceptable level in that all significant
environmental effects resulting from implementation of the
Project have been eliminated or reduced to a level of
insignificance. Based on the foregoing, the Community
Development Commission finds and determines that the Project
will not have a significant effect upon the environment.
SECTION 4. The Community Development Commission hereby
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program set forth in the Final
EIR.
SECTION 5: Upon approval and adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan, the Secretary of the Community Development
Commission is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination
with the County Clerk of the County pursuant to the provisions
of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code and the State EIR
Guidelines adopted pursuant thereto.
/
\.....-
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
,64/25/90
9308n/2601/011/39(b)
-2-
--
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
adopted by the Community Development Commission of the City of
San Bernardino at a REGULAR meeting thereof, held on
the1.atl'1dayof JUNE , 1990, by the following vote, to
wit:
NAYS:
Commissioners: ESTHER ESTRADA, JACK REILLY, JESS FLORES,
MICHAEL MAUDSLEY, TOM MINOR, VALERIE POPE-LUDLAM, NORINE MILLER.
NONE
AYES:
ABSENT
OR ABSTAIN: NONE
secr~+
of
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 18th day
JUNE , 1990.
.~
JLO-U~J)Ul_), tJl ~'Lf.L>-L.-)
Chairman of the Community
Development Commission of
the City of San Bernardino
Approved as to form and
legal content:
Agency Counsel
B~
~
04/25/90
9308n/2601/011/39(b)
-3-
I""""
'..........
I,
Development
Resolution
adopted
Commission
below, and
SECRETARY'S CERTIFICATE
OF
ADOPTION AND AUTHENTICATION
RORRR'l' ,1. TEMPLE Secretary of the Communi ty
Commission, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the attached
is a true and correct copy of Resolution No.5257
,TUNE 18, , 19~, by the Community Development
of the Ci ty of San Bernardino, by the vote set forth
that said Resolution has not been amended or repealed.
COMMISSION MEMBERS
YEAS
ESTHER R. ESTRADA
I x I
JACK REILLY
JESS FLORES
#*'"""
'-
I x I
I x I
MICHAEL MAUDSLEY
I x I
TOM MINOR
I x 1
VALERIE POPE-LUDLAM
1-41
NORINE MILLER
DATED:
I x I
JUNE 18
[SEAL]
Check Appropriate Box
NAYS
ABSENT
ABSTAIN
[~]
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
1=1
, 19 90 .
City
.~
EXHIBIT A
FINDINGS OF FACT
RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
OF THE MT. VERNON CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
FINDINGS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONCERNING THE
SIGNIFICANCE OF SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN
THE EIR
1. Demographics
A. Impact
Adoption of the Redevelopment Plan will
facilitate growth, thereby increasing the demand
for housing in the Project Area. Estimated
increases in population and housing in the
Project Area are consistent with General Plan
projections. Under a "worst case" scenario, over
the life of the 41 year Plan, the Project could
cause displacement of approximately 759 people.
B. Mitigation
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
1.
Not less than 20 percent of all taxes which
are allocated to the Community Development
Commission in accordance with Section
33334.2 of the California Health and Safety
Code shall be used by the Community
Development Commission for purposes of
increasing and improving the City's supply
of housing for persons and families of low
and moderate income.
2.
Relocation advisory assistance shall be
furnished by the Community Development
Commission to business establishments or
residents, if any, whose property is
acquired by the Community Development
Commission in connection with implementation
of the proposed Project. Relocation
payments will be made to any businesses or
residents displaced by the Project according
to Community Development Commission rules
and regulations adopted pursuant to
California Government Code and guidelines.
The Community Development Commission could
also provide additional financial assistance
which, in the Community Development
Commission's opinion, may be necessary to
carry out the purposes of the proposed
Project, subject to the availability of
funds for such purpose.
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 1 of 22
'-'
3.
Development of the Project Area in
accordance with the General Plan is expected
to ensure the attainment of the City's goals
for balanced land use and housing within the
community.
