Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.H- Public Works City Council Agenda Report t Meeting Date: (December/5/2016) From: By: , Director [Staff Person Who Prepared the Agenda Item] Subject Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino Approving the Second Street Bridge Replacement Project (Bridge #54C-0411) for Which an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was Prepared in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Synopsis of Previous Council Action 06-16-14 Approved Resolution No. 2014-234 awarding an Agreement to Tetra Tech for the design of bridge replacement at 2nd Street and Warm Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRLS-5033(052), Capital Improvement Project No. SS13- 001, Bridge No. 54C-0411. Background In 2005, an inspection by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Structures Inspection Division revealed that one of the 20 wood columns supporting the 2nd Street Bridge over Warm Creek was decayed and is no longer providing support for the structure (See attached Location Map). Although the loss of support from the decayed column has not resulted in any apparent distress to the bridge, the loss of support reduces the ability of the structure to resist earthquake loads. On January 10, 2012, Caltrans approved the City's application for Federal Highway Bridge Funds in the amount of $2,698,549 for replacement of the bridge, which included $374,760 for Preliminary Engineering (Environmental Document) and Design of the replacement bridge. This amount was increased to $488,360, or by $113,600 in FY 15/16. On June 16, 2014, an Agreement with Tetra Tech in the amount of $470,790 for the design including environmental work for the bridge replacement at 2nd Street and Warm Creek (Federal Aid Project No. BRLS-5033(052) and Capital Improvement Project No. SS13-001, Bridge No. 54C-0411) was approved by the Mayor and Common Council. The first phase of the work is to complete NEPA and CEQA environmental clearance. Tetra Tech has been working with Caltrans to complete the environmental documents required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA clearance is required to meet federal funding requirements and is currently underway with Caltrans as the Lead Agency. Expected completion is March 2017. In addition, clearance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is required to conform to California Law. The City of San Bernardino is the Lead Agency Packet Pg. 164 5.H w City Council Agenda Report 9 under CEQA and the final environmental determination must be adopted by Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council. On April 7, 2016, the Development/Environmental Review Committee (D/ERC) determined that, although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Initial Study have been added to the project. A 30 day review period as required by State law was afforded to allow public input regarding the proposed MND. No comments were received. Therefore, the D/ERC recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) be prepared and approved by Resolution. Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council approve the attached Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Project, approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit "B") and authorize the Director of Community Development or designee to file a Notice of Determination (Exhibit "C") with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County. City staff anticipates returning to the Mayor and Common Council for award of construction contract in approximately one year from completion of the negative declaration. This assumes that there will be no amendment necessary to existing agreement with TetraTech for environmental and design services. Attachments Attachments: Reso Adopting Negative Declaration for 2nd Street Bridge Replacement (DOC) Exhibit A - Second Street Bridge_Final ISMND_08.15.2016 (PDF) Exhibit B - Second Street Bridge MMRP_Aug 2016 (PDF) Exhibit C - Second Street Bridge NOD_August 2016 (PDF) Second St Bridge Vicinity Map (PDF) Ward: Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: Insert information in list form if applicable. Current Business Registration Certificate: [Applicable/Not Applicable] Packet Pg. 165 5.H.a 1 RESOLUTION NO. co .i 2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING THE SECOND STREET BRIDGE 3 REPLACEMENT PROJECT (BRIDGE #54C-0411) FOR WHICH AN INITIAL 0 4 STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED IN rn ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT - 5 AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. 6 WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of this Resolution, the Community Development z 0) 7 Director of the City of San Bernardino prepared an Initial Study in accordance with the a 8 0 California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 ("CEQA"); and Q 0 9 WHEREAS, the Development/Environmental Review Committee reviewed the Initial 10 M N 11 Study and recommends the Mayor and Common Council approve the Mitigated Negative 12 Declaration for the Second Street Bridge Replacement Project (Bridge #54C-0411) (the a� U 13 "Project"); and C. a� 14 WHEREAS, the Project analyzed under the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative 15 Declaration consists of a bridge replacement project for Second Street at Warm Creek in the m 16 L 17 City of San Bernardino; and Cn c 18 WHEREAS, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that o 19 implementation of the Project could result in a number of significant effects on the 20 environment and identified mitigation measures that would reduce the significant effects to a cu 21 less-than-significant level; and Y 22 23 WHEREAS, in connection with the approval of a project involving the preparation of z a� c 24 an initial study/mitigated negative declaration that identifies one or more significant o 25 environmental effects, CEQA requires the decision making body of the lead agency to 0 26 incorporate feasible mitigation measures that would reduce those significant environment a� 27 effects to a less-than-significant level; and 28 Q 1 Packet Pg. 166 5.H.a 1 WHEREAS,whenever a lead agency approves a project requiring the implementation 0 2 of measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment, CEQA also requires a 3 lead agency to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure compliance 0 w 4 with the mitigation measures during project implementation; and `o 5 WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino is the lead agency on the Project, and the a 6 a� Mayor and Common Council is the decision-making body for the proposed Project; and Z, 7 8 WHEREAS,the Mayor and Common Council has reviewed and considered the Initial °c0 Q 9 Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting o: 10 Program for the Project and intends to take actions on the Project in compliance with CEQA 11 � and state and local guidelines implementing CEQA; and w c 12 WHEREAS, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, attached as Exhibit 13 CL 14 A," and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as Exhibit `B," for the 15 Project are,by this reference, incorporated into this Resolution as if fully set forth herein; and m 16 WHEREAS, the Project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect a 17 on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the California Department of Fish and N 18 0 Game Code. 19 0 20 1° NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON 21 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: ° 22 SECTION 1. That the Mayor and Common Council does hereby make the following d Z 23 findings: (1) it has independently reviewed and analyzed the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative 24 Declaration and other information in the record and has considered the information contained a 25 0 therein, prior to acting upon or approving the Project, (2) the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative 26 y 27 Declaration prepared for the Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA and consistent with state and local guidelines implementing CEQA, and (3) the Initial 28 Z 2 Packet Pg. 167 5.H.a 1 Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration represents the independent judgment and analysis of 0 •L 2 the City as lead agency for the Project. The Mayor and Common Council designates the N v 3 Director of Public Works at 300 North "D" Street, Third Floor, San Bernardino, California 0 d 4 92418, as the custodian of documents and records of proceedings on which this decision is `o 5 0 based. 6 d SECTION 2. That the Mayor and Common Council does hereby approve the Project a, 7 r CL 8 and adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and a 9 Reporting Program prepared for the Project. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative d o: 10 Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are: (1) on file in the N cc 11 Community Development Department, located at 300 North "D" Street, Third Floor, San 12 E Bernardino, CA 92418 and(2) available for inspection by any interested person. 13 CD 14 SECTION 3. The Director of Community Development or designee is hereby 15 L m 16 authorized to file a Notice of Determination (Exhibit "C") for said Project with the Clerk of L 17 the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County. N 18 19 0 20 0 21 22 Z 23 C. 24 0 a 25 ;, N 26 27 u, E 28 a 3 Packet Pg. 168 5.H.a 1 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING THE SECOND STREET BRIDGE c 2 REPLACEMENT PROJECT (BRIDGE #54C-0411) FOR WHICH AN INITIAL m STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED IN 3 ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 0 4 AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. Cn 0 5 " o HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and I 6 d Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting 0 7 4- 8 thereof,held on the day of , 2016,by the following vote,to wit: 0 a 0 9 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 10 M MARQUEZ 11 � BARRIOS 12 E 13 VALDIVIA CL 14 SHORETT 15 NICKEL m 16 CHARD in 17 MULVIHILL N 18 0 w r- 19 20 Georgeann Hanna, City Clerk 0 a� 21 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of , 2016. 22 z 23 0) R. CAREY DAVIS, Mayor r 24 City of San Bernardino g 25 Approved as to form: Q GARY D. SAENZ, City Attorney 26 By: OWN 27 E kw) U 28 8 Q 4 Packet Pg. 169 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c . d aEi ca CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO c d Q! INITIAL STUDY v SECOND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT m Project Description and Location: The City of San Bernardino (City), in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), proposes to replace the existing 2nd Street Bridge (bridge) (Bridge #54C-0411) over Warm Creek (creek) L between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue (project). The project area is located approximately U 0.8 mile east of Interstate 215 (1-215) in the City of San Bernardino (San Bernardino), California (see Figure 1, o Project Location Map, and Figure 2, Regional Location Map). The project is included in the Southern California Z Association of Governments (SCAG) 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) project listing a, (Project ID SBDLS08) (SCAG, 2012) (see Appendix A, FTIP Listing).The project qualifies for funding through the CL federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP), and the City is planning on using federal funding for the project. d The existing bridge was founded on timber piles that were driven into the earth, and extend approximately 10 N feet above the natural invert of the creek. The creek is a well-defined, unimproved, natural channel between W the outlet of Town Creek Tunnel and the bridge. Downstream of the bridge, the creek is contained within a N rectangular concrete-lined channel.The existing bridge was constructed in 1952; the bridge includes 17 timber 1* piles in each bent. The deck is 64 feet wide (curb-to-curb) with a 5-foot wide sidewalk on each side. The to original timber bridge deck was replaced in 1965 with a cast-in-place (CIP) concrete bridge deck, which is LO covered by an asphalt concrete (AC) wearing surface with no expansion joints (continuous over the bridge). r 00 According to the Caltrans Historic Bridge Inventory (November 2014), the bridge is not eligible for listing in the CD National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). z r- In an August 2006 Bridge Inspection Report (BIR) prepared by Caltrans, the bridge was assigned a sufficiency N rating of 48 and was flagged as Structurally Deficient with a health index of 51.3. The BIR included S recommendations that the distressed timber elements be replaced; it specifically called for the replacement of L1 Pile Number 11 in Bent Two. The City conducted a field review of the bridge in June 2010 to identify and -a document deterioration and/or damage to the existing bridge structure. The field review concluded that a mL total of seven timber piles were estimated to have 55 percent or less of their original structural capacity; six of L the seven piles identified were found to provide no support to the bridge at all, because they were completely (n a decayed. _ 0 The purpose of the project is to improve the sufficiency rating of the bridge, including improving the longevity of the bridge, reducing maintenance, improving seismic performance, and bringing the design into compliance a with American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. The project would include replacing the existing bridge, widening each sidewalk by one foot, and installing bridge barrier X W railings that conform to AASHTO standards(see Appendix B, Project Area Map).The proposed bridge would be designed to conform to the alignment, profile, and cross section of the existing bridge, except that the new 4) sidewalks would be six feet wide, and the new bridge barrier railings would conform to AASHTO standards (see U Appendix C, Engineering Drawings). Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Packet Pg. 170 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY _ as The replacement bridge would be a continuous-span bridge, and no new piles would be required. The project aEi would require work in the creek channel to remove the existing piles within the creek bed, and there would be temporary impacts on the creek. However, no permanent impacts on the creek would result from the project. None of the existing trees would need to be removed; however, removal of ornamental vegetation within aV sidewalk planters along the surface street would be required to accommodate the bridge replacement. a Vegetation removal would be reduced to the extent feasible. co There is a 12-inch waterline and electrical conduits that would need to be placed or incorporated into or c 0 underneath the bridge, and a 2-inch water irrigation line that may need to be placed or incorporated into or underneath the sidewalks on either side of the roadway.There are gas lines under the roadway; however, they o terminate short of the bridge and would not need to be relocated. U a) During the anticipated 18-month construction period, temporary construction easements (TCE) would be d required on four adjacent parcels: z a� • Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 0135-221-22 is owned by the Superior Court of California (San Bernardino CL Justice Center). Approximately 659 square feet (sf) of the southern portion of the parcel would be used; a 00 parking lot is located on this portion of the parcel. o • APN 0135-221-12 is privately owned and is currently vacant. Approximately 1,441 sf of the southern W portion of the parcel would be used. N co • APN 0135-281-21 is owned by a labor union. Approximately 953 sf of the northern portion of the parcel 7T_ would be used; a parking lot and ornamental landscaping is located on this portion of the parcel. o LO N • APN 0135-281-22 is privately owned. Approximately 622 sf of the northern portion of the parcel would be used; a parking lot is located on this portion of the parcel. of 0 Acquisition of permanent right of way (ROW) would not be required for the project. A portion of the roadway z would be closed from Arrowhead Avenue to Mountain View Avenue during construction, and would be used D as a staging area. A temporary detour would be provided along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet c south of the project area. Meadowbrook Park would be accessible during construction, and no work would be U. m conducted on park property. -a L According to the City's Zoning Map, land uses surrounding the project area are Commercial Office (CO) to the m north, south, and west; and Public Park (PP) and Residential Medium High (RMH) to the east (City of San Bernardino, 2013). Meadowbrook Park and the outlet of Town Creek Tunnel are approximately 500 feet N upstream of the bridge. 0 m U) a X W r d E w a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project PacketPg.171 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY r c d E June 2016 Q PREPARED BY: m W GPA Consulting a, 231 California St. 00 El Segundo,CA 90717 Y v? (310) 792-2690 a c 0 PREPARED FUR: va City of San Bernardino 0 Public Works Department 0 REVIEWED BY: m Z 0 Independently reviewed, analyzed, and exercised judgment in making the determination, by the City of San Bernardino Development/Environmental Review Committee on Am-M-1 W4, pursuant to Section 0 21082 of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Q 0 N d CEQA requires the preparation of an Initial Study(IS)when a proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a governmental agency and is not exempt from CEQA.The purpose of the Initial Study is to determine whether N or not a proposal, not exempt from CEQA, qualifies for a Negative Declaration or if an Environmental Impact Report(EIR) must be prepared. ° 0 1. Project Title: Second Street Bridge Replacement Project `i r 00 2. Lead Agency: City of San Bernardino 300 North "D"Street,San Bernardino,California 92418 Z 3. Contact Person: Mike Grubbs, San Bernardino Public Works Department (909)384-5179 x3330 c 4. Project Location (Address/Nearest cross streets): 2S3 West Second Street m San Bernardino,CA 92408 m L S. Project Sponsor: City of San Bernardino, Public Works Department 0 6. Address: 300 North "D"Street, San Bernardino,California 92418 v� 7. General Plan/Zoning Designations: Q The areas adjacent to the Second Street Bridge are designated as Commercial Office to the north, south, X and west;and Public Park and Residential Medium High to the east. W m E a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 3 Packet Pg. 172 CITY OF SAN B ER N ARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c 8. Description of Project (describe the whole action involved, including, but not limited to, later phases of E the project and any secondary, support, or off-site feature necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets, if necessary): °- Proposed Project a� The purpose of the project is to improve the sufficiency rating of the bridge, including improving the longevity m of the bridge, reducing maintenance, improving seismic performance, and bringing the design into compliance with AASHTO standards. The project would include replacing the existing bridge, widening each sidewalk by 0 one foot, and installing bridge barrier railings that conform to AASHTO standards (see Appendix B, Project Area Map). The proposed bridge would be designed to conform to the alignment, profile, and cross section of o the existing bridge, except that the new sidewalks would be six feet wide, and the new bridge barrier railings would conform to AASHTO standards (see Appendix C, Engineering Drawings). The replacement bridge would be a continuous-span bridge, and no new piles would be required. The project z would require work in the creek channel to remove the existing piles within the creek bed, and there would be c' temporary impacts on the creek. However, no permanent impacts on the creek would result from the project. o None of the existing trees would need to be removed; however, removal of ornamental vegetation within Q sidewalk planters along the surface street would be required to accommodate the bridge replacement. Vegetation removal would be reduced to the extent feasible. M There is a 12-inch waterline and electrical conduits that would need to be placed or incorporated into or 04 v underneath the bridge, and a 2-inch water irrigation line that may need to be placed or incorporated into or cfl underneath the sidewalks on either side of the roadway.There are gas lines under the roadway; however,they o N terminate short of the bridge and would not need to be relocated. ui T During the anticipated 18-month construction period,TCEs would be required on four adjacent parcels: c� 0 • APN 0135-221-22 is owned by the Superior Court of California (San Bernardino Justice Center). Z M Approximately 659 sf of the southern portion of the parcel would be used; a parking lot is located on this N portion of the parcel. _ • APN 0135-221-12 is privately owned and is currently vacant. Approximately 1,441 sf of the southern portion of the parcel would be used. to • APN 0135-281-21 is owned by a labor union. Approximately 953 sf of the northern portion of the parcel L would be used; a parking lot and ornamental landscaping is located on this portion of the parcel. Cn • APN 0135-281-22 is privately owned. Approximately 622 sf of the northern portion of the parcel would be o used; a parking lot is located on this portion of the parcel. N Acquisition of permanent ROW would not be required for the project. A portion of the roadway would be Q closed from Arrowhead Avenue to Mountain View Avenue during construction, and would be used as a staging area. A temporary detour would be provided along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the W project area. Meadowbrook Park would be accessible during construction, and no work would be conducted as on park property. E U r Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Packet Pg.173 v 5.H.b ttth St_ c^ 1414 loth St z z E 9th at V4' lithSt r" i; 9Y7ta13 St E n.. U 8th St Q Vine'_' N '04 7th St F 'a .L 'C m 6th St 4 tinl,?!i1 1 O V s I G3 � fA E nth St E KnI91111k St v d t p 1; u E 4th St 41h S# N tt #'tt f C Z San E C ut't It w Court St to G Bernardino' � �. St _ E 30St o E Bryant St Q PROJECT LOCATION aaleSt � 2nd t €t t it v� �t S* end E King St F rk,,-to fitr., M as Z U- : N CD " el 't,y R i,31 t c,ALy CO Felipe Rd N Lo O tJ' Valley St � w Cluster St Z ' '4`YVatey t < £a E V'liie"r?e"y. RS _ to 0. CD Er Ef? E filth St C d -VV mill st co W Hull St 0 r^ as = V rJ3 � is E HUtdt Q M r < K ' W 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sggq ce Layer Credits:Sources frSF,HE t e U5G5,Inter-p,intrement p Corp,NPCAN,fsri Japan,MET China(Hong Esri ChiH K ),Esr(Thailand), ;'ry �. ,, �" Mies - Tom,Mapmylnd a,O Ope eet Ibutors,and the GIS User bjhoiiYPtrlltq ' - V M r N Q PROJECT LOCATION 2nd Street Bridge Replacement Project San 8eraar an Packet Pg. 174 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY ® E a� a� U M Q d f� d AML W d.