Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout51- Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BERG' IRDINO - REQUEST r 7R COUNCIL ACTION From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Resolution-Norton Reuse Dept: Planning & Building Services Mayor and Common Council Meeting May 24 , 1993 Date: May 6 , 1993 Synopsis of Previous Council action: , The San Bernardino International Airport Authority was established pursuant to a joint exercise of Powers Agreement. Recommended motion: That the resolution be adopted which finds the reuse/conversion of Norton Air Force Base consistent with the City' s General Plan and acknowledging that the San Bernardino International Airport Authority will own and operate Norton Air Force Base as a civilian airport facility. Al Bougl na ture Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Resolution Ward: 1 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution to find the reuse of Norton A.F.B. consistent with the City's General Plan and acknowledging that the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA) will own and operate the San Bernardino International Airport as a civilian airport facility. KEY POINTS: - The Airport Authority is in the process of filing an application with State of California - Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics to receive an operating permit for the operation of a civilian aviation facility at Norton A.F.B. - The attached information explains the overall process being undertaken by the Airport Authority and the City's role. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the resolution, copy attached. Prepared by: Valerie C. Ross, Acting Principal Planner Attachments: 1 Resolution Exhibit A Location Map 2 SBIAA Resolution Exhibit A Interim Airport Operating Plan Exhibit B Interim Airport operating Plan Initial Study Exhibit C East Valley Airport Land Use Commission Resolution and Staff Report 4 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THE EXISTENCE OF A CERTAIN 3 LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ACKNOWLEDGING THAT A CIVILIAN AIRPORT WILL BE OPERATED ON NORTON AIR FORCE BASE. 4 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino has previously approved an 5 agreement for the joint exercise of powers and has become a member 6 of a joint powers agency known as the San Bernardino International 7 Airport Authority (the "Airport Authority") ; and 8 WHEREAS, the Airport Authority is in the process of initiating 9 the procedural steps required to obtain the necessary operating 10 permits from the California Department of Transportation, Division 11 of Aeronautics, to enable the Airport Authority to continue the 12 flight operations at Norton Air Force Base ("NAFB") and to operate 13 a civilian aviation facility at NAFB; and 14 WHEREAS, the Division of Aeronautics requires that the local 15 political subdivision exercising land use controls over a proposed 16 civilian aviation facility provide a statement that the land uses 17 as then in effect are compatible with the proposed uses as a 18 civilian airport; and 19 WHEREAS, the City's General Plan addresses the orderly 20 transition of Norton Air Force Base to a civilian airport and 21 promotes the public or joint public-private use of Norton Air Force 22 Base and adjacent properties for aviation-related uses (Goal 1 I 23 and Objective 1.39) ; and 24 WHEREAS, Norton Air Force Base is designated PF, Public 25 Facility and the continued use as a civilian aviation facility is 26 consistent with the General Plan goal and objective; and 27 28 1 1 2 WHEREAS, the continued use of Norton Air Force Base as an 3 aviation facility and the conversion thereof to a civilian aviation 4 facility involves no change in land use; and 5 WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5 requires that 6 no political subdivision, any of its officers or employees, or any 7 person may submit any application for the construction of a new 8 airport unless the plan for such construction is first approved by 9 the City Council of the City in which the airport is to be located; 10 and 11 WHEREAS, the aviation facilities at Norton Air Force Base are 12 located entirely within the municipal boundaries of the City of San 13 Bernardino, and the Mayor and Common Council are required pursuant 14 to said Section 21661. 5 to acknowledge that the San Bernardino 15 International Airport will be operated as a civilian aviation 16 facility by the Airport Authority; and 17 WHEREAS, on April 13 , 1993 , the East Valley Airport Land Use 18 Commission adopted a resolution making findings and determinations 19 pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21670, et sea. , that the 20 civilian operations on San Bernardino International Airport by the 21 Airport Authority will continue to ensure that compatible land uses 22 will be encouraged in the vicinity of the San Bernardino 23 International Airport as provided in the Interim East Valley 24 Airport Land Use Plan; and 25 WHEREAS, on April 21, 1993, the Airport Authority adopted 26 Resolution No. 93-4 wherein an Interim Airport Operating Plan of 27 the Airport Authority was approved after having considered an 28 Initial Study (such Initial Study having been prepared pursuant to 2 O 1 the provisions of the California Environment Quality Act of 1970, 2 as amended and utilizing the City of San Bernardino environmental 3 checklist) as prepared for the purpose of evaluating whether new 4 adverse environmental effects could occur as the result of approval 5 and implementation of such Interim Airport Operating Plan that were 6 not previously evaluated in that certain Program EIR as described 7 in said Resolution; and 8 WHEREAS, the adoption of a resolution finding consistency with 9 the City's General Plan and acknowledging that the Airport 10 Authority will own and operate Norton Air Force Base as a civilian 11 airport facility is not a project subject to CEQA. 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL 13 OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 14 SECTION 1. The Mayor and Common Council hereby accept the 15 conclusions set forth in the document entitled "Norton Air Force 16 Base Conversion To Civilian Operation; Interim Airport Operating 17 Plan Initial Study" as previously considered by the Airport 18 Authority. The Airport Authority found and determined that there 19 are no new environmental impacts which had not been previously 20 addressed by the above-referenced Program EIR. The Airport 21 Authority concluded that no new adverse effects could occur and no 22 new mitigation measures were required other than those as 23 previously set forth in the Program EIR. 24 The Mayor and Common Council further find and declare that no 25 additional CEQA review is required by the City at this time in 26 connection with the approval and adoption of this Resolution. City 27 Staff is authorized and directed to file a Notice of Exemption 28 pursuant to CEQA in connection with the adoption of this 3 O 1 Resolution. 2 SECTION 2 . The Mayor and Common Council hereby determine 3 that the existing land use designation on NAFB set forth as PF, 4 Public Facility in accordance with the current General Plan of the 5 City of San Bernardino is adequate to accommodate the ownership and 6 operation of any facility within such "PF" designation by a 7 public body such as the Airport Authority as shown on Exhibit "A" . 8 ownership of all or any portion of NAFB by the Airport Authority 9 for the operation and future expansion of the San Bernardino 10 International Airport is consistent with the General Plan 11 designation of "PF" as the same now exists. 12 SECTION 3 . The Mayor and Common Council hereby acknowledge 13 that the Airport Authority intends to own and operate a civilian 14 airport facility on a portion of the existing NAFB. Such ownership 15 and operation by the Airport Authority shall be subject to all 16 applicable City zoning laws, building codes and other development 17 code restrictions. 18 SECTION 4 . The findings and determinations herein shall be 19 final and conclusive. This resolution shall take effect upon the 20 date of its adoption. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 1 A RESOLUTION. . . DETERMINING THE EXISTENCE OF A CERTAIN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ACKNOWLEDGING THAT A CIVILIAN AIRPORT WILL BE 2 OPERATED ON NORTON AIR FORCE BASE. 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly 4 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 5 Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the 6 day of 1993 , by the 7 following vote, to wit: 8 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 9 ESTRADA 10 REILLY 11 HERNANDEZ _ 12 MAUDSLEY _ 13 MINOR _ 14 POPE-LUDLAM 15 MILLER 16 17 18 CITY CLERK 19 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day 20 Of , 1993 . 21 W. R. HOLCOMB, MAYOR 22 City of San Bernardino 23 Approved as to form 24 and legal content: 25 JAMES F. PENMAN, 26 City Attorney 27 By: 28 5 -EXHIBIT "A"' . I NIi Ci�7 i a 6U @P 0 p'p % 411 ie IyIuI I ''�.q \ 11 v rf�� -[f Q � • 1.�v �N .� � qlI� f r., g d ° OOO 0 b ono q. e I II I I I I I 1 �� p � �\ \\\ m � � • � 1 11 ll99 „ \ k'r G 4 \r I�I -lid a� m Ir' i ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. qj 14 RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSION OF THE SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY APPROVING AN INTERIM AIRPORT OPERATING PLAN, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WHEREAS, the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (the "SBIAA") was duly formed pursuant to a certain agreement entitled "Joint Exercise Of Powers Agreement Creating An Agency To Be Known As The San Bernardino International Airport Authority" , as amended (the "JPA Agreement") , in accordance with California Government Code Section 6500, et seg. ; and WHEREAS, Section 3 of the JPA Agreement authorizes but does not require the SBIAA to make application for and to own and operate the aviation facilities and other appurtenant properties located on Norton Air Force Base, to be known as the San Bernardino International Airport, in accordance with the powers granted to the SBIAA; and WHEREAS, the SBIAA now desires to commence a formal application process with the . California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics ("CalTrans") , for the issuance of an operating permit for the civilian flight activities to be undertaken by the SBIAA on the San Bernardino International Airport, as required pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661, et sea. ; and - 1 - WHEREAS, California Administrative Code, Title 21 , Section 3534, requires the SBIAA to submit a Site Approval Permit Application to CalTrans for the issuance of an operating permit, provided that all requirements set forth in the Site Approval Permit have been met; and WHEREAS, a certain Final Environmental Impact Report, which was prepared and circulated as a program EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (the "Program EIR") , has been certified by the Inland Valley Development Agency and a Notice of Determination dated July 11, 1990, was duly filed on July 26, 1990, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended ("CEQA") ; and WHEREAS, the Program EIR analyzed certain levels of aviation operations and resulting noise contours, traffic and circulation impacts and other environmental impacts which are likely to occur upon the transfer of title or possession of the aviation facilities located on Norton Air Force Base to a local governmental airport operating entity; and WHEREAS, the Staff and consultants of the SBIAA have prepared the "Norton Air Force Base Conversion to Civilian Use: Interim Airport Operating Plan" (the "Interim Airport Operating Plan") as attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and which is incorporated herein by reference) and have conducted an Initial Study (such Initial Study is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and is incorporated - 2 - herein by reference) concerning the parameters of aviation operations and resulting noise contours, traffic and circulation impacts and other environmental impacts in connection with the submission by the SBIAA of the Site Approval Permit Application to CalTrans for the issuance of an operating permit, and such Initial Study is intended to determine whether the Program EIR is applicable to the SBIAA for operating a civilian airport on Norton Air Force Base within the limits established by the Interim Airport Operating Plan; and WHEREAS, Case No. 256889 was filed in June, 1990, as amended in August, 1990, to challenge the Program EIR as permitted by CEQA, and in settlement thereof, a certain Agency Settlement Agreement dated April 28, 1992 , was duly executed by the parties thereto which, in Section 4. 1 thereof, states in part that "[i]t is the intention of the parties hereto that in the event the Authority [SBIAA] undertakes, or causes or assists in the undertaking of, development activities which cause Impacts, the Authority [SBIAA] shall endeavor to mitigate such Impacts in whatever manner as may be appropriate, consistent with the requirements of state and federal laws. The parties anticipate that the Impacts may be mitigated by and agree to consider taking those mitigation measures listed in Exhibit "E" which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which Exhibit is not intended to be exclusive" ; and - 3 - WHEREAS, the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission ("EVALUC") duly approved a Resolution and Staff Report attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference as required by California Administrative Code, Title 21, Section 3534 (b) (6) ; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino must hereafter, by resolution, find that the land use designations as contained in the City of San Bernardino General Plan ;allow a civilian airport to be owned and operated by a governmental agency such as the SBIAA and that the City of San Bernardino has recognized that a civilian airport will, in fact, be operated on Norton Air Force Base by the SBIAA in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 21, Section 3534 (b) (4) and (5) . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The SBIAA hereby finds and determines, on the basis of the Initial Study and the Staff Memorandum submitted to this Commission in connection therewith, that the level of civilian flight operations and resulting noise contours, traffic and circulation impacts and other environmental impacts resulting therefrom are within the parameters identified in the Interim Airport Operating Plan, as such impacts were previously analyzed by - 4 - 1 the referenced Program EIR of the Inland Valley Development Agency, will not have any foreseeable environmental impacts which have not been previously addressed by the Program EIR. The SBIAA, upon having duly considered the Initial Study, does hereby approve the Interim Airport Operating Plan which shall be applicable for the initial civilian aviation operations by the SBIAA at San Bernardino International Airport as located on the existing aviation facilities at Norton Air Force Base. Such Interim Airport Operating Plan is also hereby found to be applicable with regard to the flight operation levels as are consistent with those limitations set forth in the Program EIR for all types of environmental impacts as addressed therein, subject to implementation of mitigation measures, as applicable, identified in the Program EIR. The SBIAA shall be considered as the Lead Agency pursuant to CEQA for all purposes of both the herein described submittal of the Site Approval Permit Application to CalTrans and the operations of a civilian airport on Norton Air Force Base by the SBIAA pursuant to the Interim Airport operating Plan. The SBIAA further finds and determines that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 , no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures will be required other than those as previously set forth in the Program EIR. The activities of the SBIAA in both applying for the operating permit from CalTrans and in undertaking the actual operating of the aviation facilities on Norton Air Force - 5 - Base as a civi_ .an airport pursuant to . _ Interim Airport Operating Plan are covered by the Program EIR and no new environmental document is now required. Staff is directed to make all necessary filings pursuant to CEQA in order to evidence the hereinabove findings and determinations of the SBIAA. Section 2 . The SBIAA hereby finds and determines that the actions of the SBIAA pursuant to this Resolution are in full conformity with the intent of the parties as expressed in Section 4 . 1 of the Agency Settlement Agreement. Section 3 . The SBIAA Staff and Consultants are hereby authorized and directed to submit to CalTrans a Site Approval Permit Application, together with this Resolution and all Exhibits, the Resolution and staff report of the EVALUC, and any resolution and Staff Report of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, plus all other documents, forms, studies, maps or drawings as required by Public Utilities Code Section 21661, et sea. , and California Administrative Code, Title 21, Section 3534 , and other pertinent provisions thereunder. Such Site Approval Permit Application may be amended and expanded from time to time as Staff and Consultants may deem necessary under the circumstances. The SBIAA hereby declares its intent to own and operate a civilian aviation facility on portions of Norton Air Force Base as may be conveyed by the United States Air Force to the SBIAA and to initially operate such civilian aviation facility within the - 6 - parameters as iden-ified in the Program EIR ano the Interim Airport Operating Plan. Section 4 . Staff and Consultants shall make available to CalTrans all additional information necessary to complete the Site Approval Permit Application as may be requested by CalTrans in order to enable CalTrans to issue an operating permit for the aviation facilities located on Norton Air Force Base which is to be known as the San Bernardino International Airport, provided that all requirements set forth in the site Approval Permit have been met. Section 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this o2 /eT day of 1993 . l� Pfesident o� the Commission for the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SEAL) ATTEST: Secretary of the Commission for the San Bernardino International Airport Authority I, �� [�.t�a Secretary of the San Bernardino International Airport Author}ity do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 93-`I was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Authority at a WJ2A., meeting thereof held on the IP14 " day of /9 p; q 1993, and that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of said Resolution, and has not been amended or repealed. Secretary of the Commission for the San Bernardino International Airpurt Authority (SEAL) SBW0001030C126 8 _ 0 EXHIBIT"A" NORTON AIR FORCE BASE CONVERSION TO CIVIIdAN USE: INTERIM AIRPORT OPERATING PLAN Project Description 1. Introduction In January 1990 the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA or Agency) was formed in response to the announced closure of Norton Air Force Base (January 1989). The Agency was formed through state legislation, Assembly Bill No. 419 (AB 419), which enabled "the creation of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) with broad redevelopment powers to mitigate the adverse effects of base closure." (URS 1990) To begin the redevelopment process the Agency prepared a program environmental impact report (EIR) to evaluate the broad scope impacts of future redevelopment, including acquisition and civilian reuse of Norton. The Program EIR, SCH#90020109, for the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelopment Plan was certified in June 1990. Although the project described in the Program EIR was defined at a general level, the impact evaluation provided selected specific information about future redevelopment and site specific information about the existing environmental conditions, and analyzed future redevelopment at both a general and specific level. For example, the Program EIR evaluated potential noise impacts from operating the future civilian airport at 37,300 annual operations (18,650 landing and takeoffs). As a Program EIR, this document forms the basis for evaluating all future projects in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (§ 15168). Since approval of the Redevelopment Plan and certification of the Program EIR, a second regional agency has been created with the specific responsibility for acquiring and managing the airport at Norton, the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA or Authority). As the closure of Norton nears (March 1994), the Air Force indicates that all aircraft operations at Norton will terminate by September 1, 1993. The Authority has established a goal of reusing Norton as a civilian airport immediately upon termination of Air Force flight operations. The purpose is to ensure that the airfield's operational status is not lost and that it will not be closed for any period of time. To accomplish this, the Authority has defined an interim airport operating plan that will be adopted and submitted to the State Department of Transportation for review and approval. In accordance with § 15168 (c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this Initial Study is being prepared to evaluate the proposed Interim Airport Operating Plan for Norton, which will 1 be renamed the San Bernardino International Airport. As required by this section of the Guidelines, "Subsequent activities in the program must be examined in light of the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared." This Initial Study will evaluate the potential environmental effects of the Interim Plan's proposed actions by comparing it with the Program EIR certified by the IVDA in 1990. If the proposed actions fall within the impact forecast of this certified Program EIR, CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines sections cited above, this will allow the Authority to utilize the Program EIR as the basis for its CEQA determination in the Interim Plan portion of the program to redevelop Norton. A long-term airport operational master plan is expected to be implemented at a later date to,supersede the Interim Airport Operating Plan outlined below. However, as noted above, the short-term goal of the Authority is to ensure that the airfield is available to civilian air traffic immediately upon cessation of Air Force flight operations. This will require the State Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, to issue a permit to the Authority for operation of Norton as a civilian airport. The Authority's intent is to avoid closure of the airfield after Air Force operations cease. Consequently, the Interim Airport Operating Plan and acquisition of the civilian airport permit from the State have been determined to offer the best means of accomplishing this objective. 2. Project Characteristics In the 1990 Redevelopment Plan EIR, the forecast for civilian airport operations was contained in the noise impact forecast section. The EIR assumed that by the year 2010 an average of 51 operations would occur each day, or approximately 37,300 annual operations. Over the first few years the number of operations per day would be small, perhaps 10 to 20 operations (landings and takeoffs) and would consist of general aviation, cargo and perhaps passenger flights. For the interim airport operations it will be assumed that the average number of daily flight operations will not exceed 51 and that annual operations will not exceed 37,000 flight operations. Until the Authority prepares and adopts an Airport Master Plan, Norton operations will be restricted to these average daily (51) and annual (37,000) flight operation numbers. To support interim civilian flight operations, specific facility modifications will be required at Norton. The proposed facility modifications include: 1. Civilian passenger terminal: The existing air passenger terminal at Norton is located near 7`s Street at the northwest edge of the airfield (see Figures 2 and 3). It serves the current military and other flights that presently utilize Norton. The Authority has decided to continue using this terminal for the interim period, but will make modifications to the interior and exterior of the terminal to make it a suitable terminal facility for a civilian airport. All modifications will be made within the existing building envelope and the immediate surrounding area. See Figure 1 for the location of the terminal. 2 2. Parking: Directly west of the terminal is an approximate twenty acre parcel with several structures (eight) and extensive paved and landscaped areas. The Authority plans to remove most of the structures and construct a parking lot on this acreage to serve future civilian passenger traffic. See Figure 1 for the location of the parking area. 3. Access Road System: The present two-lane access roads are considered inadequate to serve the terminal. As part of its interim plan, the Authority plans to reconstruct four two-lane streets as four-lane arterials. Figure 2 illustrates the alignment of these four roads. Tippecanoe Avenue from Third Street to Mill Street will be reconstructed as a four-lane or wider arterial road. Del Rosa (Sixth Street on the base) is another north-south road that will be widened to four-lanes from its current two-lane configuration. The four-lanes will be constructed from Third Street to A Street. C Street is currently one of the major east-west roads on the Base, but it is also a two-lane road. It will be expanded to a four-lane road from Tippecanoe on the west to 7" Street. Finally, 7" Street, adjacent to the interim terminal and parking area, will be expanded to four lanes from C Street north to the interim terminal. Expansion of these roads to four lanes will require the removal of some buildings that are located within the four-lane alignment. 4. Utilities and Services: Utilities and services to serve the interim terminal, parking area and the control tower are already in place. To meet City building and safety design standards the utilities and services necessary to serve interim civilian airport operations will be provided in conjunction with road construction activities. Examples include: electricity, natural gas, water, wastewater, communications, storm water drainage system, fire, police, and the other systems required to serve the airport. All of the utilities will be installed in or adjacent to the road rights-of-way. The existing fire station that must be in operation in order to provide adequate fire protection during the interim period. It is the Authority's intent to provide fire and crash rescue services using the existing fire station in order to meet airfield emergencies. Law enforcement rquired to support passenger operations are required at passenger screening points only. This service will be contracted from a law enforcement agency. 5. Fuel Farm Modifications: The existing Air Force fuel farm contains facilities that are too large for the proposed civilian airport operation. Based on agreements with the Air Force, the existing fuel farm facilities will be closed down and removed and a smaller fuel farm will be constructed to serve the needs of the public use airport. The existing fuel farm stores approximately 1.5 million gallons of jet fuel which will be replaced by civilian fuel farm facilities (storage tanks and dispensing units) containing less than 250,000 gallons of jet fuel. Provisions will also be made to continue providing aviation gas for prop planes. Storage facilities already exist at Norton, but may also be replaced. 