C. Finding of Significance
The resulting impact on housing demand from the
Project and the residential displacement and/or
relocation impacts of the Project are fully
mitigated by implementation of the above measures
as conditions of approval.
2. Traffic and Circulation
A. Impact
Over the proposed life of the Redevelopment Plan,
it is estimated that trip generation in the
Project Area may increase due, in part, to an
increase in the Project Area's economic
viability, improved housing market and employment
base.
B. Mitigation Measures
-..",,'
The following mitigation measures are recommended
as conditions of Project approval.
1. All proposals for growth inducing projects
within the proposed Project Area shall be
reviewed by the Lead Agency, in accord with
this Program Environmental Impact Report, to
assess the need for additional Environmental
Impact Analysis.
2. In the event an analysis is deemed necessary
by the Lead Agency, and said analysis shows
evidence of significant negative impact to
the existing circulation/transportation
network, appropriate mitigation measures
shall be incorporated into the project(s)
prior to the project(s) development.
3. Coordinate any major changes in circulation
patterns, e.g., street additions, street
vacations, etc., with the City of San
Bernardino Planning Department, the
California Department of Transportation
(CALTRANS) and the County of San Bernardino
as necessary.
....~-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 2 of 22
I"""'"
'--
~
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
4.
Short-term impacts to motorists and
pedestrians should be mitigated with the use
of standard safety precautions generally
employed during project construction. These
include rerouting of traffic, use of flagmen
and limited construction hours.
The following measures are not recommended as a
condition of Project approval, however, the
Agency should consider pursuit of these mobility
goals developed by the Southern California
Association of Governments as part of a draft
regional mobility plan to further reduce Project
Area circulation system deficiencies:
5. To attain and maintain mobility in an
environment of continuing population ahd
economic growth.
6. To provide sufficient capacity to safely and
efficiently meet the demand to move people
and goods resulting from the overall level
of population, employment, land use, and
housing growth projected in the baseline
growth projection.
7. To be accessible to everyone in the region
including the elderly, the handicapped, and
the transit dependent.
8. To be adaptable and to encourage major
changes in travel behavior including both
reducing the number of home-to-work trips
and reducing the use of the single-occupant
vehicle.
9. To achieve the most efficient mix of modes
including automobiles, trucks, buses, vans,
+ail, non-motorized vehicles and new
technologies.
10. To assure the productive use of facilities
through integrated growth management and
transportation system development and by
implementing system development and by
implementing system and demand management
techniques in a cost-effective manner,
particularly those which increase the use of
high occupancy vehicles.
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 3 of 22
'-
11. To be compatible with the environment and to
support the air quality management plans of
the South Air Quality Management District.
12. To support a pattern of development which
shortens trip lengths through improved
job/housing balance.
Additionally, the following measures have been
recommended by the Department of Transportation
in order to further reduce the number of trips
generated within the Project Area:
13. Formation of a Mount Vernon Corridor
Transportation Management Association to
handle such programs as ride sharing, van
pooling and transit coordination for the
area.
14. Development of a City-wide program where
each development project contributes toward
a Park and Ride program.
C.
Finding of Significance
''-''~
Upon implementation of the above mitigation
measures, no significant adverse impacts will
result to intersection operations or traffic
circulation in the Project Area.
3. Noise
A. Impacts
There will be a significant short-term increase
in noise and vibration levels on and adjacent to
specific development sites in the Project Area
during demolition, excavation, grading and other
construction activities. However, the long-term
noise impacts resulting from the Project are
insignificant.
B. Mitigation
1. I All subsequent redevelopment activities
shall adhere to the policies and actions
described in the Noise Element to the San
Bernardino General Plan.
.~
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 4 of 22
~
...........
"<c,,,,.;;...,,,,
C.
2.
Any future developments generated through
implementation of the proposed Project shall
be allowed only in the areas as designated
for that particular use by the City's
General Plan to ensure land use noise
compatibility.
3. All construction activities should be
limited to daytime hours.
4. Construction activity contracted by the
Redevelopment Agency should be monitored to
ensure that u.s. General Services
Administration (GSA) Construction-Noise
Specifications are met.
