HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS03-Redevelopment Agency
.
RE~'::VELOPMENT AGENCY .~...QUEST FOR ",,~MMISSION/COUNCIL AC (ION
From: Glenda Saul, Executive Director
Subject: ENTERPRISE ZONE EIR/EIS
_ _pt: Redevelopment Agency
Date: January 21, 1986
Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council action:
3/19/85
3/20/85
3/21/85
3/25/85
4/15/85
5/2/85
5/6/85
7/22/85
8/19/85
9/23/85
(continued
Approval of Application under AB40
Review by Ways & Means Committee
Review by Ways & Means Committee
Council/Commission approval of Enterprise Zone boundaries.
Item continued, referred to Ways & Means
Item continued, referred to Ways & Means
Application approved
Executive Director authorized to negotiate EIR/EIS with URS
Resolution 4787 authorized execution of contract with URS
Authorized contract amendment for EIR/EIS.
on next page)
Recommended motion:
(MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL)
MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DETERMINING AND CERTIFYING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENT IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE ENTERPRISE ZONE IS
ADEQUATE AND FULLY COMPLIES WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT AND NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
~kY
/ S~nMuffi
Contact person:
Glenda Saul
Supporting data attached:
YES
Phone: 383-5081
1,2,3,5,6,7
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: $
N/A
No sdverse Impact on City:
26tla1Wr
1-21-86
,
Olcil Notes:
Agenda Item No, {l-S-.,3
Glenda Saul, Executive Director
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
- ENTERPRISE ZONE
Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council action (continued):
10/4/85 CITY RESOLUTION
84-405 Allocating housing funds to Enterprise Zone.
84-406 Allocating beautification and Job Linkage funds to Enterprise Zone.
84-407 Designating Deputy City Administrator as City Coordinator.
84-410 Allocating street improvements.
84-411 Directing development of new code designation for use in Enterprise
Zone.
COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS:
4804 Authorizing staff to develop data base agreement.
4805 Authorizing staff to develop incubator project
4806 Establishing Zone Management Office.
4807 Directing development of Marketing Program.
4808 Diverting development of Export Program.
1/9/86
1/16/86
Special meeting of Environmental Review Committee recommended
certification of EIR by Mayor and Common Council.
Environmental Review Committee recommended certification of EIS by
Mayor and Common Council.
264G/MT
1-21-86
CI'~ I OF SAN BERNARD~.40 - REQUl,,,,T FOR COUNCIL ACi .ON
STAFF REPORT
Attached are copies of the addendum pages of the EIR which contain the comments
and responses to the EIR from the reveiwing agencies. The final EIR/EIS, with
the Resolution of Determination and Certification must be submitted to
California Department of Commerce no later than February 3, 1986.
Staff recommends the resolution be adopted and staff be instructed to submit the
Final EIR/EIS.
264G/MT
1-21-86
75-0264
RESOLUTION NO.
1
2
3
4
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DETERMINING AND.
CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENT IMPACT
STATEMENT FOR THE ENTERPRISE ZONE IS ADEQUATE AND FULLY COMPLIES
WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
5 OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
6
SECTION 1. The Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
7 Bernardino hereby find, determine and certify that the final
8 Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement
9 (hereinafter "EIR/EIS") for the Enterprise Zone for the City of
10 San Bernardino has been carefully reviewed by the City of San
11 Bernardino, and certifies that such EIR/EIS is adequate in each
12 and every respect, and fully complies with the policies, terms
13 and requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and
14 of the National Environmental Policy Act. The City of San
15 Bernardino hereby certifies the adequacy of said EIR/EIS.
16 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
17 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
20 wit:
21
22
23
24
18
19
Bernardino at a
meeting thereof, held on the
, 1986, by the following vote, to
day of
AYES:
Council Members
NAYS:
25 ABSENT:
26
27
2R
City Clerk
1 I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
of
, 1986.
Approved as to form:
tI4~d/.)/IP~
City Attorney
261
27
28
da
Mayor of the City of San Bernardino
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
For The
City of San Bernardino
Application For Designation
Of An Enterprise Zone
February 1986
URS
CORPORATION
412 West Hospitality Lane
San Bernardino. California
FINAL
ENVIRCJNr>mAL IflPACT REPORT /
ENVIRONi"ENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION
(f AN ENTERPRISE ZONE
ADDENDUM TO THE
DRAFT EIR/EIS:
LEITERS OF COI"MENT, RESPONSES,
AND CHANGES TO THE DRAFT
THIS ADDENDUM TO THE DRAFT EIR/EIS
CIRCULATED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT
ON NOVEMBER 7, 1985 AND THE DRAFT EIR/EIS
SHALL CONSTITUTE THE FINAL EIR/EIS
CHANGES TO THE DRAFT EIR/EIS
CONTENTS
Section E.ill.
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1
1.1 Project Purpose 1-1
1.2 Project Description 1-1
1.3 Public Involvement 1-2
1.4 Environmental Effects 1-3
1.4.1 Geology 1-3
1.4.2 Water Resources 1-4
1.4.3 Biological Resources 1-4
1.4.4 Air Quality 1-4
1.4.5 Population, Employment, and Housing 1-5
1.4.6 Planning and Land Use 1-5
1.4.7 Fiscal Analysis 1-6
1.4.8 Transportation 1-6
1.4.9 Water Supply 1-6
1. 4.10 Wastewater Collection, Treatment and 1-7
Disposal
1.4.11 Solid Waste Disposal 1-7
1.4.12 Community Services 1-7
1. 4 .13 Cultural Resources 1-8
1.4.14 Visual Resources 1-8
1.4.15 Growth Inducement 1-9
1. 4 .16 Cumulative Impacts 1-9
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A~SE AND NEED FOR ACT~ 2-1
.0
2.1 Project Description 2-1
2.2 PurDose and~ProDose~ Action 2-3
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3-1
3.1 Location 3-1
3.2 Regional Setting 3-1
3.3 Existing Land Use 3-3
4. ALTERNATIVES 4-1
4.1 Proposed Project 4-1
4.2 No Project Alternative 4-2
4.3 Alternative Project Design 4-3
4.4 Alternative Project Location 4-4
i
Section
5.
CONTENTS (Cont'd.l
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
5.1
5.2
5.3
6.
Significant Impacts That Can Be Mitigated
Significant Adverse Impacts That Cannot Be Mitigated
Summary of Mitigation Measures
GROWTH INDUCEMENT
7.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
8.
Introduction
Existing Conditions
Proposed Project Impacts
Mitigation Measures
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources
8.1.1 Existing Conditions
8.1.2 Proposed Project Impacts
8.1.3 ~ation MeasurE's
water Resour
8.2.1 Existing Conditions
8.2.2 Environmental Impacts
~;tin;atinn MO::ll<::IIY"Pc::.
10 oglca Resources
8.3.1 Existing Conditions
8.3.2 Proposed Project Impacts
8.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Air Quality
8.4.1 Existing Conditions
8.4.2 Proposed Project Impacts
8.4.3 Mitigation Measures
Population, Employment, and Housing
8.5.1 Existing Conditions
8.5.2 Proposed Project Impacts
8.5.3 Mitigation Measures
Planning and land Use
8.6.1 Existing Conditions
8.6.2 Proposed Project Impacts
8.6.3 Mitigation Measures
ii
Paoe
5-1
5-1
5-1
5-1
6-1
7-1
7-1
7-1
7-4
7-5
8-1
8-1
8-1
8-5
8-9
8-11
8-11
8-16
8-18
8-19
8-19
8-23
8-23
8-24
8-24
8-25
8-26
8-27
8-27
8-32
8-34
8-36
8-36
8-47
8-51
CONTENTS CCont'd.l
Section ~
8.7 Fi sca 1 Analysis 8-52
8.7.1 Existing Conditions 8-52
8.7.2 Impact Assessment 8-55
8.7.3 Mitigation Measures 8-67
8.8 Transportation 8-69
8.8.1 Existing Conditions 8-69
8.8.2 Proposed Project Impacts 8-73
8.8.3 Mitigation Measures 8-81
8.9 Water Supply 8-89
8.9.1 Existing Conditions 8-89
8.9.2 Proposed Project Impacts 8-94
8.9.3 Mitigation Measures 8-96
8.10 Wastewater Collection, Treatment, and Disposal 8-96
8.10.1 Existing Conditions 8-96
8.10.2 Propose~ Project Impacts 8-101
.3 8-102
8.11 o 1 8-102
8.11.1 8-102
8.11.2 Proposed Project Impacts 8-103
8.11.3 Miti9ation Measures 8-103
8.12 ~ommQnlty ~erVlces 8-103
8.12.1 Fire Protection 8-103
8.12.2 Law Enforcement 8-107
8.12.3 Electricity 8-110
8.12.4 Schools 8-111
8.12.5 Parks and Recreation Areas 8-116
8.12.6 Medical Facilities 8-120
8.12.7 li brari es 8-120
8.12.8 Telephone Service 8-121
8.12.9 Natural Gas 8-122
8.13 Cultural Resources 8-123
8.13.1 Existing Conditions 8-123
8.13.2 Impacts of Proposed Project 8-134
8.13.3 Mitigation Measures 8-135
8.14 Visual Resources 8-137
8.14.1 Existing Conditions 8-137
8.14.2 Proposed PrDject Impacts 8-144
8.14.3 Mitigation Measures 8-145
9. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USE OF 9-1
MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND ENHANCEMENT OF
LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
10. ENERGY CONSERVATION 10-1
i i i
SECTION 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 PROJECT PURPOSE
On May 10, 1985, the City of San Bernardino submitted a preliminary applica-
tion to the State Department of Commerce for the designation of an Enterprise
Zone.
The State of California's Enterprise Zone Program was established under
Assembly Bill (AB) 40, authored by Assemblyman Pat Nolan and signed into law
on March 20, 1984. The Nolan Bill established a program to stimulate private
investment and business growth in designated areas by providing tax and other
incentives and relaxing regulatory controls that impede private investment.
The Cal i forni a Department of Commerce is authori zed by the Nolan Bill to
designate up to ten enterprise zones throughout the state. Twenty of the
preliminary applicants, including the City of San Bernardino, were selected to
submit a final application. A requirement of the Final Application is the
simultaneous submittal of a Qraft Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
The Final Application and Final EIR will be reviewed and a Notice of
ConditiDnal Designation will be mailed on February 18, 1986. If specific
actions or conditions are enacted by the designated applicant within 180 days,
then the applicant's project will be designated as an enterprise zone.
Currently, federal legislation is pending that would provide for the
designation of federal enterprise zones. Subsequent projects approved at the
federal level will be required to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) in compl iance with the National Environmental Pol icy Act (NEPA). The
City has also requested the release of federal funds from the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development. For these two reasons, the City has opted
to prepare a joint EIR/EIS, to be filed with the City's final application on
November 5, 1985.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of San Bernardino has established a local Enterprise Zone by
Ordinance (adopted October 21, 1985). This same project area and local
incentives are being submitted in the City's application for a State-
designated Enterprise Zone. The proposed project assessed herein is based on
the City's application to the State. Established by the City and proposed for
State designation, the project area contains approximately 3,900 acres located
within the northwest portion of the City. The area is unequally divided into
three subareas. Subarea A encompasses approximately 2,545 acres; Subarea B
encompasses approximately 1,185 acres and is designated as the Industrial
area; and Subarea C consists of about 170 acres and is designated as the
Commercial area.
1-1
Subarea A is generally an older urbanized area that is characterized by blight
and deterioration. Existing land use is a mixture of residential tracts and
commercial strips and nodes along the principal thoroughfares. The area
includes a portion of the City's Central Business District (CBD) and includes
City Hall and several major commercial operations. Some light industry exists
along the west side of and the Santa Fe Railroad yards
DCCUPY about 95 acres sou D 5th Street and west of 1-215. Large-lot
residential areas and vacant land are the prevalent land uses in the western
sections of Subarea A west Df Muscott Street.
Most of the northern section of the proposed Enterprise Zone (Subarea B) is
vacant ~or open land~ There are scattered industrial uses, a small
percenta:geoT commercial "'a'ii'II""'sidential uses, and the southwest section of
the Shandin Hills Golf Course fairway. The Culligan Water Plant occupies a
large section of land in the central portion of Subarea B. Just north of this
site, the State College Industrial Park is developing 350 acres for light to
medium industrial uses.
The main transportation corridor through the proposed project area is 1-215,
extendi ng northwest through Subarea A and formi ng the nDrtheast boundary of
Subarea B. The major streets in the proposed Enterprise Zone are the east to
west aligned roads of Highland Avenue, Baseline Street, 9th Street, 5th
Street, and 2nd Street -- all principally supporting commercial uses. The
major north to south thoroughfares are D Street, E Street, and Mt. VernDn
Avenue, also supporting commercial development.
1.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A three-phased sCDping process was undertaken that included two public scoping
meetings held in August to solicit comments and concerns from affected
agencies and the public.
The first scoping phase concentrated on acquiring a basic understanding of the
proposed project area and of the local concerns within the proposed project
zone. This included a review of the City's General Plan, redevelopment plans,
proposed projects, and existing land uses to determine potential environmental
concerns. Two prescoping meetings with the San Bernardino Planning Department
and Redevelopment Agency were held.
The second phase consisted of two formal publ ic scoping meetings. These
meetings were open to all government agencies, organizations, interest groups,
and the general publ ic. The first scoping meeting was held at the San
Bernardino City Hall on August 15, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. and was attended by
approximately 20 people. Notices for the meetings were published as legal and
paid advertisements in The Sun. The notices were also mailed to approximately
25 interested parties i ncl udi ng government agenci es, interest groups, and
individuals.
At the request of the City Council, a second meeting was held at San
Bernardino City Hall on August 27, 1985, at 3:00 p.m. Notices for this
meeting were publ ished in the El Chicano and the Precinct ReDorter -- local
neighborhood newspapers. Direct mail ing to approximately 30 agencies and
organizations in the Northwest RedevelDpment Project area were also made. Two
1-2
SECTION 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
- -
2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The State of California's Enterprise Zone Program was established under
Assembly Bill (AB) 40, authored by Assemblyman Pat Nolan and signed into law
on March 20, 1984. The Nolan Bill established a program to stimulate private
investment and business growth in designated areas by providing tax and other
incentives and relaxing regulatory controls that impede private investment.
Twenty-two states have previously enacted similar enterprise zone legislation
and several states are now operating successful programs.
The California Department of Commerce is authorized by the Nolan Bill to
designate up to ten enterprise zones throughout the state. Preliminary
applications from interested entities were submitted in May 1985. Twenty of
the preliminary applicants, including the City of San Bernardino, were
selected to submit a final appl ication. The State has required that all
applications be received by November 5, 1985.
An integral part and requirement of the Final Application is the simultaneous
submittal of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). A certified Final EIR
must be received by the Department of Commerce by February 3, 1986. ~
purpose of this EIR is to meet the DeDartment's rpouirement for review and
a roval of " " . rammatic in that it ad-
e . ". _ ~~.. '''-Lli.lll Ioili~J~U, The
JIR/EIS will be used by the Citv of San Rprnart1ino En/ironmenta, Revle.w
.commlttee and City Council to pvall1ate tpntativp tr3_ts. narcel mansr
conditional us ermits zone ch ' the as
re Ulre. he document ma also be use ther state an c 1 a encies to
evaluate ro osa s wit in t e stud area for which e ssue a rova.
The Final Appl ication and Final EIR will be reviewed by the Department of
Commerce and a Notice of Conditional Designation will be mailed on February
18, 1986. If specific actions or conditions are enacted by the designated
applicant within 180 days, then the applicant's project will be designated as
an enterprise zone.
Currently, federal legislation is pending that would provide for the
designation of federal enterprise zones. It is likely that if the federal
bill passes, the Nolan Bill would come under the federal act. Subsequent
projects approved at the federal level will be required to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The City has also requested the release of
federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. For
these two reasons, the City has opted to prepare a joint EIR/EIS, to be filed
with the City's final application on November 5, 1985.
The City of San Bernardino has established a local Enterprise Zone by
Ordinance (adopted October 21, 1985). This same project area and local
incentives are being submitted in the City's application for a State-
2-1
designated Enterprise Zone. The proposed project assessed herein is based on
the City's application to the State. The project area contains approximately
3,900 acres and is located within the northwest portion of the City. The area
is unequally divided into three subareas (see Figure 2-1). Subarea A
encompasses approximately 2,545 acres; Subarea B encompasses approximately
1,185 acres and is designated as the Industrial area; and Subarea C consists
of about 170 acres and is designated as the Commercial area. These three
subareas are referenced throughout this report and are used in most sections
as the basis of environmental assessment rather than the proposed Enterprise
Zone as a whole.
The description of each subarea is described as follows:
o Subarea A: Beginning at the intersection of 2nd Street and D Street;
thence west to E Street; thence north to 5th Street (including Andreson
Building, H Building, and old Woolworth Building); thence west to 1-215;
thence south to RialtD Avenue; thence west to Mt. Vernon Avenue; thence
north to 4th Street; thence west to the southerly prolongation of
Herrington Avenue; thence, northerly along said prolongation Df Herrington
Avenue to 9th Street; thence west to Lytle Creek Wash; thence northerly
along Lytle Creek Wash to Highland Avenue; thence east to 1-215; thence
south to 13th Street; thence east to D Street; thence south to the point
of beginning.
o Subarea B: Beginning at the intersection of 1-215 and 16th Street; thence
northwesterly along 1-215 to 24th Street; thence west to Muscott Avenue;
thence north to Cajon Boulevard; thence northwesterly along Cajon
Boulevard (including industrial area) to California Street; thence
northwesterly along city limits to 1-215 and Palm Avenue; thence
southeasterly along 1-215 to Highland Avenue; thence east to Crosstown
Freeway (Highway 30); thence south to point of beginning.
o Subarea C: Beginning at the intersection of Mt. Vernon Avenue and 4th
Street; thence west to the southerly prolongation of Herrington Avenue;
thence northerly along said prolongation of Herrington Avenue to Highland
Avenue; thence east to the Amtrak and Santa Fe right-of-way; thence
southerly along said right-of-way to Turri 11 Avenue; thence south along
Turrill Avenue and its prolongation to the easterly prolongation of 4th
Street; thence west to the point of beginning.
It should be noted that all descriptions above include properties abutting
both sides of the right-of-ways.
2.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION
The City of San Bernardino has historically recognized a major part of the
proposed Enterprise Zone area as the most economically depressed area of the
city. According to 1980 census data, the proposed Enterprise Zone contains
the lowest income levels and highest unemployment rates. Subareas A and Care
characteri zed by underutil izat i on of commerci a 1 propert ies, vacant lots in
both residential and commercial zones, and scattered deteriorated housing and
commercial buildings.
2-2
Subarea C, the Commercial area, was selected after several workshops with City
Council and key neighborhood and community leaders. Mt. Vernon Avenue was
selected due to its numerous problems such as vacant buildings, insufficient
parking, little working capital, and ineffective market incentives.
The following list was compiled by the City and describes the current problems
and impediments to growth affecting the area.
1. Depreciated property values, structural deterioration and abandonment,
nonconformi ng and i ncompat i bl eland uses, and a general appearance of
neglect and disuse.
2. Viable businesses within the Commercial area are not distinguishable due
to problems of structural age, deferred maintenance, lack of landscaping,
and signage abuse.
3. Reuse conversion of many existing structures is limited due to age, costs
associated with renovation and/or expansion, and the scarcity of off-
street parking.
4. The numerous undeveloped parcels, scattered throughout the Commercial
area, are subject to the overgrowth of weeds, illegal dumping, and rodent
infestation.
5. The relatively low cost of property is offset by costs of demDlition and
rehabilitation, as well as limitations on reuse and expansion potential.
6. The post-Proposition 13 limitations on municipal revenues and the absence
of a focused comprehensive plan for the area have resulted in reduced
publ ic expenditures on needed capital improvements and maintenance, lack
of long-term predictability of public services, disfunctional policies,
heightened economic uncertainty, and a lack of investment incentives.
7. The Commercial area is not buffered from adjacent residential
neighborhoods. Hence, the condition of housing, generally old and
deteriorated, has a direct negative influence on the image and aesthetics
of the Commercial area. In the overall zone, approximately 50 percent of
the housing is deteriorated and/or dilapidated. The average valuation of
a housing unit is $36,000, compared to a City average of $55,000.
8. Highl and Avenue, Basel ine Street, and 5th Street, the major east/west
street through the proposed Enterprise Zone, present unsightly gateways to
the Commercial area. Abandoned structures, deteriorated building facades,
lack of streetscaping, and a cohesive land use pattern heighten
impressions of a high-risk area.
9. The Commercial area has not been within a redevelopment project; thereby
limiting investment incentives otherwise available in the competing
commercial areas to the east.
10. The absence of any major commercial tenant (e.g., supermarket) inhibits
efforts to attract and to retain the smaller convenience retailer within
the Commercial area.
2-4
11. The Commercial area lacks an identity as a market unit, thereby losing
consumer dollars to the competitive edge of clearly identified, active
commercial areas and shopping centers.