3 6. The total airfield area will be fenced as shown in Figure 3 in order to provide adequate perimeter access control. The fencing will be in accordance with FAR Part 107 requirements and will consist of chain link fencing and other security fencing components similar to that currently surrounding the Base. 7. The Authority will work with the FAA to determine at what point in time the four holes on the golf course may need to be closed at the approach end of Runway 6 (west end of the main runway near Tippecanoe, see Figure 1). If these four holes must be closed, the area will be graded, compacted, and sprayed to control dust. The grading will be completed in accordance with FAA requirements at the approach to Runway 6 and along the perimeter of the existing runway. 8. The Authority will install lighting and signage for the runways and airfield support areas in accordance with FAA requirements. Existing lighting will be used to the extent possible, but some modifications will be required to accommodate the transition from Air Force to civilian operations. 9. To ensure adequate training for fire and accident response crews, the Authority will retain the existing fire training pit facility and will utilize it at least one time per year in order to meet FAA fire training requirements. This completes the project description for the Interim Airport Operating Plan. If the Plan is approved by the Authority, the following is a summary of the activities that may result in physical changes to the environment: 1. Up to 37,000 flight operations. 2. Passenger terminal remodeling (see Figure 3). 3. Demolition and removal of structures and construction of a 20-acre parking lot (see Figure 3). 4. Demolition and removal of structures and conversion of approximately 11,400 feet of two-lane road to four-lane road (see Figure 2). 5. Installation of a comparable amount of utility infrastructure within or adjacent to the road alignments (see Figure 2). 6. Construction of new fuel storage and dispensing equipment (see Figure 3). 7. Install security fencing around the airport (see Figure 1). 8. Grade the area at the end of runway 6 (see Figure 1). 9. Install lighting and signage. The FEIR project description (pages 2-6 through 2-8) describes these types of activities at a general level and these activities are evaluated in the impact evaluation section of the FEIR, Chapter 9. Based on a comparison of the proposed project and the project described in the FEIR, the activities summarized above are consistent with the general characteristics of the redevelopment project described in the 1990 FEIR. The environmental effects of constructing the facilities outlined above and of operating the airport at the levels identified 4 will be compared with the impacts forecast in the Program EIR. Based on the impact analysis and comparison, a decision will be made by the Authority on the appropriate environmental determination for the Interim Airport Operating Plan. 3. Responsible Agencies The only known Responsible Agency for the conversion of Norton to civilian airport operations through the Interim Airport Operating Plan is the State Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics which will issue a civilian airport operation permit. Federal airport certification for passenger operation will also be obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and this environmental documentation may be used by the FAA in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 4. Initial Study. Environmental Checklist For The Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form used by the City of San Bernardino follows this project description along with substantiation developed in support of the conclusions provided in the Form. Supporting data is provided for all checklist issues. Where mitigation has been identified to reduce a potentially significant impact it is illustrated by showing an ----> on the Form. 5 RN IkM .`� c dd (J 6 W irl , � a _ ) 6 9p� 1 a. -ter 1 tll� � r �lrll, •�" �. 1�5 �� �t sil, 11A PI01'�1 • L•— 1 j It � 1 F II 11 �� � ti �. r--•— T m l FI-li�'• Tlt _t 'iae"t'�i}at'°t I .—._.J Z O 1=11' rr p1I' j 9W �� 41i .I'• .j .. +l'1 .III. li.4 � � T i �p2 a •� P I 11 j 1 I�1 1 s y= N ji' ° fit „§ m r , o 11 h a •� i '�• 'iii 11' : .. ,�. � E-A 4133tl16 NY��,F d'j,O1,�J 1 � y• 11 F.',I�jn. T.. :r, ��fi '� I [fie —.—.J ii•IMIl [Ile 0 i N PLC = + EE u IMP r ' r I �I�A- - �� � • ¢ LL I 6`i O I ' � y� b Rd's 60 .:T.•.'�� :" 11 I ttrat� tta� Iry I i t t J yI ; 11 yli � _ r-r 1 IL EXHIBIT "B" NORTON AIR FORCE BASE CONVERSION TO CIVIIdAN OPERATION: INTERIM AIRPORT OPERATING PLAN INTITAL STUDY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES The City of San Bernardino's Environment Impact Checklist addresses 13 environmental issues. The substantiation of conclusions contained in the Checklist is provided below in the same order and with the same numbering scheme as the environmental issues are discussed in the Checklist. Because the purpose of this Initial Study is to evaluate the proposed Interim Airport Operating Plan with respect to the impact forecast in the 1990 IVDA Redevelopment Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), this analysis will refer to and compare proposed project impacts to the environmental data base and impact forecasts in the FEIR. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine whether the environmental effects described in the FEIR encompass the potential impacts of the proposed project. 1. Earth Resources 1a. The geology and soils resources and constraints within the Redevelopment Area (note that Norton comprises approximately 10% of the Redevelopment area, about 2,100 acres of approximately 15,000 acres) are described on pages 9-1 through 9-25 of the FEIR. The topography on the Base slopes to the south and southeast at less than a two percent slope. The proposed project ground disturbing activities will involve surface grading activities, not major recontouring of the existing ground surface. These activities are forecast to cause less than 10,000 cubic yards of earth moving. The area where grading will occur has been totally disturbed by previous development. However, the impact evaluation of grading activities that is discussed on page 9-27 of the FEIR indicates that the soils are subject to wind erosion and disturbance will require dust control to prevent wind erosion. The proposed project falls within the nonsignif t impact forecast in the FEIR when mitigation measures are implemented. Mitigation measures for wind and water erosion contain in the FEIR (pages 9-29 and 9-47 and 9-48 are adequate to ensure that grading activities do not cause any significant adverse impacts. No additional mitigation is required. lb. The topography of the Base is essentially flat as described in the soils discussion on page (9-10 and 9-11, T'ujunga loamy sand and gravelly loamy sand) and rM topographic alterations will be required for any of the proposed grading activities. The evaluation in the FEIR addresses this issue and no additional evaluation or mitigation beyond that listed under issue Ia. is necessary based on the data in the FEIR. lc. The seismic evaluation in the FEIR (Section 9.1.13 and Section 9.1.2.1) concluded that no potential for ground rupture exists at the Base and that no Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones occur on the Base. The evaluation in the FEIR apply to the proposed facilities and no mitigation is required to address this issue. 9 Id. No unique geologic or physical features are known to occur at the Base and the FEIR did not identify any potential adverse impacts to such features. The proposed project will not alter this conclusion and no additional mitigation is required. le. The project site lies outside of areas designated for high water and/or wind erosion. The potential for erosion at this site is low because of past development and ground cover, and the very shallow slope of the property. Mitigation measures are identified under issue la. above and no additional evaluation or mitigation needs to be implemented. if. The only areas that will be disturbed in the vicinity of the Santa Ana River are located at the proposed southern boundary where the security fence will be installed and the area that will be graded just west of Runway 6. No channels or river areas will need to be disturbed by the facilities and activities required to support the interim airport operations. _ lg. The project area is located within an area subject to significant ground shaking from regional seismic events and from potential liquefaction. The potential severity of seismic activity is documented in detail on pages 9-2 through 9-7, and pages 9-16 through 9-23 of the FEIR. The potential significant impacts related to ground shaking, liquefaction and subsidence are discussed on pages 9-26 and 9.27 of the FEIR. Spec mitigation measures are identified on pages 9-28 and 9-29 which can reduce these potentially significant impacts to a nonsignificant level. The only habitable facility that will be affected by the proposed project is the airport terminal. In accordance with the first mitigation measures in Section 9.1.3 of the FEIR, a site spec geotechnical study will be prepared to determine the amount of structural modification that will be required to ensure the seismic hazards at the site will not cause it to incur severe damage, nor to cause humans occupying the site to be placed at significant risk No additional mitigation is required. The same mitigation measures will apply to the fuel farm facility that may be constructed in support of civilian airport operations. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new geologic or soil resource effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the FOR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FOR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 2. .Air Resources 2a. Short-term air emissions, related to grading and construction activities (pages 9-85 and 9-86), were evaluated in the FEIR and concluded to be nonsignificant. The proposed project will result in reconstruction of roads, grading for a parking area, fuel farm, and for safety purposes adjacent to Runway 6. All of these construction activities were considered in the FEIR and the proposed project activities fall within the original evaluation. The mitigation measures identified on page 9-88 include general measures to control short-term emissions and more specific measures were identified under the geology/erosion discussion. To implement the general measure the Authority should incorporate the construction measures contained in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook adopted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in February 1993. The evaluation of long-term or permanent emissions in the FEIR concluded that air emissions would be reduced relative to the existing circumstances at Norton in 1989, see pages 9-85 through 9.88. This is based on a total of 37,300 flight operations as defined on page 9-137, which was in turn abstracted from a P & D Technologies document,Aviation Forecasts (P&D Technologies 1989). The document also noted that the redevelopment of Norton is fully consistent with regional air quality goals which are to "provide additional employment opportunities in the job poor, housing rich San Bernardino Valley 10 0 , and to reduce the need to commute long distance to Los Angeles and Orange counties." With the goal of replacing jobs lost as a result of Norton's closure, the primary benefit obtained from redevelopment, including the proposed project, is a reduction in total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) (also see pages 9. 121 through 9-127 for growth forecasts). The proposed facility improvements are within the growth forecast scenario provided in the FEIR and are also consistent with the impact forecast in the FEIR. The net result of the redevelopment plan and the proposed project is a contribution to the overall air quality benefits forecast in the FEIR. Although the 1989 AQMP has been superceded by the 1991 AQMP, the fact that the proposed project will reduce emissions relative to the Air Force operating baseline ensures consistency between the proposed project and air quality goals expressed in the 1991 AQMP. Mitigation measures are identified for implementation with this project and they are listed in Appendix 1 to this document. The only stationary source of emissions associated with the proposed project is the fuel farm. As noted in the project description, the existing fuel farm which contains storage for over one million gallons of military jet fuel will be replaced by a facility approximately 20% of this size. The reduction in size of the fuel storage facility will reduce stationary evaporative emissions, as will the newer technology evaporative emission control system that will be required from SCAOMD. Compared to the retention of the Air Force facilities discussed in the FEIR, the proposed project will result in fewer emissions that discussed for this facility and is therefore considered to fall within the original impact forecast. , The Air Force currently utilizes the fre training pit for mandated annual training activities,usually once per year. After Norton closes, it is the Authority's intent to continue such training exercises at least one time each year as mandated by the FAA. This continued training activity is consistent with ongoing operations and will not alter the net emissions from past activities under the Air Fora. Procedures will remain the same and no additional impact is forecast from continuing this essential and rare training activity. 2b. None of the proposed activities will have operations that generate odors. The FEIR is silent on this issue,but since no potential odor problems have been identified,no potential for additional impacts will occur. 2c. The proposed project is not located within the high wind hazard area defined by the City's General Plan. Wind erosion issues are addressed under issue la. and mitigation measures were provided as listed in Appendix 1. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new air quality effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 3. Water Resources 3a. The potential to increase surface runoff and alter drainage patterns is identified as a nonsignificant impact on pages 943 and 944 of the FEIR. The Base is already developed and most of the areas that will be affected by the proposed project are already fully covered with impervious surface. Also, the proximity of the Base facilities to the Santa Ana River ensure that any increases can be accommodated in standard drainage channels as described on page 944. Based on the data in the FEIR and the limited new facilities that will be constructed by the proposed project, no additional adverse surface runoff impacts are forecast to occur. The FEIR evaluates potential surface runoff impacts that fully 11 encompass the proposed project. Mitigation measures are identified and are contained in Appendix 1. No additional mitigation is required. 3b. All surface runoff, including flood waters are captured and delivered to the Santa Ana River in existing drainage channels. These channels may be modified to carry slightly larger volumes of flow, but no significant changes to the course or flow of flood water from the Base is forecast for the proposed project. The impacts and mitigation measures identified in the FEIR text encompass the proposed project effects and no further documentation is required. 3c. Potential water quality impacts are addressed in the FEIR on pages 9-41 and 943. The proposed project activities are consistent with those activities identified in the FEIR and fall within the impact forecast in the FOR. Mitigation measures are identified to address non-point source runoff and point source discharges from facilities. The proposed project activities and facilities are not forecast to generate any point source discharges. Implementation of the non-point source discharge mitigation measures outlined in the FEIR and reproduced in Appendix 1 can ensure that no significant adverse water quality impacts will occur. 3d. As discussed in the FEIR,the Base will be served by the City Water Department and East Valley Water District. The City is expected to provide the water connection for that portion of the Base that will be affected by the proposed project. The FEIR describes overall ground water resources on pages 930 and 9-38 through 9-41 and the water supply system is described on pages 9-181 through 9487. The proposed project will have only minor demands for water relative to the current 2,700 acre feet of water utilized by the Base. Farther, as described in the impact evaluation on ground water resources, the Bunker HID Groundwater Basin is capable of supplying adequate water to meet full redevelopment demands when managed in conjunction with imported water supplies. Mitigation measures are identified in the FEIR (reproduced in Appendix 1) that identify methods of implementing water conservation and reducing total future demand for water. Based on the data in the FEIR,the proposed project will not cause a significant adverse impact on ground water supplies. Ground water quality will be enhanced by measures to be taken by redevelopment of the Base and Air Force programs to remediate contaminated areas. The potential ground water quality impacts for the redevelopment program, including the proposed project, are addressed on pages 9-44 through 9-46. No significant adverse impacts are forecast after implementing proposed mitigation measures which are listed in Appendix 1. 3e. None of the proposed facilities will be impacted by the 100-year floods as illustrated in Figure 9.12 of the FEIR. The only facility that will be occupied will be the terminal, and this facility is approximately 1/2 mile from the 100-year flood plain of the Santa Ana River. The FEIR indicates that on-Base flood control facilities will have to be upgraded when major redevelopment of the site occurs (see pages 9-43 and 9-44) and mitigation is discussed on page 9.46 which will have to be implemented to ensure that flood hazards can be fully mitigated The proposed project activities and facilities are fully addressed within the FEIR and the mitigation may include installation of flood control channels or drainage facilities as part of the new road construction component of the proposed project. No additional evaluation or mitigation is required for the proposed project. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new flood hazard, water quality or water resource effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 12 o 4. Biological Resources 4a. The FEIR identifies a Biological Resources Management Overlay within the southern portion of the Base that encompasses a Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Habitat that may contain the Santa Ana River wooly-star, a listed endangered species. With the exception of the area on the southern perimeter where the security fence and possible new lighting will be installed, all of the proposed project facilities and activities will occur in highly disturbed areas with no biological resources. The total biological resource values onsite are described in the FEIR on pages 9-53 through 9-69. The biological resource impact evaluation on page 9-71 identifies the type of facilities that will be installed by the proposed project and through a combination of site specific surveys and provision of mitigation in accordance with U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and State Department of Fish and Game (DFG). Once the final location of the security fence and any new lights are mapped and considered acceptable to the FAA, the survey will be performed and appropriate mitigation identified. The type of facilities that may be installed require very little ground disturbance and it may be possible to totally avoid disturbing any sensitive habitat or individual sensitive plant species. Mitigation measures to accomplish this are alreadv provided in the FEIR on pages 9-71 and 9-72 and in Appendix 1. 4b. Refer to issue la.and pages 9-53 through 9-71 for a discussion of sensitive plants and the mitigation that will be implemented to ensure these plant resources and their habitat are not significantly impacted. 4c. Refer to issue la. and pages 9-53 through 9-71 for a discussion of sensitive animals and the mitigation that will be implemented to ensure these faunal resources and their habitat are not significantly impacted. 4d. Mature trees may be located within the road rights of way and in accordance with mitigation in the FEIR (page 9-72) these trees would be replaced by through revegetating the areas adjacent to the completed roads with comparable numbers of trees. No additional discussion or mitigation is required beyond that identified in the FEIR. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new biological resource effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix I to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 5. Noise 5a. The proposed project does not include the development of any facilities or uses that would be sensitive to the noise environment that will be created by civilian use of Norton. As noted in the FEIR (page 9-139) "Low levels of utilization would result in little to no replacement, re-design, expansion, or modification' This is the scenario regarding the proposed project which will be observed during the interim period (i.e., before a spec Airport Master Plan is adopted) which is a maximum of 37,000 annual average operations as evaluated in the FEIR (see pages 9-139 through 9-141). At this level of operations the proposed project will result in asignificant contraction of the existing noise contours that reflected Air Force flight operations through 1989. The proposed project is consistent with the aircraft operation noise forecasts and no additional evaluation is required, nor are additional mitigation measures required beyond those contained in the FEIR and reproduced in Appendix 1. Based on the amount of traffic that may be generated by redevelopment, the FEIR indicates the potential for adverse noise levels to residences adjacent to major airport access roads such as Tippecanoe and Del Rosa. The proposed project will not generate sufficient traffic on its own to cause 13 significant noise impacts (refer to pages 9-159 through 9-165), but impacts may be significant cumulatively when redevelopment is completed. Based on these data, the Authority will conduct noise evaluations along the major access roads to the airport as indicated in mitigation identified on pages 9- 140 and 9-141 and this study will identify the traffic threshold at which noise impacts will be significant enough to require implementation of noise attenuation features (such as sound attenuation berms or walls or landscaped buffers). These measures will be implemented by the Authority and Inland Valley Development Agency in accordance with the noise significance thresholds in the FEIR (page 9-130) and the General Plans of the pertinent cities. 5b. As noted in the discussion under issue 5a., the effect of implementing civilian flight operations is to reduce aircraft noise impacts relative to Air Force flight operations w described in the FEIR. Potential noise increases to noise sensitive uses adjacent to primary access roads to the airport may be significant, but specific noise attenuation measures can and will be implemented to ensure that noise sensitive uses do not incur a significant noise impact from traffic increases related to the proposed project. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no unmitigable significant noise effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 6. land Use 6a. No change is required in the City of San Bernardino General Plan land use designations for the proposed project. As discussed in the FEIR on pages 9-91 through 9-100, the proposed project will not alter land uses within the City and the proposed project is consistent with the land uses identified within the Redevelopment Plan and the FEIR,see pages 9-98 through 9-100. No mitigation was identified and none will be required as part of the proposed project. 6b. The proposed project consists of airport support facilities and activities and it will be located within the Base's Air Installation Compatible Use Zone. However, no adverse impact to or conflict with the A1CUZ is forecast as a result of the proposed project. No mitigation is required. 6c. The proposed facilities and activities will all take place outside the Foothill Fire Zones as shown on the City's maps. No adverse impact is forecast from the proposed project from a fire hazard standpoint. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations,no new land use effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no mitigation measures will be required as indicated in the FEIR. 7, Man-made Hazards 7a. The proposed project will continue the storage and use of fuel and other chemicals to support airport activities. These use of hazardous materials on the base is addressed on pages 9.43,9-46 and 9.46. The continued use of these materials and generation of hazardous was creates a potential for must occur in accordance with strict management procedures and local, state and federal regulations. Based on the analysis of these activities in the FEIR, the potential volume of these materials will be reduced relative to Norton's Air Force flight operations, but mitigation measures will be required to ensure that the continued use of these materials does not adversely impact the environment. Pages 9.47 through 9-48 list mitigation measures(see summary of measures in Appendix 1). Implementation of these measures 14 can ensure that the facilities and activities associated with the proposed project do not cause a significant adverse impact. 7b. Since activities and facilities proposed by the project will continue the use of hazardous materials and wastes, a potential for accidental releases will also continue on the Base. As noted above, this issue is acknowledged in the FEIR and mitigation measures which require filing of business plans, preparing and using spill response plans, and maintaining spill response capability (normally assigned to the Fire Department)were identified as adequate to reduce potential accidental releases of hazardous substances below a significant level. No additional mitigation is required and the evaluation in the FEIR adequately addresses this issue. 7c. Aircraft operations will continue and the existing safety zones established for the airfield in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone will continue to be observed. No new areas will be exposed to hazards as a result of the proposed project and mitigation will be the continued observation of these potential land use conflict areas as indicated in the discussion for issue 6b. above. No additional discussion of this issue is required and no additional mitigation needs to be implemented. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new man-made hazard effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 8. Housing 8a. The proposed project will not alter the existing housing resource base nor create significant housing demand. As discussed in the FEIR in the Socioeconomic Section, Section 9.6 of the FEIR on pages 9- 101 through 9-127, the Redevelopment Plan, including the proposed project activities, is forecast to replace jobs and result in approximately the same population growth as forecast without the closure of Norton. Based on these data and the specific discussion on housing resources on pages 9-121 and 9-127, the proposed project impacts on housing will be nonsignificant and no mitigation measures are required. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new housing resource effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no mitigation measures will be required as indicated in the FEIR. 9. Transportation/Circulation 9a. The proposed project consists of retention of the airport and related support areas that will remain in the PF (Public Facilities) designation under the current proposal. None of the proposed facilities or activities will conflict with this designation. The FEIR contains a detailed discussion of transportation and circulation system impacts on pages 9-166 through 9-169. The analysis in the FEIR focused on the overall effect of traffic growth related to population growth within the region and concluded that the benefits of road improvements funded under the Redevelopment Plan would result in a net benefit to the environment. Onsite road improvements proposed by the project will result in substantially better traffic flow and better traffic connections to the circulation system on the north side of the Base. The proposed project is consistent with the impact forecast in the FEIR and will implement recommended roadway improvement required to meet airport operations. No additional specific road mitigation measures will be required to support the civilian airport operations given the reduction in traffic associated with the closure of Norton. 15 9b. Additional parking will be required and the proposed project will provide a 20-acre parking area to meet the demands for more than 2,000 vehicles. This is consistent with projections in the FEIR regarding the need for support parking facilities for the airport operations at the interim terminal facility. No additional mitigation is required and the finding that the circulation requirements can be accommodated without a significant adverse impact is supported by the proposed project. 9c. The existing transportation system will be enhanced by the proposed project through the widening of four roads on the Base (Tippecanoe, 61h Street (extension of Del Rosa), C Street and 71h Street from two lanes to four lanes. This will result in a beneficial impact on the area and on-Base circulation system. This is consistent with the forecast in the FEIR and no additional mitigation is required. 9d. The present circulation pattern will be enhanced, but the circulation pattern itself will not be affected by the proposed project. This is consistent with the forecast in the FEIR. 9e. Civilian air traffic will be modified by the proposed project; however, given that fewer civilian flight operations will occur relative to military operations, the data indicates (P & D Technologies 1990) that the project will not have any adverse impacts on air traffic. No impact to rail traffic is forecast based on the proposed project. The FEIR did not address these issues in detail, but the lack of any potential for significant impact and the lack of any mitigation requirements indicates that the proposed project is not inconsistent with the FEIR findings regarding no significant impacts from reusing the base. 9f. The proposed project will not create safety hamrds to vehicle traffic or other transportation methods along the existing road system. The improvements to four roads on the Base can enhance vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle traffic flow and enhance safety by providing sidewalks and wider roads to accommodate the approximate same volume of traffic. No impacts beyond that identified in the FEIR is forecast. 9g. All proposed traffic improvements are consistent with the circulation system addressed in the FEIR. No potential for creating a disjointed patter of roadway improvements will occur from implementing the proposed project. 9h. The FEIR addressed both population and traffic growth and concluded that implementing the Redevelopment Plan would enhance the area and local circulation system through funding of specific road improvements. The proposed project is consistent with the traffic forecast associated with 37,000 annual average flight operations and related traffic. The activities associated with operating the airport under this maximum level of use forecast under the Interim Plan will result in approximately 1,000 to 3,000 trips per day being generated. The local road capacity for streets on the north side of Norton (Tippecanoe, Del Rosa,Third and Fifth Streets) are all operating at a LOS of A or B at this time. The local road capacity for streets on the south (Tippecanoe and MID Streets) are operating at LOS C or better. The addition of 1,000 to 3,000 trips on this local road system when traffic flow is declining due to closure of Norton has no potential to result in significant increases in traffic volumes on local roadways or intersections. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new transportation or circulation system effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix I to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 16 10. Public Services 10a. Pages 9-170,9493 and 9.199 of the FEIR discuss fire protection capabilities,fire protection impacts and mitigation measures, respectively. The City of San Bernardino will assume fire protection responsibilities for the proposed project as noted in the FEIR. The Authority may contract the airport fire and accidental response task to professionals with experience in this area. Under either circumstance, fire and accident response capabilities will be ensured through the Authority. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 10b. Law enforcement services are described on pages 9-173, 9-193, and 9-200 of the FEIR. The City will provide for normal law enforcement services under the proposed project and the Authority may retain a private security service to provide for airport security. Under this proposal,law enforcement response capabilities will be ensured through the Authority. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted bevond those identified in the FEIR. loc. As described in the FEIR on pages 9-175, 9-194, and 9-200, the proposed project will have cause no impacts to the educational system. Future growth related to redevelopment of the total project area will contribute to potential impacts that will require mitigation at the time new residential units are permitted in the redevelopment area,but the proposed project will not cause any adverse impacts to the school system. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 10d. The proposed project will also not cause any impacts to park and recreation resources in the area. The impacts of total redevelopment are described on pages 9-177, 9-194 and 9-200, but the impacts of the proposed project do not include any of the recreation facilities. Therefore, no impact to park and recreational resources is forecast and no additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. loc. The proposed project will not cause any direct impacts on hospital and emergency service capabilities in the region. The FEIR addresses hospital and emergency service impacts on pages 9.178, 9-194, and 9-201. Potential for demand during an airplane crash will continue under operation of the civilian airport, but this potential currently exists from either military aircraft or civilian aircraft transporting persons for the military under contract. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. lof. Solid waste generation is addressed on pages 9-190,9-198 and 9.202, and as noted in the FEIR,the new facilities and activities proposed by the project will replace solid waste generated by the Base. The impact evaluation concludes that the redevelopment plan will not cause a significant impact and the proposed project's activities fall within this forecast. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new public service infrastructure effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 11. Utilities llal. Natural gas requirements for the redevelopment area were identified as being nonsignificant in the FEIR (see pages 9-191, 9-199 and 9-203). The proposed project's contribution to this demand is very minor 17 and is therefore also considered nonsignificant. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 11a2. Electricity requirements for the redevelopment area were identified as being nonsignificant in the FEIR (see pages 9-191, 9-199 and 9-203). The proposed project's contribution to this demand is very minor and is therefore also considered nonsignificant. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 110. The proposed project will continue to use water resources within the nonsignificant level forecast in the FEIR (see pages 9-181 through 9-187, 9-195 and 9-196, and 9-201). The water resource impacts were discussed under Issue #2 and were identified as being nonsignificant. The water system will require modifications that are already planned as part of the proposed project. Based on the data in the FEIR, the proposed project water resource and water system impacts are within the impacts and mitigations forecast in the FEIR. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 11a4. The proposed project will continue to generate wastewater and require sewage treatment capacity as described in the FEIR, pages 9-188, 9-196 and 9-202. The proposed project will generate domestic wastewater,not industrial wastewater,and the impact analysis indicates that sufficient capacity exists for the wastewater generated over the short-term. Over the long-term additional mitigation will be required to ensure sufficient wastewater treatment capacity. The wastewater collection system will require modifications that are already planned as part of the proposed project. Based on the data in the FEIR, the proposed project wastewater impacts are within the impacts and mitigations forecast in the FEIR. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 11b. The project area is already connected to all utility systems and their modification to meet specific demands of the proposed project will not cause any disjointed utility extensions. Based on the data in the FEIR, the proposed project utility impacts are within the impacts and mitigations forecast in the FEIR. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. 11c. The proposed project will require the construction and installation of collection and delivery systems to meet the demand created by civilian airport operations. However, these system enhancements were discussed in the FEIR and were found to be nonsignificant impacts. Based on the data in the FEIR, the proposed project utility impacts are within the impacts and mitigations forecast in the FEIR. No additional impacts or mitigation are noted beyond those identified in the FEIR. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations,no new utility service infrastructure effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 19% FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 12. Aesthetics 12.a. The project will not result in the construction of any structures. Several structures may be removed and a parking lot will be created and roads widened. None of these facilities or activities will obstruct any scenic views and some views may be enhanced as a result of creating open areas and widening view corridors on north-south streets. No potential for adverse impacts to scenic vistas is noted and the discussion in the FEIR appears to have adequately addressed this issue. 18 12.b. The aesthetic impacts of developing within the redevelopment area were addressed in the Land Use Section of the FEIR, and the general conclusion is that the areas involved are urban in character and the Redevelopment Plan will continue this process without negative effects on the visual setting. None of the proposed facilities will cause significant or incompatible changes in the visual setting. No potential for adverse impact to the visual setting is noted and the discussion in the FEIR appears to have adequately addressed this issue. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations, no new aesthetic resource effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no mitigation measures will be required as indicated in the FEIR. 13. Cultural Resources 13a. The alteration or destruction of any prehistoric or historic archaeological site cannot occur from implementing the proposed project. No historic structures are located on the base (U. S. Air Force 1992). all facility and activity locations are in disturbed areas where previous activities will have eliminated potential impacts to cultural resources. Based on the data in the FEIR (pages 9-142 through 9-146,no potential for significant cultural resources impacts exists from Base redevelopment if mitigation measures are implemented. These measures will be observed during implementation of the proposed project. 13b. Refer to the discussion in issue 13a. The project site is not within any identified historical district and subsequent studies by the Air Force (U. S.Air Force 1992) indicate none of the older structures on the base meet criteria of the National Historic Preservation Act as historic structures. Based on the proposed facilities and activities that will be implemented as part of interim airport operations,no new archaeological resource effects are forecast to occur that were not addressed in the 1990 FEIR and no new mitigation measures will be required beyond those identified in the FEIR. A copy of Chapter 6 of the FEIR which contains the summary list of mitigation measures is attached as Appendix 1 to this Initial Study for information and use by the Authority. 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance The purpose of this Initial Study was to determine whether the impacts of the proposed project, Interim Airport Operating Plan,would cause adverse environmental impacts not address as part of the 1990 Redevelopment Plan Program FEIR. Each facility and activity that will be implemented as part of the Interim Airport Operating Plan has been evaluated in the content of the information and conclusions contained in the 1990 Redevelopment Plan FEIR. This evaluation shows that the Interim Plan's potential impacts are well within the impacts forecast in the MR. Based on the data available,no potential for significant adverse impact will be created if the Interim Airport Operating Plan is implemented as outlined in this document. The Authority will proceed to utilize the 1990 FEIR as the basis for its environmental determination on this project with notification as required in Section 15168(e). 