5. New development located adjacent to existing
noise sources shall be appropriately
buffered to assure maximum land use
compatibility. Appropriate measures shall
be determined on a project-by-project basis
in accordance with the necessary project
specific environmental impact analysis.
6. Sensitive noise receptors shall not be
located adjacent to existing noise emitters.
Finding of Significance
Upon implementation of the above mitigation
measures, the noise impacts of the Project will
be fully mitigated.
4. Climate and Air Quality
A. Impact
''-"'
04/25/90
9388n/260l/0ll
The degree of impact on regional and local air
quality should be insignificant due to the
Project's long-term period of implementation and
given that most projects will actually involve
rehabilitation of infrastructural deficiencies.
Construction of specific development of proposals
in the Project Area will produce exhaust
emissions during construction, and dust
generation as a result of earth movement and
equipment traffic over temporary roads. Other
long-term impacts associated with future growth
under the Project consist of emissions generated
from stationary and mobile sources.
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 5 of 22
B.
Mitigation
.",-"
No mitigation measures are recommended as a
condition of Project approval. However, the
Agency should consider the following measures as
conditions to restore and perpetuate improved air
quality within the City of San Bernardino:
1. The Agency shall participate with the South
Coast Air Quality Management District and
the County of San Bernardino in the
development of long-range solutions
regarding the regional air quality.
2. Specific projects, as appropriate, shall be
reviewed by the Lead Agency for their
individual and cumulative impacts upon the
local and regional air cell during the
appropriate stage of planning.
3. Watering is the normal method of dust
control on construction sites. An effective
watering program (complete coverage twice
daily) could reduce emissions by about 50
percent. The conditions of approval for
affected projects shall require that all
construction contracts include provisions
for a comprehensive dust control effort,
involving frequent watering of all dust
sources and clean-up of all mud carried out
from construction sites onto roadways.
C. Finding of Significance
The individual and cumulative air quality impacts
of this Project are potentially insignificant or
reduced to a level of insignificance by
implementation of the above mitigation measures.
5. Cultural Resources
A. Impact
The proposed Project could have an affect upon
archaeological/historical resources in the
Project Area, particularly in these portions of
the Project Area identified as being within the
Urban Archaeological District. Development
and/or redevelopment projects could disturb, or
render inaccessible, known or potential
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 6 of 22
--
archaeologicaljhistorical sites of significant
value.
B.
Mitigation
Prior to initial planning studies being
undertaken for Plan related projects within the
proposed Project Area, the appropriate project
representative(s) shall determine if a given
project will pact a known or potentially
significant archaeological/historical site.
Following this initial determination, compliance
with the following mitigation measures, as
appropriate, shall occur:
Archaeological Sensitivity
1. Prior to planning level approvals (i.e.,
general plan, zone change, etc.), a
literature and records search and a
spot-check field survey shall be performed
by a City certified archaeologist, retained
by the project proponent, and a~~roved by
City officials.
2. Prior to planning level approvals, (i.e.
general plan, zone change, etc.), a
certified archaeologist shall be retained by
the project proponent to complete literature
and records research for recorded sites and
previous surveys. In addition, a field
survey shall be conducted by a certified
archaeologist unless the entire proposed
project site has been documented as
previously surveyed in a manner which meets
City approval. A report of the literature
and records research and the field survey
shall be submitted to City staff for their
approval. Future mitigation shall depend
upon the recommendations of this report and
will be completed prior to implementation
level approvals (i.e., tentative tract, site
plan, etc.).
3. (a) Prior to initial implementation level
approvals (i.e., tentative tract, site
plan, etc.), a certified archaeologist
shall be retained by the project
proponent to complete literature and
records research for recorded sites and
previous surveys. In addition, a field
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 7 of 22
",-,
~
'-"
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
survey shall be conducted by a
certified archaeologist unless the
entire proposed project site has been
documented as previously surveyed in a
manner which meets the approval of City
officials. A report of the literature
and records research and the field
survey shall be submitted to and
approved by City officials. Future
mitigation shall depend upon the
recommendations of this report.
