HomeMy WebLinkAbout33- Planning and Building Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: General Plan Amendment No.
94-05 and Development Code
Amendment No. 94-09, to establish the A,
Airport land use designation and establish
permitted uses on a portion of the former
Norton Air Force Base
Dept: Planning & Building Services
r Date: December 15, 1994 MCC Date: January 9, 1995
Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None.
Recommended Motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the Resolution which makes a
finding that the Inland Valley Development Agency Final Environmental Impact Report is the appropriate
environmental documentation; adopt General Plan Amendment No. 94-05; and adopt the Resolution
establishing design guidelines and that the first reading be waived and the ordinance appro ' Development
t'M�AAmendment No. 94-09 laid over for final adoption.
1 ghey (Si
1
Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 384-5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report: Resolutions (2) and Ordinance Ward: 1
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:N/A
Source:(Account No.)
Account Description:
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No. _�98
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 94-05 AND DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT NO. 94-09
REQUEST/LOCATION: The San Bernardino International Airport Authority requests approval
of a General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan land use designation from PF, Public
Facilities to A, Airport, to replace references to Norton Air Force Base, as applicable, and to
create development standards, through the Development Code Amendment, for this new land
use designation.
The subject property is a portion of the former Norton Air Force Base (See Exhibit A) that is
now under long-term lease to the San Bernardino International Airport Authority.
KEY ISSUES: The key issues are as follows:
• The City of San Bernardino General Plan was adopted on June 2, 1989.
• Upon the closure of Norton Air Force Base, for military use, the Federal
Government leased the land to two agencies; the Inland Valley Development
Agency (IVDA)and the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA).
• The IVDA generally has a long term lease on the western portion of the property,
consisting of warehouses, office space and the golf course. The SBIAA generally
has a long term lease on the eastern portion of the property, consisting of the
runways, taxiways and hangars. This application is for the SBIAA leased
property only.
• The General Plan Amendment would change the land use designation from PF,
` Public Facilities to A, Airport and update references to the former Norton Air
Force Base, as applicable.
• The Development Code Amendment would then create new development
standards and design guidelines for the new Airport land use district.
• The subject property is currently under a long term lease with the San Bernardino
International Airport Authority being the lessee.
• The approval of this application will not grant the applicant any entitlements.
Future projects on the property would still be subject to the level of review stated
in the proposed Development Code Amendment.
GPA 94-05 & DCA 94-09
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
January 9, 1994
Page 2
Please see the analysis and attachments contained in Exhibit 2, Staff Report to the Planning
Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL: The Final EIR for the IVDA's Redevelopment Plan is a program EIR
pursuant to Section 15168 of CEQA. An Initial Study was prepared and the Environmental
Review Committee (ERC) determined that no further environmental documentation is required.
The Initial Study (Attachment E of the Staff Report) substantiates this finding.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reviewed
General Plan Amendment 94-05, Development Code Amendment No. 94-09 on December 13,
1994, and voted 8-0 to recommend to the Mayor and Common Council; concurrence with the
environmental determination that the 1990 IVDA Redevelopment Plan EIR is the appropriate
environmental documentation and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 94-05 and
Development Code Amendment No. 94-09 based upon the attached Findings of Fact(Attachment
E). Commissioners present: Affaitati, Cole, Kipp, Gonzales, Melendez, Strimpel, Thrasher and
Traver.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council:
1. Concur with the environmental determination that the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation; and
2. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 94-05, which changes the land use
designation from PF, Public Facilities to A, Airport; and
3. Approve Development Code Amendment No. 94-09, which established permitted
uses, development standards and design guidelines.
Prepared by: Scott D. Donaghe, Assistant Planner
For: Al Boughey, Director, Planning and Building Services
GPA 94-05 & DCA 94-09
Mayor and Common Council meeting of
January 9, 1994
Page 3
EXHIBITS: -,f Location Map
2. Planning Commission Staff Report
Attachments:
B - Findings of Fact C�ZFs c/� h�•Y� �, l �i l =t f�rs l/)
C - General Plan Amendment Text
D - Development Code Amendment Text
E - Initial Study
3. Resolution for General Plan Amendment No. 94-05
4. Resolution for Design Guidelines for the A, Airport District(fte-�
5. Ordinance for Development Code Amendment No. 94-09 (lie
I
t
LAna
u� Ley 0-i
V V&
PPECANOE A
104*.Swppad Or.
Cl)
Oct RD"
C-D
C4
-49
.......... .
MR
Ll
ALABAMA ST
F)(HIMT, 1
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN
AIRPORT
TEXT AMENDMENTS
1) Page 1-3
paragraph #3
California State University is a major identifiable land use in the northern section of the City.
In the southeast section, the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center is a
significant land use that will play a key economic role in the City. The Santa Fe rail yards, also
a major land use, are located on the City's west side.
2) Page 1-12
paragraph #2
Throughout the City are several public or quasi-public uses which are singularly important or
unique. They include National Orange Show Grounds, California State University, San
Bernardino campus, Santa Fe Railway yards and the San Bernardino International Airport and
Trade Center. The National Orange Show Grounds contain 136 acres located between "E"
Street and Arrowhead Avenue, south of Mill Street. It is a privately owned state-chartered
facility, founded at the beginning of this century to stage the State Citrus Fruit Fair. The 160
acre California State University Campus is located in the northwest quadrant of the City, at the
corner of University Parkway and North Park Boulevard. The Santa Fe Railway yards are the
major west coast switching facilities for the Atcheson-Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad. The San
Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center is a 1,751 acre site which formerly housed
the 193rd Airlift Command while known as Norton Air Force Base. At the time the existing
land use data was collected (1987), Norton Air Force Base was classified as a public facility.
Norton Air Force Base officially closed in 1994. Through the efforts of the Inland Valley
Development Agency and the San Bernardino International Airport Authority, the Base has been
converted to an international trade center and air carrier airport.
3) Page 1-17
paragraph #4
4. San Bernardino's pattern of land uses is characterized by the presence of several major
centers (downtown, Tri-City/Commercenter, Inland Center and Central City Malls, California
State University, and the former Norton Air Force Base), "strip" commercial corridors, a mix
of well- and ill-defined residential neighborhoods, and clusters of high density housing. Many
of these are self-contained fragments, with few linkages integrating the City into an organized
and cohesive pattern of uses. Some districts, such as Tri-City/Commercenter, are internally
ATTACHMENT
e
well-organized and planned. Others, such as Highland Avenue, are long-corridors of disparate
fragments.
4) Page 1-19
paragraph #4
12. The former Norton Air Force Base was a long-term resident of the City, providing job
opportunities and, at the same time, impacting adjacent land uses. Noise attributable to its
aircraft operations adversely affected adjacent residential areas. Generally, housing located to
the west and southwest of the former base is marginal and deteriorated. While some industrial
and commercial uses have developed, there are vast tracts of undeveloped lands on the
periphery. Conversion of the base for civilian re-use will require careful coordination with the
City of San Bernardino and surrounding jurisdictions.
5) Page 1-30
Table 4 Addendum
General Plan Land Use Categories
Development
Category Location Principal Uses Intensity/Density
Airport San Bernardino Runways, 0.5
A International taxiways, general
Airport and air carrier
a v i a t i o n ,
passenger and air
cargo terminals,
hangars, airport
related office,
commercial, light
industrial
Page 2
6) Page 1-105
ISSUE FOUR: WHAT SHOULD BE THE FUTURE ROLE AND CHARACTER OF THE
SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AND TRADE CENTER?
Goal
It shall be the goal of the City of San Bernardino to:
lI Ensure the orderly and economic transition of the former Norton Air Force Base site to
productive civilian uses including an international airport and trade center in a manner
that is compatible with and enhances adjacent uses.
Objective
It shall be the objective of the City of San Bernardino to:
1.39 Promote the development and use of the existing airport facilities and related
buildings as an international air carrier airport with aviation-related office,
commercial and industrial uses.
Policies
It shall be the policy of the City of San Bernardino to:
Permitted Uses
1.39.1.10 Support the efforts of the San Bernardino International Airport Authority
to establish and develop an international air carrier airport.
1.39.1.11 Establish a new General Plan Use Category of Airport (A) which will
permit aviation and aviation-related uses including office, commercial and
industrial.
1.39.1.12 Establish an Airport (A) District for the Development Code that defines
permitted uses for the airport, appropriate development standards and
review procedures. Permitted uses include air passenger and freight
terminals, aircraft sales, repair and maintenance, aircraft associated
activities and other related uses.
1.39.1.13 Encourage the Airport Authority to prepare and maintain an Airport
Page 3
Master Plan to address the ultimate development of the airport and its
relationship to adjacent parcels and communities (I1.1).
Density/Intensity and Height
1.39.1.20 Height limits for development on the airport will be determined by
Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77 (I1.1).
1.39.1.21 The existing airport has approximately 230,000 square feet of office space
and 1,300,000 square feet of warehouse/hangar space. At ultimate build-
out, it is projected that t3maximum 0 square feet of warehoused/hangar00P 00
square feet of office and 2, q
(I1.1).
Desi!n and Develoament Guidelines
1.39.1.30 The Airport District shall include development and design standards that
will ensure physical and visual compatibility among land uses and adjacent
sites, in cooperation with the City of Highland.(I1.1).
1.39.1.31 Special attention shall be given to development that occurs adjacent to or
is visible from Third Street. Standards shall include provisions for special
landscaping requirements and screening of outdoor storage, loading docks
and truck parking areas from public view to enhance the compatibility
with adjacent land uses and the traveling public, (11-1).
1.39.1.32 Project review procedures shall be utilized that are consistent with the goal
of job and economic development at the airport and minimize procedural
delay (11.1).
1.39.1.33 Update and revise, as necessary, programs to ensure airport land use
compatibility with surrounding areas. These programs should address
issues which include compatible land uses, height and intensity of
permitted uses and should incorporate the provisions of any Airport
Master Plan prepared by the Airport Authority (11.20).
8) Page 1-118
Implementation Programs
I1.1(i)(9)
(9) San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center
9) Page 1-123
Implementation Programs
Page 4
I1.11(d)
(d) participation in feasibility studies and planning for the reuse of the former Norton
Air Force Base, as it transitions into the San Bernardino International Airport and
Trade Center.
10) Page 1-127
I1.20
Replace the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
Establish land use compatibility standards and requirements to replace the old Air Installation
Compatible Use Zone plan to account for modifications in aircraft and ground operations
resulting from the establishment of the San Bernardino International Airport. This shall include
the preparation of new noise contours and compatible land use zoning.
11) Page 4-29
paragraph 4
4.6.2 Pursue development of San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center in order
to provide opportunities for office, commercial and industrial development, including
firms interested in or requiring airport proximity or access (I4.14).
12) Page 4-38
paragraph 12
I4.14 Participate with the San Bernardino International Airport
Authority in marketing and attracting industrial users requiring airport access or
proximity and with the Inland Valley Development Agency in marketing and
attracting office, commercial and industrial users to the International Trade
Center.
13) Page 6-17
paragraph 1
6.7.2 Evaluate accessibility to San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center
consistent with the policies requiring review and approval of mitigation measures
to accommodate trips generated by new developments taking into account that
such required mitigation must consider the level of trips generated by the
previously existing Norton Air Force Base (I6.24).
14) Page 6-25
paragraph 2
I6.24 San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center Access Study
Page 5
As part of the planning for the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade
Center, the City shall coordinate with surrounding jurisdictions in the
development of a regional circulation study to demonstrate that adequate access
can be provided to the airport site and trade center.
15) Page 7-1
paragraph 6
7.OA.1.
• Domestic wastewater from the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center.
16) Page 7-3
paragraph 8
7.OA.3.
• Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force Base), and
17) Page 7-4
paragraph 5
7.013
• Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force Base), and
18) Page 7-6
paragraph 6
7.00
• Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force Base), and
19) Page 7-11
paragraph 3
H. GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES
Approximately 90-100 geothermal wells and springs have been identified in the San Bernardino
area. The geothermal wells and springs are concentrated in the Commerce Center, Central City,
Tri-City areas, and the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center (as depicted on
Figure 31).
20) Page 7-16
7.3.3 Monitor and periodically reassess rates for wastewater treatment services for
jurisdictions outside the City of San Bernardino that have wastewater treated at
the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Facility (i.e. East Valley Water District,
Page 6
Patton State Hospital, and City of Loma Linda) (I7.12).
21) Page 7-33
I17.37 Extend the system of geothermal facilities in the Commerce Center, Central City,
Tri-City areas, and San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center to
accommodate future commercial and governmental uses.
I7.39 Administer a program for the purpose of educating potential developers in the Commerce
Center, Central City, Tri-City areas, and San Bernardino International Airport and Trade
Center of the cost and energy saving benefits associated with the use of geothermal
energy. This program could be conducted in conjunction with the Chamber of
Commerce and City Redevelopment Agency as a benefit of locating in San Bernardino.
22) Page 14-5
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Within the San Bernardino planning area, three major noise sources occur and include:
(1) aircraft; (2) rail traffic; and, (3) vehicular traffic.2 Aircraft operations previously associated
with the former Norton Air Force Base were the dominant noise source in some portions of the
City. Norton Air Force Base has been converted to a civilian air carrier airport. Existing noise
conditions in the City are depicted on Figure 57. In this case, existing conditions reflect
previous military operations.
23) Page 14-12
paragraph 7
Issues
I
A. Noise in the planning area exceeds levels recommended by the State of Office of Noise
Control along major highways, freeways, and the railroads.
Page 7
ATTACHMENT A
G19.12A.050 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT DESIGN GUIDELINES
1. GENERAL
Design Guidelines for airport development shall be the same as the applicable to the
Industrial land Use Districts (Sec G 19.08.050) except as modified herein.
2. APPLICABILITY
The provisions of this section shall apply to all development located in the landside
portion of the San Bernardino International Airport, as defined in Section 19.11.030
(B)(1)(b) of this chapter and shown on a map on the file in the Department. Any
addition, remodeling, relocation, or construction requiring a building permit shall adhere
to these guidelines where applicable.
3
14 le i Lf j)
CHAPTER 19.12A
A (AIRPORT) DISTRICT
19.12A.010 PURPOSE
1. The purpose of this chapter is to achieve the following:
` (A) To define specific uses and development standards related to the unique
needs and requirements of an international airport.
(B) Ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses.
(C) Provide an appropriate area for airport-related activities and uses.
2. The purpose of the (A) Airport District is as follows:
(A) Provide for the conversion, reuse and expansion of the existing airfield
and related facilities into an air carrier airport.
(B) Provide for a regionally important land use which will offer employment
opportunities for existing and future residents of the City and surrounding
communities.
(C) Provide for a land use that will meet the needs of and attract users from
throughout the region.
Table 12A.01
Airport District List of Permitted Uses
19.12A.020 PERMITTED, DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED AND CONDITIONALLY
PERMITTED USES
The following list represents those primary uses in the Airport Zoning District which are
Permitted (P), subject to a Development Permit (D) or a Conditional Use Permit (C).
Land Use Activity "A" District
1. Accessory structures and uses typically appurtenant to a principally D
permitted land use activity.
2. Air cargo and air freight terminals. D
168a
3. Aircraft associated activities. D
(a) Aerial fire fighting enterprises. D
(b) Aerial photo and surveying enterprises. D
(c) Air carrier, commuter, scheduled air taxi and D
air taxi operations.
(d) Aircraft wash and wax operations. D
(e) Car rental. D
(t) Flying school or flying club administrative and D
classroom facilities.
(g) Rental of hangar and tie-down space for aircraft storage. D
(h) Sale of aviation petroleum products. D
(i) Sale, rental or charter of aircraft. D
(j) Sale, rental or service of aircraft parts, avionics, D
instruments or other aircraft equipment.
(k) Taxicabs, buses, limousines, rail and other ground D
transportation.
(1) Training Facility. D
4. Aircraft manufacturing and assembly, including manufacture of aircraft D
component parts.
5. Air freight warehousing with outside storage. D
6. Air Museum. D
7. Airport, airfield, helicopter field or port, landing and take-off runways D
and taxiways.
8. Buildings, improvements and activities primarily related to the operation D
of the airport facility, such as hangars, passenger terminal, operation
towers, parking lots, fuel storage and refueling facilities, maintenance,
security and public safety facilities.
9. Cellular and microwave communication facilities D
168b
10. Fire training facility. D
11. Field crops, truck gardening, berry and bush crops, flower gardening, P
wholesale nurseries and similar open agricultural uses.
12. Hotel/Motel. C
13. Interim Uses"' D
14. Intermodal Cargo Transfer Facility. D
15. Offices C
16. Packaging and packing of perishable products for air transport. D
17. Preparation of chemical fire retardants as required for aerial fire fighting. D
18. Recreation uses such as park, golf course, golf driving range and similar D
recreational uses involving the open use of land without structures
or improvements.
19. Repair, maintenance, rebuilding, alteration or exchange of aircraft and D
aircraft engine components or other parts.
20. Restaurant food service establishments including sale of alcoholic D
beverages, and retail sales as an accessory use within the terminal facilities.
21. Temporary uses pursuant to Chapter 19.70, Temporary Use Permits, T
subject to approval by the Airport Authority Executive Director and
the Director of Planning and Building Services.
22. Truck Terminal including on-site maintenance. C
Other similar uses which the Director finds to fit within the purpose/intent of the Airport District
in compliance with Section 19.02.070(3.)
(1) Permits or development applications shall be accepted for processing only with the written authorization
from the Executive Director of the Airport Authority.
(2) Interim Uses which are not airport or aviation related may be permitted on airport property for periods not
to exceed 5 years. Interim uses shall be compatible with the airport operations and adjacent uses including
those which may be located or planned off-site of the airport itself. Interim uses must be located within
a fully enclosed structure.
168c
19.12A.030 LAND USE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. GENERAL STANDARDS
A. The following standards are minimum unless stated as maximum.
Table 12A.02
Airport District Development Standards
Minimum Parcel Site 1 acre
Building Separation 10 feet
Front Setback (external streets) 50 feet
Front Setback (internal streets) 10 feet
Side Street Setback 10 feet
Rear Setback 10 feeta'
Side Setback 10 feet(2)
(1) The maximum lot coverage and structure height shall be governed by Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) requirements and regulations.
(2) These setbacks are only applicable to new construction on the landside area.
B. Airport Land Use District Standards
1. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) Airside: Those land uses, activities and portions of building structures
that fall on the airport operations side of a fenced boundary around the
airport separating those operations from direct public access.
(b) Landside: Those land uses, activities and portions of buildings and or
structures that face an adjacent public street or frontage road and are
outside of a fence boundary separating the airport operations area from
public access.
