The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About29-Development Services MAYOR & COMMON COUNCIL MEETING BACKUP MEETING DATE: May 21, 2001 Mayor and Common Council / GROUP MEETING: Community Development Commission DEPUTY: Linda Sutherland *** No backup materials are included for the following items. *** ITEM # STATUS 29 Laid Over (Ordinance only) 30 Continued to June 18, 2001 Sl Continued to June 4, 2001 (Working Partnership Agreement) S2 Presentation Only - No Action Taken . " CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: James Funk, Director Dept: Development servicesD R L~',~ 1 4 L May 1,2001 111,,'111<41 Subject: Final Environmental Impact Report, GPA No. 01-01 and DCA No. 01-03 for the HUB Project at the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Ave. & Interstate 10. Date: MCC Date: May 21, 2001 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None Recommended Motion: That the Public Hearing be closed and the Mayor and Common Council: . Adopt the resolutions that certify the Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, . Adopt the Statements of Overriding Consideration, . Certify the Traffic Impact Analysis, and . Adopt General Plan Amendment No. 01.01 based on the Findings of Fact in the Planning Commission staff report, and; . Adopt the ordinance approving Development Code Amendment No. 01-03, based on the Findings of Fact in the Planning Commission staff report. ~s~ Contact person: Margaret Park, EDA Phone: 663-1044 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Resolution, Ordinance Ward: 3 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: S/ii/b/ Agenda Item No. J..1 Exhibits 2-5 of Item #29 filed in adjacent folder. ., , ' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Final Environmental Impact Report, Traffic Impact Analysis, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03 for the HUB Project Mayor and Common Council meeting of May 21, 2001 Owner: Various Applicant: Economic Development Agency Hopkins/Pearlman Development 201 North "E" Street, Suite 301 San Bernardino, CA 92401 BACKGROUND: On July 12, 1999, the Community Development Commission approved a Cooperation Agreement with the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) that authorized the City's Redevelopment Agency to conduct redevelopment activities in the IVDA project area. The Hopkins/Pearlman Development Group entered into an Exclusive Right to Negotiate with the Economic Development Agency on August 2,1999. Although they are included in the HUB projec1, In N Out Burger will be entering into a separate Owner's Participation Agreement with the Agency for development of their new restaurant. This redevelopment project, if all entitlements and documents are approved, will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of commercial space on 24.5 acres located at the northwest corner of Tippecanoe A venue and the San Bernardino Freeway (1- 10) within the CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club) Land Use District. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of a 130,400- square-foot Sam's Club with an unattended gas station, a 45,000-square-foot general retail building, the relocation ofIn N Out Burger from its present location at the northwest corner of Rosewood Drive and Tippecanoe Avenue farther to the north, and two pad buildings measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet each. Phase II will consist of buildings totaling 70,000 square feet, including two 25,000- to 30,000-square-foot retail buildings and one pad building measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet. Potential tenan1s of these buildings are undefined at this time. In order to accommodate the proposed commercial uses, existing on-site structures will be cleared from the site. Persons currently residing within the limits of the project site will be relocated. A general plan amendment and development code amendment are also requested to modify text in both documents to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR.3, Commercial Regional- Tri-City land use district with a conditional use permit. These amendments propose to allow new drive-thrus in the CR-3 only on properties that have frontage on Tippecanoe Avenue and that are south of Hospitality Lane. Currently, both the General Plan and , ' FEIR for the HUB Page 2 of2 Development Code restrict the placement of drive-thru restaurants to the portion of the CR-3 land use district that is south ofInterstate 10. At its meeting of April 17, 2001, the Planning Commission considered the General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the EIR and all entitlements on a 7 to 0 vote. Commissioners Coute, Derry, Durr, Garcia, Sauerbrun, Thrasher and Welch were present and Commissioners Enciso, Lockett and Ramirez were absent. Refer to the Planning Commission staff report, Exhibit 2, for a complete discussion of the project. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None; the Agency paid all General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment and Environmental Impact Report application fees. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council close the public hearing and: . Certify Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH #2000081074 . Adopt the Statements of Overriding Consideration . Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program . CertifY the Traffic Impact Analysis . Adopt General Plan Amendment No. 01-01, based on the Findings of Fact in the Planning Commission staff report. . Adopt Development Code Amendment No. 01-03, based on the Findings of Fact in the Planning Commission staff report. Exhibits: I 2 3 4 5 6 Location Map Conceptual Site Plan* Planning Commission Staff Report* Final Environmental Impact Report* Statements of Overriding Consideration* Resolution for Final Environmental Impact Report and General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 Resolution for Traffic Impact Analysis Ordinance for Development Code Amendment No. 01.03 7 8 * Distributed under separate cover (May 5, 2001) '-' " EXHIBIT 1 c c u 0 B s 0 0 W U W 0 .~ S -' CJ 0 0 0 '3^'f/3 03ddlJ. 0: c a: w ii: lD t-:J: Ii: o z Z ..J 't - ..., {5 ir III o :r ...i ll.. Z <C :a: ii: a: <C a: w C Z ~ 8nU8AV U8WJ818M ~=7V 2 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN, AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01 FOR THE HUB PROJECT. 3 4 5 SECTION I. RECITALS 6 (a) WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council adopted the General Plan for the 7 City of San Bernardino by Resolution No. 89-159 on June 2, 1989; and 8 (b) WHEREAS, on August 17, 2000, the Environmental Review Committee 9 determined that the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement to construct 268,600 10 square foot retail project called "The HUB", and a General Plan Amendment and Development 11 Code Amendment to allow drive-thru restaurants in the Commercial Regional- TriCity (CR-3) 12 land use district could have a significant effect on the environment and thus warranted the 13 preparation of an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the California Environmental Quali 14 Act (CEQA); and 15 (c) WHEREAS, the City held a public scoping meeting on August 23, 2000 to solicit 16 public comment on the preparation of the Draft ElR, and 17 (d) WHEREAS, the Notice ofIntent of the City to prepare a Draft Environmental 18 Impact Report was made known to the public, responsible agencies and other interested persons for their concerns and comments from August 18, 2000 to September 18, 2000 as required by 19 20 CEQA; and (e) WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared to address the 21 22 HUB Project which includes a Disposition and Development Agreement to construct a 268,600 23 square foot retail project called "The HUB", and a General Plan Amendment and Development 24 Code Amendment to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR-3; and 25 -1- S:~'4I5-21"'loaIlMMlU'_:UOO .' (f) WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was made available to the public, responsible agencies . 2 and other interested persons for their review and comment from February 2, 2001 to March ]9, 3 200] as required by CEQA; and 4 (g) WHEREAS, verbal and written comments were received on the Draft EIR; and 5 (h) WHEREAS, these comments were responded to both orally and in writing as 6 required by CEQA; and 7 (i) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on 8 April] 7,200] in order to receive public testimony and written and oral comments on the HUB 9 Project which includes a Disposition and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment 10 No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03; and 11 (j) WHEREAS, the Deve]opment Services Department Staff Report dated April 17, 12 200], which summarizes the potentia] effect of the HUB Project which includes text 13 amendments to the General Plan and the Development Code and the Disposition and 14 Development Agreement to construct approximately 268,600 square feet of commercia] retail 15 space in two phases as identified in the Draft EIR and the FEIR were reviewed by the Planning 16 Commission; and 17 (k) WHEREAS, the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Plan was reviewed by the 18 Planning Commission in compliance with CEQA; and 19 (I) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after receiving public testimony, 20 recommended certification of the Environmenta] Impact Report, adoption ofthe Facts, Findings 21 and Statements of Overriding Consideration, adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan, 22 adoption of the Genera] Plan Amendment and adoption of the Deve]opment Code Amendment; 23 and 24 (m) WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council conducted a noticed public hearing 25 on May 2], 200] and fully reviewed and considered the Draft EIR, Fina] EIR, Mitigation -2- ~'4l5-1I""I_NMlP_'" Monitoring Plan, Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration, the Planning . 2 Division staff reports and the recommendation of the Planning Commission. 3 SECTION II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT 4 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT THE 5 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL HEREBY CERTIFY: 6 A. The Enviromnental Impact Report (EIR) for the HUB Disposition and 7 Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development 8 Code Amendment No. 01-03 has been completed in compliance with the 9 California Enviromnental Quality Act. The FEIR (including the Mitigation 10 Monitoring Plan) and all the evidence and information contained therein and the 11 Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration are on file with the 12 City Clerk's Office. Attachment A (Text Changes to the General Plan), 13 Attachment B (Text Changes to the Development Code) and Attachment C (Site 14 Vicinity Map) are attached and incorporated herein by reference; 15 B. The E1R was presented to the Mayor and Common Council who have reviewed 16 and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to adopting the Disposition 17 and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and 18 Development Code Amendment No. 01-03. 19 C. The Final EIR has identified all significant enviromnental effects of the 20 Disposition and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 21 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03 and there are no known 22 potentially significant enviromnental effects not addressed in the Final EIR. 23 D. Although the Final EIR identifies certain significant enviromnental effects that 24 would result if the Disposition and Development Agreement, General Plan 25 Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. Ol-OJ are -3- ~\llWI.oI_MNlP_J.oI" 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 E. adopted, all significant effects that can feasibly be avoided or mitigated will be avoided or mitigated by the implementation of the mitigation measures as set' forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Final EIR. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan and all information contained therein is included in the FEIR and incorporated herein by reference; Potential mitigation measures and other project alternatives not incorporated into or adopted as part of the Disposition and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03 were rejected as infeasible, based on specific economic, social or other considerations as set forth in the Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration. The Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration and all the evidence and information contained therein are on file in the City Clerk's Office and incorporated herein by reference; The Mayor and Common Council have given great weight to the significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. The Mayor and Common Council find that the significant unavoidable adverse impacts are clearly outweighed by the economic, social, cultural and other benefits of the Disposition and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03, as set forth in the Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration. The findings contained in the Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration with respect to the significant impacts identified in the Final EIR are true and correct, and are based upon substantial evidence in the record, including documents comprising the Final EIR. F. G. -4- ~'4IHI.uraKNNllP_).4K I, H. The Final Environmental Impact Report, Mitigation Monitoring Plan and the Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration reflect the independent review, analysis and judgment of the City of San Bernardino. . 2 3 4 5 SECTION m. FINDINGS 6 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF 7 THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO THAT: 8 A. The proposed text amendment to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR-3 land use 9 district is internally consistent with the General Plan in that it meets Objective 1.17 which 10 encourages the City to continue to develop region-serving uses in the CR-3 while allowing uses 11 that are of benefit to travelers. 12 B. The proposed text amendment to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR-3 land use 13 district would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of 14 the City in that the drive-thru restaurants will only be allowed on parcels that front on 15 Tippecanoe Avenue, south of Hospitality Lane and will be developed as part of the overall HUB 16 project, thus ensuring safe access, consistent architecture and a convenient location within the 17 entire project. All development will be in accordance with all mitigation measures identified in 18 the EIR and contained within the Mitigation Monitoring Program and any subsequent 19 approvals/permits required to implement the project. 20 C. The proposed text amendment to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR-3 land use 21 district would not affect the balance ofland uses within the City in that the amendment only 22 allows an additional use in the CR-3 land use district for limited parcels and does not change the 23 underlying land use designation. 24 25 -5- S.~IOWI.nIIlllRMMIlI'_~ SECTION N. CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT . 2 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the Mayor 3 and Common Council that the Environmental Impact Report is certified, the Facts, Findings and 4 Statements of Overriding Consideration are adopted and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan is 5 adopted. 6 SECTION V. AMENDMENTS 7 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON 8 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO THAT: 9 A. The Land Use Element of the General Plan of the City of San Bernardino is 10 amended by changing the text of and adding text to Policy 1.17.1 0 and Table 4 for the HUB 11 Project site. A copy of the text for Policy 1.17.10 and Table 4 is attached hereto as Attachment 12 A and incorporated herein by reference. The 24.5-acre HUB Project site is shown on the Site 13 Vicinity Map 1hat is attached hereto as Attachment C and incorporated herein by reference. 14 B. The text amendments described in Section V., Subsection A., are designated as 15 General Plan Amendment No. 01-0 I and shall take effect upon the approval of the HUB Project 16 (et al) by the Mayor and Common Council. 17 SECTION VI. TEXT CHANGE 18 This resolution and the amendment affected by it shall be inserted in an appropriate 19 location in the Land Use Element of the General Plan which has been previously adopted and 20 approved by the Mayor and Common Council and which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. 21 SECTION VII. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION 22 The Plarming Division is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the 23 County of San Bernardino Clerk of the Board of Supervisors certifying the City's compliance 24 with the California Environmental Quality Act in preparing and adopting the Environmental 25 Impact Report, Facts, Findings and Statements of Overriding Consideration and Mitigation -6- &~'<I$-21"'I\ElJ;MMIll'_~ 1 Monitoring Plan. 2 Clearinghouse. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A copy ofthe Notice of Determination will be forwarded to the State -7- ~'GS-2I./1.IIIIIl.IooUolal'_'''' 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN, AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01 FOR THE HUB PROJECT. 3 4 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and 5 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the 6 day of ,2001, by the following vote to wit: 7 Council Members: Aves Navs Abstain Absent 8 ESTRADA 9 LIEN 10 MCGINNIS 11 SCHNETZ 12 SUAREZ ANDERSON 13 MC CAMMACK 14 15 16 Rachel G. Clark, City Clerk 17 18 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of ,2001. 19 20 21 Judith Valles, Mayor City of San Bernardino Approved as to form and Legal Content: 22 James F. Penman 23 City Attorney 24 25 .8. S"""'-io&WCA~.~I"'lllllll._P_)"" ATTACHMENT A c. Reltion-Servin2 Commercial: Tri-Citv/Commercenter and Club Area Obiective 1.17 Continue and expand the Tri-City/Commercenter and Club areas as region- serving mixed use centers; capitalizing on their location along the Interstate 10 corridor, and establishing a well-defined linkage to the City's major commercial and industrial districts and residential neighborhoods. Policies It shall be the policy of the City of San Bernardino to: Permitted Uses 1.17.1 0 Permit a diversity of region-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants, (elmlllwag ElfP:ll thros in the TFi C~'/Ce_eretlllter area enly), hotels/motels, ware- house/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar uses in areas designated as "Commercial Regional-Tri-City/Commercenter and Club" area (CR-3) (11.1). 1.17.11 Permit research and development, high technology, and other business park uses, adjacent to and integrated with existing similar uses (11.1). 1.17.12 Allow for the development of outdoor dining (11.1). - " . .' .gQIX. CG-4 Commercial Regional CR-l CR-2 CR-3 CR-4 Commercial Heavy Q{ Location(s) TABLE 4 (ConL) PrindooJ Uses Development Intensity l~sllY "Theme/Specialty Centers": lJmlted CG-l uses; emphasis on FAR 1.0 Mount Vernon Avenue "specIa1ty'" retail, restaurants, between 4th and 8th Streets, theaters, cultural fadllties. and Railroad Depot and adjacent sodal service uses and excluding properties, and others as sub- furniture stores, "chain" supermarkets, sequently defined. and drugstores, and building materials and supplies. Centra1 Oty and Inland Center Malls Downtown OepMtment store anchors with suppoz:.ting retail, restaurants, enter- tainment, banlcs, and similar Uses. Government, professional. and Commercial and office: corporate offices; hotel and convention FAR 3.0 fadllties; entertainment; cultural/historic; Residential: 54 du/ supporting retail uses; restaurants; gross acre. and residential (market-rate and ResIdential vertically senior/congregate care). Integrated with commercial: +FAR 1.0. Senior/Senior Congregate Care: 108 du/acre maximum. FAR 1.5 Tri-City /Commercenter and Corporate offices, research and "Oub" Areas development, hotel and motel, restaurants (erfel~ atilt tIttua in tI~ 1'.1 wi)' I~ eJsmtor ~RlA flt'IIy)-, entertainment, warehouse retail. and supporting retail. Commercial: 0.7 Office and overnight accommodations: FAR 3.0 R&D: FAR 15 Auto Plaza Area Automobile sales and related uses. Locations throughout the Oty. FAR 0.7 CommercIal uses that require out- door sales, display. and/or storage areas (e.g., auto and truck repair fadllties, lumbeJyards, and related building materials and hardware sales, plant nurseries), light Industrial manufacturing and storage facilities, exdudes typical neighborhood commercial uses. FAR 0.7 1-29 - ATTACHMENT B COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 K. CR-3 (COMMERCIAL REGIONAL-TRI-CITY/CLUB) DISTRICT This district is intended to permit a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants (ellieklEliBg E1ri"'e lIIfIIs iB the Tri CRy/Cemmereenter area enly), (drive-thrus south of 1-10 and adjacent to Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and 1-10 only) hotels/motels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar uses. L. CR-4 (COMMERCIAL REGIONAL-AUTO PLAZA) DISTRICT This district is intended to provide for the development of new and used automobile and truck sales and related retail and service uses in the Auto Plaza area. M. CCS-l (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH) DISTRICT This district is intended to permit general retail type uses. Standards are contained in Chapter 19.13. N. CCS-2 (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH) DISTRICT This district is intended to permit service commercial uses. Standards are contained in Chapter 19.13. O. CCS-3 (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH-FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL) DISTRICT This district is intended to provide for the flood control channel. Standards are contained in Chapter 19.13. P. CH (COMMERCIAL HEAVY) DISTRICf This district is intended to accommodate automobile and truck sales and repair facilities, lumberyards, and related hardware sales, plant nurseries, light industrial manufacturing and storage facilities, and similar uses requiring extensive outdoor or indoor space for their sales, service, and/or storage, excluding neighborhood commercial uses. Q. OIP (OFFICE INDUSTRIAL PARK) DISTRICT This district is intended to establish the Waterman Avenue corridor and other appropriate areas as distinctive office industrial parks and corporate centers serving City and regional needs. Supporting retail/commercial services may be located in Corporate Office Industrial Park structures. ll-62 7/97 tI) U.... Q Q U tI) U- U QUQ U == U Q Q U ='... U ='", U QUQ'U U ='.... U U It> QUQ U ='- QUQ U "e; U QUQU U~ "", U QUQU U ~ [I.l ;: f;I;:l ".... 0 rg U UUU QUQU = U ... , .. ~ ." ,,'" UU QUQU c Eo< u;:O; .. .. Eo< c .... .. ~ 0", Q Q ~ U ~ ff ~ 0_ Q Q 'S. f;r;, U '" 0 0 == Eo< ~ Q Q c .. [I.l i .... ..;l [I.l ..0 Eo< ].;;l .. oii_ .......0 " U c iil ~6 0 ]'~ . .. ~ "'-S el ,g Eo< g.~.... C ..0 0... e-Cl.<> 8 [I.l U ... n ~ ... .S '" .... Cl. -S .. !! c Q "Co__ .. .. .;;: -S Cl. = .. .. l ~ .!l o._!..o ~ c: ~ -.= 0 0'- Q .~ IS. Et ai .. ~ "".~ Cl. := - "0 ~ -5 0 <> l~~~ i::: ~ ~].Ef .~ !l .. .. 0 '" :l;E ~.. ~ - .. .g.g.: " .. c .~ - I ~ J en.g "C ~l~~ c 13 - :5 .~ .. '" 6 Cl. [;l = ... "'0 = ~ ~.~ .. .. .. UUu >bO .= ~ . ~ ~ -;;.e ." Q-s :;' ,,].=.....-s 'C ..... ..... u .... ~ ;g:c" ~~~ii .. >- ~ ..:= :g :;j .. "'e 8 ~ 0 .. J!l:....s..-S '" U f-< ;::: ~ u..9 ..0 ... c "O....ll:g- ~~~ e .. - .5 ~ ";; ~ ~ ~"'.9g ~.g~'; . > ....e'il'll 11 .... - ... !l'S 11 .. r~~~~ e f-< 'il'" -S :3 ~ 'ls.~ B - ; U ]~~ti ~ -< - 'g ;11:;; s ao~.!! 0 l:! ~ ~:.... - e ~ 1Xl&:~~~ l!lj~ , ~~.s~~'" uu1S._ - ~ '" 'J3~.8~8 ZllO:=' 'ls ::> ~~ ~ ~ 00~~.9'~ 1 ~ Q IXlU 'il:.... ....;NM~.n ~8lS~~ "':M~~ Z :s u Q !!' ~ ~ ~ a:l U fi: - ~ ll.. a:l ~ U ; Eo< a:l - ~ ..J < ; Eo< a:l ~ - ~ z < ..J < - ~ ~ u .., 'C. alN ;:) ",N U U_ III - ::c - == T>< "" o ::c >< >< >< .., ~ )( -K U N ~ >< K U - c:i: >C Q ~ r:Q < Eo< - 8 :z U ", o 0:: < o :z . < ~ Iii l! ..J .- < rg _al u- w"3 ""'" ",< >< .. .. >< >< J fa rJ l! ~~ ~ c: u u ..9::: l'l 0 .D 'Q!;lU2 .cc-C 8 u .!!! .s _ .!:! 1:: :I <..J<< <lti do .. >< >< .. .. .. .. >< .. .. >< .. >< .. .. .. >< >< >< >< .. .. .. >< .. .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ E ~ o.J:! -0:: ,g:~~~2 ~:l!.!! iF c .. Ii . o :J i; ~ ~~adi!S lIla:ci:t..: coJ\Rt l.CIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 .. .. >< .. .. >< >< .. .. >< >< .. >< .. .. >< .. ><.. >< .. .. >< >< >< .. >< >< >< .. .. >< >< >< .. .. .. I< alI()()( .. -.. >< ><.. >< .. >< )( I< all( )( I< >< >< l< >< )II( x)II()( >< .. >< >< >< >< .. ><.. >< >< .. )( )()II( )( >< >< >< >< .. ".. .. ><.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. >< .. >< >< .. ><.. >< >< c g~ ~ .s! ~ '0 = rl..~ ~ i fj~.' '~ng ~~.p:,g;;g. all .... " .= 'g 1<O.Cl 0...... ~ .0._,,!1 ... ::CooNO_~ .:: on,.. "'::C=~t:lelll!c "" u_, _ N ~' "S! -:: IIJ .!I s::- cob r \ b Ul! e:5 ob ~~~.~:~: -l~~~~~c =~ ~ ::e I:! 'ii ~ > lii"Sl ~ :!i! u; u; Ef .. Ef.s 8 J! - ... .D::eIii_u";':"'lla.l.l...uuu 'c,rlO:: SZl 8~o - - 0 u Uo_UU> uo~lilS 'ii.~:5:S:g1i n ~'a 'f'E Ob.!ii'io'bc: coD:U ]::e::e::e::e ::e::eo::~::c ~ ~~ c!l&Hia c!l~::e ..: ~~~io~6 ~~~ci > ~ ll-80 /) .. 1 ...,J f ~ i 1 ~ ]2 f11 <~ 1 l \.:: -{. 1 II ~n ~1~ '" u U ::E Hd~ ]:g!2!~ !~~~~f -"......'" ..-i .. l2I98 - COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 cashier location shall provide direct visual access to the pump islands and the vehicles parked adjacent to the islands. 12. A bicycle rack shall be installed in a convenient location visible from' the inside of the store. 13. Each convenience store shall provide a public restroom located within the store. 14. Public pay telephones provided on-site shall not be set up for incoming calls. Public telephones shall be featured with call out service only. 15. On-site video games may not be installed or operated on the premises. 