19 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST 4 A. BACKGROUND Application Number. N/A ProjeciDescription: See attached project description: Interim Airport Operating Plan for San Bernardino International Airport (Norton AFB) , San Bernardino International Airport Authority Location: The airport is located on approximately 2. 500 acres in the East Valley region of the southwest portion of San Bernardino County in the City of San Bernardino. See Figures 1-3. Environmental Constraints Areas: Biological Habitat Area, High Liquefaction Hazard, Noise, Ground Subsidence, Significant Construction Aggregate Sector General Plan Designation: Public Facility (PF) Zoning Designation: Public Facility ( PF) S. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers,where approprate, on a separate anached sheet. 1. Earth Resources Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe a. Earth movement (cut and/or fill)of 10,0D0 cubic yards or more? X X b. Development and/or grading on a slope greater than 15%natural grade? X c. Development within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0-Geologic 3 Seismic, Figure 47, of the City's General Plan? X d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical feature? X e. Development within areas defined for high potential for water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0- Geologic d Seismic, Figure 53,of the City's General Plan? X X I. Modification of a channel,creek or river? X g. Development within an area subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe mudslides, liquefaction or other similar hazards as identified in Section 12.0- Geologic d Seismic, Figures 48, 52 and 53 of the City's General Plan? X X h. Other? None known 2. Air Resources: Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or an effeC upon ambient air quality as defined by AOMD? - X X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X c. Development within a high wind hazard area as identified in Section 15.0- Wind 8 Fire, Figure 59, of the City's General Plan? X 3. Water Resources: Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runotf due to impermeable surfaces? X X b. Chances in the purse or flow of flood waters? X X c. Discharge into surface walers or any alteration 01 surface water quality? X X d. Chance in the quantity of quality,of ground water? X X e. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as identified in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Communev Panel Number 060281 , and Se Number 16.0- Flooding, Figure 62, of the City's General Plan? X X 1. Other? None known 4. Biological Resources: Could the proposal result in: a. Development within the Biological Resources Management Overlay, as identified in Section 10.0 - Natural Resources, Figure 41,01 the City's General Plan) _X X b. Change in the number of any unique,rare or endangered species of plants or their habitat including stands of trees? X X e. Change in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals or their habitat? _X X d. Removal of viable, mature trees? (6-or greater) X X e. Other? None Known 5. Noise: Could the proposal result in: a. Development of housing, health care facilities, schools, libraries, religious facilities or other"noise"sensitive uses in areas where existing or future noise levels exceed an Ldn of 65 dB(A)exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior as identified in Section 14.0-Noise, Figures 14.6 and 14-13 of the City's General Plan? X b. Development of now or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe commercial or other uses which generate noise levels on areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities or other senshlve uses above an Ldn of 6S dB(A)exterior X X or an Ldn of 4S dB(A) interior? c. Other? None known v 6. Land Use: Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the land use as designated on the X General Plan? b. Development within an Airport District as idemified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Land Use Zoning District Map? X c. Development within Foothill Fire Zones A & B, or C as identified on the Land Use Zoning District Map? X d. Other? None known 7. Man-Made Hazards: Will the project a. Use, store,transport or dispose of hazardous or toxic materials (including but not limited to oil, pesticides,chemicals or radiation)? X X b. Involve the release of hazardous substances? X X C. Fxpcse people to the potential heahh/salmy hazards? X d. Other? None known S. Housing: WII fhe proposal: a. Remove existing housing or create a demand lot aodhional housing? X b. Other? None known Q. Transportation/Circulation: Could the proposal, in comparison with the Circulation Plan as identified in Section 6.0-Circulation of the City's General Plan, result in: a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? X - X b. Use of existing,or demand for new,parking facilhiesrstruciures? X c. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? X d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation? X a. Impact to rail or air traffic? X I. Increased safety hazards to vehicles,bicyclists or pedestrians? X g. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvements? X h. Significant increase in traffic volumes on the roadways or intersections? X X i. Other? None known 10. Public Services: Will the proposal impact the following Yes No Maybe beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service? a. Fire protection? X X b. Police protection? X X c. Schools (i.e., attendance, boundaries, overload, e1c.)? X d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X e. Medical aid? X f. Solid Waste? X X g. Other? None known 11. Utilities: Wilt the proposal: a. Impact the following beyond the capability,to provide adequate levels of service or require the construction of new facilities? 1. Natural gas? X 2. Electrichy? X 3. Water? X X c, Sewer? X X 5. Other? None known b. Resuh in a disjointed pattern of utility extensions? X c. Require the construction of new facilhies? X X 12. Aesthetics: a. Could the proposal result in the obstrumion of any scenic view? X b. Will the visual impact of the project be detrimental to the surrounding area? X C. Other? None known 13. Cultural Resources: Could the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological she by development within an archaeological sensitive area as identified in Section 3.0• Historical, Figure B. of the Chy's General Plan? X X b. Alteration or destruction of a historical site, structure or object as listed in the City's Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey? X C. Other? Nnnr known 14. Mandatory Findings of Slgnlflcance (Section 15065) AThe California Environmental Quality Act states that it any of the following can be answered yes or maybe, the project may have a significant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report shall be prepared. Yes No Maybe a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the }" quality of the environment, substantially reduce the fl habitat of a fah or wildlife species,cause a fish or - wildlife population to drop below son sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods d Caldornia history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A shun-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term jmoacts will endure well into the future.) X c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may - impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those imps:s on the environment is significant.) _ X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on humar beings, ei(her directly or indire.ly? X_ C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Attach sheets as necessary.) See the attached discussion of each issue which provides substantiation for the above checklist conclusions. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES DISCUSSION • CONTINUED See attached sheets. APPENDIX 1 a � 6. SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation measures to reduce the adverse impacts of the Project to non-significant levels are shown in Table 6-1 . The mitigation measures are listed by issue, and are exhaustive. Significant impacts of the Project are tabulated in Section 5 . The impact analyses , descriptions of the impacts, and more detailed discus- sions of mitigations are contained in Section 9 . 6-1 o � Table 6-1 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES Issue Mitigation Measure Geology 5 Soils Incorporate the results of site-specific geotechnical studies which address the potential for ground shaking, liquefac- tion, and subsidence into the design, engineering, and seismic retrofitting of all development, redevelopment of existing structures , and other construction projects planned and funded by the IVDA. Design new structures to withstand the site-specific seismic accelerations pre- dicted by the ceotechnical investigations to occur as a result of maximum credible seismic events on known active faults in the area; these accelerations may be in excess of those provided for in the Uniform Building Code. Ensure proper design and encineerirg, based on the results of site-specific eectechr.ical studies which address the potential for ground shaking, liquefac- tion, and subsidence, of all new water and wastewater conveyance facilities . Minimize wind erosion, particularly in areas underlain by Tujunca loamy sand, through application of dust palliatives during grading and other construction or redevelopment activities . If paleontologic resources are encountered during redevelopment or other construction activities, notify the San Bernardino County Museum Division of Earth Science, obtain an assessment by a qualified paleontologist of the significance and extent of the fossiliferous deposit . In the event that the deposit is determined to be significant and more extensive, develop and implement a program to iden- tify, recover, curate, and report on the nature and significance of the paleon- tologic resource. 6-2 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure Water Resources Upgrading of the Zone 2 (north bank) Santa Ana River levees (Priority III ) should be supported by the Project. Support construction of the Seven Oaks Dam, upstream in the Santa Ana Canyon, to reduce floodflows in the Santa Ana River and allow the channel to safely pass the worst likely flood through the Project Area. The IVDA may choose to support only a portion of the local costs associated with this project . Several secondary stormwater drain pro- jects are recommended for implementation in support of the Project. The Lankershim Drain, immediately north of the Base, would serve an area that currently suffers frequent ponding and poor drainage which would be remedied by this Priority I project. Several additional flood control projects are proposed for the area imme- diately west and southwest of the Base . These include Timber Creek (?ricrity ICI ) , Central A•:enue (Priority VI ) and Mill Street (Priority VII ) . These projects would directly serve IVDA areas and should be considered for project support. The estimated cost of these four projects is $6. 3 million. A small portion of the Project Area lies within the 100-year floodplain of the San Timoteo Creek Channel . The total local share of the cost for upgrading this channel is $16 . 3 million. This upgrade would be eligible for IVDA participation. Construction of the upgrades is scheduled to begin in 1993 . 6-3 0 0 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure As plans for the reuse of Norton AFB become more specific, a drainage study should be conducted to assure that an adequate drainage system is developed. This study should also look at downstream effects of drainage from the northern and western portions of the Base to assure that such problems are avoided. Stormwater retention basins should be employed where feasible to maximize groundwater infiltration and reduce the necessary capacities of downstream convey- ance facilities . During construction, standard construction measures should be sufficient to prevent excessive ere=-ion and resulting water quality impacts . Such measures include: • Minimize the area of construction disturbance; • Minimize the amount of time that dis- turbed soil is exposed to erosion by care fully timing site grading to occur immediately before the initiation of con=struction; • Keep runoff orsite during construction; alternatively, install temporary sedi- ment traps in the local drainages around the project site; • Schedule construction during the dry season (May through October) wherever possible; • After project completion, stabilize the soil and revegetate as soon as poss- ible, irrigating as necessary to estab- lish new vegetative cover. 6-4 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure Additional mitigations include : o Implement monthly street sweeping programs for all redevelopment projects supported by the IVDA to minimize the accumulation of street pollutants and their subsequent flushing to nearby streams during storms . o Require regular sweeping of parking lots as a requirement for approval of individual projects . o Industrial and commercial developments should be reviewed by the wastewater treatment department which would be receiving and treating the wastewater to assure that toxic materials are removed to acceptably low concentra- tions . In this regard, the existing industrial wastewater treatment plant at Norton AFB may be adapted for con- tinued ,.se as the Base and surroundinc areas underco redevelopment . o Consideration should be civen to an IVDA contribution to the completion of the Santa Ana Recional Interceptor (Reach IV-E) for possible use by indus- tries in the redevelopment area. To offset minor reductions in local groun- dwater recharge which may result from redevelopment, stormwater retention ponds should be considered for the larger in- dividual projects . Hazardous materials storage, handling and disposal regulations should continue to be strictly enforced by San Bernardino County to minimize the possibility of releases into the environment. 