2. The line which separates the airside area from the landside area shall, for the
purposes of this section, be referred to as the airside boundary. This boundary
is shown on a map on file with the Department. This boundary may be adjusted
administratively by the Director over time as development occurs on airport-
owned property fronting on adjacent public streets.
3. The following development standards shall be applicable to all development that
occurs on the landside portion of the airside boundary.
(a) The provisions of Chapter 19.20 Property Development Standards shall
168d
r apply.
(b) Setback - all structures shall be set back from Third Street and Del Rosa
Avenue a minimum of 50 feet. A minimum of the first 25 feet adjacent
to the street shall be landscaped. The remaining area may be used for
automobile parking. The setback can be reduced to 25 feet where a
frontage road is constructed on airport property adjacent to Third Street.
4. The regulations provided herein do not supersede or replace any regulations or
limitations governing airport or airfields which have been enacted by State or
Federal agencies,but are in addition to any such regulations or limitation. Where
these regulations are in conflict, State and Federal regulations shall supersede the
provisions of this chapter.
5. Security fencing to be installed on the airside boundary shall consist of eight (8)
foot chain link with three (3) strands of barbed wire as approved by the FAA.
19.12A.040 GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Non-Conforming Structures - The existing structures within the boundaries of
this district shall be exempt from the provisions of Section 19.62.020(7) of this
Development Code for a period of 10 years, commencing on the effective date
of this Chapter 19.12A.
2. Off-Site or Shared Parking -Development on the airport shall have the ability for
off-site or shared parking. Parking improvements shall be consistent with the
provisions of this section.
3. All tenant identification and public information signs shall meet the provisions of
Chapter 19.22, Sign Regulations, of this Development Code.
168e
SIGN REGULATIONS-19.22
fi o S g e E c c
m
cm � c'� o` m �' n mK51
e c» c o r 100 co e W o a
�
m
t e •� c L 0•e m 0.a_ � � 7 0 .4 0 _ �
< e E E 9 'o E ? o a< v m a to e1 0 6 0
Z
Oa _10
J
Alk
e
� T y y m •
T a
w
E
uj E
z
.� Z
Q ° z No a . s
H IL
7 • � 3 o `o a � � t t
3.
IF��11 0 •
z
U g Q
a cc W 16
cz
Z
LU
Yet
_e
m W e es eQ Z.
z _ g s
W
ul
g g
W 3 W ; 3 LL
a
z
z
�i i a ai o
M-39 7M
SUMMARY — CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION ——
CASE: GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 94-05 AND AGENDA ITEM: 3
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 9409 HE LNG DATE: 12-13-94
APPLICANT: San Bernardino OWNER: Same
International Airport Authority
P.O. Box 270
San Bernardino, Ca 92402
REQUEST/LOCATION-The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan
from PF, Public Facilities to "A", Airport and to create development standards, through the approval of a
Development Code Amendment,for this new land use district. The subject property is a portion of the former Norton
Air Force Base that is now owned by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA).
EXISTING LAND USE
PROPFRTI'
LAND USE ]2EsWNA=
SUBJECT Airport PF, Pub Fac
NORTH Comm. CG I, City of High.
EAST City of High. & Red.
WEST Off, Ind. PF, Pub Fac
SOUTH Golf Course PF & City of Red.
GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC YES 0 EAIMRT AZARD 9;N0103 SEWERS: YES 0
HAZARD ZONE: NO ■ NO O
HIGH FIRE HAZARD YES O REDEVELOPMENT YES O
ZONE: NO ■ ASH PROJECT AREA: NO ■
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: STAFF R ECOMMENDATION:
❑ Not Applicable ❑ E.I.R. w/ Significant ■ APPROVAL
■ Exempt Sec. Effects
15168 ❑ CONDITIONS
❑ No Significant ❑ Significant Effects,
Effects See Attached E.R.C. ❑ DENIAL
❑ Potential Effects, Minutes
❑ CONTINUANCE
Mitigating
Measures, TO-
No E.I.R.
GPA 94-05, DCA 94-09
December 13, 1994
Agenda Item #3
Page 1
REQUEST AND LOCATION
The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan from
PF, Public Facilities to "A", Airport and to create development standards, through the approval
of a Development Code Amendment, for this new land use district. The subject property is a
portion of the former Norton Air Force Base that is now owned by the San Bernardino
International Airport Authority (SBIAA)(Attachment A, Location Map).
GENERAL DISCUSSION
The subject site is a portion of the former Norton Air Force Base. Upon closing of the base,
the Federal government granted land to both the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA)and
the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA). Both agencies are governed by
boards that include members from most of the surrounding municipalities.
The IVDA, and its board, generally control the western portions of the former base(Attachment
A, Location Map). They generally have control of the warehouses, office structures and the golf
course. Currently, the IVDA is preparing a Specific Plan, and an associated Environmental
Impact Report (EIR), for their portion of the base. This project is commonly referred to as the
"International Trade Center". This Specific Plan application should appear for public hearing
in early 1995.
The SBIAA, under the authority of its board, has control of the eastern portion of the former
base. It generally has control of the runways, hangars and other airport related structures. The
goal of the SBIAA is to promote an international airport that is available to the public and to
create jobs for the local communities. The SBIAA is the applicant for this application to amend
the General Plan and create standards for the new "Airport" land use designation.
Over the years Norton Air Force Base was exempt from the City's jurisdiction. Development
standards and intensity controls were controlled by the Federal government, with minimal input
from the City of San Bernardino. The closure of the base has brought the site under the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City of San Bernardino. Since the land has come under the
jurisdiction of the City, new standards must be adopted before the re-use can prevail. The
proposed General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment would serve to limit
uses of the site to airport and airport related activities, and establish intensity controls and design
standards for the re-use of the site.
SITE AREA AND CHARACTERISTICS
The subject site is located between Tippecanoe Avenue and Alabama Street to the east and west,
respectively, and Third Street and the southern boundaries of the former Norton Air Force Base
GPA 94-05, DCA 94-09
December 13, 1994
Agenda Item #3
Page 2
on the north and south. Encompassing approximately 1,350 acres the SBIAA's land generally
consists of the eastern portion of the former base. Typically, their ownership covers the
runways, hangars and other airport associated buildings.
The project site is currently developed with 230,000 square feet of office space and 1,300,000
square feet of warehouse/hangar space. Existing runways, aprons and taxiways cover much of
the property.
BACKGROUND
The General Plan currently identifies the future role and character of Norton Air Force Base
after its cease in use as a federal facility. Goal lI of the General Plan states that it is the goal
of the City of San Bernardino to:
Ensure the orderly and economic transition of Norton Air Force Base to private or joint
public-private commercial uses which are compatible with and enhance adjacent u3m
This goal clearly identifies the that the General Plan was adopted with the knowledge that
Norton Air Force Base would be converted to a civilian air facility at some time. The policies
that serve to further implement this goal identify the need to determine appropriate densities,
design standards and ensure land use compatibility for the reuse of the former Air Force Base
(General Plan Policies 1.39.20-1.39.31).
The General Plan recognizes that the Air Force Base will be converted at some time, into a
civilian facility, and that new standards will have to be developed to ensure the orderly reuso
of the former Air Force Base.
+ZY
This General Plan Amendment serves to change two aspects of the current General Plan. First,
it will change the land use designation from PF, Public Facilities to A, Airport. This change
in land use designation does nothing more than to recognize the area as an airport. Secondly,
the General Plan Amendment will replace most of the references to Norton Air Force Base to
bring the General Plan up to date. The Development Code Amendment would then create the
development standards as identified in the current General Plan.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS
The former Norton Air Force Base and the San Bernardino International Airport have been the
subject of several previous environmental documents that are relevant to the proposed actions.
o Final Environmental Impact Report - IVDA Redevelopment Plan; June 1990;
prepared by URS Consultants
GPA 94-05, DCA 94-09
December 13, 1994
Agenda Item N3
Page 3
This document examined the possible environmental impacts that could result from
developing the site as both a trade center and a public airport (rather than a military
airport). The document took into consideration the 1994 closing date of the base which
is still very much in line with what is actually happening today. The EIR took into
consideration possible developmental impacts to geology and soils, water resources, air
quality, land use, socioeconomics, noise, cultural resources, transportation and public
services. It then.determined mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to a level of
insignificance (see Attachment E "SBIAA GPA/DCA Initial Study").
o Initial Study for Interim Airport Operating Plan; Norton Air Force Base Conversion
to Civilian Operation; SBIAA; April 1993
This initial study examined the potential environmental impacts of a proposed interim
operating plan, for the operation of a civilian airport, on a portion of the former Norton
Air Force Base.
The Initial Study determined that the environmental effects of operating the civilian
airport at levels determined in the IVDA FEIR would not have significant environmental
impacts that were not discussed in the IVDA FEIR. Primary mitigation measures
included the construction and widening of the street system along with opening them to
the general public (See Attachment E "SBIAA GPA/DCA Initial Study").
o Resolution No. 93-155 of the City of San Bernardino Determining the Existence of
a Certain Land Use Designation and Acknowledging That a Civilian Airport Will be
Operated on Norton Air Force Base
This Resolution of the City of San Bernardino Mayor and Common Council recognized
that the continued use of Norton Air Force Base as an aviation facility and the conversion
to a civilian aviation facility was consistent with the goals and policies of the General
Plan. It further allowed the SBIAA to operate the airport under the current PF, Public
Facilities land use designation.
Under Section 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the 1990 IVDA
redevelopment Plan FEIR can be used as a program EIR for this project. That is to say that if
no new environmental impacts occur as a result of this project, the previous FEIR can serve as
the environmental documentation.
The Initial Study (Attachment E) substantiates that no new impacts, or change in scope would
occur, thus no further environmental documentation is necessary under CEQA. Under CEQA
no noticing is required for this environmental determination. However, copies of the Initial
Study were sent to surrounding jurisdictions and public agencies.
GPA 94-05, DCA 94.09
December 13, 1994
Agenda Item #3
Page 4
COMMENTS RECEIVED
No comments have been received as of the date of this Staff Report.
ANALYSIS
o General Plan Amendment No. 94-05
General Plan Amendment No. 94-05 serves to simply change the designation of the SBIAA
property (Attachment C) from PF, Public Facilities to A, Airport and to strike and replace
references to the former Norton Air Force Base. The purpose of creating such a land use
district is to recognize the unique character of the airport, thus allowing unique development
standards as identified in General Plan Policy 1.39.20. The current General Plan identifies the
need to create such a district and implement policies to ensure orderly development of it.
Therefore, the General Plan Amendment serves to implement the policies that are currently
contained within the General Plan.
The re-formatting intends to remove most of the references to the former base and replace them
with either San Bernardino International Airport or International Trade Center. The intention
of replacing references to the former Air Force Base is to bring the General Plan up to date.
The adoption of this new land use I district does not create any new entitlements.
o Development Code Amendment No. 94-09
The Development Code serves to implement the goals, objectives and policies of the General
Plan. By creating development standards the Development Code enables the City's development
to conform to the goals established in the General Plan.
Development Code Amendment No. 94-09 (Attachment D) identifies permitted uses, application
required (Conditional Use Permit, Development Permit or Permitted) and creates new
development standards that are typically unique to the new Airport land use designation.
Intending to establish limits and standards for future development, the Development Code
Amendment addresses issues such as setbacks, minimum parcel sizes, building separation, etc.
In addition, the Development Code Amendment also considers issues such as interim uses and
non-conforming uses. Also included in the Development Code Amendment are areas that defer
to existing standards included in the Development Code. Areas such as landscaping, parking,
signage and design guidelines defer to existing language within the Development Code.
In addition development on the airside of the property, as opposed to the landside of the property
is also discussed. The airside of the property is defined as those buildings, operations or
GPA 94-05, DCA 94-09
December 13, 1994
Agenda Item #3
Page 5
activities that are located on the airport side of a fenced boundary separating those operations
from direct public access. Accordingly, the landside of the property would be those uses,
activities or buildings outside of the fenced boundary and front on a public street or frontage
road.
It is the intention of the Development Code Amendment to create regulatory standards to ensure
the orderly development of the international airport property.
CONCLUSION
The attached Findings of Fact (Attachment B) demonstrate the need for a General Plan
Amendment and Development Code Amendment for the subject property. The approval of both
the General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment create a consistent district and
development standards to.begin to re-use the former base site.
RECON MW20ATION
Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the Mayor and Common
Council:
1. Concur with the environmental determination; and
2. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 94-05 (Attachement C) and Development Code
Amendment No. 94-09 (Attachment D) based on the attached Findings of Fact
(Attachment B).
Respectfully Submitted,
X4—
MICHAEL E. H YS
Assistant Director of Planning
and Building
SCOTT D. DONAGHE
Assistant Planner
ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map
B - Findings of Fact
GPA 94-05, DCA 94-09
December 13, 1994
Agenda Item #3
Page 6
C - General Plan Amendment Text
D - Development Code Amendment Text
E - Initial Study
P 3� 4
s
S.R.30
�4
G7 ,,
Highland Ave. G
u u
Baseline Road _
U �
State Hwy.66
stn Street c
3rd Street ;•:�:; i ' `•:;r �:;:? :: �:�•
Mill Street '`�f•»� H
Central Ave. cr X5
ch �+
u
>> San Bernardino Ave.
oft
cv m E=
t-10 3
Site Locadon(Specific)
SAN BERNARDINO „
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT >
ATTACHMENT A
GPA 94-05, DCA 94.09
December 13, PN,
Agenda Item 013
Page 7
ATTACHMENT B
FLNDINGS OF FACT
General Plan Amendment No. 94-05 and Development Code Amendment No. 94-09
General Plan Amendment "o. 94-05
1. The proposed "A", .-airport land use designation is internally consistent with the Gc.ieral
Plan in that such a designation is not in conflict with the goals, objectives and policies
of the General Plan, and will not encumber the orderly re-use of the former Air Force
Base.
2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience or welfare of the City in that the amendment area is already an airport and
the amendment will do nothing more than recognize this use.
3. The proposed amendment would maintain the appropriate balance of uses within the City
in that the General Plan already recognizes the area as an airport and the actual use is
only changing from a military airport to a civilian airport.
4. The amendment area is physically suitable for the requested land use designation and
anticipated land use development in that the "A", Airport land use designation, and its
accompanying development standards, reflect the current use and provide standards for
this use on the basis that it is a existing facility.
Develop tent Code Amendment No. 94-09
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan in that the General Plan
currently recognizes the :onversion of the airport from military to civilian uses and
recommended that new standards be developed.
2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience or welfare of the City in that the amendment area is currently an airport and
the Development Code Amendment generally creates development standards to further
insure the compatibility between the airport property and surrounding uses.
ATTACHMENT B
4
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDNI LENT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN
AIRPORT
TEXT AMENDINiENTS
1) Page 1-3
paragraph #3
California State University is a major identifiable land use in the northern section of the City.
In the southeast section, Nef*en Ler-e° Base the San Bernardino International Airport and
Trade Center is a significant land use that will plays a key economic role in the City. The Santa
Fe rail yards, also a major land use, are located on the City's west side.
2) Page 1-12
paragraph #2
Throughout the City are several public or quasi-public uses which are singularly important or
unique. They include Netter Air- Fer-e, Brie, National Orange Show Grounds, California State
University, San Bernardino campus, efld Santa Fe Railway yards and the San Bernardino
International Airport and Trade Center. The National Orange Show Grounds contain 136 acres
located between "E" Street and Arrowhead Avenue, south of Mill Street. It is a privately owned
state-chartered facility, founded at the beginning of this century to stage the State Citrus Fruit
Fair. The 160 acre California State University Campus is located in the northwest quadrant of
the City, at the corner of University Parkway and North Park Boulevard. The Santa Fe Railway
yards are the major west coast switching facilities for the Atcheson-Topeka and Santa Fe
Railroad. The San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center Nerten Air Fere,, Dace
is the a 1,751 acre site which formerly housed the 193rd Airlift Command while known as
Norton Air Force Base. At the time the existing land use data was collected (1987), Norton Air
Force Base was classified as a public facility. Norton Air Force Base officially closed in 1994.
Through the efforts of the Inland Valley Development Agency and the San Bernardino
International Airport Authority, the Base has been converted to an international trade center and
air carrier airport.
3) Page 1-17
paragraph #4
4. San Bernardino's pattern of land uses is characterized by the presence of several major
centers (downtown, Tri-City/Commercenter, Inland Center and Central City Malls, California
State University, and the former Norton Air Force Base), "strip" commercial corridors, a mix
of well- and ill-defined residential neighborhoods, and clusters of high density housing. Many
of these are self-contained fragments, with few linkages integrating the City into an organized
ATTACHMENT C
and cohesive pattern of uses. Some districts, such as Tri-City/Commercenter, are interrial'y
well-organized and planned. Others, such as Highland Avenue, are long-corridors of disparate
fragments.
4) Page 1-19
paragraph #4
12. The former Norton Air Force Base has ieeft was a long-term resident of the City, providing
job opportunities and, at the same time, impacting adjacent land uses. Noise attributable to i*i
aircraft operations has adversely affected adjacent residential areas. Generally, housing located
to the west and southwest of the former base Neften is marginal and deteriorated. While some
industrial and commercial uses have developed, there are vast tracts of undeveloped land, on the
periphery.
. Conversion of the base for civilian re-
use will require careful coordination with the City of San Bernardino and surrounding
jurisdictions.
5) Page 1-30
Table 4 Addendum
General Plan Land Use Categories
Development
Category Location Principal Uses Intensity/Density
Airport San Bernardino Runways, 0.5
A International taxiways, general
Airport and air carrier
aviation ,
passenger and air
cargo terminals,
hangars, airport
related office,
commercial, light
industrial
Page 2
6) Page 1-105
ISSUE FOUR: WHAT SHOULD BE THE FL7UPE ROLE AND CHARACTER OF 77
NE) TGN AIR FQRG^_B cF SkI BERNARDRVO I11TERNA77ONALAIRPORTA.NVL7
CF.r l ER
Goal
It shall be the goal of the City of San Bernardinc to:
lI Ensure the orderly and economic transition of the former Norton Air Force Base site to
e productive civilian uses
including an international airport and trade center in a manner that is compatible with .
and enhances adjacent uses.
Objective (Airport)
It shall be the objective of the City of San Bernardino to:
1.39.1 .
Promote the development and use of the existing airport facilities and related buildings
as an international air carrier airport aviation-related office, commercial and
industrial uses.