12. Approximately one-third of the area within the overall ZDne is open and
vacant land. The continued underutilization of this land inhibits the
establishment of a population base sufficient in size to demand and
support the Commercial area.
13. During the past year, two savings and loan associations and a major bank
have terminated their branch operations, leaving the Commercial area and
the major portion of the zone without any banking facilities.
14. Relatively high rates of unemployment and crime, coupled with serious
problems of vandalism, graffiti, and idle youth, enhance the high-risk
image and poor reputation of the area. Consequently, access to venture
capital and long-term financing is difficult, if not impossible.
15. A sizeab,le portion of the industrial area (about 560 acres) lacks
essential infrastructure. In the absence of public assistance in the
installation of water and sewer lines, streets, flood control facilities
and ut il it i es, the area cannot be in a compet it i ve mode for pri vate
investment with the various industri al parks throughout the region. The
disposition of finished industrial sites within the balance of the
industrial area (210 acres) is impeded by relatively high land costs and
the absence of a cohesive marketing strategy.
16. The overall unemployment rate for the proposed Enterprise Zone is 14.2
percent, with unemployment among black males reaching 16.9 percent. In
addition, the dropout rate among high school youth within the proposed
Enterprise Zone is substantially higher than that for the balance of the
community.
Based on these reasons, the City determined that implementation of an
Enterprise Zone would provide the incentives and programs necessary to improve
the area and thereby improve the City's overall image. The 19 adopted local
incentives proposed for the State Enterprise Zone program are designed to do
the following:
a) Provide direct and quantifiable impacts to stimulate employment and
investment. Included in these actions are redevelopment, small business
loans, beautification, job linkage, and retail market.
b) Reduce the cost of regulatory burdens but are not directly quantifiable
except when used by investors or business persons. These include city
rebates, fee exemptions, streamlining, and parking relief.
c) Improve the physical appearance and overall environment in the Enterprise
Zone. These include housing rehabil itation, demol ition, housing
development financing, infill housing, crime prevention, capital
improvements, and education.
2-5
d) Enhance to efforts of the appl icant in marketing the advantages of the
Enterpri se Zone 1 DC at i on to new businesses and investors. Thi s woul d
include the data base actions.
e)
Improve the opportunities for the success of existing businesses and
promote new business opportunities for resident and small businesses.
Included in this category are the Technical Assistance and Incubator
Project actions.
The courses of action included in Item A above have specific employment and
investment impact statements. As indicated in the City's application
outlining the course of action for the individual incentives listed in Items
B, C, D, and E above, the direct impact of each on private business investment
and employment as a separate action cannot be measured. Although
collectively, the ultimate goal of these actions is to stimulate new
investment and employment opportunities in the Enterprise Zone. The primary
objective is to create an environment that has the potential for receiving,
and is in fact conducive to attracting, such investment and employment.
The current image and perception of much of the Enterprise Zone is negative,
caused in part by appearances. Direct financial incentives to business, in
and of themselves, will be sufficient to stimulate development activity if the
area remains in a stagnant or downward spiral causing further depreciation and
higher risk.
The rehabilitation or elimination of unsightly structures, the construction of
new housing, the publ ic investment in parks, playgrounds and street
improvements, the high visibility of law enforcement, and the improvement of
the educational system are all intended to enhance the appearance of the
Enterprise Zone. The successful implementation of these activities would help
create a positive investment environment, reflecting local pride and
participation.
The Enterprise Zone Act establishes a program to stimulate private investment
and business development in distressed areas by providing State incentives in
combination with local incentives. Descriptions of the State incentives as
published by the Department of Commerce and authorized by the Enterprise Zone
Act follow.
1. Subsidized leasing. All property owned by state or local government
within the area of a NeighborhoDd Economic Assistance Corporation (NEAC)
and is not in current use or necessary for a purpose of the state or local
agency owning the property, may be leased to the NEAC at terms to be
speci fied. The 1 ease shall permi t the NEAC to subl ease or ass ign its
leasehold interest to private entities conducting or intending to conduct
business operation within the zone.
2. Small Business loan Preference. The Office of Small Business (OSB) shall
estab 1 ish regul at ions for loans and 1 Dan guarantees admi ni stered by the
office, which give high priority to qualified businesses in an enterprise
zone, but only if the owners of the businesses are residents of an
enterprise zone, or the business is a joint venture between residents of
the enterprise zone and an existing business in the enterprise zone.
2-6
3. Energy Loan Preference. A high priority shall be given in ranking loan
applications by the State Assistance Fund for Energy, California Business
and Development Corporation, to qualified businesses in an enterprise zone
for purchasing or providing alternative energy systems.
4. Industrial Development Bonds. The California Industrial Development
Financing Advisory Commission shall authorize an annual maximum of
qual i fyi ng bonds of $75 mi 11 ion. Thi s authori zat ion shall be used for
providing funds to businesses in this bill and in AB514.
5. Training Preference. The Employment Development Department and the State
Department of Education shall give high priority to training unemployed
individuals who reside in an enterprise zone.
6. Criminal Justice Program Preference. The Office of Criminal Justice
Planning shall give high priority to application areas in the allocation
of its program resources.
7. Environmental Impact Report. Projects in enterprise zones may be
exempted from the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) if
either: 1) the effects of the project were mitigated or avoided as a
result of the EIR prepared for the program area; or 2) examined at a
sufficient level of detail in the EIR for the enterprise zone to enable
those effects to be mitigated or avoided by specific site revisions, the
imposition of conditions, or other means in connection with the
designation of the enterprise zone.
8. State Contract Preference. Whenever the state prepares an invitatiDn for
bid for a contract for goods in excess of $100,000, the state shall award
specified preferences to business bidders operating in an enterprise zone.
The maximum preference a bidder may be awarded is no more than 15 percent.
In addition, the state bidder preference would be extended to worksites
within commuting distance of a distressed area.
9. Employer Wage Credit. Allows a tax credit for qualified wages to
specified disadvantaged individuals who are hired to wDrk in an enterprise
zone. The credit is 50 percent of wages in the first year, 40 percent of
wages in the second year, 30 percent in the third, 20 percent in the
fourth, and 10 percent in the fifth year. The total credit for a worker
in any year cannot exceed 150 percent of the minimum wage. The credit is
also in lieu of the targeted job's tax credit, and wages upon which the
credit is based cannot be deducted as a business expense. The credits may
be carried forward to the longer of 15 years or the length of the
enterprise zone's designation.
10. Investment Income Exclusion. Certain income from investments in an
enterprise zone business is excluded when calculating gross taxable
income.
2-7
11. Net Operating Loss Carryover. A taxpayer engaged in the conduct of
business within an enterprise zone is allowed to carry forward and deduct
net operating losses in any given year, for up to 15 taxable years. For a
financial institution, the limit is 5 years. If this credit is elected,
then the existing small business net operating loss carry forward would
not be allowed.
12. Employee Wage Credit. Allows a 5 percent income tax credit to qualified
employees against wages earned in an enterprise zone for one year, not to
exceed $450 per employee. The credit is reduced to $0.09 for each dollar
of income received in excess of $9,000.
13. Neighborhood Enterprise Association Corporation Incentives. Section 7074
of the Enterprise Zone Act sets up a procedure for creatiDn of a
Neighborhood Enterprise Association Corporation (NEAC). The act specifies
that the NEAC be established to provide financial and technical
assistance, and to lease surplus property to businesses in an enterprise
zone. The establishment of an NEAC is optional and does not occur until
after designation as an enterprise zone.
Local incentives for private developers that have been adopted in the City's
Enterprise Zone program would play a major role in the proposed State
Enterprise Zone. The following have been adopted by the City as a part of
their local program and these incentives are intended to complement the
State's incentive package. The incentives are included herein as adopted by
City Ordinance and based on those provided in the City's preliminary State
application. Detailed information on these incentives and the anticipated
course of action for carrying out the program elements are included in the
application.
1. Redevelopment (Subareas A, B, and C)
Tax increment financing is the primary funding tool available to the
Redevelopment Agency. When a redevelopment project area is created, the
total amount of property tax collected in the previous year is established
as the "base" amount. From that point on, through the life of the
project, the amount of annual property tax revenues received in excess of
the base amDunt is the tax increment, and these revenues accrue to the
Redevelopment Agency. The essential element of this method of financing
is the sale of tax exempt bonds tD fund necessary activities to leverage
private development, with the anticipated tax increment resulting from
such development being pledged toward repayment of the bonds. Thus, this
method of financing is dependent upon new private development occurring in
the project area, and is normally only feasible in conjunction with a
relatively large development or a cluster of small developments.
Although fi ve des ignated and one proposed redevel Dpment projects i ncl ude
areas within the proposed Enterprise Zone (see Figure 2-2), it is the
Agency's intent to focus or target tax increment fi nancing efforts as
follows: assist in financing the necessary infrastructure improvements in
the most northerly section of Subarea B (Northwest Redevelopment Project)
where this type of improvement is lacking; take the lead role in
identifying a site, assembling the land, funding an incentive package,
marketing the location, and structuring a disposition and development
2-8
agreement for development of a neighborhood shopping center anchored by a
supermarket within Subarea C or adjacent thereto within the proposed
Enterprise Zone and Northwest Redevelopment Project; and assist in
funding, as necessary, land assemblage, demolition, offsite improvements,
etc. , to 1 everage the development of tWD add i t i ona 1 ne i ghborhood
convenience shopping centers within Subarea C or adjacent thereto within
the proposed Enterprise Zone and NDrthwest Redevelopment Project.
2. City Rebates (Subareas B and C)
For new and/or expanding business within the Commercial area (Subarea C),
the City will provide the following rebate incentives during the first
three years of the life of each such business:
1. 100% rebate of the utility services users' tax
2. 100% rebate of the business license tax
3. 25% rebate of the water fee (for new business only).
For purposes of this incentive, a new business is defined as any business
that is start-up in nature or has relocated to the Commercial area from
outside the corporate city limits Df San Bernardino. Note: an existing
business within the area, which has been purchased, is not considered a
new business.
An expanding business is defined as an existing business that has made a
physical move within the Commercial area or has physically expanded its
existing facilities within the area. In either case, the expansion must
have resul ted in at 1 east a 50 percent increase in permanent full-time
employees or two employees, whichever is greater. The amount of rebate on
the utility tax for an expanding business will be based on the amount of
said tax paid by the business over and above the amount paid for the 12
months prior to the expansion. Note: permanent employees referred to in
this section must be residents of the City of San Bernardino and be on the
job a minimum of 9 months.
For new industrial firms within the Industrial area (Subarea B), the City
will provide the following rebate incentives during the first year of
operation of each such firm:
1. 25% rebate of the utility service users' tax
2. 25% rebate of the business license tax.
3. Fee Exemptions (Subareas A and C)
During the first...fll.w:. years of zone designation, all new or expanding
businesses withintlietommercial area will be exempt ,.
from all engineering fees, planning fees, mechanical ees, an Ul 1ng
permit fees. Note: storm drain and sewer fees are not covered by this
exemption.
In addition, developers participating in the Redevelopment Agency's In-
fill Housing Program within the Enterprise Zone will be exempt from the
same development fees listed above. This action is exclusive to the
2-10
Commercial area and the Zone In-fill Housing Program and is not a part of
an existing program covering some larger area.
4. Job Linkage (Subareas B and C)
The overall intent of the Job Linkage Program is to attract new business,
encourage expansion of existing business, and to stimulate employment
opportunities for local economically disadvantaged residents. The program
features the combined efforts of the City's Redevelopment Agency, ECDnomic
Development Council, and EmplDyment and Training Agency.
Under the program, new or expanding businesses, which seek any form of
public assistance to assure successful development, are requested to enter
into a "first source hiring agreement" whereby the employer agrees to use
the SBETA as a first source of recruitment for all new entry level hires.
The SBETA will refer JTPA (Jobs Training Partnership Act) eligible
residents for cDnsideration. For any entry level positiDns created in
which an eligible resident is hired and retained for a minimum of 9
months, the employer may receive a cash bonus of up to $1,500 per
employee.
5. Housing Rehabilitation (Subarea A)
The purpose of the Housing Rehabilitation Program, funded by CDBG funds,
is to assist low and moderate income homeowners in upgrading their
properties to meet minimum property standards. Homeowners in need of
assistance apply to the Agency, which, through a staff of five assigned to
the Program, provides such services as property inspection,
specifications, contract award and supervision, and direct loan
ass i stance. Key to the success of the Program are the rehabil itat i on
loans, which are offered at interest rates of 1% and 5% and cannot exceed
the lesser of the actual cost of rehabilitation or $27,000.
The Program, currently available on a citywide basis, costs $115,000 a
year to operate and features an annual lending capacity of approximately
$1,000,000. As a form of targeting, the City is committed to guaranteeing
that, at a minimum, 35 percent of these funds will be loaned within the
Enterprise Zone on a yearly basis. Thus, a minimum of approximately
$5,000,000 in rehabilitation will occur during the life of the Enterprise
Zone.
6. Small Business Loans (Subareas A, B, and C)
The San Bernardino Economic Development Council (EDC) is a private,
nonprofit corporation establ ished in 1973 by the City, to serve as a
coordinating link between private business and local government. The EDC
assists the City in promoting economic development in a variety of ways,
including by providing loans to new or expanding small businesses.
The EDC revolving loan fund was originally capitalized with CDBG funds.
It receives ongoing funding from the City primarily from a fee charged by
the City on all Industrial Development Bond issues. This source has
enabled the EDC to make small business loans totaling in excess of
$1,000,000 over the past four years. In an effort to leverage its funds
2-11
and thereby expand its lending capacity, the EDC has contracted with the
First Inter-Urban Development Corporation of los Angeles to develop and
implement an integrated plan for a direct loan and loan guarantee pool
under the State's Office of Small Business loan guarantee program. The
EDC will also coordinate with various State and Federal Business Financing
programs including, but not limited to, SBICs, MESBICs, lDCs, and programs
from the Office of Small Business Development.
To help stimulate economic development within the Enterprise Zone, the EDC
has committed 50 percent of its annual 1 endi ng capacity, est imated cur-
rently at $50,000. legitimate new and expanding small businesses within
the Zone that have been denied conventional financing are el igible to
apply for EDC direct loans or loan guarantee assistance for such activi-
ties as plant acquisition or expansion, equipment, and working capital.
7. Technical Assistance (Subareas A, B, and C)
It is the intent of the Redevelopment Agency to develop contractual
relationships with California State University and Valley College for
purposes of devel opi ng a system wherein the expert i se, resources, and
scientific objectivity of the world of study can be coordinated and
focused on the needs of new and/or existing business in the Enterprise
Zone. As currently proposed, the Agency, the Economic Development
Council, the Office of Zone Management, and the Chamber of Commerce
working through the University's Institute for Public Policy Research and
the College's Institute for Tra i ni ng Devel Dpment, woul d refer bus i ness
clients for technical assistance including individual counseling,
workshops, and classroom instruction. In addition, the possibility of the
academicians conducting fiscal impact analysis, preliminary market
studies, and user identification surveys on behalf of business, has been
discussed. Preliminary discussions have identified the following areas of
need for technical assistance: resource identification, financial
planning, business plans, accounting, inventory contrDl, marketing and
data systems.
This incentive action is not a part of an existing program covering a
larger area and will only be available for matters related to business
development and maintenance in the Enterprise Zone.
8. Streamlining (Subareas A, B, and C)
The basic objective of the streamlining process is to expedite the
delivery of services to prospective developers, and in so doing reduce the
review and approval time and ultimately the cost of developments prDposed
in the Enterprise Zone.
Each prospective developer will be provided with a packet of information
detailing critical information relative to zoning, fire access, grading,
rights-of-way, water, power, and building requirements needed to complete
plans and cost estimates, secure financing, and to implement development.
In addition, staff members will provide a flow chart specifying
departments i nvol ved, key department a 1 contacts, elements requi red and
length of review time. If necessary, staff members will request a
preliminary meeting with the Development Review Committee to clarify any
2-12
matters related to development requirements Dr to critique an initial
conceptual layout of a proposed development.
The Development Review Committee (ORe) is the key to the streaml ining
process. Composed of personnel from the various City Departments involved
in plan checking and issuing permits, and coordinated by the Planning
Department, the DRC provides for one-step review and approval of
development plans and specifications. Within approximately 10 days of
receipt of a development proposal, the ORC will meet to discuss the plans
and recommend any needed correcti ons or alterations. Once the DRC has
approved the plans, the developer wi 11 be able to conclude all permit
issuance requirements with only one visit to City Hall.
9. In-fill Housing (Subarea A)
The Redevelopment Agency is committed to implementing an in-fill housing
program intended to encourage residential development on the several
hundred vacant buildable lots within the Enterprise Zone. Initially, the
program will be targeted in that area of the Zone bounded by the 1-215
Freeway on the east, Mt. Vernon Avenue on the west, 5th Street on the
south, and 9th Street on the north. Approximately 40 in-fill lots have
been identified within this otherwise developed residential area.
Critical elements of the program include:
1. Exempting of engineering, planning, mechanical, and building permit
fees
2. Short-term construction financing at below-market interest rates
3. Mortgage financing through revenue bond financing
4. Aggressive marketing program.
In addition, consideration may be given to short-term loan assistance for
site acquisition, pre-approved plans, and temporary buy down or permanent
financing.
10. Incubator Project (Subarea C)
The Redevelopment Agency, with the cooperation of the San Bernardino
Chamber of Commerce and the Economi c Development Counc il, intends to
develop an incubator project within the Enterprise Zone, preferably in the
Commercial area (Subarea C). The purpose of the incubator project is to
reduce the initial financial exposure and risk of new start-up businesses
in the Commercial area, by providing a common facility, housing four to
ten small businesses, featuring reduced rent structures, technical
ass i stance, common marketing and office support, and fl exi bl e space and
lease arrangements.
Prior to the implementation of the project, a feasibility analysis will be
conducted in order to realistically address such issues as potential user
demand, preferable site locations, to build versus to acquire, landlord
tenant versus cODperative ownership, the Agency's role and relationship,
2-13
and development and operating cost estimates. The Redevelopment Agency
will fund and coordinate project development.
11. Beautification (Subareas A and C)
The purpose of the Beautification Program funded by CDBG funds is to
provide a financial incentive to owners (or long-term tenants) of
commercial properties to invest in exterior beautification and facade
improvements. Busi ness persons who are interested fil e an appl i cat i on
with the Agency, i ncl udi ng a descri pt i on of the proposed beaut ifi cat i on
activities and cost estimate. If approved, the Agency will grant matching
funds on a dollar-for-dollar basis up to $5,000. The grant comes via a
rebate, upon proper submittal of receipts by the owner and an inspection
of the work by staff members.
12. Housing Development Financing (Subarea A)
The Redevelopment Agency will promDte the use of s i ngl e-family Mortgage
Revenue Bonds and industri a 1 Development Bonds for mul t i-family housi ng
within the Enterprise Zone (Subarea A) in order to encourage development
of numerous parcels of residentially zoned land. Although these two
financing tools are available citywide, staff members have been directed
to give due emphasis to the development of housing in the Enterprise Zone
and to give priority to multi-family and single-family projects that need
bond financing in order to achieve feasibility. Promotion is to be
handl ed primarily through a market i ng brochure and press rel eases. It
should be noted that the priority consideration referenced above can only
be provided within the constraints of bond underwriting and bond rating
criteria.
13. Demolition (Subareas A, B, and C)
The purpose of the Demolition Program, funded by CDBG funds, is to
el imi nate structures that, because of condi t ion, represent a bl i ght i ng
influence on adjacent properties, but which cannot be mandatorily abated
under local ordinance. Owners of dilapidated structures are contacted and
encouraged to seek removal of such structures through the Agency's
Program, which provides the service at no cost to the owner. One staff
member handl es property ident i fi cat ion, owner contact, appl i cat ion
processing, contract bidding, award, and supervision.
14. Data Base (Subareas A, B, and C)
The Redevelopment Agency, in concert wi th Cal i forni a State Uni versity,
will develop and maintain a data base. As originally proposed, the data
base was to be limited to land data within the Enterprise Zone; e.g.,
size, location, value, ownership, taxes, zoning, and use. Currently, the
concept has been expanded as the potential need for a wide vari ety of
information on the zone has been realized. Both entities have agreed that
a needs assessment must be cDnducted prior to making a final determination
of the type and quant ity of data to be developed and ma i nta i ned. The
actual costs associated with start-up and ongoing maintenance of the data
base wi 11 be determi ned after the needs assessment has been compl eted.
The Redevelopment Agency wi 11 provide the fund i ng, and the Uni versity' s
2-14
Data Gathering Center the manpower for developing and maintaining the data
base.
The primary intent of the program is to provide data support for zone
marketing efforts, the Technical Assistance Program, and government and
nonprofit grant proposal efforts.