(b) Prior to initial implementation level
approvals, a certified archaeologist
shall be retained by the project
proponent to perform a subsurface test
level investigation and surface
collection as appropriate. The test
level report evaluating the site shall
include discussions of significance
(depth, nature, condition, and extent
of the resources), final mitigation
recommendations a4J cost estimates.
Prior to the issuance of a grading
permit and based on the report
recommendations and City policy, final
mitigation shall be carried out based
upon a determination as the site's
disposition by City officials.
Possible determinations include, but
are not limited to, preservation,
salvage, partial salvage, or no
mitigation necessary.
(c) Prior to issuance of grading permits,
project proponent shall provide written
evidence to City officials that a
certified archaeologist has been
retained by the project proponent to
conduct salvage excavation of the
archaeological resources in the permit
area. A final report shall be
submitted to and approved by City
officials prior to any grading in the
archaeological site areas.
(d) Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
project proponent shall provide written
evidence to City officials that a
certified archaeologist has been
retained, shall be present at the
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 8 of 22
r"'"
'-'
.~
""-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
pre-grading conference, shall establish
procedures for archaeological resource
surveillance, and shall establish, in
cooperation with the project proponent,
procedures for temporarily halting or
redirecting work to permit the
sampling, identification, and
evaluation of the artifacts as
appropriate. If additional or
unexpected archaeological features are
discovered, the archaeologist shall
report such findings to City
officials. If the archaeological
resources are found to be significant,
the archaeological observer shall
determine appropriate actions, in
cooperation with the project proponent,
for exploration and/or salvage. These
actions, as well as final mitigation
and disposition of the resources, shall
be subject to the approval of City
officials.
Historical Sites
1.
Prior to planning level approvals (i.e.,
general plan, zone change, etc.), a
literature and records search and a
spot-check field survey shall be performed
by an historian, retained by the project
proponent, and approved by City officials.
2. Prior to planning level approvals (i.e.,
general plan, zone change, etc.) an
historian shall be retained by project
proponent to complete literature and records
research for recorded sites and previous
surveys. In addition, a field survey shall
be conducted unless the entire proposed
project site has been documented as
previously surveyed in a manner which meets
the approval of City officials. A report of
the literature and records research and the
field survey shall be submitted to and
approved by the City officials. Future
mitigation shall depend upon the
recommendations of this report and will be
completed prior to implementation level
approvals (i.e., tentative tract, site plan,
etc. ).
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 9 of 22
'~
'~
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
3.
Based on existing information, no historic
resources are located on the project site.
However, if historic resources are
discovered on site during an archaeological
or historical resources field surveyor by
additional information revealed during the
implementation phase of development, the
project proponent shall notify City
officials.
4.
(a) Prior to initial implementation level
approvals, (i.e., tentative tract, site
plan, etc.), an historian shall be
retained by the project proponent to
complete literature and records
research for recorded sites and
previous surveys. In addition, a field
survey shall be conducted unless the
entire proposed project site has been
documented as previously surveyed in a
manner which meets the approval of City
officials. A report of the literature
~nd records research and the field
survey shall be submitted to and
approved by City officials. Future
mitigation shall depend upon the
recommendations of this report.
(b) Prior to initial implementation level
approvals, an elevation of the historic
resources shall be completed by an
historian through comparative analysis
with other historic resources or with
materials collected by subsurface
testing on site. The evaluation report
shall include discussion of
significance, final mitigation
recommendations, and cost estimates.
Prior to the issuance of a grading
permit and based on the report
recommendations and City policy, final
mitigation shall be carried out based
upon a determination as to the site's
disposition by City officials.
Possible determinations include, but
are not limited to, preservation,
relocation, salvage, adoptive reuse,
partial salvage, complete
documentation, or no mitigation
necessary.
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 10 of 22
~
"'-'
(c) Prior to issuance of grading permit,
project applicant shall provide written
evidence to City officials that an
historian has been retained by the
applicant to implement final mitigation
measures. A final report shall be
submitted to and approved by City
officials to alteration of the
historical site area.