+ O U O (n i O w U O) d Z This page has been intentionally left blank. CL 0 .0 Q 0 0 (D Cl) N O N L0 7 O O I 0 Z N c I d co W d Q� L 0 U d U) Q L X W r C d E M U r Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Packet Pg. 175 5.H.b Project Location in California c s E O U rh r Q. d San Bernardino County w taal ay ba. - .. Crt stir nc Tr,,a l k ` m Cl) m Running s° O sprino t„J, L) `i � x O U Z aruscm� �y � a caro ssata an n. a �� * a t ,eu O CD — i N PROJECT LOCATION Cl) y W Ro^.sdEiid H33-t$ - @A-ff9 n "7l asP CA�}e' '? Rl dltti t . e(dln0 Fontana t I, . N mentwo Lp Colton 'Gfl to !tUNy - 00 Radian& .era Linda 6r>n - Z •, Grand ate_ ii LL s a _ ,tee s��i'=' Stnnytlape Fti Eh4 ove ?4 'fir � Glen m AYOn ftutodcwx +' „<r ,lurupa Rrvers4de "°g U) k, A:c e U v4F' '< % wa X s 'a , MVo-r'ete ny 0 1.5 3 4.5 Er(TI. rid), Miles tY yd S te mLazy.A etl t So p ES tMEp DeL m USGS,Int p em EP Corp.,NRCAN,Esri Japan,METI,Esri China(Hong Kong), o pmyl d a co t b t rs,and the GIS User Co unity V N Q REGIONAL LOCATION 2nd Street Bridge Replacement Project �� I19 Packet Pg. 176 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d E a� a. d m a> m U) c 0 U d L 0 U Q1 N Z 0/ This page has been intentionally left blank. c CL 0 Q 0 0 d M N O CD O N LO T 00 O 0 Z { Cn i v/ t (� �I AML W d L .V N 0 V ,,Q^� v! X W Y 0 E U a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Packet Pg. 177 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m E ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ca The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact"as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality m Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils Cn ❑ Hazards&Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning Materials ❑ Noise (❑ Population/Housing 0 Mineral Resources ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services ❑ Mandatory Findings of `o Significance m 0 Determination a' m Z On the basis of this Initial Study,the City of San Bernardino, Environmental Review Committee finds: M _ That the proposed project COULD NOT have significant effect on the environment, and a ❑ 0 a0 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Q 0 That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE v DECLARATION will be prepared. r That the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑ �°i ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. `" w 0 That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ 0 there WOULD NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that ar imposed upon the proposed project. iii m .. m T a� U�la Cn Signature Date 0 4) ©G I J a)C Ll I eP- c Q Printed Name r .n t x w m E • U Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 9 Packet Pg. 178 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY d E ° Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than m Significant with Mitigation Significant No I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ ® ❑ m` scenic vista as identified in the City's General Plan? o a� b) Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ ❑ ❑ ® N including but not limited to trees, rock ° outcroppings, and historic buildings m within a state scenic highway? ° Z c) Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ® ❑ character of the site and its a surroundings? °a Q d) Create a new source of substantial light ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or glare, which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views of the area? N Discussion: La Less Than Significant Impact. A scenic vista is defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of c°•, LO a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. Scenic vistas that are visible from the 00 project area include open views of lawn and trees in Meadowbrook Park to the east, the San CI Bernardino Mountains to the north, and the Blue Mountains to the south.The project would not result z in long-term impacts on scenic vistas because the new bridge would conform to the alignment, profile, and cross section of the existing bridge. Vegetation removal, temporary storage of construction equipment, vehicle use, and traffic signs in the project area could result in short-term impacts on U_ existing views; however, following construction, the project area would be revegetated, construction equipment, vehicles, and traffic signs would be removed, and the proposed bridge would have a m similar appearance as the existing bridge. Therefore, the project would not substantially affect views d ° within or adjacent to the project area, and impacts would be less than significant. l.b No Impact.The project is located near downtown San Bernardino on a roadway that is designated as a o collector street; the project is not located on a state scenic highway (County of San Bernardino, 2012). The closest state scenic highway is State Route 38 (SR-38) (Caltrans, 1999), nearly 40 miles east of the N project area. There are trees and open views of Meadow Brook Park that are visible from the project Q area; however, these scenic resources are not located within a state scenic highway. Therefore, there X would be no impact. W c Lc Less Than Significant Impact. The visual character of the project area and surroundings can be E described as an urbanized, downtown area that is developed with roadways, paved parking lots, high- U rise commercial buildings, multi-family residences, and a public park (Meadow Brook Park). Because a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 10 Packet Pg. 179 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m the new bridge would conform to the same vertical profile of the existing bridge,the project would not E result in long-term impacts on the visual character of the project area or vicinity. Vegetation removal, 2 temporary storage of construction equipment, vehicle use, and traffic signs in the project area could 0 result in short-term impacts on existing views; however,following construction,the project area would a� be revegetated, construction equipment, vehicles, and traffic signs would be removed, and the :22 L ' proposed bridge would have a similar appearance as the existing bridge. Therefore, the project would not substantially affect the existing visual character of the project area or its surroundings, and c impacts would be less than significant. 0 d I.d Less Than Significant Impact.The new bridge would include the same amount and intensity of lighting o as the existing bridge and would be constructed of similar materials; therefore, the project would not result in additional sources of daytime or nighttime light or glare. Temporary lighting at construction o staging areas may be necessary for public safety and security; however, any nighttime lighting would 0 be directed towards the project area, and would not be expected to substantially affect nighttime views in the area. Following construction, nighttime lighting at the bridge would be consistent with the CL existing bridge.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Q 0 N G1 II. AGRICULTURE and FORESTRY RESOURCES— Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than Would the project: Significant with Mitigation Significant No N Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland E] E of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as Q shown on the maps prepared pursuant to "' r the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring o Program of the California Resources pl Agency,to a non-agricultural use? 2 0 b) Conflict with agricultural zoning, an existing agricultural use, or Williamson Act U_ Conservation Contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause ❑ ® °� rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public Resources a c Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned U Timberland Production (as defined by cn Government Code Section 51104[g])? Q w d) Result in the loss of forest land or El conversion of forest land to non-forest w use? c 0 E e) Involve other changes in the existing ® -� environment which, due to their location w a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 11 Packet Pg. 180 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY _ m or nature, could result in conversion of E a� Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest a d use? a� Discussion: ca T Il.a No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation (CDOC), the land surrounding the U) a project area is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land (CDOC, 2012). There is no Prime Farmland, o U Unique Farmland, or Farmland of State Importance within or adjacent to the project area; therefore, v there would be no impact. o U Il.b No Impact. The Williamson Act enables local governments to enter into contracts with private o landowners for the purpose of restricting specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space use. The project area is not located on land under a Williamson Act Contract, and there are no Z a) agricultural uses or zoning within or adjacent to the project area;therefore,there would be no impact. _ CL Il.c-d No Impact. According to the CDOC, the land within and surrounding the project area is designated as a Urban and Built-Up Land (CDOC, 2012). There are no forest lands or timberland zoning or uses within N or near the project area;therefore,there would be no impact. Cn Il.e No Impact. According to the CDOC, the land surrounding the project area is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land (CDOC, 2012). There is no agricultural or forest land within or adjacent to the project area;therefore,there would be no impact. f° 0 N T 00 Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than °I Significant with Mitigation Significant No III. AIR QUALITY—Would the project: Z Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Ri of the applicable air quality plan? (South E LL Coast Air Basin) 4 a b) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ m` contribute substantially to an existing projected air quality violation based on co the thresholds in the SCAQMD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook?" 0 m c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net ❑ ❑ ® ❑ increase of any criteria pollutant for a which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or W state ambient air quality standard r (including releasing emissions that exceed = quantitative thresholds for ozone U precursors)? :4 a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 12 Packet-Pg. 181 9 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ ® El 0 0 pollutant concentrations? Q. m e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial number of people based on :a the information contained in the Project m Description Form? c 0 f) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, ❑ ❑ ® El 0 4) as either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the ° environment? 44) 0 CID g) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, ❑ ❑ ® El °' Z or regulation of any agency adopted for 0 the purpose of reducing the emission of CL greenhouse gases? Q 0 Discussion 0 Ill.a Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management M District(SCAQMD).The SCAQMD has prepared a sequence of air quality management plans (AQMP)to achieve federal and California standards for healthy air quality. The new bridge would have the same m number of lanes and capacity as the existing bridge, and would not result in additional vehicles on the o N roadway that could generate additional operational emissions compared to existing conditions. ui r However, demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the replacement bridge could generate o fugitive dust. In addition, construction vehicles traveling to and from the project area could generate o� Z temporary emissions. However, construction impacts would be short-term and temporary 2 Cn (approximately 18 months), and construction activities would be conducted in compliance with — M SCAQMD standard regulations, such as SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), which requires = ii implementation of measures to prevent, reduce, or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. Measures include d� maintaining the stability of soil through pre-watering the site before any clearing or grubbing activities. :a L In addition, SCAQMD Rule 403 requires the cleanup of construction-related dirt on approach routes to r m the site, and prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area visible beyond the property line of the emission source. The project N would also comply with California Air Resources Board (CARB) In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle 0 Regulation, which includes enforceable elements, such as limits on vehicle idling to no more than five Cn consecutive minutes, and equipment reporting and labeling. With compliance with these standard at regulations, potential impacts on implementation of the AQMP would be substantially minimized, and impacts would be less than significant. X W Ill.b. Less Than Significant Impact. Air quality standards that are applicable to the project area include the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants, which are ozone (03), E particulate matter (PMio), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide 0 is Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 13 Packet Pg. 182 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d (NO2), sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead. The California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) include m these same criteria pollutants, as well as visibility reducing particulates, hydrogen sulfide, and sulfates. M Q. Land uses adjacent to the project area consist of commercial, open space, and multi-family residential. Existing emissions are primarily related to passenger vehicles, trucks, and landscaping maintenance -aM equipment emissions. Because the project includes the replacement of an existing bridge, the project m would not be expected to result in a permanent increase in pollutant emissions above existing in conditions. c 0 U Demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the replacement bridge could generate fugitive dust (PMio and PM2.5) and diesel engine exhaust (which includes the 03 precursors, volatile organic o compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOJ). Construction emissions would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 months), and with compliance with CARB regulations and SCAQMD Rule 403 as discussed in Response Ill.a, potential impacts would be substantially minimized. Therefore, z impacts would be less than significant. c CL Ill.c Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), a 6,600 0a square mile area that includes all of Orange County and portions of surrounding Los Angeles, San `z 0 Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. The SCAB is currently designated as a nonattainment area for 0 federal and state 03, PM1o, and PM2.5 standards, and the state NO2 standard. San Bernardino County is M - also currently designated as a nonattainment area for the state and federal lead standard. For the m remaining state and federal standards,the SCAB is designated as an attainment or unclassified area. The new bridge would have the same number of lanes and capacity as the existing bridge, and would C°,, not result in additional vehicles on the roadway that could generate additional operational emissions r compared to existing conditions. Demolition and construction could generate fugitive dust, and CI construction vehicles traveling to and from the project area could generate fugitive dust. However, Z construction emissions would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 months), and with N compliance with CARB regulations and SCAQMD Rule 403 as discussed in Response Ill.a, emissions of c criteria pollutants during project construction would be substantially minimized. Therefore, the UL project's contribution to regional criteria pollutant emissions would be less than cumulatively 'a considerable, and impacts would be less than significant. m 2 Ill.d Less Than Significant Impact. Existing sensitive receptors include multi-family residences located L within 500 feet of the project area. The project would not result in a permanent increase in pollutant co emissions compared to existing conditions. However, demolition of the existing bridge and c construction of the replacement bridge could generate fugitive dust. In addition, construction vehicles traveling to and from the project area could generate temporary emissions. Construction emissions N would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 months), and with compliance with CARB a regulations and SCAQMD Rule 403 as discussed in Response Ill.a, potential impacts would be X substantially minimized;therefore, impacts would be less than significant. W Ill.e Less Than Significant Impact. Construction equipment would generate odors (diesel exhaust) that 0 could affect people on adjacent properties. However, these odors would be temporary, limited to daytime hours, and isolated to the immediate vicinity of construction activities. In addition, these a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 14 Packet Pg. 183 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY w odors would not be unfamiliar or necessarily objectionable.Therefore, potential odors from the project E would not be expected to affect a substantial number of people, and impacts would be less than cc o. significant. m Ill.f Less Than Significant Impact. The new bridge would have the same number of lanes and capacity as a the existing bridge.Therefore, project operation would not result in additional vehicles on the roadway m that could generate emissions above existing conditions. However, construction activities could Cn generate greenhouse gas emissions. The SCAQMD suggests applying greenhouse gas efficiency c 0 thresholds to projects with yearly emissions of 1,100 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) or greater. For projects that have emissions below this threshold, the effect is considered 0 less than significant. The project would not be expected to exceed the established thresholds because construction would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 months), and would comply with o CARB regulations and SCAQMD Rule 403 as discussed in Response III. a. Therefore, impacts would be z less than significant. r Ill.g Less Than Significant Impact. The project would be designed in compliance with the California Green o Building Standards Code, which includes requirements to increase recycling, reduce waste, reduce Q water use, and implement other measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.The project would not m result in additional vehicles on the roadway that could generate emissions above existing conditions. In addition, the project would not substantially conflict with any greenhouse gas reduction plans, policies, N m or regulations because construction would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 months), 7 ., and would comply with CARB regulations and SCAQMD Rule 403 as discussed in Response III. a. CO 0 Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. N LO 00 0 I IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than Z Significant with Mitigation Significant No 2 project: T Impact Incorporated Impact Impact R a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either = ❑ ❑ directly or through habitat modifications, El U-1 on any species identified as a candidate, a' -a sensitive, or special status species in local m` or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or m by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? N c 0 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ ® ❑ ❑ cn riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional `t plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or w U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Ar c m c) Have a substantial adverse effect on ❑ ® ❑ ❑ federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 15 Packet Pg. 184 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? a� 07 d) Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑ ® ❑ ❑ m any native resident or migratory wildlife U) corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? o v m e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances El El ❑ protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy of ordinance? o a� f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural _ r Community Conservation Plan, or other o approved local, regional, or state habitat < conservation plan? 0 m o: Discussion M N The following discussion incorporates the results of the Natural Environment Study (NES) that was CD conducted for the project (GPA Consulting, 2016). The biological study area (BSA) includes the area cc that could be directly impacted by the project, either temporarily or permanently, and a buffer around C°14 the project