15. Parking Relief (Subareas A, B, and C)
For new or expanding businesses desiring to occupy existing commercial
structures, where inability to meet current off-street parking standards
is the only deterrent to successful occupancy, the City will grant parking
vari ances as establ i shed by Ci ty Ordi nance. In addi t ion, for busi nesses
des i ri ng to construct new facil it i es, where i nabil ity to meet current
setback requirements is the only deterrent to successful development, the
City will grant variances as established by City Ordinance.
16. Capital Improvements (Subareas A and C)
Every year, the City prepares a 5-year Capital Improvement Plan for the
entire community, which 1 ists needed capital improvements in terms of
priority, location, categDry, year of need, and funding source. The
current 5-year pl an ident i fied needed capi tal improvements withi n the
Enterpri se Zone total i ng $8,853,614.00. However, because 1 Dca 1 revenues
and priorities are subject tD change, Dnly those capital improvements
approved and funded for the Enterprise zone in fiscal year 1985-86 are
incl uded.
Based on historical analysis, the same level of funding for capital
improvements in the Enterprise Zone can be anticipated annually. In
addition, the City is committed to annually funding $1,000,000.00 in
street resurfacing throughout the community, of which $150,000 to $300,000
will be expended within the Enterprise Zone.
The amount of funding for capital improvements totals $1,448,584,00 and is
funded, in part, through CDBG, Federal Aid, Urban Redevelopment, and
Federal Aid Safety Funds.
17. Retail Food Market (Subarea C)
In order for the fi rst major cDmmerci al anchor to be attracted to the
area, the Redevelopment Agency will have to take an active role. As such,
the Agency will not only focus its financing tools on attracting a major
supermarket, but will utilize a variety of other incentives as well. The
Agency will assist, as necessary, to secure a site, assemble land,
demolish existing structures, provide relocation benefits, and secure
construct i on and permanent fi nanci ng. The potential for fee rebates and
waivers, technical assistance, streamlining, and job linkage benefits will
enhance the Agency's efforts.
18. Crime Prevention (Subareas A and C)
In order to improve police community relations, increase police visibility
and reduce crime, the City has establ ished two Pol ice Service Centers
2-15
within the Enterprise Zone, one of which is located in the Commercial area
(Subarea C). In addition, the Pol ice Department has initiated
implementatiDn of the Neighborhood Watch Program in Enterprise Zone
neighborhoods, and at the same time has beefed up its patrol of the area.
19. Education (Subareas A, B, and C)
The City has committed $100,000 in CDBG funds to cover, in part, the
start-up costs associated with planning and implementing a "stay in
school" program aimed at reducing the drop out rate in the City schools.
A task force studying the problem has suggested that the funds be provided
to the School District in exchange for a commitment to at least match the
funds and to use the pooled resources to employ additional school
counselors to work exclusively at the intermediate grade levels with the
target student population with the highest drop out potential.
Black and Hispanic youth are the principal targets of the program. Thus,
although the program would be available in intermediate schools throughout
the District, in effect it would be targeted, since a majority of Black
and Hispanic students reside within the Enterprise Zone.
2-16
SECTION 3
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.1 LOCATION
The proposed Enterprise Zone project is located in the City of San Bernardino,
a southern Cal ifornia city with a population of over 130,000 people. The
proposed project area generally includes portions of the west, central, and
northwest sections of the City. It is located north of Interstate 10 (1-10)
and is mostly west of Interstate 215 (1-215) (see Figure 2-1). The proposed
Enterprise Zone is physically divided into two sections. The nDrthern section
extends from Palm Avenue, in the Verdemont area, south to 24th Street, and
generally lies between Cajon Boulevard and 1-215. This region covers
approximately 1,125 acres and includes most of Subarea B, the industrial
section of the proposed Enterprise Zone. The southern section generally lies
east of Lytle Creek Wash between Highland and Rialto avenues and extends
easterly to D Street. This section encompasses approximately 2,775 acres and
includes Subareas A and C as well as a small portion of Subarea B.
3.2 REGIONAL SETTING
The proposed Enterprise Zone lies in the central portion of the San Bernardino
Valley and in the northwest quadrant of the City of San
is re ionall located in rn Califor 'a's rn
oca e a rOX1ma e 1 es eas 0 os
r1 n an m1 es n
an an
1no oun a1ns
on an alluvial fan and elevations range from 1,680 feet mean sea level
(m.s.l.) near Palm Avenue to 1,060 feet m.s.l. near the intersection of D
Street and Rialto Avenue to the south. This gradual northwest to southeast
slope averages under a 2 percent gradient.
The proposed project area is surrounded by several different land uses and
residential communities. The northern strip (Subarea B) is just west of the
State College area of the City of San Bernardino. This region is primarily a
resi dent i a 1 area that has been devel opi ng since 1968 as part of the State
College Area Plan. The region adjacent tD the northern part of Subarea B is
the Verdemont area, consisting of generally open land and rural residential
development. Lytle Creek Wash is adjacent to the west of Subarea B. Muscoy,
a residential area, is located to the west of Subarea B and to the north of
Subarea A. This area is unincorporated and consists Df older, low- to medium-
income residential developments.
The southern portion (Subareas A and C) of the proposed Enterpri se Zone is
surrounded by established urbanized areas to the south and east within the
Ci ty 1 imi ts. Adj acent to the westernmost boundary 1 i es Lytl e Creek Wash and
the nDrthernmost boundary of the City of Rialto.
3-1
The area east of Subarea A, the older, establ ished section of the City,
consists primarily of land designated for residential land uses. Commercial
development exi sts along the major east/west arteri a 1 s and along D Street.
lands to the south of Subarea A are mixed residential and commercial.
The climate of the proposed project area is Coastal Mediterranean and is
characterized with mild, wet winters, and warm, dry summers. A review of
cl imatological data from San Bernardino indicates that maximum temperatures
range in the 90s to occasionally low 100s during the summer season with lows
in the 60s. Winter minima infrequently drop below freezing while days are
usually in the 60s. Precipitation mostly falls between November and April and
the average annual rainfall for San Bernardino is 14.35 inches. Winds are
generally 1 ight westerly during the day, becoming 1 ight easterly at night.
Strong north to northeast Santa Ana winds develop over the region on the
average of five to ten times per year. These winds may be severe at times,
reaching over 60 miles per hour.
3.3 EXISTING lAND USE
Subarea A is generally an older urbanized area that is showing signs of blight
and deterioration. Existing land use is a mixture of residential tracts and
commercial strips and nodes along the principal thoroughfares. The area
includes a portion of the City's Central Business District (CBD) and includes
City Hall and several major commercial operations. Some light industry exists
along the west side of 1-215 and the Santa Fe Railroad yards occupy about 95
acres south of 5th Street and west of 1-215. large-lot residential areas and
vacant land are the prevalent land uses in the western sections of Subarea A
west of Muscott Street.
Most of the northern section of the proposed Enterprise Zone (Subarea B) is
vacant land (22 percent) that has been disturbed or open land (47 percent)
that is undisturbed. There are scattered industrial uses, a small percentage
of commercial and residential uses, and the southwest section of the Shandin
Hills Golf Course fairway. The Culligan Water Plant occupies a large section
of land in the central portion of Subarea B. Just north of this site, the
State College Industrial Park is developing 350 acres for light to medium
industrial uses.
The main transportation corridor through the proposed project area is 1-215,
extending north and south through Subarea A and forming the northeast boundary
of Subarea B. The major streets in the proposed Enterprise Zone are the east
to west al igned roads of Highland Avenue, Basel ine Street, 9th Street, 5th
Street, and 2nd Street -- all prinCipally supporting commercial uses. The
major north to south thoroughfares are D Street, E Street, and Mt. Vernon
Avenue, also supporting commercial development.
3-3
transformed from a solid to a liquid state as a result of increased pore fluid
pressure and a reduction in the effective stress. The most favorable
conditions for the occurrence of liquefaction include the presence of
sediments of lDW relative density, shallow groundwater (less than 30 feet in
depth) and strong seismic shaking. In the southeastern portion of Subareas A
and C, shallow groundwater has occurred historically (Dutcher and Garrett,
1963), sediments of lDW relative density are found, and strong seismic shaking
is expected. The approximate area of potential liquefaction hazard within the
proposed Enterprise Zone is shown on Figure 8-1.
Potential slope instability impacts to development within the proposed
Enterprise Zone could result from landsliding and debris flows. Although both
of these phenomena are gravity-driven mass movements, landsl ides generally
occur in the form of relatively competent (coherent) rock masses while debris
flows normally involve failure of a surficial soil horizon. Both of these
phenomena can be instigated by seismic shaking. Slope instability hazards are
expected to be minimal due to the low relief throughout much of the proposed
Enterprise Zone. Numerous landslides have been mapped in the Shandin Hills
(Miller, 1979). A small portiDn of the Shandin Hills lies within the proposed
Enterprise Zone. The slopes associated with the Shandin Hills in the proposed
Enterprise Zone are not steep, but nevertheless may be subject to slope
instability hazards.
Impacts of development within the proposed Enterprise Zone to soils and
geologic resources would occur in the form of lDng- and short-term increases
in rates of erosion from runoff. An increase in erosion rates is an
unavoidable result of almost any type of disturbance to the ground surface.
Long-term increases in erosion rates are not expected to be associated with
urbanization, as soils are largely covered by impermeable surfaces (pavement,
asphalt, etc.).
An adequate local supply of aggregate is important to future development in
the San Bernardino region. Yearly per capita consumption of aggregate in the
San Bernardino region is estimated tD be on the order of 5 cubic yards
(Miller, 1984). A shortfall on the order of 50 mill ion tons of aggregate
reserves is expected in the San Bernardi no regi on over the next 50 years
(Miller, 1984). The aggregate resource within the proposed Enterprise Zone is
economically important as a potentially local source of construction materials
and as a potential incentive to onsite mining development. Continued urban
development in the aggregate-bearing areas of the proposed Enterprise Zone
would irreversibly limit the accessibility to such aggregate reSDurces.
Although current 1 and use wi thi n most of the proposed Enterpri se Zone is
incompatible with aggregate mining, the California Department of Conservation
(1985) has designated small portions of the proposed Enterprise Zone as
aggregate resource sectors (Figure 8-1). Surface mining within these resource
sectors is compatible with existing land use (California Department of
Conservation, 1985).
8.1.3
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation of impacts of the geological environment on the proposed Enterprise
Zone are considered necessary with respect to soils engineering and geologic
8-9
streets within the area withDut storm drains occasionally reaches nuisance
proportions, pDnding at street sides or intersections to interrupt traffic
flow during high rainfall events. Major storm drainage channels and buried
storm drains do exist throughout the area; additional storm drainage projects
are planned (see Figure 8-3).
On the pervious, open 1 ands and especi ally in the natural stream channel s,
such as Cajon Creek Wash, which is adjacent to Subarea B of the proposed
Enterprise Zone near its southwestern border, much of the accumulated runDff
percolates into the alluvial, underground storage aquifer. As an example of
percolatiDn rates in this area, the maximum flow recorded on Lytle Creek at a
gage in its mountainous canyon is 35,900 cubic feet per second (cfs), while
the maximum flow recorded in the urbanized area of San Bernardino has been
only 17,500 cfs. Therefore, tens of thousands cfs of water can percolate into
the groundwater basin befDre storm flows are 10s1 UUWIISLream in the Santa Ana
River; this source-area capture is planned and managed.
8.2.1.1 Groundwater
San Bernardino and the proposed Enterprise Zone Dverlie the Bunker Hill Basin
of the Upper Santa Ana Groundwater Basin. This basin is comprised of areally
extensive and relatively deep alluvial aquifers whose accumulated groundwaters
serve as the major water source for communities between San Bernardino and the
Orange County line.
In the Bunker Hill Basin, major water development and importation
responsibilities have been assumed by the San Bernardino Valley Municipal
Water District, a state-chartered agency that wholesales native surface water
and imported State Project water to local water agencies. The District also
monitors local groundwater and acts in a management role for such resources.
The quality of groundwater beneath the unconfined water table throughout the
Bunker Hill Basin is particularly good, generally ranging in Total Dissolved
Solids (salt) content from 150 to 300 mg/l, which is lower than municipal
suppl i es anywhere in southern Cal i forni a. By contrast, groundwater at the
Orange County 1 ine contains dissolved salts in the 700 to 1,000 mg/l range.
This difference in quality results from the extensive pumpage, use,
contamination, and repercolation that the water receives as it flows down-
gradient toward Orange County. The quality of the Bunker Hill Basin
groundwater is also enhanced by the spreading and percolation of State Water
Project water, which has a salt content between 100 and 200 mg/l.
Water levels in the Bunker Hill Groundwater Basin historically have fluctuated
duri ng decade-l Dng alternate cycl es of wet and dry peri ods. Duri ng above-
norma 1 rai nfa 11 periods, more recharge has occurred, and groundwater 1 evel s
have risen. In dry periods, less recharge was available, and higher pumpage
to meet demands resulted in a lowered water table. During the 1950s, changes
as great as 50 feet during a 20-year period were not uncommon, and pumpers
would complain during the falling water table periods of rising costs
associated with pumping from greater and greater depths.
Importation and recharge of State Water Project water, which started in the
early 1970s, were designed to alleviate the falling groundwater table
8-12
8.2.2.2 Storm Drainaae
Further development within the proposed Enterprise Zone area, particularly in
the currently undeveloped areas of the industrial zone, will modify existing
storm drainage patterns and result (through greater imperviousness) in larger
vol umes of runoff. As development occurs, drainage improvements already
planned will be implemented. Hence, no major drainage impacts are
anticipated. Each development on currently pervious, uncovered, naturally
sloping land will alter local ized storm runoff patterns. Therefore planned
landscaping and road patterns and slopes would be necessary for development
with the proposed Enterprise Zone to avoid local ponding of street
intersections or damage (by flooding) to neighboring property.
8.2.3 MITIGATION MEASUR~
8.2.3.1 Groundwater
Development in the proposed Enterprise Zone Subarea B should be planned in
such a way that existing percolation basins will not be covered, or flows to
those areas should be channeled to alternate downstream recharge areas so the
net recharge of usable groundwater will not be decreased.
Both federal and state regulations have been set forth to protect groundwaters
as well as surface waters. In general, any business or industry that
generates any hazardous waste, regardless of the quantity, must comply with
federal and state regulations. These regulations require that a comprehensive
operating permit must be received from the State of California or the
Environmental ProtectiDn Agency. They also require that all hazardous
material facilities be properly sited and not be located
within a 100-year flood plain if any environmen a arm can occur.
8.2.3.2 Storm Drainaae
The Comprehensive Storm Drain Plan can be considered as a means to mitigate
general flooding conditions that might occur in the propDsed Enterprise Zone.
Adequate onsite drainage patterns and facil ities should be required as a
consequence of normal project revi ew processes. For exampl e, site gradi ng
should be required tD ensure drainage toward streets rather than toward
neighboring properties. Erosion control measures during and following
construction should be required.
No building should be permitted in floodways that are currently susceptible to
high flows and potentially very damaging debris flows.
8-18
8.3
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
B.3.1
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Approximately 70 percent (2,720 acres) of the proposed Enterprise Zone area is
fully developed and habitat for native plant or wildlife species in this
heavily urbanized portion of the proposed project area is low. Most
vegetation has been introduced, including palm, elm, ash, jacaranda, silk oak,
eucalyptus, walnut, pepper, and olive trees; oleander, camellia, and other
ornamental shrubs; and a variety of groundcover.
Wildl ife found in this part of the proposed Enterprise Zone includes toads,
1 izards, snakes, birds, domestic cats and dogs, and rodents. Most of these
species use yards or vacant lots for foraging and shelter. Weed lots also
support a number of insects and migratory seed and insect-eating birds in
season. No rare, threatened, or endangered wildlife species are known to
exist in this area of the proposed Enterprise Zone.
The remaining 30 percent (1,180 acres) of the proposed Enterprise Zone is
currently undeveloped. Of this land, about 850 acres have been severely
disturbed (see Figures 8-6 and 8-7) by recent or past plowing, grading,
vehicular traffic, and even hiking and other pedestrian traffic. These areas
support an assortment of weeds common to southern California, including
bromes, oats, Russian thistle, and mustards. Annual grasses and broad-leafed
plants that germinate from seed crops and die by early summer are also found.
Typically, these are representati e of dist as and indi
to the proposed Enterprise Zone. 1S 1 1 e erv1ce as sate
that the following plants could possibly occur within the proposed project
area. These plants are either currently being proposed Dr in the information
gathering stage for being proposed for inclusion in the federal threatened and
endangered species listing.
Common Name
Santa Ana River eriastrum
Slender-horned spine flower
Thread-leaved brodiaea
Many-stemmed live-forever
San Jacinto bedstraw
Los Angeles sunflower
Pringle monardella
Short-joint beavertail
San Bernardino orthocarpus
Nevin's barberry
Scientific Name
Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum
Centrosteqia leDtoceras
Brodiaea filifolia
Dudleva multicaulis
Galium californicum ssp. Drimum
Helianthus nuttallii ssp. Darishii
Monardella Drinqlei
ODuntia basilaris var. brachvclada
OrthocarDus lasiorhvnchus
Mahoni a nevi nii
No existing plant or animal species found within this area are currently
listed as rare, threatened, or endangered. However, one plant (the Santa Ana
River Wooly Star --Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum) has been mapped by
the Cal ifornia Department of Fish and Game as potentially occurring in this
part of the proposed project area. This species is currently a candidate for
both federal and state listings of rare and endangered plants. t s e '
s eci 1 concern that have been si hted in or near the ro ec area
are s own on 1
8-19
Wildlife is the same as that found in the urbanized areas.
threatened, or endangered wildlife species are known tD exist
of the proposed Enterprise Zone.
Approximately 330 acres of the undeveloped land are undisturbed open areas.
These areas exhi bi t typi ca 1 desert pl ants such as yucca, castor bean, and
. cti and succ ant na River
Eriastrum enSl lum ssp. sanc orum e en er- orne plne ower
(Chorizanthe leDtoceras). Both plants are candidates for inclusion in state
and federal listings of threatened and endangered plants.
No known rare,
in this portion
Wildlife inhabiting these open areas includes rabbits, rodents, birds,
lizards, snakes, toads, and insects. '1
that two specis of s ecia1
ar 0 ows:
Common Name
Scientific Name
CnemidoDhorus hvoervthrus
Phr nosoma coronatum b1ainvi11ei
Orange-throat whiptai1
San Diego horned lizard
The State has 1 isted one species that was noted during site inspection as
being of special concern. This is the Cooper's hawk (AcciDiter cooDerii) (see
Figure 8-8).
No San Diego Horned lizards (Phrvnosoma Coronatum blainvillei) were noted
within the proposed project area, although they have been sighted nearby, and
sufficient habitat for their occurrence exists. This species is listed by
federal and state agencies as being of special concern.
8.3.2
PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
Razing existing buildings (if required) may result in elimination of some of
the ornamental p1antings. Since some of these p1antings are in poor
condition, the loss would not be significant.
Building on vacant land would reduce the foraging areas used by insect-eating
birds and other animals.
Development wi thin the 330 acres of open, undi sturbed 1 and wou1 d severely
1 imit the habitat offered to wild1 ife, and it would e1 iminate any plants in
graded, leveled, or otherwise disturbed areas. Ultimately, those species
requiring undisturbed habitat, including those of special concern, would be
forced into other regi ons (wil d1 i fe) or destroyed (vegetat ion) . Si nce there
are species of special concern on the site and laws exist to protect the
threatened or endangered species, development of this portion of the proposed
Enterprise Zone is potentially significant.
8.3.3
MITIGATION MEASURES
Since it is probable that viable populations of the Santa Ana River WOD1y Star
(Eri astrum densifo1 i urn ssp. sanctorum) and the Sl ender Horned Spi ne F1 ower
8-23
(Chorizanthe leDtoceras) exist within the proposed project area, it is
recommended that a detailed site survey for these species be done prior to
finalizing development plans. This survey should include all areas that are
undeveloped and undisturbed and any undeveloped disturbed areas that are
adjacent to lytle Creek. Wash, at a minimum (see Figure 8-8). If viable
popul at ions are found, then it is recommended that development patterns be
devised that wDuld not adversely impact these species since they are currently
protected by the State and proposed for inclusion under federal law.
Consideration should be given to the implementation of a design concept that
will preserve undisturbed strips of land along the lytle Creek. Wash area where
either species exists. This would ensure preservation of viable populatiDns
in areas that would allow for propagation and would not be developable because
of the flDDd plain.
The establishment of new ornamental plantings to replace those removed would
add to the aesthetics of the site as well as provide an enhanced environment
for certain urban bird species. Irrigated landscaped areas would increase the
growth rates of such plantings, but not necessarily their forage value. The
reintroduction of plants native to this semi-arid region of southern
California would also enhance the wildlife potential of the area and harmonize
with the surrounding terrain.
Development patterns should avoid totally surrounding natural areas, however
limited, since this prevents movement of animals, thereby restricting
population migratiDn or local breeding, and potentially eliminating the
species from that area.
Native vegetation existing in the area should be left as undisturbed as
possible.