(d) Development adjacent to a place,
structure, or object of historic
significance shall be designed so that
permitted uses and architectural design
will protect the visual setting of the
historic site. Such design shall be
submitted to and approved by ctty
officials prior to any alteration of
the historical site area.
C. Finding of Significance
Upon implementation of the above mitigation
measures into the Project, the impacts of
the Project on cultural resources are
reduced to a level of insignificance.
6. Earth Resources
A. The proposed Project, being consistent with the
City's General Plan, will allow development
within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone.
Plan related development within this zone will
require mitigation measures to minimize
earthquake related health and safety risks to the
general public such as ground shaking,
liquefaction and erosion. Portions of the
Project Area are within aggregate resource zones
of regional significance as classified by the
State Division of Mines and Geology. The Project
has the potential to create land use conflicts
that would prevent future mining of these areas;
loss of significant resources will have to be
mitigated. Related projects could ultimately
involve the modification of unique geologic or
physical features located within the Project
Area. Loss of significant resources will have to
be mitigated.
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 11 of 22
B. Mitigation
Seismic
1. Geotechnical and soils engineering reports
shall be prepared in conjunction with the
preparation of preliminary design layouts
and grading plans for the Project Area.
These studies will determine areas of
seismic and geologic sensitivity and will
provide specific mitigation measures for the
treatment of potential seismic hazards and
other hazardous geologic conditions.
2. All rehabilitation and new development
projects implemented as a result of the
proposed Project, shall be built in
accordance with current and applicable
Uniform Building Code standards and
applicable County ordinances and safety
provisions, which may limit construction and
site preparation activities such as grading,
and make provisions for appropriate land use
restrictions, as deemed necessary, to
protect residents and others from potential
environmental safety hazards, either
seismically induced or those resulting from
other conditions such as inadequate soil
conditions, which may exist in the proposed
Project Area.
3. Rehabilitation programs for upgrading
deficiencies where such improvement in
warranted shall be practiced by the Agency.
All new development projects within the
proposed Project Area shall be built in
accordance with current and applicable
Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards and
other applicable City, County, State and
Federal laws, regulations and guidelines.
4. The Agency shall work with the City in the
monitoring of and Compliance with the
requirements of Senate Bill 547, the
structure hazard program.
Mineral Resources
1. The value of existing aggregate reserves
within the proposed Project Area shall be
assessed by the Lead Agency, in cooperation
~
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 12 of 22
P""
'-'
.~
with the State Department of Conservation's
Division of Mines and Geology, on a
project-by-project basis to determine the
need for, and feasibility of, specific
project mitigation measures, e.g.,
extractive development of resources prior to
other types of development, appropriate and
compatible development locations, etc.
Application of this mitigation measure will
assure that the Agency continually monitor
aggregate reserves within Project Area
boundaries following the parameters
established by the Department of
Conservation.
2.
The Redevelopment Agency shall, when
feasible, work with other City departments
to direct urban growth to areas
demonstrating less mineral resources in
order to protect any existing aggregate
reserves.
3.
Provision shall be made for the reclamation
of mining sites, pursuant to Section 4.3.4,
Mineral Resources, of the City's General
Plan.
4.
The Redevelopment Agency shall, when
feasible, promote higher densities and/or
clustering areas of development to allow a
greater portion of those parts of the
proposed Project area to remain available
for mining of aggregate reserves prior to
allowing urban development.
C. Finding of Significance
This City Council finds that incorporation of the
above mitigation measures into the Project will
reduce the seismic and geological impacts of the
Project to a level of insignificance.
7. Biotic Resources
A. Impact
Future redevelopment activities within the
ProJect Area could affect various types of
vegetation and some small rodents located in the
Project Area. However, most of the Project Area
has undergone extensive disturbance by urban land
uses.
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 13 of 22
,,,,.,.,...,
B.
Mitigation
'-'
1. Development in the Project Area shall comply
with the requirements of the City's
biological management overlay zone as
appropriate.
C. Finding of Significance
Incorporation of the above mitigation measure
into the Project fully mitigates the impacts of
the Project on biotic resources.