Policies
It shall be the policy of the City of San Bernardino to:
Permitted Uses
i.3 1(1 G d • with the U.S. A C........ •1.,. ..r 1.me r d . as a..h ut e f fnil 6w-f f e lit es
and epefatiens at Neften Air For-ee Base weas designated as�
"Publie M
1.39.i i Fefmulafe a speeifie plan in eellaber-atien with ether- appr-epfiate jur-isdiefiefis
impaeted by its f
f of 7 high teehfieleff
e.;.aot— and a llar-y T1 1Q\
ai 1 f ., e / •
Page 3
1.39.1.10 Support the efforts of the San Bernardino International Airport Authority to
establish and develop an international air carrier airport.
1.39.1.11 Establish a new General Plan Use Category of Airport (A) which will permit
aviation and aviation-related uses including office, commercial and industrial.
1.39.1.12 Establish an Airp, rt (A)District for the Development Code that defines permitted
uses for the airport, approp.-iate development standards and review procedure.
Permitted uses include air passenger and freight terminal, aircraft sales, repair
and maintenance, aircraf: associated activities and other re:.-,ted uses.
1.39.1.13 Encourage the Airport Authorir to prepare and maintain an Airport Master plan
to address the ultimate development of the airport and its relationship to adjacent
parcels anon c. -imunities (11.1).
Density/Intensity and Height
uses, .
1.39.1.20 Height limits for development on the airport will be determined by Federal
Aviation Regulations, Part 77 (1;.1).
1.39.1.21 The existing airport has approximately 230,000 square feet of office space and
1,300,000 square feet of warehouse/hangar space. At ultimate build-out, it is
projected that the maximum development would be 500,000 square feet of office
and 2,300,000 square feet of warehouselhangar space (71.1).
Design and Development Guidelines
b
Affl p � r
O f •� i"
TT'C 11 d, ^ u,u 17 14\
end e f as neeessafy, pfegfams te ensure land use
-` f
f
1.39.1.30 The Airport District shall include develops=ent and design standards that will
ensure physical and visual compatibility among land uses and adjacent sites, in
cooperation with the City of Highland.(11.1).
1.39.1.31 Special attention shall be given to development that occurs adjacent to or is
Page 4
visible from Third Street. Standards shall include provisions for special
landscaping requirements and screening of outdoor storage, loading docks and
truck parking areas from public view to enhance the compatibility with adjacent
land uses and the traveling public, (11.1).
1.39.1.32 Project review procedures shall be utilized that are consistent with the goal of job
and economic development at the airport and minimize procedural delay (11.1).
1.39.1.33 Update and revise, as necessary, progry-ns to ensure airport land use
compatibility with surrounding areas. I-r-se programs should address issues
which include compatible land uses, height and intensity of permitted uses and
should incorpn-.zre the provisions of any .-t :port Master Plan prepared by the
Airport Authority (IL-20).
8) Page 1-118
Implementation Programs
(9) Neftef Fee-e,. Base E....:_ens San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center
9) Page 1-123
Implementation Programs
Il.II(d)
(d) participation in feasibility studies and planning for the reuse of the former Norton
Air Force Base, as it transitions into the San Bernardino International Airport
and Trade Center.
10) Pa^e 1-127
I1.20
Replace R-ew=-se the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
tieeee Establish land use compatibility standards and requirements sib to wtd replaeing
replace the old Air Installation Compatible Use Zone plan to account for ai} modifications in
aircraft and ground sie operations resulting from the establishment of the San Bernardino
International Airport. This shall include the preparation of new noise contours and compatible
land use zoning.
11) Page 4-29
paragraph 4
4.6.2 Pursue ' development of San Bernardino International
Airport and Trade Center in order to provide opportunities for office, commercial and
Page 5
industrial finni development, including firms interested n or requiring airport proximity
or access (14.14).
12) Page 4-38
paragraph 12
I4.14 Participate in a study with .,.e U.S. 1 • z e/D aftm „t_of Defense en the ro RDI s
I1\. 14( J V rl l i 11
with the San Bernardino International Airports
Authority in marketir; and attracting industrial users requiring airport access or
proximir; ind with the Inland Valley Developmen: Agency in marketing and attracting
office, commercial and industrial users to the International Trade Center.
13) Page 6-17
paragraph 1
6.7.2 Evaluate accessibility to Nefteft Ai- Fefee Base San Bernardino International Airport
and Trade Center consistent with the policies requiring review and approval of mitigation
measures to accommodate trips generated by new developments taking into account that
such required mitigation must consider the level of trips generated by the previously
existing Norton Air Force Base
(16.24).
14) Page 6-25
paragraph 2
I6.24 Ne San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center Access Study
Sheuld '
,As part of the planning for the San Bernardino International
Airport and Trade Center, the City shall coordinate with surrounding jurisdictions in the
development of fequif;e-tha a gfeu d aeee regional circulation study be-pied-by-Cke
�enents to demonstrate that adequate access can be provided to the airport site
and trade center. te-pfeyide a ffleehaflism fef finafleing,
15) Page 7-1
1 paragraph 6
7.OA.1.
• Domestic wastewater from the Neften Fer-ee Base San Bernardino International Airport
and Trade Center.
16) Page 7-3
paragraph 8
Page 6
7.OA.3.
• *Nefleirr"Af Fer-ee Based Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force
Bas,---), and
17) ?aye 7-4
paragraph 5
7.OB
• '-�3ftefi Aif Fefee-Base, Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force
Base), and
18) Page 7-6
paragraph 6
7.00
• Nene Air- eree-AaseT Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force
Base), and
19) Page 7-11
paragraph 3
H. GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES
Approximately 90-100 geothermal wells and springs have been identified in the San Bernardino
area. The geothermal wells and springs are concentrated in the Commerce Center, Central City,
Tri-City areas, and Nefle- Fee;e,. Base the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade
Center (as depicted on Figure 31).
` 20) Page 7-16
7.3.3 Monitor and periodically reassess rates for wastewater treatment services for jurisdictions
outside the City of San Bernardino that have wastewater treated at the San Bernardino
Water Reclamation Facility (i.e. NeFte erze Base East Valley Water District,
Patton State Hospital, and City of Loma Linda) (17.12).
` 21) Page 7-33
I17.37 Extend the system of geothermal facilities in the Commerce Center, Central City,
Tri-City areas, and �. Ft ft A4 For-ee San Bernardino International Airport
and Trade Center to accommodate future commercial and governmental uses.
I7.39 Administer a program for the purpose of educating potential developers in the Commerce
Center, Central City, Tri-City areas, and Z;e Air- Fo_ee Base San Bernardino
Page 7
International Airport and Trade Center of the cost and energy saving benefits associatM
with the use of geothermal energy. This program could be conducted in conjunction with
the Chamber of Commerce and City Redevelopment Agency as a benefit of locating in
San Bernardino.
22) Page 14-5
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
I Within the San Bernardino '
anning area, three major noise source o<:lr and inc:ude:
(1) aircraft; (2) rail traffic; and, (3) vehicular traffic.'- Aircraft operations ere previously
associated with the former Norton Air Force Base $f�d-afe were the dominant noise source in
some portions of the City. Norton Air Force Base has been converted to a civilian air carrier
airport. Existing noise conditions in the City are depicted on Figure 57. In this case, existing
conditions reflect previous military operations.
23) Page 14-12
Paragraph 7
Issues
A. Noise in the planning area exceeds levels recommended by the State of Office of Noise
Control along major highways, freeways, and the railroads. ojid 4l:b 1 t paths 0 NOfWfl Air-F f..
Base.
MAP AMEiN`DNI IENTS
1. Amend General Plan Land Use Map to show an Airport (A) designation on a::::�- wrty
owned or encompassed by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority as
illustrated on the attached Exhibit A.
I
Page 8
saseS•�7^�'
W44 u
CC
Y T :• =
cn
J r
�• i
I — •'�- 3L it
I ti I 1 .I I� � �� ��rj'�'�rl(•a � O
���:�� .Fib• _ �:+- _ '"-•'-
.� ', :. iii 1' �_� ."':.0 cFsi_� �• S r�
•i I,
• F� V 1 � •
a-&a WWI
A (Airport) D6-triet
Purpose
1. The purpose of this chapter is to achieve the following:
(A) To define specific uses, devAopment standards related to the unique
needs and requirements of an international airport.
(B) Ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses.
(C) Provide an appropriate area for airport-related activities and uses.
2. The purpose of the (A) Airport District is as follows:
(A) Provide for the conversion, reuse and expansion of the existing airfield
and related facilities into an air carrier airport.
(B) Provide for a regionally important land use which will offer employment
opportunities for existing and future residents of the City and surrounding
communities.
(C) Provide for a land use that will meet the needs of and attract users from
throughout the region.
Table
Airport District List of Permitted Uses 0)
PERMITTED, DEVELOPMENT PERMTTED AND CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED
USES
The following list represents those primary uses in the Airport Zoning District which are
Permitted (P), subject to a Development Permit (D) or a Conditional Use Permit (C).
Page 1 November 22, 1994
ATTACHMENT D
Land Use Activity "A" District
1. Accessory structures and uses typically appurtenant to a principally D
permitted land use activity.
2. Air cargo and air freight terminals. D
3. Aircraft' associateL aztivities. D
(a) Aerial fire fighting enterprises. D
(b) Aerial photo and surveying enterprises. D
(c) Air carrier, commuter, scheduled air taxi and D
air taxi operations.
D
(d) Aircraft wash and wax operations.
(e) Car rental. D
(f) Flying school or flying club administrative and D
classroom facilities.
(g) Rental of hangar and tie-down space for D
aircraft storage.
(h) Sale of aviation petroleum products. D
(i) Sale, rental or charter of aircraft. D
(j) Sale, rental or service of aircraft parts, D
avionics, instruments or other aircraft
equipment.
(k) Taxicabs, buses, limousines, rail and other D
ground transportation.
(1) Training Facility D
4. Aircraft manufacturing and assembly, including manufacture of D
aircraft component parts.
5. Air freight warehousing with outside storage. D
Page 2 November 22, 1994
6. Air Museum D
'i. Airport, airfield, helicopter field or port, landing and take-off D
runways and taxiways.
8. Buildings, improvements and activities primarily related to the D
operation of the airport facility, such as hangars, passenger
terminal, operation towers, parking lots, fuel storage and refueling
facilities, maintenance, security and public safety facilities.
9. Cellular and microwave communication facilities. D
10. Fire training facility. D
11. Field crops, truck gardening, berry and bush crops, flower P
gardening, wholesale nurseries and similar open agricultural uses.
12. Hotel/Motel. C
13. Interim Uses (2) D
14. Intermodal Cargo Transfer Facility. D
15. Offices C
f
16. Packaging and packing of perishable products for air transport. D
17. Preparation of chemical fire retardants as required for aerial fire D
fighting.
18. Recreation uses such as park, golf course, golf driving range and D
similar recreational uses involving the open use of land without
structures or improvements._
19. Repair, maintenance, rebuilding, alteration or exchange of aircraft D
and aircraft engine components or other parts.
20. Restaurant food service establishments includin; sale of alcoholic D
beverages, and retail sales as an accessory use within the terminal
facilities.
21. Temporary uses pursuant to Chapter 19.70, Temporary Use T
Permits, subject to approval by the Airport Authority Executive
Director and Director.
22. Truck Terminal including on-site maintenance. C
Other similar uses which the Director finds to fit within the purpose/intent of the Airport District
in compliance with Section 19.02.070(3.)
1. Permits or development applications shall be accepted for processing only with the
Page 3 November 22, 1994
written authorization from the Executive Director of the Airport Authority.
2. Interim Uses which are not airport or aviation related may be permitted on airport
property for periods not to exceed 5 years. Interim uses shall be compatible with the
airport operations arid' adjacent uses including those which may be located or planned off-
site of the airport itself. Interim uses must be located within a fully enclosed structure.
LAND USE DISTRICT DZVELOP.NIENT STANDARDS
` 1.0 GENERAL STANDARDS
A. The following standards are m_nimum unless stated as maximum.
Table _
Airport District Development Standards
Minimum Parcel Site 1 acre
Building Separation 10 feet
Front Setback (external streets) 50 feet
Front Setback (internal streets) 10 feet
Side Street Setback 10 feet
Rear Setback 10 feet(2)
Side Setback 10 feet(2)
1) The maximum lot coverage and structure height shall be governed by
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements and regulations.
2) These setbacks are only applicable to new construction on the ':ancside
area.
I
B. Airport Land Use District Standards
1. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) Airside: Those land uses, activities and portions of building structures
that fall on the airport operations side of a fenced boundary around the
airport separating those operations from direct public access.
(b) Landside: Those land uses, activities and portions of buildings and or
structures that face an adjacent public street or frontage road and are
outside of a fence boundary separating the airport operations area from
public access.
Page 4 November 22, 1994
2. The line which separates the airside area from the landside area shall, for the
purposes of this section, be referred to as the airside boundary. This boundary
is shown on a map on file with the Department. This boundary may be adjusted
administratively by the Director over time as development occurs on airport-
owned property fronting on adjacent public streets.
3. The following development standards shall be applicable ,,) all development that
occurs on the landside portion of the airside boundary.
` (a) The provisions of Chapter 19.20 Property Development Standards shall
apply.
(b) Setback - all structures shall be set back frorr. Third Street and Del Rosa
Avenue a minimum of 50 feet. A minimum of the first 25 feet adjacent
to the street shall be landscaped. The remaining area may be used for
automobile parking. The setback can be reduced to 25 feet where a
frontage road is constructed on airport property adjacent to Third Street.
C. The regulations provided herein do not supersede or replace any regulations or
limitations goy-!ruing airport or airfields which have been enacted by State or
Federal agencies,but are in addition to any such regulations or limitation. Where
th 2se regulations are in conflict, Sate and Federal regulations shall supersede the
provisions of this chapter.
4. Security fencing to be installed on the airside boundary shall consist of eight (8)
foot chain link with three (3) strands of barbed wire as approved by the FAA.
General Provisions
1. Non-Conforming Structures - The existing structures within the boundaries of
this district shall be exempt from the provisions of Section 19.62.0200 of this
Development Code for a period of 10 years, commencing on (insert effective date
of the proposed DCA).
2. Off-Site or Shared Parking - Development on the airport shall have the ability for
off-site or shared parking. Parking improvements shall be consistent with the
provisions of this section.
Amend section 19.22, Table 022.01, Sign Regulations by Land Use Category, as follows:
D. Signs Permitted in OIP, IL, 1H, IE Industrial Districts and the A (Airport )
District.
Page 5 November 22, 1994
AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT DESIGN GUIDELINES
Design Guidelines for airport development shall be the same as the applicable to the
Industrial land Use Districts (Sec G 19.08.OS0) except as modified herein.
Applicability
This section shall apply to all development located on the San Bernardino International
Airport within the landsi de portion of the airport as defined in section and shown on a
I map on the file in the Department. Any addition, remodeling, relocation, or construction
requiring a building permit shall adhere to th--se guidelines where applicable.
I
Page 6 November 22, 1994
CITY Or SAN BERNARDINO
LNU TIAL STUDY
FOR SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
GPA 94-05 AND DCA 94-09
October 26, 1994
Prepared for.
Ory of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
(909) 384-5057
Prepared by:
LSA Associates, Inc.
1 Park Plaza, Suite 500
Irvine, CA 92714
(714) 553-0666
LSA Project #TOJ401
Independently Reviewed,Analyzed and Exercised Judgement in Making the Determination
by the Environmental Review Comminee on November 17, 19914 pursuant to Section
21082 of the California Environmental Quality Act
Verified bX,;�:;
ATTACHMENT E
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
Application Number
Applicant: San Bernardino International Airport Authority
Project Summary
The project is a General Plan Amendment and Development Code change to
specify th= use of portions of the former Norton Air Force Base for airport
and airport related uses, consistent with adopted plans for the San Bernar-
dino International Airport. The project is located on the site of the former
Air Base.
Please refer to the attached analysis for a detailed project description, envi-
ronmental setting and environmental constraints.
Environmental Determination
On the basis of this Initial Study, the impacts of the proposed project have
been previously analyzed in the Final EIR for the Inland Valley Redevelop-
ment Project prepared for the Inland Valley Redevelopment Agency (June,
1990). The project as proposed is consistent with the project described in
the Prior EIR. The impacts of the project as identified in this Initial Study
are consistent with the impacts analyzed in the Prior EIR. Therefore, con-
sistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines (Section _), no new
EIR shall be required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
��C/- ,Z�5 � /gym
Name and Title
Signature
✓�vJ �' 7
Date
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Checklist (8/94)
10/26M(I:•••TOJ401%DETERMIN.51)
MIA Amod,,f
SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SUMMARY
The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) Ind
,adoption of a Development Code Amendment for -he San Bernardino Inter-
national Airport, located on a portion of the site of the former Norton Air
Force Base. The regional location is shown in Figu:t '_. and the project area
is shown in Figure 2. The propose
action would ali,i the City's General
Plan and Development Codtt with the adop-ed plan of the San Bernardino
In:t:rnational Airport Authority 'S27AA) to operate an airport and airport
related uses on the site. SBIAA is the agency charged with the responsibility
of establishing an operating plan for the Airport, along with determining the
number and character of long-range and near term flight operations.
The existing City General Plan and Development Code designation for the
site is "Public Facilities." A large number of public uses, including a military
brase and airport, are consistent with these designations. Since Dorton Air
Force Base was exempt from City jurisdiction., there were and are no devel-
opment intensity controls or development standards applicable to the site
within the City's existing General Plan or Development Code. The proposed
action would limit uses of the site to an Airport and Airport related uses, and
establish intensity controls and design standards for the physical develop-
ment of the site.
PREVIOUS E MONMFMAL REVIEW
The former Norton Air Force Base and the San Bernardino International
Airport have been the subject of several previous cnvironmen ta? documents
that are relevant to the proposed project actions. This Initial Study refers to
the analyses conducted as part of the documents listed and described below.
Final Environmental Impact Reports -Redevelopment Plan; Inland
Valley Development agency;June, 1990;prepared by URS Consultants, Ina
This EM covered a redevelopment area of 14,246 acres, includ::-g the entire
Norton Air Force Base, as well as adjacent areas within the cities of San Ber-
nardino, Loma Linda, Colton, and the County of San Bernardino. Land uses
permitted under the Redevelopment Plan were defined as "those and only
those permitted by the applicable General Plans of the Agency's participating
jurisdictions." Briefly, these included Urban Land Use (commercial, residen-
tial, industrial, office, agriculture, aviation related, institutional and quasi-
public uses) and Public Uses (streets, airports, rights-of-way and easements,
and other public and open space uses).