area to encompass areas that could be indirectly affected. The BSA encompasses r 00 approximately 1.73 acres and includes the bridge, the area approximately 100 feet east and west of of the bridge, and the creek channel approximately 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project Z area. Biological reconnaissance surveys were conducted of the BSA on April 22, April 23 and May 6, 2015. c The BSA is in an urban area adjacent to a city park, and provides limited habitat for wildlife species; d i wildlife observed in the BSA includes multiple bird species, bats, mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis), and -a bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus). Existing vegetation consists primarily of disturbed and ornamental m .r landscaping.There are native and non-native plant species growing within and adjacent to the BSA. y L .V IV.a No Impact. A search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) was conducted, and a United States Fish and wildlife Service (USFWS) species list was reviewed for the project. According to 0 the CNDDB, there are several candidate, sensitive, and special-status plant and wildlife species with in the potential to be in the project area, based on geographic distribution. However, no federally or Q state-listed special status plant or wildlife species were identified within the BSA during the biological surveys, and based on existing habitat, these species are not expected to be in the BSA. Therefore, x W there would be no impact. r IV.b Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. There is marginal riparian habitat along the E northeastern bank in the BSA. There are a limited number of native riparian trees, including Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). The trees are small in stature, and their q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 16 Packet Pg. 185 u n CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m understory includes sparse, non-native vegetation. The project would include vegetation removal, but E tree removal is not anticipated. Construction would require minor activities within the creek, including o CL the use of a bobcat which would be lowered into the creek from the bridge deck to prevent impacts on the creek bed and riparian vegetation. A minor water diversion would be installed under the bridge structure to shift the creek flow to the opposite side of the creek bed and allow work on the bridge pilings. No heavy machinery would be operated within the creek, and a protective netting would be m used to prevent debris from entering the creek. Work within the creek would result in 0.04 acre of -a c temporary impacts on disturbed riparian vegetation. Native riparian species, including Oregon ash and 0 white alder, would be impacted during construction; however, no permanent impacts on riparian in L habitat would result from the project. The following mitigation measures are proposed to assure there ,o would be no substantial loss of riparian habitat as a result of work within the creek. With o implementation of mitigation measures discussed below, impacts would be less than significant. Z Mitigation Measures To avoid and minimize potential impacts on riparian habitat,the following avoidance and minimization c measures would be implemented: Q 0 MM 1310-1: Work areas would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and staging areas would be in the upland area along the roadway and outside of the creek channel. co N MM 1310-2: Staging areas would be restricted to upland areas, outside of the creek corridor, to minimize impacts on the creek and riparian habitat. cfl 0 MM 1310-3: Following project construction, disturbed areas would be restored to their pre-project ui conditions or better, and any re-vegetation or erosion control implemented would be completed using co 0 native species. Z MM 13I0-4: Individual trees and shrubs with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of four inches or less N that must be trimmed but do not require complete removal would be cut at ground level with hand tools to allow for regrowth and reduce disturbance of the surrounding vegetation. i MM 1310-5: The water diversion plan would be consistent with regulatory permit and agreement -a0' requirements, and would be submitted to appropriate resource agencies for approval prior to m construction. Discussion Cn c IV.c Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The creek flows through the BSA and flows to the 0 Santa Ana River south of the project area. The channel is under the jurisdiction of the United States cn Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the Q California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Because the project would require work within the >_ creek, a Pre-construction Notification (PCN) under Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Nationwide w Permit 14 from the USACE, CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW would E 'A1�'' be required. Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 17 Packet Pg. 186 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m A jurisdictional delineation was conducted on May 6, 2015, to delineate wetlands and other waters of E the United States (U.S.) and state in the BSA. Wetlands were delineated in two locations within the CL BSA: upstream of the bridge along the edge of the flowing portion of the creek, and immediately downstream of the bridge, on a sand bar in the channel. There are approximately 0.03 acre of a) wetlands and 0.15 acre of non-wetland waters of the U.S. in the BSA. co W Under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, the limits of CDFW's jurisdiction is defined Lo as the top of the bank to the top of the opposite bank of a stream, channel, or basin, or to the outer c 0 limit of riparian vegetation located within or immediately adjacent to the river, stream, creek, pond, or U lake or other impoundment, whichever is greater. There is approximately 0.50 acre of waters of the o state under CDFW jurisdiction within the BSA. U a) Construction would require activities within the creek channel, including the use of a bobcat which would be lowered into the creek from the bridge deck, and a minor water diversion. The water z diversion would be installed under the bridge structure to shift the creek flow to the opposite side of c the creek bed and allow work on the bridge pilings. No heavy machinery would be operated within the o creek, and a protective netting would be used to prevent debris from entering the creek. Q 0 The project would result in temporary impacts on approximately 0.03 acre of jurisdictional wetlands, 0 as well as 0.15 acre of other waters of the U.S. and 0.04 acre of other waters of the state. Construction impacts on water quality could also impact wetlands indirectly. Because the project would require work within the creek, a PCN under CWA Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 from the USACE, CWA W Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and a California Fish and Game Code Section c N 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW would be required. However, with ui implementation of mitigation measures discussed below, impacts would be less than significant. c Mitigation Measures z E In addition to mitigation measures MM 1310-1, MM 1310-2 and MM 1310-3 in Section IV.b,the following N measures would be implemented to avoid and/or minimize impacts on wetlands and other S jurisdictional waters: -I a� MM 1310-6: Best management practices (BMP), such as silt fencing, fiber rolls, straw bales, or other measures would be implemented during construction to minimize dust, dirt, and construction debris leaving the construction area. ; MM 1310-7: All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, would be stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover, or vegetative ground cover. Cl) Q MM 1310-8: All unpaved access roads would be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water of s chemical stabilizer/suppressant. w MM 1310-9: Appropriate hazardous material BMPs would be implemented to reduce the potential for chemical spills or contaminant releases into the creek, including any non-stormwater discharge. m E MM BIO-10: All equipment refueling and maintenance would be conducted in the upland staging area away from the creek, wetlands, and other sensitive areas per standard specifications and regulatory a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 18 Packet Pg. 187 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY v permits. In addition, vehicles and equipment would be checked daily for fluid and fuel leaks, and drip E pans would be placed under all equipment that is parked and not in operation. a MM BIO-11: Vegetation removed from the BSA would be treated and disposed of in a manner following the recommendations of the California Invasive Plant Council to prevent the spread of a invasive species on site or off site. BMPs may include, but are not limited to, identification of existing m invasive species, avoidance of invasive species in erosion control, staff training, equipment cleaning in when entering and exiting the project area, and monitoring. o U MM BIO-12: A restoration plan will be developed to replace wetlands impacted at a minimum ratio of � 1:1; however, the final ratio will be identified through consultation and coordination with resource agencies during the permitting process. The revegetation plan will include a summary of impacted vegetation, a planting plan, mitigation ratios, and success criteria based on resource agency requirements. The revegetation plan will be developed in coordination with and approved by the z CDFW and USACE prior to implementation. a MM BIO-13: Invasive plant species in the project area will be removed and disposed of in a manner 0 that minimizes the potential for their reestablishment. Invasive plants will be identified by a biologist `t 0 prior to their removal and removal procedures will follow the recommendations of the California Invasive Plant Council. If herbicides are applied, they will be applied in compliance with applicable co state and federal laws. cNc Discussion 0 IVA Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Ci T Migratory Birds of A query of the CDFW Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) and a site survey were z conducted to determine the likelihood for the BSA to be used as a migratory wildlife corridor. The BSA Cn consists of trees and various types of vegetation that could provide suitable foraging or nesting habitat for birds. Five bird species were observed in the BSA during surveys, including the house finch LL� (Hoemorhous mexiconus), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), black phoebe (Saynoris nigricans), v American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), and common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas). Therefore, there m is the potential for migratory birds to be in the BSA during construction, including the Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii) and yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), both of which are state-listed as species Cn of special concern. 0 Tree and vegetation removal could result in direct impacts on migratory birds and raptors if these in activities are conducted while birds are nesting within or adjacent to the affected areas. Temporary Q noise-generating activities, such as excavation, grading, and paving, could also result in temporary indirect impacts on nesting birds and raptors if they were loud enough to result in disturbance. x However, with implementation of avoidance and minimization measures discussed below, impacts W Y would be less than significant. as E U w a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 19 Packet Pg. 188 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d Mitigation Measures y U To avoid and minimize potential impacts on nesting migratory birds and raptors, the following o. avoidance and minimization measures would be implemented: d MM BIO-14: If construction is scheduled to begin during bird nesting season (typically February 15 to -a .7 September 15), nesting bird surveys would be completed no more than 48 hours prior to construction m to determine if there are any nesting birds or active nests within or adjacent to the project area (within N 300 feet for birds and 500 feet for raptors). Surveys would be repeated if construction activities are o U suspended for three days or more. rn L MM BIO-15: If nesting birds are found in the BSA, appropriate buffers consisting of orange U flagging/fencing or similar (typically 300 feet for birds and 500 feet for raptors) would be installed and 0 maintained until nesting activity has ended, as determined in coordination with the project biologist and regulatory agencies, as appropriate. a, c Bats o "0 All bats are protected under the California Fish and Game Code. Bats were detected during emergence Q 0 surveys on both sides of the bridge, and were observed downstream of the bridge foraging in the shallow creek. It was not determined where the bats originated from. Signs of roosting bats were not observed under the bridge during the surveys, although suitable roosting habitat is present. It is also possible that bats may be roosting on the adjacent bridge at Arrowhead Drive, but this was not confirmed. Bats could be directly impacted if they are roosting in the bridge structure during c construction. Construction noise and vibration could indirectly impact bats if they are roosting LO immediately adjacent to construction activities, and are disturbed by these activities. Tree removal is 7 0 not anticipated; however, if trees were to be removed, bats could be directly impacted during tree of removal. The existing habitat is marginal, and because of the high human usage, the bridge location is Z not considered desirable habitat. In addition, with implementation of avoidance and minimization measures discussed below, impacts would be less than significant. c E i Mitigation Measures m a� 72 To avoid and minimize potential impacts on bats, the following avoidance and minimization measures m would be implemented: MM BIO-16: Prior to construction, all trees within 100 feet of the project area would be surveyed by a qualified bat specialist to determine the presence/absence of bats and any active or potential bat- 0 roosting cavities. During the non-breeding and active season, any bats roosting in trees would be safely N evicted under the direction of a bat specialist and under consultation with the CDFW. Q MM BIO-17: Once it has been determined that all roosting bats have been safely evicted from roosting cavities, exclusionary devices approved by the CDFW would be installed and maintained to prevent w bats from roosting in these cavities prior to and during construction. d MM BIO-18: Pre-construction bat surveys would be conducted by a qualified bat specialist no more E AF A than seven days prior to the removal of any trees within the project area to confirm that exclusionary Y measures have been successful and there are no bats within the project area. If no roosting bats are Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 20 Packet Pg. 189 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m detected, no further surveys would be required provided the tree removal is completed within seven E days. If removal is delayed more than seven days from the survey date, additional surveys would be M conducted no more than seven days prior to tree removal to ensure that no bats have moved into the 0 area. 2 MM BIO-19: Surveys and exclusion measures are expected to prevent maternal colonies from m becoming established within 100 feet of the project area. In the event that a maternal colony of bats is N found, the CDFW would be consulted, and no work would be conducted within 100 feet of the c 0 maternal roosting site until the maternal season is over or the bats have left the site, or as otherwise directed by the CDFW. The site would be designated as a sensitive area and protected until the bats o have left the site or the young bats are volant. No clearing and grubbing would be authorized adjacent to the roosting site. Combustion equipment, such as generators, pumps, and vehicles, would not to be o parked nor operated under or within 100 feet of the roosting site. Construction personnel would not Z enter into areas beneath the colony, especially during the evening exodus. Discussion o IV.e No Impact.There are no oak trees in the project area, and the project would not conflict with any local Q 0 policies or ordinances protecting biological resources;therefore,there would be no impact. Discussion M N IV.f No Impact. The project area is not located within the limits of a regional conservation plan such as a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan; therefore, there would be no 0 impact. ,N r 00 O 1 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than Z Significant with Mitigation Significant N project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact �o c a) Be developed in a sensitive ❑ El 1:1 ❑ U. i archaeological area as identified in the a, City's General Plan? m b) Cause a substantial adverse change in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ a the significance of an archaeological Cn resource as defined in CEQA Section c 0 15064.5? m Cn c) Cause a substantial adverse change in ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Q the significance of a historic resource Z pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5? x w d) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ® ❑ paleontological resource or site unique E to geologic feature? Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 21 Packet Pg. 190 rL+" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY .r a� V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than ' project: Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a� e) Disturb any human remains, including ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 0 those interred outside formal L ■ cemeteries? 00 Discussion = 0 U The following discussion incorporates the results of the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) and Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) that were conducted for the project (Statisical Research, Inc., 2016). The HPSR and ASR included results of consultation with local historical organizations (City Historic Preservation Commission and City Historical and Pioneer Society), the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and Native American tribes; a records search at the South Central z Coastal Information Center(SCCIQ and observations during field surveys. c' 0. V.a Less Than Significant Impact. The City's General Plan does not identify the project area as a sensitive 00 archaeological area. In addition, according to the ASR prepared for the project, the project area was `r 0 not identified as being sensitive for archaeological resources (Statistical Research, Inc., 2016). According to the ASR, there is limited potential for buried archaeological remains within the creek M because of the history of flooding within and surrounding the project area. In addition, in 2004, Caltrans performed archaeological data recovery excavations immediately north and west of the creek (Costello & Hallaran, 2010), and extensive archival research was performed for the entire city block. N During this study, no subsurface archaeological remains were encountered on the west bank of the ui creek. Therefore, the project area has not been identified as a sensitive archaeological area, and the c likelihood is very low that there are buried archaeological remains in the project area. As a standard ❑� practice, if cultural materials are discovered during construction, all earth-moving activity within and M Cn around the immediate discovery area would be diverted until a qualified archaeologist can assess the M nature and significance of the find. With adherence to standard procedures related to archaeological S U_ resources, impacts would be less than significant. d a� V.b Less Than Significant Impact. No archaeological resources that meet the definition in CEQA Section m 1S604.S were identified in the project area during the completion of an ASR that was prepared for the project (Statistical Research, Inc., 2016). As a standard practice, if cultural materials are discovered N during construction, all earth-moving activity within and around the immediate discovery area would be diverted until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find. With 0 adherence to standard procedures related to archaeological resources, impacts would be less than in significant. a V.c No Impact. According to the Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) prepared for the project, the X bridge is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and is not a significant w resource under CEQA (Statisical Research, Inc., 2016). In addition, no historic resources were identified m in the project area during completion of the HPSR, which included consultation with local historical E L) organizations,the NAHC, and Native American tribes; completion of a records search at the SCCIC; and field surveys of the project area (Statistical Research, Inc., 2016). During the 2004 Historical a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 22 Packet Pg. 191 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d Archaeology Data Recovery Report for the Caltrans District 8 San Bernardino Headquarters Demolition E Project, which included extensive archival research for the entire city block, no historical-period 2 CL development, except for the bridge, was identified in the project area (Costello & Hallaran, 2010). No historic resources have been identified in the project area;therefore,there would be no impact. V.d-e Less Than Significant Impact. According to the HPSR and ASR completed for the project, no m paleontological resources or burial sites have been identified in the project area (Statisical Research, Cn Inc., 2016). As a standard practice, if cultural materials are discovered during construction, all earth- 0 moving activity within and around the immediate discovery area would be diverted until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find. In accordance with State Health and o Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are discovered, further disturbances and activities would stop in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains, and the County Coroner would be o contacted. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98, if the remains are Z thought to be Native American, the coroner would notify the Native American Heritage Commission = (NAHC),which would then notify the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). Further provisions of PRC 5097.98 a would be followed as applicable. With adherence to standard procedures, State Health and Safety Q Code Section 7050.5, and PRC Section 5097.98, impacts would be less than significant. 0 0 Q! c14 Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the �t Significant with Mitigation Significant project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact � 0 N a) Involve earth movement (cut and/or fill) ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Ln based on information contained in the o 0 Preliminary Project Description? 1 0 Z b) Expose people or structures to ❑ ® ❑ ❑ T substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,or death? U_ m I c) Be located within an Alquist-Priolo ❑ ❑ ® ❑ °' Earthquake Fault Zone? m T m d) Result in erosion, dust or the loss of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ in topsoil? -a c 0 e) Be located within an area subject to ❑ ❑ ❑ ® in landslides, mudslides, subsidence, or other similar hazards as identified in the a City's General Plan? X f) Be located within an area subject to El El ❑ w liquefaction as identified in the City's General Plan? a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 23 Packet Pg. 192 ti CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY d VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a g) Modify any unique geological or physical ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 0� feature based on a site survey/ L evaluation? 0a T N h) Result in erosion, dust, or unstable soil ❑ ❑ ® ❑ o conditions from excavation, grading, fill, or other construction activities? N L 0 V� i) Other: Development within Hillside ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ a� Management District on slopes in excess of 15 percent. Z c Discussion CL 0 The following discussion incorporates the results of the Geotechnical Investigation that was conducted a for the project (Diaz, Yourman & Associates, 2010). The Geotechnical Investigation provides 0 geotechnical recommendations for the project, based on review of available as-built data, a site Z reconnaissance, a field investigation, and discussions during the project development team (PDT) N cc meetings. Vl.a-b Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The project would require excavation to remove the existing bridge and construct the new bridge; however, excavation is anticipated to be no more `; than five feet in depth. In addition, according to the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the 00 0 project, compacted fill would be placed in the project area to support the new bridge foundation (Diaz, 0 Yourman & Associates, 2010). The excavation and fill volume would be approximately 102 cubic yards Z of soil. N Cut and fill activities could result in unstable subsurface conditions in the project area, thereby exposing people or structures to potential hazards, including the risk of loss, injury, or death. All cut and fill activities would be performed in accordance with current standards and general requirements for performing earthwork activities, such as grading and material requirements. In addition, with implementation of mitigation measure MM-GEO-1 below, the project would be designed to minimize +; potential geology and soils hazards, including the exposure of people or structures to the risk of loss, c injury, or death. 0 d A Caltrans Bridge Inspection Report conducted in August 2006 concluded that the existing bridge is N structurally deficient. The purpose of the project is to improve public safety by replacing the existing Q deficient bridge with a structurally sound bridge, which would reduce potential adverse effects on people or structures, including the risk of loss, injury, or death. In addition, with compliance with w standard procedures and implementation of mitigation measure MM GEO-1, impacts would be less a� than significant. E U a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 24 Packet Pg. 193 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c Mitigation Measures E MM GEO-1: Prior to issuance of building permit, the project Applicant shall submit plans to the City of o San Bernardino for review and approval demonstrating project compliance with the latest adopted edition of the California Building Standards Code seismic requirements and the recommendations of a design-level geotechnical investigation. All soil engineering recommendations and structural foundations shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer. The approved plans shall be ® incorporated into the project. All onsite soil engineering activities shall be conducted under the O supervision of a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist. 0 Vl.c Less Than Significant Impact. According to the CDOC,the project is not located within an Alquist-Priolo 0 Earthquake Fault Zone. However, there are several faults in proximity to the City, including the San Andreas Fault to the north, the San Jacinto Fault to the west, and the Banning Fault to the South; a, therefore, ground shaking would likely occur in the project area during an earthquake on nearby z faults. Because Southern California is a seismically active area, there is a potential for seismic events in c r the region as a whole. Therefore, the 2013 California Building Code includes seismic design o requirements that all projects are required to comply with. With compliance with the 2013 California a Building Code, potential impacts would be substantially minimized. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. M VIA Less Than Significant Impact. Based on soil boring tests conducted during the Geotechnical 04 Investigation for the project, it was determined that the first 15 feet of soil consist of loose to medium ca dense, silty sand with traces of fine gravels and cobbles (Diaz, Yourman & Associates, 2010). These o N soils could be susceptible to erosion during construction activities, including clearing, trenching, and Sri r excavation, which could result in dust and the loss of topsoil, especially during high winds, rainfall, or o other storm events. o� Z Construction is scheduled to be completed during the dry season, which would reduce potential N impacts related to storm events. In addition, the project would be constructed in accordance with the CWA Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) Permit, which requires a iii Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and implementation of BMPs aimed at reducing soil erosion and the loss of topsoil in the project area. m With compliance with the NPDES permit, potential impacts would be substantially minimized; m therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Vl.e No Impact. According to the City's General Plan, the project area is not susceptible to landslides or o mudflows, and no subsidence has been recorded in the city since 1972 (City of San Bernardino, 2005). U The project area is not located in an area subject to landslides, mudslides, subsidence, or other similar N hazards as identified in the City's General Plan;therefore,there would be no impact. a r Vl.f Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction occurs when strong earthquake shaking causes water-. x saturated soils to collapse from a sudden loss of strength and cohesion, transforming the soil to a w r liquefied state. According to the City's General Plan, the City is located over an underground lake, E which increases the risk of liquefaction (City of San Bernardino, 2005); therefore, the project area is located in an area with a high potential for liquefaction. The project would be constructed in Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 25 Packet Pg. 194 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m compliance with the 2013 California Building Code, which would ensure that bridge structure and foundation are designed to prevent collapse. In addition, soils in the project area would be stabilized M through the use of compacted fill, which would support the bridge foundation and minimize potential 0 hazards.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. •a Vl.g No Impact. There are no unique geological or physical features in the project area; therefore, there m would be no impact. in •a Vl.h Less Than Significant Impact. Based on soil boring tests conducted during the Geotechnical o U Investigation for the project, it was determined that the first 15 feet of soil consist of loose to medium a) dense, silty sand with traces of fine gravels and cobbles (Diaz, Yourman & Associates, 2010). These o soils could be susceptible to erosion during construction activities, including clearing, trenching, and excavation, which could result in dust and the loss of topsoil, especially during high winds, rainfall, or m other storm events. z 0) Construction is scheduled to be completed during the dry season, which would reduce potential Q impacts related to storm event. In addition, the project would be constructed in accordance with the °a CWA Section 402 NPDES Permit, which requires a WQMP, SWPPP, and implementation of BMPs aimed `t 0 at reducing soil erosion and the loss of topsoil in the project area. With compliance with the NPDES permit, potential impacts would be substantially minimized; therefore, impacts would be less than M significant. Vl.i No Impact. According to the City's General Plan, the project area is not located within the City's cc Hillside Management Overlay District(HMOD);therefore there would be no impact. ° N LO T 00 ° Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than z VII. HAZARDS AND MATERIALS—Would the project: Significant with Mitigation Significant 2 Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact m a) Create significant hazard to the public or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ _ the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous L materials? m m 5D b) Create a significant hazard to the public ❑ ❑ ® ❑ N or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident 0 conditions involving the release of in hazardous material into the ' Q environment? s c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle ❑ ❑ El X w hazardous or acutely hazardous c materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or s U proposed school? 4 Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 26 Packet'Pg. 195 S,H.b j CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than 0 VII. HAZARDS AND MATERIALS—Would the Significant with Mitigation Significant � project: Q, Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact � d) Be located on a site which is included on ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 0 a) a list of hazardous materials sites :° L compiled pursuant to Government Code m Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it U) ■ create a significant hazard to the public c 0 or the environment? Cn L e) For a project located within an airport ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 0 land use plan or, where such a plan has n not been adopted, within two miles of a a, public airport or public use airport, would z the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project a area? 0 Q 0 f) Impair implementation of or physically ❑ El ❑ ❑ (n a) interfere with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? N g) Expose people or structures to a ❑ ❑ ❑ significant risk of loss, injury, or death N involving wildland fires, including where ui wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas o or where residences are intermixed with 1 0 wildlands? Z E U) h) Other: Expose persons or property to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ significant risk, injury, or death involving LL high winds? L Discussion m r Vll.a-b Less Than Significant Impact. Hazardous materials used or transported in the project area are currently d limited to materials required for the routine maintenance of the existing bridge (e.g., paints and co sealants), as well materials being transported on vehicles traveling along the roadway. There is no 0 routine hazardous materials disposal in the project area, because these materials are disposed of cn offsite in approved hazardous waste disposal facilities in compliance with federal, state, and local Q regulations. The new bridge would not involve the routine transport or use of hazardous materials beyond existing conditions. x W Construction activities could involve the transport or use of hazardous materials, including construction debris resulting from bridge demolition, and diesel fuels, lubricants, solvents, and asphalt used in the E construction of the new bridge. The transport, use, and disposal of these materials would be 0 conducted in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws pertaining to the safe handling, a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 27 Packet Pg.196 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY _ m transport, and disposal of hazardous materials, including the Federal Resource Conservation and E Recovery Act (RCRA), which includes requirements for hazardous solid waste management; the v CL California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Environmental Health Standards for the Management of Hazardous Waste (California Code of Regulations,Title 22, Division 4.5), which include a) standards for generators and transporters of hazardous waste; and the City of San Bernardino L Municipal Code, which states that hazardous waste shall not be placed in the City's receptacles, and N includes other hazardous waste disposal measures. Adherence to these standard policies and _ regulations would substantially minimize potential hazardous materials releases, and hazards to the 0 public or environment.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. v� L 0 Vll.c No Impact. The nearest school to the project area is Solar Charter Academy, located approximately 0.75 mile south of the project area.There are no existing or proposed schools within 0.25 mile of the project o a� area;therefore,there would be no impact. z VILd No Impact. The project is not listed as a hazardous materials site on the California Department of Toxic c Substances Control (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese List), or on the State o Water Resources Control Board's GeoTracker database.Therefore,there would be no impact. a 0 Vll.e No Impact. The nearest airports to the project area are San Bernardino International Airport (SBIA), located approximately 2.4 mile southeast of the project area, and Flabob Airport, located co approximately 10.5 miles southwest of the project area. The project area is not located within an � C-1 adopted or planned airport land use plan. In addition, the project would not result in any safety hazards because the new bridge would have similar vertical and horizontal profiles to the existing CD N bridge, and no vertical elements would be included in the project that could result in safety hazards ui r related to air travel.Therefore,there would be no impact. 00 0 I Vll.f Less Than Significant Impact. During construction, the project would require the closure of a portion of Z Second Street from Arrowhead Avenue to Mountain View Avenue so that this area can be used for N temporary construction staging. During this closure, a temporary detour would be provided along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the project area. The closure of Second Street would U- require emergency vehicles to use an alternate route, which could potentially add to response times. However, coordination would be conducted with emergency service providers prior to construction, and m detour signage would be provided in the project area to minimize potential impacts. In addition, the road closure would be temporary during the construction phase of the project, and emergency vehicle access N would be restored to existing conditions following construction. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant. U CD Vll.g No impact. The project area is in an urban area, and there are no wildlands within or adjacent to the N project area. The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or a death involving wildland fires.Therefore,there would be no impact. X Vll.h Less Than Significant Impact. The City's General Plan identifies the northern half of the city along the w r San Bernardino Mountain foothills as a "High Wind Area," which requires stringent conditions for the E construction of buildings and public facilities. The project area is not located in this area; therefore, standard building regulations are applicable to the project, and impacts would be less than significant. Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 28 Packet Pg. 197 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m 1= m U VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY— Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than Q Would the project: Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a) a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ m waste discharge requirements? N b) Substantially deplete groundwater ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 0 supplies or interfere substantially with in groundwater recharge such that there o would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table o level (e.g., the production rate of pre- z existing nearby wells would drop to a level a� that would not support existing land uses r or planned uses for which permits have o been granted)? Q 0 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage ❑ ❑ ® ❑ °' pattern of the site or area, including M through the alteration of the course of a CD stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on c site or off site during construction? ry LO V7 d) Substantially alter the existing drainage ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 01 pattern of the site or area, including o Z through the alteration of the course of a N stream or river, or substantially increase — the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on "I site or off site? a� .c 0° e) Create or contribute runoff water that ❑ ❑ ® E] d would exceed the capacity of existing or m planned stormwater drainage systems or Cn provide substantial additional sources of o post-construction polluted runoff, such as d from areas of material storage, vehicle or N equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment Q maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or x storage, delivery areas, loading docks, or W r other outdoor areas? m E f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ® ❑ ❑ cc quality or beneficial uses? Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 29 Packet Pg. 198 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY— Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than y Would the project: Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact m it g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area El ® a� structures that would impede or redirect :a L flood flows? m T h) Expose people or structures to a ❑ ® o significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding as a result of a levee or N L dam? U i) Expose people or property to inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? Z c Discussion :Z; sz 0 Vlll.a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Construction activities would be conducted over and Q within the creek, which flows underneath the existing bridge. A minor water diversion would be installed 0 under the bridge structure to shift the creek flow to the opposite side of the creek bed and allow work on ly the bridge pilings. No heavy machinery would be operated within the creek,and a protective netting would N be used to prevent debris from entering the creek. It The project would be subject to the requirements of the City's Stormwater and Water Pollution Control o regulations and the City's CWA Section 402 NPDES Permit, which includes preparing a SWPPP to ,N reduce construction and operational impacts. Operation of the project would not result in substantial w 0 soil erosion, dust, or unstable soil conditions, and the project would not result in the discharge of 0 waste. During construction, standard construction-related BMPs would be implemented, which Z include, but are not limited to, preservation of existing vegetation, silt fences, street sweeping, storm T drain inlet protection, waste management, and water conservation practices to avoid the degradation of C water quality. The SWPPP would be prepared prior to construction and would identify specific BMPs to _I CD be implemented. With incorporation of BMPs, compliance with required permits, and implementation M L of mitigation measures HYD-1 and HYD-2 listed below, impacts would be less than significant. m T m Mitigation Measures Cn MM HYD-1: Work areas would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible to avoid the creek and minimize impacts on waters of the U.S. and state. 