8.4
AIR OUALITY
8.4.1
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The proposed Enterprise Zone is located in the central San Bernardino Valley.
This area is a part of the South Coast Air Basin and is managed by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
The San Bernardino Valley is a broad, relatively flat basin bounded by high
mountains on the north and east. The predominance of the eastern Pacific high
pressure zone and a thermal low in the interior deserts usually produces mild
temperatures and light westerly breezes. The area's proximity to the Pacific
Ocean allDws a marine layer inversion to affect the basin on most days. This
inversion, strong summer solar radiation, and the extensive pollutant area
source of the los Angeles Basin combine to produce high ozone level sand
reduced visibility on up to 50 percent of the days between May and September.
The SCAQMD maintains an air monitoring station on east 3rd Street in downtown
San Bernardi no. The station is approximately one-quarter mil e east of the
proposed Enterpri se Zone and data from thi s station is considered
representative of the study area.
8-24
proposed Enterprise Zone, 61.4 percent of the resident work force engages in
blue-collar occupations (see Table 8-3). In the City and County, blue-collar
laborers constitute 45.7 percent and 48.2 percent of the work force,
respectively. Further, the unemployment rates of 17.7 for males and 12.7
percent for females are significantly higher than those for City and County
areas.
Although the labor force participation rate for the proposed Enterprise Zone
area's male population is higher than that for the City, the female labor
participation rate is significantly lower. There are two possible causes for
this lower rate. One reason may be that these lower-income female workers are
not able to afford child care during working hours. The other cause may be
attributable to the large Hispanic population in the subject area. Labor
participation rates for Hispanic women are historically lower than those for
other ethnic groups because of large family sizes and a more traditional
family structure.
8.5.1.3 Housina
Census data show that the housing in the proposed Enterprise Zone Study Area
Al (west of 1-215) L1ee Figure 8-JJU is older than that for the entire City.
In a 1981 survey, 5b percent Dr the housing stock was classified by the City
Planning Department as deteriorated and/or dilapidated. This high percentage
reflects a lack of investment to perform the ever-increasing deferred
maintenance required for older homes. Without develDpment incentives to
encourage replacement of the aging housing stock, the residential vacancy rate
is likely to rise as older structures become uninhabitable. Coincidentally,
property values and rents will remain significantly lower than the City's
average property values and rents.
It is assumed that approximately 125 new multi-family units will be
constructed every two years, based upon the large amount of land designated
for multi-family zoning under the Redevelopment Agency's recommended 1 and
usage for the Northwest Redevelopment Project, as well as the expectation that
the local low-income market will naturally favor the less expensive multi-
family units. Precedents for this type of development have occurred in the
northwest corner of the proposed Enterprise Zone area.
Table 8-4 shows that a lower percentage of the housing units within the
proposed Enterprise Zone are owner-occupied than in either the City or the
County. Average home values are also far lower in the proposed zone. The
City's average home has a value 34.6 percent greater than that in the subject
area and the County's average home value is 47.3 percent greater. Similarly,
the proposed zone's average rent is 19.2 percent lower than the City's average
and 29.0 percent lower than the County's average. These lower values and
rents are due to the publ ic's perception of bl ight in the area, an older
housing stock, and a lack of deferred maintenance on many homes in the area.
8.5.1.4 DisDlacement
Displacement has been occurring on the east side of 1-215 in the proposed
Enterpri se Zone area north of downtown as the central busi ness di strict
8-29
expands and older homes are replaced by, or converted to, commerc i a 1 uses.
This loss has been estimated at ten units per year. Some businesses located
on north Mt. Vernon Avenue may be displaced over the next 15 years if the
Redevelopment Agency's recommended multi-family zoning is enacted for that
area.
8.5.2
PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
The creation of the proposed Enterprise Zone is expected to generate increased
development activity in the area. It is through this additional development
that the following impacts to population, employment, and housing are likely
to occur.
8.5.2.1 DemooraDhics
The population of the proposed Enterprise Zone is projected to increase at a
faster rate than under existing conditions because of the anticipated rise in
the growth of housing construction. Between 1985 and 2000, popul at ion is
projected to grow by 17.8 percent as a result of the proposed Enterprise Zone
versus a projected gain of 8.7 percent if no project is undertaken (see Table
8-5).
No change in the residents' existing ethnic mix is anticipated other than the
growth of the Hispanic population, as discussed above.
Both income measures for the area -- per capita income and median household
income h can be expected to ri se to the " ,
proposed Enterprise Zone contribute to a re uc 10n 0 t e unemp oymen ra e.
Income levels will be prevented from rising beyond this point given the lower-
salaried occupations of the majority of the area's residents and the high
number of retired persons with fixed incomes.
8.5.2.2 EmDlovment
To the extent that the proposed Enterprise Zone incentive programs are
successful in attracting new business into the subject area, the unemployment
rate within the area should decrease. The proposed project is nDt expected to
significantly affect the distribution of resident occupations or the low
female participation rate previously discussed.
8.5.2.3 Housino
The provision of development incentives of the proposed Enterprise Zone will
create an anticipated 57.4 percent increase in housing construction (853 addi-
tional units) for the period between 1985 and 2000 (see Table 8-5). These new
units will be inhabited not only by people moving into
idents as a ortion of e xistin housin s oc --
e 1 a es ur 1
8-32
Table 8-5
PROJECTED POPULATION, HOUSING, AND HOUSEHOLDS
Proposed
Current Enterprise Zone
Proiections Proiections
Population
1985 22,156 22,156
1990 22,473 22,579
2000 24,088 26,106
Housing Units
1985 8,376 8,376
1990 8,764 ~
2000 9,523
Households
1985 tffi -H*
1990
2000 8,859 9,598
Source: Urban Decision Systems, Inc.; William C. Lawrence Company.
8-33
Table 8-6 lists the acreage and percentage of land uses by category for each
subarea and the proposed Enterprise Zone as a whole.
Table 8-6
EXISTING LAND USE SUMMARY
Total
Land Use Subarea A Subarea B Subarea C Proiect
Cateoorv Acres ~ Acres ~ Acres ~ Acres ~
Vacant Land 318 13 260 22 22 13 600 15
Single-Family Res. 1,104 43 4 71 47 28 1,155 30
Multi-Family Res. 94 4 6 4 100 3
General Comm. 120 5 16 1 34 20 170 4
Auto. Comm. 33 1 7 + 5 3 45 1
Industrial 100 4 176 4 2 280 7
Professional 2 <1 2 <1 1 <1 5 >1
Public 58 ~ ~ 7 'I 65 2
Schoo 1 60 2 5 3 65 2
Park 26 1 50 4 4 2 880 2
Open Space 25 1 555 47 580 15
Subtota 1 1,940 76 1,070 90 135 79 3,145 81
Streets 605 24 115 10 35 21 755 19
TOTAL 2,545 100 1,185 100 170 100 3,900 100
8.6.1.2 General Plan
The City of San Bernard i nD General Plan was adopted in August 1964 and
contains goals and objectives for citywide growth and development. The
document is used as a guide to development to avoid conflicting land uses.
Changes to the plan may be made through a General Plan Amendment process,
which provides for review and comment by interested parties at public hearings
prior to approval. If changes are approved, then the plan text and/or map are
amended to refl ect the changes. Amendment reviews i ncl ude envi ronmenta 1
documentation regulated by CEQA.
The City's General Plan has two areas for which detailed land use plans were
prepared: the Central City Area and General Plan Amendment (GPA) #82-2, which
was done in conjunction with approval of the Northwest Redevelopment Project.
Additionally, a separate text and map has been prepared for the State College
area. The proposed Enterprise Zone overlies portions of all three subareas.
The Central City General Plan map is shown on Figure 8-11. The area of GPA
#82-2 appears on Figure 8-12 and the State College area plan appears on Figure
8-13. The City Planning Department is currently working on a Citywide General
Pl an revi si on program that woul d combi ne the three separate pl ans into a
single document with uniform text and maps.
In the General Plan, Subarea A is largely designated for single-family,
medium- to low-density residential. Land bordering Baseline and Mt. Vernon
Avenue is planned for medium- to high-density residential. Strip commercial
is pl anned for certai n major streets, but amendments to the General Pl an,
8-38
Table 8-8
EX I STI NG ZON I NG
Zone Subarea A
CateQorv Acres 12
Commercial 405 16
Manufacturing 302 12
Si ngl e-Family 649 25
(R-l)
Multi-Family 225 9
(R-2)
Multi -Family 175 7
(R-3,4)
Open 110 4
Transitional 74 3
Subtota 1 1,940 76
Streets 605 24
TOTAL 2,545 100
8.6.1.4 Redevelooment Proiects
Subarea B
Acres 12
Subarea C
~ ~
47
2
Total
Proiect
~ ~
705 18
1,125 29
655 17
225 6
175 5
110 3
130 3
3,145 81
755 19
3,900 100
220
820
6
19
69
<1
80
3
30
79
21
Redevelopment projects playa major role in land use planning in the City of
San Bernardino. The City of San Bernardino Redevelopment Agency has ten
existing and one proposed redevelopment projects within the corporate city
1 imits. Si x of these projects are wi thi n the bDundary of the proposed
Enterprise Zone; they are shown on Figure 2-2 and are listed in Table 8-9.
These redevelopment projects dictate a broad range of land use criteria and
development strategies that not only affect existing land uses but have been
incorporated into the City's Enterprise Zone incentive program. land use
related redevelopment strategies are listed below. Although summarized, some
specific references to the proposed Enterprise Zone have been retained as
examples. Most have been taken from the Northwest Redevelopment Project (RDA,
1982).
ExamDle RedeveloDment Plan Framework.
o Residential. Redevelopment provides for a combination of new development
and rehabilitation of residences. Existing residential neighborhoods
would remain, encouraging rehabilitation and removal of blighted, unsound
structures where necessary. Actions to be implemented would include
improved street 1 ighting, new curbs, gutters and sidewal ks, landscaping
and buffering programs, and code enforcement. New residential development
is proposed in the largely undeveloped areas.
20
4
1,070
115
2
+-
10
52
135
35
1,185 100
170 100
8-45
as suggested in the proposed Enterprise Zone incentives would be difficult to
establish if they are in fact legally feasible. Variances for rehabilitation
of existing structures should receive top priority.
Development proposals that are inconsistent with existing zoning should be
reviewed individually to determine their compatibility with the General Plan.
Development that is inconsistent with the General Plan would be subject tD
amendment procedures and environmental documentatiDn.
8.7 FISCAL ANALYSIS
This analysis examines the applicable revenue and cost impacts to the City of
San Bernardino as a result of implementation of the proposed Enterprise Zone.
Revenue and cost impacts to the City Redevelopment Agency have not been
considered. The quantitative figures used in this analysis were obtained from
the Annual Budoet Fiscal Year 1985-1986, City officials, and the Final Draft
of 1984/85-1988/89 CaoHal ImDrovement Prooram. The methodology used is
described in Appendix B.
The analysis is conducted for
Enterprise Zone designation.
1985 dollars.
a 15-year period -- the length of the proposed
All quantitative figures used are in constant
The primary sources of revenues and costs analyzed are those that occur on an
annual recurring basis. Where possible, capital improvement projects targeted
for the proposed Enterprise Zone area have been included. Where this is nDt
possible, capital improvement requirements have been estimated.
Although the Redevelopment Agency revenues and costs have not been included in
this analysis, assessed valuation in the proposed project area has been
allocated between City and Redevelopment areas. This is to allow comparison
with the redevelopment alternative.
For purposes of the fiscal analysis, the project area has been divided into
five study areas: industrial zone, commercial zone, other west of 1-215,
west of -215 and south Third Street and other ea
19ure sows e su areas over aye on Dun anes. e
industrial zone corresponds with Subarea B, the commercial zone with Subarea
C, and the "other" areas shown as study areas AI, A2, and A3 are within
Subarea A.
8.7.1
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The 1985 total assessed valuation of the proposed Enterprise Zone is estimated
at $183 million (see Table 8-11). Population is 22,156 with an annual per
capita income of $5,274. Based on statistics from the U.S. Department Df
Labor, individuals in this income category spend approximately 65 percent of
their income on retail goods and services (BLS, 1985). Roughly 300 businesses
are located in the project area.
8-52
Table 8-23
COMPARISON OF FISCAL IMPACTS:
NO PROJECT VS. PROPOSED ENTERPRISE ZONE
($OOOs)
Year
1987 1990 2000
REVENUES
Enterprise Zone $3,470 $3,740 $5,110
No Project $3.399 $3.557 $4.260
Difference of Alternatives $71 $183 $850
COSTS
Enterprise Zone $5,574 $6,686 $7,479
No Project $5.520 $6.642 $6.843
Difference of Alternatives $54 $44 $636
NET REVENUE/(COSTl
Enterprise Zone ($2,105) ($2,946) ($2,369)
No Project ($2.121) ($3.085) ($2.583)
Difference of Alternatives $16 $139 $214
8-68
8.8 TRANSPORTATION
8.8.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
8.8.1.1 Reoional Hiohwav Svstem
The proposed Enterprise Zone area is located in the City of San Bernardino,
which is situated east of the apex of Lytle Creek Wash and the Santa Ana Wash,
and at the base of the San Bernardino Mountains. As depicted in Figure 8-16,
regiDnal highway travel is serviced by the crossroads of two major
transportation corridors:
I} An east-west corridor that includes both Interstate 10 (I-I0) and Route 60
connections with the Pomona and San Gabriel Valleys and beyond to the Los
Angeles basin to the west and east to Palm Springs and beyond.
2) A north-south corridor through the Cajon Pass serviced by 1-215; this
corridor is growing in importance as highway construction on 1-15 to the
south improves the southern leg of this corridor into San Diego County and
into the City of San Diego.
Currently, the major north-to-south travel in this area is on 1-215 from the
San Bernardino Desert communities directly through the City of San Bernardino,
into the City of Riverside, and south to San Diego County. 1-215 connects to
State Route 91 in the Riverside area, forming the corridor extension southwest
into Orange County.
The 1-10 corridor provides the major east-west transportation 1 ink to San
Bernardino as it intersects with 1-215 at the south end of the City. Most
travel is between Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and east to Palm Springs. ~
ro osed Foothill Freewa extension Route 30 will connect the existin Route
, n Avenue 0 the 1- 10 Freewa in La Verne to the west. Wh
com leted the FODthill Freewa will rovide a direct 1 ink between the La
erne an lmas area 0 os n e es ount an the Cit of San BernardinD.
is wi resu t in divertino commuter traffic now usino 1-10. The route has
been desionated and Dlans for construction are currentlv awaitin~
environmental rp-view.
8.8.1.2 Rail
Due to its location relative to the mountain passes, the City of San
Bernardino has become a major rail hub from which rail lines diverge to access
the northern or southern cross-country routes, eventually leading to Chicago,
New Orleans, and points beyond. Amtrak, which provides passenger rail service
to these and other destinations along the routes, has a station within the
proposed Enterpri se ZDne located on 3rd Street. The Atchi son, Topeka, and
Santa Fe (AT&SF) railroad has a freight facil ity adjacent to the Amtrak
station and makes extensive use of those routes, as does the Southern Pacific,
the other major southern California rail company.
8-69
8.8.1.3 ~
Regi Dna 1 and nationwide bus servi ce is provided by both the Greyhound and
Trailways buslines. A local carrier, Mountain Area Transit, provides service
from the San Bernardino area to various resorts in the nearby San Bernardino
Mountains. Both national carriers are located in the downtown area in the
proposed Enterprise Zone (Subarea A) on G Street. Mountain Area Transit
shares the Greyhound facility.
Access to the Southern California Rapid Transit District system, the major bus
system in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, with connections to virtually all
the communities the Los Angeles basin, is by way of Line 496. The terminus of
the line is a loop in downtown San Bernardino on the eastern boundary of the
proposed Enterprise Zone. In addition, Omnitrans provides fixed-route
service, dial-a-ride, and dial-a-lift service with connections within San
Bernardino County. The dial-a-ride service operates as a shared taxi; dial-a-
lift is designed for the handicapped. Most of the fixed-route buses are lift-
equipped to provide handicapped service. Fixed-route headways vary throughout
the day, generally providing service at 30-minute intervals during the peak
periods, and 60-mi nute headways during non-peak peri ods. It is important to
note that Omnitrans fixed-route ~ pick up passengers at nondesignated
stops -- the bus will stop at the safest corner closest to the passenger. The
nondesignated courtesy stops are in addition tD scheduled stops at locations
indicated with blue and white rectangular signposts. Public transit bus
routes and facilities are noted in Figure 8-17.
8.8.1.4 Air
OntariD International Airport is located approximately 20 miles west of the
City of San Bernardino. South of and adjacent to 1-10, this airport facility
is most frequently used bYCommuters to and from the San Bernardino area.
Ontario Airport is rapidly growing in importance as an alternative to air
travel into Los Angeles International Airport and Orange County (John Wayne)
Airnort.
Although not directly related to the proposed Enterprise Zone, it should be
noted that Norton Air Force Base is located just north of 1-10, in the
southeast portion of the City.
8.8.1.5 Arterials
The circulation system within the proposed Enterprise Zone is bisected and
dominated by 1-215. As such, within the study area, access to the regional
highway system is first obtained through access to 1-215.
Table 8-24 lists the arterial access points and the move options available for
1-215 within the study area, and reveals that although there are numerous
access points to the regional system through the study area, the full range of
movements is absent from most, greatly reducing overall access. That lack 1S
made more significant b~cause the missing movements are almost all related to
access to/from the west.
B-71
Further, it is impDrtant to provide adequate sidewalk connections to and
amenities at bus stop locations. The minimum recommended sidewalk width is 6
feet. Bus stop amenities may include benches, shelters, and ridership/route
information displays. Finally, it is recommended that bus stops be limited to
the identified bust stop locations.
8.9
WATER SUPPLY
8.9.1
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Within the bDundaries of the proposed Enterprise Zone, three separate entities
provide water service to area users: the San Bernardino Municipal Water
Department, the Muscoy Mutual Water Company, and the Southern California Water
Company. The San Bernardino Municipal Water Department, the largest of the
three suppliers, currently provides water service to approximately 82 percent
of the proposed project area. An additional 14 percent of the area is within
the Water Department's service area, but extension of existing water mains are
required to serve any new development. This area is located in the partially
developed industrial area (Subarea B). The Muscoy Mutual Water Company serves
about 3 percent of the proposed Enterpri se Zone (i n the northwest corner of
Subarea A). Southern California Water Company serves the remaining 1 percent
of the area. Each entity's service area within the proposed Enterprise Zone
is shown on Figure 8-20.
Southern California Water Company's system is considered to be inadequate and
is currently undergoing condemnation. By Resolution 84-535, the City of San
Bernardino establ ished a joint powers agreement with the East Valley Water
District for the purpose of exercising "their powers jointly in providing for
the acquisition, construction, maintenance, repair, management, operation, and
control of facilities for the production and distribution of a water supply
system in that area of the Ci ty. .. presently served by Southern Cal i forni a
Water Company, and to assist in the financing of public improvements of such
water system" (City of San Bernardino Resolution 84-535, adopted 1-7-85). The
area within the proposed Enterprise Zone currently serviced by Southern
California Water will be serviced, through this joint powers agreement, by the
City of San Bernardino. The San Bernardino Municipal Water Department serves
the water supply needs of the City's metropol itan area. The City's water
system currently consists of 39 wells, 468 miles of water mains, and about 92
million gallons (MG) of storage. This system currently serves over 134,000
people with an average of 30 million gallons per day (mgd) of water. For the
past 5 years, demand has averaged 28.9 mgd or 32,400 acre-feet of water per
year (1 acre-foot. 325,850 gallons).
During a typical year, per-capita water usage averages approximately 210 to
215 gallons per day, varying from a low of 120 in the winter to a high of 450
ga 11 ons per day duri ng the summer. Summer increases result from somewhat
higher in-house consumption, but primarily from substantially higher lawn and
garden watering.
The City obtains
8-89
8.9.3
MITIGATION MEASURES
Because there would be negligible impacts to the City's water system, largely
as a result of existing well capacity that exceeds expected growth demands, no
mitigations would be necessary. However, the City ShDUld continue to
encourage water conservation for any new users and should continue to maintain
its high standards in pipeline construction and maintenance, which have kept
water system losses extremely low.
8.10 WASTEWATER COLLECTION. TREATMENT. AND DISPOSAL
8.10.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The sewage collection and treatment facilities servlclng the proposed project
area are owned and operated by the City of San BernardinD. Specific
1 imitations (e.g., pretreatment and noncorrosivity standards) on wastewater
discharges tD the sewers and treatment plant are set forth in a City of San
Bernardino wastewater ordinance (see Appendix C). All sewers within the
proposed project area flow by gravity to the City's 24.S-mgd activated sludge
wastewater treatment plant. This plant was constructed in 1938, was upgraded
in 1969, and currently is undergoing further expansion to 28.0 mgd. The plant
is currently operating at capacity. .Treated effluent is discharged to the
Santa Ana Ri ver south of the plant. The 1 an . ,
cease and des i st order for odor. A c ea wa
n 0
The quality of wastewater permitted to be discharged at the treatment plant is
governed by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit,
administered by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (see Table
8-39). The 3.S-mgd expansion, scheduled to be on line by 1988, will include
an upgrade of the solids-handling, aeration, and clarification processes.