8. Public Health and Safety/Man Made Hazards
A.
Impact
'~
Short term negative impacts upon the general
public's health and safety will be limited to
those impacts associated with construction
activities that are necessary to implement the
Project. Such negative impacts may include, but
not be limited to: (1) temporary traffic
congestion resulting from roadway and utilities
infrastructure improvement/expansion projects;
(2) increased noise and air pollutant levels
resulting from construction projects; and (3)
temporary impediment of some pedestrian pathways
during reconstruction and improvement of those
same routes. The Project is not expected to
expose people to potential man-made hazards such
as hazardous wastes and toxic ch~micals. The
City has initiated procedures for monitoring
industries that store, utilize or transport such
chemicals. Industries within the Project Area
that have contact with such chemicals will be
subject to these existing procedures and
restrictions.
B.
Mitigation
1. The use of standard safety precautions
generally employed during project
construction phases, which interface with
the general public, shall be used as a means
to mitigate potential safety hazards. Such
precautions may include, but not be limited
to:
--
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 14 of 22
r-
a.
rerouting of traffic away from
construction areas;
"'-'
b. use of flagmen at hazardous
construction zones;
c. timing of construction to take
advantage of light periods of traffic;
d. use of exhaust and noise filters on
construction equipment;
e. limiting construction projects which
include earth moving to months of low
rainfall, thereby reducing the chance
of erosion; and
f. use of water applications upon graded
areas during dry summer months to
provide dust control.
2. Depending upon the specific project,
additional mitigation measures may be
required. The Community Development
Commission, acting as the Lead Agency, shall
determine on a project-by- project basis
and, in accord with this Program
Environmental Impact Report, the need for
additional environmental assessment. The
need for additional mitigations to lessen
impacts of short term construction related
hazards that affect the health and safety of
the general public shall be analyzed at that
time.
C. Finding of Significance
Incorporation of the above mitigation measures
into the Project fully mitigates the public
health and safety impacts of the Project.
9. Schools
A. Impact
Short-term impacts from redevelopment activities
could include traffic disruption and noise
related to infrastructural improvement projects
and road construction taking place near or
adjacent to the school sites located within the
--
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 15 of 22
"-'
Project Area. Long-term impacts of the proposed
project upon the affected school districts are
related to the increase in population incurred
from redevelopment related housing programs and
commercial/industrial employment base increases.
However, no significant impacts upon the three
school districts presently serving the Project
Area are expected to occur as a result of the
Plan's implementation, because the number of new
students that will be generated as a result of
new housing and employment opportunities within
the Project Area is insignificant over the 41
year life of the Plan.
B.
Mitigation
1. Short-term impacts to school children shall
be mitigated with the use of standard safety
precautions generally employed during
traffic related construction such as:
rerouting of traffic, use of flagmen, etc.
2. Construction activity contracted by the
Agency should be monitored to ensure that
u.S. General Services Administration (GSA)
construction-noise specifications are met.
-
3 .
The School Districts should continue to
collect the development fee for purposes of
funding school facility programs.
C. Finding of Significance
Upon implementation of the above mitigation
measures into the Project, the potential school
service impacts in the Project Area are reduced
to a level of insignificance.
10. Water
A. Impact
Implementation of the Project may result in
impacts on water supply services. Daily water
consumption subsequent to the completion of new
development in the Project Area could increase as
a result of Project implementation. However, the
increase in water consumption should be
insignificant on a regional scale.
~'-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 16 of 22
B. Mitigation
~
The following mitigation measures are recommended
as conditions of Project approval to further
ensure the long-term availability and
conservation of regional water resources:
1. All proposals for future growth inducing
projects shall be reviewed by the Lead
Agency, in accord with this Program
Environmental Impact Report, to determine
the need for specific projects environmental
impact analysis relative to impacts such
development may have upon regional water
resources and local distribution facilities.
2. Water distribution system expansioh and/or
improvement projects shall precede or be
concurrent with all growth generating
projects.
3 .
