Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout29- Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BER ARDINO - REQUEST OR COUNCIL ACTION --om: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Development Agreement No. 91-01 , Inland Center Mall Expansion ..ept: Planning & Building Services Date: October 1 , 1992 Synopsis of Previous Council action: None Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and the resolution be adopted. Al ;7 _ ignature oughe Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 384-5357 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Development Ward: 3 Agreement, Resolution FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:- N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: 1%00-ncil Notes: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Development Agreement No. 91-01, Inland Center Mall Mayor and Common Council meeting of October 19, 1992 REQUEST AND LOCATION The applicant/developer requests approval of a Development Agreement (DA 91-01) to govern the development of a phased expansion project at Inland Center Mall. The mall is located east of the I-215 Freeway, south of Inland Center Drive and west of "E" Street. MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. The Mayor and Common Council may approve Development Agreement No. 91-01. 2. The Mayor and Common Council may continue Development Agreement No. 91-01 to a date certain and direct staff to prepare additional information. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the resolution which adopts the Negative Declaration, adopts the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program and approves Development Agreement No. 91-01. SPECIFIC PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND The applicant/developer proposes to add an additional 776,465 gross square feet consisting of 540, 000 square feet in up to three new department stores and 236,465 square feet in a second level to the mall. Up to four parking structures are included to accommodate required parking. Inland Center Mall was built in 1965 and consists of approximately 985, 883 square feet. It includes three department stores that are connected by a one level mall. The site consists of 62.5 acres with 4400 parking spaces. The total gross square feet upon project completion will be 1, 762, 348 with a total of 7420 parking spaces. The Inland Center Mall consists of 4 parcels. Parcel 1 contains Sears, Sears Auto Center and parking areas; Parcel 2 contains Broadway and parking areas; Parcel 3 contains the mall portion itself and parking areas; and Parcel 4 contains May Co. , the theater complex and parking areas. There is a reciprocal easement over all of the parcels. The applicant/developer owns Parcel 3 and intends to upgrade and expand the mall portion and to add two new DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 2 major department stores. The applicant/developer also intends to use their best efforts to induce the other parcels to upgrade and remodel and to construct a third major department store on Parcel 2. The applicant is seeking a commitment from the City in terms of approval of the expansion project. This is required in order for them to solicit commitment from the prospective new department stores and in-line tenants. However, they are not to the point of having all of the specifics required to obtain approval of a Development Permit. Some of these specifics would change based on future tenant needs, especially the major department stores, and will be defined with each phase. Staff was unable to approve a project without having the specifics. Therefore, a Development Agreement was determined to be an appropriate tool to give the applicant the commitment they needed from the City, while giving the City the comfort level that the project will comply with development requirements. The Development Agreement incorporates, by reference, the requirements of the Development Code. The main issues are summarized in this report. �.,.. ANALYSIS The mall is designated CR-1, Commercial Regional. This designation was established specifically to address the two malls in the City. General Plan Land Use Element goals, objectives and policies address Inland Center Mall (and Central City Mall) as principal region-serving retail centers and the need to encourage intensification and upgrading. The economic analysis for the General Plan projected the need for an additional 2+ million square feet of regional and subregional space by 2010. This project would provide almost 800, 000 square feet of regional retail space. The Economic Development Element goals, objectives and policies address the provision of regional retail space as necessary to help the City retain its role as a region-serving center. The General Plan establishes an F.A.R. of 1.5 with a height of 4 stories or 52 feet for development in the CR-1. The ultimate project has an F.A.R. of .65 with a height not exceeding 52 feet. The Development Code permits lot coverage of 75% and the ultimate project is approximately 65% lot coverage. Phasing The Development Agreement is proposed for a 30 year term. The intent is that the mall will continue as legal, conforming structures for that period of time. The actual expansion p nsion is DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 3 proposed as four phases, ranging from 1994 to 2000. Each project, by phase, will be processed through a Development Permit, consistent with established processing procedures. At that time, the specific Development Code requirements will be addressed. Each phase will include the necessary improvements such as parking, landscaping, etc. Other applications such as parcel maps or lot line adjustments may also be processed concurrently. Although the Development Agreement addresses the proposed timeframe for development, by phase, (approximately an 8 year buildout) , additional language has been included that commits the applicant to show substantial progress toward actual development within that timeframe. The Development Agreement provides for completion of Phase I within 10 years of approval of the agreement and pulling building permits for Phase II within 15 years of approval of the agreement. This should ensure that the actual development occurs in a (relatively) timely manner and that the environmental analysis remains valid. I-215 Improvement Project CalTrans is in the process of preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed widening of I-215 from the interchange with I-10 up to where I-215 splits from the Cross-Town Freeway. Several alternatives have been identified, but the analysis of impacts has not been completed. This presents an awkward situation for projects such as the Inland Center Mall expansion which are proposed to occur over several years. All of the alternatives will have some impact on the mall, but the extent is not known at this time. The Development