With the exception of the partially developed industrial area (Subarea B),
most of the proposed project area is sewered (see Figures 8-22 through 8-24).
A few small residential areas within the northwest portion of Subarea A oper-
ate on septic systems. The sewer system in places is up to 97 years old, and
number of areas of severely restricted flDW have been identified by the City.
Seven of these 1 ie within the proposed Enterprise Zone (see Figure 8-24).
The City has not yet investigated the specific causes of the flow restriction
(pipe damage, root growth, or other factors).
Existing sewers in Subareas A and C of the proposed Enterprise Zone range from
8 inches to 27 inches in diameter. Flow is generally to the sDuth and east.
With the exception of the localized restrictions to flow mentioned above, City
staff personnel report that capacity for added flow exists in these sewers.
Sewers in the industrial portion of the proposed Enterprise Zone (Subarea C)
are 8-inch and IS-inch lines, all installed within the past 10 years. The
flows in these sewers are substantially below capacity since industrial
development has not reached what was planned for the area.
8-96
8.10.2 PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
The proposed Enterprise Zone would have virtually no adverse effects Dn the
sewer system or the waste treatment plant as a result of expected growth, and
hence no adverse effects on the Santa Ana River are to be expected.
Population growth without the project is expected to be 1,932 people over a
IS-year period, which translates to 338,100 gallons per day of additional
wastewater, based on the current average wasteload of 175 gallons per capita
per day. Growth expected from the proposed Enterprise Zone is 3,950 people,
which WDuld result in the generation of 691,250 additional gallons per day of
wastewater. Projected increases without the proposed project result in a 1.2
percent increase over exi st ing sewered flows entering the Ci ty' s treatment
plant. The proposed Enterprise Zone project would result in a 2.8 percent
increase, most of which would occur following the plant's upgrade to 28 mgd.
Because the treatment plant is currently operating at capacity, any additional
growth that would generate flows to the plant is considered adverse.
(Operation of any plant at flows greater than its design capacity can result
in discharge of incompletely treated effluent.) However, the current
overloading is caused regionally (throughout the service area), and the
proposed project itself will not directly impact the plant. Additionally, the
expansion is expected to be online within 1 year following the 1986
designation year of the proposed Enterprise Zone.
A single l8-inch sewer, laid at the slopes or grades typical of the area (0.5
to 1.2 percent), will carry 0.48 to 0.75 mgd, a waste flow expectable from a
neighborhood Df 27,000 to 43,000 people. Sewers in the southeast (downstream)
portion of the proposed Enterprise Zone are as large as 27 inches in diameter,
a size capable of carrying sewage for 70,000 tD 100,000 people. There are
currently 22,156 people in the proposed Enterprise Zone area. Therefore, the
sewer system in general is adequate to support growth associated with the
proposed Enterprise ZDne.
New sewers would need to be installed in the small residential areas not
currently sewered and in the northern section of Subarea B as new development
occurs. Points of connection to existing, adequately sized downstream sewers
woul d be avai labl e wi thi n a quarter-mil e anywhere in the area. In ei ther
area, sewer installation wDuld be a normal consequence of the development and
would not constitute a significant impact.
The seven localized zones of restricted sewer flow that the City has
identified mayor may not require improvements to accommodate either baseline
or with-project growth. If growth occurs in areas upstream of and near these
restrictions, then these sewers would likely have to be rehabilitated.
However, the 1,962 new peopl e associ ated with the no project a lternat i ve or
the 3,950 people associated with the proposed project would likely be
distributed throughout the proposed project, which currently has a population
estimated at over 22,000 people. Therefore, the wasteload contribution at
any given location would not 1 ikely be significant or necessarily require
sewer rehabilitation even in the areas Df existing restrictions.
An estimated additional 57 Qausing units are expected to be constructed each
year with the proposea proJect, which would also include several multi-family
housing projects. Accordingly, more sewer connections per year are expected
with the project than without, and several-day interruptions of local traffic
8-101
and the potential for construction dust and noise are to be expected while the
sewer connections are being made. These sewer-rel ated impacts woul d be
negligible and temporary.
~0.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation measures for the existing sewer system or the treatment plant
would be required.
8.11 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
8.11.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of San Bernardino Refuse Department provides all refuse collection
service throughout the City. The City's solid waste collection and disposal
operations are administered as an "enterprise fund," which means they are
self-sufficient, supported by users' fees. Accordingly, expansion of service
is virtually immediate -- if an area grows by 120 "accounts," then a new
"route" is established and a truck and crew are added. There are commercial
accDunts, for which up to 6-days-per-week service is available at $1.75 per
cubic yard. Residential accounts are established for twice-weekly service at
a fee of $6.60 per month. Apartment houses or condominium complexes are often
treated as commercial accounts.
A residential "route" (of which there are 14 to 18 operated throughout the
City, varying by day) consists of a 25-cubic-yard truck filled 2 to 2.5 times
per day with 2 to 2.5 trips to a landfill. The weight capacity of a 25-cubic-
yard truck is 6 to 7.5 tons of waste. In the proposed Enterprise Zone area
there are currently the equivalent of about two routes served each day.
The average loading rate per person per day is not well defined, but two sets
of data provided by the Public Services Department suggest that it is higher
than the national average of about 5 lb/person/day. If 2.25 loads per truck
weighing 7 tons (14,000 pounds) per load constitute a truck-day (31,500
1 b/day), and if a truck can servi ce 120 accounts in 1 day, then the average
account's load per service day equals 263 lb (31,500/120). For twice-weekly
service of a residential account, it can then be assumed that one residential
account generates 526 pounds per 7-day week. Assuming an average household
size of 2.8, the solid waste loading rate would be equivalent to 26.8
lb/person/day [526/(7 x 2.8)]. A second set of data provided by the City
results in an estimated loading rate of slightly less. A typical residential
load for a week consists of three 32-gallon containers and a 60-lb sack of
trimmings on one service day and 1.5 containers on the second service day. If
the 32-gallon containers hold 85 pounds each (20 lb/cubic foot), then the
tota 1 wei ght for the week woul d be 442 1 b. The tot a 1 weight di vided by 7
days' load for 2.8 people results in the equivalent of 22.6 lb/person/day.
Current landfill sites used by the City are in Fontana and Colton. There are
2 years of remaining life at the Fontana site and 3 years remaining at the
Colton site. Plans are under way for a master site in'the San Timoteo Canyon
area that woul d last throughout the 15-year proposed Enterpri se Zone peri od
8-103
(until the year 2000). An alternative energy-recovery (1,600 tons per day)
plant to be operated by private enterprise is also being considered. For
either of these alternatives a waste transfer station in the vicinity of
Norton Air Force Base is under consideration. (Note as a third estimate of
the per capita loading rate that 1,600 tons or 3,200,000 lb/day divided by
134,600 people -- the current City population -- is 23.8 lb/person/day.)
8.11.2 PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
Because the average loading rate per person has not been well defined but is
apparently much higher than the national average, a nominal value of 20
lb/person/day was assumed for projecting future demands. At 20 lb/person/day,
the projected popul at ion increase without the proposed Enterpri se Zone area
would add an additional 38,640 lb of garbage to be collected each day. This
is sl ightly more than a route or truckload per day (31,500 lb/day/truck).
With the proposed Enterprise Zone project, 3,950 people or 79,000 lb/day would
be added. This is equivalent to roughly 2-1/2 additional routes
(79,000/31,500).
The single additional truck and crew that would be required tD service the
project-related population increase would not result in a significant impact
on the City, especially because the operation is fully supported by user fees
and additional trucks can be added when necessary.
The residential waste load projected to result from popul at ion increases
without the proposed project represents roughly 966 cubic feet or 36 cubic
yards/day of additional space to be used at the landfill by the end of the 15-
year period. With implementation of the proposed Enterprise Zone, the total
addition would be 1,975 cubic feet or 73 cubic yards/day. The impact, which
is not considered significant, would be a reduction in useful life of the
landfill by 37 cubic yards/day. These figures include an assumed compaction
at the landfill to 40 lb/cubic foot.
8.11.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
No mi t i gat i on measures are recommended since the City's operat ion is self-
sustaining and plans are under way for increasing long-term disposal-site
capacity.
8.12 COMMUNITY SERVICES
8.12.1 FIRE PROTECTION
8.12.1.1 Existina Conditions
The proposed Enterpri se Zone woul d be served by the City of San Bernardi no
Fire Department. The Department currently consists of 12 companies located at
10 fire stations. Each company consists of one engine or aerial ladder truck
and three firefighters. The Department staff total s 182, of which 149 are
8-104
8.12.2 LAW ENFORCEMENT
8.12.2.1 Existina Conditions
The proposed Enterprise Zone lies entirely within the jurisdiction of the San
BernardinD Pol ice Department. The Department headquarters is located in
Subarea A downtown at 466 W. 4th Street. The number of sworn officers
currently tot~ the Department has recently added 47 new officers.
The Departmenf"""j5"l'iis staff needs based on a ratio of 1.75 officers per
1,000 persons. In consideration Df the recent strengthening of the staff size
and by using an estimated 1985 population of 135,000 for San ~ernardinn t~
officer-to-person ratio is 1.8 per 1,000.
The Pol ice Department has recently initiated a new law enforcement concept,
termed or Community Oriented Police (COP). The City has been divided into six
sectors, with each sector containing one or two ..
ers. These neighborhood stations are manned by a leu en an
t during the day and early evening hours. The lieutenant acts as e
area co ander to the officers assigned to that section and as a neighborhood
or cDmmunity liaison.
The neighborhood ,enters have been establ ished to promote pDl ice visibil ity
and access, to eter 1 Dca 1 crime, and, most importantly, to encourage
neighborhood cooperation in reporting and fighting crime. The area commander
and his personnel gain more first-hand knowledge about local crime and traffic
probl ems and are better abl e to respond to the communi ty' s needs. The
neighborhood~act as m~~ina n~rp< fn~ neighborhood watch programs and
also provide an open-door poilcy, aTlowing the local community to discuss
problems on a more personal level.
The three sectors that serve the proposed Enterprise Zone are Areas A, B, and
C (not to be confused with the proposed Enterpri se Zone subareas). These
areas are depicted on Figure 8-26. ~ <'fr:::i:. in Area A are
located at 637 N. Mt. Vernon Avenue and ~ _____ Area B has a
substation located at ~ and one of the stations for Area C
is at Lytle Creek Park.
The number of personnel presently assigned to each area is as follows: Area
A - 29 officers ad 'vilians, Area B - ?F\ nfficers and 2 civilians, and
Area C -~cers an . ilians. The officers work on a 3-shift-per-day
schedul e"':"""""R the new nelg borhood concept, each area commander is allowed
the flexibility to schedule his personnel to best meet the protection needs of
his unique area. This allows the area commander to concentrate his staff on
particular local crime problems.
The Department indicates that the proposed Enterprise Zone area has a higher
than average crime rate. However, the City reports that there has been no
significant increase in the overall crime rates for the proposed Enterprise
Zone area during the past few years. The COP program has decreased crime in
the immediate area around the established service centers and the concept has
been well received within the community.
8-107
The Police Department is evaluated on an annual basis to assess its needs for
additional personnel and equipment. Their requirements for additional
allocations are based not only on the 1.75 officers per 1,000 people ratio,
but also Dn numerous factors such as recent crime statistics and an overall
rating of pDlice protection.
Pol ice protection within the proposed project area is presently considered
adequate. With the additional officers recently hired and the COP program,
the responsiveness and effectiveness of the Department is expected to improve.
8.12.2.2 ProDosed PrDiect ImDacts
An increase in population and commercial and industrial development as a
result of the proposed Enterprise Zone would produce a minimal impact on law
enforcement. The expected population of 26,106 in the year 2000 is
approximately 2,000 more than projected with the no project alternative. This
would require an addition.' fnllr n~ficers over what would be required without
the project. The proposed project would also require the additional purchase
~f one ne~olice vehicle.
The additional commercial developments would increase crime rates,
particularly in the Areas .llL.bur.5l.l.ar,y and robbery, There wDuld also be an
overall increrse ln the numlier ot-poll\;e respun~es and in traffic control or
accidents. The industrial area (Subarea B) would experience an increase in
burglaries and alarm responses; due to its more remote location, this area
would not allow as qUick a response time for police service as other sections
in the proposed project area. This problem would need to be addressed as
industrial growth Dccurs and the burglary rate is assessed.
As development occurs in Subarea B, along with the adjacent State University
area, additional police protection will be required. A service cente~ and/or
increased patrolling in the area may be needed. The Department lnOlcates that
it would welcome the opportunity to set up a neighbDrhood station in either
new or old developments if provided the land or building.
he additional costs of law enforcement may be offset by revenue provided by
new commercial and industrial development. These costs and revenue generated
by development have been assumed in the fiscal analysis, which shows an in-
crease of only 0.02 in the year 2000 revenue/cost over the no project alterna-
tive.
8.12.2.3 Mitiaation Measures
As development occurs, the need for additional officers and equipment are
assessed annually, following a review of the number of calls for pol ice
services, the number of crimes that occur, the crime rate, and the traffic
conditions. Request for additional allocations are presented to the City
Counc il .
Further mitigation measures would involve residential and commercial security
measures including adequate lighting; police-approved locks and alarms; use of
trained security personnel at large construction sites and at large
8-109
8.12.4.2 ProDosed Proiect ImDacts
The proposed Enterprise Zone is projected to increase the area's population by
about 2,018 and the number of households by 739 during the next 15 years over
the no prDject alternative. Using City of San BernardinD student-generated
rates of 0.625 for mixed single-family and multi-family units. A total of
1,129 students would be generated over the IS-year period. An increase of 462
students over the no project alternative would be realized due to the proposed
Enterprise Zone.
The current distribution of total students is 41 percent in elementary
schools, 13 percent in intermediate schools, and 46 percent in high schools.
Assuming this same ratio over the IS-year project period, the proposed
Enterprise Zone would add an additional 189 students to the elementary
schools, 60 students to the intermediate schools, and 213 students to the high
schools. These figures represent 3 percent of the existing total capacities
of each of the three school systems. Additional facilities are anticipated to
meet growth demands over the next 15 years. Students generated by the
proposed Enterprise Zone will represent 3 percent of existing capacities that
are 1 ikely to increase by the year 2000. Therefore, no significant direct
impacts from growth associated with the project area is expected.
8.12.4.3 Mitiaation Measures
Although the proposed project will not directly impact the SChODl systems,
overcrowded conditions currently exist at the elementary school s and to a
lesser extent at certain intermediate and high schools. The District
continues to reassess school enrollment boundaries to alleviate overcrowding
at particular schools. Portable classrooms help to temporarily relieve
overcrowding and the District has plans to reopen the Muscott SChODl or
possibly build a new school on the site when conditions warrant or when funds
become avail abl e. Add it iona 1 revenues generated by th~ proposed Enterpri se
Zone will assist in alleviating a citywide problem. i '
i nd' s that these fees ma be
1m rovemen e 1 rlC reserves e rl
1n 1 1 ana n 1mpac 10n
8.12.5 PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS
8.12.5.1 Existina Conditions
There are nine park and recreation areas located in the proposed Enterprise
Zone (see Figure 8-30). These facilities include two community centers for
senior citizens, two all-purpose community buildings, one swimming pool, five
ball fields (four 1 ighted), four basketball courts, seven children's pl ay
areas, one soccer field, one gymnasium, and five picnic areas. The total
recreation areas within the proposed Enterprise Zone amount to ~s.
Seven additional parks encompassing a total of ab~res are located
within 1 mile of the proposed Enterprise Zone. The~es include three
swimming pools, four community buildings, a field house, a gymnasium, and ten
lighted ball fields. The Shandin Hills Public Golf Course fairway also
8-116
Facil itv
INSIDE PROJECT
Cultural Center
Encanto Park
Guiterrez Field
Johnson Hall
la Plaza Park
Ninth St. Park
Orangewood Park
Rio Vista Park
Sr. Citizen Ctr.
OUTSIDE PROJECT
Blair Park
Delmann Heights
Guadalupe Field
Hudson Park
lytle Creek Park
Table 8-41
PARK AND RECREATION AREAS
location
Size
(Acres)
536 W. 11th Street
1180 W. 9th Street
~
14th St. and Mt. Vernon
906 Wi 11 son St.
7th St. and Mt. Vernon
9th St. & Garner Ave.
Muscott & 19th St.
California & Baseline
600 W. 5th St.
1400 W. Marshall Blvd. 34
2969 Flores St. 19
8th St. & Roberds 2
Hillcrest Dr. and 10
Circle Rd.
380 S. K St. 18
Meadowbrook Park 2nd St. and Sierra Way
14
Meadowbrook Field Rialto & Allen
Nunez Park 1717 W. 5th St.
22
8-119
Facil ities
1
Community Building
Ball fields, play area,
community building, gym,
picnic area, pODl
2
6
Ball field, play area
Ball field, play area
community building, pool
2
4
5
7
Play area, picnic area
Play area, picnic area
Ball field, play area, tennis
Ballfield, play area, picnic area
soccer field
1
Community building
Ball fields, tennis
Ball field, play area
community building, pool
Ball fields
Play area, picnic area
Ball field, play area
community building,
picnic area, tennis
Play area, picnic area,
pool, tennis
5
Ball fields, play area,
field house
Ball fields, play area, community
building, picnic area, soccer,
pool, tennis
San Bernardino Historical and Pioneer Society has identified a number of
structures that they consider of historical note.
The proposed zone encompasses much of the early areas of the city's growth and
development (Figure 8-31) and a fairly representative sample of structures,
particularly residences, from each period of growth is present within specific
subareas. The area encompassing the entire proposed Enterprise Zone will be
subdivided intD six subareas based on style or historic use for discussion of
architectural/cultural features as follows:
1. Central Business District - This area is defined as the section of the
proposed Enterpri se Zone between 2nd and 5th streets along D and E
streets. While much of the business district recently has been
redeveloped, a few structures of historical and architectural note still
remain. These structures evidence the wide range of preceding
architectural styles ranging from the Beaux-Arts U.S. Post Office and the
modified moderne of the former Woolworth's Building to the simpler
frontier vernacular of the rn k and the n uildin.
Although some buildings, like e av
a covere y unsympa e 1 c mo mos
retain much of their original character.
2. Northern Residential - This area includes structures between 5th and 13th
streets, and D Street and 1-215. Mixed residential use dominates with
structures dating from 1880 to 1920. A 1 imited number of community
related facilities such as churches are present. A strip commercial
district, which consists of heavily modified older structures interspersed
between recent commercial facilities, cuts through the area along Baseline
Street. A number of outstanding Queen Anne Victorian houses and cottages
are still present along with a variety of Cal ifornia Bungalows. Many of
the houses, particularly the larger Victorian residences, have been
converted to apartments; most are poorly mai nta i ned and the monDchrome
paint schemes fail to highl ight their architectural features. Mature
landscaping and tree-lined streets enhance the quality of the area,
although much of the residential shrubs, like the housing, have had
limited maintenance.
3. Railroad Complex - Bounded by 5th Street, Rialto Avenue, Mt. Vernon
Avenue, and 1-215, this area is the heart of the railroad facilities that
contributed much to the histDric importance of San Bernardino since the
1890s. It includes the Spanish Revival style Santa Fe Station built in
1918, the railyard shop facilities (including a portion of the
roundhouse), and a community of small, vernacular railroad worker housing
dating from approximately 1890 to 1920. A recent commercial strip along
Viaduct Road/3rd Street separates the station and yards from the housing.
The Santa Fe Station, which has received little or no modification to both
exterior and interior features, is potentially National Register quality.
The associated housing area is currently under study by the City Planning
Department as a unique historical district of the City.
4. Mt. Vernon Hispanic Area - This area includes commercial structures along
Mt. Vernon Avenue and the residential area between 5th Street, 9th Street,
and 1-215. Predominantly single-story commercial buildings lining Mt.
Vernon Avenue date from approximately 1900 to 1935; most have been
8-130
consumptiDn for industrial uses are projected to increase more than other land
uses both with and without the proposed project. The increase would be 180
percent for the no project alternative and 240 percent for the proposed
Enterprise Zone.
Table 10-2 shows the estimated current and projected natural gas consumption
for the proposed project area. Southern California Gas Company's 1983 average
consumption rates for its entire service area were used. The number of multi-
family and single-family households was estimated g,om land use data and
schools and public buildings were included with commerclal. 1
The proposed Enterprise Zone project would result in a 38 percent increase in
natural gas consumptiDn during the next 15 years; representin~cent
increase over total consumption for the no project alterna~with
electrical consumption, the expected industrial development, primarily in
Subarea B, shows the greatest increase in natural gas usage.