10/26/94(:%.TOJ401 -NORTONIS)
��s 3� Yom•
S.R.30 2
G`u
Highland A% Ci
u u
Baseline Road a a
ec •` u
E
m
State Hwy.66 1 :)Eh Street
3rd Street
Mill Street
in
� o �
n
Central Ave. E C
vi O
a
'
> a San Bernardino Ave.
a
c
s
�^ u G
c
N a
r-lo 3
Site Location(Specific) „
SAN BERN kRD NO
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ..%V 5CA`F
� g•ry _
�� I t J• '..�� `' c o 0
Ij
wz
r Z < -
CA
�. t-i
OT
`b
cz
a
-�r
Y
I wa �:I 'qtr� �f� _-��"/'._a.,z•�� .L:. -' �L/
�C7y^.— 7 �� � mow.. T��j•
`y"' f • `��.5�- ^i.A�'�_:q?::r.Ali , —:ti::i��- � O
.• ,emu+•.`.•a%v 2®066 L
NJ
z
1SA Associofcs, lw
The EIR examined the following issues:
• Geology and Soils
• Water Resources
• Biological Resources
• Air Quality
•
Land _se
• Socioeconomics
• Noise
• Cultural Resources
• Transportation
Public Services.
These issues we.e evaluated in comparison to the then existing land uses and
air base operations. It was concluded that significant environmental impacts
could occur in the areas of geology, paleontologic resources, water resourc-
es, noise, cultural resources, transportation and public services. In all uses,
it was concluded that impacts could be either avoided or mitigated to less
than significant levels by measures outlined in the EIR The only alternative
to the project considered in this EIR was No Project, defined as no compre-
hensive reuse of Norton Air Force Base in accordance with the redevelop.
ment plan.
Portions of this EIR analysis addressing areas located within the boundaries
of the former Norton Air Force Base and, more specifically, within the geo-
graphic boundary of the area of this proposed General Plan Amendment and
zone change are considered relevant to this Initial Study. The FEIR assumed
that the site would be developed as a commercial airport. The Draft and
Final EIRs 1cr the IVDA Redevelopment Plan (SCH# 90020109) are available
for review at the offices of the City of San Bernardino, Department of Plan-
ning and Building Services, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA, 92418.
The Final EIR was certified by the Inland Valley Development Agency in June,
1990.
Final Environmental Impact Statement-Disposal and Reuse of Norton Air Force
Base, California.; U.S Air Force;June, 1993.
The study area for this EIS comprised 1,981 acres, including the airfield and
administrative, industrial, and residential areas within the boundaries of the
former Norton Air Force Base. The reuse of the former base was assumed to
be consistent with the Redevelopment Plan of the Inland Valley Development
Agency, and included civilian airport operations and an office/industrial park.
A total of 1,256 acres was assumed to be devoted to aviation (airport) uses
and 725 acres to industrial, commercial, and recreational uses. Issues exam-
ined in the EIS included the following:
• Community Setting
•
Land Use and Aesthetics
10/26/94(1:•.TOJ40t,.NORTON.M 4
lSA Awo-iales,
• Transoortation
• Utilities
• Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste Management
• Soils and Geology
• Water Resources
• Air Quality
• Noise
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources.
These issues were evaluated in comparison to conditions projected to C-n ist at
' the time of base closure or cessation of active operations, in 1994. The EIS
also examined this range of issues for several project alternatives including:
an airport with Mixed Use Development; an Aircraft Maintenance Center
Alternative; a Non-Aviation Alternative; other Land Use Concepts for discrete
areas within the subject site; and a No Project Alternative, which assumed the
base would remain under federal control and be placed in "caretaker status,"
or essentially an unutilized state. Other alternatives considered in the EIS,
but eliminated from consideration included a Major Regional Hub Airport, a
Major Air Cargo Center, a Regional Shopping Center, and a Natural
Resources Conservation Area.
The EIS concluded that, in comparison to conditions at closure, the pro-
posed IVDA Redevelopment Plan within the boundaries of the former air
base had the potential for "substantial" environmental impacts, including
employment and population increases, land use intensification, traffic genera-
tion, demand for utilities, and generation of hazardous materials/wastes.
Portions of the EIS analysis addressing the aviation operations anticipated
under the IVDA Redevelopment Plan on the former air base are considered
relevant to this initial Study for inforn.zzion purposes. The EIS considered a
variety of operational scenarios for a commercial airport. The Final EIS for
the Disposal and Reuse of the Norton Air Force Base is available for review at
the offices of the City of San Bernardino, California, 92418. The Final EIS
was completed by the U.S. Air Force in June, 1993.
Initial Study Interim Airport Operating Plan;Norton Air Force Base Conversion to
Civilian Operation; San Bernardino, International Airport Autbority (SBIAA),
April, 1993•
This Initial Study evaluated the potential environmental impacts of a pro-
posed interim airport operating plan `rich would permit civilian airport
operations on a portion of the forme: Norton Air Force Base. It was
assumed that operations would not exceed an average of 51 daily flights and
37,300 annual flight operations, consistent with the maximum parameters
evaluated in the IVDA Redevelopment Plan EIR (SCH #90020109).
10/26M(I:••.TOJ401-•.NORTONIS) 5
tsA Amci&rrs, Mr.
The Initial Study determined that the environmental effects of operating the
airport at levels outlined above would not cause adverse environmental
effects not evaluated in IVDA Redevelopment Plan FEIR, and that "no poten-
tial for significant adverse impacts" would be created through implementa-
tion of the Interim Airport Operating Plan.
Primary mitigation measures include the construction and widening of the
street system through the former Norton Air Force Base site, irc:.:ling the
widening of Tippecanoe Avenue, Sheppard Drive (formerly C Street) and the
extension of Del Rosa Avenue and Mill Street, and Norton Way (formerly
Seventh Street), along with opening of these streets to the general public.
' These improvements will provide access sufficient to support the Interim
Operating Plan. The Initial Study for the Interim Airport Operating Plan is
available for review at the City of San Bernardino, Department of 'fanning
and Building Services, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California,
92418.
The SBIAA will also prepare a Long Range Operating Plan for the Airport.
This plan may consider operations beyond 37,300 annual operations. If
additional operations are considered at that time, the environmental impacts
of such operations will be assessed by the SBIAA and mitigation measures
identified for such impacts.
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Location
The project area affected by proposed actions encompasses an area of ap-
proximately 1,350 acres, and comprises the portion of the former Norton Air
Force Base under the jurisdiction of the San Bernardino International Airport
Authority. Figure 2 illustrates the project area.
1
Existing Uses
The project area is presently developed with approximately 230,000 square
feet of office space and 1,300,000 square feet of wawhouse/hangar space. In
addition, the site contains runways and taxiways. These facilities are operat-
ed by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA), of which
the City of San Bernardino is a member. At the present time, the facilities
are utilized for an airport, and airport related activities but the level of avia-
tion activities is limited.
F-viWng General Plan and Zoning Designations
The project area is wholly within the corporate boundaries of the City of San
Bernardino. The subject site has historically been designated on the General
1Qa6/94(I:,MJ401-,NOXMN.IS7 6
W
LSA Associates, :..�
Plan Land Use/Zoning District Map and in accompanying text as a Public
Facility.
This designation has existed primarily to acknowledge the previous oper-
ations of the Norton Air Force Base, although the City of San Bernardino had
no land use authority over the base. The current General Plan and Develop-
ment Code do not contain .zny develcpme^.t intensity limits on th= site.
Proposed General Plan and Development Code Designations
The purpose of the proposed actions is tc bring the City's General Plan
current with actions taken previously by U.S. Air Force in closing the base,
and with the redevelopment plan formulated by the Inland Valley Develop-
ment Agency or the former base, both of which have been described in the
preceding discussion and evaluated in previously certified or approved envi-
ronmental documents. The General Plan and Development Code designation
would also establish development intensity limits and development standards
for the site, where none presently exist.
Specifically, the proposed actions under consideration in this Initial Study
I include the following:
I 0 Adoption of an Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to
show an Airport (AP) designation on that property owned or encom-
passed by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (see
Figure 2);
Revision of all existing references in the General Plan to update the
text to reflect the current status of &,e San Bernardino International
Airport;
' Updating the goals, objectives and policies of the Land Use and Urban
Design section of the General Plan Land Use Element to reflect the
cur-e:1t intent of the City with regard to the proposed international
airport, and
Adoption of a New Airport (AP) Zone District of the City of San Bern-
ardino Development Code in order to provide a specific designation
for the San Bernardino International airport consistent with the pre-
( ceding General Plan amendments, and to include appropriate devel-
opment and design standards and review procedures for the project
area. At ultimate build out, it is projected that the maximum develop-
ment would be approximately 500,000 square feet of office space and
2,300,000 square feet oc warehousefiangar space.
The adoption of the General Plan Land Use Map Designation and the new
Airport (AP) Zone does not grant any new entitlement. If approved, the text
modifications to the General Plan and Development Code will establish limits
7
10/26/94(1:,.TOJ401 NORTON.LS)
LLB.icsoctates,1,:r.
and standards for future development at the airport. Individual development
projects undertaken in the future at :he airport will be reviewed by the City,
in accordance with these limits and standards, prior to their implementation.
Attachment A to this Initial Study lists specific amendments to the General
Plan that are part of these actions, and outline the proposed Airport (A?) Dis-
trict.
The related environmental effects of these policy actions are anticipated to be
wholly within the scope of the project descriptions of the Program EIR (SCH
#90020109) prepared for the Inland Valley Development Agency Redevelop-
ment Plan. It is the purpose of this Initial Study to provide documentation
in support of this statement.
An Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form (Attachment B) follows this
project description, with substantiation of conclusions indicated on the
Checklist Form provided in Attachment C. Where appropriate, citations of
information contained in previous environmental documentation are provid-
ed. Where mitigation measures are necessary to reduce a potentially signifi-
cant im?act, ref.trence to adopted measures is also provided. Attachment D
to this document summarizes all mitigation measures adopted in the IVDA
Final EIR for the Redevelopment Plan.
Previous environmental documentation has included examination of an
extensive range of project alternatives, as listed in the first section of this
Initial Study. If the actions proposed were not to be enacted, the General
Plan of the City of San Bernardino would, at the least, remain out of date
with respect m the evolving programs for the San Bernardino International
Airport, and ciuld be construed as in conflict with the objectives of adopted
plans of the SBIAA. As such, a No Project Alternative is not considered
appropriate :; any context.
Attachments
Attachments to the Initial Study include:
A. Supplemental Information on the Project Description
• Proposed Chapter 19.11 -AP (Airport) District
• Proposed General Plan Amendments
3. Envircnmental Impact Checklist
C. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
D. Summary of Mitigation Measures - FOR for the IVDA Redevelopment
Plan (SCH #90021009)
10/26/94(1:%TO)401-,NORTON.LS) 8
Attachment B
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
A. BAC.GROUND
Application Number: N/A
t
Project Description: Amendment of the City of San Bprrardino General Plan and enactment of a new zonino
district to brino -he General Plan into consistency with the U.S. Air F^rce closure of the former Norton
Air Force Base and the IVDA Redevelopment Plan and the development of the San Bernardino International
Airport.
Location: The Proiect area consists of approximately 1.350 acres in the East Valley reoion of the southwest
_portion of San Bernardino County in the City of San Bernardino (see Figure 11.
Environmental Constraints Areas: Biolooical Habitat Area. High Liouefaction Hazard, Noise. Ground
Subsidence. Siorificant Construction Aooreaate Sector
General Plan Designation: Public Facility (PF1
Zoning Designation:_Public Facility (PF)
B. EVVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain 'Yes' and 'Maybe' answers on a separate attached sheet. 'No'
answers are explained on this checklist. See Attachment 'A' 71re6rtrrtary Environmental Description Form,
where necessary.
1. Earth Resources Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe
a. Earth movement(cut and/or file on slopes of 16%or
more based on information contained in the Preliminary
Environmental Description Form No. D.(3)? X
b. Development and/or grading on a slops greater then
15% natural grade based on review of General Plan
HMOD map,which designates areas of 15%or greater
slope in the City? X
c. Development within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone as defined in Section 12.0- Geologic & Seismic,
Figure 47, of the City's General Plan? X
d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical feature
based on field review? X
1
e. Development within areas defined for high potential for Yes No Maybe
water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0-
Geologic &Seismic. Figure 63, of the City's General
Plan? X
f. Modification of a channel, creek or river based on
review of USGS Topographic Map (Name)
g. Development within an area subject to landslides,
mudslidea, subsi,encs or other similar hazards as
identified in Section 12.0- Geologic & Seismic, Figures
48, 61, 52 and 63 of the C.'y's General Plan? X
I
h. Development within an area subject to liquefaction as
shown in Section 12.0- Geologic & Seismic, Figuri 48,
of the City's General Plan? X
L Other? None known
2. Air Resources: Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or an effect upon ambient air
quality as defined by South Coast Ai Quality
Management District, based on meeting the threshold
for significance in the District's, 'CEQA Ai Quality
Handbook'? X
b. The creation c$ objectionable odors based on
information contained in Preliminary Description Form,
No. G.(3)? X
c. Development within a high wind hazard area as
identified in Section 15.0-Wind &Fire, Figure 69, of
the City's General Plan? X
3. Water Resources: Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rata and amount of surface runoff due to impermeable
surfaces that cannot be mitigated by Public Works
Standard Requirements to contain and convey runoff to
approved storm drain based on review of the proposed
site plan? X
b. Significant alterstion in the course or flow of flood
waters based on consultation with Public Works staff? X
c. Discharge into surface waters or any alteration of
surface water quality based on requirements of Public
Works to have runoff directed to approved storm
drains? X
d. Change in the quantity or quality of ground water? X
e. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as
identified in the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel
Number 060281 -_, and Section 16.0-Flooding,
Figure 62, of the City's General Plan? X
f. Other? None known
10/2!!/9411:%T0J401%CHKLST-2.NOR)
4. Siologwal Rest rtes: Could the proposal result in: yes No Maybe
a. Development within the Biological Resources
Management Overlay, as identified in Section 10.0-
Natural Resources, Figure 41, of the City's General
Plan? X
1. Change in the number of any unique, rare
c•endangered species of plants or their
habitat including stands of trees based on
information contained in the Preliminary
Environmental Description Form No. B.(1)
and verified by on-site survey/evaluation? X
2. Change in the number of any unique, rare
or endangered species of animals or their
habitat based on information contained in
the Preliminary Environmental Description
Form No. E.(8) and verified by site
survey/evaluation? X
3. Impacts to the wildlife disbursal or
migration corridors? X
b. Removal of viable, mature trees based on site
survey/avaluation and review of the proposed site plan?
16' or greater trunK diameter at 4' above the ground) X
c. 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 66 dB(A) exterior and an Ldn of 46 dB(A) interior
as identified in Section 14.0-Noise, Figures 57 and 58
of the City's General Plan? X
b. Development of new or expansion of existing industrial,
commercial or other uses which generate noise levels
above an Ldn of 65 dB(A)exterior or an Ldn of 46 dB1A)
interior that may affect areas containing housing,
schools, health care facilities or other sensitive uses
based on information in the Preliminary Environmental
Description Form No. G.(1) and evaluation of
surrounding land uses No. C., and verified by site
survey/evaluation? X
c. Other? None known
a. Land Uses: Will the proposal result in:
a. A change in the land use as designated based on the
review of the General Plan Land Use Plan/Zoning
Districts Map? X
b. Development within an Airport District as identified 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 Development Code Overlay Districts
Map? X
10/2t119411:%T0.1401%CHKLST-2.NOR1
yes No M sybe
d. Other? None known _ --
7. Man-Made Hazards: Based on information contained in
Preliminary Environmental Description Form, No. G.0) and
G.(2) 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
b. Involve the release of hazardous substances? X
C. Expose people to the potential health/safety hazards? X
M
d. Other? None known
8. Housing: Will the proposal:
3. Remove existing housing as verified by a site
X
survey/evaluation?
b. Create a significant demand for additional housing based
on the proposed use and evaluation of project size? X
c. Other? None known
9. Transportation/Circulation: Could the proposal, in
comparison with the Circulation Plan as identified in Section
6.0-Circulation of the City's General Plan and based on the
conclusions of the City Traffic Engineer and review of the
Traffic Study if one was prepared, result in:
a. A significant incrsass in traffic volumes on the
roadways or intersections or an increase that is
significantly greater than the land use designated on the
General Plan? X
b. Use of existing, or demand for new,parking
facilities/structures?
C. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? _X
d. Alteration of present patterns of :.irculation? X
e. Impact to rail or air traffic? X
f. Increased safety hazards to vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians? — —X
9.i A disjointed pattern of roadway improvements? X
h. Other? None known
10. PubSc Services: Based on the responses of the responsible
agencies or departments,will the proposal impact the
following beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of
service?
a. Firs protection? X
b. Police protection?
X
c. Schools (i.e., attendance, boundaries, overload, etc.)? x—
t 0/2e/s411:%TOJ40t%CHKLST-2.NOM
yes No I.laybe
X
d. Parke or other recreational facilities?
X
e. Medical aid?
X
f. Solid Waste?
g. Other? None known
11, L ti ties: Will the proposal:
e. Based on the responses of the responsible A90116es.
Departments, or Utility Company, impact the following
beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of
service cr require the construction of new facilities?
X
1. Natural gas?
X
2. Electricity?
X
3. Water?
X
4. Sewer?
5. Other? None known
b. Result in a disjointed pattern of utility extensions e ���? --X
on review of existing patterns and proposed
12. Aesd+etics:
a. Could the proposal result in the obstruction of ar4
significant or important scenic view b-sed cr.evalwtion
of the view shed verified by sits survey,evaluation? --X-
b. Will the visual impact of the project caste aesthetically
offensive changes in the existing visua+ s �? X
a site survey and evaluation of the proposed ----
c. Other? None known
13. Culttral Resources: Could the proposal result in:
' a. The alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or his
archaeological site by development within an
archaeological sensitive area as identified in Section 3.0 X
- Historical, Figure S, of the City's General Plan?
b. Alteration or destruction of a historical sits,stnxttre or
object as listed in the City's Historic Resources X
j Reconnaissance Survey?
i c, Other? None known
1012E19411:%T0.1401%QIKLST-2.NOR1
7
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance (Section 15065)
The California Environmental Quality Act states that if 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
prepares. Based on this initial Study:
yes No Maybe
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the
criahty of the environment, substantially reduce the
hdbitat of a fish or wtn..:ife �;oecies, cause a fish or
wildlife population to :rop below self sustaining levels,
threaten to elirr:rate 3 plant or animal community,
reduce the rxuroer or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered F ant or animal or eliminate important
exe.,^ples of the major periods of California history or
pre.story? X
b. Does :he aroje;:t have the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? (A potential to achieve short term
goals short-term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.) X
c. Does -`,e project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may
impact on two or more saparate resources where the
impact on each resource is relatively small, but where
the effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.) X
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or inuirectly? X
C. DISCUSSION OF 3-WIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary)-
See the attached discussion o` each issue for substantiation of the preceding checklist concerns.