16. A convenience store adjacent to any residentially designated district shall have a 6 foot high decorative masonry wall along property lines adjacent to such districts. 17. All parking, loading, circulation aisles, and pump island bay areas shall be constructed with (pCC) concrete. H. DAY CARE CENTERS Refer to Section 19.04.030(2)(B). I. DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS This Section contains standards for drive-thru restaurants as well as prohibition of same in specified land use districts. Drive-thru restaurants are subject to Conditional Use Permit review. 1. Establishments providing drive-thru facilities may be permitted in the CG-l, CG-2, CG-3, CG-4, and CR-3 (south of 1-10 only and adjacent to I Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and 1-10 only) land use districts . 2. Pedestrian walkways should not intersect the drive-thru drive aisles, but where they do, they shall have clear visibility, and they must be emphasized by enriched paving or striping. 3. Drive-thru aisles shall have a minimum 12 foot width on curves and a minimum 11 foot width on straight sections. 4. Drive-thru aisles shall provide sufficient stacking area behind menu board to accommodate a minimum of 6 cars. 5. All service areas, restrooms and ground mounted and roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. ll-92 7/97 - a: Q a: w a: lD ATTACHMENT C c lil " .~ " '3/\ f~ c Ji .. ~ .s 8 ON 03ddl.L Z ....I 't - ...J ~ iL Vl o :r -i D.. Z <C :iE i:E a: <C /e"l1:) .. l> anua^v ueWJateM RESOLUTION NO. ~~. ~'V 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CERTIFYING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE HUB PROJECT 3 PURSUANT TO THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN 4 SECTION 1. RECITALS 5 6 (a) WHEREAS, on November 3,1993 the San Bernardino Associated Governments 7 adopted the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) pursuant to California Government Code 8 Section 65089.3(a) which requires the county and cities to adopt and implement "a program to 9 analyze the impacts ofland use decisions, including an estimate of the costs associated with 10 mitigating these impacts" on the CMP network of roadways; and 11 (b) WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council adopted a Land Use/Transportatio 12 Analysis Program for the City pursuant to the CMP for the City of San Bernardino by Resolution 13 No. 93-74 on March 22, 1993; and 14 (c) WHEREAS, on August 17,2000, the City determined that the proposed HUB 15 Project development would exceed the threshold of250,000 square feet of commercial/retail 16 space established in the City's Resolution No. 93-74 and thus warranted the preparation of a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Report pursuant to the Congestion Management Plan 17 18 (CMP); and (d) WHEREAS, a Draft TIA Report was prepared to address the traffic impacts of the 19 20 HUB Project on designated CMP roadways and Freeways, appropriate mitigation and fair share 21 contribution toward CMP roadway and Freeway improvements; and 22 (e) WHEREAS, the Draft TIA Report was made available to the various regional and 23 sub-regional agencies and to the adjacent jurisdictions for their review during a 2 I-day review 24 period which began on December 15,2000 and ended on January 4, 2001 as required by the 25 CMP; and -1- P:\DeveIoplRenl Dept\MIlfBII'et\The HUB\TIA Resolution.doc (f) WHEREAS, verbal and written comments were received on the Draft TIA Report . 2 and responded to via changes to the Draft TIA Report; and 3 (g) WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council conducted a noticed public hearing 4 on May 21, 200 I and fully reviewed and considered the Draft TIA Report, the Planning Division 5 staff report and the recommendations of the Development Services Department. 6 SECTION II. TRAFFIC IMP ACT ANALYSIS REPORT 7 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED BY THE 8 MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL THAT: 9 A. The TIA Report for the HUB Project has been completed in compliance with the 10 regional CMP and the City's Land Userrransportation Analysis Program and found to be 11 consistent with the regional Congestion Transportation Plan model. The TIA Report and all the 12 evidence and information contained therein is attached hereto as Attachment A (Draft TIA 13 Report) and incorporated herein by reference. 14 B. The TIA Report was presented to the Mayor and Common Council who reviewed 15 and considered the information in the land use decision and traffic impact mitigation process 16 prior to approving the HUB Project (General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development 17 Code Amendment No. 01-03 considered. 18 C. The TIA Report has identified all of the HUB Project's traffic impacts to 19 designated CMP roadways and Freeways, the appropriate mitigation and fair share contribution 20 toward CMP roadway and freeway improvements. 21 D. All of the HUB Project's traffic impacts can be mitigated by the implementation 22 of the mitigation measures as identified in the TIA Report. 23 E. The HUB Project's estimated fair share contribution is $5,062,216 for CMP 24 roadway improvements and $357,516 for freeway improvements. 25 .2- P:\Developmcnt DepMUrpret\11le HUB\TIA ResoJution.doc F. The Mayor and Common Council have given great weight to the project's traffic . 2 impacts to designated CMP roadways and freeways, the appropriate mitigation and fair share' 3 contribution toward CMP roadway and freeway improvements. The Mayor and Common 4 Council have agreed to find and set aside funding for the HUB Project's estimated fair share 5 contribution for freeway and interchange improvements to be paid when Caltrans completes the 6 Interstate 10/Tippecanoe interchange design and it is funded through the RTIP Program. 7 SECTION III. CERTIFICATION OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT 8 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the Mayor 9 and Common Council that the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the HUB Project (Disposition 10 and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code 11 Amendment No. 01.03) is certified. 12 IIII 13 IIII 14 IIII 15 IIII 16 IIII 17 IIII 18 IIII 19 IIII 20 IIII 21 IIII 22 IIII 23 IIII 24 IIII 25 IIII -3. P:\Devdopmcnt Dcpt\Mupret\1be HUB\TlA ResoluuOJ'uloc RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CERTIFYING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE HUB PROJECT 2 PURSUANT TO THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and 4 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a 5 meeting thereof, held on the 6 day of , 200 I, by the following vote to wit: Council Members: 7 Ayes Nays Abstain Absent 8 ESTRADA LIEN MCGINNIS SCHNETZ SUAREZ 9 10 11 12 ANDERSON 13 MC CAMMACK ]4 15 Rachel G. Clark, City Clerk 16 17 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of ,2001. 18 19 20 Judith Valles, Mayor City of San Bernardino 21 Approved as to form and Legal Content: 22 James F. Penman 23 City Attorney 24 By: ~ 1-. f~ o 25 -4- P:\Developmem Dept\Marpret\The HUB\TJA Resolution.doc 1 2 3 ~(Q)[?W ORDIN;\NCE~O. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MODIFYING CHAPTER 19.06 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS) OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE) TO ADD TEXT ALLOWING DRIVE- THRU RESTAURANTS IN THE CR-3 LAND USE DISTRICT. 4 5 THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 6 DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 7 SECTION 1. Chapter 19.06, Sections 19.06.010(2)(K) and 19.06.020 Table 06.01(0)(4) 8 and Table 06.03(1), and Section 19.06.030(2)(1)(2) of the Municipal Code (Development Code) 9 are amended to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR-3 as shown in Exhibit A altached hereto 10 11 12 13 fill and incorporated herein by reference. fill 14 fill 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MODIFYING CHAPTER 19.06 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS) OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE) TO ADD TEXT ALLOWING DRIVE- THRU RESTAURANTS IN THE CR-3 LAND USE DISTRICT. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing ordinance was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof. held 6 on the 7 day of ,2001, by the following vote to wit: Council Members: ABSTAIN ABSENT AYES NAYS 8 9 ESTRADA 10 LIEN 11 MCGINNIS 12 SCHNETZ 13 SUAREZ 14 15 ANDERSON 16 MC CAMMACK 17 18 City Clerk 19 The foregoing ordinance is hereby approved this 20 2001. 21 22 23 Approved as to form 24 and legal content: day of JUDITH V ALLES, Mayor City of San Bernardino 25 JAMES F. PENMAN ~: :~~ r;: ~ (J~ 28 U 2 EXHIBIT A COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 K. CR-3 (COMMERCIAL REGIONAL-TRI-CITY/CLUB) DISTRICT This district is intended to pennit a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporale and professional offices, retail commercial, enlertaimnent (thealers, nightclubs, etc.), [mancial establishments, restaurants (eKeauiiBg arp.'e tiIrus in tile Tri City/CeHURereeBter area eBly), (drive-thrus south of 1-10 and adjacent to Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and 1-10 only) hotels/molels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar uses. L. CR-4 (COMMERCIAL REGIONAL-AUTO PLAZA) DISTRICT This district is intended to provide for the development of new and used automobile and truck sales and related retail and service uses in the Auto Plaza area. M. CCS-l (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH) DISTRICT This district is intended to pennit general retail type uses. Standards are contained in Chapler 19.13. N. CCS-2 (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH) DISTRICT This district is inlended to pennit service commercial uses. Standards are contained in Chapler 19.13. O. CCS-3 (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH-FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL) DISTRICT This district is inlended to provide for the flood control channel. Standards are contained in Chapler 19.13. P. CH (COMMERCIAL IlEA VY) DISTRICT This district is inlended to accommodate automobile and truck sales and repair facilities, lumberyards, and related hardware sales, plant nurseries, light industrial manufacturing and storage facilities, and similar uses requiring eXlensive outdoor or indoor space for their sales, service, and/or storage, excluding neighborhood commercial uses. Q. OIP (OFFICE INDUSTRIAL PARK) DISTRICT This district is intended to establish the Waterman Avenue corridor and other appropriate areas as distinctive office industrial parks and corporale centers serving City and regional needs. Supporting retail/commercial services may be localed in Corporale Office Industrial Park structures. 11-62 7/97 '" UN 0 0 U '" U~ U OUO U = U 0 0 U ='..,. U =',., U OUO'U U ='N U U 'U ouo U ='~ OUO U ~e; U OUOU U~ ~,., U OUOU U >, rIl C f;I;1 ~N 0 rIl U UUU OUOU 0 OJ U - , - ~ ... f;I;1 ~Vl UU OUOU " !:: u:::' .. .. " .... .. ~ ON 0 0 ~ U g rs: O~ ~ 0 0 's. ~ U ~ 0 = E-o Z " 0 0 .. rIl U .. .... ! ~ .. rIl ,Q E-o :8 ." .. oO~ ~~.c = U .S = r~U " Q! .. ]~ 8 ~ > a.~ go -< E-o ,g .~ '() ... .. rIl " ~.. .~ '" 0 .... V 1-0 U) ~ ""-S ~ ~ " ~ "t;So..!:!... .. UJ ..... oS c:l. ::I " ... .. e;::t:: ';:I .. :;1 .~~._~.o ~ 0 "" o .~ 0 .~ 1-0 ~ .. ~ " > "" ~ (/.I 1-0 .- }~~~ == c:L._~.g ..=ot) E=: .... ~..d bl) ::I U ~ :E .~ ui "0 (.) d ~ .. 0 '" ~:EoubO - ~ ... ~ '8 " .S ~ " ~ " gj .S "'... . ~ f;I;1 ~ .:: i " 0 ~ bl) I ~ " ;:>(/)-=:3 ] l!l':: "" 0 1'l ~ ~'C .. ~ i:i ._.... ~ " "" li - .. -gU~~'~bO .!l .~ .3 'C 0 .. go ~j~-:S .- ~].!:!.......:: E 'c ""_O-s ... 0 .- .~ Go) '0' ~ 0 8 -i: 19..2 Cl.) li5o~ .. >- ~ VI == :g cv ~ ... .. ....(/.1 ~.s ... u _;'::::::0 0 gj 0 ~ (/.1'- 0 !:QeeZ " f-< .o~"'CU= lJ.1:CU~o ;; .5S"Gi5 ~ :g ~ 0'" - S 5 ~ ~ l!l .. ::c"UiB 5 1-0 0 _ i ~ :s:38'''''''Cu ,,0 8 ~rl.s7Jll ~ .g ~ li ... f-< bO':: ::;; .l:l ~- 0 ~ ..",Sli-s ~l~~~ nl(fJ~- !lU ..c ._ c.."O - .. . ._ ~ o'~ .~ ~ 5 ~ 0 -uCI.I;oo ogerl:- - 0 ~ .... co -... tt~~i 'il~rl " ..!. ~ ~.S -;;;-~ "" uuj5,._ ~ '" 'E~.8~g oz~~ .... ;:> :a "".. ~ .!l 0 oo~".E~ ~ 0 " ~ ~ Q I'QUuS..:- ....:N~.q:'" ul>~:a "":NfC'i-.:t Z 0 j U ci [{' CO~ t.CIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 rI) ~ ~ -< E-< rI) U .... "" .... U r:l Q.o rI) ~ U Ci! ~ .... Q ...:l -< .... ~ ~ ;;J ~ .... ~ -< ...:l -< .... ~ ~ o u '" .. .. 'C.. .. a:l ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ::l - .. '" N .. .. U U - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. - 2: .. .. .. .. .. .. == ~>< .. " .. .. .. ""' 0 .. .. .. .. " :I: .. .. " .. " " " " .. " U .... . " " .. " ..: " " " U '" . -" " -.. " " ..: " " .. .. U N c>: .. " .. .. " " " " " " " " .. " " U - , .. .. " " ..: " .. U "t 0 " " " " " " " " " " U '" , " " " .. " 0 " .. .. " U N . " " " " " .. .. " 0 " " .. >< " " U oliN -":> " " " .. .. " " on" .. " " " '0 Ou U ... . " 0 " .. " .. .. .. U - . 0 .. " " " .. " U Z " .. " .. " " " " U .., la s: '" '0 I~ 0 , c .5 'iJ .S: r- i 0 ~ .. .!l s: .... , ;; :!! '0 - ..: c 0 ~ co. -< 0 ~ e ::! , c :q .S ";' uoo U i:! 11!::: .;;; ~ jJ !!I'" u_ g- O " c . 6 Ie 1::00 Z u l'J e s 0::1 ....U ll.. - l'J co 9 r! 0'" r! ~ e Ol .. rl U:Q I~ ~ ~ la :I: 00 ~::e ouO'o .. I~ is '" ~ '0 c .. u '" I~ ..: ! .!l .!l j~ .::: 00 l! H =00 ~ .. .~ ,- la > ~ .!! u 5U I~ .. - e;;; 0 .;;; u ,g U 2 ;t .. ~ 4:: .. ~ .~ 81il- ..J a:l 1 " ~::e :;j 0; 0; -< " 8 1 :I: .~ !a ~ !! 9 c l.ti :I: 't .~ ":lL8l - a:l - u e ::e .!! I~ 11 11 ' ~ &l ,g .. .. .~ ~ '" "h ~ u u U~oo - 8 8 ;;; " I~ 8~ :g l'J'" 0 'E 'E !~ - > 1l>~u :; 'e 9 9 c u :5 :5 :; ~ Ol lli '5 ~c ,,",'0 ~ " 0 8 .. ~ '0 .. ~ <:I 0 0 .s::e ::e ::!! ::!! ::!! u u ;;;8 ;;;~::!! "'-< -< -< c:l "':C '" '" '" ..: l!:i u Q ui u: 0 :c: ...: ..; :.: -l ::i! :i 0 p; 6 llIl <Ii ~ ::i .,: ~ ..; <= Id <= r:l ...:l =:I ~ /) 1 ~ f :t- ! J \) 32 [11 <J 1 t l.::: --+ 1 ~ !i;n :2 '<:2 ~ ~ ~ '" J 0 ~ii ~ 00 ,., "", C! Cl;CI;r!. S~~R~ IN, 1- __t'f\N"", 'Q\Dfacga ..c::aOOOO- l~~~~ _ N "'" .... "" .. .J ll.so 12/98 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 cashier location shall provide direct visual access to the pump islands and the vehicles parked adjacent to the islands. 12. A bicycle rack shall be installed in a convenient location visible from the inside of the store. 13. Each convenience store shall provide a public restroom located within the store. 14. Public pay telephones provided on-site shall not be set up for incoming calls. Public telephones shall be featured with call out service only. 15. On-site video games may not be installed or operated on the premises. 16. A convenience store adjacent to any residentially designated district shall have a 6 foot high decorative masonry wall along property lines adjacent to such districts. 17. All parking, loading, circulation aisles, and pump island bay areas shall be constructed with (pCC) concrete. H. DAY CARE CENTERS Refer to Section 19.04.030(2)(B). I. DRIVE- THRU RESTAURANTS This Section contains standards for drive-thru restaurants as well as prohibition of same in specified land use districts. Drive-thru restaurants are subject to Conditional Use Permit review. 1. Establishments providing drive-thru facilities may be permitted in the CG-l, CG-2, CG-3, CG-4, and CR-3 (south of 1-10 only and adjacent to Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and 1-10 only) land use districts . 2. Pedestrian walkways should not intersect the drive-thru drive aisles, but where they do, they shall have clear visibility, and they must be emphasized by enriched paving or striping. 3. Drive-thru aisles shall have a minimum 12 foot width on curves and a minimum 11 foot width on straight sections. 4. Drive-thru aisles shall provide sufficient stacking area behind menu board to accommodate a minimum of 6 cars. 5. All service areas, restrooms and ground mounted and roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. 11-92 7/97 . . ** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - NOT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT ** RESOLUTION AGENDA ITEM TRACKING FORM Meeting Date (Date Adopted): 5- 21-0 \ 29 Item # .G Vote: Ayes 1-, Nays Change to motion to amend original documents: Reso. # On Attachments: ~ Contract term: - Note on Resolution of Attachment stored separately: --=- Direct City Clerk to (circle I): PUBLISH, POST, RECORD W/COUNTY Date Sent to Mayor: 5 - z s -(:) \ Date of Mayor's Signature: 5- ~S~6 \ Date of Clerk/CDC Signature: -5 ',;;;lS-e:, , Date Memo/Letter Sent for Signa 60 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 30th day: 90 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 45th day: See Attached: See Attached: ed: Request for Council Action & Staff Report Attached: Updated Prior Resolutions (Other Than Below): Updated CITY Personnel Folders (6413, 6429, 6433,10584,10585,12634): Updated CDC Personnel Folders (5557): Updated Traffic Folders (3985, 8234, 655, 92-389): Copies Distribnted to: City Attorney ./ Parks & Rec. Code Compliance Dev. Services / Police Public Services Water Notes: Abstain Resolution # ...cd 8e-- '2ooH2.~ Absent -e- ZC:j::.>\- 1'2.4 NullNoid After: - By: ~ Reso. Log Updated: Seal Impressed: /' ./ Date Returned: _ Yes ./' No By Yes No -.L... By Yes No ,/ By Yes No ./ By Yes NoT By EDA Finance MIS Others: BEFORE FILING. REVIEW FORM TO ENSURE ANY NOTATIONS MADE HERE ARE TRANSFERRED TO THE YEARLY RESOLUTION CHRONOLOGICAL LOG FOR FUTURE REFERENCE rContract Term, etc.) Ready to File: t1-tr Date:.:J (')'1/t)/ Revised 01/12/01 \/J ~ ~~t:d ~ffis !;$~ ~\O ~ 'n > \ \ 1 \ ~ \ I \ , \~ -'OJ ~\rn ~\~ ~~ ;;\'0 ~\\z mO ,. ~-n ;;'\~ ~lT1 \:a ,~ \ \ \ I I I I , I I I ~ ~ j= ;0--1 ~ I):> I ~ ~.I~~ C I ~ 11' T III ,J t~~' ~- I' i ~ , i l:P ,..~'-~ c. ~f" 'I I~I I .,,0 ,..... II -:ll ~~ -+ -;- ~~ II '6J> , ..;. " '"11 ""\11 " J> ,...." T 1 T ' P> ~., _.-J I ~~<ii ~!~ 'I ~;~ . ~~li zg~ ~~, OZ~ In I mm I I ~i , T 1 IT'TL"-T -- I 11 Ii --I r:-:. 11111'1' I' t t , m' ,~ ~Ol I m ~I z ,I (J) - l o Z, s'C . ~~ - i;; II- $1 1 ~', I ~ ~I' 11 ~ , I ~ I, I'~ I I -~ _2IP~~~AN()E AVE .- " E,' .-++--- - ~=- ;.?;.?oor ""1 .., t:: s::.:l ~ ~ _. :3 5' -. P: 0. ~ ::l -. v- rr. ::l > ;Al "0 uo ..., t.) ""t "'-- ('tI ..... 0 .- ~ o' :5 ~ 0: "' " 0. . . . . _ 00 ~o-~ _ _ \0 + :::: ~ ...00 .... _u:>- o~V>> O~Ul() 0- l'J'J "'"t Vl ......, ~ ~ 1 i I 'I _ 1, " " ~ ~C T -; C ;0 m 1:_ "'U ~ )> (f) m L, _ -1: 4 , i -j j 1 () ~ 00 0 I :0 2 5' :cO I -c D> C/l ~:z: 0 0 >-t C/l 0 :"" ~ () mO - :0 iii' (1) - 0 )> e; o' i)!-a :J I -; ........ :E ~~ - :3 ;:;: ::: C) - I o~ ~z z :::l ~fn 1\:)1 Lf I' 1 I I H . 'L\ l ., ~ j I -1 I -1 Ii :J _ :J - T T I - I _ 3 , ~ II " 11 tTl ~ ::r: 53 - -l N EXHIBIT 3 - '""', SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION CASE: Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH #2000081074 for the HUB, Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA), General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03. AGENDA ITEM: HEARING DATE: WARD: I April 17, 2001 3 APPLICANT: Economic Development Agency Hopkins/Pearlman Development 201 North "E" Street, Suite 301 San Bernardino, CA 92401 OWNER: Various r '-, REQUEST/LOCATION: Implementation of the proposed project will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of commercial space on 24.5 acres located at the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and the San Bernardino Freeway (1-10). The 24.S-acre site, located within the CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club) Land Use District, lies adjacent to the freeway, and is contiguous with commercial property. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. A Disposition and Development Agreement between the developer and the Economic Development Agency will be completed prior to implementation of the proposed project. A development code amendment and general plan amendment are proposed to permit development of drive-thru restaurants within the CR- 3 land use district subject to approval of a conditional use permit. In order to accommodate the proposed commercial uses, existing on-site structures will be cleared from the site. Persons currently residing within the limits of the project site will be relocated. CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS: None ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: o Not Applicable o Exempt o No Significant Effects 1<1 Poten1ial Effects, EIR, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan .- STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1<1 Approval o Conditions o Denial o Continuance to: ......' - ""'"", - \,.., - '- The HUB EIR/GPA Ol-OI/DCA 01-03 Hearing Dale: April I?, 2001 Page 2 REQUEST The applican1 requests 1hat the Planning Commission recommend to the Mayor and Common Council: 1. Certifica1ion of an Environmental Impact Report with a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the HUB Project; 2. Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations due to un-mitigated air quality and traffic impacts from the project; 3. Approval of General Plan Amendment No. 01-01; and . 4. Approval of Development Code Amendment No. 01-03. BACKGROUND On July 12, 1999, the Community Development Commission approved a Cooperation Agreement with the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) that authorized the City's Redevelopment Agency 10 conduct redevelopment activities in the IVDA project area. The Hopkins/Pearlman Developmen1 Group en1ered in10 an Exclusive Right to Negotiate with the Economic Development Agency on August 2, 1999. This allowed the developers to prepare preliminary plans and perform due diligence for the project. Although they are included in the HUB projec1, In N Out Restaurants has entered into a separate Owner's Participation Agreement with the Agency for development of their new restaurant. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This redevelopment project, if all entitlements and documents are approved, will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of commercial space on 24.5 acres located at the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and the San Bernardino Freeway (1-10). The 24.5- acre site, located within the CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club) Land Use District, lies adjacent 10 the freeway, and is con1iguQus with commercial property. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of 17.57 acres and will include all land south of the Harriman Place extension and five parcels at the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Laurelwood Drive. The gross square footage of Phase I buildings will be approximately 198,600 square feet, including a 130,400-square-foot Sam's Club with an unattended gas station, a 45,000-square-foot general retail building, the relocation of a drive-thru restaurant from its present location at the northwest corner of Rosewood Drive and Tippecanoe A venue farther to the north, and two pad buildings measuring from 5,000 1010,000 square feel each Phase II will consist of 6.93 acres, including the remaining land north of the Harriman Place extension to the western property boundary. The gross square footage of Phase II buildings will be a maximum of 70,000 square feet, including two 25,000- to 30,000-square-foot retail buildings and one pad building measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet. Potential tenants of these buildings are undefined at this time. The proposed project will include 1,309 parking spaces. -- \-' r '"-, .",., . '-, The HUB EIR/GPA OI-OI/DCA 01-03 Hearing Date: April 17. 2001 Page 3 In order to accommodate the proposed commercial uses, existing on-site structures will be cleared from the site. Persons currently residing within the limits of the project site will be relocated. During Phase I of the proposed project, 49 residential units, the motel, and the existing drive-thru restaurant will be demolished and the drive-thru restaurant will be relocated adjacent to the southeast comer of Tippecanoe A venue and Harriman Place extension. Phase II will remove the remaining 46 residential units from the project site and will complete build out of the proposed project. Architectural design of each retail building and details such as trash enclosure placement, parking, hydrant locations and specific landscaping materials will require submittal of a Development Permit II or a Conditional Use Permit subject to review and approval by the appropriate review authority. A general plan amendment and development code amendment are also requested to modifY text in both documents to allow drive-thru restaurants in the CR-3, Commercial Regional-Tri-City land use distriC1 with a conditional use permit. Currently, both the General Plan and Developmen1 Code restrict the placement of drive-thru to the CR-3 land use district that is south ofInterstate 10. These amendments propose to allow new drive-thru's in the CR-3 only on properties that have frontage on Tippecanoe Avenue and that are south of Hospitality Lane. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ENVIRONMENT AL DETERMINATION In May 2000, Planning and EDA staff prepared a draft Initial Study and determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required. LSA Associates completed, and Planning Division staff independently reviewed, the Initial Study that identified Traffic, Air Quality, Noise and Cultural Resources as being potentially significantly impac1ed by this proposed project. The following public review opportunities were provided in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act regulations: . Notice of Preparation Public Review Period: August 18 - September 18, 2000 . Public Scoping Meeting: August 23, 2000 . Traffic Impact Analysis Agency Review Period: December 15,2000 - January 4, 2001 . Public Review of the Draft Environmen1al Impact Report: February 2, 2001 - March 19, 2001 The Draft Environmental Impact Report analyzed the potential impacts and presented recommendations for mitigation of the impacts. The mitigation measures that are recommended include realignment of Harriman Place, widening and improving Tippecanoe A venue and adding signalization at the entrance to the development on Harriman Place. The HUB EIR/GPA OI-OI/DCA 01-03 Hearing Date: April 17. 