0 d U) MM HYD-2: Measures for preventing material, equipment, and debris from falling into the creek a would be in place at all times while the bridge deck is being removed. The work area would be tented :2 and isolated to minimize the potential for concrete dust, debris, paint chips, rust, and construction x material to fall into the creek. w r c Vlll.b Less than Significant Impact. Water is currently used in the project area during routine cleaning of the E bridge and for ornamental landscaping. Water supplies in the project area are provided by the San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD), which obtains water from the Bunker Hill a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 30 Packet Pg. 199 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c Groundwater Basin. During project operation, water use would not be expected to increase above E� existing conditions. During the construction phase, water would be required for construction-related cva activities, which include cement mixing and watering to control dust and stabilize loose soils. The use 0 of water during construction would be temporary and short-term, and could be accommodated by the 0 CD existing groundwater supplies. The project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies. L Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. °D co Vlll.c-d Less Than Significant Impact. The new bridge would be wider than the existing bridge by ,a approximately three feet on each side, resulting in an increase in impervious surface area of approximately 312 square feet, which could result in an increase in the rate or amount of stormwater o runoff. However, potential increases in storm water runoff are not expected to be substantial, and the project would be designed to accommodate projected levels of runoff. There would be no substantial o changes in drainage patterns, and no substantial increases in erosion, siltation, or flooding are z anticipated to result from the project.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. M Vlll.e Less than Significant Impact. The new bridge would be wider than the existing bridge by o approximately three feet on each side, resulting in an increase in impervious surface area of Q approximately 312 square feet, which could result in an increase in stormwater runoff. However, the project would be designed to accommodate projected levels of runoff so that additional flows would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. In addition, there would N be no post-construction sources for polluted runoff other than those which currently exist. During operation, there would be no material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment Co maintenance, waste handing, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks, N Sri or other sources of polluted runoff in the project area. During construction, hazardous materials and 7 wastes may be handled in the project area, in accordance with federal, state, and local laws, including Qi RCRA,the DTSC Environmental Health Standards for the Management of Hazardous Waste, and the City of Z San Bernardino Municipal Code (see Response Vll.a-b). Adherence to these standard policies and (n regulations would substantially minimize potential sources of polluted runoff during construction. -6 Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. "I m VIII) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction activities may include jackhammering, a L sandblasting, and use of petroleum-based products, paints, solvents, and sealers. There is a potential for m r concrete dust,debris, paint chips, rust,and construction material to fall into the creek,which could result in a) the release of pollutants and contaminants, and could affect water quality in the creek. To minimize N potential impacts, a minor water diversion would be installed under the bridge structure to shift the creek o flow to the opposite side of the creek bed and allow work on the bridge pilings. No heavy machinery would cn be operated within the creek, and a protective netting would be used to prevent debris from entering the Q creek. Standard BMPs would be incorporated into the project to comply with regulatory permits, including the w CWA Section 402 NPDES Permit, CWA Section 404 Nationwide Permit, CWA Section 401 Water Quality c Certification,and California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. BMPs that d E may be considered for the project include, but are not limited to, preservation of existing vegetation, silt fences, street sweeping, storm drain inlet protection, waste management, and water conservation a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 31 Packet Pg. 200 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m practices to avoid the degradation of water quality. The SWPPP would be prepared prior to construction E and would identify specific BMPs to be implemented. With the incorporation of BMPs, compliance with M 0. required permits, and implementation of measures MM HYD-1 and MM HYD-2 listed above, impacts would be less than significant. Vlll.g No Impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate m Map (FIRM) Panel 06071C8681H (effective August 28, 2008), the project area is located in Zone X, in which is an area of minimal hazard that is outside the 100-year floodplain (FEMA, 2008). In addition, o the FIRM indicates that the project area is not located in a regulatory floodway. Therefore, there would be no impact. o Vlll.h No impact. The project area is in the Seven Oaks Dam Inundation area, as shown in the City's General m Plan (City of San Bernardino, 2005). However, the project would improve the safety of the community by replacing the structurally deficient bridge with a new structural sound bridge. The new bridge z would not increase the risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding from dam failure. Therefore, c there would be no impact. o Vlll.i No Impact. The project is not located near or adjacent to a lake or ocean; therefore, there is no a 0 potential for inundation by a seiche (a wave or oscillation of the surface of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosed basin) or tsunami (a long high sea wave caused by an earthquake, submarine landslide, M or other disturbance) In addition, according to the City's General Plan,the project area is not located in to v an area at risk of mudflows.Therefore,there would be no impact. cc 0 N LO T Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than 00 IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the o Significant with Mitigation Significant QI project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact z a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ® ❑ community? 0I b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 policy, or regulation of an agency with L jurisdiction over the project(including, but 00 not limited to the general plan, specific a plan, local coastal program, or zoning co ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (n a c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ .a conservation plan or natural community x conservation plan? W d) Be developed within the Hillside ❑ ❑ ❑ ® E Management Overlay District? cc r a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 32 Packet Pg.201 a i 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than y Significant with Mitigation Significant project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a d e) Be developed with Foothill Fire Zones A ❑ ❑ ❑ and B, or C as identified in the City's L General Plan? m cn f) Be developed within the Airport Influence ❑ ❑ ❑ ® o Area as adopted by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority? N 0 r- Discussion IX.a Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located near downtown San Bernardino in an established community. The project would replace an existing bridge and would not require additional Zay development. The project would require the temporary closure of a portion of Second Street between a Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue during construction, which is expected to last 18 00 months. Street parking in this location is generally used by individuals visiting the San Bernardino Justice o Center (Justice Center); alternate parking for the Justice Center is located north of Third Street, between Mountain View Avenue and Sierra Way. The City would coordinate with the Justice Center to provide M signage directing these individuals to the alternate parking facilities during construction. Continuous access to the Justice Center parking lot from Second Street would be maintained during construction. A m temporary pedestrian bridge would be installed to allow pedestrian access over the creek, and a o N temporary detour would be established along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the ui project area, which would allow traffic access around the project area. One driveway to the east of the c bridge would be closed during construction; however, an alternate entrance to this parcel is available o� Z on King Street, which would remain open during construction. Following construction, access along the 2 roadway and to surrounding properties would be restored to existing conditions. Therefore, the project — M would not divide an established community, and impacts would be less than significant. LL I IX.b No Impact. According to the City's General Plan, the areas immediately adjacent to the project area are designated as Commercial Office, Public Park (Meadowbrook Park), and Multifamily Residential m The project area is located approximately SO miles from the Pacific Coast and is not within the Coastal v Zone. The new bridge would serve the same purpose of the existing bridge, and would improve public safety by replacing the structurally deficient bridge. In addition, acquisition of ROW would not be c required for the project, and no changes in land use or zoning designations would be required. 0 Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation, and cn there would be not impact. a IX.c. No Impact. According to the City's General Plan, the project is not located in an applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan area;therefore,there would be no impact. w IX.d No Impact. According to the City's General Plan, the project is not located within the City's Hillside Management Overlay District(HMOD);therefore,there would be no impact. IX.e No Impact. According to the City's General Plan, the project is not located within or adjacent to a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 33 Packet Pg.202 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY E d Foothill Fire Zones A, B, or C;therefore,there would be no impact. E m U IX.f No Impact. The project is not located within the "Airport Influence Area" for the San Bernardino a International Airport(SBIA);therefore,there would be no impact. d AML W X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than cn Significant with Mitigation Significant 'a project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact 0 cn a� a) Result in the loss of availability of known ❑ ❑ ® ❑ L mineral resource that would be of value ° to the region and the residents of the state? (D z b) Result in the loss of locally important ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c mineral resource recovery site delineated Q ' on a local general plan or other land use? Q c) Be located in a Mineral Resource Zone as ❑ ❑ ® ❑ N d adopted by the State Mining Geology Board an identified in the City's General M C4 Plan? cg Discussion o cv X.a-c Less Than Significant Impact. In 1975, the California State legislature adopted the Surface Mining and r Reclamation Act (SMARA). SMARA designated certain areas as Mineral Resources Zones (MRZs) that of are of statewide or regional importance. The project area is located in a region classified as MRZ-2, Z which indicates that there are significant mineral deposits or that there is a likelihood of significant N mineral deposits within the project area. In addition, according to the County's General Plan, mineral resources are found in the natural sand and gravel deposits along Warm Creek and other creeks in the LL� county(County of San Bernardino, 2012). The project would replace an existing bridge with a new bridge at the same location; therefore, during op project operation, it is not anticipated that the project would result in a loss of known mineral L resources. During project construction, work would be required in the creek channel, which could in disturb potential mineral resources; however, the project area is currently not being used for mineral c 0 resource extraction, and therefore is not considered a locally important mineral resource recovery site. In addition, the construction required for the new bridge would not be expected to result in the loss of availability of known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. a Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. s X w c as E is U is Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 34 Packet Pg.203 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than E XI. NOISE—Would the project result in: Significant with Mitigation Significant �o Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Q. m a) Exposure of persons or generation of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ m noise levels in excess standards 2 established in the City's General Plan or m` Development Code, or applicable in standards of other agencies? o U b) Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ cn excessive groundborne vibration or o groundborne noise levels? a� 0 c) A substantial permanent increase in ❑ ❑ ❑ m z ambient noise level in the project vicinity above existing without the project? CL 0 d) A substantial or periodic increase in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Q ambient noise levels in the project m vicinity above existing without the project? N ° e) For a project located within an airport ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ land use plan or Airport Influence area, o would the project expose people residing `14 LO or working in the project area to 00 excessive noise levels? °I 0 z Discussion 2 N Xl.a Less Than Significant Impact. Land uses adjacent to the project area include Commercial Office to the Ri north, south, and west; and Public Park(Meadowbrook Park) and Residential Medium High to the east. u-I Multi-family residential buildings are located approximately 200 feet east of the project area. The o, 72 City's Noise Ordinance (Section 19.20.030.15 of the Development Code) specifies the maximum m acceptable noise levels in residential areas in the city. These standards indicate that exterior noise m levels at residential locations should not exceed 65 decibels (dB), and interior levels should not exceed 45 dB. No specific noise standards are provided for commercial or public park uses. In addition, the City prohibits construction activities between the hours of 8:00 PM and 7:00 AM. However, ' construction activities necessary for the immediate preservation of life or property, related to facilities N of park and recreation departments, public works projects, or essential public services and facilities are Q exempt from the provisions of the Noise Ordinance. X Existing noise sources in the project area include vehicular traffic on nearby roadways, residential uses uJ u (distant heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system) and ambient noise associated with Meadowbrook Park. Project operation would not result in increased noise levels because the capacity = of the roadway would remain the same, and the project would not result in additional vehicles on the w roadway that could contribute to additional traffic noise. However, during construction a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 35 Packet Pg.204 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m jackhammering, sandblasting, and other construction activities could result in a temporary increase in m noise levels within and adjacent to the project area. The City has not designated CEQA significance M CL thresholds to assess noise impacts during construction. 0) The noise levels for construction equipment that would typically be used for the project are provided M- below. ca Construction Equipment Noise Levels N C Equipment Type Maximum Noise Level(Lmax)of d Equipment at 50 Feet(in dB) (n L 0 Dump Truck 76 U a� D Front End Loader 79 0 Air Compressor 78 Z rn c Pneumatic Tools 85 0_ 0 Concrete Mixer Truck 79 Q Concrete Pump Truck 81 0 Jackhammer 89 M Sand Blasting 96 C14 Source:U.S.Department of Transportation,Federal Highway Administration,2011 Notes:The noise levels shown above are actual,measured noise levels based on measurements performed for the Central Artery/Tunnel Project.Noise measurements were N averaged to compute the actual emission level. ui T 00 I Generally, sound levels for a point source will decrease by 6 dB for each doubling of distance. z However, the multi-family residential buildings located 200 feet east of the project area may be vii exposed to noise levels in excess of the City's Noise Ordinance. Because the project is a public works Ri project, it would be exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance; however, efforts would be made to limit U_ construction between the hours of 6:00 AM to 3:00 pm to minimize potential noise impacts on -M sensitive receptors. In addition, construction noise would be short-term and temporary. Therefore, m impacts would be less than significant. L Xl.b Less Than Significant Impact. Land uses adjacent to the project area include Commercial Office to the N north, south, and west; and Public Park (Meadowbrook Park) and Residential Medium High to the east. o Multi-family residential buildings are located approximately 200 feet east of the project area. Existing cn sources of groundborne vibration and noise in the project area include vehicles traveling on nearby ry roadways. Project operation would not result in additional sources of groundborne vibration or noise in Q the project area. Project construction could result in additional groundborne vibration and noise in the x immediate area from construction vehicles traveling to and from the project area, as well as W intermittent activities associated with demolition and construction of the new bridge. Construction would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 months), and the project would generally be U limited to the hours of 6:00 AM to 3:00 PM to minimize any potential impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Groundborne noise and vibration levels from project construction would be typical of a Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 36 Packet Pg. 205 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY a� bridge replacement project, and would not be considered excessive given the temporary nature of E construction activities.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. cva CL Xl.c No Impact. Existing noise sources in the project area include vehicular traffic on nearby roadways, W residential uses (distant HVAC system) and ambient noise associated with Meadowbrook Park. Project operation would not result in increased noise levels because the capacity of the roadway would remain m the same, and the project would not result in additional vehicles on the roadway that could contribute N to additional traffic noise. No permanent increases in ambient noise levels would result from the � 0 project;therefore,there would be no impact. Xl.d Less Than Significant Impact. During operation of the project, noise levels would be expected to 0 remain the same as existing conditions. However, during construction jackhammering, sandblasting, and other construction activities could result in a temporary increase in noise levels within and adjacent to the project area. Construction would be short-term and temporary (approximately 18 z months), and would typically take place between the hours of 6:00 AM to 3:00 PM to minimize any c potential impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. In addition, following construction, ambient noise o levels would return to existing conditions.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. < a 0 Xl.e No Impact. The nearest airports to the project area are SBIA, located approximately 2.4 mile southeast of the project area, and Flabob Airport, located approximately 10.5 miles southwest of the M project area. The project would not be located within an airport influence area and would not expose people to excessive noise levels above existing conditions.Therefore,there would be no impact. 0 N MI. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant o the project: i Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact p Z a) Induce substantial growth in an area ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 2 N either directly (e.g., by proposing new Ta homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., U_ through extension of roads or other infrastructure?) ML W b) Remove existing housing and displace ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ d substantial numbers of people, to necessitating the construction of o replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 U N N Discussion Q XILa-b No Impact.The project would replace an existing bridge in a developed community.The project would .o not include new development that could induce population growth, and would not include new roads x or infrastructure, or add any capacity to the roadway.The project would not include the demolition or W removal of existing housing that would displace people; therefore,there would be no impact. C U w a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 37 Packet Pg. 206 ,i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m XI11. PUBLIC SERVICES—Would the project: Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than 0 Significant with Mitigation Significant u Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a a� a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental -a impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance M objectives for any of the public services? in c i. Fire protection, including medical ❑ ❑ ® ❑ w aid? L 0 ii. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ (D 0 ■ iii. Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Z ' iv. Parks or other recreational facilities? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ a 0 v. Other governmental services. 0 aD Discussion M Xlll.a i.