Mitigation -neasures incorporates in the FEIR for the Redevelopment Plan prepared by the Inland Valley
Developmen* Agency are summarized in Attachmer• D to this document and referenced throughout the
checklist discussion With the implementation of mitigation measures, as identified. all potential adverse
environmental impacts tiia' could result from enactment of the proposed policy actions will be reduced to
less than significant `evels See Attachment C to this checklist form for environment evaluation and
—achment D `or a summary of referenced mitigation measures.
101261940:%TOJ401%cfeasT-2.N0r0
LSA Assoclarrrs. !rev
ATTACHMENT C
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
10/26M(I:-,T0J401%.NORTON.IS7
LSAAs"Hrwr , It,c_
AM-CHMENT C
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST: DISCUSSION OF
ENWRONMF.NTAL EVALUATION
The City of San Bernardino's Environment Impact Checklist evaluates 14
issues. The substantiation of conclusions contained in the attached 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 pur-
pose of this Initial Study is to evaluate the proposed project with respect to
i the certified 1990 IVDA Redevelopment Plan Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR), this analysis refers to the environmental impacts identified in
the FEIR Specific citations of applicable information are provided through-
out the following discussion. Attachment D to this document lists all mitiga-
tion measures incorporated in the FEIR.
1. Earth Resources
la. Geology and soils resources, and constraints within the project area,
are described on pages 9-1 through 9-25 of the FEIR The topo-
graphy on the project area slopes to the south and southeast at less
than a two percent slope. The implementation of proposed policy
actions would result in minor surface grading activities. Areas where
future grading would occur have been disturbed by previous develop-
ment. Grading activities will be subject to mitigation to prevent wind
erosion; however, mitigation measures contained in the FEIR are con-
sidered adequate to ensure that grading activities do not cause any
signi&cant adverse impacts. These measures are summarized in
Attachment D to this document.
lb. The topography of the project area is essentially flat, as described in
discussion on page 9-10 and 9-11 of the FEIR No topographic alter-
atons are anticipated from grading activities as a result of project
implementation. No additional mitigation beyond that indicated
under issue la is considered necessary, based on evaluation in the
FEIR
lc. The seismic evaluation in the FEIR (Section 9.1.1.3 and Section
9.1.2.1) concluded that no potential for ground rupture exists in the
project area. No Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones exist on site.
No mitigation is considered necessary.
ld. No unique geologic or physical features exist on the project site. No
mitigation is considered necessary.
le. The project site lies outside of areas designated for high water and/or
wind erosion. The potential for erosion is considered low because of
past development, existing ground cover, and the minimal slope of
10/26/94(1:%TQJ401,ATPACHQ
LSA Associates,Inc.
the project area. Mitigation measures identified under issue la ate'
considered sufficient to address potential erosion impacts.
1f. No channels or river areas would be disturbed by the future facilities
and activities that would occur as a result of the proposed policy
actions. No mitigation is necessary.
1g. No development is proposed in an area subject to landslides, mud-
slides, subsidence or other similar hazards as identified in Section
12.0, Geologic and Seismic, of the City's General Plan, and Figures 48,
51, 52, and 53.
lh. The project area is located within an area subject to significant
ground shaking from regional seismic events, and could be subject to
potential liquefaction. The potential severity of seismic activity is doc-
umented 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 and liquefaction are discussed on pages 9-26 and 9-27 of the
FEIR. Specific mitigation measures from the FEIR are identified in At-
tachment D to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
2. Air Resources
2a. Short-tem. pol!L:ant emissions related to grading and construction
activities (pages 9-85 and 9-86 of the FEIR) were evaluated in the
FEIR, and it was concluded that they were less than significant. Im-
plementation of the proposed policy actions would result in the fu-
ture reconstruction of roads, grading parking areas, and other con-
struction activites. Mitigation measures from the FEIR identified in
Attachment D to this Initial Study include measures to control short-
term emissions.
The evaluation of long-trm impacts indicated that pollutant emis-
sions would be reduced relative to the Norton Air Force Base opera-
tions existing in 1989 (pages 9-85 through 9-88). The FEIR analyses
also determined that the redevelopment of the project area would be
consistent with regional air quality goals of the 1991 AQMP. The net
result of the IVDA redevelopment plan, and hence the proposed pro-
ject, was determined to be beneficial in that emissions relative to the
Air Force operating baseline would be reduced. Mitigation measures
are listed in Attachment D to this document.
As part of the Record of Decision for the EIS for the Disposal and Re-
use of Norton Air Force Base, the U.S. Air Force made a
determination (March, 1993) that the reuse plan as proposed by the
IVDA, inclusive of the Airport, was consistent with the 1991 Air
Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. This
10/26/94(1:-,M4011-A7rACHC) 2
LSAAssociates,Ina
determination, which is on file with the City of pan Bernardino,
contains certain stipulations on the total level of activity on the base,
inclusive of both the San Bernardino International Airport and the
San Bernardino International Trade Center. These stipulations
measures include a combination of the following:
1. Limitations on aircraft operations.
Z. Acquisition of Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs).
3. Implementation of transportation control measures.
4. Other mitigations to be defined.
The effect of these mitigation measures is to ensure that emissions
from the former Norton Air Force Base site will not exceed the emis-
sions from this site as forecast in the AQMP.
2b. No potential odor problems are anticipated with resF°ct to
implementation of the proposed policy actions.
2c. The project area 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 are provided, as listed in
Attachment D to this document.
3. Water Resources
3a. Potential increases in surface runoff and alteration Lz drainage pat-
terns are identified as less than significant impacts (pages 9-43 and 9-
44 ci the FEIR). The project area is already developed, _nd most of
' the areas that will be redeveloped in the future are already fully cov-
ered with impervious surfaces. Future drainage improvements will be
consistent with public works standard requirements. Mitigation mea-
sures are identified in Attachment D to this document.
3b. All surface runoff, including floodwaters, 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; however, no
significant changes to the course or flow of flood water from the
project area are anticipated. The impacts and mitigation measures
identified in the FEIR text encompass the proposed project effects,
and no further documentation is considered necessary.
3c. Potential surface water quality impacts of redevelopment within the
project area are addressed in the FEIR, on pages 9-41 and 9-43• Miti-
gation measures are identified to address potential non-point source
runoff and point source discharges. Implementation of the mitigation
10126/94(1:••.TOJ401-•.ATTACHC) 3
LSA Associates, inn.
measures outlined in the FEIR and contained in Attachment D to this
document would reduce potential surface water quality impacts to
less than significant levels.
3d. The FEIR describes overall 3roundwater resources on pages 9-30 and
9-38 through 9-41; the water supply system to the project area is
described on pages 9-181 thrc•igh 9-187. The Bunker Hill Groundwa-
ter Basin is considered capable of supplying adequate water to meet
full redevelopment demands, when managed in conjunction with
imported water supplies. Mitigation measures contained in the FEIR
identify methods of implementing water conservation and reducing
f future demand for water. 3ased on the data in the FEIR, implementa-
tion of the proposed policy actions would not cause a significant
adverse impact on groundwater supplies. Groundwater quality would
be enhanced by measures to be taken with redevelopment of the
project area and Air Force programs to remediate contaminated areas.
No significant adverse impacts are anticipated after implementation of
mitigation measures listed in Attachment D to this document.
3e. The FEIR indicates that on-site flood control facilities will have to be
upgraded when major redevelopment of the site occurs (see pages 9-
43 and 9-44). Measures discussed on page 9-46 will have to be imple-
mented to ensure that flood hazards will be fully mitigated. No addi-
tional mitigation is considered necessary.
4. Biological Resources
4a. The SBIAA component of the Norton Air Force Base Reuse does not
affect the Biological Resources Management Overlay as shown in
Figure 41 of the General Pla_-t. (Ar---s within the San Bernardino
International Trade Center site [the remainder of the Norton Base]
' are within the overlay area).
4al. Refer to issue la and pages 9-53 through 9-71 of the FEIR for a dis-
cussion of sensitive plants and mitigation that would be implemented
to ensure these sensitive species and habitat are not significantly
impacted.
4a2. Refer to issue la and pages 9-53 through 9-71 of the FEIR for a -,is-
cussion of sensitive animals and mitigation that would be implement-
ed to ensure sensitive species and habitat are not significantly impact-
ed.
4a3. The project is now located along identified wildlife migration dis-
bursed corridors.
4b. Mature trees may be located within future road rights-of--way. In
accordance with mitigation in the FEIR (page 9-72), such trees would
10/26/94(1:•.M401••.ATTACHQ 4
LSA Associates, ILBG
be replaced by revegetating areas adjacent to future roads with a com-
parable numbers of trees. No additional mitigation is considered
necessary.
S. Noise
5a. No facilities or uses that would be nois-- sensitive are anticipated
within the project area. Mitigation measures contained in Attachment
D to this document are considered sufficient.
Based on the amount of traffic that could be generated by full rede-
velopment, the FEIR indicates the potential for adverse noise impacts
to residences adjacent to major airport access roads. Noise evalua-
tions along the major access roads to the airport, as indicated in miti-
gation identified on pages 9-140 and 9-141 of the FEIR, will identify
the thresholds at which noise impacts will be significant enough to
require implementation of noise attenuation fea cures. Measures will
be implemented by the Airport Authority and Inland Valley Develop.
ment Agency in accordance with noise significance thresholds in the
FEIR (page 9-130). No additional mitigation is considered :necessary.
5b. The project (change of General Plan and zoning to airport and airport
related uses) will not change the noise levels on or adjacent to the
site. The proposed General Plan and Zoning :s consistent with the
project as analyzed in the FEIR. The primary noise generator (the
airport) is already allowed under the existing General Plan and zon-
ing; and changing the General Plan and zoning to specify
airport/airport related u--s will not change noise contours.
Both the FEIR and the EIS for the Disposal and Reuse of the Norton
Air Force Base included noise analyses for various ai.ernative operat-
ing plans for the Airport. All of the sceran.as considered generally
resultf d in noise levels h s than the previous use of the site as the
Norton Air Force Base.
Noise levels from the airport are completely determined by the type
and frequency of air operations cn the site. As discussed above, the
SBIAA has adopted an interim operating plan for the airport that
allows for 37,300 annual operations. This level of operation and
consequent noise contours are within the levels analyzed in the FEIR
and substantially less than the level of operations at the former Nor-
ton Air Force Base. The SBIAA has not developed a long-range oper-
ating plan for the airport. Until such time as an operating plan is
developed and approved, the City will remin the Norton Air Base
Noise contours currently shown in the General Plan.
The applicable mitigation measures from the FEIR are contained in
Appendix D.
10116/94(1:%TOJ401•••ATTACHQ 5
LSA
6. Land Use
6a. The proposed project will limit the wide range of land uses presently
permitted by the General Plan, and will make the General Plan consis-
tent with the Redevelopment Plan and the FEIR. No land use mitiga-
tion is considered necessary.
6b. The implementation of the proposed policy actions would permit
airport support facilities and activities to be located within the Base's
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone. However, no adverse impact to
or :onflict with the AICUZ is anticipated. No mitigation is required.
6c. Future development would take place outside designated Foothill Fire
Zones. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
7. Man Alade Hazards
7a. The implementation of future airport activities would continue the
storage and use of fuel and other chemicals to support airport activi-
ties. This use of hazardous materials is addressed on pages 9-43 and
9-46 of the :=EIR. The continued use of such materials and generation
of hazardous waste is required to occur accordance with strict man-
agement procedures dictated by local, State and federal regulations.
Analysis of these activities in the FEIR indicates that the potential
volume of these materials will be reduced relative to previous Air
Force flight operations. Mitigation measures are required to ensure
that th= coranued use of these materials does not adversely impact
the environment, as listed ;n pages 947 through 9-48 of the FEIR and
Attachment J to this document. Implementation of these measures
will ensure that future airport activities do not cause significant ad-
verse impacts.
7b. Since futurt airport activities will continue the use of hazardous mate-
rials, a potential for accidental releases 7vill also continue on site. As
noted above, :he issue is addressed fully in the FEIR, and mitigation
measures were identified to reduce potential accidental releases of
hazardous substances to less than significant levels. No additional
` mitigation is considered necessary.
7c. Aircraft operations will continue, and the existing safety zones estab-
lished for the airfield in the :4ir Installation Compatible Use Zone will
continue to be observed. No new areas will be exposed to hazards,
and mitigation as indicated :n issue 6b will address potential con-
cerns. yo additional mitigation is considered necessary.
10/26194(1:---TOJ401-•-ATTACHC) 6
LSA Associates,Inc
8. Housing
8a. The existing housing resource base will not be altered or impacted by
implementation of the proposed policy actions.
8b. As discussed in Section 9.6 of the FEIR (pages 9-101 through 9-127),
the Redevelopment Plan is forecast to replace jobs and result in
approximately the same population growth as is forecast without the
closure of the air base. On this basis, impacts on housing will be less
than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
I
9. TransportationlCirculation
9a. The area is currently designated as Public Facility on the City's Gen-
eral Plan, and an airport and associated uses are allowed in an area
designated Public Facility. Restricting the designation to airport and
airport related Facilities will not cause an increase in traffic that is
greater than the land uses currently designated on the General Plan.
The FEIR also assessed adequacy of the existing and planned local
` and regional circulation system in the vicinity of the site. The FEIR
concluded that the redevelopment of the Norton Air Force Base site
(inclusive of the San Bernardino International Airport) would have a
generally beneficial impact to circulation through the following:
• Opening of the formerly closed base roadways to the public.
(Le, Tippecanoe Avenue).
• Widening and reconstruction of:oadways through the base.
The proposed General Plan and zoning is consistent with the project
as analyzed in the FEIR.
SBIAA and the Inland Valley Development Agency are rirrently pro-
ceeding to develop a backbone roadway system through the Norton
I Air Force Base site. This includes widening and reconstruction of
Tippecanoe Avenue, Sheppard Drive, Del Rosa Avenue and Mill Street.
These project will both facilitate local access to the site and improve
regional circulation by reducing constraints to north/south and
east/west circulation through the former base.
The mirig,tion measures identified in the FEIR are contained in At-
tachment D and are in the process of being implemented. No addi-
tional impacts have been identified and, therefore, no additional
mitigation measures are required.
10/26/94(1:%T0J401-,ATrACHC) 7
LSA Associates, !nG
9b. New parking areas will be required to meet the demands of future
airport development, as identified in the FEIR. No additional mitiga�
tion beyond that required by the FEIR is considered necessary.
9c. The existing circulation system will be and is being enhanced through
the improvement of various surrounding roadways in conjunction
with future de%t opment of a public roadway system through the
base. No mitigation beyond that required in the FEIR is considered
necessary.
9d. The present circulation pattern will be enhanced through develop-
ment of a public r cadway system through the base. This is consistent
with the forecast :n the FEIR. No additional mitigation measures are
required.
9e. Civilian air traffic will be modified by future airport development.
The civilian air traffic operations will be subject to applicable regulati-
on by the Federal Aviation Administration and the State Department
of Transportation Division of Aeronautics. No adverse impacts on air
traffic patterns are anticipated. No impact to rail traffic has been
identified.
9f. Future airport development is not anticipated to create safety hazards
to vehicular traffic or other transportation modes along the existing
road system. The improvements to on-site roadways may enhance
vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic flow, and enhance safety by
providing sidewalks and wider roads to accommodate anticipated
airport related traffic. No impacts beyond those identified in the FEIR
are anticipated.
9g. Traffic improvements in conjunction with future airport development
will be consistent with the circulation system discussed in the FEIR.
No potential for creating a disjointed pattern of roadway improve-
ments is anticipated.
10. Public Services
10a. Pages 9-170, 9-193 and 9-199 of the FEIR discuss fire protection capa-
bilities, fire protection impacts, and mitigation measures, respectively.
The City of San Bernardino has assumed fire protection responsibili-
ties within the project area. No impacts are anticipated, or mitigation
measures necessary 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 of San Bernardino is providing law en-
forcement services. The Airport Authority may also retain a private
security service to provide for airport security if necessary. No ad-
10/26/94(1:,.TOJ401%ATTACHC) 8
LSA As.�ociates, Inc-
verse nipacts are anticir.1tec' or mitigation measures considered nec-
e--,sary beyond those identified in the FEIR.
l -c. As described in the FEIR, on pages 9-175, 9-194, and 9-200, the pro-
posed airport development will have no impacts on the educational
system. No impacts are anticipated, or mitigation measures consid-
ered necessary beyond those identified in the FEIR.
10d. The proposed airport development will not cause any adverse impacts
to park and recreation resources in the area. No mitigation measures
are considered necessary.
1Oe. The proposed airport development will not cause any direct impacts
to 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. Emergency services may be required in the
event of airport or aircraft accidents, under operation of the civilian
airport. A similar potential has existed from either military aircraft or
civilian aircraft transporting persons for the military under contract
however. No additional impacts or mitigations are anticipated,
beyond those identified in the FEIR.
I
lof. Solid waste generation is addressed on pages 9-190, 9-198 and 9-202
of the FEIR. Solid waste generated by future airport facilities and
activities will essentially replace solid waste generated by the former
air base. The FEIR concludes that the airport redevelopment plan will
not cause a significant adverse impact. No impacts are anticipated, or
mitigation measures considered necessary beyond those identified in
the FEIR
11. Utilities
llal. Natural gas requirements for the airport redevelopment plan were
identified as less than significant in the FEIR (see pages 9-191, 9-199
and 9-203). No impacts are anticipated, or mitigation measures con-
; sidered necessary beyond those identified in the FEIR.
11a2. Electricity requirements for the airport redevelopment plan were
identified as being less than significant in the FEIR (see pages 9-191,
9-199 and 9-203)• No impacts are anticipated, or mitigation measures
considered necessary beyond those identified in the FEIR.
1W. The water resource impacts were discussed under Issue #2, and were
identified as less than significant. The water system will require mod-
ifications that are planned and are being implemented as part of the
proposed airport development. No impacts are anticipated, or mitiga-
tion measures considered necessary beyond those identified in the
FEIR.