2001 Page 4 _ After close of the 45-day review period, staff received comments from !he following \,.., organizations: . Southern California Association of Governments . State of California, Department of Toxic Substances · Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hamp10n, LLP (on behalf ofIn N Out Burger) . State of California, Office of Planning and Research . San Bernardino Association of Governments Staff reviewed all comments and responses to !he comments are provided in Appendix H of the EIR. In N Out Burger reques1ed a median cut approximately 400 feet from the Tippecanoe intersection. Their concern was in providing the easiest and quickest access for their customers. The Transportation and Circulation Section of !he EIR recommends that no median cuts be provided on Harriman Place between Tippecanoe A venue and the signalized entrance to the project, which is located approximately 1200 feet to the west. The City Engineer and Traffic Engineer however, have reviewed several proposed designed presented by In N Out's civil engineer and have determined that a "left tum in only" median cut could be accommodated safely, wi1hout impacting traffic flow. ..... Nevertheless, there are significant unavoidable impacts associated with Air Quality and Traffic 1hat cannot be mitigated to less!han significan11evel. As such, if the Mayor and Common Council wish to adopt the EIR, they must adopt Statements of Overriding Considera1ions for those unavoidable impacts. \",.., ENTITLEMENTS SUBJECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW The following entillements are covered by the EIR and are within !he purview of the Planning Commission: 1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REpORT - See discussion above. 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GP A) & DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) A general plan amendment and development code amendment are proposed to modify text to allow development of drive-thru restaurants wi!hin the CR-3 land use district subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Approval of Ibis amendment would allow parcels !hat front on !he west side of Tippecanoe, south of Hospitality Lane to develop with drive-thru restaurants subject to a CUP. This would allow In N Out Burger to pursue a conditional use permit for construction of a new restaurant. 3. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS A copy of the Statement of Overriding Considerations is included as Attachment F. Because 1here are several impacts that cannot be mitigated to below a leyel of significance, the Mayor and Common Council cannot approve !he project unless they "find !hat the benefits of the proposed project outweigh !he unavoidable significant environmental effects.'" The Statement outlines why !he City is "willing to accept each significant effect. ,,2 - ~, I CEQA Deskbook, 1999 Edition, pg.85 'Ibid. ,- '"-, (, - --. The HUB E/R/GPA Ol-Ol/DCA 0/-03 Hearing Date: April 17. 2001 Page 5 ENTITLEMENTS SUBJECT ONLY TO MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL REVIEW The following en1itlements are covered by the EIR, but are not subject to Planning Commission action: 1. DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DDA) A Oisposition and Oevelopmen1 Agreement between the applicant and the RDA of the City of San Bernardino will be completed prior to implementation of the proposed project. The DOA is an agreemen1 between the developer and the Agency outlining such things as: financing, purchase and transfer of property and development responsibilities. Although the ODA is not under the purview of the Planning Commission, it will rely on this EIR for required CEQA documentation and the DDA is required to be reviewed and approved by the Mayor and Common Council acting as the Community Development Commission. 2. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA) The HUB is subject to the regional CMP because it exceeds the threshold of 250,000 square feet of retail/commercial established in the City's Resolution (No. 93-74) that adopts the CMP. A Traffic Impac1 Analysis (TIA) was prepared that reviewed and analyzed the impacts of the projec1 wi1hin a five (5) mile area around the project. The TIA Report includes detailed traffic mi1igations and the associated costs for the project's fair share contribution toward CMP roadway and freeway improvements. The mitiga1ions recommended by the TIA are incorporated into the Transportation and Circulation Section of the EIR. Due to the monetary considerations, the TIA report falls wi1hin the purview of the legislative body and will be reviewed by the Mayor and Common Council. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1. Is the proposed amendment internally consistent with the General Plan? Yes. Modifying Policy 1.17.1010 allow drive-thrus in the CR-3 area will enable Objective 1.17 to be fulfilled in that the Tri-City's close proximity to Interstate 10 has generated interest from drive-thru restauran1s over the past few years. By limiting drive-thrus in this area to only those parcels along Tippecanoe, the City can maintain the region-serving focus of the CR-3 district while meeting the needs of development. The east side of Tippecanoe A venue is within the CG-I land use district and already permits drive-thru's with a CUP. 2. Will the proposed amendment be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City? No. The amendment will allow development of drive-thru restauran1s only on parcels that front on Tippecanoe Avenue. Further, any drive-thrus will be developed as part of the overall HUB retail project, thus ensuring access, architecture, and location consistent with the rest of the development. ~ ....... - .......' .- ~~. The HUB EIR/GPA OJ-Ol/DCA 0/-03 Hearing Date: April/?, 200/ Page 6 3. Will the proposed amendment maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City? Yes. Only abou1 fifteen (15) acres would be affected by this amendment. Further, the CR-3 land use district remains in place with no reduction in total acreage. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 1. Is the proposed amendment consistent with the General Plan? Yes. The deletion of references to drive-thru restaurants and their addition as a conditionally permitted use is consistent with the General Plan in that i1 will not conflict with any goal, policy or objective in the General Plan, subject 10 approval ofGPA 01-01. 2. Would the proposed amendment be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City? No. It would serve the public interest in that it would allow construc1ion of drive-thrus near Inters1ate 10 where it is most beneficial to travelers, but it would not be allowed throughout the Tri-City area, thus maintaining its regional office & retail focus. Parcels on Tippecanoe Avenue, a wide, straight street, are visible to passing motorists both on Tippecanoe and Interstate 10, and Harriman Place, the primary access to the parcels will be improved to provide safe and convenient access to those potential drive-thrus. CONCLUSION The proposal meets all necessary Findings of Fact for approval of General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and Development Code Amendment No. 01-03. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend that the Mayor and Common Council: . Adopt Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH #2000081074 and the accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan; . Adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Air Quality and Traffic; . Approve General Plan Amendment No. 01-01 based upon the Findings of Fact contained in this Staff Report; . Approve Development Code Amendment No. 01-03 based upon the Findings of Fact contained in this Staff Report. .~ \"... .- ,-. .- \".. The HUB EJR/GPA OJ-OJ/DCA OJ-03 Hearing Date: April /7. 2001 Page 7 Respectfully Submitted, ~p~ James Funk Director of Development Services P..J - Margaret Park, AICP EDA Projec1 Manager Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Vicinity Map Conceptual Si1e Plan Proposed Changes to the General Plan Proposed Changes to the Development Code Final EIR comprised of: Draft Environmental Impact Report, Response to Comments & Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (distributed 4/9/2001 under separate cover) Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considera1ions Attachment F .- \,... Ii c a: w it m r' '-, -, "'- ~. c o ;; "3 o u N"03ddl.L z ~ >- I- - ..., ~ a: Ul o :r > " " .... .,j c.. Z <C :!E a: a: <C 9nU9^V UeWJ9teM ~i ATTACHMENT "A" The HUB EIR/GPA OJ-aI/DCA 01-03 Hearing Date: April 17. 2001 Page 8 -, ~, ATTACHMENT B CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN TO BE PROVIDED BY DEVELOPER ,- '"", - ""-, c' ,gQO:. CG-4 CDmmercial Regional CR-l CR-2 - '"-, CR-3 CR-4 Commercial Heavy CH _. 10.,., Location(s) T ABL1l4 (ConL) Principal Uses ATTACHMENT "C" Development Intensitv IDensitv "Theme/Specialty Centers": Umited CG-l uses; emphasis on FAR 1.0 Mount Vernon Avenue Mspecialty'" retail, restaurants, between 4th and 8th Streets, theaters, cultural facilities, and Railroad Depot and adjacent social service uses and excluding properties, and others as sub- furniture stores, MchainM supermarkets, sequently defined. and drugstores, and building materials and supplies. Central Oty and Inland Center Malls Downtown Tri-City /Commercenter and MCub. Areas Auto Plaza Area Locations throughout the Oty. Department store anchors with suppor:ting retail, restaurants, enter- tainment, banks, and similar Uses. FAR 1.5 Government, professional, and Commerdal and office: oorporate offices; hotel and convention FAR 3.0 facilities; entertainment; cultural/historic; Residential: 54 du./ supporting retail uses; restaurants; gross acre. and residential (market-rale and Residential vertically senior/oongregate care). integrated with commerdal: +FAR 1.0. Senior/Senior Congregate Care: 108 du/acre maximum. Corpora Ie offices, research and development, hotel and mOlel, restaurants (l!lldllditi.g dft"le lhnl ill tI.... T.: €It, 1Q)1ft...e.s8RtGI' ::t1V1 ~ entertainment, warehouse retail, and supporting retail. Automobile sales and related uses. Commercial uses that require out- door sales, display, and/or storage areas (e.g., auto and truck repair facilities, lumberyards, and related building materials and hardware sales, plant nurseries), light industrial manufacturing and storage facilities, excludes typical neighborhood oommercial uses. 1-29 Commercial: 0.7 Office and overnight accommodations: FAR 3.0 R&D: FAR 1.5 FAR 0.7 FAR 0.7 .-. \....' c. Ree:ion-Servine: Commercial: Tri-City/Commercenter and Club Area Obiective 1.17 Continue and expand the Tri-City/Comrnercenter and Club areas as region- serving mixed use centers; capitalizing on their location along the Interstate 10 corridor, and establishing a well-defined linkage to the City's major commercial and industrial districts and residential neighborhoods. Policies It shall be the policy of the City of San Bernardino to: Permitted Uses 1.17.10 Permit a diversity of region-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants, (exGlllding 00'18 thRis iB the Tr-i Ci~'.'CaHlHler-{)eBter area aBly), hotels/motels, ware- house/promotional retail, supporting relail and services, and similar uses in areas designated as "Commercial Regional-Tri-City/Commercenter and Club" area (CR-3) (I 1.1). ,-. \"., 1.17.11 Permit research and development, high technology, and other business park uses, adjacent to and integrated with existing similar uses (11.1). 1.17.12 Allow for the development of outdoor dining (I 1.1). ,..- ,-..- - ,-. _. "', ,.., ""~ ATIACHMENT "D" COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 K. CR-3 (COMMERCIAL REGIONAL-TRl-CITY/CLUB) DISTRICT This district is intended to pennit a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), flnancial establishments, restaurants (elEelusiflg sri':!! tfl.."1lS in the Tri City/CemmereeBter area enly), (drive-thrus south of 1-10 and adjacent to Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and 1-10 only) hotels/motels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar uses. L. CR-4 (COMMERCIAL REGIONAL-AUTO PLAZA) DISTRICT This district is intended to provide for the development of new and used automobile and truck sales and related retail and service uses in the Auto Plaza area. M. CCS-l (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH) DISTRICT This district is intended to pennit general retail type uses. Standards are contained in Chapter 19.13. N. CCS-2 (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH) DISTRICT This district is intended to pennit service commercial uses. Standards are contained in Chapter 19.13. O. CCS-3 (CENTRAL CITY SOUTH-FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL) DISTRICT This district is intended to provide for the flood control channel. Standards are contained in Chapter 19.13. P. CH (COMMERCIAL HEAVY) DISTRICT This district is intended to accommodate automobile and truck sales and repair facilities. lumberyards, and related hardware sales, plant nurseries, light industrial manufacturing and storage facilities. and similar uses requiring extensive outdoor or indoor space for their sales, service, and/or storage, excluding neighborhood commercial uses. Q. OIP (OFFICE INDUSTRIAL PARK) DISTRICT This district is intended to establish the Waterman Avenue corridor and other appropriate areas as distinctive office industrial parks and corporate centers serving City and regional needs. Supporting retail/commercial services may be located in Corporate Office Industrial Park structures. ll-62 7/97 ~ '--, c; .... c:> ..c c: : ..:l ~ <Il U'" U <Il U- U == U 1:1:" U 1:1:", U 1:1:", U 1:1:_ U "e; U- " "", U Vl [;oJ Vl " '" ;:JU Q :.l " '" E-4 u::' .... ~ 8'" [;oJ ~ 0_ ~u o ....z VlU ..... ..:l Vl .... U ..... = .... Vl ..... Q ..:l < ..... u = [;oJ ~ o u >- ... ;; E= ~ w '" ::> Q ~ ....l ..~ .s" '0 0 ~ .8i<:€.....8 ~ 0 " u ... "" a "'l:1o..!!_ "" .- -s c:l. = .!!~._E.o .t:: ... ~ t':S A :=c:l.-&1~ ~fjCO .E ~ :E'S . u ~ ~ #.2'S ~:!3Ja:=:n "0 = vi'u ':::= .. uUut'lS'>bO .~ ,g :E ~ 'E .5 ::!:~=gj"~ -::.: ~ uS .c~"OU)- .5~u;~::J43 j " " ." '0 " -~C=~-S .~ c:l."O - A -owcuo ... co CQ: -- 'Se=~~'O ~ e'Q. ~ ~ .~ oo~".9<l lXlUue'il:E U U U U U U U U U U UUU UU ~ go '.~ Cd - ff ~ ... - " 0 !; ~ ~ "" 0 .si!!!] e ... :l 0 8 co'''::!: .l:l .S'Ej... i< ~ 'E "-,,P-- C'CI - _ tll) ~~:lj~~ "";N~-.:t.n ~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~ri:g ~ ~'s v ....u"'8 a.~- " _ u ... u .5 c.-s ~ " " t: It:.:::= u 0 '> w ... .:::= .cou o = t'lS .. fJ:EO!!bLl C ~ C = .S ~:l.g'O~ .ccc.~- ~~a-;;:S ~-5l;g:o" ."1 '" 8 .. -s III .c ~. s ... 0 0 .aneS=;; :S'il:l'O.~ . .- co c o~f~= UU"a_ .s~Agg ~813w~ ci Q Q ~UO o Q OUO'U ~UO OUO OUOU OUOU OUOU ~ c o '" .. , - '0 C co .. " co ..1 ~ .. ~ 's, .. o == c II ~ .c .. " c .. .. -< .. o c co u .. C. c. e::: s ~ " .. u co .- '0 co '0 C co i o - . - ... o ~ o !{' OUQU o 0 o 0 o 0 j '" ~ 8 .. 1 ~!:: .="" ~ "''' " .= tIO I > 'i l~ is 'O_O-s ~ = 0 .- !!!E!:!z~ ~ Wan ~il~~ .~ ~;; -~'" '" 1>'-" " c:lZCl:Cl: "";N~-.:t ,-. ,-. ro. '"', ,.. ",.. 00 Q", " < Q..o z- <,,- ~o u -", ~U - U ~~ ooU 00 f-o'" ue Q1 f-oN 000:: -U Q ..l- <0:: Z;:U f-o.... 000 ;;lu Q Z'" -0 QU Z <N ..l0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ </J N U U _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ )( X l< >( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >( x >< >< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ )( x )( )( ~ ~ >< x >< x ~ ~ ~ ,;go. '" "70 Ou U ~r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ )( l< >< >< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ </J Cl '" <: Cl z <: f- </J ..0 <: U "' "- </J ~ N o ~c ~ ~ ~ ~ eN ~ .E'~ ~ ~~ g ~ E .~ ~ ~ t; g ~ ] ~ .~~ 8 ~ i ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ .~~~ "~!_~_~ oogNE~S :Coo ~5 .9~19oV) lI)oo;t: :;1Il.~lnU:tooOUYI;ll- ~e _ ~'Cl- ~u~UN~ s:t~~ u~E~cco~U~~O~~ uG) ~~ 2u-~-OO~ U~~OO ~oB._.g.__~__~._oo c> cuu-=-"u~ tiuu ;::"~c-O,i: u.,,",,_IIl__ ~ ...s;;;-' .~~ o=='~cu2~~~~~u'~,i:~ ._~~~S~.~ '~co'Go ~ o~~ u ~~~~~S>~JI-o~_!~~_~~~__~.2o~- --o"uoo:t.=~ ~~_ u.. _s.__-~....u...~~.~~u..~o ~ EE -- 1-0 _~~U, I;IlO-~UI-oU- - ~~~!gS~~~~g~g'~'~~E~~~~:c~~';'~Jj~~i~~ ~~~~~<~8o~]~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8~~~ <~ 0o~~o~..o~ ~~~zo~ 6~ ~~::>> ~ X ~ .... '" "" '" oo '" U ::; >. '2 o o ~ "" c ~ " c ~ ..J q e 5. ~ o '" c u " ~ 0; .0 " " c " > <: " o c .... ~ '" " J, ~ E- ~ S ~ fl u ~ ::; "i' ]00 N ~'" ]~~..;tr-!-. tU_""i'o;'_ ONVNN -;"N~N_ _ - ('.'H'~ 11'\ ~:;::~~a .c 00 0000_ guuuu :!'"!-!-~'! ,.- ,-. ,.- \.." .- ,-. COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS - 19.06 cashier location shall provide direct visual access to the pump islands and the vehicles parked adjacent to the islands. 12. A bicycle rack shall be installed in a convenient location visible from the inside of the store. 13. Each convenience store shall provide a public restroom located within the store. 14. Public pay telephones provided on-site shall not be set up for incoming calls. Public telephones shall be featured with call out service only. 15. On-site video games may not be installed or operated on the premises. 16. A convenience store adjacent to any residentially designated district shall have a 6 foot high decorative masonry wall along property lines adjacent to such districts. 17. All parking, loading, circulation aisles, and pump island bay areas shall be constructed with (pCC) concrete. H. DAY CARE CENTERS Refer to Section 19.04.030(2)(B). I. DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS This Section contains standards for drive-thru restaurants as well as prohibition of same in specified land use districts. Drive-thru restaurants are subject to Conditional Use Permit review. 1. Establishments providing drive-thru facilities may be permitted in the CG-l, CG-2, CG-3, CG-4, and CR-3 (south of 1-10 only and adjacent to Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and 1-10 only) land use districts . 2. Pedestrian walkways should not intersect the drive-thru drive aisles, but where they do, they shall have clear visibility, and they must be emphasized by enriched paving or striping. 3. Drive-thru aisles shall have a minimum 12 foot width on curves and a minimum 11 foot width on straight sections. 4. Drive-thru aisles shall provide sufficient stacking area behind menu board to accommodate a minimum of 6 cars. 5. All service areas, restrooms and ground mounted and roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. n.92 7/97 'r> EXHIBIT 4 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT \, -..-. THE HUB CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2000081074 , LSA Project No. CBD030 PUPAlI.ED FOil: City of San Bernardino Development Services Department 300 N. "D" Street, 3'" Floor San Bernardino, California 92401 Contact: Ms. Valerie Ross, Principal Planner (909) 384-5057 PUPAlI.ED BY: LSA Associates, Inc. 1650 Spruce Street, Suite 500 Riverside, California 92507 (909) 781-9310 UVIEWED BY: --, -, The City of San Bernardino has independently reviewed, analyzed and exercised judgement in the analysis contained in the Environmental Impact Report and supporting documentation pursuant to Section 21082 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , ~~ --, April 5, 2001 - LSAASSOClATES.lNC. - - TABLE OF CONTENTS ... Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1-1 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT .............................................................................................1-1 1.3 IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND LEVEL OF IMPACT SUMMARY TABLE.......l-I 1.4 AREA OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED.......................... I-I 1.5 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................1-4 2.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................2-1 2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES ......................................................................2-1 2.2 BACKGROUND/IDSTORY .....................................................................................2-2 2.3 PROJECT APPROVALS AND/OR ACTIONS TO BE COMPLETED ..................2-2 2.4 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT DISCUSSED IN THE EIR ........................................................................................2-3 2.5 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT.....................................................2-4 2.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION.................................2-10 2.7 DOCUMENT FORMAT .........................................................................................2-11 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .....................................................................................................3-1 3.1 GEOGRAPlllCAL SETIING ...................................................................................3-1 3.2 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................3-1 3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS .............................................................................3-3 3.4 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS/PERMITS REQUESTED.......................................3-4 3.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ..........................................................................................3-5 4.0 EXISTING SETIING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES..............................4.l-1 4.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .......................................................4.1-1 4.2 AIR QUALITY .......................................................................................................4.2-1 4.3 NOISE .................................................................................................................. .4.3-1 4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................4.4-1 5.0 ADDITIONAL TOPICS REQUIRED BY CEQA..................................................................5-1 5.1 SIGNIFlCANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED .........................................................................................5-1 5.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS.........................5-1 5.3 GROWTH INDUCEMENT.......................................................................................5-2 6.0 ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................................................................6-1 6.1 AL TERNA TNES UNDER CONSIDERATION ......................................................6-1 6.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED .............................................6-3 6.3 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS .................................................................................6-5 6.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATNE.........................................6-20 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ..........................................................................................................7-1 8.0 CONTACTS ...........................................................................................................................8-1 9.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................9-1 .. - ... .. - .. ... . - . ... .. .. . ",. .. - - - .. - . .. .. .... ... - ".. ... - ... 4/5/01(R:\CBD0301FINAL EIR\TABLE OF CONTENTS]JNAL.lXlC) ij - ... - - lSAASSOClATES,INC. - - APPENDICES A - NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND INITIAL STIJDY, MAILING LIST, RESPONSES TO NOTICE OF PREPARATION B - TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS C - AIR QUALITY CALCULATIONS D - NOISE ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS E - CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT F - TREE SURVEY FOR TRACT 2743 G- MARKET DATA H - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR I - MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN - .. - .. ... .. ... .. LIST OF FIGURES - .. 1.1 1.2 .. .. 2.1 .. 3.1 .. .. 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.1.6 4.1.7 4.1.8 4.1.9 4.1.10 4.1.11 4.1.12 4.1.13 4.1.14 4.1.15 4.1.16 4.1.17 4.1.18 4.1.19 4.1.20 .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ",. .. ... ... ... 4.2.1 ... Page Regional/Project Location.................................................. ...... .............. ............................... 1-2 Conceptual Site Plan.................................................................... ..... .................. ........ ........... 1-3 Cumulative Projects................................................................................ ............................. 2-14 Surrounding Land Use ........................................................................................................... 3-2 Analysis Intersection Locations ......................................................................................... 4.1-2 Existing Circulation System ............................................................................................... 4.1-4 Existing Intersection Geometries ....................................................................................... 4.1-5 Existing (2000) P.M. Peak Hour Turn Volumes ................................................................ 4.1-6 Existing (2000) Mid-Day Peak Hour Turn Volumes ......................................................... 4.1-7 Year 2002 Without Project P.M. Peak Hour Turn Volumes............................................ 4.1-11 Year 2002 Without Project Mid-Day Peak Hour Turn Volumes..................................... 4.1-12 Year 2020 Without Project P.M. Peak Hour Turn Volumes ............................................ 4.1-15 Year 2020 Without Project Mid-Day Peak Hour Turn Volumes..................................... 4.1-16 Project Trip Distribution Patterns..................................................................................... 