-ii Less Than Significant Impact. During construction, a portion of Second Street between Arrowhead to Avenue and Mountain View Avenue would be closed for approximately 18 months, so that this area can 15� be used for temporary construction staging; however, a temporary detour would be provided along East o Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the project area. The closure would require that ,N emergency services use an alternate route that could potentially add to response times; however, o coordination would be conducted with emergency service providers prior to construction, and detour of signage would be provided in the project area to minimize potential impacts. Operation of the project 2 would not require new or expanded facilities to maintain service ratios or response times. Therefore, N Ta impacts would be less than significant. U. I Xlll.a iii. No Impact.The nearest school to the project area is Solar Charter Academy, located approximately 0.75 mile south of the project area. The project would replace an existing bridge with a structurally sound :° m bridge with the same roadway capacity as the existing bridge. The project would induce population growth in the project area that could require the expansion of or construction of new schools.Therefore, there would be no impact. 0 Xlll.a iv. Less Than Significant Impact.The project would replace an existing bridge in a developed community. The project would not be expected to induce population growth in the project area that would require new or expanded parks. Meadowbrook Park is located adjacent to the project area. A portion of `t Second Street would be temporarily closed for approximately 18 months between Arrowhead Avenue C and Mountain View Avenue so that this area can be used as a temporary construction staging area, w which could affect access to the park; however,temporary access would be provided along Sierra Way, and regular access would be restored following construction. Therefore, impacts would be less than E significant. ;a a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 38 Packet Pg.207 j i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d Xlll.a v. Less Than Significant Impact. The project includes replacing an existing bridge with a structurally sound E bridge that would have the same roadway capacity as the existing bridge. The project would not be o expected to induce population growth in the project area that could require the expansion of or 0 construction of new governmental facilities. A portion of Second Street would be temporarily closed for a) approximately 18 months between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue so that this area a can be used as a temporary construction staging area, which could restrict regular access to several 00 Cn governmental facilities located within one-mile of the project area. A temporary detour would be -a _ provided along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the project area, which would o allow access to the facilities. In addition, access would be restored following construction. Therefore, in impacts would be less than significant. ° U 0 a� Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than z XIV. RECREATION—Would the project: Significant with Mitigation Significant = Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Q 0 a) Increase the demand for neighborhood ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Q or regional parks or other recreational 0 facilities? m c� b) Include recreational facilities or require ❑ ❑ ® ❑ `�' cc the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have o an adverse physical effect on the N Sri environment? co 0 I Discussion z XIV.a—b Less Than Significant Impact. Meadowbrook Park is located on Second Street adjacent to and north of Cn the project area. A portion of Second Street between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue would be temporarily closed for approximately 18 months during construction so that this area can be U_ used for temporary construction staging.Temporary access to the park would be provided along Sierra Way. The project includes replacing an existing bridge with a structurally sound bridge that would have m the same roadway capacity as the existing bridge. The project would not be expected to increase the demand for parks or other recreational facilities. In addition, the project does not include recreational Cn facilities, and would not be expected to induce population growth in the project area that could require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. m U) .c X W r m E Y a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 39 Packet Pg.208 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY _ d XV. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION— Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than y Significant with Mitigation Significant 0 Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact 0 m a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ordinance or policy establishing measures _42�L of effectiveness for the performance of m T the circulation system, taking into Cn account all modes of transportation = including mass transit and non-motorized v travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not ° limited to intersections, streets, m highways, and freeways, pedestrian and a� bicycle paths, and mass transit? m Z a� b) Conflict with an applicable congestion ❑ ❑ ® ❑ _ CL management program, including, but not 0 6 limited to level of service standards and a travel demand measures, or other as standards established by the county congestion management agency for M N designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, ❑ ❑ ❑ ® c including an increase in traffic levels or a N ui change in location that results in r 00 substantial risks? I 0 d) Substantially increase hazards due to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Z design feature (e.g., sharp curves of Cl) dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? LL I e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ AML W f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ programs regarding public transit, bicycle, N or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease performance or safety of such 0 facilities? co Discussion: Q :a XV.a—b Less Than Significant Impact. Second Street is a 4-lane roadway (two lanes in each direction) and is x designated as a collector street (i.e., a low-to-moderate-capacity road that serves to move traffic from w r local streets to arterial roads). There are no transit routes on Second Street between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue. In addition, according to San Bernardino County's Non-Motorized s Ar Transportation Plan prepared by the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), there are no r designated bicycle paths on Second Street within the project area (SANBAG, 2011). There are no a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 40 Packet Pg.209 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY E m shoulders on either side of the roadway; however, there are sidewalks on both sides of the roadway. m Street parking on Second Street between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue is generally used by individuals visiting the Justice Center; alternate parking for the Justice Center is located north of Third Street, between Mountain View Avenue and Sierra Way. The project would include replacing the existing bridge with a structurally sound bridge. The roadway ao design would be similar to the existing roadway and would be consistent with the City's designation of N Second Street as a collector street. During construction, a portion of Second Street would be c temporarily closed to all traffic (vehicle,transit, bike, and pedestrian) between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue, and would be used as a staging area. Because street parking would not be o available in this area during construction, the City would coordinate with the Justice Center to provide 0 signage directing individuals to alternate parking facilities north of Third Street, between Mountain o View Avenue and Sierra Way. Continuous access to the Justice Center parking lot from Second Street z would be maintained during construction. One driveway to the east of the bridge would be closed a, during construction; however, an alternate entrance to this parcel is available on King Street, which a would remain open during construction. A temporary pedestrian bridge would be installed to allow a pedestrian access over the creek during construction, and a temporary detour would be provided N along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the project area. The closure of Second Street and the use of a detour route, as well as construction vehicles traveling N cc on nearby roadways to the project area, could result in traffic congestion, temporarily reducing the effectiveness and performance of the local circulation system. Potential impacts would be localized within the immediate area, and would be substantially minimized through implementation of a traffic °ry LO management plan,which would include coordination with emergency service providers and the Justice 00 Center, and the use of detour signs to direct vehicles to the alternate route and alternate parking Qi facilities. Following construction, transportation facilities in the project area would return to existing Z conditions. Therefore, the project would not substantially conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, cn or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, and impacts would be less than significant. LL m a XV.c No Impact. The nearest airports to the project area are SBIA, located approximately 2.4 miles L southeast of the project area, and Flabob Airport, located approximately 10.5 miles southwest of the 4, project area. The project area is not located within the airport influence area of the SBIA, and the a r project would not result in impacts on the frequency or pattern of air traffic at these airports. N Therefore,there would be no impact. o U XV.d Less Than Significant Impact. Operation of the project would not be expected to generate additional in traffic because the number of lanes and roadway capacity would be the same as existing conditions. Q r Therefore, the roadway would continue to operate as a collector street, in accordance with the City's roadway designation, and no incompatible uses would be anticipated to result from the project. No w increase in road hazards are anticipated over long-term operation because the new bridge would be designed in compliance with AASHTO standards, and would have similar vertical and horizontal profiles E as the existing bridge.There is a potential for temporary traffic delays as a result of rerouting of traffic during construction in certain portions of the project area; however, no substantial hazards are a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 41 Packet Pg. 210 j ) 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m anticipated with implementation of a traffic management plan, which would include coordination with m emergency service providers and the Justice Center, and the use of detour signs to direct vehicles to cvv the alternate route and alternate parking facilities. Following construction, traffic patterns would return to existing conditions, and no roadway hazards would result from project operation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. ° m XV.e Less Than Significant Impact. During construction,the project would require the temporary closure of a vy portion of Second Street from Arrowhead Avenue to Mountain View Avenue so that this area can be 0 used for construction staging. A temporary detour would be provided on East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the project area. The closure of Second Street would require that o emergency services use an alternate route that could potentially add to response times. However, v coordination would be conducted with emergency service providers prior to construction, and detour signage would be provided in the project area to minimize potential impacts. In addition, following construction, emergency access in the project area would return to existing conditions. Therefore, M impacts would be less than significant. a 0 XV.f Less Than Significant Impact. The project would include replacing the existing bridge with a a structurally sound bridge. The project would help to ensure the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians over the bridge. The roadway design would be similar to the existing roadway and would ® be consistent with the City's General Plan designation of Second Street as a collector street. During N to construction, a portion of Second Street would be temporarily closed to all traffic (vehicle, transit, bike, and pedestrian) between Arrowhead Avenue and Mountain View Avenue, and would be used as 0 a staging area. Because street parking would not be available in this area during construction, the City ry LO would coordinate with the Justice Center to provide signage directing individuals to alternate parking 7 facilities north of Third Street, between Mountain View Avenue and Sierra Way. Continuous access to Q� the Justice Center parking lot from Second Street would be maintained during construction. One Z driveway to the east of the bridge would be closed during construction; however, an alternate N entrance to this parcel is available on King Street, which would remain open during construction. A temporary pedestrian bridge would be installed to allow pedestrian access over the creek during 1- construction, and a temporary detour would be provided along East Rialto Avenue, approximately 685 feet south of the project area. m T The closure of Second Street and the use of a detour route, as well as construction vehicles traveling a on nearby roadways to the project area, could result in traffic congestion, temporarily reducing the N performance of the local circulation system, including public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. o Potential impacts would be localized within the immediate area, and would be substantially minimized N through implementation of a traffic management plan, which would include coordination with a emergency service providers and the Justice Center, and the use of detour signs to direct vehicles to = the alternate route and alternate parking facilities. Following construction, transportation facilities in the project area would return to existing conditions. Therefore, the project would not substantially w r conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. U r Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 42 Packet Pg. 211 9,H:b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than m XVI. UTILITIES—Would the project: Significant with Mitigation Significant ca Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Q. m a) Exceed wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ a� requirements of the Santa Ana Regional a L Water Quality Control Board? m T Cn b) Require or result in the construction of ❑ ❑ El a c new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, m the construction of which would cause o significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ ® a� m z new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the Q construction of which could cause 0 significant environmental effects? 0 d) Have sufficient water supplies available ❑ ❑ ❑ to serve the project from existing N entitlements and resources, or are new or W v expanded entitlements needed? .. CD e) Result in determination by the ❑ ❑ ❑ ® CO Sri wastewater treatment provider, which 00 serves or may serve the project that it has °i adequate capacity to serve the project's z projected demand in addition to the 2 Cn provider's existing commitments? Ta c f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ ❑ ® ❑ d� permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? '- m T g) Comply with Federal, State, and local ❑ ❑ ❑ ® °' statutes and regulations related to solid N waste? 0 0 U d Discussion N Q XVI.a No Impact. The project would not result in the generation or wastewater; therefore, there would be no impact. x W XVI.b No Impact. Existing water lines on the bridge would be replaced and incorporated into the new bridge design. Water is currently used in the project area during routine cleaning of the bridge and for 4) ornamental landscaping. During project operation, water use would not be expected to increase above existing conditions. During the construction phase, water would be required for construction-related a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 43 Packet Pg.212 j CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY _ a� activities, which include cement mixing and watering to control dust and stabilize loose soils. The use E of water during construction would be temporary and short-term, and could be accommodated by R existing water supplies. The project would not require new or expanded water or wastewater 0 treatment facilities.Therefore,there would be no impact. XVI.c No Impact. The new bridge would be wider than the existing bridge by approximately three feet on m each side, resulting in an increase in impervious surface area of approximately 312 square feet, which U) could result in an increase in the rate or amount of stormwater runoff. However, potential increases in c 0 storm water runoff are not expected to be substantial, and the bridge would be designed to accommodate the projected levels of stormwater runoff so that additional flows would not exceed the o capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. No new storm water drainage facilities would be required as a result of the project.Therefore,there would be no impact. XVI.d No Impact. Water is currently used in the project area during routine cleaning of the bridge and for z ornamental landscaping. Water for the project area is supplied by the SBMWD, which obtains water c from the Bunker Hill Groundwater Basin. During project operation, water use would not be expected o to increase above existing conditions. During the construction phase, water would be required for Q construction-related activities, which include cement mixing and watering to control dust and stabilize loose soils. The use of water during construction would be temporary and short-term, and could be accommodated by existing water supplies. Therefore, no new entitlements would be needed, and there would be no impact. �! XVI.e No Impact. The project would not result in any wastewater or need for wastewater treatment. o N Therefore,there would be no impact. U') r XVI.f Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction would generate solid waste, which would be ci transported to the Mid-Valley Landfill. The landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate the Z project's solid waste disposal needs.Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. y XVI.g No Impact. The project would be constructed in compliance with federal, state, and local statutes and c regulations related to solid waste, including RCRA, the DTSC Environmental Health Standards for the mI Management of Hazardous Waste, and the City of San Bernardino Municipal Code (see Response Vll.a-b). a .: Therefore,there would be no impact. m T m a� r 0 U N Cl) Q X w r _ m E Y_ Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 44 Packet Pg.213 ) 4 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY E0 E a� Potentially Less Than Significant Less Than a XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF w SIGNIFICANCE Significant with Mitigation Significant 0� Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact cn v a) Does the project have the potential to ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Ca degrade the quality of the environment, c"n substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife ° U population to drop below self-sustaining U) levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or o animal community, reduce the number or U 0 restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important m examples of the major periods of = California history or prehistory? CL 0 v b) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Q individually limited, but cumulatively LO considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a r� project are considerable when viewed in N ° connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and o the effects of probable future projects.) LO r c) Does the project have environmental ❑ ® ❑ ❑ °i effects that would cause substantial z z adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? �a c U. Discussion 0i XVI.a Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. 