10/26/94(I:••.TOJ401%ATTACRC) 9
LA Associate;Inc
lla4. Proposed airport development will generate domestic wastewater.
The FEIR indicates that sufficient capacity exists for the wastewatcr
generated over the short term. Over the long term, additional mitiga-
tion will be required and are being implemented to ensure sufficient
wastewater treatment capacity. The wastewater collection system will
require modifications that are planned as part of future airport devel-
opment. No impacts are anticipated, or mitigation measures consid-
ered necessary beyond those identified in the FEIR.
11b. The project area is already connected to all utility systems, and .heir
modification to meet specific demands of future airport development
is not anticipated to cause disjointed utility extensions. No impacts
are anticipated, or mitigation measures considered necessary beyond
those identified in the FEIR.
12. Aestbetics
12a. No scenic views have been identified within or adjacent to the site.
Therefore, no facilities or activities would obstruct any scenic views.
Some views could be enhanced as a result of creating open areas and
widening view corridors in some areas. No potential for adverse
impacts to scenic vistas is anticipated. No mitigation measures are
considered necessary.
12b. The potential aesthetic impacts of airport redevelopment were ad-
dressed in the Land Use Section of the FEIR. The general conclusion
was that the areas potentially affected are urban in character, and the
Redevelopment Plan will not aster this process in an adverse manner.
Incompatible changes in the visual setting are not anticipated. No
mitigation measures are considered necessary.
13. Cultural Resources
13a. No historic structures are located within the project area. All pro-
posed facility and activity locations have been disturbed by previous
activities, which have eliminated potential cultural resources. Based
on the data in the FEIR (pages 9-142 through 9-146), no potential for
significant cultural resources impacts is anticipated from redevelop-
ment of the project area with mitigation measures identified in the
FEIR
13b. Refer to the discussion in iss.re 13a. The project area 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 former base meet criteria of the National Historic Preservation Act
as historic structures. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
10/26/94(1:170)40 t%ATtAC11C) 10
LSA Associates,Inc
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance
The purpose of this Initial Study was to determine whether the impacts of
the proposed project actions (adoption of text changes in City of San Bernar-
dino General Plan and Development Code) could cause adverse environmen-
tal impacts not addressed as part of the 1990 Redevelopment Plan Project
FEIR. This evaluation demonstrates that the potential impacts of the pro-
posed policy actions are w=11 within the impact forecast contained in th::
FEIR. Based on the data available, no p•--tential for adverse impact beyond
that identified in the 1990 EIR will be created by implementation of the
General Plan amendments or enactment of the proposed AP District, as
outlined in this document. No additioral environmental documentation
needs to be prepared for the proposed project actions considered in this
Initial Study.
10/26/94(1:-,M401,-A7TACHC) 11
LSAAssodatex Inc
ATTACHMENT D
MITIGATION MEASURES FROM FEIR FOR IVDA
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
f
i
I
10/76/94(1:-.TOJ401••.NOKMN.IS)
LSA Associates,Inc.
ATTACHMENT D
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
Geology and Soils Incorporate the results of site specific geotechrli-
cal studies, which addJ°ss the potential for
ground shaking, liquefaction, ar.d subsidence,
into the design, engineering, and seismic retrofit-
ting of all development, redevelopment of exist-
ing structures, and other construction projects
planned and funded by the IVDA.
Design new structures to withstand the site.
specific seismic accelerations predicted by the
geotechnical 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 Uni-
form Building Code_
Ensure prc per design and °ngineering, based on
the results of site speci& geotechnical studies,
which address the potential for ground shaking,
liquefaction, and subsidence, of all new water
and wastewater conveyance Facilities.
Minimize wind erosion, particularly in areas un-
derlain by Tujunga loamy sand, through appli-
cation of dust palliatives during grading and
other construction or redevelopment activities.
If paleontologic resources are encountered dur-
ing redevelopment or other construction activi-
ties, notify the San Bernardino County Museum
Division of Earth Science, and obtain an assess-
ment by a qualified paleontologist of the signifi-
cance 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 identify, recover, curate,
and report on the nature and significance of the
paleontologic resource.
Water Resources Upgrading of the Zone 2 (north bankfSanta Ana
River levees (Priority III) should be supported by
the project.
1021 P94(1!,.TQJ 401',ATrACH-D)
LSA Associates,Inc
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FEIR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA 'Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
Support construction of the Seven Oaks Dam,
upstream in the Santa Ana Canyon, to reduce
floodflows in the Santa Ana Rive: 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 asso-
ciated with this project.
Several secondary stormwater drain projects are
recommended for implementation in support of
the project. The Iankershim Drain, immediately
north of the Base, would serve an area that cur-
rently suffers frequent ponding and poor drain-
age, which would be remedied by this Priority I
project. Several additional flood control projects
are proposed for the area immediately west and
southwest of the Base. These include Timber
Creek (Priority III), Central Avenue (Priority VI)
and Mill Street (Priority VII). These projects
would directly serve IVDA areas, and should be
considered for project support. The estimatcd
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 participa-
tion. Construction of the upgrades is scheduled
to begin in 1993.
As plans for the reuse of Norton AFB become
more specific, a drainage study should be con-
ducted to assure that an adequate drainage sys-
tem is developed. This study should also look at
downstream effects of drainage from the north-
ern and western portions of the Base to assure
that such problems are avoided.
Stormwater retention basins should be employed
where feasible to maximize groundwater infiltra-
tion and reduce the necessary capacities of
downstream conveyance facilities.
1021/94(1:,-T0)401••.ATTACH-D) 2
LSA Associates, Ina
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FEIR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
During construction, standard construction mea-
sures should be sufficient to prevent excessive
erosion and resul,:nom water quality impacs.
Such measures include the following:
Minimize the area of construction distur-
bance;
Minimize the amount of time that dis-
turbed soil is exposed to erosion, by
carefully timing site grading to occur
immediately before the initiation of
construction;
Keep runoff on site during construction;
alternatively, install temporary sediment
traps in the local drainages around the
project site;
Schedule construction during the dry sea-
son (May through October), wherever
possible;
After project completion, stabilize the soil
and revegetate as soon as possible, irri-
gating as necessary to establish new vege-
tative cover.
Additional mitigations include the following.
• implement monthly street sweeping pro-
grams for all redevelopment projects sup-
ported by the lVDA to minimize the accu-
mulation of street pollutants and their
subsequent flushing to nearby streams
during storms.
• Require regular sweeping of parking lots
as a requirement for approval of individ-
ual projects.
10121/94(1:-%TO3401,.ATTACH-D) 3
L:A Associate;Ina
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
• Industrial and commercial develeaments
should 'e reviewed by the wastewater
treatment department that would be re-
ceiving and treating the wastewater, to
assure that toxic materials are removed
to acceptably low concentrations. In this
regard, the existing industrial wastewater
treatment plant at Norton AFB may be
adapted for continued use, as the Base
and surrounding areas undergo redevel-
opment.
• Consideration should be given to an
IVDA contribution to the completion of
the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor
(Reach IV-E) for possible use by Indus-
' tries in the redevelopment area.
To offset minor reductions in local groundwater
recharge, which may result from rc.'evelopment,
stormwater retention ponds should be consid-
ered for the larger individual projects.
Hazardous materials storage, handling and dis-
posal regulations should continue to be strictly
enforced by San Bernardino County to minimize
the possibility of releases into the environment.
The Installation Restoration Program at Norton
'I AFB should be continued. When ultimately com-
pleted, long-term groundwater cleanup measures
should be carried out by the Air Force to assure
the restoration of high quality groundwater un-
derlying the Base. Redevelopment plans should
be cocrdinate,' with the Air Force to assure that
such plans do not interfere with groundwater
cleanup measures.
10/21/94(1:•••TO)401%AMCH•D) 4
!SA Associate. Inc-
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
Biological Resources Site specific surveys, in consultation with the
USFWS and DFG, should be required for any
IVDA sponsore' projects &.at may affect flood-
plain and upland alluvial :teas, and known or
suspected sensitive or important habitats (e.g.,
riparian woodland, Riversidian alluvial sage
scrub), flora (e.g., Santa Ana River WoOly Star,
Slender-horned Spineflower), x sauna (e.g.,
greenest tiger beetle, Delhi sar. s flower loving
fly, San Diego horned lizard).
Whenever feasible, implement alternative sched-
uling, project designs, and/or establish buffer
zones to assure avoidance of any sensitive bio-
logical resources.
Implement restoration_:1d moni or.n.g programs
to assure a return to °atural conditions after
construction related disturbances.
Air Quality Prohibit the development of land ::ses (e.g.,
heavy manufacturing) that will contribute sig-
nificantly to ai- quality legradation, unless suffi-
cient mitigation measures are undertaken ac-
cording to SCAQMD s-.andards.
Require dust abatement measures during grading
and construction ope:atio-is.
Evaluate the air emissions of industrial .and uses
to ensure that they will r::impact adjacent uses.
Cooperate with the SCAQMD, and incorporate
pertinent local implementation prov;;ions of the
Air Qualiry Managemc-,t Plan.
Work with the SCAQMD to establish controls,
and monitor uses in the City that could add to
the air basin's degradation (e.g., auto repair,
manufacturers).
Work with the other local cities in -he South
Coast Air Basin to implement regional mechan-
isms to reduce air etissions and improve air
quality.
10r21/94(I:--.TOJ401-,ATrACH-D) rj
A As"Ciates,/nC:
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
Promote a pattern of land uses that locates resi-
dential uses in c1c se proximity to employment
and commercial services and provides, to the
fullest extent possible, local job opportunities
and commercial service to minimize vehicular
travel and associated air emissions.
Designate lands for the development of new
uses that 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 improv-
ements and other amenities to encourage pedes-
trian activity in 'cey City areas, to reduce vehic-
ular 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.
Establish development standards that concen-
trate new commercial buildings in proximity to
existing commercial buildings and pedestrian
areas n order to facilitate walking and to reduce
vehicular trips.
Cc--cider implementing a shuttle system that will
connect the Tri-City/Commercenter, Downtown
i Area, ar,d Regional Opportunities Corridor.
Require new development to implement or par-
ticiFatr in transportation demand management
programs that provide incentives for car pooling,
van ?Dols, and the use of public transit, and ern-
pay other trip reduction techniques (consistent
with the Circulation Element and South Coast
Air Quality Management Plan).
Continue to cooperate with Omnitrans and :he
Rapid Transit District to expand as necessary the
comprehensive mass transit system for the City,
to reduce vehicular travel.
10/21/94(1:-,,401%AWACH-D) 6
UA Atsonases, Inc.
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
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 ncent::es for existi:g buildings to retro-
fit and require new buit•3:c_:7 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 development, as required
by State law.
Evaluate the means of establishing an appropri-
ate program by which energy efficient fixtures
and energy saving design elements can be in-
stalled in existing multifamily residential, com-
mercial and industrial developments.
Require energy audits of existing public struc-
tures and encourage audits of private structures,
identifying levels of existing energy use and po-
tential conservation measures.
Provide incentives, including tecanicai assistance
and possible low-interest loans, for the installa-
tion of energy cone nation measures in existing
buildings characterized by a high level of energy
consumption.
Require the use of passive design concepts, in
accordance with State law, which make use of
the natural climate to increase energy efficiency.
Through the development review process, re-
quire that new development consider the ability
of adjacent properties to utilize energy conserva-
tion design.
Educate the public regarding the need for energy
conservation techniques that can be employed,
and systems that are available.
10/21/94(1:%'rO)401••.ATTACH-D) 7
LSA Auodates.!nc
Summary of;litigation Measures
FEIR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation ;Measure
Land Use No mitigation measures are recommended.
Socioeconomics No :.7itigaticn 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 finalized. These de-
tailed analyses will, as appropriate, include spe-
cific measures to mitigate noise impacts of.
• Airport operations;
• Project related extensions of any railroad
lines or increased railroad operations;
and
• Roadway expansions, upgrades, and in-
creased 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 Archaeological Informa-
tion Center, San Bernardino County Museum,
Redlands, California.
Should the records check indicate the presence
of known archaeological or historical resources,
I or a moderate to high sensitivity for such re-
sources being present, a cultural resources field
survey of the project area shall be conducted by
a qualified professional. Depending on the types
of cultural resources involved, the qualified pro-
fessional(s) may be a prehistoric archaeologist,
historic archaeologist, historian and/or architec-
tural 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 significance/
importance according to the criteria in CEQA
Appendix K and/or the criteria for eligibility for
listing in the National Register of Historic Plac-
es, as specified in 36 CFR 60.4.
10/21/94(1:-,TO)401••.ATTACH-D) 8
LSA Associates, Lne
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
The results of the cultural resources field survey
shall be documented in a written report follow-
ing the Guidelines for Cultural Resource Man-
agement Reports of the Archaeological Informa-
tion Center, and shall be filed at that location.
A plan to mitigate impacts to signifi-
cant/important cultural resources shall be devel-
oped and implemented prior to or in conjunc-
tion with project zonstruction. Mitigation may
include data recovery (excavation, analysis, and
curation of archaeological resources), archival
research and photographic documentation of
historic structures, or avoidance and preserva-
tion in place of archaeological or historic re-
sources.
The Native American Heritage Commission and
San Manuel Reservation shall be notified in writ-
ing of any proposed evaluation or mitigation
excavations that involve Native American archae-
ological remains, and any comments or concerns
expressed by the Native American community
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 Archaeologi-
cal Information Center.
All artifacts collected or recovered in cultural
resource investigations shall be catalogued and
curated with the San Bernardino County Muse-
um.
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 support-
ed by the IVDA.
10/21/94(1:•••TOJ401••.ATrACIi.D) 9
!SA Associates, Ina
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
Alternative techniques are available to snik the
vehicular traffic demands to alternative time peri-
ods or to alternative modes of transportation.
These elements should be incorporated into a
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) and
Transportation Demand Mar.=.gement (TDM)
Plan for appropriate 1VDA supported projects.
Actions to make better use of the existing net-
work, reduce auto usage in congested areas or
time periods, and increase transit ridership
through improved service and efficiency include
the following programs:
• A program to encourage on-Base or pro-
ject area employers to provide employees
with optional alternative work schedules,
including staggered work hours, flexible
work hours, and 4 day, 40 hour work-
weeks to avoid commuting during rush
hours.
• A program to encourage employers to
enhance utilization of public transit by
providing work hours that meet transit
schedules, partial or full reimbursement
of transit fares, providing bus shelters,
providing shuttle service to multi-modal
transit centers, and distributing infor-
mation on transit routes and schedules.
• A program to encourage employers to
take steps to increase auto occupancy,
such as creation of carpools and van-
pools, providing preferential parking for
carpools and vanpools, implementation
of matching programs for prospective
carpoolers, and levying parking fees as
disincentives to single occupant vehicles.
• A program to incorporate bicycle incen-
tives into project designs. These may
include safe storage facilities and dedicat-
ed lanes or paths.
10%1/94(1:,-TOJ401%ATTACH-D) 10
LGt Associates, Inc
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelops:nt Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
Public Services The City of San Bernardino Fire Department
should plan for the orderly transfer of fire pro-
tection services at the Base. New firefighting
equipment and necessary mcdifcatiens to ctic
existing Base fire facility s ould be supported by
the IVDA.
The City of San Bernardino Police Department
should plan for the orderly t1-:74e- of public
protection services at the Base. New equipment
needs related to this added responsibility should
be supported by the lVDA.
Municipal and regional recreation departments
should enter into cooperative agr-temems to en-
sure that the existing recreational facili, es locat-
ed at Norton AFB are available to serve and ben-
efit 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 public use.
The IVDA should consider the devA'c?meet of .a
linear park a:�-ig the Santa Ana River, utilizing
Base lands adjacent to the river.
Water conservation should be required of the
individual redevelepmert prognams. This
should include the -ollowing measures:
• Use of lowflow 9.5 gallons) toilets
'rohibit the hosedown of parking lots
and loading areas; vacuum vehicles
should be used, instead
• Minimize the use of lawns ;n landscap.
ing; encourage the use of drought toler-
ant plants
• Use automatic irrigation systems timed to
irrigate during the low water use hours:
11:00 p.m. to 5:00 am.
• For industries requiring water, recircula-
tion/reuse where feasible to minimize
water use.
10/21/94(1:-,TOJ401-.ATTACH•D) 1
LSA Associates, Inc.
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FOR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Redevelopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
In light of the current groundwate- contarr,ina-
tion problems on the Base (Section 9.2.1), the
quality of the Base wells should be closely moni-
tored. Contingency plans for drilling replace-
ment wells in areas unlikely to be influenced by
known groundwater contamination should be
` developed, in the eve-it one or more of the cur-
rent wells develops water quality problems.
local tistewater utilities should be involved
in :he siting of new industries within the rede-
velcpment area. Strong industrial wastewater
pretreatment requirements should be developed
for each industry to protect the treatment pro-
cesses of the municipal wastewater plants.
The Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant at the
Base should be considered for continued use to
treat the waste 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 '.ines serving the Base
should be evaluated for needed upgrades to ser-
vice :he :�-drve�c-3ed Base.
• A solid ..;cste source reduction and recy-
cling =lement should be prepared in ac-
cordance with AB939, which will outline
speci;:_ :7-ste reduction mechanisms to
achieve : 1e state mandated solid waste
reduction of 25 percent by the year 1995
and 50 percent solid waste reduction by
the year '000.
iTras:1 receptacle guidelines/standards for
commercial and residentirt developments
should be ;ncluded in the project's de-
sign guidelines. This could include, but
not _,t Imited to, trash compactors,
source separation, solid waste reduction
and recycling.
10/21/94(1:-.TO)401-,ATrACH-D) 12
LSA Assodate;Lnc
Summary of Mitigation Measures
FEIR (SCH# 90020109) for the IVDA Rede,relopment Plan
Issue Mitigation Measure
• The northeast portion of the Base cc,.
tains landfill areas known to contain
hazardous or toxic wastes. ,'Mitigation o:
any potential hazards this site is being
addressed as part of the Base's Insta::..-
tion Restoration Program (see Section. )),
and an EIS being prepared by the Depart-
ment of Defense on the Base closure.
The Air Ford, in cooperation with the
State Department of Health and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, plans
to clean up the hazardous or toxic waste.
These areas must be cleaned up prior to
transfer of the Base to civilian -.ise.
Energy Projects supported or sponsored by the IVDA, as
appropriate, shall incorporate:
• Energy conservation practices and incen-
tives to comply with the requirements of
the California State Energy Regulations,
• Feasible, energy censervi..g •echnologies,
including alternative energy sources and
technologies,
• TSWIDDM measures for employment gen-
erating land uses, and
• Project environmental documentation
(Initial Studies, Negative Declarations or
EIRs) that evaluate the potential for ener-
gy conservation and provide associated
mitigations.