6-5 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure The Installation Restoration Program at Norton AFB should be continued. When ultimately completed, long-term ground- water cleanup measures should be carried out by the Air Force to assure the res- toration of high quality groundwater underlying the Base. Redevelopment plans should be coordinated with the Air Force to assure that such plans do not interfere with groundwater cleanup measures . Biological Resources Site-specific surveys, in consultation with the USFWS and DFG, should be required for any IVDA-sponsored projects that may affect floodplain and upland alluvial areas, and known or suspected sensitive or important habitats (e. g. , riparian wood- land, Riversidian alluvial sage scrub) , flora (e.g. , Santa Ana River Woolly Star, Slender-horned Spineflower) , or fauna (e . g. , greenest tiger beetle, Delhi sands flower loving fly, San Diego horned lizard) . wherever feasible, implement alternative scheduling, project designs , and/or esta- blish buffer zones to assure avoidance of any sensitive biological resources . Implement restoration and monitoring Programs to assure a return to natural conditions after construction-related disturbances. Air ouality Prohibit the development of land uses (e.g. , heavy manufacturing) which will contributed significantly to air quality degradation, unless sufficient mitigation measures are undertaken according SCAQMD standards . Require dust abatement measures during grading and construction operations . 6-6 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure Evaluate the air emissions of industrial land uses to ensure that they will not impact adjacent uses . Cooperate with the SCAQMD and incorporate pertinent local implementation provisions of the Air Quality Management Plan. Work with the SCAQMD to establish controls and monitor uses in the City which could add to the air basin ' s degradation (e. g. , auto repair, manufacturers) . Work with the other local cities in the South Coast Air Basin to implement region- al mechanisms to reduce air emissions and improve air quality. Promote a pattern of land uses which locates residential uses in close proxi- mity to employment and commercial services and provides, to the fullest extent poss- ible, local job opportunities and commer- cial service to minimize vehicular travel and associated air emissions . Desicnate lands for the development of new uses which increase the jobs-housing balance, to the fullest extent possible. Disperse urban service centers (libraries, post offices, social services, etc. ) to minimize vehicle miles traveled and the concomitant dispersion of air pollutants . Implement the installation of streetscape improvements and other amenities to encourage pedestrian activity in key City areas to reduce vehicular travel and associated air emissions . Facilitate the development of centralized parking lots and structures in commercial districts to promote walking between individual businesses in lieu of the use of automobiles . 6-7 O 0 Table 6-1, Continued Issue mitigation N.easure Establish development standards that concentrate new commercial buildings in proximity to existing commercial buildings and pedestrian ares in order to facilitate walking and to reduce vehicular trips . Consider implementing a shuttle system that will connect the Tri-City/Commer- center, Downtown Area , and Regional Oppor- tunities Corridor. Require new development to implement or participate in transportation demand management programs which provide incen- tives for car pooling, van pools , and the use of public transit and employ other trip reduction techniques (consistent with the Circulation Element and South Coast Air Quality Management Plan) . Continue to cooperate with Omnitrans and the Rapid Transit District to expand as necessary the comprehensive mass transit system for the City to reduce vehicular travel . Consider developing a program to restrict the use of automobiles during Stage 2 or higher air quality alerts . Promote the use of public transit and alternative travel modes to reduce air emissions . Provide incentives for existing buildings to retrofit and require new buildings to incorporate low polluting energy systems . Purchase City vehicles that use energy efficient fuel and minimize air pollution. Require the incorporation of water and energy conservation features in the design of all new construction and site develop- ment as required by State law. 6-6 Table 6-1 , Continued Issue Mitigation Measure Evaluate the means of establishing an appropriate program by which energy effi- cient fixtures and energy-saving design elements can be installed in existing multi-family residential, commercial , and industrial developments . Rewire energy audits of existing public structures and encourage audits of private structures , identifying levels of existing energy use and potential conservation measures . Provide incentives for the installation of energy conservation measures in existing buildincs characterized by a high level of energy consumption, including technical assistance and possible low-interest loans . Require the use of passive design concepts in accordance with State Law which make use of the natural climate to increase energy ef`_iciency. Require through the development review process that new development consider the ability of adjacent properties to utilize energy conservation design . Educate the public regarding the need for energy conservation, techniques which can be employed, and systems which are avail- able. Land Use No mitigation measures are recommended. Socioeconomics No mitigation measures are recommended . Noise A detailed, quantitative noise analysis will be conducted when the ultimate base reuse/redevelopment plans, including area- specific land use designations , are final- ized. These detailed analyses will, as appropriate, include specific measures to mitigate noise impacts of: 6-9 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure • airport operations ; • Project-related extensions of any railroad lines or increased railroad operations; and • roadway expansions , upgrades, and increased traffic levels along base access routes, particularly as these would affect sensitive receptors such as residential areas . Cultural Resources As part of the environmental Initial Study for each subsequent project, a records check shall be requested from the Archaeo- logical Information Center, San Bernardino County Museum, Redlands , CA. Should the records check indicate the presence of known archaeological or his- torical resources, or a moderate to high sensitivity for such resources being present, a cultural resources field survey of the Project Area shall be conducted by a cialified professional . Depending cn the types of cultural resources involved, the j.,alified profess ional ( =_ ) may be a prehistoric archaeologist, historic arch- :.7 aeoloost, historian, and/or architectural historian. All identified cultural resources within a Project Area shall be documented on appropriate forms to be filed with the Archaeological Information Center, and shall be evaluated for signifi- cance/importance according to the criteria in CEQA Appendix R and/or the criteria for elibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places as specified in 36 CFR 60 . 4 . 6-10 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure The results of the cultural resources field survey shall be documented in a written report following the Guidelines for Cultural Resource Manaoement Reports of the Archaeological Information Center, and shall be filed at that location. A plan to mitigate impacts to signifi- cant/important cultural resources shall be developed and implemented prior to or in conjunction with project construction. Mitigation may include data recovery (excavation, analysis , and curation of archaeological resources ) , archival research and photographic documentation of historic structures , or avoidance and preservation in place of archaeological or historic resources . The Native American Heritage Commission and San Manuel Reservation shall be noti- fied in writing of any proposed evaluation or mitigation excavations that involve Native ncrican archaeoloeical remain, and any comments or concerns expressed by the Native ;nerican ccimnunity shall be fully considered. The results of any studies conducted for cultural resources impact mitigation shall be documented in a written report and filed at the Archaeological Information Center. All artifacts collected or recovered in cultural resource investigations shall be catalogued and curated with the San Bernardino County Museum. Transportation The Norton Air Force Base Reuse Plan shall be evaluated for impacts to the local and regional circulation system, and measures to mitigate the circulation impacts of base reuse shall be given priority status among the projects to be supported by the IVDA. 6-11 , O Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure Alternative techniques are available to shift the vehicular traffic demands to alternative time periods or to alternative modes of transportation. These elements should be incorporated into a Transporta- tion Systems Management (TSM) and Trans- portation Demand Management (TDM) Plan for appropriate IVDA-supported projects . Actions to make better use of the existing network, reduce auto usage in congested areas or time periods , and increase tran- sit ridership through improved service and efficiency include the following programs : • A procram to encourage onbase or Pro- ject Frea employers to provide employ- ees with optional alternative work schedules, including staggered work hours, flexible work hours , and 4-day, 40-hour workweeks to avoid commuting durinc rush hours . • A program to encourage employers to ennanze utiliZatiCn Or public transit by crcviding work hours -at meet transit schedules, partial or full reimSursement of transit fares , provid- ing bus shelters, providing shuttle service to multi-modal transit centers , and by distributing information on transit routes and schedules . o A program to encourage employers to take steps to increase auto occupancy, such as creation of carpools and van- pools, providing preferential parkin for carpools and vanpools, implementa- tion of matching programs for prospec- tive carpoolers, and levying parking fees as disincentives to single-occu- pant vehicles . o A program to incorporate bicycle incen- tives into project designs . These may include safe storage facilities and dedicated lanes or paths . 6-12 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Yeasure Public Services The City of San Bernardino Fire Department should plan for the orderly transfer of fire protection services at the base. New firefighting equipment and necessary modifications to the existing base fire facility should be supported by the IVDAS. The City of San Bernardino Police Depart- ment should plan for the orderly transfer of public protection services at the base . New equipment needs related to this added responsibility should be supported by the IVDA. Municipal and regional recreation depart- ments should enter into cooperative agree- ments to ensure that the existing recrea- tional facilities located at Norton AFB are available to serve and benefit the area residents . This should include the use of pools , ballfields , the gymnasium, etc . The existing golf course should be operated and maintained as a golf course for oublic use . The IVDA should consider the development of a linear park along the Santa Ana River, utilizing base lands adjacent to the river. water conservation should be required of the individual redevelopment projects . This should include the following measures : • Use of lowflow ( 1 . 5 gallons) toilets • Prohibition on the hosedown of parking lots and loading areas; vacuum vehicles should be used, instead • Minimize the use of lawns in landscap- ing; encourage the use of drought- tolerant plants 6-13 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure o Use automatic irrigation systems timed to irrigate during the low water use hours : 11 : 00 pm to 5 : 00 am. o For industries require water recircula- tion/reuse where feasible to minimize water use. In light of the current groundwater contamination problems on the base (Section 9 . 2 . 