Consideration by the Lead Agency, in accord
with the Department of Water Resources
recommendation, consider implementing a
comprehensive program to use reclaimed water
for irrigation purposes in order to free up
fresh water supplies for beneficial uses
requiring high quality water supplies.
~".
Additionally, the following mitigation measures
should be established, when appropriate, to
reduce water use, thereby reducing demands upon
the existing and future distribution systems:
4. Plumbing fixtures that reduce water usage
shall be utilized (i.e., low volume toilet
tanks, flow control devices for faucets and
shower heads) in accordance with Title 24 of
the California Administrative Code.
5. The use of drought-tolerant plant species
and drip irrigation systems shall be
considered in order to reduce water usage.
6. Installation of low flush toilets in
accordance with Health and Safety Code
Section 17921.3.
7. Installation of low flow showers and faucets
in accordance with California Administrative
Code, Title 24, Part 6, Article I, T20-1406E.
.~
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 17 of 22
-
-'
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
8.
Future developers should be assessed a water
capacity fee for importation and
distribution facilities.
9. The use of approved American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) showerheads,
lavatory faucets and sinks in all new
development, in accordance with California
Administrative Code, Title 20,
Section 1604(f).
10. Compliance with California Administrative
Code Section 1606(b) (Appliance Efficiency
Standards) which prohibits the sale of
fixtures that do not comply with regulations.
11. Compliance with the California
Administrative Code, Title 24,
Section 2-5307(b) (California Energy
Conservation Standards for New Buildings)
which prohibits the installation of fixtures
unless the manufacturer has certified to the
CEC compliance with the flow rate standard.
12. Compliance with the California
Administrative Code, Title 24,
Sections 2-5352(i) and (j) which addresses
pipe insulation requirements that can reduce
water used before hot water reaches
equipment or fixtures.
13. Compliance with Health and.Safety Code
Section 4047 which prohibits installation of
residential water softening or conditioning
appliances unless certain conditions are
satisfied.
14. Compliance with Health and Safety Code
Section 7800 which specifies that lavatories
in all public facilities constructed after
January 1, 1985, be equipped with
self-closing faucets that limit flow .of hot
water.
Recommendations to be implemented where
applicable:
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 18 of 22
Interior:
-
15. Supply line pressure: recommend water
pressure greater than 50 psi be reduced to
50 psi or less by means of a
pressure-reducing valve.
16. Flush valve operated water closets:
recommend 3 gallons per flush.
17. Drinking fountains: recommend installation
of self-closing valves.
18. Pipe insulation: recommend all hot water
lines in dwelling units be insulated to
provide hot water quickly with less water
use and to prevent hot pipes from' heating
cold pipes.
19. Restaurants: use of water-conserving models
of dishwashers or retrofitting spray
emitters. Drinking water to be served upon
request only.
,-". .
20. Hotel Rooms: conservation reminders be
posted in rooms and restrooms.
Thermostatically controlled mixing valve be
installed for bath/shower.
21. Laundry Facilities: water-conserving models
of washers be used.
22. Ultra-low-flush-toilets: 1-1/2 gallon per
flush toilets be installed in all new
construction.
Exterior:
23. Landscape with low water-consuming plants.
24. Use mulch extensively in all landscaped
areas. Mulch applied to top soil will
improve the water-holding capacity of the
soil by reducing evaporation and soil
compaction.
25. Preserve and protect existing trees and
shrubs. Established plants are often
adapted to low water conditions and their
use saves water needed to establish
replacement vegetation.
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 19 of 22
,~,
"-'
26. Minimize the use of law by limiting it to
lawn-dependent uses, such as playing
fields. When lawn is used, require warm
season grasses.
27. Group plants of similar water use to reduce
overirrigation of low-water-using plants.
28. Provide information to occupants regarding
benefits of low-water-using landscaping and
sources of additional assistance.
29. Use mulch extensively in all landscaped
areas. Mulch applied on top of soil will
improve the water-holding capacity of the
soil by reducing evaporation and soil
compaction.
30. Preserve and protect existing trees and
shrubs. Established plants are often
adapted to low-water-using conditions and
their use saves water needed to establish
replacement vegetation.