Although the proposed project will not adversely impact regional energy
sources, energy conservation measures for utility companies and all consumers
are necessary to help conserve important energy resources. SCE's commitment
to develop additional alternate and renewable energy resources will help to
ensure that future demands are met. Additionally, the City of San Bernardino
is initiating its geothermal heating project that will distribute heat to
several government buildings located at the south end of San Bernardino.
All new and renovated buildings in the proposed Enterprise Zone must be
designed for optimum energy efficiency in accordance with residential and
nonresidential energy conservation standards adopted by the California Energy
Commission. These regulations include energy-saving designs for buildings and
homes and specifications for lighting, heating, cooling, and hot water supply.
SCE currently has an energy audit program that further assists in conserving
energy resources. The no-cost program provides home or business surveys of
energy use and suggestions on how to save energy. The County of San
Bernardino is also auditing their buildings and implementing many energy
conservation measures. Southern California Gas Company has home energy audit
and weatherizatiDn financing programs. Some of their measures include
increased insulation, weather stripping, water heater blankets, and water flow
restrictions.
The proposed Enterprise Zone would also promDte energy conservation by
providing incentives to local commercial and industrial developers. The
increase in local commercial development and job programs would result in a
decrease of total vehicle mileage as residents would be able to shop and work
closer to home.
Requests were made of both SCE and SCGC to provide i nformat i on on thei r
availability of facilities, energy supply, and development service pDlicies.
Correspondence received from both companies is included in Section 15.
10-3
SECTION 11
COORDINATION WITH OTHERS
11.1 SCOPING ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
The Council Df Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508) for
implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) require "...an
early and open process for determi ni ng the scope of issues rel ated to the
proposed action. This process shall be termed scoping...." The purpDses of
scoping are:
1) To identify the significant issues for study in the environmental impact
statement (EIS)
2) To determine the scope of the research for each issue.
Scoping activities are undertaken in response to these federal requirements as
part of the assessment of environmental impacts of major federal actions or of
actions that may include federal agency involvement. As part of the proposed
Enterprise Zone Application environmental impact assessment process, a three-
phased scoping process was undertaken that included two public scoping
meetings held in August 1985 to sol icit comments and concerns from affected
agencies and the public.
Prescoping, the initial phase, concentrated on acquiring a basic understanding
of the proposed project area and of the local concerns within the proposed
project zone. This included a review of the City's General Plan,
redevelopment pl ans, proposed projects, and exi st ing 1 and uses to determi ne
potential environmental concerns. Additionally, interested and responsible
agencies were notified of the City's intent to prepare a Draft EIS by mailings
Df a notice of preparation (NOP) and were thereby requested to submit
comments. A total of 13 letters of response were received by the City. These
are included in Section 11.7.
The second phase consisted of two formal publ ic scoping meetings. Following
the 45-day NOP response period and notification by the State Department of
Commerce that the City's preliminary application had been selected, scoping
meetings were held to gain input from the public. These meetings were open to
all government agencies, organizations, interest groups, and the general
public. Notices for the first meeting were published on August 5 (legal
advertisement) and August 12 (paid advertisement) in The Sun. The notices
were alsD mailed to approximately 25 interested parties including government
agencies, interest groups, and individuals.
The initial scoping meeting was held at the San Bernardino City Hall on August
15, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. Handouts were distributed that included a project
description and location map, city staff contacts, and a comment sheet that
included the following environmental topics considered for the EIR/EIS:
11-1
o Geology, mineral resources
o Water quality
o Water, wastewater, solid waste service
o land use and planning
o Community/public services
o Fiscal analysis
o Population/housing
o Traffic/circulation
o Biological resources
o Cultural resources.
In the general session that followed the City's presentation, comments were
invited concerning the environmental impacts of the proposed Enterprise Zone.
At the request of the City Council, a second meeting was held at San
Bernardino City Hall on August 27, 1985, at 3:00 p.m. Notices for this
meeting were publ ished in the El Chicano and the Precinct ReDorter -- local
neighborhood newspapers -- on August 26. Direct mail ing to approximately
30 agencies and organizations in the Northwest Redevelopment Project area were
also made in an attempt to generate a more widespread response and attendance.
Handouts similar to those distributed at the initial meeting were available
wi th an addi t i onal one-page summary of the issues di scussed at the fi rst
meeting. Two of the three individuals who arrived at the meeting had attended
the previous scoping session and the third individual was briefed on the
proposed project by City staff. Due to a lack of any other attendees and the
three individuals' earlier provision of and/or lack of comments, the meeting
was officially canceled at 3:30 p.m.
~hird phase of the scoping process, all concerns and issues generated
~he first two phases were analyzed, documented, and included into the
EIS process. Information obtained from prescoping contacts and data,
information gathered at the public scoping meeting, and written public
comments were incorporated.
The City considered all information generated during prescoping and scoping as
well as public comments pertinent to specific areas. Issues selected to merit
in-depth considerat i on in the EIR/EIS incl uded those 1 i sted above,
specifically as determined most important by attendees of the first publ ic
meeting (summarized in Table 11-1), and the additional issue of the proposed
Enterprise Zone's potential impacts to visual resources.
Issues or concerns raised at the scoping meeting that have not been addressed
in the Draft EIR/EIS either because they relate to existing conditions within
the study and would not be affected solely as a result of the proposed
Enterprise Zone or because they are not problems to be resolved within the
scope of NEPA or CEQA, include:
~ise
o Noise impacts to existing housing and future development from 1-215 and
Santa Fe Railroad
11-2
Table 11-1.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND CONCERNS RAISED DURING
THE AUGUST 15, 1985, SCOPING SESSION
Land Use and Plannino
Zoning changes
Transportation
Need for westbound offramp Dff
southbound 1-215
ZDning inconsistencies
Increased commercial activity
impacts on community and
residential areas
Impact of completed Route 30 Freeway
Need for regional bus terminal and
improved local service
Communitv Services
Fiscal and Economic Analvsis
Job training costs
Cost of Enterprise Zone project
Revenue expected
Marketing of area
Impacts on parks and recreation
Job programs and training
Need for general improvements
Street lighting
Poor landscaping
Other Issues
Water
Drainage and flooding
Water Quality
Air qual ity
Historical buildings and houses
Groundwater
Seismic concerns
Wastewater
PODulation and Housino
Demographics
Aesthetics
Signs, architecture, and
and landscaping
Housing shortages, deterioration,
and renovation
11-3
o Relocation of school bus stops
o Types of commercial establishments to be allowed.
Other issues or concerns that have not been addressed in this EIR/EIS are
those that will be described in the Enterprise Zone Application or are
programmat i c issues that woul d not result in impacts to the envi ronment.
Those issues raised at the scoping meeting are:
o Regulation of job training programs
o Subareas to which job training programs apply
o Agency(s) that will regulate job training programs
o Selection/approval of developers
o Limitation on funding
o Subarea selection criteria
o Competition among development firms for/funds
o Subareas to be prioritized
o Monitoring program for project benefit assessment
o Monitoring program for allocation of funds.
11.2 DOCUMENT MAILING LIST
All persons that received the City's notice of preparation (NOP) and/or
scoping meeting notice, signed in at one of the scoping sessions, or submitted
written comments addressing the proposed Enterprise Zone project have received
a copy of this Draft EIR/EIS. The distribution is shDwn on the following
pages.
11.3 NOTICE OF PREPARATION MAILING LIST
City of San Bernardino
MaYDr's Office
San Bernardino, CA
City of San Bernardino
Counc il Offi ces
San Bernardino, CA
Catherine A. Doehring
1070 Alcalde Drive
Glendale, CA 91207
San Bernardino Area Chamber of
Commerce
546 W. Sixth Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
11-4
State of California
Department of Commerce
1121 L Street
Su ite 600
Sacramento, CA 95814
ATTN: Richard Whitman, Manager
Enterprise Zone Program
Parker and Covert
1901 E. Fourth Street
Suite 312
Santa Ana, CA 92705
San Bernardino Unified
School District
777 North F Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Wests ide Homeowners & Tenants Assoc.
1524 W. 7th Street
San Bernardino, CA 92411
Economic Development Department
175 W. Fifth Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
NWR Project Area CDmmittee
RDA, Ezel James
ATTN:: John Hobbs
Uptown Citizen Advisory
Committee
RDA, Eze 1 James
ATTN: Hugh Holmes
Vanir Commercial Brokerage, Inc.
P.O. Box 310
San Bernardino, CA 92402
ATTN: Ernest A. Garcia
Associate Broker
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
City of San Bernardino
Berrye Hanson
Engineering Division
San Bernardino County Planning
Environmental Review
385 N. Arrowhead Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Edith R. Wolfe, et al.
15993-10 Avenida Villaha
San Diego, CA 92128
Thurman L. Johnson, et al.
1600 S. Camino Real
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Grover C. Wimberly III
643 W. Baseline Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Orange Show Plaza Association
501 Park Center Drive
San Bernardino, CA 92705
Jack and Nancy Kennedy
6150 Tiburn Drive
Riverside, CA 92506
Bernie and Sheila Barrad, etc.
11669 Bernardo Way
Grand Terrace, CA 92324
KFXM Broadcasting Company
P.O. 50005
San Bernardino, CA 92412
Janice Peddie, et al.
18 Robin Court
Newport Beach, CA 92663
CAD Associates
10700 Alcalde Drive
Glendale, CA 91207
City of San Bernardino
Mikel Park
Fire Department
11-5
City of San Bernardino
Annie Ramos
Park and Recreation Dept.
City of San Bernardino
Manuel Moreno, Jr.
Public Services/Streets
City of San Bernardino
Warren Knudson
Finance Department
City of San Bernardino
Peter Liu
Traffic Engineer
City of San Bernardino
Tom Minor
Police Department
City of Riverside
Planning Department
3900 Main Street
Riverside, CA 92501
Transportation Department
Caltrans - District B
P.O. Box 231
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Central Downtown Library
401 North Arrowhead Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92404
Southern California Gas Company
Division Headquarters
624 W. Fourth Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
EPWA/Land Management
East Valley Planning Team
385 N. Arrowhead Ave., 3rd Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182
South Coast Air Quality District
1280 Cooley Drive
Colton, CA 92324
Mr. Will N. Teater, Urban Planner
Dept. of Housing & Urban Dev.
34 Civic Center Placa
Santa Ana, CA 92701
City of San Bernardino
Steve Whitney
City Li brari an
Central Library
City of San Bernardino
Jack Rosebraugh
Building and Safety Dept.
City of San BernardinD
Ralph Prince
City Attorney
City of San Bernardino
Herbert Wessel
Water Department
San Bernardino Flood Control
852 E. Third Street
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Orange Show Plaza Assoc.
501 Park Center Drive
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Water Quality ContrDl Board
6809 Indiana Avenue, Ste. 200
Riverside, CA 92506
SCAG
600 S. Commonwealth, Ste. 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90005
Ken Fellows
Department of Water Resources
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 96814
Dept. of Conservation Division
of Mines and Geology
Ferry Building
San Francisco, CA 94101
California Dept. of Forestry
3800 N. Sierra Way
San Bernardino, CA 92405
South Coast Air Quality Manage-
ment District
9150 Flair Drive
El Monte, CA 97131
11-6
Colton Fire Department
303 East "E" Street
Colton, CA 92324
Archaeological Survey
District Clearinghouse
UCLA
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Southern Pacific Industrial
ATTN: Bill Jones
One Market Street, Ste. 200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Southern California Edison Co.
Land Administration
P.O. Box 410
Long Beach, CA 90801
United States Corps of Eng.
District Engineer
300 North Los Angeles St.
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Chow, Chaw-Hsiu and Lin Hsiu Tung
750 W. Fairway Drive
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Regency Inn Partnership
666 Fairway Drive
San Bernardino, CA 92408
California State Clearinghouse
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dept. of Housing & Urban Dev.
Region IX, Los Angeles Area
2500 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90000
Pacific Telephone
c/o Judy Bouma
3073 Adams St., RM 215
Riverside, CA 92504
Colton Unified School Dist.
ATTN: Superintendent
1212 Valencia Drive
Colton, CA 92324
11-7
California Inventory of Historic Resources, State of California. Sacramento:
California Department of Parks and Recreation. 1976.
California Inventory of Historic Resources throuah 1975, State of California.
Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation. 1981.
Charzan, Stan, Assistant Administrator, San Bernardino Community Hospital.
City of San Bernardino, A Tour of Historic San Bernardino. 1976.
City of San Bernardino Planning Department, Hiahland Area Plan Technical
Report No.3. July 1985.
City of San Bernardino Planning Department, Draft Environmental ImDact ReDort.
Verdemont Area Plan, September 1984, p.54.
Consumer Expenditure Survey: Interview Survey, 1980-1981, U.S. Department of
labor, Bureau of labor Statistics. April 1985.
Curtis, Sgt. Robert W., San Bernardino Police Department.
Dutcher, l.C., and A.A. Garrett, Geologic and Hydrologic Features of the San
Bernardino Area, California. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper
1419. 1963.
Euling, Robert, Assistant library Administrator, Norman E. Feldheym Central
library.
Fife, D.l., D.A. Rodgers, G.W. Chase, R.H. Chapman, and E.C. Sprotte, Geologic
Hazards in Southwestern San Bernardino County, California. California
Division of Mines and Geoloav SDecial ReDort 113. 1976.
40 CFR, parts 260 through 280, inclusive.
Frick, C., Extinct Vertebrate Faunas of the Badlands of Bautista Creek and San
Timoteo Canyon, Southern California. University of California
Publications in Geoloav (12)5, p.277-424. 1921.
Haenszel, Arda, San Bernardino's First Hotel. Odvssey 7(2). San Bernardino:
City of San Bernardino Historical and Pioneer Society. 1985a.
Haenszel, Arda, San Bernardino City Historical landmarks. Ms. on file with
the City of San Bernardino Historical and Pioneer Society. San
Bernardino, 1985b.
Har er Wa ne G., U.S. De artment of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
ovem er
"Historical landmarks of San Bernardino County," San Bernardino County Museum
Association Quarterly 28(1-2). 1980.
Holladay, Fred, Qur Vanishing Heritage. Odyssey 7(4). San Bernardino: City
of San Bernardino Historical and Pioneer Society. 1985.
12-2
However, this density cannDt exceed the maximum density permitted by the
General Plan designation for that area.
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
City:
County:
C-l, C-2, C-3, C-3A, and C-M
C-l and C-2
The City and County permit a wide range of commercial uses from small retail
stores serving the needs of a neighborhood to more intense uses serving
regional needs. The City and County zoning Drdinances list various commercial
uses and development standards permitted in all six commercial districts in
the study area. These districts are: Neighborhood Commercial (C-l), and
General Commercial (C-2) in the County, and Community Commercial (C-2),
General Commercial (C-3), Limited General Commercial (C-3A), and Commercial-
Manufacturing (C-M) in the City. The County permits residential uses within
C-2 districts while the City does nDt.
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
City:
M-l and M-IA
M-l and M-R
County:
-
Industrial uses are those that generally permit assembly or production of
durable goods and services. The City has two industrial districts: Light
Industrial (M-l) and Limited Light Manufacturing-Industrial (M-IA). The
County al so has two i ndustri a 1 di stri cts: Limited Manufacturi ng (M-l) and
Restricted Manufacturing (M-R).
OTHER DISTRICTS
City:
T, A-P, and 0
County:
A-P, P, FP, and Attachments I, H, and T
The study~contains.Jli~e loning districts that are less prevalent than the
primary resi'Creiitial, commerclal, and industrial districts. These districts
are: Transitional (T), Administrative-Professional (A-P), Open (0), and Flood
Plain (FP).
The City's Transitional (T) district is used to provide a transitional buffer
area between commercial and residential uses. It is always found wedged
between these two districts and, as such, permits commercial parking or
residential uses as per the abutting district.
The Administrative-Professional (A-P) district in the City permits
administrative, executive, professional, and research offices, and those
businesses of an office nature. Art galleries, exhibit halls, medical and
biological laboratories, and nonprinting publishing companies are also
permitted uses in this district. The County's Administrative-Professional
(A-P) district is similar in that it permits those uses cited above by the
A-2
City but includes financial institutions and studios for professional work or
teaching of any form of fine arts.
The Open (0) district is found only in incorpDrated areas. Agricultural uses
are permitted provided that no structures, either temporary or permanent, be
erected. Structures relating to flood control channels, spreading grounds,
settling basins, freeways, parkways, parks, playgrounds, and wildlife
preserves are exceptions to the provision.
~F10Dd Plain (FP) is an area which, under present conditions, is subject to
~;e~iodic flooding and accompanying hazards, in the interests of public health,
safety, and general welfare. Two types of flood plain districts (FP-l and
FP-2) are found in the County, however, the City's Open district permits very
similar uses. Various uses related to flood control facilities, field
agriculture, recreation, and surface mining are permitted. It does not allow
occupancy, encroachment of structures, and improvement or development that
would obstruct the natural flow of flood waters within the designated floodway
on the flood plain.
The Interim (I), Hazard (HP), and Transitional (T) attached designations
found, only within the County, are not zoning districts of and by themselves.
When "I" is attached with any other primary district, it imposes interim
regulations to provide adequate time for studies, meetings, and hearings to be
held in order to effectuate a comprehensive plan in accordance with the State
Planning and Zoning law. An interim designation can be used for a period not
to exceed 2 years. The interim period should reasonably preserve and maintain
the character of the primary district until findings and recommendations are
addressed. The Flood Hazard (H) designation, as an overlay to all other
districts, primarily provides regulations and standards for new construction
of any structure. In the H-l designation, the first habitable floor must be
one foot or more above the designated flood elevation. The H-2 designation,
the first habitable floor must be one foot above the existing natural ground
level. The 'T" symbol, when attached to another district, specifies standards
for special setbacks, sideyards, open spaces, and buffers.
Source: Highland Area Plan, City of San Bernardino Planning Department,
July 1985
A-3
LETTERS OF CQ'If1}JT AND RESPONSES
--,
~~
C I T Y 0 FAN B ERN R D ION 0
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
85H-211
TO:
VALER~E ROSS, ASSISTANT PLANNER
FROM:
ANNIE F. RAMOS, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND
COMMUNITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: REVIEW - DRAFT EIR/EIS. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION OF AN ENTERPRISE ZONE
DATE:
November 26, 1985
(6540)
COPIES:
I have reviewed the above draft and am attaching a copy of
pages 8-116, 8-117 and 8-119 with the needed ch~nges.
If you have any questions please contact ma at ~e3-5030.
~7~
ANNIE F. RAMOS, DIRECTOR
PARKS, RECREATION ~ COMMUNITY SERVICES
AFR:mg
~. ~'_'u_._
1,:;'W.l'(--'C:'FY f
SAN f1C::.':.'..~:;.:io I
m f]g ~EnG'0(.?:W
,DEC,'Z'1985
/
i
\
\
I
l
J
!
8.12.4.2 ProDosed Proiect Imoacts
The proposed Enterprise Zone is projected to increase the area's population by
about 2,018 and the number of hous~holds by 739 during the next 15 years over
the no project alternative. Using City .of San Bernardino student-generated
rates of 0.625 for mixed single-family and multi-family units. . A total of
1,129 students would be generated over the IS-year period. An increase of 462
students over the no project alternative ~ould be realized due to the proposed
Enterprise Zone. .
The current distribution of total students is 41 percent. in elementary
schools, 13 percent in intermediate schools; and 46 percent in high schools.
Assuming this same ratio over the IS-year project period, the proposed
Enterprise Zone would add an additional. 189 students to the elementary
schools, 60 students to the intermediate schools, and 213 students to the high
schoo 1 s. These figures represent 3 percent of the exi st i ng total capaci ties
of each of the three school systems. Additional facilities are anticipated to
meet growth demands over the next 15 years. Students generated by the
proposed Enterprise Zone will represent 3 percent of existing capacities that
are likely to increase by the year 2000. Therefore, no significant direct
impacts from growth associated with the project area is expected.
8.12.4.3 MitiQation Measures
I
Although the proposed project wi 11 not di.rectly impact the school systems,
overcrowded conditions currently exist .at the. elementary schools and to a
1 esser extent at certain intermedi ate and high schools. "The Di stri ct
cont i nues to reassess school enrollment' boundari es to a 11 evi ate overcrowdi ng
at particular schools. Portable classrooms help to temporarily relieve
overcrowding and the District has plan.s to reopen the Muscott School or
possibly build a new school on the site .when conditions warrant or when funds
become avail abl e. Addi tiona 1 revenues g.enerated by the proposed Enterpri se
Zone will assist in alleviating a citywide problem.
8.12.5 PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS
8.12.5.1 Existina Conditions
There are nine park and recreation areas located in the proposed Enterprise
Zone (see Figure 8-30). These facil ities include two community centers for
senior citizens, two all-purpose community buildings, one swimming pool, five
ba 11 fi e 1 ds (four 1 ighted) , four basketball courts, seven chil dren' s play
areas, one soccer field, one gymnasium, and five picnic areas. The total
recreation areas within the proposed Enterprise Zone amount to about '~cres,
. ,,,'1_ -p...