1) , the quality of the base wells should be closely monitored. Contingency plans for drilling replacement wells in areas unlikely to be influenced by known groundwater contamination should be developed in the event one or more of the current wells develops water quality Drobleirs . The local wastewater utilities should be involved in the siting of new industries within the redevelopment area. Strong industrial wastewater pretreatment recuireme:ts should be developed fcr each industry to Drotect the treatment processes of the municipal wastewater plants . The Industrial 'wastewater Treatment Plant at the base should be considered for continued use to treat the wastes of new industries locating at the base. The SARI line may also prove feasible for disposing of industrial discharges and should be investigated. The water and sewer lines serving the base should be evaluated for needed upgrades to service the redeveloped base. 6-19 Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure o A solid waste source reduction and recycling element should be prepared in accordance with AB939, which will outline specific waste reduction mecha- nisms to achieve the state mandated solid waste reduction of 25 percent by the year 1995, and 50 percent solid waste reduction by the year 2000 . • Trash receptacle guidelines/standards for commercial and residential develop- ments should be included in the pro- ject's design guidelines. This could include, but not be limited to, trash compactors, source separation, solid waste reduction and recycling. • The northeast portion of the base contains landfill areas which are kmoan to contain hazardous or toxic wastes . Mitigation of any potential hazards at this site is being addressed as part of the base ' s Installation Restoration P-og-—. ( nee cecticn 9 ,1 and in an ETC be-;-,- =re-^ared .zy the rpa-=^ en_ of Deferse on the base closure. The Air Force, in cooperation, with the State Department cf -ealth and the U.S. Envirc,imental Protection Agency plans to clean un the hazardous or toxic waste. These areas must be cleaned un prior to transfer of the base to civi- lian use. Enerav Projects supported or sponsored by the IVDA, as appropriate, shall incorporate: o Energy ccnser-ration practices and incentives to comply with the require- ments of the California State Energy Regulations, o Feasible energy-conserving tech- nologies, including alternative energy sources and technologies, 6-15 Q Table 6-1, Continued Issue Mitigation Measure • TSM/TDM measures for employment-genera- ting land uses, and • Project environmental documentation (initial studies, negative declara- tions, or EIRs) which evaluate the potential for energy conservation, and provide associated mitigations . 6-16 EXHIBIT "C" STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: East Valley Airport Land Use Commission FROM: Sandra L. Viera, Administrative Manager San Bernardino International Airport Authority DATE: April 13, 1993 RE: Civilian Airport Operations on Norton Air Force Base and Conformity with the Interim East Valley Airport Land Use Plan The San Bernardino International Airport Authority ("SBIAA") has submitted a request to the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission ("EVALUC") with regard to certain actions as required pursuant to the Public Utilities Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder. The California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics ("CalTrans") , requires that upon a conversion of the airport facilities on a military base to civilian uses an application process be followed for the issuance of an operating permit for such facility. The local governmental agency that will be assuming the ownership and operations of the proposed airport must obtain certain documents and findings and determinations from other local governmental bodies. The SBIAA will be required to obtain from the City of San Bernardino a verification that the land uses currently designated in the City of San Bernardino General Plan will allow for the ownership and operation of a governmentally owned airport by the SBIAA. Additionally, CalTrans will require that the City of San Bernardino acknowledge that the aviation facilities currently existing on Norton Air Force Base will be owned and operated by the SBIAA as a civilian airport. A further requirement of CalTrans is that there be a finding by the local Airport Land Use Commission, which in this case is the EVALUC, to the effect that the Interim East Valley _ Airport Land Use Plan (the "Interim Plan") formulated by this Commission is consistent with and will allow for the operation and ownership of a civilian airport by the SBIAA on the existing Norton Air Force Base facilities. The SBIAA is aware that an Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan will eventually need to be considered and adopted by this Commission as required under Public Utilities Code Section 21675. In the interim, however, each development project within the area encompassed by the existing Interim Plan will require a public hearing by this Commission prior to such property proceeding with its development. The SBIAA intends to commence the preparation of an Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan at the same time that a General Plan Amendment will be processed by o Page 2 the City of San Bernardino to amend the land use designations on Norton Air Force Base. Review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended ("CEQA") , will be required by both the City of San Bernardino and the Commission. The Air Force has already substantially reduced military flight operations on Norton Air Force Base and will undertake further flight reductions by July, 1993. It is estimated that all military flight operations will be terminated between August 15, 1993 , and September 1, 1993. Norton Air Force Base will be officially closed on or about March 31, 1994. It is the goal of the SBIAA to be able to operate a civilian airport on Norton Air Force Base on or after September 1, 1993, with the Staff and Consultants of the SBIAA having access to the aviation facilities by approximately July 1, 1993. This will enable the SBIAA to become familiar with the operations of the Airport to thus allow for an orderly conversion to civilian flight operations by September 1, 1993. There is a current aviation tenant located on Norton Air Force Base who is under a Sublease arrangement from the Air Force. Lockheed Commercial Air Craft Centers, Inc. , executed a Sublease Agreement to undertake refurbishing of B-747 aircraft on two (2) hangar facilities at Norton in July, 1990. The actual operations of this refurbishing activity commenced in approximately October, 1991, and there are currently approximately 14 B-747 aircraft located on Norton that are either under contract for refurbishing or are awaiting execution of a contract to commence refurbishing activities. It is imperative that the SBIAA be in a position to maintain the operational status of the Norton aviation facilities to accommodate this aviation tenant. The SBIAA intends to take official action on the submittal of the application to CalTrans on April 21, 1993 and at that time will make the necessary findings pursuant to CEQA, that prior environmental actions completed in July, 1990 will enable a certain level of Airport operations to occur for the foreseeable future. Subsequent to the meeting of the SBIAA on April 21, 1993, the City of San Bernardino will consider a resolution that will comply with the CalTrans requirement that the local governmental agency having land use jurisdiction over the proposed Airport finds and determines that the land use designations currently in effect will allow for the operation of a civilian airport and that such governmental agency acknowledge that an airport will be owned and operated by another governmental agency within the boundaries of such municipal entity having land use jurisdiction. Page 3 FINDINGS: 1. An EVALUC action recommending no objection to the proposed application, to CalTrans, is consistent with the requirements of Public Utilities Code Section 21661, et sue. 2. Subject to official sanction of the reuse of Norton Air Force Base by the Air Force, and the EVALUC public hearing review process, the proposed use of a portion of the Norton Air Force Base site as a public use airport, to be operated by the _SBIAA, could be consistent with the Interim Plan until such time as the EVALUC adopts an Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan for operation. 3. The proposed application will enable the SBIAA to meet a requirement of CalTrans, Public Utilities Code Section 21661, et sea. , and obtain an operating permit. Once officially sanctioned by the Air Force as the agency authorized to reuse a portion of the Norton Air Force Base as a public use airport, the SBIAA will have the ability, through the development of an Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, to promote the public interest by providing for the orderly development of the public use airport and the area around the airport. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends (i) that the EVALUC approve the attached Resolution and forward such Resolution to the SBIAA, (ii) that the EVALUC recommend to CalTrans, subject to official sanction by the United States Air Force of the SBLKA as the agency authorized to reuse a portion of Norton Air Force Base as a public use airport, that EVALUC not object to the proposed application; (iii) adopt the Findings contained in this Staff Report; and (iv) instruct the SBIAA to continue all necessary efforts to coordinate establishment of the San Bernardino International Airport at Norton Air Force Base, including the preparation of the required Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. seuwoonuocvs. 000M 12M o RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE EAST VALLEY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WHEREAS, the San Bernardino International Airport Authority ("SBIAA") has submitted a request to the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission ("EVALUC") requesting that certain findings be made by the EVALUC with respect to the establishment of a governmentally owned and operated Airport to be located on the existing Norton Air Force Base facility; and WHEREAS, Norton Air Fn=a Base has previously been announced for closure by the United States Government and it is intended that military flight operations will terminate on or about September 1, 1993 and Norton Air Force Base will close for all purposes on or about March 31, 1994; and WHEREAS, the SBIAA is in the process of obtaining the necessary operating permits and certifications from the state of California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics ("CalTrans") , as required pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661, et sea. ; and WHEREAS, the EVALUC has been duly established and is in existence pursuant to the requirements of Public Utilities Code Section 21670, et sea. ; and - 1 - WHEREAS, the EVALUC has previously adopted the Interim East Valley Airport Land Use Plan which is presently in effect, and it is the intent that subsequent hereto the EVALUC, together with the SBIAA, shall cause to be prepared an Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Norton Air Force Base and the surrounding areas which shall hereinafter be considered by the EVALUC; and WHEREAS, Section 3534 (b) (6) of Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations requires as a part of an application to construct or establish an airport within the State of California that there be an action by the appropriate airport land use commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE EAST VALLEY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The EVALUC hereby acknowledges that it is the intent of the SBIAA to acquire the aviation facilities as are presently located on Norton Air Force Base and to operate a civilian airport on approximately 1,700 acres of the airport and aviation related areas of Norton Air Force Base as set forth on the adopted Airport Layout Plan ("ALP") of the SBIAA, which ALP has been approved by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") . The SBIAA will take action as required pursuant to the Public Utilities Code and the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended ("CEQA") , to comply with all other requirements of CalTrans in the submission of an application for the establishment of a civilian - 2 - airport on Norton Air Force Base which shall be owned and operated by the SBIAA. Section 2. Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21670, et sea. , this Commission has the power and duty to ensure that compatible land uses will be encouraged in the vicinity of all new and existing airports and to coordinate State, regional and local levels so as to provide for the orderly development of air transportation and to protect the public health, safety and welfare. This Commission has previously prepared and adopted the Interim East Valley Airport Land Use Plan (the ^Interim Plan") and pursuant thereto has retained the power to review and approve all development plans within the area encompassed by the Interim Plan until such time as an Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan is adopted and approved by the EVALUC pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21675. Section 3. This Commission hereby adopts the Findings and Recommendations contained in the Staff Report as submitted to and on file with this Commission and further finds and determines that the Interim Plan as previously formulated and adopted by this Commission provides for the orderly growth in the areas surrounding the proposed San Bernardino International Airport which is within the jurisdiction of this Commission as set forth in the Interim Plan. The Commission further finds and determines that the proposed ownership and operation of the San Bernardino International Airport by the SBIAA could be consistent with the Interim Plan and all existing adopted land use plans, rules and - 3 - regulations of this Commission, and such ownership and operation of the San Bernardino International Airport by the SBIAA could be consistent with the adopted General Plans of the affected jurisdictions including the City of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino based upon the Findings presented in the Staff Report referred to herein. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect from and after its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1993. Chairman of the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission Attest: Secretary of the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission I, Secretary of the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission (EVALUC) do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the EVALUC at a meeting thereof, held on the day of , 1993, and that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of said Resolution, and has not been amended or repealed. Attest: Secretary of the East Valley Airport Land Use Commission .L� 4 -