Agreement contains language that commits the City to supporting an alternative that provides directs access to Inland Center Drive and/or from any collector distributor road. Staff concurs that the I-215 Improvement Project should not adversely impact access to and the ultimate functioning of the mall and supports the language in the agreement. An example of an alternative preferred by the applicant is also included. Staff recommends that a commitment to the applicant's preferred alternative not be made at this time. Parking The applicant will provide parking, by phase, in conjunction with proposed development. The proposed parking added to the existing parking, will exceed the Code requirement at buildout. The DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 4 Development Agreement contains language that addresses the loss of parking due to the freeway widening and provides for replacement, if necessary. It is not anticipated that the freeway widening will remove parking to the extent that it falls below Code requirements. One of the mitigation measures requires the establishment of a 100 park and ride facility in the mall parking lot. With approximately 371 extra parking spaces at buildout, this will not impact parking. Landscaping The Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the Development Code pertaining to landscaping requirements. The existing landscaping will be maintained as much as possible and coordinated with the new landscaping. Mature trees that have to be removed to accommodate the development will be relocated on-site as much as possible. The mall maintains landscaping along the eastern perimeter of the parking lot that is located on Flood Control District right-of-way. The Development Agreement provides for continued maintenance of the landscaping and partial credit for meeting the overall landscaping requirements. Freeway Corridor Overlay Chapter 19. 14 of the Development Code contains additional requirements for those properties that are adjacent to the freeway. The intent of the Freeway Corridor Overlay was to ensure that projects adjacent to the freeway presented a pleasing view to freeway travelers. The key requirements are signage (addressed later in this report) and landscaping. The Development Agreement addresses the provision of a 25 foot landscaped setback along the freeway, consistent with the Development Code, and acknowledges that the location of the buffer could impact the mall perimeter road and/or parking, depending on the ultimate freeway widening project. It is proposed that the City will not unreasonably withhold approval of placing the buffer on public property or a combination of public/private property. Staff concurs with this proposal because we want to ensure that the buffer is completed while not impacting project circulation. We feel that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the Development Code. Traffic and Circulation The Initial Study prepared for the project identified potential DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 5 impacts to traffic and circulation. Several substantial mitigation measures were identified to reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. These mitigation measures are required at each phase of development and some continue after buildout. The Development Agreement contains language pertaining to a possible westerly extension of Central Avenue. While staff would prefer that all reference to Central Avenue be deleted from the agreement, the Development Agreement does not require commitment on the part of the City. The perimeter road around the mall is proposed to remain upon ultimate development which staff concurs with. The road provides access to all areas of the mall and parking lot. It may be impacted by the freeway widening, however, but the extent is not known at this time. As addressed in the I-215 Improvement Project section of this report, staff concurs that the City should support an alternative which has the least overall impacts. We feel that the perimeter road is an important consideration. Design Considerations The Development Agreement incorporates the General Plan policies and Development Code requirements pertaining to design. The applicant has prepared a concept plan, included as an exhibit, which meets the intent of the Development Code. Specific design issues will be addressed through the Development Permit process for each phase. Signage The applicant proposes to process an amendment to the Development Code pertaining to signage in CR-1, Commercial Regional land use districts as addressed in Exhibit "H" of the Development Agreement. The Development Code does not differentiate between uses within the freeway corridor overlay, not does it differentiate between CR-1 and other commercial land use districts. Staff concurs that Inland Center Mall can be looked at differently from other freeway adjacent uses because of its region serving function and its size. Staff also concurs that sign opportunities for the CR-1 designation should be different from other commercial designations. The changes being considered have not been fully identified at this time, however, staff would support an amendment to Code requirements, within reason. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS Tom Dodson and Associates prepared the Initial Study for this DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 6 project. The Environmental Review Committee recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration at their meeting of March 19, 1992 . The Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration were available for public review from March 24, 1992 through April 23 , 1992. The key areas of concern were traffic and circulation (previously addressed in this report) and air quality. Potential impacts to air quality were identified in the Initial Study due to the overall poor air quality in the area. The Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program contains substantial measures that address construction related impacts and project impacts. The proposed Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review since it met CEQA criteria for potential regional significance. Comments were received from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the San Bernardino County Transportation/Flood Control Department pertaining to the requirement for an NPDES permit. The Flood Control District also commented on drainage. Comments were also received from Caltrans, District 8, questioning the adequacy of the traffic study and its conclusions. The South Coast Air Quality Management District submitted comments questioning the air quality impact analysis. The comments received and the responses are included as Attachment "E" to this report. Additional analysis and/or mitigation measures were included where deemed appropriate. Copies of the responses were distributed to the commenting agencies and no further comments have been received. A Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program was prepared and is addressed in the text of the Development Agreement and is included as Exhibit "G" in the agreement. CITY REVIEW The Development Agreement has been revised throughout the review process to include recommendation of the various departments. The Development Review Committee recommended approval. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments were received other than those addressed in the CEQA Status section of this report. DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 7 CONCLUSION The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan in that it provides regional shopping opportunities and will help the City to maintain its lead role in the Inland Empire. It is also consistent with the density/intensity policies and design policies in the General Plan. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the standards and design guidelines in the Development Code. Compliance with the mitigation measures will ensure that all potential adverse impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8, 1992, took public input, approved the project, in concept, and continued to enable the applicant to revise the Development Agreement to incorporate staff's recommendations. On September 22, 1992 the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program and approval of the Development Agreement. Attachments: A - Owner/Applicant List B - Resolution C - Development Agreement D - Initial Study E - Environmental Comments and Responses Prepared by: Valerie C. Ross Acting Principal Planner for: Al Boughey, AICP Director Note: The applicant will submit 5 originals of the Development Agreement to the City Attorney's Office, for signature, after Council action. The originals will have the typographical errors corrected. One original will be filed with the City Clerk after all signatures have been obtained. 0 0 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 2 ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING 3 THE MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 (INLAND CENTER MALL 4 EXPANSION) . 5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 6 SECTION 1. Recitals 7 (a) Development Agreement No. 91-01 was considered by the 8 Planning Commission on September 8, 1992 after a noticed public 9 hearing, and the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval 10 has been considered by the Mayor and Common Council. 11 (b) An Initial Study was prepared on March 19, 1992 and 12 reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning 13 Commission who both determined that Development Agreement No. 91-01 14 would not have a significant effect on the environment and 15 therefore, recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be 16 adopted. 17 (c) The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration received a 30 18 day public review period from March 24 , 1992 to April 23 , 1992 and 19 all comments relative thereto have been reviewed by the Planning 20 Commission and the Mayor and Common Council in compliance with the 21 California Environmental Quality Act and local regulations. 22 (d) The proposed Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program was 23 reviewed by the Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council in 24 compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and local 25 regulations. 26 27 28 1 Alfib 0 V 1 (e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public hearing and fully reviewed and considered ed proposed Development 3 Agreement No. 91-01 on October 19, 1992 . 4 (f) The adoption of Development Agreement No. 91-01 is deemed 5 in the interest of the orderly development of the City and is 6 consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the existing 7 General Plan. 8 SECTION 2 . Negative Declaration 9 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the 10 Mayor and Common Council that the proposed Development Agreement 11 will have no significant effect on the environment, and the 12 Mitigated Negative Declaration heretofore prepared by the 13 Environmental Review committee as to the effect of this proposed 14 Agreement is hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted. 15 SECTION 3 . Mitigation Monitoring/Retorting Program BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED b the 16 Y Mayo y r and Common Council that 17 the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is hereby ratified, 18 affirmed and adopted. 19 SECTION 4 . Findinas 20 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council of the 21 City of San Bernardino that: 22 A. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the 23 goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 24 B. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the 25 Development Code. 26 C. The proposed Development Agreement will promote the 27 welfare and public interest of the City. 28 2 ........:... 0 0 1 SECTION 5. Development Agreement 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council that: 3 A. Development Agreement No. 91-01 will govern the 4 development of the Inland Center Mall as specifically described in 5 the Development Agreement labeled Attachment 1, a copy of which is 6 attached and incorporated herein by reference. 7 B. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute on 8 behalf of said City, Development Agreement No. 91-01. 9 C. The authorization to execute the above referenced 10 agreement is rescinded if the parties to the agreement fail to 11 execute it within sixty (60) days of the passage of this 12 resolution. 13 D. Development Agreement No. 91-01 shall be effective 14 immediately upon adoption and execution of this resolution. 15 SECTION 6. Notice of Determination 16 The Planning Division is hereby directed to file a Notice of 17 Determination with the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino 18 certifying the City's compliance with the California Environmental 19 Quality Act in preparing the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 20 SECTION 7 . Recordation 21 The developer shall record the Development Agreement in the 22 Office of the County Recorder no later than ten (10) days after it 23 is executed by the parties. 24 25 26 27 28 3 1 RESOLUTION. . . ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION 2 MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 (INLAND CENTER MALL EXPANSION) . 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 therefore, held on the 6 day of 1992 , by the following vote, to 7 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 City Clerk 18 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day 19 of 1992 . 20 21 W. R. Holcomb, Mayor City of San Bernardino 22 Approved as to 23 form and legal content: 24 JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney 25 By. 26 27 28 4