--
31. Install efficient irrigation systems that
minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize
the water that will reach the plant roots.
Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and
automatic irrigation systems are a few
methods of increasing irrigation efficiency.
32. Use pervious paving materi~l whenever
feasible to reduce surface water runoff and
to aid in ground water recharge.
33. Grade slopes so that runoff of surface water
is minimized.
34. Investigate the feasibility of using
reclaimed waste water, stored rainwater, or
grey water for irrigation.
35. Encourage cluster development, which can
reduce the amount of land being converted to
urban use. This will reduce the amount of
impervious paving created and thereby aid in
ground water recharge.
36. Preserve existing natural drainage areas and
encourage the incorporation of natural
drainage systems in new developments. This
aids ground water recharge.
-
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 20 of 22
(~
37. To aid in ground water recharge, preserve
flood plains and aquifer recharge areas as
open space.
C. Finding of Significance
Upon implementation of the above mitigation
measures, the impacts of the Project on water
supply services are fully mitigated.
11. Other Impacts
Based on the EIR and the Record before the
Community Development Commission, the Community
Development Commission hereby finds that
implementation of the Project results in no other
significant adverse environmental impacts.
FINDINGS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONCERNING THE
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Each of the alternatives presented in the EIR has been
considered. Those alternatives are hereby found to be
infeasible based on economic, social and other considerations
as set forth below.
-
1. Infeasibility of the No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative would not accomplish the
goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan.
Adoption of the No Project Alternative would serve
only to delay the potential adverse impacts associated
with development of the Project site (increased
traffic, noise, or air pollution). If private
development of sites within the Project Area does not
occur in the near future, adoption of the No Project
Alternative would result in a direct loss of revenue
to the Community Development Commission as well as a
potential indirect loss since the values of
surrounding properties would be adversely affected.
Uncertainty in development also could make it more
difficult to generate developer interest in
redevelopment of the Project Area. Accordingly, the
No Project Alternative is found to be infeasible.
2. Infeasibility of the Alternative Project Areas and
Size Alternative.
The environmental impacts of the proposed Redevelop-
ment Project would be greater under these alternatives
because decreasing the size of the Project Area does
"\~
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 21 of 22
"-'
not eliminate the need for the identified infrastruc-
ture improvements. In the final analysis, decreasing
the existing Project Area size is not appropriate
since the established boundaries were chosen on the
basis of existing conditions including physical
deterioration, social maladjustment, and economic
decline. The existing Project Area represents a
well-defined area with specific revitalization needs.
Accordingly, the Alternative Project Area Size
Alternative is rejected as infeasible.
3 .
Infeasibility of the Limited Redevelopment Activities
Alternative.
.#I"~
The environmental impacts resulting from implementation
of the Limited Redevelopment Activities Alternative
would be greater than those occurring as a result of
the Project's implementation. Additionally, tax
increment revenues would be severely restricted. Such
restrictions or limitations would result in
commensurate reductions in the Community Development
Commission's ability to undertake the Redevelopment
Program as contemplated by the amended Redevelopment
Plan, including: (1) reductions in public
improvements and facilities provided; (2) a restricted
ability to eliminate conditions of deficiency; and
(3) a reduced ability to implement the goals of the
General Plan and to eliminate existing environmental
deficiencies and problems occurring within the Project
Area. In the final analysis, the Limited
Redevelopment Activities Alternative is not an
environmentally superior alternative to the Plan
amendment and, therefore, it is rejected as infeasible.
"--
4.
Infeasibility of the Alternative Financing Alternative.
As an alternative to the Redevelopment Project, the
Community Development Commission or City could attempt
to undertake a similar program utilizing alternative
sources of revenue (sources other than tax increment
revenues). However, no single source would be
sufficient in amount or purpose to accomplish the
activities contemplated by the Redevelopment Project.
Accordingly, the Alternative Financing Alternative is
rejected as infeasible.
--
04/25/90
9388n/2601/011
EXHIBIT A
PAGE 22 of 22