2 co Potential to Degrade the Quality of the Environment L As detailed in this report, the project has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, Cn specifically in the areas of biological resources, geology and soils, and hydrology and water quality (see o Sections IV, Biological Resources; VI, Geology and Soils; and VIII, Hydrology and Water Quality); to however, the project would comply with regulatory permits, including the CWA Section 402 NPDES Permit, CWA Section 404 Nationwide Permit, CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification, and California a Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement; and with implementation of x mitigation measures listed in previous sections of this report, potential impacts on the quality of the w environment would be less than significant. E Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 45 Packet Pg.214 i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY v Potential to Substantially Reduce the Habitat of a Fish or Wildlife Species E As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources, there is wetland and riparian habitat in the BSA,which a could support wildlife species. Construction would require activities within the creek channel, including equipment access and removal of the existing piers,which would result in temporary direct impacts on -0 approximately 0.03 acre of jurisdictional wetlands and approximately 0.50 acre of disturbed riparian m vegetation. Construction impacts on water quality could also impact wetlands indirectly. In addition, co the project would include vegetation removal; therefore, the project would result in impacts on 0 wetland and riparian habitat. However, with implementation of mitigation measures MM 13I0-1 U to through MM 13I0-13, potential impacts on wetland and riparian habitat for fish and wildlife species 0 would be less than significant. m Potential to Cause a Fish or Wildlife Population to Drop below Self-Sustaining Levels, or Threaten to 0 Eliminate a Plant or Animal Community Z 0 Multiple bird species, bats, mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis), and bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) E CL were observed in the BSA, as well as riparian and wetland vegetation communities. Wildlife and 0 vegetation communities could be impacted directly by vegetation and bridge removal, and wildlife Q 0 could be indirectly impacted by noise-generating activities required for project construction. With 0 implementation of mitigation measures MM 1310-1 through MM 1310-19, potential impacts on fish and M wildlife population levels, and plant and animal communities would be less than significant. `" Potential to Reduce the Number or Restrict the Range of a Rare or Endangered Plant or Animal cc 0 No rare or endangered plant or wildlife species were identified within the BSA during the biological LO surveys, and based on existing habitat, these species are not expected to be in the BSA. Therefore,the co 0 project would have no impact on the number or range of rare or endangered plants or animals. 1 0 Z Potential to Eliminate Important Examples of the Major Periods of California History or Prehistory No historic or prehistoric resources were identified in the project area during completion of an HPSR and ASR prepared for the project, and these resources are not expected to be in the project area U_ (Statisical Research, Inc., 2016);therefore,the project would have no impact on important examples of a the major periods of California history or prehistory. m XVI.b Less Than Significant Impact. According to the City's Community Development Department, as of 4) October 5, 2015 there are approximately 76 development projects in the city that include industrial, Cn commercial, residential, and institutional uses, and have been approved by the City or are undergoing o review (City of San Bernardino, 2015). Along with the planned projects and other potential projects in N the city, the proposed project could contribute to cumulative impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, R biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, public services, transportation/circulation, and utilities. However, with the implementation of mitigation measures, the project would not result W r in any significant impacts. The planned development projects, as well as other projects constructed in the area, would be expected to implement similar measures, and cumulative impacts would be = U _ w Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 46 Packet Pg.215 i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d minimal; therefore, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than cumulatively m considerable. 0 CL XVI.c Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As detailed in this report, the project could have environmental effects that could result in adverse effects on human beings, specifically in the areas of 00 air quality, geology and soils, and hydrology and water quality (see Sections III, Air Quality; VI, Geology m and Soils; and VIII, Hydrology and Water Quality); however, with implementation of mitigation Cn measures listed in previous sections of this report, potential adverse effects on human beings would c 0 be less than significant. d L ° V COMMENTS RECEIVED ON DRAFT IS/MND o a7 The City made the Draft IS/MND and Notice of Intent (NOI) available for review at the City of San Bernardino z Community Development Department offices located at 300 North "D" Street, 3rd Floor, San Bernardino, CA 92418. The City invited public comments (by mail, fax, or email) during the public review period, which was o from Tuesday, June 28, 2016 through Tuesday, July 27, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. The City received no comments on Q the Draft IS/MND during the public review period. ° The Draft IS/MND, NOI, and Notice of Completion (NOC) were posted with the State Clearinghouse. The State o: Clearinghouse submitted the documents to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on Tuesday, July 27, 2016, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. A letter was received from !t. CD the State Clearinghouse on Tuesday, July 27, 2016 stating that the State Clearinghouse review requirements o for draft environmental documents have been complied with, pursuant to CEQA. ,` T 00 C1 0 Z 2 Ln LL Q� co W T d L .!r 0 V f� N Q .V .Q s X W c m E U Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 47 Packet Pg.216 j CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c REFERENCES m U Caltrans. (1999, March 5).Scenic Route. Retrieved from California Scenic Highway Mapping System: a m http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm m a� CDOC. (2012).San Bernardino County Important Farmland-Sheet 2 of 2. California Department of L co Conservation. U) City of San Bernardino. (2005).San Bernardino General Plan. San Bernardino: San Bernardino Planning Division. 0 City of San Bernardino. (2013,June 19). Official Zoning Map. Retrieved from m http://www.sbcity.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BloblD=15754 0 City of San Bernardino. (2015, October 5). City of San Bernardino Community Development Department-Major o Projects List(Updated October 5, 2015). Retrieved October 16, 2015,from http://www.sbcity.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=18152 Z a� Costello,J. G., & Hallaran, K. B. (2010). The Luck of Third Street:Historical Archaeology Data Recovery Report a for the Caltrans District 8 San Bernardino Headquarters Demolition Project(P36-010399, CA-SBR- Q 10399H,P36-010400, CA-SBR-10400H,P36-010820, CA-SBR-10820H). San Bernardino: Caltrans District 0 CD 8. County of San Bernardino. (2012, March 13). San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, General Plan, Circulation co LO and Transportation Map. San Bernardino,California, United States of America. �! cfl Diaz, Yourman &Associates. (2010). Geotechnical Investigation, Rehabilitation of Second Street Bridge Over c N Warm Creek. Santa Anna: Diaz,Yourman &Associates. r 00 Diaz,Yourman &Associates. (2010). Geotechnical Investigation-Rehabilitation of Second Street Bridge Over ci Warm Creek. Santa Anna: Diaz,Yourman &Associates. Z 2 FEMA. (2008). Flood Rate Insurance Map-Panel 06071C8681H. FEMA. N �a GPA Consulting. (2016).2nd Street Bridge over Warm Creek Bridge Replacement Project, Natural Environment S Study. El Segundo: GPA Consulting. d I a� SANBAG. (2011).San Bernardino County-Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. San Bernardino. m SCAG. (2012).2013 Federal Adopted FTIP. Retrieved from San Bernardino County Project Listing: m http://ftip.scag.ca.gov/Documents/F2013-FTIP-LocalSB.pdf N c Statisical Research, Inc. (2016). Historic Property Survey Report, Warm Creek-Second Street Bridge(#54C- 0 d 0411), City of San Bernardino. Redlands: Statisical Research, Inc. N Statistical Research, Inc. (2016).Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Replacement of the Warm Q Creek-Second Street Bridge(#54C-0411), City of San Bernardino, California. Redlands: Statistical x Research, Inc. w Y c E C V Y Q Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 48 Packet Pg.217 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES E a� U Biological Resources Q, m MM 1310-1: Work areas would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and staging areas would be a� in the upland area along the roadway and outside of the creek channel. co W MM BIO-2: Staging areas would be restricted to upland areas, outside of the creek corridor, to N minimize impacts on the creek and riparian habitat. 0 MM BIO-3: Following project construction, disturbed areas would be restored to their pre-project conditions or better, and any re-vegetation or erosion control implemented would be completed using o 0 native species. 0 MM 1310-4: Individual trees and shrubs with a dbh of four inches or less that must be trimmed but do 0 not require complete removal would be cut at ground level with hand tools to allow for regrowth and Z a, reduce disturbance of the surrounding vegetation. CL MM 1310-5: The water diversion plan would be consistent with regulatory permit and agreement Q requirements, and would be submitted to appropriate resource agencies for approval prior to 0 construction. Q! MM 1310-6: BMPs, such as silt fencing, fiber rolls, straw bales, or other measures would be N implemented during construction to minimize dust, dirt, and construction debris leaving the 7 construction area. 0 N MM 1310-7: All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for LO T construction purposes, would be stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical c stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover, or vegetative ground cover. o� Z MM BIO-8: All unpaved access roads would be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or N chemical stabilizer/suppressant. MM 1310-9: Appropriate hazardous material BMPs would be implemented to reduce the potential for _I chemical spills or contaminant releases into the creek, including any non-stormwater discharge. a L MM BIO-10: All equipment refueling and maintenance would be conducted in the upland staging area m away from the creek, wetlands, and other sensitive areas per standard specifications and regulatory permits. In addition, vehicles and equipment would be checked daily for fluid and fuel leaks, and drip pans would be placed under all equipment that is parked and not in operation. 0 m MM BIO-11: Vegetation removed from the BSA would be treated and disposed of in a manner Cn following the recommendations of the California Invasive Plant Council to prevent the spread of Q invasive species on site or off site. BMPs may include, but are not limited to, identification of existing ° invasive species, avoidance of invasive species in erosion control, staff training, equipment cleaning W when entering and exiting the project area, and monitoring. 0 MM BIO-12: A restoration plan will be developed to replace wetlands impacted at a minimum ratio of 1:1; however, the final ratio will be identified through consultation and coordination with resource r a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 49 Packet Pg.218 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY m agencies during the permitting process. The revegetation plan will include a summary of impacted m vegetation, a planting plan, mitigation ratios, and success criteria based on resource agency requirements. The revegetation plan will be developed in coordination with and approved by the CDFW and USACE prior to implementation. 2 MM BIO-13: Invasive plant species in the project area will be removed and disposed of in a manner m that minimizes the potential for their reestablishment. Invasive plants will be identified by a biologist U) prior to their removal and removal procedures will follow the recommendations of the California c 0 Invasive Plant Council. If herbicides are applied, they will be applied in compliance with applicable state and federal laws. 0 MM BIO-14: If construction is scheduled to begin during bird nesting season (typically February 15 to September 15), nesting bird surveys would be completed no more than 48 hours prior to construction to determine if there are any nesting birds or active nests within or adjacent to the project area (within z 300 feet for birds and 500 feet for raptors). Surveys would be repeated if construction activities are c r suspended for three days or more. o MM BIO-15: If nesting birds are found in the BSA, appropriate buffers consisting of orange < 0 flagging/fencing or similar (typically 300 feet for birds and 500 feet for raptors) would be installed and W ■ maintained until nesting activity has ended, as determined in coordination with the project biologist M and regulatory agencies, as appropriate. MM BIO-16: Prior to construction, all trees within 100 feet of the project area would be surveyed by a cc qualified bat specialist to determine the presence/absence of bats and any active or potential bat- LO roosting cavities. During the non-breeding and active season, any bats roosting in trees would be safely evicted under the direction of a bat specialist and under consultation with the CDFW. ci 0 MM BIO-17: Once it has been determined that all roosting bats have been safely evicted from roosting Z cavities, exclusionary devices approved by the CDFW would be installed and maintained to prevent N bats from roosting in these cavities prior to and during construction. c U_ MM BIO-18: Pre-construction bat surveys would be conducted by a qualified bat specialist no more a� than seven days prior to the removal of any trees within the project area to confirm that exclusionary measures have been successful and there are no bats within the project area. If no roosting bats are °D d detected, no further surveys would be required provided the tree removal is completed within seven days. If removal is delayed more than seven days from the survey date, additional surveys would be Cf) conducted no more than seven days prior to tree removal to ensure that no bats have moved into the 0 area. Cn m MM BIO-19: Surveys and exclusion measures are expected to prevent maternal colonies from a becoming established within 100 feet of the project area. In the event that a maternal colony of bats is .2 found, the CDFW would be consulted, and no work would be conducted within 100 feet of the w maternal roosting site until the maternal season is over or the bats have left the site, or as otherwise directed by the CDFW. The site would be designated as a sensitive area and protected until the bats E have left the site or the young bats are volant. No clearing and grubbing would be authorized adjacent to the roosting site. Combustion equipment, such as generators, pumps, and vehicles, would not to be Q j Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 50 I 'J Packet Pg. 219 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY w parked nor operated under or within 100 feet of the roosting site. Construction personnel would not m enter into areas beneath the colony,especially during the evening exodus. CL Geology and Soils d MM GEO-1: Prior to issuance of building permit, the project Applicant shall submit plans to the City of -a L San Bernardino for review and approval demonstrating project compliance with the latest adopted m edition of the California Building Standards Code seismic requirements and the recommendations of a Cn design-level geotechnical investigation. All soil engineering recommendations and structural o U foundations shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer. The approved plans shall be incorporated into the project. All onsite soil engineering activities shall be conducted under the o supervision of a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist. a0i 0 Hydrology and Water Quality Z MM HYD-1: Work areas would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible to avoid the creek and minimize impacts on waters of the U.S. and state. o MM HYD-2: Measures for preventing material, equipment, and debris from falling into the creek a 0 would be in place at all times while the bridge deck is being removed. The work area would be tented and isolated to minimize the potential for concrete dust, debris, paint chips, rust, and construction material to fall into the creek. 04 m 0 N LO T co CD CZC 1 L N M LL L M d ''L^^ V/ 0 'U N a .Q s X W U � t6 ate'+ a Second Street Bridge Replacement Project 51 Packet Pg. 220 E M CO T 0 C/) 0 CD z CL 0 This page has been intentionally left blank. 0 04 LO T7 CO z m U) U- Co 4) Cn LU Packet Pg. 221 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c m E v U tQ Q GN E� O APPENDIX A m FTIP LISTING O U d Cn L O v- U O aY N O7 G i2 O 'O d O in a� M N O <f' fD r O N 7 co O I Z 2 S2 t9 G tL I N �L m d d L v/ O V 'O^ V/ .2 x w c a� E U fC r� Q Packet Pg. 222 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c a� E U Q. d d >3? �L m T Cn 0 U G7 Cn L 0 V Z 0) This page has been intentionally left blank. a. a 0 -a Q 0 N d Cl) N ft7 *, tD O N r 00 O 0 Z 2 N LL I d a� .a �L m d L .V U) 0 U N L x w Y E V i.� Q Packet Pg. 223 J01 oad BON Bul;dopy osaa : EZ9t,) 9WZ-SV90 GNWSI Ieui=I—aBplaB ;aaa;S puooaS-y;Iq!gx3 :;uauayae;;y N: O M O M V V N W O (D 00 - O M M :. C14 co Cl) 0 r+� �+ w d E, E, E E, J v O O v o w a o a cc,E'{ o E'I o E o E o :., N ) N N N Q ¢ Q Q C)', o z o 0 N X O N N! N W U ao 00 W r- r- v r. O N O M L O C Z O V' (7 O O N N N M J N L N O.. O. O - O', O, C6 o 01 p N N, U N N, Z N �, N tQ. a) W 04 (a W ca :. (.:) O U (D U 7 U O D� - (.).(D 04 Z QMi CD �'" > M „ O W M N E'M C7 F- N M J 0 N E'..M J N ,A'... o!a1 Q Q ,n o m J Z (n o l,,0') J (Y) c c4 U) c > Q ��H > o f 0IW N U{w CY N U'W m N CL N W J WO O O cr- U w U 2 w U IX d X Q o'o o X w (n X (n W D w > 00 o w > � !W > 0 o 00 o o' O V H v (N s U O>01 J O N N N J N N N N J N w N N J N Q N 0) Z >` 0) W T cm U Q U Q w Q Z Q Z O U r- N V Z O O CD L Cn 0 d) N N M W O � U O 00 N � Z N Lr) (O } N r- v (n 0 W Lj N W Cl) W N w Z_ N w O N >_ D N 0) Q U M'W M F M N - M O O O F M in oo U orn v V o W J O N N W O 7 C m C 0- O co M C W O L .O d 0) U (l) of C\j -C m N m O O CL N d N N N O O w Z _ U) 3 € Q 0 W 0 J M 0) C) (Y W ly O = � CD (o O ID) N O O J co I- O :Lo Lo O U E ONE E d •° � _o � E � � � On E Z �'MM Q o m rn a m;o a` m 00 a m o d mfr- Z tm�o d � 0o mm cm M H fn C J v rO,(Z' O O'2 m O,,Z M 0:2 U c CL C) U) CL T a l U CL w E (Y H w � vv Z LO (D 00 0- � o w moo m O M W M W (D oo ,� U cl C• m X O V V O ce V V' N O: (O OD Q O M M @ Z f' r C) F M M M o2S H ifi _la 1- _ Y W 1 < �a � of U U ~ LL Fw!o Z o 0o a Z Z o r— (o o H Q Z I- C Q Z O o Er ONN [Yo OU O (Mnvv Cl) o Ova °o_ � o w Oo ° 00 O U U W U'',Vi m rn Q U,v n �o U N im 00 of U D M Cl) W 2 w Ct `Jm 0 Q Z Q} 0 LL 6I > Of O � d U)p� o m o o'! Q a m�o w �i p 2! > m WO Of Lli J O (D Q (.9 O W(D..0 O O > (� (O )c) .0 N C 2 C Z N 00 O C I� N F W .Vl W W .N J w (D f� .N < W M M of O ca 2' (a �'< a) O LLI mm O mm w co }Z mm :�.. i Q W Q Q,U W Q'U p Q 0 J g Q 0 0 UJ U U m <Q < H L L i5 0 c O c Q> E 3 a x Z,-o �,v w W Z Z+'o T- M sic O _ U U c w c OIN O N U �H U O �U Ulm U O W V m W /)Z m O w m J W o _ c '-' WD c UW c :Cn Z W Cn d' Q W�'}f6 (n Q U 0' N cn LL> ~ D O OQ~ 00 O U) 0) c J U) - -'� D O Q W cOo Q_ O W J ~00 0 O Z Q . Z F O Q ,Z DO a - (D Q D O o - Q d w } Co W - Q. W w D (D n Z U) R I CO � J 00 i) w 0 i0 U J O� c�i C9 Z C7 W (D O i W N 00 N U C j '0 N Cn (n C i� w U�0 N (o 'UA 0�V(❑ r O •- tU/) C } O` 00 N 0 7:W m O,J N 0l 0 (r U' O W m OL (D a) CL' =''0: ~ O Oi a) Q 7 H p CL 0 0 w W C (n d 0 0 (D LL Co Q -i�U d o 0 m�LL'm U N d O Z LL U N ;m m o o a` (n (n N N aoi ooa 6oN 6ul;dopV osol : £Z9ti) 9WZ'SV80 aNWSI leUl=l—o6pla8 ;ooi;S pu000S-`d;lq!4x3 :;uouayoe;;y LO -q N 2 N L CL a� a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY E m U f6 O. d d im APPENDIX 6 n Co PROJECT AREA MAP Cn O U (n i O U N N Z i37 C 'a+ O O N Cl) N O r O N Lo T 00 O 0 cZc ,G N d �L m i+ L Y 3 Cn Q V 'd N 1 x w d E Q Packet Pg. 226 i 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY c d E a� ca CL Q: w �a m w U) c 0 U U) L a- O V d a'1 This page has been intentionally left blank. z a� c w :a 0 Q 0 c) N d. r O N T 00 0 I 0 cZ G LL d I 'a �L m d Q� L 0 0 U) Q X W E V E .FJ Q Packet Pg. 227 ao}000 BON Bui;dopV osaa SZ9t►) 9w-9voo UNWSI leuli GBplaB;aaa;S pu038S-V 4!glyx3 :;uawyoe;} -q N 2 L 6 i a m .� u m a. 3� J~ � O a a� z � O W v J W � F- U QJ w • 0 tao CL M }rrr t 'f N r : z�, i J01 oaa BON 6ul;dopy oseU : £Z9ti) 940Z'SL'90 4NWSI Ieul=I a6pla8 IGGAS pu030S-V IMRIx3 :Iuauayoe;;y N = N 'c' d 4 U R k \ a 3 i 1 j 2 Y 3 3 i i 3 5.H.b CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY 10 c m 1= m U fII Q. d d APPENDIX C m ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS 0 U d N L 0 V Z r Q 0 Q 0 IF NNQ� LL M N r O N Lo r 00 O z f6 C LL d �L m J.A d L V N 0 U d .Q t K uj C d E U w r Q Packet Pg. 230 b 3 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION INITIAL STUDY 0 d 1 v is n. a� m a� �L m r Cn C 0 V vI L 0 V 0 d Z This page has been intentionally left blank. a 0 .a a 0 m Q: c� N w Iq (D O N T 00 0 0 Z 2 T LL AMML W V d L co 0 V N 1 7 Q Y k W C N E s V cv Q Packet Pg. 231 r�rrrrrrw• ...--1 . T .. .............._T a � i En " 8 two O 2 wl� S °¢ U L a � LLp $oo" a �w O wo=e- m�wo X,IT EE- � II l =�pk2 ttO� Z U ^ i d O Mad 3 _�� N �3 s o, a =a s v $ < w�<,o 0 U° W ° < `EL <� o U°o�zd zd w N _° 1. Z- 0 O V _ < O Iz 04 - - o o gp Q4 ° p-= W Y z p a o �K�o 3 w �� o> �1 ° " oN� i g w LU ` V 3 zw, - � - Z `g - y m "-x ��°°oJ°�WG�o-w o g"= oW'= Y� O Z. wLL w - y \v W o � ^�' is c S" ,. oQ°W z .� aoSN �� °BO o �W _ 0 - S wing - a moo <�� - _ sm� �z "_ w, ="w o -w - _ Amory :2z', o wa aim LL �0 go- Z. w�Np Z o¢W p=W<p �; o ow <j o LL �� ° �w � a� =ALL- H a �_ � W o 40 w= w< � o o w ax w =G Fzp w;ww z. Q�> '"'o"z °3 po o$o'a aia< <o' -M F <d Z `off _ m aa= �" - - - - o - gg <3 �zNn i LL $R 3 ¢zdrc F ¢ r N� �zz rc °mw r� wzn m w oN N " i Ii O - o v €i uJ'.11 n Z, K i �z 30 a 8°,> o "O z�a€" �2 p p=� o �' �', $ �.ppo . apw, .$ . SHE 'ais3W �° .r r'ao< n ° W. 0 o <z 5.H.b cl T T- Llj WW ftl 0 Z a 8 1�', 'W' (Z' z o (91 010 z 0 a V;01 Z'w x 0 0 z i:y LL m w - -W RD o 0 LQ X w Q, U. -1, -- 0 z 1: 0 Z: X 1 w z z ly w I : =1 !,- , W 0 0 X� 0 M 10 Olw 1 w w w M a w L C4 Lkj L O J.- z ,,. .-OW- L H a 0 0 H O - z q 0 Q) C I Z Z)ww ol z " E --w g, A W � oz z z ad fUC w I -W OE z tl a�a T oz 9 w dia,QzH -a :aka wz, 41 'i :2:1 a a O IAIV MIA w w- 'w W. Lq E�,s Z- � (n a'Z� U..,--Z z o W 0 wz IAV 0 W Z H Z U) 0 a Z-�wz W.W, W. 0 0 0 0 X Z z 0: m- W.I<--W w x .Z %-. 