4.1-26 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (New Trips) - Off-Site Intersections ..........................4.1-27 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (New Trips) - Project Access Locations .................... 4.1-28 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (Pass-By Trips) - Off-Site Intersections .................... 4.1-29 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (Pass-By Trips) - Project Access Locations............... 4.1-30 Project P.M. Peak Hour Turn Volumes............................................................................ 4.1-31 Project Mid-Day Peak Hour Turn Volumes..................................................................... 4.1-32 Year 2002 Plus Project P.M. Peak Hour Turn Volumes .................................................. 4.1-34 Year 2002 Plus Project Mid-Day Peak Hour Turn Volumes ........................................... 4.1-35 Year 2020 Plus Project P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Turn Volumes .............................. 4.1-41 Year 2020 Plus Project Mid-Day Peak Hour Intersection Turn Volumes ....................... 4.1-42 SCAQMD Air Monitoring Locations Within The South Coast Air Basin ........................ 4.2-7 4.3.1 Noise Monitoring Locations...............................................................................................4.3-6 ". .. ... ... 4/5//01(\IRJV5IPROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRITABLE OF CONTENTS]INAL.DOC) III ... .. - .... lSAASSOClATES. INC. ... .... .. LIST OF TABLES Page .... .. I.A 2.A 4.1.A 4.1.B 4.1.C 4.1.D 4.1.E 4.1.F 4.1.G 4.1.H 4.1.1 4.1.J 4.1.K .... - .. - - - .. ... ... 4.2.A 4.2.B 4.2.C 4.2.D 4.2.E .... .. ... 4.3.A 4.3.B 4.3.C 4.3.D 4.3.E .. ... .. ... 4.3.F .. 4.3.G .... III 5.A 5.B 5.C ... .. 6.A 6.B 6.C .. lilt ... ... ... ... ... .. Environmental Summary of the HUB Project....................................................................... 1-7 Cumulative Projects........................................ ......................... ............................................ 2-11 Existing (2000) Intersection Levels of Service ................................................................. 4.1-8 Existing (2000) P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis........................................... 4.1-9 Year 2002 Intersection Levels of Service .......................................................................4.1-\3 Year 2002 P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis ................................................. 4.1-14 Year 2020 Intersection Levels of Service .......................................................................4.1-17 Year 2020 P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis ................................................. 4.1-19 The Hub Trip Generation .................................................................................................4.1-25 Year 2002 Plus Project with Mitigation Intersection Levels of Service.......................... 4.1-38 Year 2002 Plus Project with Mitigation P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis... 4.1-39 Year 2020 Plus Project with Mitigation Intersection Levels of Service ..........................4.1-45 Year 2020 Plus Project with Mitigation P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis... 4.1-47 Ambient Air Quality Standards .......................................................................................... 4.2-3 Ambient Air Quality ........................................................................................................... 4.2-8 Carbon Monoxide Concentrations.................................................................................... 4.2-14 Peak Grading Day Construction Emissions ..................................................................... 4.2-17 Total Emissions from Proposed Project (poundslday)..................................................... 4.2-21 Existing Traffic Noise Levels in the Vicinity of the Proposed Project Site....................... 4.3-4 Ambient Noise Monitoring Results....................................................................................4.3-5 Hourly Noise Level Performance Standards Locally Regulated Sources.......................... 4.3-7 InteriorlExterior Noise Level Standards - Mobile Noise Sources CNEL or Ldn.............. 4.3-8 Future Year 2020 Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels Without Implementation of the Project..................................................................................................................... 4.3-10 Future Year 2020 Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels with Implementation of the Project............................................................................................................................... 4.3-11 Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels ...........................................................4.3- \3 Population, Housing, and Employment Forecasts................................................................. 5-3 Current and Potential JobsIHousing Ratios........................................................................... 5-4 Current and Future JobsIHousing Ratios............................................................................... 5-4 Summary of the Comparison of the Project Alternatives to the Proposed Project............... 6-6 Alternative 1- No Project Estimated Traffic Generation .....................................................6-8 Alternative 2 - Office-Commercial Estimated Traffic Generation ....................................... 6-9 ... 4/5//01(\IRJV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFINAL EIRITABLE OF CONTENTS_FINAL.DOC) IV ... ... .. LSAASSOClATES, INC. - - SUMMARY OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT .. - INTRODUCTION ... The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the HUB in San Bernardino, State of California Clearinghouse No. 2000081074, has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. The Final EIR consists of the following contents: ... ... ... ... . The Draft EIR (January 30, 2001, State of California Clearinghouse No. 2000081074), revised to include a complete listing of the impacts associated with the project that remain significant and unavoidable after mitigation. ... - . List of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR (located in Appendix H) .. ... . Comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period (located in Appendix H); .. .. . The responses of the lead agency to significant environmental points raised in comment documents received regarding the Draft EIR during the public review and consultation process (located in Appendix H); and ... ,... . The Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) (located in Appendix I). .. ... PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD .. The public review period for the Draft EIR began on January 31, 2001, and ended on March 19, 2001, covering the CEQA mandated 45-day public review period. A Notice of Completion of a Draft EIR was filed with the State Clearinghouse along with the required number of copies of the document for circulation to various state agencies. Copies of the Draft EIR were also mailed directly to local and state agencies for review. In addition, a copy of the document was made available to the public at the City of San Bernardino Planning Department and the Norman Feldhym Library in the City of San Bernardino. .. ... .. ... ". III LIST OF PERSONS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PUBLIC AGENCIES COMMENTING ON THE DRAFT EIR ... .. The persons, organizations, and public agencies that have submitted comments on the Draft EIR through March 19,2001 are listed below. A total offour written comment letters were received on the Draft EIR. Three of the comment documents were from public agencies, while one of the comment documents was from an individual. Document D from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) did not require response since its purpose was to inform the City that it has complied with the state EIR review requirements. ... .... ... .. ... ... 4/5//0 I (\\RJV5IPROJECTS\CBD030IFlNAL EIR\T ABLE OF CONTENTS ]lNAL.DOC) v ... ... - .. - .. ... .. - .. ... .. - ... - ... ". .. ". ... ". .. .... .. fill .. ... .. ". .. ... w ... .. .... .. ... .. ... .. LSAASSOClATES, INC. Comment Documeots Received on the Draft EIR A Southern California Association of Governments Jeffery M. Smith, AICP Senior Planner, Intergovernmental Review B State of California, Department of Toxic Substances Haissam Y. Sailoum, P.E. Unit Chief, Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office C Sheppard, MuUin, Richter & Hampton, LLP Jack H. Rubens D State of California, Office of Planning and Research Terry Roberts Senior Planner E San Bernardino Associated Governments Bob R. Wirtz, P.E. Traffic and Transporation SUMMARY OF REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(c) "the response to comments may take the form of revisions to the Draft EIR or may be a separate section in the Final EIR. Where the response to comments makes important changes in information contained in the text of the Draft ErR, the Lead Agency should either: (1) revise the text in the body of the EIR or, (2) include marginal notes showing the information is revised in the response to comments." The Draft EIR (Section 6, Alternatives) has been revised in response to written comments received from Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP. However, there were minor additions and corrections added at various locations in the text. The information contained in these minor text additions and corrections was determined by the City not to be "significant new information" as it does not change the project description, the impact analyses, nor the proposed mitigation measures. The City has determined that the added and corrected text would be shown as double underline. The following summarizes the changes made to the Draft EIR. . The Hub Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) contained in Appendix B has been amended to incorporate responses to comments made by Mr. Bob Wirtz of San Bernardino Associated Governments in his letter dated February 27, 2001 (a copy of which is contained in Appendix H is this Final EIR. A copy of the revised TIA is contained in Appendix B of this Final EIR. . The conclusion to Alternative 8 - Proposed Project with Retention of Drive- Thru Restaurant at its Present Location (Section 6) of the Draft EIR was revised in the process to responding to the comments. 4/5/101(\\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFlNAL EIRITABLE OF CONTENTS]INAL.DOC) VI - ... LSAASSOClATES, INC. - .. COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR AND RESPONSES - - Appendix H of the Final EIR contains the comments on the Draft EIR and responses to those comments. The primary objective and purpose of the EIR public review process is to obtain comments on the adequacy of the analysis of environmental impacts, the mitigation measures presented, and other analyses contained in the report. CEQA requires that the City respond to all significant environmental comments in a level of detail commensurate to the comment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088). Comments that do not directly relate to the analysis in this document (i.e., are outside the scope of this document) are not given specific responses. However, all comments are included in this section so that the decision-makers know the opinions of the commentors. ... .. ... .. - ... The public review period for the Draft EIR began on January 31, 2001 and ended on March 19, 2001. A total of four letters from various agencies and members of the public were received. A list of persons/agencies who responded to the Draft EIR are included earlier in this section and also in Appendix H. - - .. Comment documents are arranged by date of receipt by the City. Aside from issues raised regarding non-environmental effect of the project, the courtesy statements, introductions, and closings, the text of each comment document has been divided into individual comments. Brackets and identification numbers in the right margin of each comment documen1 delineate each comment. Following each comment document is a page( s) of responses associated with each comment. A number that corresponds to the comment identified on the original comment documen1 precedes each response. ... ... ... ... .. MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN .. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan is contained in Appendix I. The program has been prepared in compliance with the State law to ensure compliance with mitigation measures adopted for the project by the City of San Bernardino. Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code, Paragraph 201081.6), effective January I, 1989, requires adoption of a reporting or monitoring program for those conditions of approval placed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment. The monitoring plan has been designed to ensure compliance during project implementation in accordance with State law. - - ... ... .. - .. ... .. .... .. ... .. ... .. 4/5//0 I (\\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRIT ABLE OF CONTENTS ]INAL.DOC) VB .... ... ... .. LSAASSOCIATES, INC. ... .. 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - 1.1 INTRODUCTION .. ... This Executive Summary for the HUB project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State of California Clearinghouse No. 2000081074, has been prepared according to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. This EIR has been prepared by the City of San Bernardino to identify the proposed project's potential impacts on the environment, to discuss alternatives, and to propose mitigation measures that will offset, minimize or otherwise avoid significant environmental impacts. This EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15120 through 15131 and 15161 regulating EIRs. .. ... .. ... .. 1.1 PROPOSED PROJECT ~ .. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of commercial space on 24.5 acres located at the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and the San Bernardino Freeway (1-10) (Figure 1.1). The project site is located within the CR-3, Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club District, lies adjacent to the freeway, and is contiguous with commercial property. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of 17.57 acres and will include all land south of the Harriman Place extension and five parcels at the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place. The gross square footage of Phase I buildings will be approximately 198,600 square feet, including a 130,400-square-foot warehouse discount center with an unattended gas station, a 45,000-square-foot general retail building, and two pad buildings measuring approximately 10,000 square feet each. The existing In-N-Out Burger franchise will be demolished and rebuilt as a 3,200-square-foot drive-through restaurant at the future southwest comer of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue. Phase IT will consist of 6.93 acres, including the remaining land north of the Harriman Place extension to the western property boundary. Implementation of Phase II will include construction of up to 70,000 square feet, divided amongst two 25,000- to 30,000-square-foot retail buildings and one pad building measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet (Figure 1.2). Potential tenants of these buildings are undefined at this time. The proposed project includes approximately 1,309 parking spaces. A Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between the applicant and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino (RDA) will be completed prior to implementation of the proposed project. ... .. toll .. .. .. ... .. "'" .. ... 1.3 IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND LEVEL OF IMPACT SUMMARY TABLE ... ... Table I.A, Environmental Summary of The HUB in the City of San Bernardino, located at the end of this section, summarizes project impacts, mitigation measures, and the level of significance of impacts after mitigation and unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project. .. .. 1.4 AREA OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED .. .. In addition to a summary of each significant effect and the proposed mitigation measures to reduce or avoid that effect, CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)2 requires that areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency (City of San Bernardino) be stated in the EIR summary. This discussion includes issues raised by other agencies and the public, and issues to be resolved including the choice among alternatives that would mitigate the significant effects identified in the EIR. The following discussion describes the area of controversy and issues to be resolved for the proposed project. ... .. .... ... III 3/28/01 (\\RIV5IPROJECTSICBD0301FINAL EIRISECTlON J EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.DOC) I-I .. .. - .. ... .. .. .. .. III "'" .. - - ... III .. .. ,. .. fIlA .. ... .. ".. - .. III ". .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ,.. .. ,- -: : -, o<J ~ : 11 ii'li '" ,I ~II "'~ San Bernardino County o N -- I . !s I. .. I' .; Iii . < ! rn. .., Figure 1.1 L SA LSA Associates, Inc. The Hub in San Bernardino/ Environmental Impact Report Regional/Project Location 0' ],000' o N 2,000' - - - ... - hi / I ~ J / \ \ \ \ ~ lli~ a:~ LI\-~ G'ie ~u. ~~ ;<(.\n i,1n \.U~ ~~ ~ rJ? .. "" .. - .. .. - .. .. - III ". .. .. \ \ \ \ \ ... - .. .' .. .. .. ... .. po ... "'" .. T1 "-- r:'llilllllllllll!~ . I I , '\ \ ... .. fI" .. ".. .. ( \ g o M ., M >> -= ~ " B ~ g <: "ll tl .~ e o ~ .g ~ Ii " '" ~ 'u a ~ ~ u _ ~ ~ ~ :s ~ ...... ~'tC:: .58..~ '1::!"'.... ~<l:; II) "'-- , "-l._ '" aCZl ~........ "'~<>l ,51- ;::l -. <:s- E: - 0.. '- '" II) .Q~U .;!",l:: ""i20 ",.-u ~... ~ II) ..... ;::l tlO ~ ~z d <~ ;; (/)] <: ---I ~ <> ~ '" ., ~ <> - - l3A ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... The City held a noticed public scoping meeting at San Bernardino City Hall on the evening of August 23, 2000. The intent of the public scoping meeting was to receive public comment, as related to the proposed project, on the issues the public would like to have addressed in the EIR. Issues were raised at the public scoping meeting regarding traffic in and around the project site, and the potential for noise generated by construction and operation of proposed on-site uses. The Initial Study identified potential impacts associated with these issues as potentially significant. The EIR analyzes these (and other) issues and provides mitigation for impacts that are determined to be significant. . .. .. .. .. Additional comments not related to the potential physical environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project included: the method of relocation of current residents, funding of the relocation process, and amount and manner of compensation of displaced residents and/or property owners. As stated at the public scoping meeting, only those economic issues and fiscal impacts of the proposed project which constitute substantial evidence of a significant environmental impact (which contribute to or cause physical impacts on the environment) will be discussed in the EIR. No other issues of controversy or outstanding issues have been identified. ... .. .. .. . 1.5 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES - .. The EIR identifies six alternatives that are analyzed in greater detail in Section 6.0 of the EIR. The alternatives are summarized below. ... .. Alternative 1 - No Build ... .... Under this alternative, the project site would remain in its current condition. The existing residential and commercial uses would not be removed or relocated. Land adjacent and north of the 1-10 would remain undeveloped. Roadway and/or other improvements to the project site would not occur. .. .. Alternative 2 - No Project ... - Under the No Project Alternative, the project as proposed would not proceed. As defined in the CEQA Guidelines, the no project alternative includes "what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project was not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6). - .. .. The current City floor to area ratio (FAR) standard for commercial uses is 0.70. Under this scenario, the maximum permitted development of the 24.5-acre project site would yield approximately 747,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses. .. .. Alternative 3 - Office-Commercial Alternative .. .. Implementation of this alternative would result in development of office uses on the 6.93 acres located north of the Harriman Place extension, while the site's southern 17.57 acres would be developed with commercial uses. The maximum level of development permitted under current City standards of3.0 floor to area ratio (FAR) would total 905,612 and 535,744 square feet of office and commercial/retail space, respectively. ... ... . -'" III 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.DOC) 1-4 "" III - - LU ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Alternative 4 - Removal of All Residential Units During Phase I (Environmentally Superior Alternative) - .. Under this alternative, all on-site structures, including those located north of the proposed Harriman Place extension (phase II) would be removed at the same time. This alternative would eliminate potential noise and air quality impacts to residential units within Phase II that may occur during the construction and operation ofland uses planned in Phase I. .. .. - Alternative 5 - Harriman Place Improvements and Relocation of Drive-Thru Restaurant .. . Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project, with the exception of the relocation of the existing drive-thru restaurant to the southwest comer of the Tippecanoe A venue/Harriman Place intersection, no other development of proposed on-site commercial uses would take place. Existing residential and commercial (the existing motel) structures along Harriman Place to the west of the intersection with Tippicanoe Avenue will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant. All other residential structures within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain in place, but will terminate in a cul-de-sac, thereby eliminating an existing through traffic route to Tippecanoe Avenue. - .. - - .. ,.. .. Alternative 6 - Harriman Place Improvements and Retention of Drive-Thru Restaurant at Present Location ... .. Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project. The existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained in its present location, but development of proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place. Existing residential and commercial structures along Harriman Place to the west of the intersection with Tippicanoe Avenue, including the existing motel, would be acquired and dernolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the improvements to the Harriman Placerrippecanoe Avenue intersection. All other structures within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain a through roadway to Tippecanoe Avenue as it currently exists. .. - .. ... ...' .. ... Alternative 7 - Proposed Project with Relocation of Drive-Thru Restaurant to Northwest Corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue - ... Under this alternative the existing drive-thru restaurant will be relocated to the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place (the location of the proposed "Pad B"). Development of other commercial uses and roadway improvements would proceed as envisioned in the proposed project. Existing residential and commercial structures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the construction of the proposed commercial uses. Rosewood Drive west of Tippecanoe Avenue will be vacated. ".. ... .. ... Alternative 8 - Project with Retention of Drive- Thru Restaurant at its Present Location .. Under this alternative, the existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained at its present location. All other commercial and roadway components of the project would be developed as proposed. As with ... .. 3/28/01 (\\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.DOC) 1-5 ... .. - - LSAASSQCIATES, INC. ... .. the proposed project, acquisition and demolition of existing residential and commercial structures will take place to accommodate the proposed commercial uses and roadway improvements. Harriman Place will be extended to Tippecanoe Avenue, but Rosewood Drive will only be vacated west of Tippecanoe Avenue thus allowing for ingress and egress to the existing drive-thru restaurant from the open section of Rosewood Drive. ... .. - - - .. - . - III - .. .. .. - .. - .. - ... .... .. - .. .. .... .. .. .. ... ... .. 3/28/01 (\\R1V5IPROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 1 EXEClITNE SUMMARY.DOC) 1-6 ,. .. - - - - - .. ... .. .- .. - .. ... ill ... .. ~ .. - .. - .. - - ...' .. .... .. .. .. .. .. 0 '" ~ .; . .. ~ D ~ .... ~ < ~ .. "" .. <> c :0 .. .. C .. " III c .. :tl '" .5 .. = .. III .. ;;> " ::c " " c ... .51 - - ... .. <> t' - .. ~ E E = '" -; - c " E c <> .. .;: c "" I .., - " :Q .. ... " " " .. ... 0: '= -; c -< II ... .. E - l:l - .. g " = ~ .. .. - - ;; ~ ... ... $ IE ~ = .!i' ~ ... '" ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ..., '0 E ';; C' E .'" " o 'i .~ E o z - " o~ ~..6"'O 8'O'N II EE N 15..8 Q. M ..g ~~NE~Eg-.tii ~... td .- .- :3 (j] g "'C C II) ~ ;; .... rs u CO>'YIIlUUIU <"'O.~tU .- u';: II,) 0 ;; ~Eu.g,"'O:ao.~ ~ ~ al e ~.t. ll)';: oSE: 0.8 8';:-0 ... c III U'- c,... .... U tILl fa..2 tU t: 0 ~ IE 'c;j E Co u ~ 1: '0' td cc'- 0 U c,... tij ... j,;; I"': N...... 0.. c...... .....utijOoo c t1 ~ = N 6..~ ~ 13 ~ .g,..c c a = ~ "'0 rg;; O_Oll)tUu~c.c a g fJl >. ~ - 0 e.~ \0-0_ ~"'Oii ~g-C.Vl o:::~~uo"'ll)a a ;; u u::O ~ ~.s..c '';::: <Il.:: 11).5 l.;;; = ... .... ._ c '"'...... loll 0 Cl:l III -0 .