10/21/94(1:--.M401,-ATTACH-D) 13
PROPOSED GENERAL ?LAN A�NIENDMEVT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN
AIRPORT
TEXT ANIENDNIENTS
1) Page 1-3
paragraph #3
California State University is a major identifiable land use in the northern section of the City.
In the southeast section, the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center is a
significant land use that will play a key economic role in the City. The Santa Fe rail yards, also
a major land use, are located on the City's west side.
2) Page 1-12
paragraph #2
Throughout the City are se, eral ?ublic or quasi-public °-ses which are singularly importat.: or
unique. They include National Orarge Show grounds, California State University, San
Bernardino campus, Santa Fe Railway yards and the San 3ertardino International Airport and
Trade Center. The Nadonal Orange Show Grounds --ontain 136 acres located between "E"
Street and Arrowheau Avenue, south of Mill Street. It is a pri._-._�!h owned state--nartered
facility, founded at the beginning e this century to stage the State C:.rus Fruit Fair. The 160
acre California State University Campus is located in the northwest quadrant of the City, at the
corner of University Parkwa,- and North Park Boule-.ard. The Santa Fe `.ZaiNay yards t1re
major west coast switching facilities for the Atcheson-Topeka and Santa Fe RailroLd. The San
Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center is a 1,751 acre site which formerly housed
the 193rd Airlift Command while known as Norton Air orce Base. At the time the existing
land use data was collected (1987), Norton Air Force Base was classified as a public facility.
Norton Air Force Base officially closed in 1994. Through the efforts of the Inland Valley
Development Agency and the San Bernardino International Airport Authority, the Base has been
converted to an international trade center and air carrier airport.
3) Page 1-17
paragraph #4
4. San Bernardino's pattern of land uses is characterized by the presence of several major
centers (downtown, Tri-City/Commercenter, Inland Center and Central City Malls, California
State University, and the former Morton Air Force Base), "strip" commercial corridors, a mix
of well- and ill-defined residential neighborhoods, and clusters of high density housing. Many
of these are self-contained fragments, with few linkages integrating the City into an organized
and cohesive pattern of uses. Some districts, such as Tri-City/Commercenter, are internally
ATTACHMENT A
well-organized and planned. Others, such as Highland Avenue, are long-corridors of disparate
fragments.
4) Page 1-19
paragraph #4
12. The former Norton Air Forc° Base was a long--erm resident of the City, providing job
opportunities and, at the same time, impacting adjacent land uses. tic:;e attributable to its
aircraft operations _i-, ely affected adjacent -es:.'ential areas. Genera-ly, housing locateu to
the west and southwest of the fors:..- base is marginal and deteriorated. While some industrial
and commercial uses have developed, there are vast tracts of undeveloped lands on the
periphery. Ccn:ersion of the base for civilian re-use will require careful coordination with the
City of San Bernardino anc surrounding jurisdictions.
5) Page 1-30
Table 4 Addendum
General Plan Land Use Categories
Development
Category Location Principal Uses Intensity/Density
Airport San Bernardino Runways, 0.5
A I n ter n at i,)n a l taxi-.vays, general
Airport a-d air carrier
a v i a t i o n ,
passenger and air
cargo terminals,
hansars, :.port
related office,
commercial, light
industrial
I
I
Page 2
6) Page 1-'05
ISSUE FOUR: WHAT SHOULD BE THE FUTURE ROLE AND CHARACTER OF THE_
SAN BERNARDINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AND TRADE CENT7R9
Goal
It shall to -ie goal of the City of San Bernardino to:
lI Ensure the orderly and economic transitic-i of the former Norton Air Force Base site to
productive civilian uses including an international airport and tr_.de center in a manner
that is compatible with and enhances adjacent uses.
Objectiyee
It shall be the objective of the City of San Bernardino to:
1.39 Promote *he development and use of the existing airport facilities and related
buildings as an international air carrier airport with aviation-related office,
commercial and industrial uses.
Policies
It shall be the policy of the City of San Bernardino to:
Permitted Uses
I 1.39.1.10 Szpport the efforts of the San Bernardino International Airport Authority
to establish and develop an international air carrier airport.
1.39.1.11 Establish a new General Plan Use Category of Airport (A) which will
permit aviation and aviation-related uses including office, commercial and
r.�ustrial.
1.39.1.1 ' Establish an Airport (A) District for the Development Code that defines
permitted uses for the airport, appropriate development standards and
review procedures. Permitted uses include air passenger and freight
terminals, aircraft sales, repair and maintenance, aircraft associated
activities and other related uses.
1.39.1.13 Encourage the Airport Authority to prepare and maintain an Airport
Page 3
Master Plan to address the ultimate development of the airport and its
relationship to adjacent parcels and communities (Il.1).
Density/Intensit3 and Height
1.39.1.20 Height limits for development on the airport will be determined by
Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77 (I1.1).
1.39.1.21 The existing airport has approximately 230,000 square feet of office space
and 1,300,000 square feet of wa-°house/hangar space. At ultimate build-
out, it is projected that the =--.imum development would be 500,000
square feet of office anc 2,300,0._0 square feet of warehouse/hangar space
(11.1).
Design and Development Guidelines
1.39.1.30 The Airport District shall include development and design standards that
will ensure physical and visual compatibility among land uses and adjacent
sites, in cooperation with the City of Highland.(11.1).
1.39.1.31 Special attenr:on shall be.given to development that occurs adjacent to or
is visible from Third Street. Standards shall include provisions for special
landscaping requirements and screening of outdoor storage, loading docks
and truck parking areas from public view to enhance the compatibility
wi th adjacent land uses and the traveling public. (11-1)-
1.39.1.32 Project review procedures shall be utilized that are consistent with the goal
of job and economic development at the airport and minimize procedural
delay (I1.1).
1.39.1.33 Update and revise, as necessary, programs to ensure airport land use
compatibility with surrounding areas. These programs should address
issues which include compatible land uses, height and intensity of
k permitted uses and should incorporate the provisions of any Airport
I Master Plan prepared by the A::Nrt Authority (I1.20).
8) Page 1-118
Implementation Programs
I1.1(i)(9)
(9) San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center
9) Page 1-123
Implementation Programs
Page 4
I1.11(d)
(d) participation in feasibility studies and planning for the reuse of the former Norton
Air Force Base, as it transitions into the San Bernardino International Airport and
Trade Center.
10) Page 1-127
I1.20
Replace the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
Establish land use compatibility standards and requirements to replace the old Air Installation
Compatible Use Zone plan to account for modifications in aircraft and ground operations
resulting from the establishment of the San Bernardino International Airport. This shall include
the preparation of new noise contours and compatible land use zoning.
11) Page 4-29
paragraph 4
` 4.6.2 Pursue development of San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center in order
to provide opportunities for office, commercial and industrial development, including
firms interested in or requiring airport proximity or access (I4.14).
12) Page 4-38
paragraph 12
I4.14 Participate with the San Bernardino International Airport
Authority in marketing and attracting industrial users requiring airport access or
proximity and with the Inland Valley Development Agency in marketing and
attracting office, commercial and industrial users to the International Trade
Center.
13) Page 6-17
paragraph 1
6.7.2 Evaluate accessibility to San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center
consistent with the policies requiring review and approval of mitigation measures
to accommodate trips generated by new developments taking into account that
such required mitigation must consider the level of trips generated by the
previously existing Norton Air Force Base (I6.24).
14) Page 6-25
paragraph 2
I6.24 San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center Access Study
Page 5
As part of the planning for the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade
Center, the City shall coordinate with surrounding jurisdictions in the
development of a regional circulation study to demonstrate that adequate access
can be provided to the airport site and trade center.
15) Page 7-1
paragraph 6
7.OA.1.
• Domestic wastewater from the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center.
16) Page 7-3
paragraph 8
7.OA.3.
• Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force Base), and
17) Page 7-4
paragraph 5
7.OB
• Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force Base), and
18) Page 7-6
paragraph 6
7.00
• Inland Valley Development Agency (formerly Norton Air Force Base), and
19) Page 7-11
paragraph 3
H. GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES
Approximately 90-100 geothermal wells and springs have been identified in the San Bernardino
area. The geothermal wells and springs are concentrated in the Commerce Center, Central City,
Tri-City areas, and the San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center (as depicted on
Figure 31).
20) Page 7-16
7.3.3 Monitor and periodically reassess rates for wastewater treatment services for
jurisdictions outside the City of San Bernardino that have wastewater treated at
the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Facility (i.e. East Valley Water District,
Page 6
Patton State Hospital, and City of Loma Linda) (I7.12).
21) Page 7-33
I17.37 Extend the system of geothermal facilities in the Commerce Center, Central City,
Tri-City areas, and San Bernardino International Airport and Trade Center to
accommodate future commercial and governmental uses.
I7.39 Administer a program for the purpose of educating potential developers in the Commerce
Center, Central City, Tri-City areas, and San Bernardino International Airport and Trade
Center of the cost and energy saving benefits associated with the use of geothermal
energy. This program could be conducted in conjunction with the Chamber of
Commerce and City Redevelopment Agency as a benefit of locating in San Bernardino.
22) Page 14-5
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Within the San Bernardino planning area, three major noise sources occur and include:
(1)aircraft; (2) rail traffic; and, (3) vehicular traffic.2 Aircraft operations previously associated
with the former Norton Air Force Base were the dominant noise source in some portions of the
City. Norton Air Force Base has been converted to a civilian air carrier airport. Existing noise
conditions in the City are depicted on Figure 57. In this case, existing conditions reflect
previous military operations.
23) Page 14-12
paragraph 7
Issues
i
A. Noise in the planning area exceeds levels recommended by the State of Office of Noise
Control along major highways, freeways, and the railroads.
i
Page 7
63
CD
IM
Sb"wdDr
z tv
>
CD
L.L
cn
CD
. . .......
-i
IF
Li
ALABAMA ST
ATTACHMENT B
ATTACHMENT A
CHAPTER 19.12A
A (AIRPORT) DISTRICT
19.12A.010 PURPOSE
1. The purpose of this chapter is to achieve the following:
(A) To define specific uses and development standards related to the unique
needs and requirements of an international airport.
(B) Ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses.
(C) Provide an appropriate area for airport-related activities and uses.
2. The purpose of the (A) Airport District is as follows:
(A) Provide for the conversion, reuse and expansion of the existing airfield
and related facilities into an air carrier airport.
(B) Provide for a regionally important land use which will offer employment
opportunities for existing and future residents of the City and surrounding
communities.
(C) Provide for a land use that will meet the needs of and attract users from
throughout the region.
Table 12A.01
Airport District List of Permitted Uses
19.12A.020 PERMITTED, DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED AND CONDITIONALLY
PERMITTED USES
The following list represents those primary uses in the Airport Zoning District which are
Permitted (P), subject to a Development Permit (D) or a Conditional Use Permit (C).
Land Use Activity "A" District
1. Accessory structures and uses typically appurtenant to a principally D
permitted land use activity.
2. Air cargo and air freight terminals. D
3. Aircraft associated activities. D
(a) Aerial fire fighting enterprises. D
(b) Aerial photo and surveying enterprises. D
(c) Air carrier, commuter, scheduled air taxi and D
air taxi operations.
(d) Aircraft wash and wax operations. D
(e) Car rental. D
(f) Flying school or flying club administrative and D
classroom facilities.
(g) Rental of hangar and tie-down space for aircraft storage. D
(h) Sale of aviation petroleum products. D
(i) Sale, rental or charter of aircraft. D
(j) Sale, rental or service of aircraft parts, avionics, D
instruments or other aircraft equipment.
(k) Taxicabs, buses, limousines, rail and other ground D
transportation.
(1) Training Facility. D
4. Aircraft manufacturing and assembly, including manufacture of aircraft D
component parts.
5. Air freight warehousing with outside storage. D
6. Air Museum. D
7. Airport, airfield, helicopter field or port, landing and take-off runways D
and taxiways.
8. Buildings, improvements and activities primarily related to the operation D
of the airport facility, such as hangars, passenger terminal, operation
towers, parking lots, fuel storage and refueling facilities, maintenance,
security and public safety facilities.
9. Cellular and microwave communication facilities. D
10. Fire training facility. D
11. Field crops, truck gardening, berry and bush crops, flower gardening, P
wholesale nurseries and similar open agricultural uses.
12. Hotel/Motel. C
13. Interim Uses (2) D
14. Intermodal Cargo Transfer Facility. D
15. Offices C
16. Packaging and packing of perishable products for air transport. D
17. Preparation of chemical fire retardants as required for aerial fire fighting. D
18. Recreation uses such as park, golf course, golf driving range and similar D
recreational uses involving the open use of land without structures
or improvements.
19. Repair, maintenance, rebuilding, alteration or exchange of aircraft and D
aircraft engine components or other parts.
20. Restaurant food service establishments including sale of alcoholic D
beverages, and retail sales as an accessory use within the terminal facilities.
21. Temporary uses pursuant to Chapter 19.70, Temporary Use Permits, T
subject to approval by the Airport Authority Executive Director and
Director.
22. Truck Terminal including on-site maintenance. C
Other similar uses which the Director finds to fit within the purpose/intent of the Airport District
in compliance with Section 19.02.070(3.)
1. Permits or development applications shall be accepted for processing only with the written authorization
from the Executive Director of the Airport Authority.
2. Interim Uses which are not airport or aviation related may be permitted on airport property for periods not
to exceed 5 years. Interim uses shall be compatible with the airport operations and adjacent uses including
those which may be located or planned off-site of the airport itself. Interim uses must be located within
a fully enclosed structure.
19.12A.030 LAND USE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. GENERAL STANDARDS
A. The following standards are minimum unless stated as maximum.
Table 12A.02
Airport District Development Standards
Minimum Parcel Site 1 acre
Building Separation 10 feet
Front Setback (external streets) 50 feet
Front Setback (internal streets) 10 feet
Side Street Setback 10 feet
Rear Setback 10 feet(2)
Side Setback 10 feet(2)
1) The maximum lot coverage and structure height shall be governed by
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements and regulations.
2) These setbacks are only applicable to new construction on the landside
area.
B. Airport Land Use District Standards
1. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) Airside: Those land uses, activities and portions of building structures
that fall on the airport operations side of a fenced boundary around the
airport separating those operations from direct public access.
(b) Landside: Those land uses, activities and portions of buildings and or
structures that face an adjacent public street or frontage road and are
outside of a fence boundary separating the airport operations area from
public access.
2. The line which separates the airside area from the landside area shall, for the
purposes of this section, be referred to as the airside boundary. This boundary
is shown on a map on file with the Department. This boundary may be adjusted
administratively by the Director over time as development occurs on airport-
owned property fronting on adjacent public streets.
3. The following development standards shall be applicable to all development that
occurs on the landside portion of the airside boundary.
(a) The provisions of Chapter 19.20 Property Development Standards shall
apply.
(b) Setback - all structures shall be set back from Third Street and Del Rosa
Avenue a minimum of 50 feet. A minimum of the first 25 feet adjacent
to the street shall be landscaped. The remaining area may be used for
automobile parking. The setback can be reduced to 25 feet where a
frontage road is constructed on airport property adjacent to Third Street.
4. The regulations provided herein do not supersede or replace any regulations or
limitations governing airport or airfields which have been enacted by State or
Federal agencies,but are in addition to any such regulations or limitation. Where
these regulations are in conflict, State and Federal regulations shall supersede the
provisions of this chapter.
5. Security fencing to be installed on the airside boundary shall consist of eight (8)
foot chain link with three (3) strands of barbed wire as approved by the FAA.
19.12A.040 GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Non-Conforming Structures - The existing structures within the boundaries of
this district shall be exempt from the provisions of Section 19.62.020(7) of this
Development Code for a period of 10 years, commencing on (insert effective date
of the proposed DCA).
2. Off-Site or Shared Parking - Development on the airport shall have the ability for
off-site or shared parking. Parking improvements shall be consistent with the
provisions of this section.
3. All tenant identification and public information signs shall meet the provisions of
Chapter 19.22, Sign Regulations, of this Development Code.
SIGN REGULATIONS-1922
a
a m a o 3 a n
• m „ m a � � p, � .x
4� � , � � � � � p � a— l7 ly • e � ,m
Y i E m m E g
< ° 0-4 0.4 § ° ° S o a
IL E
Q < � E g o a e Ln 0U) tn< ctn c y .4 .m
O
O � e
W
Q
a � g b ' a i r in
CQ gs � E Q � P E
� Q
N > a
W � g aO
pap Z � Ea _ $ E
lull)
a ai
a 3 � t '
mi
w IN Lu
pG
c
W
zz
i
W
rb
W 3 s W
CL
N
Z
a i a u d
M-39 7/92
ATTACHMENT 8
ATTACHMENT A
G19.12A.050 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT DESIGN GUIDELINES
Design Guidelines for airport development shall be the same as the applicable to the
Industrial land Use Districts (Sec G 19.08.050) except as modified herein.
2. APPLICABILTlY
The provisions of this section shall apply to all development located in the landside
portion of the San Bernardino International Airport, as defined in Section 19.11.030
(B)(1)(b) of this chapter and shown on a map on the file in the Department. Any
addition, remodeling, relocation, or construction requiring a building permit shall adhere
to these guidelines where applicable.
3
01/09/1935 02: 45 3 10 4 9 2 0 0 jAMES DEA13UILERA ESQ PAGE 01
JAMES DeAGUILERA
Attorney at Law
341 W- 2nd Street, Suite 6
San Bernardino, Cafiforr a 92401
(%- 9)381-9000
FAX (.909)384-9200
Fax: Transmission Cover Sheet
N07R The following communications, are intended for the eyes of the party to whom die),
are addressed only. The contents of this communication are strictly confidential and are
protected by law from disclosure to any unauthorized person(s). Dyou have received this
transmission in error, please notify sender at once, and return it. via first-class mail, to the
address above. Your cooperation is apprect4ted.
DATE: January 9. 1994
TO: 01.1, Clea's Office
Attention' Melanie Pale
FAX o.40Q, 384 5468
# PAGES FOLLOW- -7
(Please call sender, immediately if entire transmission is nor received).
FROM— Ruth Hardy for Jame; DeAguflera
MESSAGE: Pursuant to YOUI telephone comrrsation this morning with Mr.