Seven additional parks encompassing a total of about ~.acres are located
within 1 mile of the proposed Enterprise .Zone. These facilities include three
swimming pools, four community buildings, a field house, a gymnasium, and ten
lighted ball fields. The Shandin Hills Public Golf Course fairway also
8-116
-
"
"
~,.; , "f!/ ,>~~~,'.(-" )'t
. ,I '/101J'" ..
,~ ",,<.(.:. ;,.
.. ~~~ ~~~<:: . ~
\ \~ '\ ~ IV' \1 z
\, ~'~:0~( \1 ~
,<{g~;~" ,- l:!
.,,(~~~~~-.r:;:~ u
~~ ~~~'l'{(" /~ 0 l:!
~ ", ,tt..; ~( ~ '? ~
". -. ~ _' I CD 0::
L' .' i- <,;, <(
V'.\ ,;" 'I, ii: 0..
" " > .', ".
j ~ l ~ ~:~;..;,~ ,~~~;h 'l'~~ ..A . .
.'\. "\ ( \V'" '~lt
i " ~ . ~ l1iO~DOOL
, '" ' ~[][. om
c. 9j..
v - ,,' '7L J' r::;, . nlIl
1 > <,\,.~I~ I .:;;; . DOl. 0000. om
I . '''th '~ m, r1gJOCUODQC
! ~'~ 'I. ~ \\WJ~I E~~:lBffimDc
, V\ ,\r- ~~~d~~rng~
~" "l~ L', c; 0 :lEi~ ..'9 c::
')'f~' ~~ ~ =uu- S;;j=
[" ' \. 51 E ~ ~I, ;t. -~BE
~' , ~"IX b:'" , ~II " iJ~ Il-J~ ~mr
3 h lJ: i.i . : JD- ~ . ~,~
"'. '. J~'" -;: rrf- ...wJ - .501'+ .JE3EEc::i ,1\.:"'l~nc:
:;l -=- =,= ;";' ~ ~.-;:~. . ~:lIllllf3J ~ J- Iml,,~
__ ~ - i ~w l- l!r~e:J It ~ UfJ1wmL!~'[JE
~ ~ g ~~ Jmmr::o OE36 !'"""f Ek:':lO~~ D~,
n rro!hriilii I r -~ tU ~8~ ~bI1. - "*== l:::ll.. Ju ' JlJl
lJ lUt~ 1111 ,r ~ ,;:: ').\ I ~,f:ill3~,~J 380 .ollJ8[~1] iiJL.'
;-. fI; ~'ij f~e1ll~~\ \ ~~~~_:__'[_ 3E~JiJ ~t :bll.n[~~1 ,J 1JC,
:: .~.. ~c&"'i l~jJ~~l ( ~ eL~ ~ rqoorl ~lt11~~O JITt
1 .. ~.., t~,;;,;~~..., \ I l!.lL~ill.1JL Ell I ~lc l~I][Jt:Jl J]O
i l't~J[~~ '~-:f< ) ~ J[J[]' U(:J ( I, '1".;)_ ~
"'" ';:'-.. 0= \' I -.. 'DC. J ....'
p,\.."\ ~ r -- L __L-" f, ,~ ~I "0" 8[JLJ~d' 1-
liI- '7 J J:J~E:''!!. '\.( I '," _""":_:c:..... --..,:.,.. \~~r-~, ~.
e;-. 1l~. ~JlI-~-' \>T-r),..~ , "":::.:: '-.--~ilJF:11\ \ '\' I i',
1!J~~ . ~-J: --- ._t~~ ,~\_ ~"'~:: 8ft ~\! /" ~1::'IH' f" fA
!'1:3OC -, --~ . =='.t i3l L..Q _. ]l::'f'l. ~I
Pi{U_U .1-: .. ~9 .-- . ~f.~t "\ ~r~: r~ ]l~t~3~11~ D f.... ~t ','/1 ~
.....:'.F~E.::;. f~f.1,;" f!~,~'t ::1'"1;:~~]'- UJ~'~a3rF-~~:jflll1- _:,,:';,' .
,~,I. ~.-", l'::~ i ' 'L r::., r'" .;;!;,lnl~~lJjs ~ll ,,[ / .
~ i f{~, _ '-"L!'{~'~._..' ~~ ~fl::c \ ,\ ..-.1'iJ~L:J 0".\.
~1".f:f l.f:p ::.:r I 7::' ..:I:::~H,: I'.J . lf~~lf.tj)k I --
..
.
.
.
:.
c
.2
OJ
.
;;
.
a:
..
c~_
i
.
~
.
..
.
J
~ "!
.
I
o
i
J
1.1
"
/
Facil itv
INSIDE PROJECT
vi Cultural Center
Encanto Park
Guiterrez Field
Johnson Hall
La Plaza Park
. Ninth St. Park
I
V Orangewood Park
Rio Vista Park
Sr. Citizen Ctr.
OUTSIDE PROJECT
Blair Park
Delmann Heights
Guadalupe Field
J Hudson Park
lytle Creek Park
Meadowbrook Park
V Meadowbrook Field
Nunez Park
r--~I
I_a:-. ~ 1_ :......" j-~J
laOle 8-41
P~qK AND,RECREATIO~ ~REAS
location
Size
(Acres I
II r!:>
536 W.~ Street
1180 W. 9th Street
1
~
B
Facil ities
~
m
~
..
~
.
~
~
!
~
,
-
~
I
.
Community Building
Ball fields, play area,
community building, gym,
picnic area, pool
14th St. and Mt. Vernon 2 Ball field, play area
906 Willson St. -~ ~ Ball field, play area .
community building, pool
7th St. and Mt. Vernon 2 Play area, picnic area
.
9th St. & Garner Ave. 4 Play area, picnic area
19~
Muscott &,9th St. 5 Ball field, play area, tennis
.'
Californfa & Baseline 7 Ballfield, play area, picnic area
soccer field
600 W. 5th St. 1; Community bUilding
1400 W. Marshall Blvd.
:J,q (" 2.
).6M Flores St.
34
19
8th St. & Roberds
p~ 012l/dvn:l:r-<7>-
Hill creSL . ana
Chde KO.
2
. tQ,
E~
380 S. K St.
18
2nd St. and Sierra Way
14
I< i4 ~ &efR/~
2flG St 'dr:11'4 ,i grr. l.[ay
5
1717 W. 5th St.
~
~
Ball fields, tennis
,
~
.
(
~
i
,
f.!
~.
Ball field, play area
community building, pool
Ball fields
Play area, picnic area
Ball field, play area
community building,
picnic area, tennis
;
;
.~
~
Play area, picnic area,
pool, tennis
Ball fields, play area,
field house
~
22 Ball fields, play area, community
~ building, picnic area, soccer,
IiItI pool, tennis
i
~
8-119
.- ;:-;-~ '~, ,,;
_ "' 4,,::"-. . ~. . ." .
,
'-
;
I
Ii
'--" I - ;'li""'f'=7"...=r-::~I=;--:::r-:
--. . I.' . . . . .. --...,. ,,',"_., .1 .~...., '''Ii r, __.
~_ ~I I
~i
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAL_
EXEClITIVE DIRECTOR
January 7, 1986
Anni e F. Ramos
Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services
City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Ms. Ramos:
Thank you for your comments on the City's Enterprise Zone Draft EIR/EIS. Your
corrections to pages 8-116; 8-119; and Figure 8-30, page 8-117 have been added
and will appear in the final document.
Ad/edit d/utl
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
1S~~9
Stephen T. Lilburn
URS Project Manager
~
STL:cmc
CITY HALL. 300 NORTH "0" STREET. RM, 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW
{
San Bernardino City Unified School District
E. Neal Roberts. Ed.D. Superintendent
Harold L. Boring, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent, Administrative Serviees
'___.n"
Tb"",'s No Better Place To Learn
December 20, 1985
Mr. Olen Jones
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Review Committee
300 North "0" Street, 3rd floor
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Mr. Jones:
On behalf of the San Bernardino City Unified School District, we
commend the thought and effort of the City toward revitalization of
the west side area of town.
The success of this project, however, should increase the base of
residential homes and apartments for this area. This increase in
housing has the potential to create significant problems for the
School District. Currently, under the San Bernardino City Resolu-
tion No. 85-337 new residential construction within the Enterprise
Zone will be subject to school mitigation fees. Funds generated from
this fee may not be sufficient to provide necessary classrooms,
transportation and other school components.
In consideration of the above, the San Bernardino City Unified School
District reserves the right to seek and obtain additional mitigation
efforts in line with the analysis of student impaction that may be
generated from this project.
Sincerely,
.Jurl/L,
Scott Shira, Manager
Planning and Development
e
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
m North F Street. San Bernardino. CA 92410 . (714) 381-1238
SS:ln
~~.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAUL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Janua ry 7, 1986
Scott Shira
Manager
Planning and Development
San Bernardino City
Unified School District
777 North "F" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Dear Mr. Shira:
Thank you for your comments to the City's Enterprise Zone Draft EIRjEIS. Your
comments regarding the need for additional funding based on future student
impaction have been incorporated into the document on page 8-116 and will
appear in the final EIR along with a copy of your letter.
46itdt At~f
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
~~Q
Stephen T. Lilburn
URS Project Manager
-
STL:cmc
CITY HALL. 300 NORTH "D" STREET. RM. 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW
C I T Y F SAN BEN A R DIN 0
lNTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
8512-1201
TO: Valerie C. Ross, Assistant Planner
FROM: Mikel J. Park, Fire Marshal
SUBJECT: Enterprise Zoning
DATE:
December 16, 1985
(6560)
COPIES:
-------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with Section 1.4.12 ~Q~~~~!!Y_~~B~!~~~
E!B~_EBQ!~~!!Q~l Development associated with the proposed
enterprise zone is not expected to adversely impact fire
protection capabi I ities. No mitigation measures beyond
compliance with building and safety ordinances are recommend-
e d.
We concur with the statement on Community Services, Section
1.4.12. 7
m~@mow~fril
un L:;
DEe 17 1985
MJP/cl
CITY Pl"i:;""'J .:.:, ,,::;;':ENT.
SAN BERNARDINO, CA
;'-~lmIC:'~;:)~
I u l SAi, BE......DINO
ulJ, rr;~!b @iD\':7rn
DEe l' '0' 1985:
'~
sr"FF 1
r~?:lItt-':.'511
0.:'. __
I;.~ -1
c.....~.._ J
n I
E.C. --:- 1
G.G._i
K.i.:._/,
t.~. f;_
'~.r_ == j
M.fJ._1
P..R__j
~ \}, u:: I
FILE_
~4
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAL.
EXECtmvE DIRECTOR
January 16, 1986
Mikel J. Park
Fire Marshal
City of San Bernardino
200 East 3rd Street
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Dear Mr. Park:
Thank you for your comments to the City of San Bernardino's Enterprise Zone
Draft EIR/EIS. A copy of the Final EIR/EIS will be sent to you following
approval by the City Council.
~~$J,~I
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
:
~r{)
Stephen T. Lilburn
URS Project Manager
STL:cmc
OTY HALL. 300 NORTH no" STREET. RM. 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW
~ - .~
-
"
; ^
>,' ~'7ri ~.I -
j I;".
\ . ,
''l.r".,..
UI"Tl [) C., 1'.1 ~S fINIROI_Jv1U\1/d "IiO, [CI IlIl; MiL ,.:(' ,
'1I.'l"..YHH'~('10~:. [1,( ?!1~~;
JL 1,; 6 10:-'~
(If i IU, u:
'-," i ,', i ~!. L ;,. I "II,,:"
Mr. 01 en Jones
Environmental Review Committee
City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
3rd Fl oor
San Bernardino,. California 92418
Dea r Mr. Jones:
On November 19, 1985 this office received and Officially filed the
draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) entitled: San Bernardino
Enterprise Zone Application, Oesignation and CDBG, City and County of
San Bernardino, California.
Your agency requested comments on the EIS be received by
Decemher 23, 1985 (see enclosed). Section 1506.10 of the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations requires that the Environmental
Protection Agency publish a weekly Notice of Availability in the
Federal Register (FR) of the EISs filed during the preceding week. Due
to the FR publication cycle, NO As are published on Friday of each week
and notTCe only those EISs filed Monday through Friday of the preceding
week. The regulations further require that the minimum review periods be
calculated from the NOA FR publication date.
Therefore, based on the official filing of this EIS, the following
dates apply:
Date NOA published in the FR
November 29, 1985
Due Date/Closure of the minimum
45-day revi ew peri oel
I strongly urge you to send a letter to all parties reviewing the EIS
informing them of the correct date. If you have any questions please
contact Jan lott Shaw of my staff on area code 202 or FTS 382-5074.
January 13, 1986.
~} ~'-
.J
~ "
:;~~.,e.
~~n Hi rsch
Director
Office of Federal Activities
'-,
, c:..
-.
. "',
. ~
"0
,{~..
-
~... ...
REDEVl;LOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Janua ry 7, 1986
Allan Hirsch
Director
Office of Federal Activities
EPA
Washington, DC 20400
Dear Mr. Hirsch:
In response to your letter of December 6, 1985, we extended the EIS review
period to January 13, 1986. Appropriate reviewing agencies were notified by
mail on December 16, 1985 of the extension. A copy of the announcement is
attached.
~~c~ .~/c/
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
~ ' CO-
Stephen T. lilburn
URS Project Manager
.
STl:cmc
CITY HALL . 300 NORTH "0" STREET . RM. 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW
~.~i;;;;~-.-
.-. ,
-:-:::
ITY OF SAN. BERNARDINO 300 NORTH '"D"STREET,SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418
.----...~
EVLYN WILCOX
Mavor
December 16, 1985
MemDers of the Common Council
Esth... Estrada. . . . . . . . . . . . . First Ward
Jack Aemy............. .$econdWard
Ralph Hernandez . . . . . . . . . . . Third Wud
Steve Marks. . . . . . . . . . . . . Fourth Wud
Gordon QUNtI . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fifth Ward
Dan Frazier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sixth Ward
.Hick Strickler. . . . . . . . . . . .s.venth Ward
To Whom it May Concern;
On November 7, 1985 the City of San Bernardino Environmental Review
Committee sent out a Notice of Completion for a Draft EIR/EIS for the
City of San Bernardino Application for Designation of a State Enterprise
Zone. The public review period was given as November 7, 1985 through
December 23, 1985. It has since come to my attention that the Notice
of Availability (NOA) of the EIS must be published in the Federal Register
for the mandatory 45 day review period. Due to their publication cycle,
we must extend the review period for the EIS until January 13, 1986.
We would appreciate your comments on the Draft EIS at your earliest
convenience. If there are any questions, please contact me at 383-5057.
Respectively,
. j/. . ,,,
rtl..J!i'U...':'. C f'\J-.b
VALERIE C. ROSS,
Secretary, Environmental
Review Committee
VCR/mtb
,. -'"'
'-;. i-~....:"
'-.,I ,,'
CITY OF SAN B....RNARDIN""
-
MEMORAND~M
To VALERIE ROSS, ASSISTANT PLANNER 'From D.A. ROBBINS, LIEUTENANT
Subject DRAFT EIRfEIS FOR THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Date DECEMBER 10, 1985
APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION OF AN ENTERPRISE ZONE
Approved
Date
A review of 8.12.2 LAW ENFORCEMENT through 8.12.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
has been made and the attached changes recommended.
!I4I;(Lr
,'.A. ROBBINS, LIEUTENANT
[2 ~@~nw~ illJ
OEe 101985
fern
CITY PLANIojlNG !),h'.S ,;~lENT
SAN BERNARDINO. CA
-
--- -..-.------\ffi
' r",.,"CN'."I.',{'f ,
0\\ i ";:':'~".:,":() ,\\ I
'U": ...'..:.:.'.......-.~-
I ,-,.... . - ,.. -.!::V"
... '.' ,\.",- ..-
If\\. . .....
DEe 1 2 1985
., .
c.ry Oil rHE~~
., .
, '
Police protection within the proposed project area is presently considered adequate.
With the additional officers recently hired and the COP program, the responsiveness
and effectiveness of the Oepartment is expected to improve.
8.12.2.2 PROPOSEO PROJECT IMPACTS.
An increase in population and commercial and industrial development as a result of
the proposed Enterprise Zone would produce a minimal impact on law enforcement.
The expected population of 26,106 in the year 2000 is approximately 2,000 more than
projected with the no project alternative. This would require an additional four
officers over what would be required without the project. The proposed project
would also require the additional purchase of one new police vehicle.
The additional commercial developments would increase crime rates, particularly in
the areas of burglary and robbery. There would also be an overall increase in the
number of police responses and in traffic control or accidents. The industrial
area (Subarea B) would experience an increase in burglaries and alarm responses;
due to this more remote location, this area would not allow as quiCk a response
time for police service as other sections in the proposed project area. This
problem would need to be addressed as industrial growth occurs and the burglary
rate is assessed. '
As development occurs in Subarea B. along with the adjacent State University area,
additional pOlice protection will be required. A service center and/or increased
patrolling in the area may be needed. The Department indicates that it would
welcome the opportunity to set up a neighborhood center in either new or old
developments if provided the land or buiJdfng. The additional costs of law en-
forcement may be offset by revenue provided by new commercial and industrial
development. These costs and revenue generated by development have been assumed
in the fiscal analysis, which shows an increase of only 0.02 in the year 2000_
revenue/cost over the the no project alternative.
8.12.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
As development occurs, the need for additional officers, and equipment are assessed
annually, following a review of the numbe~of calls for police services, the number
of crimes that occur, the crime rate, and the traffic conditions. Request for
additional allocations are presented to the City Council.
Further mitigation measures would involve residential and commercial security
measures including adequate lighting; police-approved locks and alarms; use of
trained security personnel at large construction sites and at large residential,
commercial, and industrial complexes; and good communcation with the Police
Department.
8.12.2
LAW ENFORCEMENT
8.12.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The proposed Enterprise Zone lies entirely within the jurisidiction of the San
Bernardino Police Department. The Department headquarters is located in Subarea A
downtown at 466 W. 4th Street. The number of sworn officers currently totals
243, as the Department has recently added 47 new officers. The Department plans
its staff needs based on a ratio of 1.75 officers per 1,000 persons. In consider-
ation of the recent strengthening of the staff size and by using an extimated 1985
population of 135,000 for San Bernardino, the officer-to-person ratio is 1.8 per
1,000.
The Police Department has recently initiated a new law enforcement concept, termed
Community Oriented Policing (COP). The City has been divided into six geographical
sectors with each sector containing one or two Police Community Service Centers.
These neighborhood centers are manned by a lieutenant and police assistant during
the day and early evening hours. The lieutenant acts as the area commander to the
officers assigned to that section and as a neighborhood or community liaison.
The neighborhood centers have been established to promote police visibility and
access. to deter local crime, and, most importantly, to encourage neighborhood
cooperation in reporting and fighting crime. The area commander and his personnel
gain more first-hand knowledge about local crime and traffic problems and are
better able to respond to the community's needs. The neighborhood centers also
act as meeting places for neighborhood watch programs, and also provide an open-
door policy, allowing the local community to discuss problems on a more personal
level.
~
The three sectors that serve the proposed Enterprise Zone are Areas A. B, and C
(not to be confused with the proposed Enterprise Zone subareas). These areas
are depicted on Figure 8-26. The Community Centers in Area A are located at
637 N. Mt. Vernon Avenue and 1654 W. 10th Street. Area B has a center located
at 536 W. 11th Street and one of the service centers for Area C is located at
Lytle Creek Park.
The number of personnel presently assigned to each area is as follows: Area
officers and 4 civilians, Area B - 26 officers and 2 civilians, and Area C -
officers and 4 civilians. The officers wotk on a 3-shift-per-day schedule.
the new neighborhood concept, each area commander is allowed the flexibility
schedule his personnel to best meet the protection needs of his unique area.
allows the area commander to concentrate his staff on particular local crime
A - 29
22
With
to
This
problems.
The Department indicates that the proposed Enterprise Zone area has a higher than
average crime rate. However, the City reports that there has been no significant
increase in the overall crime rates for the proposed Enterprise Zone area during
the past few years. The COP program has decreased crime in the immediate area
around the established service centers and the concept has been well received
within the community.
The Police Department is evaluated on an annual basis to assiss its needs for
additional personnel and equipment. Their requirements for additional allocations
are based not only on the 1.75 officers per 1,000 people ratio, but also on
numerous factors such as recent crime statistics and the number of calls for police
service.
~~
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAUL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Janua ry 7, 1986
D.A. Robbins, Lt.
City of San Bernardino
Police Department
466 W. 4th Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Lt. Robbins:
Thank you for your comments on the City's Enterprise Zone Draft EIR/EIS. Your
suggestions for corrections to pages 8-107 and 8-109 have been incorporated
and will appear in the final document.
4h;~4 ~;?f;
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
~~~(> C'Q
Stephen T. Lilburn
URS PrDject Manager
--.