~ "0 e ~ 'i '';: ~ tl -g.-::: ~ c.~(Il u u- U"OUIIl_..c'C<<IU ..c C u = Cl:l ... 1ii c..o !- 8 ~ 0. a 'i e .5 B ""0 C - < '" - e 0( 2 = =.... Cl:l ::s ,9 .c .- ,s ..2 g.l':; u ~'i~'i ~ ~~ li s~ ~5 '- II) liTtlOQ.-=:o -t;:: Q.,CIl ~'" 0.... u o>~au Nu.-eCl:lU.....cut;:: .... <"t:l..e eo >..50 ~-- ~ c CIJ.9:.g'2 5 u"3 ~ uS.D a.;j.!!~.;.3 S e.~ e 0 0 u ODN"t:l ~.D l"t:l =. loll ui~ci>..f:!"t:l ~~::I~U~C > u 1oIl'- ..e.D IU ~ :s! g tii u e 1-0 ~ 81UQ.uul-oo..og,ocl-o=u::l-5 Q.&:;~-st8eg.e~lU~ao..:a1oll !~~~]g8~.f:!g~!g..~~] u -5 S " .8 :; .0 ." E o u " :a -" ~ ~ J9 '" u ~ 5 .. ... ~ E " " o 0." oj!) ~ " c." - 5 .~ ~ 8 8 0.0. " 5 -" .- ..."" " -c- "": ~ -- ...;;,s l:l g ~ - ;; ~ ... $ ~ .!i' '" -C> ] ;; .!! c c.. ..5 6b3 ';j .c 'o'~ "'" o " 'i 6 u.o "'... .- 1:: "'0 o " ::; " '-5 u ~ Iii.s ....lo. o~ .- ~ - " g > .- 0 ~5 o " ~:: o.~ ~ ." 0<: u '" '0 .- " > " e o 0. .Do..... 1;; _ " u "" u ~.5 !j o ~ > :Z-a~ .5 ~ ~ loll ~.9 g :::a'~ ;:sg~ o u " -oc ~.~.;; u 8 loll e Q.~ cS ~p- uo.....: :aN" ~ 00 "0-" .8N ~ t) a 1U0. "'0 5 5 E cO ci. .;:; ell 6 .:: 0:0 o.....llii "": E >> -" '" ...; .~ i' tj.E :s! lee .!.s.s~ '0 Iii . " ,,-" Iii';: '0-0 "E'" 8 ::I g. ~::i: tIS~~ ,-._ 0 o ~ ,,'0 E .2 g 3 .-:: O.c '" .0 "" "t:l ~__ ~iQ.o ",_..E g E ~ E 5.3:'r;; .3 ~~'o.c ........- c:.~ u"O 0 1-0 o c.- "0 i ::1== u~ ~ 6 &-".- .0 Q. t: "0 .... ~ g ~ ~ ~ o.~ ~ 0. ~ u 0<: ~ ...J_:::"O~-ci .€'o g ~ ~ s"O~o~ ._ g Vi.D ::I ~i~~~ =:300"0 a ~ "";" "";" i ,,"'--- ;3I11GlGl"O ~::I::I::I~ CCC~ -g~~~H ::1<<<1-0 ~ u u u en _ 0 0 0 c :J ~ Iii ~ 0 :>uuu~ ~ u U IU U o Q. Q. Q."O ::;:~~~~ '0 " " o -S ~ '" ..... o " .g '5 '" -< , ~ 0. ~ 0<: '" " " o .0 1;; " ~ o , 'ii " oJ Ii Iii >- -<: E " " 0- ~:c u "" g, 'C .90 H .....:: .... , - '0'0 HH u"O CC= uooa u- ="0 ..c c . = u'i="O'-'::~o a;j oBoou< fr- Q.~ ~ ~ C C U a:l loll uouOcZ =E ""55';::'-~ ::I . "'0 u u........ '--c.-e~2..cell 0-=01500....- . c u u U 1-0 loll 1-0 loll .9:;-5 ~g eScS i .-:::c ~~U_UIolll:l :g::l~U.D ei= <~a~o~uo..u .-5-uc"O-=u>" loll ::I E -s a'i: e =-= .D ~5l.3:I-oU.D'3..c-g ea"t:l4::..g~~g'~a ~S..2S~~I-oue -giJ"OIU-g~:Eooa ::slolls::Io....::Iaoo o~o=I-ol-oo..c= .D"O.D IU IU u ~ U'- -c..c~-S"Ocall :a~0;;I"""",-=0"" ~ u 6 ~ 0 ~.-.5 ..:::- o Iii ~ " ""- II 0 E __~~C.DclJ_U . ~ u .- ~ 1-0 . C ~ E ::I IU 5:::.B t::' ::I IU ~"t:l Q."O tIS = <<} u ::I .. u 0..- :::.- ::I c....~.-:>'...IoIlc:U 1U..c 0;;1 ~ ~ IU-- IU a ~ .~ 0.-0 -ci ~ -s ~ c: ........ 1-0 U U u 0.-........ 0 111 "0 U c: C loll ce U'- o c ~ IU U U loll 0 0 i5o:2:s!-ssi2 U.D....~~c...::utii g,..c 1-0 IU U ._ tIS IU C Q.t:..g.D.D-S U &:;0 ~ g 0 S s'~ g.E= ~ go -0 -1 u ~ .... "' Iii .. = ~ o M 8 '" SI Pi ~ <:! M - - - - ... - .. .. .. .. ... - - . - - .. . ... .. ... .. - ... ... .. ... .. .. II. .. .. 0 .. 3 .;; . iw ~ 0 ~ - ~ < ~ .. filii . " " " !l I;:: 'c 'ii " -0( .s -0 2 " Q. E o u " -'" -0 o .~ '" 0 ~ 0 = "g ; 2 ,,:;; :E g = ~ .S: - " ..,s ~g :E- ~ 2 " <:Q ~ '" .... o o UN ~8 -'" :I " .. e - - '" " = '" '" - -0 o o o oS :i " -0 o o u " 00 ol .... o o .g :a -0 ..; ~ > " '3 o <:Q 00 -0 ~ '6 " ~ " " .t: U '" ~ 0- ~ 2 u.a -0", ~..!! o -0 o U 0 .'" -= ol olc-- .~.... a '-2 ~ ~ 0.'- .!!E~ .D.- .- 'iQ.~ :: ~ oS.5 . - ol " g~ 5~ .~ ~ .::'S! 2 ~ u 0 t) 3 ~ ~ ~ E.5 g .!. c :g::: f/l g 12 o,g..=.... s.~ ~~ u CIS 0 0 .- t) "'" Cl:l i~;:~'SU~G,)E -c.,-e:-e..cH > o 5.!!2.bZtJ:: 5 0;;.:..55=1-0(.)'':: ::c~u Ou~ca ~ i) 1:; -5 ~ ~ '13 .5!!l clU...uEaelU.~ ::sl.l::Q., .co~E o IU,S 0 f/l-5 ClSU -8> =""'.. - ~ 0 . f/l ';j.- .s:-9: u o..Q';;~ 5"0 ~ cElZl...~;>U~ CO'- 0 u= IU t) ~~...J-5E"oeg cgg~:f(5i:.a.~ .9 :s: ~ ~ III rA' 2 u - u E ~ u u ... ~::l 1;~i~] "'0 c.2 _ >,_ ::s ... tUu 0"'" Cl:l >,0 .. u>> c.CQ~b -5<u<lio~!!JE -,~~~:::lldl -:E.t:.:;;5ct:ea3" ~B-uSg>.;g .!:! Cl:l ~ '- 0.::: Cl:l 0 .D> '= 0 0 C o.u tl:I:;;:>- 0 ....-..c r- "0 a.E' 0.. e= U .... c C {II l-o t> 51 u ._ Cl:I ::IOu Oil... ,u c ~ 0.-5 '0'.5 t':l 2' ~NN ~ 6,>-5 0..... .,g..=.ou_e2c~ :c~.s5ea4.lc. J ~ ... ... E .- C e E .......-O:UuQ.f/luu.- <~~-g..2"Eg~:E "'!..c..c::lU;>.l5.- ::;;::'i~.g g ~.5~ ~ .~ 'i; " d s ~ ~ ~ <t " ~ .~ "- ~ .:! "- ~ c '" ~ ~ u E,s ::l .5 E 00 ol '2 E U "0 's ''':: .D i u:.a.~ .s V'l-Ss-s"O N~uO~ ..!..!a~;:s! i3~'0'5~ ou _ I-.c 0 ::t'ii Q.,_ u ~~ ~ E':!! .cO-o..c "'0 .... Q. (.) U CijN....:.c g tl g,~ ::t .0 I-N O'ci ij ~ ~ 6.0 [.TJ ,:!! -g ou :€ OV:3t:].... "'7 ~:s! ,0 ~ -luO,""UQ. N >..c = C E ....: < ~,.g g'= "':~.s~~~ .... s:: ou~ (.) ~ c [.TJ Q.'~ I,;: ... v ~" to .- - 'ai ..,~ e III So !~ g ci. S'Vi '" ~ COg c.g ...J ,g ~ S ~ to ~ III Q. ,~~ 6,5 . 's ,5 'i ~ 1! ~ ~ g~.!! ....o-c.... '-6.v'-a o E ~ g u c ,_ -= "'0 to: 0_.... V'- '';:::: :-:: 'ai I- So .s ~ III tf'Vi 5 ~ 6:d c E I- ,_ ou cO v:3E~.s c.Bouo~ .5El3"O.!! -0 ~~ "-,,,0 .coo'" .....- ~ sg~ :5 'i).5 '';:::: .0 U .s"3S '5:s! e o > - 00" u - - v Q..3 ag.a ~'';::::] .!::.s 0 cO'- .... '+'=0 ol 0 _ u 0 " ~ ~,~ Ea..!l =~~ ol _ U ~~S 7: ou e u -= - Cf-.......,; o ~- Q.vi'O',~ e....I-"'O Q.5 c..c .... e'- v ~ ou 0 8: '0' i5 ~< 6. 6.~.5 vEv"'O -= ,- u v !- ~ ~:9: -<._ c.. t3 . ~ ou III ff'!.!a.s~ ;;E6~ ~ " .,g 'i; " c V " 9 " ~ .l! .:: " ~ .'" ~ ~ 0:: c '" c '" ~ ~ .5 ::t :g &g ]~ .~ - 0 u :3 8 ~ Soe .... lU'- ~.O' ~ ~ Q.~ ~~!- vc.~ a 0 g ~8 ..c .g~ ~ o~ t " 0 ~ :3 ~ eO c.. .- 00 I- co..!? ~...J"'O ... E ~ ....::3~ . ,5"9 ti.5 :s! lEE E]]e _........('CI 2 a '" ..!! -0 " " o tj ~ "'OE o u 8 ~ " u 00 0. ~~ OM C ,:!! .g C :a~ -0-'" <'Vi , c _ 0 " 0. e ~ OOu '" a ~~ E~ " 00 <tJ " fa '0' Ed: u . 1;; u ~] '" -0 " 3:0"'0 .&33 .c 0 0 1::-"'-'" 0--= c ~ 'S ' "0 ou ~ 7: c"O ou v 8 6 'ai ~ ~~ac.. cO VI Q.\O '- cO ~ ..n 00' cO ,:!! g~-oo .- - ~.- ~ e ~:E "'02 OU._ <.... a ~ '~-28. "0._ VI g~ 2 ~ ea:::c=e ::t :3 v Cl:I o.&:O~ 6.i€ g,!:: voo...s OIl c.o VI c ",s . e 1li :3 0 o a a,~ 'U c.."O '"" E~6c.. ~ cO~ ~ 0 < v VI a ~~ol- o'En c :3 cO .... ~--- cO= E~ ~.!! 2 'C -0 o g ~ -'" .c 't;j e :: U :3 ,_ ::t.......s "O.EVI o ..- g'e 11 v v.= 00 -0 0 ~ 'S: 0: o e ' c Co E .g g e :a ~ ~ "0 ,- 0 ..; :i E ..c u 0. e jli c'Vi OIl :.= '- 'C SO-o '~6 3 E o'i.& v ~~€~ Q.'- 0 c.. ~-gco ea::: E a: .,.; -0"'''' -g fa gf.~ o .- 0 o g :i .- ~~-a:E U e ~'~ ~a-o ::=~~ ..!..!!i5~ g SolS. "Ii ~ ~ ~j <~v~ea:::-o o o'C > '""''''0_ ea:::c co'c=cCl:l .- .- 0 = = > ::t'Ej "2"'0 ].ov _ 0 ,_ u Cl:I 8 "'0 't;j .0 -= e6.i~~5~~~i~ _u~ooCCU"'?~1Il 000ll _ '-VoO"'O =~ "'~il:g__o .- - 0.;21 '" ,..l e:: .!. .!. ..!l :Eogv'UGJv'U'U"3 ou'UQ;::3===:I:lC:::: =:1 C C C C C =~ 55]~~~~~~H <<g<<<<<<.c .ovvuuvvoo fa i .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 c EE~~~~~~h 2 20 t t 8. 8. Q. 8..g Cl:I cO_ c.c..c.c.c.c.c::; ~~.!.i=i=i=i=i=i=<( ol 0' 0' dol] a.c .; 2 .E~~a 000-_ 'C.2E-a J - 0'- -0-- 0--0 "'0 :s -= c C O,~:I = .0 '- 0 0.5"0;9 .0 :I c VI ..c 0 = v 1:: VI 0 ::t 0"'0;9 v ;:E~;; '- _ ou ~. o co u Q. cu~~M .g ~ Ii ol :ge:l <.3 .. O" 1= U 5 ~u5_ ~;:;'Ee 003.32 ::.&==. ~.s.!!.!! ~:I"'O"'O :s a c g 5"'0 g.&. >c.o.... < 0"" III v ~ ~ ~, o III U ... a cO "'0 "'0 ~u~55 c.a~~ 0._ VI VI i= 00 . .!!l " " i:: u 0. M N ~ o o " <I u ~ ~ OJ .... o ~ '" o Cl <:Q Y g ~ ~ '" - - - - III' .. .. III - - - - - .. - .. .. .. ... .. - .. .. - .. .. ".. .. ".. .. - .. 0 - ~ .; . lIP ~ 0 0 III' ~ < ~ III .. .. .. ... c .. ... c ';; 'ii c -< '" e o '" ~ "0 S rIl c:: t.) . ~~~~] CIS ClS CIS u E ~E u!a a g2.!ei .- ......c ::l'- ;::..c...._~ "'0._ ::l.c- '" f#.l"'O","OODC ~<"'O.E._::l .. I =.... ... 0 C ;:2g]-g~8 = ....&;} ::I ::I Q,) ... Ql5'E,g,g~g, ~ ;> o..c.... ~("I") C<=:;gjClSr..j o u 0 u ~ III .S: C ~ U'l Q,) 0..- -:Oa"'O~~Q · ~ 0..= ~ tl:l:'= _ E ~ -s &-o:E i~ClS~ca~:a'~ ~ II) ~ U 4i 8.. "']~a]~ "Q)..cE- ... ::I 5!fl::l E E ~ = ....... ::I ca ~e=:S-..c <-s~~~~ g-g-g:;:;;a a ::I ::l C S rIl o S2:.8 ::l 0 ';... u- O,.c U o.-S-S'€!t;.g., c....::l;o;;uO F=g5lu::tQ: ~ - ... .. E ~ .. = ~ ~ - -S ; oo~] CIS ~... tstf c .5~-~ 0 atS: -g~ ~ ~~E'5~5erll ::sat CP6.,c.!a=oeue fJo"'c.a ClSafll""u.;i::l a::t tS: e.c.5 uor..c 'S ~ ~ "' ~ o .eo.fl.lfIllU~..c'-",~u _UlVl_.:"'OC _"Oo.cE .... 5 '2 II of! a ~ e e ~ e " e t:ClS'~ ~>.<<I::l-'-::So g .::.c e ~ 0 <<I.c ell "0 >. 0"'';:; ~ CIS (.) 0. -CIS .... ~ 0 c:; <."H.j:iUEo. u ~ C rIl::l U 01.) CIS ~ e ;>._ rIl o.u.c C;:t ~ = U...; u e s'-~~'.5~ u 0 e!€ ~;e';; c.';: e > >. c .~ ... c >. ~ '0' ell rn E ::I U u CIS 0 ca U CIS 0. ... ca u _ as -s "'0 0. u e -s.~ 0. III c.~ oS ~ u ] i<'" hi ~ e gf; ._ u ~ '8' -0- :E :g ~Q. -0 'O~ eN .g :a ._ u '" '" al.c ~.~ - ~ ~~ 6 ...; '~ ..t U u 0- ~ 0 ,....i<' .5 ~ .. ceO ~"'", ouO -5i5...J tIl 6.0 < - e ~ <:;e ~"3=, ~~~ ~ .,g 'S <3 6- ~ ~ ~ ot t ~ '", <t ~ ~ 0: c .... c .... ~ ~ ~ = tIl >. ~~~ o u :~~ e ~ ~ et~ ~"OII) II)c~ a ~ '" ~ ~ - ~ E ,g .cO u ~ Ee-" ".c II 11\ - 0- ~[.JJ E ~ '" . II) 0 e- ~...J-s ~ E e =' ;:I .- o E ~ ~'2 .9 ~'s ~ u -: II) c !:a "l!'..c:8t1l ...........E ~ ~ ~ II) l:I....9.o, ~ !.8 6.~ :> o :I: '" e ~ o .c 'gj u u e o '- o e .g 'i3 ~ .,., N .... '" a - u u :: '" .c C Z e u u ~ .c o oj ::;:] u u e e 0 0'" '0 a e oJ .S< a -- :a at '" 0 <0:: . . u'" ~ ~ e .- ~ E <'" e a ~ e 0 c-5 B ~ os u ~ g '" 0 a . oj .,.,U ;::;;> ..!.OO 5::c ::c u",'" ~ e e - ~ ~ u 0 0 .o.ooS ::: ~ ~ ..!. II) ~ c .~ ~ o ::; '" a u e 1ii .c C Z e u u ~ u .c '" e '" ~ ~ ] 5 ~< '" ~ o u :J:> u e o '- o e .g 'i3 ~ . u u :: '" os ~ ~ :;;: '" a u ~ e u ~ a E oj u a 1;;- ~:> cO ~:I: ~'" l) 3 .cO 0-5 :J: B '" a u ~ e u > < ~ u :> e 'a C ~ o ::; e u u ~ U u .c ~ '" e 3 ~ 0< .c os 'gj's "'..s: 0:: os ....u '" a u ~ e u > < os S ~ -a u e u u ~ u .c ]1J ~ ~ ]V5 - os ~ ~ o~ :i:< e u .S< ~ 11 !i:i . < < a E u 1;; ~ e u u ~ u .c '" e ~ o .c ;;; u ~ o or; :iN ~ '; ~ 0- ~ :.( ... ... cr- . '" u ~ '= '" e .~ e o .~ .~ 's o Z <1 ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ " ~ ~ .~ '" ~ ~ -s ~ ~ ~ ...., ~tIl UU .B ...."0 "0"0 .;;; ct"OCl'ioo ~, u:!2o-g-5"'~u ~E .c~g~e!ie.!!i:ilae '::~ct:c-5"=32Et"Oo o 1-0 tIl 0 c"O'- tS c S ct: >.11) c'':: 0 c..::I::[.JJ t:l en U ... 0 c..'- .0 <....ta E...,.U ;fl.!:: c:e'ye!l~l-ouNII)O<<l uE'-uoO~II)..c:u~ "i' 0':: c-<;;';l-'" >.0 bI;lCo) Co) u.8o~'~ >'ooc C<<l.!!~ ~,~r-.ouo ..9~ II) u.8.G ~ c"O c'':: II) o"O:'::""OCY>"-~ u g ~ -= i en"3c5Q."B~ gf"B <.i e ~ ~ ~cn ~'~~:a:: ~Q.,OIl;:l...lI)ucen!:au:i a....9] 51 ~-5;: 8 ~ ~'E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'2' E ~ :l g ~ cE is t- "0 C C 0. -g ~ 5 'i ,9.5 tIl ..."0 u.9"O..c:'~e- ~ 00"'" , u e ... u en 0 ;:I ,- C a t: en S en ,- 1-0 e t:lI) e ,_ c .S! 8.. a en 8..::0 c..._ u e'= 0 ~ 0 Cli)O <<I U g.~ 0 a''::: _l-oo.~I-ot;j..c:u~uu.!! ~o.uenc..II)I-j;,O 1-0 en <e ~ C:! ~ " .g ..,: u ~ ~ Iii " c ~ ~ 8 '" <,i ei - - - 110 - ... ... .. - .. ... ... ... ... ... .. .. .. - .. - .. ... - ... ... ,... .. .... .. ... ... <3 .. ~ .; . iiIif ~ a ~ - ~ < ~ .. ... .. OJ = -< ~ t = ~ .. .. :>1 = .S! ~ .. ~ i '0 ~ ':; '" ~ .~ c o :~ 'e o ;z ~ ~ ... .. u .. IE ~--= ~IIJ u5Ci:i13~ .: oS ,= ~..c oS ~ ~ c~--.~ IIJ~ '_O~"'~I;fl.O'.c u....rda"o~l-o_ ~5~-c.cQ.o UEtJOalVl.cC ~ 0..5 5r..c =';:9:0 ._oc_.t::o;>>~u lIJu=]~:E.r!l~1- ~ i>.50 g] 8......~ ..~~u:E8=~a ~ IIJ v.J . "0 u 0 '5'~ .9 cg e:g g.~.co 6,g. 't 0."0.2 t,)..! "'0 .~ e:; ~ e = U ~.= & 0. 0'- ::s E 0 0 '" :t u ~ SeE!::I ~ Q.tU -s'-~ u.ceg ~ e B 0] e '0 c..- 805w'''''.scuc ""'11: u_'" ~"'O..c 0 <:l _or..Sr.o;<_f-<- a... Oil CIS "'0 1I.)::l ~ .::t c'u._"O.c 0 rIi 0. ~::Et~B!-<~ue "Ect) =E._ Ern 0-6..;0='- ~eeec~aoa Eo.;; u 0 0 'is' ~ > t,) 'EUCUj;;uQ!.l: b(l ::l:- 0 II.) 0. IIJ H::; .- ~ - s of ti u '0'= Q ~ ~ e B ~.s 5. J:1 'r;; E ~ .. = ~ ~ - '0 ~ ':; [ .~ o o 'g .~ 'e o ;z OlIou .,g. .[ s .s 1Ls ~ lL~ .9tl:i1ll 1li.5'-oll.. II.) CIl "t:l 0.'- "0 ..... - > .~ 2 c 'u at i "'C e OEuClS.-_ IlJIIJU '0 "ccO:aEc.c ~-auoCdt;;-UaC::: lI:l=;>'';::C/l[I'Jll...g 0 .' "0 ClS ~ IIJ.- _ U')_ G-2 l:l tll)~.t:: e.~Ko:; s;:o.o=eug-.5rn ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ g u.~"E e '_'_ ;> U'- IIJ 0 0 cQ: ~ !o? a CI:I r.= =..c III ... E I:;>.cq;;<o ~:oc.IIJ'" c3 ClSo~'i~u~CQ S s::;SCtll):;'O' CSio 1:3 .- "'0 C a.... u 0.00 "'0 Q:: at :; 't:) 0 0.-5 0 l.., - _ 1-0 0 = 0."'0 cE.o :5 s::: ~ ::.. "'0 0 U._ :> <:lIc...~=;g-uc... EUVI o..~.c._- <:lIUc..s~ou"'~u~ %f'ii ..g ~ E.. ~ ~ ~ 0. s::: .t:) .:: u ~ u ~ ,~ ... e rl 1;3 1-0 ~'.c U.c - .-.... ...,-:;u~....c...c~.s....~ <E "f-l...,ou'-50 E~o.. o''::.c~ol-o .5'0-] 1Ii.:::~f--t;: a. "tjUd'VI=== .e'2"B :Ii ~ 0 0.9: ~ 0..Q.. (;j 00 VI ~oo'~ - ~ 1-0 &.~'Vi'iii &. .~ 1i! U .B'E ~ 00' rs 0 2 ~ ~~u u ~-5< uZ 0. VI~.!!i c'a e;... .. o"'O:lo.ce '~~VI a VI::2 B"'O c ,_Qoc=.:; 0 E ~ 0..9: 0 t:: 0 '.;1 u~~~~o~ ... =......c.j; VI::5 VI I-o.~ 0...... B I;; - -."J C U'" .~ U 'C ~ E 1Ii.9: c; 'E 2 rr.J U . = "'0 VI _ l.., _ u u 2= t;!.!!! a 0 ~.s.s~o"'OEuC O"RI-oQ..a.ijut;:.9: ul)~"'O.!!(;j='2~ E u VI ijB ~.g.2,O= iii u~::2 'C.cUVl~~ -,,' :s!]6~iE.S e = =VlZ~OVlll:l-!a ]o~I...,-S"ijrsEo..Eil rr.J ~ .s 0 0.0 u ~._ E " cu..g E t: -5 .5 .90 ;>...S"B = u VI = if Ii a'- ._ _ s c u 0. = .9: IE bO'; ~ u.S E ~ ~'i] c .. !ih 0=="'0 u u 0 u u.c'.:::I 5 .c 00 u - iii ti:EE~g u"'O VI_._ ~ a !so: 1;; _ ~ u :3: ~ 'ii 0 ~ c'u -51-g-5~g, 1-0 <+:; ~ g, VI ~ rs ~ '3-r: ~._ = 0'" u l:: ~ u u 3: = 'E - = - 8u~.g~ :3: VI u ::s .~.9g~ijE ~ = u = 2 0 g 0 u 1;;1=~.s = O-.c 0.... U ~..::: U-ctlS:3: ] B.9:..s U f-'iiio-U <rs5~~ ~~ugE@ ..,. = VI tIS :0 ~ ~ ..... " o ~ S ~ .~ '" -C> ] " ,!l c 0., '" .gt _.c ~ .~ g, "0 .~.~~'o .~ ti c:g . eui5o~ ~-5a..~t;! 01-00.- "0 ..::::~=:Ea UVl ~(;j 5:s! ~ ;>.. U :g].c"ij-5 8~:E'~~ "O-5:3:~"ij a Q .;~.o gf~ i ~ ~ :;O'Q.. ~:s! ~cJ -g.g :5 rr.J Cd t :3: ~uco..~ ~-5z~! "",:11'o5.E N "" 0- .~.'!lo.&. .... u 1;;0 tIS ~:s! S ~'C ~=="OB ! ~ &. a '5 ..~ .5 e 1~ 'C;a !S-= .~ ~ _ 0 g,E o 0 " c -=-= :';::: .; 5 =.~ 0;- .c " ~ c _ 0 ~ ~ =~ 012 u II c 0 .g:s! ...: U - ~' s]'O ~ 0 " rs! rs Uo'" u ::: ii ~ 1i.5 =E'O _ .9o..g ~ g. ~ .5 U gfg~~a ~~~~.s ~:3: 'i':: ~ S = c ~ 00 '-uuN.5 ~ E ='Vi ~ S "'- ,,- VI'=~-Sg, c c:r> 00 0 o u 0 c _ U f:: U'- 5 ~;:.s~E -5=,....::,1-00. ~~t.M.g. ~:;..g>.u 5~~"@i 'ii :3:.c u VI ~ e oo-fi.!! 1-0 U :5 "O"':! O~I-ou.c tis-s-g~ g :3: ~B ~ g ~ ~ ~.- u.s--u.s _... c.c = is c 9 - .- ..::::g~==E C,,) 5 ~ :3: g Ss..1l,:; VI VI 0'- Cl:l rs~Et"O u u VI o...c u"ggfsfi t:g'~'~"B u .- Q 2 - -:g (;j E. 0; r-i.!! g 5 e E ..,. 0.= C,,) 0.'':::: o - , u .g 1 u ~ ~ til ;; c ~ [g Cl '" Y g ~ <:! ~ - - ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. - .. - .. ... .. .. loa "'" ... ... - ... ... - ... ... ... ... .. u ... 3 .; . III ~ a ~ ... ~ < ~ .. ... .. ;; c < ..c 0 o ..- ~"'" ~ 0 ... .~.= .5 :2:~ ~ _ 0 ~ ~a~ g ';:: = ',= 2 ~ "- ~ " ~ = ~.g ~ g ~ ti III ~ 's 5t ~ .s '2 ~ ; ere t'3~ en ~ ':::""0 ~ ~ ::E=a~~ c.uC,)~"O g';;lE8~ += ... ~ u ... =S.t:~bO E 3 ';:'3 ;::: .... 0 B.~ ... =..c._ ~ ~8~~~ c: g, -s ::: .g..s::: S 5 g .E E ~ ... ;;> U '",", ~e~-g o~'ic u B ~... ... = ~ ..=.- g t- '0 CO c:: Q c -;;'.e ~ s !2 .~ ~ ~,g e .. = .~ ..c ~ ... '" 'C ... ~ ~ " o " = ... '" a 1:: o 8:~ " ~ ~ " :::: c: .c .g ~ " ~ " 3.:: e :g c 8 o ... U-5 = ~ .g ..e " ~ g .~ ~ - = = o ... U g ... .- ..c ._ f-< ~ ro1 ~ -- .", :;1 a B 'r;; ~ =,g .g,g g1l 's :~ ...- ~ ~ ~ ~ "gj ..c ... ~ 5 ~- ... 0 .- ~ .~ c ._ 0 ~~ ~ 5-6 8..s ,g.. ... = ri'~ '" 0 ...= -s..e ;>,;>, .c'" '" 5 B " e 5 g:S ~5 ~ ~ " 0 0::: ::! '", :;1 a ..." = ... = ~ 0'" 'i Co ~ t:: 0 ';: g,'; :E ~~~ ~ " ~ ~ ... ~ :.0 -~ 0=-0 cfcc,.c ,S! -;l ~ ~ e ~ ~ ... ... ut:i= ~ ;>, ~ ... ~- . ~ ~ ~~ 2 ._ ~ u ;;'2 co e ~.; ..c ~ ... i 0 t u~~ .9 .."", .5 g a 11 ~ ... ~.;.~ oli~'" = ...c 'C;~~ ~ 'C c u B'S; ..~~ ce~ 'C - e ::I a 0 Q ...c::: u :: t:i [g ~B.g8 B ~ 1-0 ""0 ~ u ... ~ rg e"5 5 ~~Sl~ --=""0 ca rg :t c: ~~.g ~ tIlcoo>' 5 ~.5 ~ t:if~~ ~Q.~- tig~~ -..c" ~ 01)_""0 'C g g B 0. c:'- ~ III u"O c.. :s ~] g lAa~~ 0"0 11)'- ::S.....- ...::.l: l:l 5 oS ... II 5 5" ~ ...: 't:: u ::I '" ;> ::s ... 0 ~05.!!..c c e 'E CiS b o II,) 's "0 0.. .ti~ as ii ~ 2 -= .... 0.0::::: t:i ~ -<.5 E C'- . E V"l OOBo- ~ ~ .~ e ~ c: P QJ '- 0 'C ii1-SB 8 8::; ~.! ~ o..'-~""O H ~".5 .c~~.5i$: ... -5 ~ .0'; B U ...: ... l;i " o..uu 5..c " 0=0 to) ''::: 0 .~ g..: c: >,,== .521j ~ ~ .~ S B -g'~ ~ 5 ~ ~ E g o~:; ~ OIlot:j .5 ~ =' >e-o e-~ i~~ .....c'" . ~ ... ~:: 0.0 ._ 0_ 11 ~ ... k. i ~ """,,,, oO!3~ C t:j._ ~ '6 ~ u'o.s ~ :l 0 ~~S <( '" .~ 0 - ~ u 5 g. ~ o 'Ii '0 5 15. ... '" -0 ~ ... ~ o " ... .c d :;.g '5l S ~ = ~... "'~ o ~ !-6 a" ;S !! ~ ~ 0. 5S ~ ~ 4aU ",] ....- ::.c Co- ~ .~ ~;s =s .~ en'" ... 1;j .... "'~ = .g " 2 1;; = o " ~ . o = Oil'", a .~ .... :a 0 ~- '5.s 1;j Co 5 ... _..c ;:5 ~ 0 0", !l ~,g :::" Sl'5j ..... .5 .~ 1:: ... &.;S ~ 5 ~ 0 -", .:l S " 2 S f-< ~ 'C .c .... ...'" ~ " -0 0 ';j ... ~ Co S ~ ~ ~ 85.!a..c::: _Sog fODErn " = " ~';::o 8 c g >.~ Oil "..c" . B -0 .~:= 0 ~a..c:::o.~ H~~fi-&. "'~..c::: ~rn 0.._ u C ... ~ ~ a.,; ': .- U A ~ OD ~ U ij-8 f =' 0 5 ta s.: ta>._=,o ->l ~E 5a~ ... 0 OJ -0 0- ... ... 'Ys~o.i ~ia-gAi 0~.t::;S~ U.c..c::: U ~ c u,~ E 'ii .2 1U..c ~ ~ g~:€ag J::l rIl~ ~ rn s.: ;a] -= g:-.,!! oUu....1o U 1U E;> ... "g E .~e; ~ !-< ~ go e..c::: ~.->.a.s:! -:2 <I! rnrn N'3 i.O e 2 ..c ~ o..c '" '" ... >< 0 OmS ZQ S';:: ... '01:"'- o:l 4a.cE'~ CI U'- ~< o.E o U 0 u '1ij r.I) >'::0 .~ 0 =a .- 5 -5 '" gj ~-o"'~ U ~ ~ 0 '5- ~ ~ Z C.uo~ -:2'5l] S =' u =' ~~.s&. , - ] " e B ~ <2:! 'qi ~ e c =' Co 0", gj ]~ 'fi... uor] =' 0,.::.( U rn CIl U U .-<gje5 ~ c..,!! E Cl .~ ~ 0 !-< CIl U U -- a'- u ~J::l.r:;s ......u'- ~4a:; 0 o>.i~ E:s! 'fi'1i:j "0 CIl CIl u c-g~"O i:d rn ... 0 E A o..c u Oll ~ ~ "0.5 u.- coE"O 00'- u .~ ~~ E t:: U t;::; 0 oCb.e- ~ctlOo a:=;Eg J::l 00'- '- &.o~ o [ij !i'= ~ > U os :;:>...Cib..c::: o = ~ ~:= J < ~ g'5 N'- 0.- r-!~a~ ~o.>u '" ~... ... - 0 CIl 1U ~ u c .- 0. OD.2 ~ E ~ ~ <I:l .- ".- gj c _ E <I:l .~ 5 ~ S .~ a'~'1i:j 1 5 E c .~ :J _ u 0 E ao.uu 1 ... _c"O"O co .E';;;-=a u 5 00 g c ~ 0. 00._ 0 - [ij ~ .- ... '!:..c::: 0 0. " os u ~ E " E..c " " Iii ., ., _ 0 ~ .. 0'- <I:l C - '7' ~ <<l 0 = OIl"O U U ~ "B':;: gj .s.! . OIl 8 ""'- N Sl:::: f '" N~~i >I "Ii u iJ c et 't~'2'~ l;S o...c::: >< ~ E OJ 0 u <:! _~-Sa ~ .... - - .. - .. - .. .... .. .... .. - .. ... .. ... .. .. .. - .. ... - ... .. ... ... ... .. - .. 0 - ~ .,; . w , <3 ~ "'" ~ ~ .. " ... IlII -~ Q,) 8 In ~ l,;: ~=,e~c8'- ~e~-;~.~ c Vl 0.= en '"' ._.sc-E-o=~ =~.~]....:~CI:l fiji.!a.~ ~.!.q ,-:,:e-5~"O'ii Q~u>_"3:S .~:6-ga~~ !#) caZ "ii~ .;. -; Vl ~]"2 ~ c 5 = e t: oo.~ 0 .- <=~~'Viet)~ ~ Ol)'~a 0.8..- "'Ege..c:~e'";::E -0._-.- ., .. .. = ., .. .. :E = .51 ~ .. ~ ~ "3.... ~ ~ - .~ ., e IS Q, 'Cij"O .... .~ ~ a 5 g,~ o .- Wl ~ b..~ -:s II) rn ~~-Sb u-s-a e]'~ 'g ~ 0"'0 II) ;J~II)O = "ii c. Vl rn'- Il) ':t)g.o .g~:2 e VJ g Q..9o ~ ~.:s~ ~ ~ ~ a:.a e- o U._ " ~ ... -s e :G ._ 0 -= :r:r.:::E-o .. ., 'c; z "1 ... '0 ... - 'S '" e .~ c o .~ .~ 's o :z " u o ~ .... ;; 8 'S " ." 0; " o i: ~ ..., ;>, '0 - ~"3 ~.s .~ ~ e.~ ';; ~.~ c '';:: C\D e :I ~.5 0.. "a Vl 0.'- ~..9 = 1: :a~~:2 a 0 <Il II) c...g ~ e ~ "O..!! g .'" fa....'!l-' ~ (1).2:1 ~ i COc.o ~.g : e!-5 e t'll 0'- = e-~.g~.2!J cG~g'o~ ibsoz.o "- (.) e.... '0 -it ... ::l II) C t:EE~"O ~ 0 ';:;; 0 "3 'Q-i:'dV'lO "-l~E"ii~ b(juu...._ s:::iQ1C........- ~ '"' CQ ILl a... -5 ~ "0 ~ ~ ~ ~~ f '0 e 'S '" ... - .~ c o 'i .. - 's o :z ... - e 00_ c c.@a~~5g 1-011)'0 If) ~ ~:2-gz.~~ > :I "ii ';> II) ..!! ~ (.) u'- II) II) Vj..9'~ ~ 6 .22 U Vl _ 00-= 0'';'";:: C) C II) Z ';; c .~.- a .. '::: :I e -g :r; ~ ~ ]I 0..,2 '0 ~~5.s3c8... O._,o.....fa ..s"'g ';:j e c a u ::5.9 e ~:g 60S ts:oc1ii_ol7l~ :::::<IUU-O'- '_ QD III ::1"00 fIl "'l:S=O==~= 8'-<>"'~ .~ ....,1 11U .:: c~ -5 "'l:S -..s U ~ -;; ~ 6"0 <ca g;.:..c..!! ;:..a<~~~1U l..' >.._ u o.D ~ h- =0 g,. e u "0 :..:::.........901::'2:; Il.l ;.: ~: E- (i:i r.fl 0 ~~~r.fl~t)~ ..:ro: r.fl u =_ u~.eea.lU.g ~.5 g.~.5.s 5 '0 e 'S '" e .~ c o .~ .~ 's o :z '0 0 u~ "...:..,= lE8.g~e g e a .::~ o.u...... .5 IU uQ ~ 1I)..c 8:;"0 - ooc::.- 8..0 fao....~- -5gg~~ _'- <( 0 II) ~!co~.s .l! g.~] Ci5 ~]e-g"Oe E--OOMU .. e II) ~ II) 0 .~e~u..s~ o (i:i IU $ ::: ::I ~ ~ t) l!S 0 ~ u._.5....J u ~.::: =.D t) ~::IaUflll!S l..~ U._o. ~ ...,~ ::: IU e fIl fIl ti ~ ,- E u 1U..c 11)- l..;>fIl_"'a ~u::Iuuu ba--;;.~E.ES :t:.~ rr IU,~ = .3gg<~,~ N - , '0 e 's '" e .~ c o :~ 's o :z 3 ~-g o tlQ.O'= ~.E...u-o u.:::o.u= ..: ti~II)-5~~::1 .se-Su:a'o~ .cfllsee=O t:lO II) fIl ,- fIl = "0 63tC::uO:; ..c~.:.-.o..ct)O .::: 0.. (5 "0 "0 l!S ~ <(~~.g:;EQ,., - 0 ... .~ ~ "0 g,,:::';:; C;S'5 i b Ja a e S=5~~~~ '';:5eo..!!.-8 u ;> 0..- II) Q U 5 u '3 ~.~ 'r;; ~ 2..!!C'uooc o~~;;:=..e U'r;; 0"0 5 e l!S s; ~ ~ ~:E ~ ~ :t:.- 0. e p ... i5. o.cflluii;1I)1I) '';: >.. C ;> s:: oS u f3 - (d = t: u t:~l:lcuJ:f'" 0,- u II) "i'..c IU ~<<i-5..c 00'60':: ~uE~c._.", l::l"'ou..eOh~ ~~4::'~,5g~ g ." 1 ... ii ~ Iii .. c ~ ~ 8 '" SI et ~ <::! ~ - - .. .. - .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... ... --- - ... - ... ... ... ... ... .. 0 ~ ... .; . ... !; 5 ~ ~ - < ~ .. ... lit .. .. C .. .. 0:: 'c -; C -( .1H 5 g~ ._ 0 .- ~.sSQ .~ o.tl"Vj '~.g5a ~ e :a oS c"'O 0 ~ 0- C,) 0 .- is ,"",- E ~ 0 to co:ll~g eu e .a !9 II) ::S.- u . - l:l ~ClSv E" U CIS s;> _ e e._ ~ ., .. .. " ., .. .. :;: c .S! ~ .. ..... .c c "0 6~ .2 ~ - 0 :;E'a <~ 8:a r-.:~ ... c ~.s: . - " u ..85 ,.g :a _ 0 g ~ '" c .~ ~ e-a ~2ui .0">> =oo.g " -&,.- -5::s0 s::2= O.c " "5;' b 5-a] ~g-g 0::;: " u ~ <g~ - .", "i~3 .,,0..'" ~ i ~ - ". ~ -5 e "8"i ~ 0. Il.f~ u:-= ::;I -=-gta ~ E E '1{i s.s g ~.~ ~~ 5 :.a ...rti f! c .tij ..Uc '05.8 a'a ~ c 8' U .2 c IE ~ 0 ::s > .- e "u'" ~ .5 ~ o rIl ._ U C " .~ 0 E III ~'a ~ -; E '= 0."0 e '= a ~g'bLl 'ii_c bl)(; '! .5"5J u !3 rn 0. Q g ~~ => i;j'1::' _ l:: g, "0 ttlseB "If' to) c..fIl ~ S::,Q Ot'::l'-o_ OD..c 0 '.zJ .!::! co.. _ u- e!.5 l:l 2 B o ~"O~ 1n 0 .c:e~Bge- ot)u~u..o "Oy..5!o,....:.."O a8'.t::-~=s Clla.3'~ c ~ .5 "B -; 3 ~ ... 'i~'';:"ii<~ bhg.5'~ ~'5' E ls.~ ~ i a o 0 0._ u "'0 ~..r::"'~g,~ VI ... t:i ... 0. 0 ~~~.~E=g. u ..5! fI) f/l - -~Uto!.Vlo. 0._ U '+-i 0 u .~.~-=ot3.s o ._ ... ~ CIS '- z~~<r:';;'o - <co::::l tf'iSc:l"'O~~..: ~'="Or---~o.i ....u-r--.=Eu u 2 0\ "0 e.- t+: -1;;0;0.0'.- Coc'" o'~6b ! 8 go:: oS g';;;j ., ~ .. .. e l:l ~ g ~ ~ :;~ -" ~ ~ :s. ~ .~ '" -<:- ] " " c "- '" e i& ~ U . - 0.0 ~ 'Vi e ~ Q,Q, e >> 8~ .= c " ~ gj U .c . g gj ~JS ~ l:l "'" o U "';; ..u c 0 '!-;; u.o c= u CIS iii bLl..r:: 5 u rIl E.. .~ ~~ u o 0 u c~e ~u~ = = .- .:2 ~.;; E t 5 ~ ~ ~ =OOJ) -< 0...5 ~~ .~ _€u f'I'i 0 u ~ o...s " u .~] "0.. ~'" _ U a .~ a- .~ -s ~ ''5 .~ .c ,,~o.. g n 5 'B'~ ~ E.D.o :g -g t- o " " uo", U ~ c .;; ~ g ..0.0 C .. U ~E-S ~~OJ) c ~ c uS..2 e c " 8~"'O C c 11 e.:2 -a. E ~ U 0=.0 C)5- .,gi~ - '" .9.~ tj I-oOc.2 .:2 = \0 ~ !~ e 8.:= f'I'i e.~ .,,;B~= M " u " = o ~ ;;; " = - -; u ." .. '" ~ 'S <r U . .!<l c o .~ .~ E o z l:l u ~ ~ ..... " ~ ~ :s. ~ .bo 0; a -;S ~ ~ " ..... ~ U e ~ 'i z ~.,g '" (.J ~ c .... u 2 ~O~UU~ t;i cc.o-s-su"a u tU~"S 1-0 u.;;.~ .c -4-0 1-0 0 1-0 I OJ) .:: UJ 0 ij":;:O.s c ..2 o~u.cO"auoo u_o:;;e",t"S~ gti~"'O.-=:u.s[g'fi z~~su~tfg.~ HUJucEO<1-o1-o ~ _.~ y tIl 0.. 0 ~~ ~ g.ti~.:q~:g ;::Cco':::.cC)-;-tU <:I u 0.. (,,) (;l.c ~ 4-0 C) ~'Oe2~.90~'c Cl:: 0...- (;l 1-0 III _ 0 0 -4-0Cco:Es.-ti ~OtU8-4-05e:E '~~~4-0eOeut) <:I '::l 4-0 0 a 1-0 c 0.. tU o<l:;]-g~~8~0.. ~ u -.c -.-.- c e ~-s.;;; tj:E ~~ tU';:' ~;sue~Cl::UJcu ~ ._~ 1-0 tU tU.52 ~ .;. ~ ~.- 0 1-0._._ - U u 'S::!"'OSh~.,gEE2;>~ 5Bc-g'O~~-al::l :s ~'f);'5 ~~ ~ g '0 ~ ::C.5::.ao..~uuC)ce '"' ~ ~ 0 c gj-" ut;.s E tU g; C Q, U .9.5 '; i~ g :E c ~ . EB~u g &og] u U III _ C) C) e = 5.g-~ I-oeel;:; .,g - .3'2 ~jB'~ . - '" c ~l;:; _ U ota-S _.c... "'0=0 ~.~ C-d 1-0'- OJ)'c C o'O.5:'u t.;:::: - c 0._ u e~~;>.s .E_'5.s~ 8]~.=t- tU III "S III U u (;l1,;:.2 ~ [g 'Oil:.:.-=: C) ftS!~.~e ~B~~S .2 ~ .c ~:o '" ~.....- ~ .:: a -d ~ C ~ "S 5 E.g 1,;:t.;:;..ctlS g:=u;"E: .:::~.suo g O"~ t:: ~ =" U ~~it! - ~ t.;:; u 6 '2 'i;i-g ;> e .~.c u u -;s III o..c .,g.:! ~.; : -;; ~- e ~ - '"0 .5 u ~ ~~~~S! ...c 8 o..-;s ::~~5g l:l u ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ :s. ~ .~ '" -<:- ] " :!! o "- ... o "'~ .- 0 tU E.5 8 u .E-;;;!~ ~-s-e:i ~ c :::I 0 .~:S.~~ 0'-"'0 C .~! s.g ..c C = y 8 ~.52 E ~Q.g~ :::I u.t:l 0 ~.o~~.... ~ i;'Q ~ ~ "'0 e .'0' 0.. B III B Q..s ~ -;S'Vi 1)1)- -'C - c la ~ :::I ~'C (,,) C .D'~:::It.;:::: ::> 1-0 8"'0'- Oo..rnC _:O"'OS'~ ~la~3~ "';rnOO= --ag.~.~ Col'!: 1-0 1-0- s.. B o...c 5 e"e~g9 _ .... Vl_ g ." :t u :0 .. .... 0: tii ... . ;; <> 8 '" Si ~ ~ <:! M .. .. ... - ... .. - .. ... - ... .. ... III ... ... ... .. "" .. ... .. ... ilL ... ... - - ... .... ... .. ... .. "'" .. .. .. 0; ~ .,; . ~ " o . ~ < ~ .... .. ... = .. ... I:: ';; 'ii = -< '" .. .. = '" .. .. ::E = .51 ~ .. u ~g o~.~ -g 8"3 ~<~ uu ocu,b :EZ=' .s c u'S ~ ~ u u a] €:-:.g cC'c:i t>~-S u 3 ~ c'1;j 5 ~ ~.... ~ ;>-..::,&, oo::s 0 o-a..... rnC15 ~.ot) a "'0 !3 .~u u i ~ :E u s .E .~ i8"'O]~.~."o~.:::~t> -so"'OE-~u:>..ti~~"O~ - - i .- ~ ~- c .- t;:; = eel ta . t'Iil '';::.."'0'- 0 ~ ..c .S ~ eo;> u '0 c u .....rnbLl.~OCo-=c",o> uu'cr--- >"'O"'O-~a'':: 11 ~~g;.s'i a.!~ ~-:O! cn...c o~=z g~.~!3~-5 "3 .3 s.g ~] 'S ~ ~] ~ ':i j;, VI'- .... ~.... t: 0 ~ ti B:O'S~]~Bc';l~~13 =...=lZlo:s'-uo"" u_ ::s u's u:; O"O'1ij H.Et+:.! 8.c 1-0 "'0 u C - CI'l c.-s '';: Co) c 1:: B 0 E = :; 'S 2'- 5 5l "<E!"ue"~c'-~'-gj M g~ 8:;:~ 8.~.~~ tile rn_u...cu.c.cEt)c .= ]"i 6 t;: C ~ ::= 0 U u.~ a.... E ~ u e A~...J ~ e"'O ~!l gj..:::8~-,::E.e g lij ,S..cuou<QUUU<Il a rn t:E-o-5'7_...J-s-s e.E E"'!c=~uc:Ee$u~<<Ie ::sooj:l.,,-'-c->oe ,.elrl""'o""oo""'-- U :::: g 8:: g "Iii'~ ~ 11 eO ~ .c:>.iu:c.-c58....le = 0.... .c u e u VJ ::E "":.fl3~t:iaE~e=u.E ~ u O:::l::S u 0 u c.1!.c:<+-< 'It'ooU o.E..cuQ e mE- 0 .. ~ i '" ~ ... .. " o '0 1 u :g t: '" tij .. . ~ 8 OJ Y g ~ CO! ~ E ~ '" .. = '" '" - - .. UA ASSOCIATES, INC. - .a 2.0 INTRODUCTION .. - This EIR has been prepared to evaluate environmental effects that would result from the construction and occupation of the proposed project. The City of San Bernardino is the Lead Agency and has the responsibility for preparing and certifying this EIR prior to consideration of the proposed project. The City has the authority to make decisions regarding discretionary actions relating to implementation of the proposed project. This EIR is intended to serve as an informational document to be used by the City in assessing the environmental effects of the proposed project and the mitigation measures recommended to avoid or minimize identified significant impacts. This document is also a public disclosure document available to agencies and the public for review and comment prior to consideration of the discretionary actions required for project approval. This EIR is intended to examine the environmental effects associated with the approval of the development of 268,600 square feet of retail and restaurant space at the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and 1-10. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES .. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) - .. Approval of the proposed project requires discretionary actions by the City of San Bernardino, the San Bernardino Redevelopment Agency and to the extent that the exercise of certain condemnation power may be necessary for the implementation of the project, the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA). Because the City has discretionary authority to choose whether to approve or not approve the proposed project, CEQA requires that the proposal be reviewed to determine the environmental effects that would result if the proposed project is approved and implemented. The IVDA has previously taken action to acknowledge that the City of San Bernardino shall be deemed to be the Lead Agency for the environmental review of the proposed project. :;00 .. ... .. .. ... A Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed project was prepared by the City and distributed on August 17, 2000. The NOP, describing the project and issues to be addressed, was distributed to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and other interested parties for a 30-day review period. This public review period extended from August 18 to September 15,2000. The objective of distributing a NOP is to identify and determine the full range and scope of environmental issues of concern so that these issues might be fully examined in the EIR. Comments received during the NOP process have been addressed in the applicable sections of this document. The NOP, distribution list, and public agency comments on the NOP received by the City are included in Appendix A. ... .... ... .. ,.. - As stipulated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, an Initial Study was prepared for the proposed project (refer to Appendix A). The Initial Study determined that implementation of the proposed project could result in potentially significant impacts on traffic, air quality, noise, and cultural resources. These are the topic areas discussed in further detail in the EIR. - .. .. ... ill ... .. 3/28/01I\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIRISection 2lntroduction.doc 2-1 ... .. - - LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - .. 2.2 BACKGROUNDfllISTORY - Public Meetings .. ... A Public Scoping Meeting was held on the evening of August 23. 2000 at San Bernardino City Hall to provide information regarding the proposed project to members of the community. In addition. this meeting allowed the project applicant to obtain comments from the public concerning the proposed project. Issues were raised at the public scoping meeting regarding traffic in and around the project site, and the potential for noise generated by construction and operation of proposed on- site uses. Additional comments not related to the potential physical environmental impacts from the proposed project included the method of relocation of current residents, funding of the relocation process, and amount and manner of compensation of displaced residents and/or property owners. ... ... ... ... - - 2.3 PROJECT APPROVALS AND/OR ACTIONS TO BE COMPLETED .. Prior to implementation of the proposed project the following approvals and/or actions must be completed: - ... . City of San Bernardino General Plan Amendment (GPA-OI-Ol) - to amend the General Plan allowing development of drive-thru restaurants within the CR -3 land use district, subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). - .. .. . City of San Bernardino Development Code Amendment (DCA 01-03) - to amend the Development Code allowing development of drive-thru restaurants within the CR-3 land use district, subject to a CUP. - - . Santa Ana Water Quality Control Board, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) (Section 402) Permit .. ... . California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Encroachment Permit .. . City of San Bernardino Encroachment Permit - io. . Redevelopment Agency (RDA) of the City of San Bernardino approval of Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between developer and Agency and approval of (OP A) with existing commercial business (drive-thru) for Harriman Place Extension Improvements, and land acquisitionlland assembly by the RDA with assistance by the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) under an agreement between the RDA and the IVDA ... .. ... . City of San Bernardino approval of a Tentative Parcel Map .. . City of San Bernardino Hazardous Materials PermillBusiness Plan - ... . City of San Bernardino approval of a Conditional Use Permit (for the proposed drive-thru restaurant) ... ill . City of San Bernardino approval of a Development Permit II (inclusive of construction permits for the project) - ill 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 2 Introduction.doc 2-2 ... ... .. - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. .. .. . State of California, Office of Historic Preservation Section 106 Clearance '" . State Infrastructure Bank Loan Application (for Harriman Place Extension) - ... . Approval of housing relocation plan for the proposed project in support of use of Agency low and moderate income housing funds and/or HUD relocation funds. - . City of San Bernardino approval of Demolition Permits .. IiIII . City of San Bernardino approval of a Traffic Improvement Analysis ... . City of San Bemardino Tree Removal Permit - - 2.4 POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT DISCUSSED IN THE EIR .. - Through its initial environmental review of the proposed project, the City has determined that a focused EIR is required to fully evaluate the impacts on the following resources. III .. Traffic/Circulation ill .. Implementation of the proposed project will result in increased vehicle trips, resulting in potential roadway and intersection congestion in the vicinity of the project site. Project trip generation estimates and project traffic impacts have been identified in a technical traffic study prepared for the EIR (Appendix B). The traffic study includes detailed evaluations of existing traffic volumes and patterns, and effects of this proposal on local traffic characteristics. In addition, the proposed project will alter the existing pattem of circulation for the project site. Potential traffic related impacts and mitigation measures to reduce the level of significance of these impacts are included in Section 4.1 of the EIR. ... ... ... ... ... Air Quality Ii< Demolition, grading, and construction activities at the project site will result in localized increased levels of emissions and particulates. The project will also generate increased vehicle trips in the project area, leading to increased emissions and air pollutants. Additional emissions will result from the consumption of natural gas on site and generation of electricity used by the planned commercial facilities. To implement the proposed project, existing multi-and single-family dwellings within the limits of the project site will be demolished. Residential units within the portion of the site to be developed as Phase II may be affected by these construction and operational (vehicle traffic) emissions. The volume of emissions/particulates resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed project have been estimated in the Air Quality Study prepared for the EIR (Appendix C). The analysis of the proposed project's impacts on air quality is provided in Section 4.2 of the EIR. ... "" - IIu - .. ... Noise III Noise sensitive land uses include residential uses, hospitals, schools, convalescent hospitals, and similar uses. Existing on-site land uses consist of single- and multi-family residential dwellings, motel and restaurant (fast-food) uses. While existing residential uses are permitted in this area, they are not generally compatible with typical uses allowed in commercially designated areas. .. - Ii< 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 2 Introduction.doc 2-3 - .. ~ III UA ASSOCIATES, INC. ... ~ Demolition of residential units will precede each phase of development. Residential units within the portion of the site to be developed as Phase II may be significantly impacted by construction and operational noise (increased traffic noise, loading areas, parking area noise) associated with Phase 1. The EIR includes an Acoustical Report (Appendix D) that examines potential noise impacts and proposes mitigation measures that would reduce noise impacts. Section 4.3 of the EIR provides the noise analysis of the proposed project. .. ... .. III Cultural Resources ~ ... The City's Historic Resource Reconnaissance Survey showed no historic sites exist within the project site. A historical resource assessment was conducted to determine if any structure within the limits of the proposed project site is historically significant. This report is summarized in Section 4.4 of the EIR and is provided in its entirety in Appendix E. ... ... ~ 2.5 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT .. ~ The effects of the proposed project found not to be significant were identified in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project (Appendix A) and are summarized below. There are no changed circumstances that would necessitate a change in the analysis provided in the Initial Study. The effects determined in the Initial Study not to be potentially significant are not discussed in further detail in the EIR. ... ... .. Aesthetics ... .. The scale and height of the structures is comparable to the existing Costco (big-box retail) north of the proposed project site and other structures located within the Tri-City Specific Plan located west of the proposed project site. Standards included in the City's Development Code pertaining to the reduction oflight and glare will be incorporated into the project during the construction of Phase I to minimize potential light and glare impacts to residences located in the northern portion of the project site. Because residential units located in Phase II will be demolished prior to construction of this phase, any potential light and/or glare impact will be eliminated. Adherence to the City standards pertaining to the control oflight and glare will reduce impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level. .. - ... ... - Biological Resources ... .... The project site is currently developed with single-family, multi-family, a motel, and a drive-thru restaurant. On-site vegetation consists of non-native and ornamental trees and shrubs within existing residential lots. The site does not provide suitable habitat for endangered or rare species or other habitat. The project site is not identified as a wildlife disbursal or mitigation corridor. No wetland habitat is present on site. ... ... ilL ill Implementation of the proposed project will require the removal of all existing trees from the project site. An arborist report, included as Appendix F, was prepared to evaluate the trees that are present within the limits of the project site. The arborist report concluded that no . heritage trees. or native trees are evident on-site. The majority of trees within the limits of the project site have been planted by homeowners. Of these trees, few would be considered valuable enough to warrant preservation. Many of these trees have been improperly pruned and have visible signs of structural imperfections. These trees exhibit visible signs of decay, systematic decline and surface roots that have damaged paving and walkways. These trees will most likely fail structurally and systematically in the coming 2-4 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 2 Introduction.doc ... III ... !oil ... ... !lit .. .. I.3A ASSOCIATES, INC. ... .. years, present a public safety hazard and must be removed. .. .. There are trees on-site which are worthy of consideration to preserve and/or relocate (among them, the palm trees, Italian Cypress and the stand of Canary Island Pines on Lot 42.) The palm trees could be relocated and incorporated into project landscaping . Difficulties in boxing and relocating the Italian Cypress without damaging adjacent trees (because they were planted extremely close) and the financial cost of moving the Canary Island Pines, may limit the feasibility of moving these trees. The arborist report included methodologies for the preservation and relocation of trees. While a number of on-site trees may be suitable for reservation or relocation, no heritage trees" or native trees are evident on- site. A tree removal permit will be obtained by the City of San Bernardino prior to removal of on-site trees. Adherence to applicable provisions of this permit will eliminate potential impacts associated with the removal of on-site trees. .. .. ... ... ... .. .. Because the project site does not provide suitable habitat for endangered or rare species or other habitat, is not identified as a wildlife disbursal or mitigation corridor or wetland habitat, and does not harbor any "heritage trees" of native trees. potential impacts to biological resources will be less than significant and are not addressed further in the EIR. .. .. .. Geology/Soils .. While implementation of the proposed project will require the grading of 24.5 acres (which may increase the potential for the erosion of exposed soils on-site), compliance with NPDES permit requirements will reduce potential impacts related to soil erosion to a less than significant level. Adherence to City grading and erosion control measures will further reduce potential erosion impacts to a less than significant level. III .. III .. The extreme southwest comer of the project site lies within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone of the Lorna Linda Fault. A geotechnical investigation, reviewed and approved by the City and/or its designated representative, will precede development of the proposed project site. Adherence to local and State regulations and standards pertaining to the siting and construction of habitable structures will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level. No unique geologic or physical feature is present on site. Because, the proposed project site is located in an area with a slope of less than I percent, no potential for landslide or mudslide exists on site. The project site is located within an area that is subject to strong ground shaking and within an area of historic and potential ground subsidence. Future development could involve soils subject to seismic settling or liquefaction. Adherence to City construction standards and/or the most current provisions ofthe Uniform Building Code (UBC) will reduce potential impacts associated with seismic events, including liquefaction, to a less than significant level. No further discussion of issues pertaining to on-site geology and/or soils is required in the project EIR. ... III .. III ... .. ... ... III ... .. ... ... ... III 3/28/011\RIV5\PROJECfSICBD030IFinal EIRlSection 2 Introduction.doc 2-5 .. .. - .. LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. .. .. Land Use - - The project site is located within the Tri-City Redevelopment Project Area and is designated CR-3 (Commercial Regional-Tri City/Club) land use district in the City of San Bernardino General Plan. This district is intended to permit a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants, hotel/motels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar uses. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the development of up 10 268,600 square feet of retail and restaurant uses. Retail, office, and restaurant uses are located north, south, and west of the proposed project site, respectively. Development of the proposed project represents a logical extension of these uses in an area that is designated for ''regional commercial" purposes. Land east of the project site is designated "CG-I" (Commercial General) in the City's General Plan. Development of the proposed project represents a logical extension of these uses in an area that is designated for "regional commercial" purposes. Existing on-site land uses consist of single- and multi-family residential dwellings, motel and restaurant (fast-food) uses. While single-family residential uses legally established prior to June 3, 1991 are permitted in this area, they are not generally compatible with the typical uses allowed in commercially designated areas. .. .. .. .. .. - .. .. - - The construction and occupation ofland uses in Phase I may result in noise, air quality, and traffic impacts to residential uses located within the area planned for development in Phase II of the proposed project. Potential impacts associated with these issues will be addressed in the Noise, Air Quality, and Traffic discussions included in the project EIR. - - - Mineral Resources and Energy .. Construction and operation of the proposed project would not require use of large or wasteful amounts of fuel or energy. The proposed project will utilize construction materials such as gravel, sand, wood, asphalt cement, steel bars, etc., for the proposed on-site structures. Energy in the form of fossil fuels and electricity will also be utilized during construction and operation of proposed on- site uses. Based on South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) generation factors, the proposed project will consume approximately 9,764 kilowatt hours of electricity and 24,312 cubic feet of natural gas per day. The use of energy to construct and operate the proposed project would be an irrevocable commitment of fossil fuel resources. The project will comply with the City's policies relevant to energy conservation, and would incorporate designs that include energy conservation features consistent with UBC standards and State Building Energy Efficiency Standards (under Title 24 of the California Administrative Code). - .. .. .. .. .. .. The majority of the project site has been previously developed with urban uses. The City's General Plan does not identify the project site as a regionally significant source of mineral resources. No significant impacts related to mineral or energy resources was identified in the Initial Study; therefore, further discussion of this issue is not required in the project EIR. .. ... .. Hazards and Hazardous Materials .. .. Land uses in the proposed project include retail and restaurant uses that will entail the transfer, storage, and sale of hazardous materials including, but not limited to: pesticides, fertilizers, paint products, petroleum products, and compressed gases (propane, butane, etc.). Such activity is routinely conducted at retail outlets. Because of the presence of hazardous materials on site, a potential exists for the inadvertent release of hazardous materials. Such a release may result from either natural (flood, earthquake, fire) or human-induced (traffic accident) events. Adherence to applicable City, State, and federal requirements, standards, andlor guidelines pertaining to the use, 2-6 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 2lntroduction.doc .. ... .. .. - .. - .. !.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. .. .. storage, sale or transport of hazardous materials will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level. .. .. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of retail and restaurant uses. As indicated in the Initial Study, the project site is located in an area prone to groundshaking and liquefaction. On-site structures will be designed and constructed to meet standards mandated by the City and/or the most current version of the UBC. In addition, structures within the project area will be subject to applicable requirements and/or standards mandated by the San Bernardino Fire Department regarding the provision of fire protection programs and equipment. Adherence to these requirements, standards, and/or guidelines will reduce potential health/safety hazard to a less than significant level. .. - .. .. .. .. PopulationIHousing '"" The project site contains existing single-family and multi-family housing, which will be removed in both phases of the project. The RDA will conduct a relocation study to address the purchase of the homes and businesses and the relocation of the occupants. The proposed project is not expected to serve as an inducement for new residential development in the area beyond that predicted in the General Plan. Residents will be relocated to existing residential units. No new residential units will be built as a result of this project. No residential development is associated with the project. Adherence to applicable City, State, and federal standards will reduce potential impacts resulting from the removal of existing housing and residents to a less than significant level. - .. .. .. .. .. Construction of the proposed on-site uses will create short-term construction related jobs. It is anticipated that the development of the project site will utilize construction personnel from the local labor force, thus limiting the demand for housing. Upon completion, most full- or part-time employees will be drawn from the local labor pool. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue will be reduced to a less than significant level and will not be discussed further in the EIR. .. - .. The Lead Agency understands that an existing big-box retailer located just west of the project has expressed interest in the big-box retail building that will be built in the Hub in Phase I, which could result in a relocation of the existing big-box operation. Should such a relocation occur, the existing location would be vacant until another tenant occupies the site; however, the lease payments and the maintenance of the building would continue during the remaining term of the lease. .. .. .. .. The San Bernardino office of Coldwell Banker Richard Ellis has provided information concerning vacancy rates and available inventory of industrial buildings (which include big-box buildings) in the Inland Empire East corridor for the year 2000. The East Corridor includes the cities of Colton, Corona, Moreno Valley, Perris, RedlandsILoma Linda, Rialto, Riverside and San Bernardino. This data shows that the vacancy rate in San Bernardino in the fourth quarter was 3.11%, and throughout the calendar year 2000, the available sites of 100,000 square feet or more steadily declined. Additionally, according to the Quarter-By-Quarter Gross Activity analysis provided in Appendix G, 342,320 square feet of industrial buildings were leased in San Bernardino last year, including two sites (less than 100,000 square feet) which were leased in the fourth quarter. .. ... .. ... ... .. This information suggests that a sufficient demand exists for vacant big-boxes in San Bernardino. Furthermore, because the potential vacancy would be located in a growing commercial corridor within the City and immediately adjacent to the Hub, it is anticipated that the location is an asset, which would appeal to a tenant looking for a commercial or industrial site. .. ... ... .. 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECfS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 2 Introduction.doc 2-7 .. .. - .. !.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Public Services ... ... Fire prevention/protection and emergency medical assistance in the City of San Bernardino is provided by the San Bernardino City Fire Department while the San Bernardino Police Department provides police protection services. Compliance with conditions established by the San Bernardino Fire and/or Police Department(s) will reduce any potential public safety hazards to a less than significant level. - ill - The proposed project is located within the Redlands Unified School District. Payment of fees ($0.33 per square foot of commercial building space) as required by the District will reduce impacts associated with the provision of school services to a less than significant level. .. .. .. As stated in the Initial Study, the amount of solid waste generated daily from the proposed project represents less than I percent of the daily surplus capacity at the landfills which will receive solid waste from the proposed on-site uses. Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact current operations or the expected lifetime oflandfills receiving solid waste from the project site. .. .. .. Maintenance of public facilities and infrastructure in the City would not be significantly altered by development of the proposed project. The services and utilities required to operate this manner of commercial use would be typical of other commercial uses in the City, and will not result in excessive wear and tear on existing circulation facilities. Therefore, potential impacts associated with this issue will be less than significant. No further analysis of this issue in the project EIR is required. .. .. .. ". Recreation .. ... The proposed project will decrease the future need for additional neighborhood and regional parks since existing residential development at the project site will be removed and residents will be relocated within the community. Furthermore, the project site will be committed to commercial uses eliminating the need for additional neighborhood and regional parks within the community. Development of the project site with commercial uses would not contribute to the physical deterioration of park and recreation facilities; therefore, no impact related to this issue is anticipated. The proposed project does not require construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No further analysis of this issue in the project EIR is required. .. ... II" .. .. Utilities and Service Systems ... Water service to the project site will be provided by the San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD), which serves the majority of the City. Groundwater supplies 100 percent of the water provided by the SBMWD. Any increase in water demand resulting from implementation of the proposed project will be partially offset by water no longer demanded by existing on-site uses. Therefore, a minimal net increase in water demand is anticipated. The SBMWD has confirmed there is sufficient water to supply the proposed on-site land uses and will provide written evidence of that fact prior to the issuance of building permits. The SBMWD has stated that an existing water main located within Tippecanoe A venue is sufficiently sized to provide water to the proposed on-site land uses. Standard conditions of approval to the project includes: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant is required to satisfy SBMWD requirements related to the payment of fees and/or the provision of adequate water facilities. All facilities are required to be designed, installed, and maintained to meet SBMWD standards. Prior to development, the project applicant is required to obtain evidence that the proposed project's water demands can be met by the SBMWD. Adherence to these conditions will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than 2-8 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECfS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 2 Introduction.doc "'"' .. ... .. ... ill ... ... .. OIl .. - .. LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. .. .. significant level and no further analysis is required. .. .. Wastewater and sewer treatment for the proposed project will be conveyed to and processed by faciiities at the San Bernardino Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), which provides combined domestic and industrial wastewater treatment services to the cities of San Bernardino and Lorna Linda, as well as the East Valley Water District (EVWD) and Patton State Hospital. The WWTP has a design capacity of 31 to 32 million gallons per day (mgd). Current inflow to the WWTP is approximately 25 mgd, resulting in 5 to 6 mgd of surplus capacity. .. .. .. .. Existing land uses within the project site include single- and multi-family residential units as well as a motel and a restaurant (fast-food) use. A majority of the existing dwelling units within the project area are not connected to the City's sewer system. An 8-inch sewer line extends from the west within Rosewood Drive. An existing restaurant (In-N-Out Burger) is connected to this line. The proposed project envisions the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of retail and restaurant uses. The SBMWD assigns a generation factor of23 gallons per day (gpd) per 1,000 square feet of retail space. Forrestaurant uses, a generation factor of 15 gpd per seat is utilized. .. III .. .. .. Assuming 265,400 square feet of retail uses and 100 seats of restaurant use (within 3,200 square feet of restaurant space), the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 7,604 gpd of wastewater. As previously mentioned, current daily surplus at the San Bernardino WWTP is approximately 5 to 6 mgd. The projected wastewater flows equal approximately 0.15 percent of the daily surplus capacity at WWTP. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant will be required to satisfy SBMWD requirements related to the payment of fees and/or the provision of adequate wastewater facilities. All facilities will be designed, installed, and maintained to meet SBMWD standards. No significant impacts related to the provision of sewer or water treatment services to the project site are anticipated. .. .. .. .... .. ... While the project site is within an area identified as having a moderate or minimal flood hazard, project grading will elevate building pads for on-site structures 1 foot above ground surface to adequately mitigate potential flood hazards. The City of San Bernardino Development Services Department, Public Works Division administers storm drain and flood control facilities within the City. The intent of the City of San Bernardino is to maintain all storm waters within the underground drain system (except for street flows reaching interception points) for a 10-year frequency storm in all areas of the City. Streets are designed to accommodate storm flows between curbs (for 25-year storms) and between rights-of-way (for 100-year storms). Private on-site drains, installed wholly on private property and maintained by the owners, may discharge into local or regional drains. The project applicant will be required to install adequate on-site storm drain facilities. The on-site storm drain system will be designed, installed and maintained per Public Works Division standards. Potential impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project are not expected to be significant. .. .. .. .. .. III III ... ... The proposed project site has previously been developed for urban use. Development of the proposed project will necessitate the removal of existing structures and the removal of old utility services and the installation or reconfiguration of new utility facility service. The installation of utility lines to the project site represents a logical extension of utility lines in a commercially zoned area of the City. The removal, installation, or reconfiguration of utility lines will be conducted according to applicable City and/or utility provider requirements and standards. Development of the proposed project will not result in a disjointed pattern of utility extension. No further analysis is required in the proj ect EIR. .. ... III .. ... .. 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030\Final EIR\Section 2 Introduction.doc 2-9 .. ... ... .. LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. .... .. 2.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .. Description of Cumulative Projects .. .... .. Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR include a discussion of the potential cumulative impacts of a proposed project. Cumulative impacts are defined as two or more individual effects that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the development when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable or probable future developments. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, developments taking place over a period of time. The CEQA Guidelines, Section 15130 (a) and (b), states: .. .. .... .. (a) Cumulative impacts shall be discussed when they are significant, .... .. (b) The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided of the effects attributable to the project. The discussion should be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness. .... .. .. The cumulative baseline for this project includes past, present and probable future projects, which are either approved or not built, in the design phase, or under construction. In determining the cumulative impacts of a proposed project with other area projects, an EIR may either consider a list of past, present and probable future projects, or it may consider a summary of projections method. (State CEQA Guidelines, section l5130(b)(l).) The Draft EIR used the summary of projections method. The cumulative analyses for Traffic and Circulation (Section 4.1), Air Quality (Section 4.2), and Noise (Section 4.3) are based on the City of San Bernardino's traffic model projections, which account for future increases in traffic volumes from cumulative projects. The traffic volumes are in turn used to generate the cumulative background condition in the air and noise analyses. Accordingly, the Draft EIR projected growth in the City and utilized those growth projections for impacts to traffic, air quality and noise in determining whether the project would have cumulatively significant impacts. This projected growth method automatically takes into account any past, present or future projects. Accordingly, the list of cumulative projects set forth in the Draft EIR is not, and need not be, exhaustive of all related projects considered by this method. In any event, the Draft EIR acknowledges that some of the cumulative impacts of the project regarding traffic would remain significant. .... .. .. .. .... .. .... .. .. ... Sources for these projects include projects proposed for the Cities of San Bernardino and Lorna Linda. Table 2.A lists the cumulative projects considered in this analysis while Figure 2.1 indicates the location of the projects cited in Table 2.A. .. .. .. The assessment of the cumulative impacts is done qualitatively since it is difficult to predict timing and density of all the projects. All of these projects have been or will be the subject of separate environmental studies. The cumulative impact analysis is provided in each issue area section of the EIR (i.e., traffic, air quality, noise, etc.) after the discussion on impacts of the proposed project. .. .. ... .. ... .. 3/28/01I\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIRlSection 2 Introduction.doc 2-10 ... .. - - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - .. Table 2.A - Cumulative Projects - - Map # Project City of San Bernardino Location Description - .. 1 Car Dealership 1100 S. E Street, north of Orange Approved: 60,241 sq. ft expansion of Expansion Show Road an existing auto dealership. 2 Office Building 1955 S. Hunts Lane Approved: 35,000 sq. ft. office on 1.39 acres. 3 ~el Bros Sign I Street, south of Congress St., north APfEroved: 14,605 sq. ft. warehouse on ompany of Lytle Creek 3. 8 acres. 4 Rancon TriCity Retail East of Waterman Ave., West of Approved: 3,017,127 sq. ft. total Center Gage Canal, North ofllie 10 consisting of Restaurant, Office Park, Freeway, South of the Santa Ana Hotel Recreation. River .. - - . - .. .. 5 Retail Buildings Comer of Orchard & Laure1wood Proposed: Two retail buildings consisting of 7,500083' ft and approximately 22, sq. ft. on 2.5 acres. 6 Addition to telephone East side of Waterman Ave.; south APftroved: Expansion from an existing switching equipment of Orange Show Road 3, 64 sq. ft. building to 11,298 sq. ft. building on 1.45 acres. 7 Credit Uuion 246 S. Memorial Drive Ap~roved: Construction of 16,600 sq. ft. uilding. 8 Anita's Mexican Food 4"' Street, west ofMt Vernon On Hold: Expansion to 33,068 sq. ft. Corp of food preparation facilities and shop buildings on 1.3 acres. - . .. .. .. llII llII 9 Brier Business Center North of Brier Drive, East of Gifford App'roved: Construction offour office A venue and North 01 Hardt Street bUIldings totaling approximately 80,000 sq. ft. '" III 10 Freight Trucking Tenninal North side ofRialto Ave., east of the Review: 115,178 sq. ft. of truck docks, East Branch of Lytle Creek and West office and shop buildings on 31.5 ofMt. Vernon Ave. acres. .. llII 11 San Bernardino International Trade Center and Specific Plan East and West of Tippecanoe Ave. Approved: 11,400,741 total consisting north of Palm Meadows Dr. south of of Research and Development, Tourist 3"' Street. Conunercial, Trade Par1C, Office and Industrial. .. .. .. City of Loma Linda .. 12 Mancha Industriesj Inc. Located in the southern portion of - Housing and Go f the City's boundary' bounded to the Course Development west by the City of Colton and the east by San Bernardino County. ProJ!9.sed: 790 total acres with 675 dwellin&. units on 245 acres and a 27- hole golf course on 545 acres. .. .. ... . ... .. 3/28/01I\RIV5IPROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIRISection 2lntroduction.doc 2-11 ... .. - .. l3A ASSOCIATES, INC. ... .. .. Map # Project Location 14 Automated Car Wash, North side of Barton Road Auto Lubrication Shop immediatela- east of the Edison and Self-Storage Lot. easement a ~acent to the City COIp Yard. 15 Residential Northeast comer of Lawton and Development Whittier. 16 Social care facility and Northwest comer of Barton Road skilled nursing facility and New Jersey Street. DesCriptiOO Approved: Automated car wash with gas pumps, lube shop and self-storage on 7.73 acres. ... .. .. .. .. Approved: 38 single family dwelling umts on 4.98 acres. .. Approved: 106,000 sq, ft. of social care facility ano 44,OOU sq. ft. of skilled nursing care facility on 6.3 acres. .. .. 2.7 DOCUMENT FORMAT .. To assist the reader's review of the document, the following describes the format of the EIR. .. . Section 1.0 contains the Executive Summary of the EIR document, listing all project impacts, mitigation measures that have been recommended to reduce any significant impacts of the proposed project, and the level of significance of each impact following mitigation. The summary is presented in a matrix (tabular) format. .. ... .. . Section 2.0 contains a discussion of the EIR's purpose, background, and legal requirements, as well as this outline of the document's format. A summary discussion of the effec1s found not to be significant is also included in this chapter. In addition, a discussion on cumulative projects is provided. .. .. .. . Section 3.0 contains the description for the proposed project, including location and project objectives. .. .. . Section 4.0 contains the environmental analysis of the proposed project. Discussion of environmental setting, impacts, and mitigation by environmental topic (e.g., traffic, air quality, noise, and cultural resources) is organized under the following framework: .. .. .. Existing Setting. Information in the existing setting contains a detailed discussion of the local and regional environmental conditions (both environmental and man-made) in existence at the time the EIR was prepared. Existing setting information provides the reader with the "baseline" from which future impacts are analyzed, and provides a standard against which to measure these impacts. ... - .. .. Existing Policies and Regulations. Identifies local, regional, State or federal regulations, requirements, standards or guidelines that apply to the proposed project. .. .. Thresholds of Significance. Determinations regarding the significance of potential impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project are provided. .. .. Impacts. An analysis of potential impacts of the proposed project construction and operation is presented in this section. This discussion focuses on the impacts of implementation of the proposed project, and includes potential short-tenn/long-term .. .. 3/28/01\\RIV5\PROmCfS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 2 Introduction.doc 2-12 - .. - - l..SA ASSOCIATES, INC. - . .. and direcllindirect project impacts, and consistency with applicable planning documents or regulations including the City of San Bernardino General Plan. .. Mitigation Measures. The measures proposed to mitigate any potential impacts of the proposed project are identified and include, where appropriate, references to their timing and the party(ies) responsible for implementation. . .. .. Level of Significance after Mitigation. Provides a conclusionary statement as to whether implernentation of the proposed mitigation will reduce the proposed project's impacts to a level less than significant or not .. .. Cumulative Impacts. Analysis of the potential cumulative project impacts in conjunction with reasonably foreseeable development within the study area. This discussion focuses on the potential environmental effects of the proposed project when combined with the potential build out of future planned development associated with the City's General Plan. .. .. .. . Section 5.0 contains discussions of additional topics required by CEQA, including long-term effects of the proposed project, significant irreversible environmental changes, and growth inducing impacts. .. .. ... . Section 6.0 contains discussion of alternatives to development of the proposed project As allowed by CEQA, most of the impacts of these alternatives are evaluated at a more general level than the analyses in Section 4.0. This section also evaluates the proposed effects of the No Project and No Build Alternative and identifies the Environmentally Superior Alternative. .. .. .. . Sections 7.0 through 9.0 contain listings of organizations and persons consulted in preparation of the EIR, the EIR preparers, and reference documents used. .. .. . The Appendices (under separate cover) contain copies of the Initial Study and NOP comment letters, technical reports, and any relevant correspondence received during the course of the proposed project ... .. ,.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. lilt ... lilt 3/28/011\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIRISection 2 Introduction.doc 2-13 .. .. - .. - .. - - .. .. .. .. - .. - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... ... I;; ~ .. ~ ~ o '"' \ .1S VW\I1lVlV o 7j1! Q::I".... UJ~Q:: <tlQ::O ~ ;t\\ ~~& ~~i:i;;:<i' <:::---'~I:>: fi!~ ~ 1/:", "- W ~ " e~ < ~ is V1N't:IO:lI1V~ 3A't/ M3IA NIV1NnOW lIQ,....~oml'l S 3A't/ 30NV:>3ddU I;; C ll: M ~ ~ ~ 2 l.S 3 S w 1I c ~ ll: 3^,,' NON't:I3A lNnOW ~ "' ~ c 2l '" ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ i _g ~ B _ i:n II 'e- 0.. - " " " " "eo 'e- 0.. 0.. Q I"T- ~ow:, I rol :U ...l ' :(<-0 ~ z ili ~ CANYON ~ ~ z c '" ~ '" ~ '" f i i I :-----------------1 ! I i---J I i e I :_nl ,un___J : :' 1 , ' , ' : : I' , ' , ' : ,'"--------____~_' . " " 1'l z ~ W ll: I;; Z W ~ W ~ Z ~ fi! ~ ~ N1 SlNnH <i'ri ,,-1"/ ' ~",d""~ ~! ~I , 0.> , UI~ O.~ ZIO Q'U o:lw <.C ZI- 0:'" w,o: 1II1~ Z'o: ~I i i i i i i i ...... o~ lZl .::: C +J ~~~ 1:::lQ::.~ E- 0 "U ... ""~ 6~ C1) ~"5 > .5 E:o,p ","c<I ~"...... .......;::l ~.g S f.;;'";::l tliU N Q) ... ;::l OJ) ..... ~ ~ <~ '" " ~ 1;1 ~ (./) .~ ~ .( ~ < s --I~ <:z ~ ~ ~ 'IS - - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - .. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ... 3.1 GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING .. .. The proposed project is located within the Inland Empire Region of southern California in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County. The site is located adjacent to 1-10, a main east-west transportation corridor, and 2 miles east of Interstate 215 (1-215), a major north-south transportation corridor. The cities of Colton, Grand Terrace, Highland, Redlands, and Lorna Linda, the County of Riverside, and unincorporated pockets of San Bernardino County are located within 5 miles of the project site. .. .. .. .. The project site is located in an area where the terrain is generally flat, with a slope ofless than I percent. No natural streams or major drainage courses are present on site. On-site vegetation consists of ruderal vegetation as well as non-native and/or ornamental vegetation. No unique geologic, biologic, or archeological/paleontological resources are located within the limits of the project site. The project site has been previously disturbed and occupied. .. ... .. .. Current on-site land uses include single- and multi-family residential dwellings (95 units), a drive- thru restaurant, a motel, and several parcels of vacant or unimproved lands. Of the 79 parcels within the project site, 20 have no existing structures or are vacant, while 54 are occupied with residential structures. Commercial structures have been constructed on two parcels. Adjacent land uses include commercial and residential uses to the east on the east side of Tippecanoe Avenue, restaurant and retail and vacant disturbed land to the north and west, and 1-10 to the south. The north side of the project site is adjacent to a Staples retail center and a Costco store. To the west and adjacent to the project site, is an existing Sports-Mart and Sam's Club shopping center with smaller uses (pet store, nail salon, and small restaurant). ... .. .. .. i. .... Retail, office, and restaurant uses are located north and west of the proposed project site, within an area designated "CR-3" by the City's General Plan. Lands east and southwest of the project site are designated "CG-I" (General Commercial) in the City's General Plan and are developed with commercial uses (to the southwest) of a mixture of commercial and residential uses and vacant land (to the east). The area south ofI-IO located within the City of Loma Linda is developed with commercial uses along Anderson Street (Tippecanoe Avenue) and Redlands Boulevard (Figure 3.1). .It ... lit ,.. 3.2 BACKGROUND I. City of San Bernardino General Plan ,... ,... The project site is located within the City's CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club) district. This district permits a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants, hotel/motels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar services. In addition, this district allows single-family residential uses legally established prior to June 3, 1991 that are currently located on site. '1Ia ,. "" ... Implementation of the proposed project will require the removal of all exiting on-site structures. Development of the proposed project will occur in two phases, with the demolition of existing structures to precede each stage of development. Residential units within the portion of the site to be acquired and later developed as Phase II, may be affected by the construction and operation of retail and restaurant uses planned for Phase I (increased traffic, construction and vehicle emissions, increased noise, light and glare). ill ... . ill 3/28/01 (\\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFlNAL EIRISECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRlPTION.DOC) 3-1 ... ... - - .. - a _II r<l .~ 8 ~~~ CI) 'I 'il.,," -'=- .....;:l ;c .. . .. .Cl .Cl C ! ~ .....!!'.!II OJ:) ] 1 1l ~ .. e j il: ~ .- Hi~i;8]~'ih ~ s..::s:!151 =~~~ !nHH~jlU ~8u]]];f;i!~~~~ 1;~~~g~~~~IiJ~1 - - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. - .. .. III .. .. .. ... .... ill ... .. .. .. .. ... o l:: OJ O:c'" '- ,,0-, 1!."...... O:SCl::;~ E- s:: ","'c<s ~W ~.!j eo "5_ s:: ;:l::3'- '- 'i:'1:) ..c",S:: .;!E;:l .......0:0 ",l:?t:: ~';;:;:l ~CZl ~z <~ <> :ii: U)'1 ~ -< -l~ <> - - - .. ... .. .. .. - iii .. ... .. ill .. . .. .. ... ill .. iii """ .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. """ .. ... iii ... .. UA ASSOCIATES, INC. 3.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The primary goals of the HUB in San Bernardino are as follows: . Ensure that development of the site is in accordance with established functional standards and design and aesthetic standards contained in the City's Development Code. . Develop land uses that represent a logical extension of adjacent development. . Assure the commercial development will attract businesses that will strengthen the economic viability of the City by providing a productive mix of tax generating uses. . Establish a well-balanced and carefully planned collection of specialized and general retail outlets, which can take advantage of the site's established accessibility. . Provide adequate amenities, facilities, infrastructure, and services to support the activity created by the proposed project. . Create employment opportunities for citizens of the City and surrounding communities. . Eliminate existing blighted areas, which have had a negative impact on the surrounding area and develop uses that will enhance the area's image. . Implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Inland Valley Redevelopment Agency and compliment the efforts of the Inland Valley Draft Plan to foster the reuse of the former Norton Air Force Base under the redevelopment cooperation agreement among the IVDA and the City and the RDA. 3/28/01 (\\RNSIPROJECTSICB1J030IFINAL E1RISECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.DOC) 3-5 - .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. III .. III .. .. ~ III .. .. .. III .. .. .. \It "" .. .. III II"' III ... .. ... .. LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 4.0 EXISTING SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURE 4.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared by LSA in JanllllI)', 2001 to assess the potential circulation impacts associated with the proposed development of The Hub project. The technical analysis is presented in its entirety in Appendix B of this EIR and is summarized in the discussion below. The TIA for the proposed project has been prepared according to the provisions of the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. Under the CMP guidelines, this TIA examines potential project impacts for two conditions: . Year of Project Opening Conditions - The CMP guidelines require an assessment of circulation improvements that will be required to accommodate forecast traffic under project opening day conditions (i.e., full build out of the project as the worst case scenario). For purposes of the CMP analysis, a year 2002 horizon was selected as the opening day. The impact section of this EIR summarizes the project impacts under the year 2002 conditions. . Year 2020 Build Out Conditions - The forecast 2020 conditions are based on traffic data from the East Valley Traffic Model which is maintained by the City of San Bernardino. For purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis, this scenario represents the highest level of analysis developed by SCAG, the San Bernardino Association of Governments (SANBAG), and other local and regional agencies. The cumulative section of this EIR summarizes the project impacts under the cumulative year 2020 condition. Specific methodologies used to develop forecast conditions for this analysis are described in detail in the technical report (Appendix B). Consistent with CMP requirements, the TIA analysis examines existing and forecast future traffic conditions for the p.m. peak hour. At the request of the City of San Bernardino, the TIA included an examination of mid-day peak hour conditions for selected locations. The study area and resulting analysis intersections were identified per CMP criteria and in consultation with City staff. The study area locations are illustrated in Figure 4.1.1. Specifically, the study area includes the following 18 intersections and project access locations: . Waterman Avenue/Mill Street - p.m. peak hour only Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - p.m. peak hour only Waterman AvenueNanderbilt Way - p.m. peak hour only Waterman AvenueIHospitality Lane - mid-day and p.m. peak hours 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Harriman Place/Hospitality Lane - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Tippecanoe Avenue/Mill Street - p.m. peak hour only Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue - p.m. peak hour only Tippecanoe A venue/Hospitality Lane - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Tippecanoe A venueILaurelwood Drive - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Tippecanoe A venue/I-l 0 Westbound Ramps - mid-day and p.m. peak hours . . . . . . . . . . . 