DcAguilera. attached is another copy of our January 4, 1994 letter to
Mayor Minor and the Mernbers of the Ciliv Council. We request that this
letter be entered mto the Administrative Record of the Proceedings of the
Public Hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change scheduled to be heard by the City Council at 2:00 p.m. this
afternoon, January 9, ':494.
Thank you.
01/'0911995 08: 15 94^9_!2492 Cl Cl J(VES DEAGUILEPA E'_:::0 PAGE 02
3"s mere
Counselor and ,-Attormg at.Lam
;:amiary 4, 1995
HCn . Torn Minor, Mayc;r
'Iember-S of the CI' 7y CJIi:CZ!
City --f San
-00 Nrt I'D"
San Eernardin(.;, Caj_x--n-' =
Nc r nT ;6 Fc-r a s: c nv e i
C-e
ard Z'
zeaz- lvlavor
TI-i i S R-- ,Iht To Know r 7. RTN a n
:-,f di u al s n^ a---
he apparejjt lack 5, re I e va-it .-r-a or, re,:7a rd-, i-g
the ccnVerS-Jor, Of Ncrtcn Air Fcrce Base to Civill' an use and the
�he
7-i ri'j d r.m a-'t 57 'D7 — "u-�:�:
:"n --:ela�in :ship t-O -environmp,-nal. and
L
p-'r W is(� 0"f 1�CS- L t e � a Z� t 0 k:,0 w
�:'n Jan-la'L'v 8 ; a General
Plan
r-;e ll".-mendmen7. '-.,h:.c-h wily facili-r-an--±
We recrut-sr- rhat chese cormmen�s Le made a par-- Of
the AririinJ zz--rac-" -,re of the prnceedin�i--- 17- ;Is clur pcsil.�ir-n
4
�har: thl' s , P,-,o-j =C-,t' in fart-- , Dart o-6 a larcrer p-r-c-jecrE. Which, -As
W h C 1, 111 a Zia ve S Ll n-If :n r-he envir-�rm. en:i wnich have
nOt :)r mitigated a;-'.1, a--- s"'Ici- , a cc'mplet-e-
-,nvi r--mnenta' TM
re4arred tc ac
the
he
1 . no tasiz- '
-rs a --' nte2:r.dLti,)nal airpD--,-
w- �n --hosA cf -�Le as an A-4f
Force Base . 7 1 1 k I n,,-1 c ana` y2;-Ls cnnfuses r l J.ti sue a'ld, cf
th? magrdi-,. de impacts .
&,-2 St,-Ce' Svlfc 6 LSam Ternal-dimo, Cdl'fcl" a
r
01/09/1995 08: 45 '909384'32eO JANIE 'IE4.GUILEF-A E'SO PAGE 03
7,1.m M-;.nc-, may�,r
Members of the City Ccoun`jj
City of Sari Be _.amino
January 4 , 1995
Page 2
2 Reli,.�LTI-e QT' the T77-A R��devejspme-
M� z,01 a
. he 'Chang �5 in an- US= d
I T a S
as a r--e d w I-' n
i-an Norton F,--t:'c:e 13ase, an-j,
are beyDnd the t'ie rede•4relopmen: P7.
curscr-"
t�ja:: t�-is CLI'-=C-almer is
,. se,i r=neat-L-d jv
—su-zan"-s w=,,
rel.)ar- 'z the Re6,,,�velcpment P1 azri c-�nClucc-,y -. '-I-ac
z1:1e cf date e i v- s e-d A-rar;-znr-'L*/ 1771 "
zhe e
e n,d m'Y n r- F` t ..e ex in q- hl Fa 1
C-:t n e 27 a, recQ,77-, z---d 7-11,e cf :Tcr�'-n A_,
a 7.;c--
C n M'-Z-
t
-'�ase ,
-.n t`menc:me-:
2: f°__ge c e 7, Air Forge, fiase and r 1:1 a C s i w r e f r e n C e t
4 -cc r I- c e
f taw
Flat Amendment Is f,---)r the firsr- the
cf an
F.Irl=c ac th4s wl— _a-d
the City a,,T:-,.hcrizes suc-1-i lan(� use
General P-' c.n t�z-rL-' i�� li�.tie, if any, infl,-i�znce t7,ha:� f--h�-!-
cvc-i� actj,,,ytjes and uJ' r-' c,--t , The
SJ p r em a cy C 1.a,,-i c,
the ai;rhori7v nfl' luczlil 2 aq-,11-3-e
Ors ,
r-h-- s re,asc.,n alnnr,-, it IS imr-eratil,-e t__&= al-I cf the of
cineratlne7 ar J'Lnt�erncaticnal at
411-rior tU th--' z ty
t'c C- -
an
MY clle- ,�s a-e c;' t-he Ge:-.e--al P-
the Cccle unless and
v.ntil and TrnT-,P-c,, Rm-cr-. the Lotali --y c_`
Z'
the -is pr-2-ara,3 . Th,--- a--=- add' cr�,:,-w a-r,—mr==S in
Sea7;en a~j On' Of t1 rements cf
iz ccrrio,'Tcri kncw` edge rlrar the da,,=-Icpme:v� and cptc of
the San jntez-rj,-_--jc.-1a" Air-po::r- 4s par-. cf a 13rcci7
project for conversicn or Norton Air Base to civ-' ! '
.4 1-1 an lase .
Simulta.-,eouslv w--, t.h thc= Citvls to adcp , G.7i:--,eral Plan and
Pevelc)cment 4ode Amendments to -Faciiita--e t-jje Airi�cl-t Auit:tcri --y
act' ivizies, the Cir-y and ara r-l-eparincr a Snecilfic Plan an,.'- ITIR
f retevelop-,e7-. of c'Lher areas of the fcr7-,,er Force Ease .
ThiV craat es the mast cbvious se rent of t-- r-c)tal pro' -t
1395 08: 45 D 0,33 8 4 D 2 X14_1 J4,1ES DE_`GUILEP�21 E-1-11--i. PAGE 0 4
Hcn, Tom Minor, Mayor
Members of the City Ccvjcj I
City of San Bernardinc
January 4 , 1995
Page
The cumu�ar_ive impacts c., 1�raffic, demand fnr public services, air
pollution,, etc . cannot 1-le underst:ocu' by segmenting the projecc jr.,
this. _j
�Iis Matter.
Ad,cliticnally, it is c--mmor, knowledge that last year the
Inland Valley Develc_ome7t Agenc:y expendEd over $'7,1j0 , 00C to prznarf;�
a Master Plan f:)r the tctal-ity of the project " This Master Plan
serves as the "hluc- Pint" 'Lc-- redevelopment oil the " T%'CA lands"
and the airport Tiie Agency avoided pre-paring -a comprehens: ve EIR
MaSLe-17 P11 an ty as a 17eAli-
a I .g S t d e txen��s were made CJ and Qchers that , a-, such as a Ger.era-, Plan Amendmen-, was
pr3cosed, a w,'Duld he prepared On r.he Of
become suhmerge,_i by chc,_,p2.nQ a large pro J I ecr- ones
each with a r•ninimal p
, cLen-nia-1. i' ,npact cn the eriv, ronmen-L
whi--h cumulatively may have disastrous consequence's See BQnzun '
v, -Local- Aaar. v Fgmation ccmin1_c;,si_o_n ( 1975) 11 Cal. . 3d 263 at 2e3 -
-P4 : 118 Cal . Rptr . 249 .
7 -1.nacrs bL- Evaluated 112a-_ he
P'-_ In numer-ous instances , the Initial
d4
_d t-he Redevelopmeni: Prciect EIR, deffers analysis of airport
related activiti-_s, s,,ich as flicht Qiperations and noise, tc a lat°r
time when an airport plan w__11 be pre-pared . Al: this point , there
4 ,
more r—han s�ifficient informaticn available to s-,..1pport a
EIR C-r-
_i_jt OF the pr_jec.r_ 11-(: Lhe
a_ r--_rt ore raninns . PLn Tec,-.1rc,, cq,, e2-:2 o::,,z�T
Plan for San sernarairic in'.ern-iT_ianal
S traints analysis and the
Federal Aviation AdM4njraZjon
tas prepared the a-' r space
In fact , the Tnrer teal Trade POrL Mas'_er Plan
pr;posed a Second runway in or�Jer to increase capacitv to i30, 000
veal.cceraticns per ve . Aaa-n, because of the S,,.apr -
emacy Clause
lim;Gaticns it is d o u ti 1,u I whether r,n c e the General Plan Amendment
is approved, anyone ol_her than t.-II-e ajrport Qperator will control
th-e aizport' s growth . For this reason, it is essential a:-,d a
re,,-,u_4rernc-nt of law that the E17. o- the totality or the project he
prepared at thi5
1 0 9/19,3 10 1:9: 4.5 909 3�R 4 92'IF-1 0 j,-'4-AE`, PEA.,51JILEFY, E':,:'!--' 41,13 E x-15
Hon - Tom Minor, Maycr
Members of the City Council
City of San nernardino
January 4 , 1997
Page 4
shculd we cur -_' -ier, L: at a Poir-,
n
Pzc,,. -S wl'Erl Crenlu4 ae 11
24 1 r 0 1) TMT____'r,__R- _'-_' r -- ",e 71— `,)rnia fist
Dist . 19 a
App 3n 20 , 34 ; 143 �_al Rpt:r . 36F , A stu&v
conducted after approval cf -a pro-, ect- `w-
I,
nave a
dirninis!"_ed infia ence Or, decsion maki.jg "Even if
s"b'ect
apP,cval , it i S to ne 3Q
P 0 S t -h o c r^1r n Vi ag e n,� a c L j `�n 5 t-'r,a z� a s t e:�r` L_
condemned Jn dlecisi,)ns ccr.str�jjf (--(,)A, T
at Cage
arc V . A_n- crel 13 CM,
3d ;;8 at P 242
Rptr .
11 Th e_ I:and a r
of
_aj, —E"c!�' Tl-�e
a- s h e s a L Th_n- h(D
an EIR
7_.Dur! haS- --1ea--ly :�C a,- Lt,(I ha r e--r-i i a�a t n
at-,
-
w'n
-Z' e fa-_r7 ar,_
oil 07
e7j-
Cn tfl��
e.avironmp-n- a,-,d, r-1.e r e,f c r th i�r s a 1 w t1h,r e s h I r:
for the pr_-Qara7icn ct an '-d . L, I
at page 24 . prnouncGme=
'17v
was reaf f-, nr.ej the C a i 0 rn ia Env iron-nen�L-C-1- uai�-Lzv A--;- ( ��Afl )
with the adoption c16 Pub."61"c, Resources code Sep rIcn
any aspect of the pro-iect may cause a S; qnzif4 -a-. t c-ffLnct -n tt-e
env,Lronment , then a n ;FF is d Re re�ar,14 a C Ii o e gs .
Sec . 15003 (b! (I
TrZ d es r ink t-,'-.e fair ai g-L.)men.t teen, nhe Cc,,Ir,_,
ILL21_—a C u h- V,
g - ( 1992 ) 6 Ca' App , 411-b 13,071
underscored the fact that t7he scheme 'gc)vec-n-,` r,:7 the fair
ara-1-ITMe-TIL test e s t aLt I I shes :-* 1cw t]L-Ireshold for req-,A1rir1g an RIP !71
its decision on the standard of --view, the Court stated : "t he fa-- --
argument test is derived from Section 2151 wh-',,-h reqti_- r_=s an
on any m 4 v e a s 4 �a
- -z� effe-, on i�'-
_L un JL L
erLvIrC)nMent - T"'_aL Section cf an in th_=
rs t r S a 7,c P- w'-1 ca:, be f cn tht� Las-' s c'
S-dh,S-Lan74LZ1 -v,-cience r-hat the may ?lave siqnIfi.__:znt effec-
Is S, n �f SUC-
or--, the L h e.r 1�., a!�si:antia.' evid,��-nc�L_
i;r,nact , c(Dr,t--rar*,., is n_`'. aL- -7, te t-- supp. rt de
dispense W rh a r, E I Section 21151 creates e 1::.w 1_hles170_a
reqv.irerr ,nt for I.-itlaj. -�%rena_-A_tinn of an L:IR. and r2fiects E_
pref erenr_-E, for rest i v i n cy d o u 12�t s 17, ta',•o r of a E I R w h on P t r
question is whethe-z such r?vi,w -(.s war-ran fed. Y f-4 at P As�c- 1:316 .
19,3E, OEI 45 ,0 93 413 C jr-`.IEIS DEAr3l-!IILEP, ESC-,., PAGE Ol 6
Membei�z�
Ct San
Januar-,r 4, i99 z-,
Page S
A.1, een Made
S�-Vdy Can�rc7 w, z:ne ic)w
-'%re-gho a re��
r e Parar -, cn of an F, R -., he
4�_,'� I
J- L LCw %)f the --a- S t: -ldy d 1
wh-,' C- ?C1:11
wher. -, ne -s
a` v ay ta u s a s 7 s c: n s,,A q, n e
Ecmz-it-
-nd I `h
tv
I :UC
p rc w a c h �,ul :i h a v C.,
- b e e n F-I a -=r a e'd e I C W
r Q _fir S c"f I Th�--
L a 1 �f 'La
p e
a
ant
documenl�s and tza, t-icar-i3r,
lowever
there iss no evid�z-nc--- Chat thrt rrir-LqaCior: have in f L
teei-� made pa-- cf thls -he p-,r-7,t-:t descriptJon makes n,-
2eferencp tc the mac-er C Fla n fcr Lhe S an 2?=a rzn o inz j r-ja
i-
T 2 T 1 c:F c 7,t a n h er i-i f z a
rull.'.vay cf 0 , C r
o n c I s 4-on, t, a-, -f h;-7- 1 ror.I'--5;.:-t!f a i:rl� 1.']r' .0f GP-ne r a
Pla.-- and T)eve' opinE�nt- Ccdie Amen6menr t-
s w L�,r'n- n a n-p I e d
P-an ,Df the c-f can rnerna`" -4-ir.c wuIA". F--- lesgt cul-, cf
program-c- C-
V, t,i 2:n a I-
and c o,., a-;: in
the ob-j -- c7- iv,��,s c)f ajj- nr-e�, -z�, a.,zm
-i - - I I- - As such, a
These S��atemen*-s sicznifi--ance cf -, he General C;.-Lan
Amendment- . On, L
L has tne authn-witv
e,Lthe-- tc aiitho.-ize nn-- Fe s r.d use r(-�u lzh i r s C;a ri;-=ra I
plan_
S r r k--c i S r e ai5 7-11 e-s e a c r i c ri� axe o f
u"dertaker w i t ho'-,t
monu-me r t a. imr-or"-ance and a.T t�
envirr=men�l-al-1 reVlew .
S--,dy i,:ienlil" ff— as
and "may'.jell pctenttia! sig,-if Ca-,jr
impacts c4- a-: r r Lrces The
m
e= e c rarlscr- of cl
'-a n a t n S (7 1 e n -",1�1�:0 1 v e a n, --m, z� 1C 7'
emi s s icns r f-�I a �Lv�� t.
14 A r F—ce Fase or
Additl- ' onally, the sr,zCly
ne pr�],:�cr w- -h
.v .1�,� - 5 , C,n��_4
t h S'9 1 r Pl,all for j-,C)ast
9/19,9 5 0E, w5
G9:=!E:a'D 2,0 cl JA t E'S 3JILEPA Ez F--�E 0 7
HC:ri . -7cm x-; -c
Membe-z"s �. f n
Jan,ua-C7/
Pa,ae 6
®Z
r
L
n t'0 Z-F,
f d 3 d,
I I-'a 5�, %C ear n,--4
CE QA :'he r
0r, A tn-- 1. V e:a 11,.1 IS a,
v,.�.ir in-.
7 n,;
e.a n
cn
V 7 n
r a -i n,n
for a cl W r-� S r.or
n e
LIC
t
r Op
P-rcl!� C W-
pro _ -,- -, '.t e-4 - ,
pe�m - ty ChB GEn�-�ra' P' an . iI f Z!IC
Car G r,a T-lan
)1 1.Z e S Cl,-, i �- or'e lai-id u5e aC -.has loca-. -`.gin, and
thaC i!F 7-',
r _ ':es ncw
- - ,r,-s� a whi ch
A � Fr
C e a S E e x-I 's Th-4 ,s lan is rf - L'?^r2SE? ?� a
an 1-
�j L4 f f
AE s L r-I-e
v,
P a e s i�,
n
h e r e n c,:--
a e n F-c:t�- a nc, c 1�-1
IC7 t % f7
p L a
A T1
a C t
a C:,. t: a 1.
s s e r� e r n om,_ a rl:i c am: a on s S,- 4
Fcrca iia-zs a c V e
a f c q:�ac�� -s S c a 11 s ).`- f t c Tri e
operaticn of an i-ternw-lDnal: a.-Jrport a�-
f re ic�rhl-- ssrvice, wili , c)f ccl-rse , have S.L b-sta-tiaT
ampasts , w h ilr�pac�, S n �e n e,lra' a'_e trIe
:I u C C )n� S-ae 7le:j S -7 t
A
f F, Ls are n r f a.c L
p r c S p
r 7�7 S ji VIQ_ -q'n,xn Lhar
unl e s s Ie re a r� b 8!��1
E�
1/0 9,119 9 5 08: 45 909.849200 JANIES DEAGUILERA E,::,C P A 1 E 8
H 7 ino r
7j a r,.
7
s
Z E
7-
7r,I
C e S Ei S,
lot,
:fir-
i.
r
w2. am
SAN BERNARDINO
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY Hhw-1 Addw-
- t i3iddiN, 759
lln0I Adder+ S,w BIRNAR(11O JN[1R1NI0N,1 AIRFXAt,(-A V2409
F•,,�i r)Ihn &n UU
\N BIk-RdMI,(,a 9 2 4 0 2 (FoRMeR NI)RioN AFB)
November 14, 1994
City of San Bernardino
Planning and Building Services Department
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Subject: General Plan Amendment Application
Dear Mr. Boughey:
Enclosed herein is an executed City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Services
Department General Plan Amendment Application and related fees, which I am submitting on
behalf of the San Bernardino International Airport Authority (Authority).
The Authority represents that in the event the City of San Bernardino notifies the Authority that'
its approval of the General Plan Amendment has.been legally challenged, the Authority will
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of San Bernardino, its officers, agents and '
employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of San Bernardino.
The Authority further agrees to reimburse the City of San Bernardino for any costs and attorneys'
fees which the City of San Bernardino may be required by the Court to pay as result of such
action.
Thank y u for your consideration of the enclosed Application.
Sincer ,
L�4e4
Dennis Johnson,
President of the Commission
r
1994/2O55.doc
X33