1111K�7 Z s 0 T z 0 0 WW I., 0 z w 0 zIl 1 0 on z 0 <z 00, < z 0 Zi 0 T Iz w 2 Ce) 0 w C14 z 0 Z IM 0 z �0: 1 10, w WO 0 1 - C� 9 z Z. ? Iwwz w W-0 Ogg , . 0 < LO z LD 9 w z z z w < a 0 1 C6 Z-w Z- a . 2 < 'o -a < L, z < w w 1. z 0 O.Z-,- x 0 z 0 w 0 0 0 0 0 z z M W w 0 I 1 :1 0 0 w W 0 w E W . , 0 w 0 0 FX D 0 0 M z z I Z LU U) 'd co a w w a a Lu -j o z z o T T wo X. z<"i L a < LL z z z I I uj W w wn 0 z z WZ z < .2 z < Z . L w M , 0 O - . < 0 cr 0 1 1 a z z 0 W. Yl� w O 0 < . 2 w ow 8 w z m t 0 0 -:1 w X < z ZZlo I < A F- z 0 < a M Z W < 0 z < w " MOWWO > < m wm M 1 3) '0 o Q z °. w w w MLL L 0. W, ZJ 2 2 z oz w; C& w w Q w 0 Q! t M 0 1 15 < < L) 0 M z z a) I? O• 0 w w 0-� < 0. W., z W-P 0 a w 1T \ IW W-0 uo" -W, I z -W,=.W, w¢ 9,�s 6z �,6 0 W z- j .'Z 0 PO Z'.�W- �--=0-, <Z, :X-,:.31 rw- �'w w -Z -O¢ a- WZ71-san I w P� wo§�Mw. <OEWZ8 X H-M -- ol uw�<w-.z , . z D '.Z2 w❑ d-Uu- P 0 -W X O�w�'Mo-W ZJ L 0 OW 0 w :we S.zo%Z, 'I zz ww �ww WT. M x w< =.Wm� VraO 0 z 0 Or-O-05 00 ',�W7-W' W.'.-W �D'wz O-W MW w�w w wo &'w M Z 2 w '06 a z3 o�j "Ot T-Z, Z, 6 z- w pa; 0M.L't 0.-yw LO 0 w 0 <z x -a ?0: �wm a 0 0 Wz L) 0- -W wz ow<u -0(., -0 woo 5w- �0'�ow- x < Sw z ;g '0� z a 0.02 (9 < W 0 w H.-A -W z 0'- 1 (, . . 0 m T OM<n -W w- z z z M M 2 Z <V: .2 1.1 LU 0.<-.<8 ZZ-WO 3<wo E Z-.-0 �x 20. .0, a w 2�-:Z, "o z 9 ?, M '02 -ww 4-E ow. 0 Qw5zM 0 a R 0, 8. w Z 0 Z- �Z- B Z 0 W, o w'w z p< ww. Z,-Y -w- -Z W. -w- -Z z x 'aw-a �g u 6 w w ZW Z w w w. w < z w z. H. Z-- 0 'o W- 8w W-W w W- < 5w I 8n-mw <tF0 020 50 0�OZ :eF,:5 z t 0 LU Iz WX '0 M w < on! p�-z .0 W 'wz -u Z ;w �-W�--Z W- w I Z 0 M 0 �oj 1-1 ZO-.1 7'Wl LL, z P,::i O-W lzo We Z-< <11 W.- zw zw -W 8 0. a ow..0 ww- 0 U. M oz zo- 0.-T. 'P. 2 `z 'z- 0-'b M .0 o- w z x 0 --w 00 'Zo OWW 0�W-. Z, ��w 8 W.-W�Z- w M w X<-.W WE O.W zo Iffi a�-,w-, �Mw,z o w T�R .W w 0 w o w of�! 1 W, W-. W� �w zo�o w a OT,S z z 0-00 .2-,9 W Y.8�-- < , E t u w w z W�5<t M-,o z w w- LO) 0. ZOO " 11 w xo�oo wwow 0<, 02 -zz 0 w w 0 z x 0 1 a < z w IOWEW �,Oz�' 10, �W., 'M 0, 0<0� 'a > z � !k 3� 0 w I a U) z3woot 'wo 0 z O� t: M�j z L) 0 0 Lo Y o z W Z z m I�w 'W W c W-Q�ow. z § ME x wo w z w -x Z o< W� <� Z. ;� �i -``M 0 15 - 0 L.w HM Mo Os < Ho,> I �w W Z< z �o ,()!g, 00 woo M a w �5mou. zPM Z lzzT w zM zz z wo �Ozz� T 2 w 0 Ln 0 00< 0 0 o M 00 oz� w m(D w LO m w w 0 W:5 0 < I an am < W, 0 W I z z w W C2. w 0 w w w a 0 0 z w w 0 0 T z w z I�2 SS 7:,, 0 0 0 0 ,=1 -M. M,o N5, '10, Ho. �002<2§w 10 11 1 W < z z w z w in m r .6 6 i00041k w Z 5.H.b a NOS � i 0 � q -- °+ I 1 I \ C ( \ q F5 , V 1 �= Zl CL 1 •�\\\\\\\\\\\\� \\ CD \\ \v\\\a\ 1 ) & ° co ______________�______________ c Vvvv O - -- -------------- ---- - - - - m O CL ?3 W I UE P, O \ \ tD O .05.9 i 4 17 I X N E fo pl I Y (00o coo ti 1 V Y W p 4 'IH U) 1 '9t I fis U- 1v j W > OI ' I a o L 1 M 1 - c c�n 1 0o 1 0 X LU 2 N J � C I CC 1 � C LU Q O W W Q W z - _ G- - z N O N O I of O O O a r � L � on Z & p <Z 5.H.b am p 2 M 00 O a �� ° a w ro�Wwt�2 N � U in d/ E + / l X111 � llrivllll say ca OD ' N m QX I I / U I I e; Tre/ x� i O If ll ljj • ' W y co \ Z Q N O /� � X N Y' Y - m i uw o .9z W '� Cl) CD N , W6 O / 1 _ + / - OO N I • / e D , V ' LU / 1 LL zo UJ 0 tY1 06 ---- -----�--------------- N - %, w Q % t cc I 1 I I I Q i �m 0 N w o' i y uj Of W O m V) U CD J J nom. neA 4 Z o r <Z N S.H.b 0 � o w w J o a F P p ¢ W iJ31 M0139 33S - 00+5L �NI� H�ldW ego o J q o o u� °0"5 � ° 3 z a < b W w r ° O N r R ¢ 1 tY Cy Boa � z I I {' I ✓ xmw w4 0 o z o a cz'- y rc i 3 Cjq W g � r LL' c' �d> z W 3 H w ��' i �-Z O 2 iz¢ ? o fw Z "' 3 3 w °o J i 1- N 2 z °.n s m a F O m 3 a w ti] Q Z°U 2U Z W �a w m zrc U z z z z z z z z GL a W sm wR w a So Z r - <w �I m o w LL ° 00000000 � �I I U M z co + 1* CL III• .\ I+ co 1 I •I' .I• ..I__ � ?\ 't3 ktw b L .0 l o Uw x=w O ,A-. ' MV r � I�T 11 to w I I I I wz N?z 4 � o z o W I I o QI 1 - r, w '$ az m LL pm C H I r W > w - o m a rn _ 1 ° m` w ^I v W z a € > — aO - -- z �+ A. f I Z fn o H g g K ^ N N 1 ? YfY d Z O cn 0 ` rll� J Q (sa �u Q I ^ :r w .j I Ij I Ir I v) AZO o b � 1j \ _ t.0 4YL) cr S \1 sl \ Z (9L) 1 (s L) z to � � 00' 32. •�4 I it o J I 04 d LL 1HOo !X 09V ]IS-00+51 SNIP HOiVN r Z 1 r o a z I I S,H:h r UiT � i � uwwi V W p ro [„UaE, a Z o � N N O g w 4 � I h 2 4�w U _ IIfIIIIIII � II II ^ �t � $ wzc OO.te Oo«ez $ s OO.az OO«LZZ Oo.sz O I� L LL F ?i 3AVM31A NIViNnoiN a z I y a I♦ �� C; o d i I'Y �, Arco � row yam= N ��w ia� °arc 6 { zw0 wrco m IL R.lew I ( I 0 o Qgo oiz ° T I I z - r+ ` w to I.: °"'p°o az.oa (32 �� C T ow \ i �. x O i d V m� fn \ a°i \� ,Ii I Ioo2o pew 0 p I mt=aTY G�'m .o k I : ONOOQ owo prc_ d O a Z I C \c I S a> OSOr O �O 6� F- I 17.00.117_Oa I z 'g"a g N & y fn I °°°° y p za N '< u, Z awiac ° z z s ffiWg� w o--,--. =� c4 boy °Ra N _ I2 I I o'o��i px �oai aag-z 5 main a y CD tl'z T y1 O Z F oaf N I i \ \) \ \: wo°w i°w oo to .+ PP v w i cxi w CO ti °LL ¢y y o poi •� z ^< i b .. off.. ai i 2 o I p U�fy Q j Ui�Wt��V 1 1 i J t O I \\\\nmll \ I`i r I gg --------------- , ? .oe. l t \ d T 0 `\ I v Z CD Zi r 7V r \ g o 1 \ _„� w 1 I I a w 6 m LU N � I $ a I _Y i i i ^I/ I� r \ 1 Qiu I III 1 /1 I ` W 'I � 8 R✓ ' I I 1.� � � ..... ........... / v 4 .. -.. .......... > Q Q W a _ 5 1 ° o � 1 �. o i r F az 5.H.b O ti U �cq 9�4 . pQ g fr � I III III II ! I IIII 11111 ' 1 11 I I I I I I ���j,r 11 111 I I I I I!I 1 1111 l I I I I I I l I I l I I I I r ( / I G III I I I I 111111111 r 1 11111111 l 1111 i� � � d / ,� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1� � .� ✓� � p / i r IiI ' I ° / / C, /W d r cp+p lJ I I I l/I I/� � /� Z at - z r - - .. Lo C6 LU Ln m a / M r r �r r - se r i aP lm r m i i i Lu g �O m �- \I z LU d , II r R I r r 1 1 1 I � Y�/ / 1 r CCS I O � 2 ^a a 1 C � u O M C Z � � 0. 1331 MO138 33S-00+96 3NI1 HOIVVY Iz C I. I coi � U L I 1£ t \ I�I •I i I W o , Q Ir M gg 1 I� � I;�• � � �r. , I I � o \ / J 3 k I r s I � � o i R F i w a Q LLJ' Lvl (sal w Q ......_... o UO RBI v I y O 1 1 ail O i, ... Q Z 19L1 l ISO ------� r ---- 1 3j. I w x'' ,I�_ I .;III I i 't .•o, 1HJIH 3AO9V 33S 00+SL 3NI1 HOIVIN '• i a= e p w a C ��'o ++ I O ti e� I TTl ETT Tl7TTTT ---------IT.--� p w 3AVM31ANIV1Nf10W R Ai � a 4 HIM Y J N82\ i gII i MH I " ' ddb ar4 ar' I $ga :a g o ;w ►�� I,r � , 1 I FH w off? i¢ N o 3 ��`� ----------- -�---- p° mw a • a a • w q Is,l �I ( 1 j i i m W o z a v-`, Z g ul y -- -----_ --3AVM31ANIV1Nf10W---�`- --- �� °a ;€ o ff' ° 2 3AV17V3HM02RIV N rii W - oq t° mg. J t 2 d Y� 3 7 M'M "' & : Ns l p N °<= j I I &= I I 0 m .o a` c m E m U R a d m rn a m in v c 0 v d `o U d 0 O) d Z co C s O Q O b d M R O O N N O O Z N A c LL I d >a a 0] d d N v C O V d y Q 9 L X W C d E t U N Q Packet Pg.237 5.H.c EXHIBIT `B" 0 L n. SECOND STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT a MITIGATION MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM CLU t4 This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared to implement the mitigation measures outlined in the Draft and Final Initial Study (herein Final Initial Study) for the Second Street Bridge Replacement Project. This program has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the State and City of San Bernardino CEQA m T Guidelines. Cn CEQA Section 21081.6 requires adoption of a monitoring and/or reporting program for those v measures or conditions imposed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the (n L environment. The law states that the monitoring or reporting program shall be designed to ensure ° compliance during project implementation. a� The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contains the following elements: z c 1. The mitigation measures are recorded with the action and procedure necessary to 0 ensure compliance. The program lists the mitigation measures contained within a the Initial Study. y 2. A procedure for compliance and verification has been outlined for each � mandatory mitigation action. This procedure designates who will take action, N what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be co reported. 3. The program contains a separate Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Record N for each action. On each of these record sheets, the pertinent actions and dates a will be logged, and copies of permits, correspondence or other data relevant will ai be retained by the City of San Bernardino. Of 4. The program is designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to 2 compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. If changes are made, new monitoring compliance m procedures and records will be developed and incorporated into the program. Cna� L The individual mitigation measures and accompanying monitoring/reporting actions follow. They are presented in the same order as in the Final Initial Study. 0 Cn m X W August 15,2016 m E NO U Y Q Packet Pg. 238 S.H:c Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Page 2 U I. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES o 0 a c CD MM BIO-1: Work areas would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible, and staging areas would be in the upland area along the roadway and outside of the creek channel. a� MM BIO-2: Staging areas would be restricted to upland areas, outside of the creek corridor, to minimize impacts on the creek and riparian habitat. m MM BIO-3: Following project construction, disturbed areas would be restored to their pre- rn project conditions or better, and any re-vegetation or erosion control implemented would be completed using native species. MM BIO-4: Individual trees and shrubs with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of four inches o or less that must be trimmed but do not require complete removal would be cut at ground level with hand tools to allow for regrowth and reduce disturbance of the surrounding vegetation. rn MM BIO-5: The water diversion plan would be consistent with regulatory permit and agreement requirements, and would be submitted to appropriate resource a agencies for approval prior to construction. Q 0 LJ MM BIO-6: Best management practices (BMP), such as silt fencing, fiber rolls, straw bales, or other measures would be implemented during construction to minimize dust, N dirt, and construction debris leaving the construction area. MM BIO-7: All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized o for construction purposes, would be stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover, or a vegetative ground cover. a� MM BIO-8: All unpaved access roads would be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. L MM BIO-9: Appropriate hazardous material BMPs would be implemented to reduce the m potential for chemical spills or contaminant releases into the creek, including any non-stormwater discharge. c MM BIO-10: All equipment refueling and maintenance would be conducted in the upland CD staging area away from the creek, wetlands, and other sensitive areas per standard specifications and regulatory permits. In addition, vehicles and m equipment would be checked daily for fluid and fuel leaks, and drip pans would 's; be placed under all equipment that is parked and not in operation. X W MM BIO-11: Vegetation removed from the biological study area (BSA) would be treated and disposed of in a manner following the recommendations of the California s Invasive Plant Council to prevent the spread of invasive species on site or off r Q Packet Pg. 239 S.H.c ri Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program R Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Page 3 site. BMPs may include, but are not limited to, identification of existing 2 invasive species, avoidance of invasive species in erosion control, staff training, a` equipment cleaning when entering and exiting the project area, and monitoring. MM BIO-12: A restoration plan will be developed to replace wetlands impacted at a minimum ratio of 1:1; however, the final ratio will be identified through C consultation and coordination with resource agencies during the permitting process. The revegetation plan will include a summary of impacted vegetation, a planting plan, mitigation ratios, and success criteria based on resource agency m requirements. The revegetation plan will be developed in coordination with and N approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and c United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) prior to implementation. 0 m MM BIO-13: Invasive plant species in the project area will be removed and disposed of in a o manner that minimizes the potential for their reestablishment. Invasive plants will be identified by a biologist prior to their removal and removal procedures o will follow the recommendations of the California Invasive Plant Council. If herbicides are applied, they will be applied in compliance with applicable state Z, and federal laws. CL 0 MM BIO-14: If construction is scheduled to begin during bird nesting season (typically Q February 15 to September 15), nesting bird surveys would be completed no more than 48 hours prior to construction to determine if there are any nesting Q� birds or active nests within or adjacent to the project area (within 300 feet for N birds and 500 feet for raptors). Surveys would be repeated if construction co activities are suspended for three days or more. 0 MM BIO-15: If nesting birds are found in the BSA, appropriate buffers consisting of orange flagging/fencing or similar (typically 300 feet for birds and 500 feet for raptors) Q would be installed and maintained until nesting activity has ended, as a determined in coordination with the project biologist and regulatory agencies, as appropriate. a� 0, MM BIO-16: Prior to construction, all trees within 100 feet of the project area would be m surveyed by a qualified bat specialist to determine the presence/absence of bats and any active or potential bat-roosting cavities. During the non-breeding and active season, any bats roosting in trees would be safely evicted under the Cn direction of a bat specialist and under consultation with the CDFW. o U G1 MM BIO-17: Once it has been determined that all roosting bats have been safely evicted from roosting cavities, exclusionary devices approved by the CDFW would be m installed and maintained to prevent bats from roosting in these cavities prior to -2 and during construction. w MM BIO-18: Pre-construction bat surveys would be conducted by a qualified bat specialist no more than seven days prior to the removal of any trees within the project area to E confirm that exclusionary measures have been successful and there are no bats o Q Packet Pg. 240 S.H.c Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Page 4 within the project area. If no roosting bats are detected, no further surveys o would be required provided the tree removal is completed within seven days. If a removal is delayed more than seven days from the survey date, additional surveys would be conducted no more than seven days prior to tree removal to E ensure that no bats have moved into the area. a MM BIO-19: Surveys and exclusion measures are expected to prevent maternal colonies from becoming established within 100 feet of the project area. In the event that a maternal colony of bats is found, the CDFW would be consulted, and no work m would be conducted within 100 feet of the maternal roosting site until the y maternal season is over or the bats have left the site, or as otherwise directed by = the CDFW. The site would be designated as a sensitive area and protected until 0 the bats have left the site or the young bats are volant. No clearing and grubbing in would be authorized adjacent to the roosting site. Combustion equipment, such w as generators, pumps, and vehicles, would not to be parked nor operated under or within 100 feet of the roosting site. Construction personnel would not enter o into areas beneath the colony, especially during the evening exodus. z IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION 0. 0 City staff shall verify implementation of the above mitigation measures. Q 0 0 COMPLIANCE RECORD M N When Required: The verification shall be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit. to WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY: N a DATE PREPARED: 0, L m d L .V 0 U d m X W C N E t` t U Q Packet Pg. 241 5.M.c Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Page 5 II. GEOLOGY AND SOILS o L 0. MM GEO-1: Prior to issuance of building permit, the project Applicant shall submit plans to the City of San Bernardino for review and approval demonstrating project compliance with the latest adopted edition of the California Building Standards CL Code seismic requirements and the recommendations of a design-level CD geotechnical investigation. All soil engineering recommendations and structural foundations shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer. The approved 2 plans shall be incorporated into the project. All onsite soil engineering activities m shall be conducted under the supervision of a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist. o U IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION N L 0 Building Plan Check staff will verify the implementation of the above mitigation measure at submittal and approval of building permits, whichever is later. z COMPLIANCE RECORD a When Required: The verification shall be completed prior to issuance of building permits. a 0 WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY: M N DATE PREPARED: 0 N a7 7 Q I a. d L m a.+ d d L Y Cn 0 U N m t X UJ C N E Y Q 3 Packet Pg. 242 5.H.c Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Second Street Bridge Replacement Project Page 6 U III. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY •o L n. MM HYD-1: Work areas would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible to avoid the creek and minimize impacts on waters of the United States (U.S.) and state. 0) MM HYD-2: Measures for preventing material, equipment, and debris from falling into the W creek would be in place at all times while the bridge deck is being removed. The work area would be tented and isolated to minimize the potential for concrete -� dust, debris,paint chips,rust, and construction material to fall into the creek. m IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION 0 U City staff will verify implementation of the above mitigation measures at submittal and approval (n L of final development plans and throughout construction. ,o U Q1 COMPLIANCE RECORD ° CD Z When Required: The verification shall be completed prior to issuance of building permits and CD during construction. a 0 WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY: Q 0 N o DATE PREPARED: to r Q N Q I a a� L m T y L ,,i^ce+ VJ 0 U d m s X W w C N E August 15,2016 Q Packet Pg. 243 7'07PHirt Form EXHIBIT "C" Notice of Determination Appendix D U N To: From: ❑ Office of Planning and Research Public Agency: City of San Bernardino n U.S. Mail: Street Address: Address: 300 North"D"Street �- San Bernardino, CA 92418 P.O. Box 3044 1400 Tenth St., Rm 113 Mike Grubbs E Contact: Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (909)384-5179 T ® County Clerk County of: San Bernardino Lead Agency(if different from above): a, Address: 385 N.Arrowhead Ave,2nd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415 Address: m T Contact: cn Phone: c 0 U SUBJECT.Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse):2016061062 a� Project Title: Second Street Bridge Replacement Project, Bridge#54C-0411 Z Project Applicant: City of San Bernardino 0y Project Location (include county): E. Second Street over Warm Creek,San Bernardino, San Bernardino County o Project Description: a The City of San Bernardino, in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation, proposes to replace the 0 existing Second Street Bridge over Warm Creek between Arrowhead Ave.and Mountain View Ave.(project).The purpose of the project is to improve the sufficiency rating of the bridge, including improving the longevity of the bridge, reducing maintenance, improving seismic performance, and bringing the design into compliance with American N Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials standards.The project would include replacing the existing bridge,widening each sidewalk by one foot, and installing bridge barrier railings that conform to AASHTO standards. This is to advise that the City of San Bernardino has approved the above o (X❑ Lead Agency or ❑ Responsible Agency) N N described project on and has made the following determinations regarding the above a� (date) Q described project. o1 O 1. The project[❑ will ❑will not] have a significant effect on the environment. Z (D 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. a X1 A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. op 3. Mitigation measures [X❑were ❑ were not] made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [X❑ was ❑ was not] adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations [❑ was X❑ was not] adopted for this project. 6. Findings [X❑ were ❑ were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval, or the Lj negative Declaration, is available to the General Public at: City of San Bernardino Community Development Dept. 300 North"D"Street, 3rd Floor San Bernardino, CA 92418 s X w Signature (Public Agency): Title: Director of Community Development c a� Date: Date Received for filing at OPR: E c� w a Authority cited: Sections 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference Section 21000-21174, Public Resources Code. Revised 2011 Packet Pg. 244 mm 5.H.e r s M NYMRlLVMa �+ rat 0 H"1U�I,. � hV N1Ppglt S i Gi ttF s k"a � 1 Itlt 5 ti #t1r..Y.liW cy ' g�g'w w 4�t z L tv t wrn Cy r� ' r Ssi0i 7Ml R � F bi xR' i�, xv ''° " � ,�wa I st � Sxd1KY# �~.tvr-5 - � ��t P g;, H�;�jy � � d ' zY : i''+� �� kikl�i� �,, 'a., Y •-_ i.W44 "" t �671Ra[14 S"� i5 y g G ' fQ CL imh Uk 10, Co f s a� N ST '` 1s d 15 3 E s: *d Mid V r + O 15, n kid✓ r A F I °S '.t ,,t,r`. .a+a_.u.�x_ -� _ +°" �� awst€Y � . ro L s _ Rem On L u _ # tinE'ity Z #q vut�lr x+tT-AY M Q L Q O a� Nt N �* sny mOlA u;W t g rip s S� a tl gg E O U) U e � + ° .m "� ' , r ' end Due 0 Uy` II a + f � l > �_ ut AY S 3d ': ,-I V ss _.A 4k ICA _ . Packet Pg. 245