STL:cmc
OTY HALL. 300 NORTH "0" STREET. RM. 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 ROEV UW
~ i
J
" ','
51. . 0# t"AlJfOllNlA-OfFIC 0# tHE GO't!RHOfI
GKlRGE llEUlCMt.. .... eo-
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
1_ 1&lTH S11lef
s.J.Q.a uS no. c:A. 95114
~
December 20. 1985
Sarah Knecht
San Bernardino City.
300 N. D Street
San Bernardino. CA. 92418
Subject: City of San Bernardino Enterprise Zone
SCHIf 85042912
Dear ',Is. Knecht:
'!be State Clear1nghouse sul:m1tted the above named draft Fnv1ronmental Impact.
Report (Em) to selected state agencies for review. '!he review per10d 13
closed and the ('1'YTmf>'lta of the individual agency(ies) ls(are) enclosed.
Also, on the enclosed Notice of CaDpletion, the Clear1nghouse has checked
which agencies have camnented. Pleaae review the Notice of Canpletion to
ensure that your ccmnent pa~ 13 CC1ilplete. If' the package 1.5 not 1n
order, please not1!'y the State Clear1ngbouse 1mDediately. Your eight digit
State Clear1ngbouse lJI.lIIlber :!Should be used :!So that we rm:y reply pranptly.
Please note that recent legislation requires that. a responsible agency or
other publ1c agency shall only make substantive ('''''''''''nts on a project which .
are with1n the area of tl-..e agency's expert1se or which relate to activities
which that agency IllUSt carr:r out or approve. (AB 2583. Ch. 1514, Stats.
1984.)
'!bese t"nIl1TlPTlta are forwarded for your use 1n preparing your final EIR. If
you need mre 1nfonnat1on or clar1t'ication. we suggest you contact the
c..,....rrt:1r..g agency at your earliest conven1ence.
Please contact Peggy Osborn at 916/445~613 1f' you have any questions
regarding the environmental renew process. ;
STAFF :1
ROUTING "
FAS,__I
o,A'_i
V,B._.I
A:L._ii
Q,w._:i
E.G._l~
G.G'_j
K,M._
II,B._I
II.F._j
M,N,_
R.R. _
s:w._
V.R
S1ncerely .
-r-"/': /c:?,~. .;,
'/ -::;:::7:f~t (;:;n-/~~iJ/f.f'.
John B. Chan1an "
Chief Deputy Director
Of'f'ice of Planning and Res~
co: Resources Agency
00 ~@~~W~ ill)
DEe 231985
CITY PLANNING Li., n.., :.1ENT
SAN BERNARDINO, CA
Fnclosures
. FlLE_
'.~ ... '. '
STATE OF CAUfORNtA-8USINESS.TRANSPORTATlOh.....O HOUSING AGENCY
GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN. Gtwernor
December 2, 1985
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re: State Departme~t of Commerce Comments on
Enterprise Zone Application Draft EIR _
City of San Bernardino (N052)
Dear Ms. Saul:
The State Department of Commerce has reviewed the Draft
Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") filed with your Final Enter-
prise Zone Application and submits these comments on the adequacy
of the Draft EIR.
The project description does not include a statement
briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR as required by
Section l5124(d) of the CEQA Guidelines. This statement should
be included and should state that the Department of Commerce will
use this EIR in its review of the enterprise zone project.
.'
With respect to sewage collection, treatment and dis-
posal, the Final Application for Enterprise Zone Designation
states that the City is "currently running under a cease and
desist order for odor." (Final Application at p. 2.) The Draft
EIR, however. does not mention or discuss this cease and desist
order. This inconsistency between the Final Application and the
Draft EIR should be clarified in the final EIR.
The Department of Commerce appreciates this opportunity
to submit comments on your Draft EIR. Please give our comments
consideration in preparing the Final ErR and completing the
environmental review process. You should be aware that if the
project is to be approved, you must submit the following docu-
ments to the Department of Commerce by February 3, 1986: cer-
tified Final EIR, Notice of Determination, written findings, if
applicable, and a resolution approving the project.
Glenda Saul
December 2, 1985
Page 2
RPS10/San Bernadino
If you have any questions regarding the environmental
review of enterprise zone applications, please contact Richard
Shanahan, an attorney with Kronick, Moskovitz. Tiedemann &
Girard, the Department's environmental consultants for the
enterprise zone program, at (916) 444-8028.
hristy Campbel
Director
CMC: jwb
~~l
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAUL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
January 7, 1986
Christy Campbell Walters
Di rector
State Department of Commerce
1121 "L" Street, Suite 600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ms. Walters:
Thank you for your comments to the City of San Bernardino's Enterprise Zone
Draft EIR/EIS.
Regarding your first comment on the statement describing the intended uses of
the EIR, Section 3, "Project Description, Purpose and Need for Action," has
been modified to reflect your concern. Section 2.1, "Project Description"
(page 2-1) states in the first four paragraphs the function of the EIR in the
application and its intended use by the Department of Commerce. The text has
been modified and includes a listing of intended approvals associated with the
EIR.
A reference to the cease and desist order for odor at the waste water treat-
ment facility has been added to the document on page 8-96. This is consistent
with the application and reflects the fact that facility expansion is being
undertaken to alleviate the problem at this time.
~atf?~tf
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
~~--eQ
Stephen . L,lburn
URS Project Manager
-
STL:cmc
CITY HALL. 300 NORTH "D" STREET. RM. 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW
h. e m 0 ran dum
To
. State Clearinghouse
Office of Planning & Research
l~OO 10th Street
Sacramento, CA 9581~
Date. December 13, 1985
Attention Peggy Osborn
file. 08-215-6.658/14.104
SCH#85042912
from DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAnON
District 8
Subject, DEIR/DEIS - For the Ci ty of San Bernard ino Appl ication for
Designation of an Enterprise Zone
We have reviewed the above-referenced document and request
consideration of the following:
o Table 8-24 should be corrected to show actual conditions at
Baseline and Institution Road using trip generation numbers.
Trips should be assigned to existing and future ramps and
impacts addressed with possible mitigations.
o Mitigation measures for freeway impact other than widening
should be addressed including ramp meters, carpooling, bicycle
facilities, and development and utilization of local arterial
street network.
Should any work be required within State highway right of way,
Caltrans would be a responsible agency and may require that
certain mitigation measures be provided as a condition.of permit
issuance.
We would like a copy of the final dQcument as soon as it is
available.
If you have any questions, please contact Marie J. Petry at
(714) 383-4024.
-9; J}. C{~
GUY G. VISBAL
Chief, Transportation Planning
Branch A
'.
MP:df
cc: FDHusum, Plan Coordination Unit, DOTP
File (2)
\0 \?,~\%\I~I@, ~
~ ote 1819'05 0115e
5t.a\O g1.~..!1gb
~i
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAuL
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
January 7, 1986
Guy G. Visbul
Chief Transportation Planning
Ca ltrans
District 8
247 W. 3rd Street
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Dear Mr. Visbal:
Thank you for your comments to the City of San Bernardino's Enterprise Zone
Draft EIR/EIS. The transportation-related analysis of the report was prepared
by BSI Consultants. They have responded to those comments and made correc-
tions to the document as required. Their response is presented in the
January 6, 1986 letter attached. These changes will be incorporated in the
document as stated and will appear in the final EIR along with a copy of your
comment.
/~~~ ~c<f
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
Stephen T. Lilburn
URS Project Manager
STL: cmc
CITY HALL. 300 NORTH NON STREET. RM. 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW
DSi CONSULTANTS, INC.
Consultants to Governmental Agencies
Engineering
Planning
Architecture
Management
.January 6, 1986
Mr. Steve Li1burn
URS Company
412 West Hospitality Lane
Suite 208
San Bernardino, California 92408
SUB.JECT: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS - DEIR/DEIS FOR CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO APPLICATION rOR DESIGNATION or AN ENTERPRISE ZONE
Dear Mr. Li1burn:
The purpose of this letter is to respond to comments made
upon review of the transportation section of the subject
DEIR/DEIS. The comments are referenced prior to the response
in order to facilitate understanding. In addition, revised
text pages are attached, with revised sections underlined.
COMMENT 1: "Table 8-24 should be corrected to show actual
conditions at Baseline and Institution Road using
trip generation numbers. Trips should be assigned
to existing and future ramps and impacts
addressed with possible mitigations."
RESPONSE: (INSERT 8.8.1.5, paragraph 2, line 1.)
Table 8-24 lists existing average daily traffic (ADT)
volumes on all existing 1-215 access ramps to/from the study
area. The source of this data was 1984 Ra.p Volu.es on the
California State FreeNay Syste. - District 8, compiled in
.June, 1985, by the Division of Traffic Engineering of the
State of California Business, Transportation and Housing
Agency Department of Transportation.
Table 8-24
INTERSTATE 215 STUDY AREA ACCESS
Northbound Southbound
Arterial Access On Off On Off
2nd Street 5000 9000 7800 None
3rd Street None None None 2950
4th Street 4250 None 6700 None
6th Street None 6000 None 5200
10th Street 2300 None None None
Baseline Street None 4900 6700 None
State Route 259 None 21500 21500 None
Highland Avenue 260 2850 None None
27th Street 2600 2350 5200 2150
University Parkway 320 3950 2800 330
Institution/Palm 190 650 780 820
1415 East Seventeenth Street. Santa Ana, California 92701 . (714) 558-1952
A Berryman & Stephenson Industries Company
Mr. Steve Lilburn
.January 6, 1986
Page Two
(INSERT 8.8.3.2, paragraph 1, line 6.)
At Baseline Street in the vicinity of 1-215, ultimate ADT
traffic volumes were forecasted to remain generally constant
with existing conditions - with increased traffic carried by
the State Route 30 extension in the study area. However,
the existing volume to capacity ratios exceed 0.90 and
indicate a need to program additional capacity improvements.
In addition to the recommended TSM measures, a feasibility
study should be conducted to evaluate the potential for
constcuction of a southbound off ramp and an additional
westbound travel lane on Baseline Street between the subject
ramp and Mount Vernon Avenue.
At Institution Road/Palm Avenue interchange with 1-215,
ultimate ADT may be anticipated to increase significantly.
ADT on Cajon Boulevard around Institution Road/Palm Avenue
was forecasted to increase from 4,200 existing to 27,100
ultimate - an increase of 545 percent. Application of the
subject percent increase to the existing ramp volumes result
in the following ultimate projections (rounded):
1,225 ADT for northbound on ramp;
4,200 ADT for northbound off ramp:
5,030 ADT for southbound on ramp: and
5,300 ADT for southbound off ramp.
Although all forecasted ramp ADT
existing capacities, provision of
should be considered in view of
anticipated to be generated within
adjacent to this interchange.
volumes are less than
two lanes per on ramp
the heavy truck traffic
the industrial land uses
COMMENT 2: "Mitigation measures for freeway impact other
than widening should be addressed including ramp
meters, carpooling, bicycle facilities and devel-
opment and utilization of local street network."
RESPONSE:
(INSERT 8.8.3.1, paragraph 1, line 1.)
Freeway widening to provide one additional travel lane in
each direction would increase capacity by 30,000 vehicles
per day. This would improve the V/C ratio from 1.22 (i.e.,
22 percent in excess of LOS D capacity - LOS D is considered
most appropriate for freeways) to 0.97.
n.~
u~1
---. ='
Mr. Steve Lilburn
.January 6, 1986
Page Three
The 0.97 V/C ratio implies an average daily operation which
is very near unstable flow. During the peak periods 1-215
may be expected to provide unstable flow, with low operating
speeds and momentary stoppages. Such operation typically
leads to freeway traffic diversion onto the local street
system in driver attempts to avoid congestion. Ramp meters
have been demonstrated to smooth unstable flow operations
and are recommended for study area on ramps.
In view of the forecasted ADT volume to capacity ratios for
ultimate general plan buildout with arterial upgrade
mitigations, the diversion of freeway traffic onto the local
street system is clearly not acceptable. Other alternative
mitigation measures for freeway impact may include the
provision of a bicycle facility parallel to the 1-215
(estimated to cost $40,000 per mile for an off-road
facility, possibly along the A.T. & S.F. Railroad tracks):
and carpooling.
Carpooling may best be encouraged via prov~s~on of separate
lanes for high occupancy vehicle (HOV) use. HOV lanes are
most acceptable when they are newly constructed travel lanes
rather than conversions of existing lanes. The potential
capacity increase is dependent upon the number of buses and
car/vanpools, their seating capacities, and other factors.
Evaluations of other freeway transit/carpool lanes indicate
an increase in the number of carpools and an increase in
transit use. Such increases effectively consolidate more
person trips into fewer vehicle trips, preserving freeway
capacity and mitigating through traffic diversion onto the
local street system. Thus it is recommended that the EIS
process be initiated as soon as possible to provide for
construction of additional freeway lanes for HOV use.
IN CLOSING
If any questions arise upon your review of these responses,
please call me at (714) 558-1952.
Sincerely,
BSI
.Jame
Vice
0Si
proposed 'Enterprise Zone (Subar81 A) on Ii Street. Mountain Area Transit
shares the Greyhound facility.
Access to the Southern California Rapid Transit District system, the major bus
system in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, with connections to virtually all
the communities the Los Angeles basin, is by way of Line 496. The terminus of
the line is a loop in downtown San Bernardino on the eastern boundary of the
proposed Enterprise Zone. In addition, Omnitrans provides fixed-route
service, dlal-a-ride, and dial-a-lift service with connections within San
Bernardino County. The dial~a-ride service operates as a shared taxi; dial-a-
lift is designed for the handicapped. Most of the fixed-route buses are llft-
equipped to provide handicapped service. Fixed-route headways vary throughout
the day, generally providing service at 30-minute intervals during the peak
periods, and 60-mlnute headways during non-peak periods. It is important to
note that Omnitrans fixed-route busses pick up passengers at nondesignated
stops -- the bus will stop at the safest closest corner to the passenger. The
nondesignated courtesy stops are in addition to scheduled stops at locations
indicated with blue and white rectangular signposts. Public transit bus
routes and facilities are noted in Figure 8-17.
8.8.1.4 Air
Ontario International Airport is located approximately 20 miles west of the
City of San Bernardino. North of and adjacent to 1-10, this airport facility
is most frequently used by cOllll1uters to and from the San Bernardino area.
Ontario Airport is. rapidly growing in importance as an alternative to air
travel into Los Angeles International Airport and Orange County (John Wayne)
International Airport.
Although not directly related to the proposed Enterprise Zone, it should be
noted that Norton Air Force Base is located just north of 1-10, in the
southeast portion of the City.
8.8.1.5 Arterials
The circulation system within the proposed Enterprise Zone is bisected and
dominated by 1-215. As such, within the study area, access to the regional
highway system is first obtained through access to 1-215.
~ 8 21 lists the arterial aeeess paints an~ the Move eptiens a~aili~le fer
-i-n5-1ritMn--the~1KJy area, and re"Jeals that.~lthough there are numerous
access points to the regional system through the study area, the full range of
movements is absent from most, greatly reducing overall access. That lack is
made more significant because the missing movements are almost all related to
access to/from the west.
8-71
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
.
.
I
I
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
Table 8-24
INTERSTATE 215 STUDY AREA ACCESS
"'-..,
'" Arterial Access
2nd Street
3rd Street
4th Street
6th Street
lOth Street
Baseline Street
13th Street
State Route 259
Highland Av e
27th Str.
Uni ity Parkway
titution Road
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
This situation is due largely to the presence of a major rail facility, the
classification yard of the AT&SF, and the location of its main track, which
runs parallel to the freeway and Cajon Boulevard. The presence of the rail
line makes construction of freeway ramps to the west into the proposed
Enterprise Zone extremely difficult and has deterred such construction to
date. The 1-215 also inhibits local east-west traffic flow, with freeway
crossings limited to University Parkway, 27th Street, Highland Avenue,
Muscupiabe Drive, 16th Street, Basel ine Street, 9th Street, 5th Street, and
Rialto Avenue.
As noted in Table 8-24, poor access is provided to 1-215 and the regional
highway system for that part of the proposed Enterprise Zone west of the
freeway. Existing average daily traffic volumes within the propos~d
Enterprise lone are depicted in the Traffic Flow Hap shown in Figure 8-18.
Table 8-25 indicates existing volume to capacity (V/C) ratios.
8.8.2 PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
The process of estimating the amount of traffic generated by proposed land
uses is referred to as travel demand forecasting. Travel demand forecasting
is generilly comprised of trip generation, mode split, traffic distribution,
and route (or trip) assignment. Separate travel demand forecasts were
completed for existing plus the proposed Enterprise Zone project, and for
cumulative General Plan land use buildout within the proposed project area.
8.8.2.1 TriD Generation
To estimate the trip generation resulting from buildout of the proposed
Enterpri se Zone, and from ul t imate bulldout of the General Plan Land Use
Element within the proposed Enterprise Zone study area, the study area was
divided into five traffic analysis zones (TAl). TAZ delineation, illustrated
on Figure 8-19, was 'based on land use homogeneity, physical constraints, and
access characteristics.
8-73
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I:
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
system management lIIflasures may be provided. The alternative mitigations are
addressed below, in general order from most intensive to least intensive.
These measures will be implemented by the City as growth demands and the most
feasible will be selected following review of conditions as they change.
8.8.3.1 Freewav Widenlno
The ,revisien ef ene addltienal travel lane in eaGh direGtien If I 215 weuld
inercI3c ea,leity by Ipprexlmatcly 3Q,QQQ vehiEles per day. This weuld
till"" ~~! Life -,"IE lot;o r.OIIl 1.2e (i.!. t 22 percent in txeess ef level sf
u. .ice B capacity LaS B 13 e8l1sidcl"cd Illest apprepriate fer freeways) te
6.97. In view of the obvious need for widening, it is reconvnended that the
EIS process be initiated as soon as possible preceding the actual construc-
tion.
8.8.3.2 1-215 Interchanoes
The construction of an interchange at 5th Street has been considered in
concept by the City and Caltrans. However, no detailed analyses have been
conducted. In view of the lack of access to/from the proposed Enterprise Zone
area west of 1-215, it is recommended that detailed analyses be conducted to
document the feasibility of a partial interchange with southbound off and on
ramps at 5th Street. r~.thel, it i3 reeommclldcd that Ilstclltial IIIsdifieatislIS
.~ the Baseline iftteFEhange ~e e~alY3ted.
.
8.8.3.3 Maior Hiohwav Imorovements
This alternative mitigation involves a series of major capital investments in
widening the existing arterial highway system. The effectiveness of the
respective widening projects was calculated by V/C ratio analyses that
employed the increased capacity figures in comparison with forecasted average
dally traffic volumes associated with the proposed Enterprise Zone project and
the ultimate General Plan buildout (see Tables 8-35 and 8-36, respectively).
The recommended major highway Improvements generally consist of median
division for major arterials, although a need for the addition of single
travel lanes in each direction was identified on University Parkway and Cajon
Boulevard to serve adjacent Industrial uses. Median division may take the
form of double yellow lines with an approximate 4-foot spacing.
When medians are constructed on any arterial street, spacing between median
openings is reconvnended to be at least every 400 feet, with left-turn pocket
lengths designed to provide safe and efficient left-turn movements to existing
and projected future development In the immediate vicinity.
8.8.3.4 Hiohwav Transoortation Svstem Manaoement
This alternative is comprised of a series of relatively low-cost roadway and
operational improvements to make more efficient use of the existing highway
system. Recommended components of this alternative include traffic signal
8-84
,
CITY OF SAN. BEnNARDINO - MEMORANDUM
To Vincent Bautista, Principal Planner
Subject Review of Draft EIR/EIS. Enterprise Zone
From Peter Liu. Traffic Engineer
Date December 13, 1985
File No. 13.99
Approved
Date
We have reviewed the subject traffic
Consultants, Inc., and are basically
and recommandations.
impact analysis report prepared by BSI
in agreement with the consultant's findings
The report should also include some statement addressing the status of Foothill
Freeway (Rte 30), primarily the sections between the cities of LaVerne and San
Bernardino and the 30/215 interchange and their overall benefits to the area
transportation system and provide relief to traffic congestion on local streets.
The maps should also be modified to include the proposed alignment of Rte 30.
Thanks for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject report.
ROGER G. HARDGRAVE
Directo of Public Works/Chief Engineer
,
PHL:ps
"
fffi~~B;~~
:OEC: ~ :11B65.
. -
//1/
(.ry ON rHI=M~
~i
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
GLENDA SAu~
EXEClITIVE DIRECTOR
January 16, 1986
Peter H. Liu
Traffic Engineer
San Bernardino Public Works
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Mr. Liu:
Thank you for your comments to the City's Enterprise Zone Draft EIR/EIS. A
discussion of the status of the Foothill Freeway (Route 30) and its overall
benefit to the area has been included on page 8-69 of the report. The
proposed route has also been identified on Figure 8-16.
~4M
Glenda Saul
Executive Director
Redevelopment Agency
~x (?~
Stephen . Lilburn
URS Project Manager
STL:cmc
CITY HALL. 300 NORTH NO" STREET. RM, 320 . SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418 . PHONE: (714) 383-5081
TELEX: 6711291 RDEV UW