3/28101 (\\RJV5\PROJECTSICBD030\Final EIRlSection 4.1 Traffic DEIR.doc) 4.1-1 - - l.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. - .. 3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS .. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of commercial space on 24.5 acres located at the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and the San Bernardino Freeway (1-10). The 24.5-acre site is located within the CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club District), lies adjacent to the freeway, and is contiguous with commercial property. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of 17.57 acres and will include all land south of the Harriman Place extension and five parcels at the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place. The gross square footage of Phase I buildings will be approximately 198,600 square feet, including a 130,400-square-foot warehouse discount center with an unattended gas station, a 45,000-square-foot general retail building, the relocation of a drive-thru restaurant from its present location at the northwest comer of Rosewood Drive and Tippecanoe Avenue farther to the north, and two pad buildings measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet each. A Disposition and Development Agreement between the applicant and the RDA of the City of San Bernardino will be completed prior to implementation of the proposed project. - - '" .. - .. - -- . Phase II will consist of 6.93 acres, including the remaining land north of the Harriman Place extension to the western property boundary. The gross square footage of Phase II buildings will be a maximum of 70,000 square feet, including two 25,000- to 30,000-square-foot retail buildings and one pad building measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet. Potential tenants of these buildings are undefined at this time. The proposed project will include 1,309 parking spaces. ""' 1; .. .. ~ .. II'" .. Portions ofthree existing streets, Rosewood, Laurelwood, and Orchard Drives, within the project site will be vacated. Harriman Place will be extended eastward across the project site, intersecting with Tippecanoe Avenue at the eastern boundary of the project site. The City recently installed a signal light at the intersection of Laurelwood and Tippecanoe Avenue. In the future, this will become the intersection of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue. The extension of Harriman Place will be built in phases, with the first phase consisting of the installation of a 62-foot wide roadway. The second phase of the Harriman Place extension will widen the roadway by an additional 22 feet. II'" .. .. In order to accommodate the proposed commercial uses, existing on-site structures will be cleared from the site. Persons currently residing within the limits of the project site will be relocated. During Phase I of the proposed project, 49 residential units, the motel, and the existing drive-thru restaurant will be acquired and demolished and the drive-thru restaurant will be relocated adjacent to the southwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place. Phase II will include the acquisition and removal of the remaining 46 residential units from the project site and will complete build out of the proposed project. ,.. , .. ... .. .. The construction and operation of Phase 1 of the proposed project would create approximately 289 full-time equivalent (FIE) construction jobs and approximately 497 FTE retail/commercial positions. Additional 315 jobs would be indirectly created during this phase of the proposed project. Construction and operation of Phase II would directly and indirectly create 277 and 111 jobs, respectively. At full build out, the construction and operation of the proposed project will result in the creation ofapproximately 1,489 FTE jobs. .. .. - .. .. .. .. .. 3/28/01 (\\RIV5\PROJECTSICBIJ030IFINAL EIRISEcnON 3 PROJECT DESCRlPTION.DOC) 3-3 ... .. - lilt LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - .. 3.4 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS/PERMITS REQUIRED - . City of San Bernardino General Plan Amendment (GPA-OI-OI) - to amend the General Plan allowing development of drive-thru restaurants within the CR-3 land use district, subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). .. - - . City of San Bernardino Development Code Amendment (DCA 01-03) - to amend the Development Code allowing development of drive-thru restaurants within the CR-3 land use district, subject to a CUP. .. .. - . Santa Ana Water Quality Control Board, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) (Section 402) Permit .. . California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Encroachment Permit .. .. . City of San Bernardino Encroachment Permit ... . Redevelopment Agency (RDA) of the City of San Bemardino approval of Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between developer and Agency and approval of (OP A) with existing commercial business (drive-thru) for Harriman Place Extension Improvements, and land acquisition/land assembly by the RDA with assistance by the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) under an agreement between the RDA and the IVDA .. WI III . City of San Bernardino approval of a Tentative Parcel Map .. ill . City of San Bernardino Hazardous Materials PermitlBusiness Plan .. . City of San Bernardino approval of a Conditional Use Permit (for the proposed drive-thru restaurant) III .. . City of San Bernardino approval of a Development Permit II (inclusive of construction permits for the project) .. '"' .. . State of California, Office of Historic Preservation Section 106 Clearance . State Infrastructure Bank Loan Application (for Harriman Place Extension) .. .. . Approval of housing relocation plan for the proposed project in support of use of Agency low and moderate income housing funds and/or HUD relocation funds. ... . City of San Bernardino approval of Demolition Permits .. . City of San Bernardino approval of a Traffic Improvement Analysis .. .. . City of San Bernardino Tree Removal Permit ... .. .. III 3/28/01 (\1RJV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.DOC) 3-4 .. lilt r . r r " I '" c " C/) ?\ N .. ;.., " 2l c ~ '< > ~ i ~ ~ " z:> r(> ~ o' <!. en Z Q..~ '< ;;.;;1 >~" ..,"'.... (1)::i? Ill""'" ......'" -. vS::S (1)-,,, -~l:> (1)~,,, ::J"1:j b:l ~l:>" ~.C":l "'f ::s -", III ~l:> =-.~ a. o c-. .......'" ... _0 "Tj .... CICl s:: .., (1) ~ ..... ..... r .. ,..."" . II'" "'J .. .. ... '" LA CADENA OR MOUNT VERNON AVE ~ :ll ~ '< o :ll ~~ ~c ~~ <>i' 47 S E 5T g o m :!i ~ ~ m ~ ~ 'y l"l . .m - Cl w l"l '" z 50 '=' ..., ..., . . .2. a. n n co p. p. ~ :-0 en :ll z ~ C' m '" 0 Q. ~ m ..., '< :ll n :> 0 ~ ~ . ~ n '" ::c ., '" z 0 I: 0 0 0 ~ . :;l '0 '" CALIFORNIA AVE ~ c " o z ;; ~ '" > z '" m :ll z > :ll o Z o ~ m ALAS AMA ST ~ Q 42 " ?' ~ ~ - '" . " . 60 " ?' ~ '" .... 50 ... ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. ... - ... . Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Anderson Street/Redlands Boulevard - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Westerly Phase 1 Project Access/Harriman Place - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Primary Access/Harriman Place - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Phase II Central Access/Harriman Place - mid-day and p.m. peak hours Easterly Access/Harriman Place - mid-day and p.m. peak hours. . - . . ... . . .. ... .. Environmental Setting ... Existing Conditions .. . Existing Roadway System - .. An inventory of the existing study area street system was conducted by LSA during August and September, 2000. A summary of the existing traffic counts is provided in the appendices to the TIA. The existing street network, number of mid-block lanes and intersection traffic control are presented in Figure 4.1.2. The number of mid-block arterial lanes indicates the average number of through travel lanes. ... .. ,.. .. Figure 4.1.3 illustrates the existing turn lanes at study area intersections. All existing intersections are currently signalized, with the exception of the Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive intersection, where Rosewood Drive is controlled with stop signs. ... ... Regional access is provided via the 1-10 freeway, located immediately south of the project site. Access to the project site is provided via an interchange at Tippecanoe Avenue (access to/from the east and west on 1-10). Access to and from the west on 1-10 is also provided via the 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane. ill .. ... . Existing Traffic Conditions ill The existing p.m. peak hour turn volumes for the analysis intersections are illustrated in Figure 4.1.4, and existing mid-day peak hour volumes are illustrated in Figure 4.1.5. Base traffic counts were collected by LSA during August and September, 2000. An intersection level of service analysis was conducted for this condition to determine current circulation system performance. .. ... ... Table 4.I.A presents the existing condition intersection level of service analysis summary. Level of service calculation worksheets are contained in Appendix B. As this summary indicates, all study area intersections are currently operating within the City's LOS D threshold, with the exception of: ill ... .. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps (mid-day and p.m. peak hours). Anderson Street/Redlands Boulevard (mid-day peak hour). ... .. Table 4.I.B summarizes the existing p.m. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. Peak hour volumes were taken from the San Bernardino County CMP freeway analysis. As seen in Table 4.I.B, all freeway segments examined are currently operating at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better). ... iii ... iii 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal E1R\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIR.doc) 4.1-3 .. .. ... ... ... .. 6 6 ... MILL ST III 4 4 ... .. 4 4 - .. CENTRAL AVE 4 4 2 .. w .. ~ w 4 ... 4 0 z .. <( u W Q. Q. ... i= - 4 w ORANGE SHOW RD ~ 4 4 "" z .. <( 4 :; cr w .. ~ s: 4 ill ... .. 6 4 VANDERBILT ... WY 6 6 .. DR HOSPITALITY LN 4 .. .. REDLANDS BLVD .. 4 4 4 .. 4 4 .. .. LEGEND .. 4 Number of Lanes .. ~ Signal .. 1/30/01 (CBD030/EIRn'rafjic-Section) Figure 4.1.2 ... ... L S ^ .. ~ The Hub in San Bernardino .. 0' 1,750' 3,500' N Environmental Impact Report ... Existing Circulation System .. I C/) > tT1 >: _. en - .... ::s CICl S'~ ct ;;.;;1 ""tC5t";) ~"';t:: 0:1;:: ::t.r\) t::J- 0'" -. iii'" ::s_", CJ~~ (1)"1:j b:l 01:>" 3 ~::l (1) ~I:> q~~ -.0 -. 0...'" en _0 ... , .. - . " . . .. . . . "Tj _. CICl s:: .., (1) ~ 0-. WATERMAN AVE 0 0- \ ~ ~ f7(', 0 m " 0 ~ ?' _~ G ~ ~ Q >~ ~ ~ " ~ m en ~ :I: I- ~ . < :ll ~ ~ 0 AIVOEIlS~E U e~~99-0~o TIPPECANOE AVE 0- ~~ .. I ~ 0 '" '" I: ~ 0 - !"> '"" - :I: ~ -< .. -C' ~ 3. ii ~ "C 3 3 '" .. !;l - " l .. - " " " ~ 0 - :f - '" ..J ..JUl. T ..J~~l. :> f lil ~ f C5 "C ~ ![ J -d~ ~ J -dt~ en - ~ ~ l - r- .J. - " - T -. T !;? - :-' !" !" -< ::;: ::l -c' .. "C "C l ii 16 l '" !;l 3 !;l " - .. ~ " - lil " lil - - ~ ~ ,~l. - :> ,~l. f ~ - !!!. f ~ 0 iil J 0 J J .,~ " .,t~ ~ .,., ~ ~ <Q '" - - en - !<l. - ". T 8" - ~ c: T " :>:l c. c. :>:l .. 3 "C en - !>' ~ ~ -< ~ ::l -C' "C "C ii 16 @ 3 ~ !;l ~ .. - " " " lil - lil - - :> ~ ~ + - I .J-l. f !!!. ,~l. f f en .. .. is. .,~ 0 " J .,t~ ~ J m - CD ~ .. T '" - en 3 - - 15' .. ::;: - 0 a. T "< c: -. " ::r c. 0 :>:l ~ .. 3 "C en - !>' ,... z ,... -< ::;: 0 :> -C' ff " 16 !!? l c. ~ CD <5 '" !;l ~ 0 01 ~ " - ~ 0 0 - " - " '" l s en - ~ - - "" '..J ~ ~ l. ..JHl. ..J~l. ,. :>:l f f :I: f ~ '" 0 c. or 0 en C' J en J "C j .,.,t,. " .,tt~. "2. ![ c. + 3 en ![ J ~ r- CD - ~ ~ ~ r- T r- " - " " - - - -. T -. - ?' P . ::l - "C 0 "C ~ ::;: l '" <> '" .. en " - go - lil - c - ~ ,l. f " ..J~~l. c. f !!!. :>:l r- .. .. J .,~ 3 J .,t~ c "C @ en ~ - 3: .J. lil 8. - "C - !;? T ![ -. ~ r- " " ~ ~ Q " ::: '< ~ ~ ~ "- ..... w I"" .. I C/) > m ;:< ..... '" - ..... ::s CICl ,-., IV 0 0 0 '-' :c ~ '"tI (tlt>] Ill'" ~;;.;;1 :I:~ " o~~ S::""," ""'t:::s _. ..,ii; '" s::-'" "Tj 3 ~~ .... CICl "1:jb:l Ei ~~" .....~::l (tl s:: I:> ~ a~ it ..... 0-' ~ (tl... '" '" _0 .. r .. r ~ , ~ , , ~ ~ . ~ .. .. ~ ~ . 0-. WATERMAN AVE 0 0- \ ~ ~ r7~---- ~ ( 1\ I: 0 m 0 :!i " 0) G ?' ~ ~ r- " ~ '1 m ~ U> m :J: t- ~ . > :ll II 0 ANOEFlSQIo; ~E e9ige-e~ ~ ~ 0 TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I r;; z 0 U> '" I: 0 II ~ !" ,.. ~ .... I ::;: .. rt "'C. 3. ." '" l 32 3 l66 3 l146 @ '" .. "'''' -"'- ::J .. ::J .. jj~~ ::J 00 '" '" 0 .... -1204 ." -17 - "'.. - 908 '" .J [ 18 :f .J~L. [ 31 ~ .J~L. [104 ~ 0 l!!. U> ~ ." ~ ~ 241 J -d ,- f!2 92 J -d ,- U> 1126- ,- ~ ~ 15, '" r 15- ...."'''' 1052- "''''- ::J 0 '" "'-- '" <0 '" a. 103, '" 125, ...."'.... Si' ~ :-' !'-' !'-' .... .... ~ "'C. "'C. 1il 1il CD @ @ l151 3 196 ::J ::J '" '" .. -.. - 0 l 524 0 00 '" ::J '" '" 00 '" '" .... 0 <0 -n2 "''''0 -958 [ )> .J~L. [ 0 ~ .J~L. [ 110 - 1159 < a l!!. T ~ <5 iil -d ,- -d ,- ::J ~ 438 J ~,- f!2 83 J '" 81 J '" ~ 846- "'''' 875- 000 '" 905- "'-'" -0 ::T 00 '" '" <0.... 0, 0 55, 0 " :IE a. :>::J :>::J a. .. 3 ." U> ~ ?' ~ ~ =I ~ .... "'C. ." ." 1 CD '" 3 @ ::J l 33 .. l11 ::J Rlom 0 O~CD ::J - - ~ - 695 '" "''''''' - 686 I "'....'" -1116 ~ .J~L. [ 846 ~ .J~L. [ 335 .J~L. [ 130 ~ 1); .. ::J <::I ::J ~t,- a. ~t,- m to 53 J '" 36J .. 807_ '" ~ !!l. 3 825- <0"'''' g 281 , .. 587- 00 - '" ~ 00 .... a. -"'- 129, '" " 98, "'''' ::J S' a. 0 ?i ~ 3 ." U> ~ !D ~ Z ~ 0 .... ~ ~ ~ "'C. 'i? a. 1il CD '" @ 3 (;l l142 l128 l177 ." 0 .. - ::J '" '" .. ...."'''' ~ ::J <0"'.... ~ ...."'- ::J 00.... - ~ "''''0 - 566 <0"'- - 914 ~ "'-.... -812 I; ~ C! :>::J .J~L. [ 321 .J~L. [ 27 .J~L. [ 116 'm- '" l!!. :f a. I 0 -< ii> 0 U> ::J ~t,- U> ~t,- ." ~t,- [3 a. 90J ." 335 J ~ 334 J U> ~ r- to ~ ~ ~ 583- o~~ ~ 692 - .. "'- r 513- .. '" <0 0_'" <0 00 00 ~ 57, 00000 r 41, ::J 762, '" 00 ::J ~ ?' P . =I ~ ." <::I ." ~ '" @ l40 !e. l73 ::J ~~~ g "'....- 0 -.. '" '" -1370 " 0"'00 -400 ~ .J~L. [ 16 ::J .J~L. [ 59 a. :>::J ?> .. .. 3 c ~t,- ~t,- Ci1 177J ." 413 J <e. ;e I 8- 1053 - -"'''' 0 81- "''"''"' '" U> - <0 0 21, '2. 112, "'0 c !!!: ~ ~ r ::J '" '1 0: Q ~ '< ~ ~ ~ ~ r ... . r r r r .. . .. ... - ,ill" .... ~ . . . , ., I C/) > '" '< :: " ~ '< ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ . ANOEFlSQIy ~E o \ ~ I r70--....~ ( 1 _1 G OJ ~ , . ~ -~ H u ~i-' ~ o en '" I: o WATERMAN AVE o ~ " m '" :J: ~ :ll o o ~ " ?' ~ en .... ~ m TIPPECANOE AVE \\ ~ ,.. ~ .... ~ ,,' CD 1 '" l 3 3 8l"'''' l 259 ll> " <D " "'- lil '" -1083 "'........ -569 .J (30 ~ .J~L. (106 ~ ~ I 0 ?1 '" -d,- ,- "2. 329 J '" 1275- !!I CD [ 12, '" ~ 456- ~....- .... "'- r- 734, -"'- " !;i' ~ ~ !" =l , ~ "C 0> "C ::;; CD " CD l103 ll> " 60 _ <D '" lil l501 ....-'" 0 "''''.... -226 ~ <: .J~L. - 1010 " ( 70 Q. ?i 0> 3 -d,- ~ 419 J .,,- "C 532 J <e. '" "'.... I 149- ~go g- 949- "'0 0 '" en '" 533 , "'0.... <: "C " ~ Q. ;;0 ~ ll> 3 r- "C " '" ~ !'" ~ .... I -6' ll> 1il 3. 3 @ ll> l49 " !ll~ " "'''' 0 " ~~~ CD 0'" - 708 :f -31 i .JL. ( 515 0 .J~L. ( 20 '" "2. 5 !!I .,t,- m ~ 254 J ll> '" 890_ r- go 181, " 31- -"'''' C> "'.... <: 119, .... en " Q. ;;0 ll> 3 lil ~ ~ tr1 ~ .... ,,' :>< Q. "C CD .... CD @ '" OJ l163 l160 - 0 " _. -~'" .... '" ::s " _ en lil C> '" '" en en '" - 571 '" <D C> - 649 CICl "" .J~L. ~ .J~L. ---- ;;0 ( 236 CD ( 38 N CD 3: Q. 0 0> 0 0 " .,t,- '" .,t,- Q. 101 J ... 424 J 0 '" ~ '-' CD 517 - -"'''' ~ <: 641- ...."'- ~ Q. ~<DO .... <D '" 89, -- r- 27 , " _. Q.. I CI ~ ~ "ti !=' (tlt>j .... Ill'" -6' ;>;";;.;;1 "C CD :I: ~ " " l41 ll> " O~~ 0 00 .... CD - '" en - 1233 S::""," ~ .J~L. ( 7 1-1;: _. CD _:)i:, ;0 i'" s::-'" "Tj ll> <: .,t,- :3 ~~ .... Cil 29 J ~]b:l CICl ~ s:: 8- 1008- "''''.... 0" " @ 0 -" 10, -~'" !;i' s:: I:> ~ 3~i3.. ..... 0-' (tl" '" VI '" _0 - - - - - .. - .. - .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. Table 4.1.A - Existing (2000) Intersection Levels of Service Mid-Day Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Interseetion V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS I. Waterman Avenue/Mill Street not examined 0.65 38.8 D 2. Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road not examined 0.63 36.4 D 3. Waterman AvenuelVanderbilt Way not examined 0.66 33.5 C 4. Waterman Avenue/Hospitality Lane 0.59 34.5 C 0.94 50.6 D 5 . 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane 0.94 50.6 D 0.74 32.7 C 6 . Harriman Place/Hospitality Lane 0.48 26.0 C 0.42 24.5 C 7 . Tippecanoe A venue/Mill Street not examined 0.51 18.0 B 8 . Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Ave. not examined 0.78 40.2 D 9 . Tippecanoe A venue/Hospitality Lane 0.67 24.8 C 0.68 25.6 C 10 . Tippecanoe A venueILaurelwood Drive 0.54 25.5 C 0.50 22.5 C II . Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drivel 16.9 C 17.8 C 12 . Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps 0.84 28.2 C 0.80 29.8 C 13 . Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps 1.07 54.4 F * 1.05 61.8 F * 14 . Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard 0.68 55.7 E * 0.76 37.3 D "" .. * LOS exceeds threshold criteria. ... III "" .. ... .. ... III ... .. ... .. - ... - ... Notes: V/C = Volume/capacity ratio LOS = Level of Service Unsignalized intersection. 4/5/01 (R:\CBD030\Draft EIRlSection 4.1 Tables.xlslExist LOS) - ... ... - - .. - . - .. ... . - . .. .. .. .. "" .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .. . ... ... ... . ... .. - - - ... LSAASSOCIATES, INC. Table 4.1.B - Existing (2000) P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Segments Lanes Cap. Total Vol. PHF V/C LOS 1-10 Eastbound Ninth Street to Mount Vernon Avenue Mount Vernon Avenue to 1-215 1-215 to Waterman Avenue Waterman Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue Tippecanoe Avenue to Mountain View Avenue Mountain View Avenue to California Avenue California Avenue to Alabama Street Alabama Street to SR-30 4 8,800 6,330 6,550 0.74 C 4 8,800 6,380 6,600 0.75 C 4 8,800 8,170 8,450 0.96 E 4 8,800 7,130 7,370 0.84 D 4 8,800 6,670 6,900 0.78 D 4 8,800 6,330 6,550 0.74 C 4 8,800 6,720 6,950 0.79 D 4 8,800 6,480 6,700 0.76 C 1-10 Westbound Mount Vernon Avenue to Ninth Street 1-215 to Mount Vernon Avenue Waterman Avenue to 1-215 Tippecanoe Avenue to Waterman Avenue Mountain View Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue California Avenue to Mountain View Avenue Alabama Street to California Avenue SR-30 to Alabama Street 4 8,800 5,170 5,350 0.61 C 4 8,800 5,220 5,400 0.61 C 4 8,800 6,030 6,240 0.71 C 4 8,800 5,270 5,450 0.62 C 4 8,800 4,930 5,100 0.58 C 4 8,800 4,670 4,830 0.55 C 4 8,800 4,480 4,630 0.53 B 4 8,800 4,320 4,470 0.51 B 415/01 (R:\CBD0301Draft EIR\Section 4.1 Tables.xlslExist Fwy) - ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... Year 2002 Without Project Conditions - - Future year 2002 traffic conditions are based on traffic forecasts provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) traffic model. A detailed discussion of the development of future traffic volumes is contained in Appendix B. - - - The analysis of 2002 condition is based on existing circulation system, as there are no committed improvements in the vicinity of the project site. - . Year 2002 Traffic Conditions ... Figure 4.1.6 illustrates the year 2002 without project p.m. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. Figure 4.1.7 illustrates the year 2002 without project mid-day peak hour turn volumes. The year 2002 without project levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in Table 4.1.C. The level of service calculation sheets are contained in Appendix B. .. ... .. ... As indicated in Table 4.I.C, all intersections examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service under year 2002 background conditions, with the exception of the following: .. ... Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps (mid-day and p.m. peak hour). .. .. Table 4.1.0 summarizes the projected year 2002 without project p.m. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table 4.I.D, all freeway segments examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 without project conditions, with the exception of: ... ... 1-10 Eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue .. ... Year 2020 Without Project Conditions ... Future year 2020 traffic conditions are based on traffic forecasts provided by the East Valley model for year 2020 using the methodology discussed under the Analysis Methodology section of the TIA (Appendix B). Due to the relatively high proportion of truck traffic in the vicinity of the project site, adjustments were made to account for the effects of truck trips on roadway conditions. In addition, traffic generated by future development of the San Bernardino International Trade Center and Airport Specific Plan was added to the roadway system in the project vicinity. .. .. ... - The same circulation improvements and stop control examined in the 2002 analysis are also used for the year 2020 analysis. ... .. . Year 2020 Traffic Conditions ... Figure 4.1.8 illustrates the year 2020 without project p.m. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. Figure 4.1.9 illustrates the year 2020 without project mid-day peak hour turn volumes. The levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in Table 4.I.E. ... ... .... - - 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIR.doc) 4.1-10 ... .. ~ ~ .. . . .. .. , , , , I C/) > '" '< :: ?l ~ :;; '< ~ ~ ~ "'- ; ;! '; z ANOEFlSQIv ~E 0-. WATERMAN AVE \ ~ ~ r7r\ 0) G ~ ~ ~ t- . s: ~ ~ H e~\~8$-e~ ~ ~ tU- '---0 z o '" '" ~ o 0- o ~ G> m '" J: ~ :ll o o m :!i ~ ~ " ?' ~ '" .... TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I ~ ~ !'> ,... ~ --l ::I: :E III is' 3. III "0 3 S- .. l32 l67 3 ll50 &l ~ III W., _w_ ::> III ::> ~oU8 ::> oo """ 0 '" -1301 "" -16 oo-., -940 .. :E I -'~l.. :>> -' ( 18 0 -'~l.. ( 31 ( 110 ~ '" "0 ::c ~ 0 246 J .,t,.. f!2 102 J .,t,.. '" 1225- ,.. ~ .. ~ 15, w ..... 14- ....,w 1090- "w- ::> 0 w ..."'- ...-., 0. 104 , ., 144 , "''''''' ~ - :-"' !'> !'> --l --l ~ is' is' Tll Tll S- !il &l l150 3 l111 ::> ::> ., ., III -....- 0 l 535 ~ ~.,.... ::> w...", .. co '" -836 ......w - 992 ~ -1240 ~ -'~l.. ( 25 ~ ';~l.. ( 115 i !!!. 0 iil c .,t,.. ::> .,t,.. ~ 465 J .,,.. f!2 90 J '" 98J .. !a. 523- .,w 949- "''''., en 936- lll-'" g :t:~ ., '" ::T "'... 74 , ~ 59, .... '" ::> ::c 0. ::c 0. III 3 "0 '" - !'> !"" !"" --l =I ~ is' "0 "0 S- Tll .. &l &l l41 3 l11 ::> III ::> ....'" 0 -w_ ::> - - lil co co .. ~~= ~ "'oo'" ...- - 759 - 782 -1143 ~ -'l.. ( 687 ~ -'~l.. ( 362 ~ -'~l.. ( 147 !!!. !!!. ~ !i? ::> c ::> .,t,.. 0. .,t,.. m tD 67 J .. 36 J III 865_ .. 2: ~ 3 .. 861 - ~c..n~ 307 , III 794- ~~~ :E '" a. 105, "< 135, '" ::> S' 0. 0 ?r ~ 3 "0 '" ~ ~ :0- :0- --l ~ ?: ~. 0. S- .. &l 3 OJ l168 ll44 l186 0 -....., ::> w ., III ....,., ::> omra ~ ~~~ ::> "'oo., en - 617 - 976 ~ "'...'" -822 "" -'~l.. ( 333 ~ -'~l.. (36 -'~l.. (122 ::c .. ::I: 0. ::I: li: ii> 0 ::> .,t,.. '" .,t,.. "0 .,t,.. 0. 102 J 12. 352 J ~ 350 J '" ![ tD ~ [ 622- :::~~ ~ 763- ........., ..... 538- ........- ... - 0 '" co co 58, ww", ..... 50 , ::> 800 , w.,_ ::> :-c s:: ~;< ~ ~ P (tllllt>] =I ~ Ill'" '" "0 c ~N;;.;;1 "0 ~ .. 0 l41 l75 :I:O~" III - '" ::> ~ .,...- O"';t:: 0 co .... co oo .... "'",w -1453 "''''., o N::il: .. c -404 S::::;::" "'" ~ -'~l.. ( 16 ::> -'~l.. ( 65 0. '"'1 :::S_. !!!. ::c ~_.S" :::s ..... III s:: er::::[:? III 3 "Tj '" .,t,.. .,t,.. iil 184 J "0 405 J 3o::i '" .... re. CICl ~ ::I: S::"1:j b:l Ei 8 1144- -.,'" 0 86- w....w ~-I:> '" '" w_... o ""C~~ 0. 21, "0 115, 0.... -""'t~:::S (tl ~ ~ s:: 0 I:> ~ ~ 3'-'"{3 ~ ..... ..... o c-. ::> (tl n" '" 0\ tI.J l"""t-_C !"" I C/) > s::: .... Q.. I CI ~ "C~ (tllll.... III .., :iJ :>I"'N;;.;;1 .....o~" .....0"'.... o N:l? s:: :E" "'" ""1 ;:s_. l-j _.~ ;:s s:: So-'" 9 o~!i S::"1:j .... ~-I:>"" o "C~ ~ -""'t......::1 s:: 0....,1:> O={5 it ~ (l) c-' (tl (")" '" CI'J ""_0 . . . "Tj .... CICl s:: .., (tl f'- ..... ~ ~ , . 0 WATERMAN AVE \ ~ ~ j7~~ ! ( 1 0 m 0 :!i " -l Q ~ ~ ?' ~ 0, > I " ~ m ~ '" :I: -r ~ II :ll 0 ~"Ot;RS9N -....:.4J!t; 88899-0-" ~~ TIPPECANOE AVE z 0 '" '" ~ ~ - ~ !'> :;; --l ;:;' .. "0 S- CD l 264 3 l264 !;l 8l"''' .. '" '" ., ::> "'- ::> co",_ co., co -591 co ",co 0 ~ - 591 CD ..I p.. ( 108 .J~L.. ( 108 ~ ~ ~ :I: 0 , -d,... .. -d,... .. 335 J "0 335 J c: ~ (ii ~ 478 - ~A_ ~ 478- ~A_ ., - ., - 747 -. ",co", , 747 -. ",co", a. ::> 0 ~ - !-" - =! . - :g 0 CD :;; !;l l3 CD l105 ::> ., .. - "'., ~ '" 8' .... ., ., '" -1083 ",,,,co - 229 )> ..I c .J~L.. ( 30 ::> ( 71 ~ a. ?? ::c .. [.g 3 538 J -d,... i!j 1275- ,... "0 !l!.. 8. 12 -. '" :I: 152- ., "'- .... 0 moo !? .. 540 -. "''''''' "0 ~ ~ , ::> "" !" :I: =! .. "0 3. al 3 !;l .. l49 ~ ::> ~~U'1 l501 ~ ",co", -31 ~ - 1010 0 .J~L.. ( 20 ~ .. "0 5 ~ -d,... ~ 419 J .,,... ~ 259 J , ~ 949- ., A ::> 31- -.,., ., 0 o A.... c: ",co 121 -. "'''' ::> a. S' 3 "0 .. - =-' !'" --l =! ;:;' :g 1il !;l !;l l152 ::> ::> l!l~ ~ "'-'" 0 gg:\e CD 0., -708 -1386 ~ .JL.. ( 515 i .J~L.. (188 0 .,t,... !.r !:i.l 101 J !!l. 890_ g 181 -. 1559- A.... ., "'....- c: 510 -. 0 '" ::> a. S' 3 "0 .. - !C> ~ --l ?: ;:;' a. al CD 0 Ol l163 .. l161 0 -~., ::> A ., ::> - m g - A., en co ., - 571 "'-- - 727 ~ .J~L.. )> .J~L.. CD ( 236 ~ ( 41 a. iii" 0 ::> .,t,... .. .,t,... a. 101 J "2. 431 J .. ![ <D - "'., ~ < 517- 712- "''''- ~"'o ., 0 co a. 89 -. -- , 29 -. ::> ~ '" ~ ?\ 15 c ~ ~ ~ i! ~ .0. -...l ... ... - .. .. .. ... .. ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... .. f ... ". .. ... , ... .. ... ... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... ... .. .. .. ... ~ III C,j oE III rIJ ... e '" ;; t ...l " oS: ... C,j III '" .. III ... " - .... = = .... .. '" III ... , '-i - ~ III :c '" ,... u z . . C 'e llo ~ :l a:::...CI1 NgO ~::..l ....... .. .. ,., :I~~ >< ,.,Q .. Q ~~ '" ..0 ~ :l..l .. ., .S = :;-=~ =Q"QS .,lloQ :::i ~=-=~ of > llo - :l ., .c - .. '" ~~g "'... ~ :! ~ ~~~ ><Q , ~~ . .. oououuuou... 1l:l......O Il:lU Il:lll:l NO'Ir;~MOQ\tf"J~r; \Or--O..q- r"---n 0\ V") oci..c MO..oN VIM ~NNr-= ff"i\Ci d N MMM'll:tMNM"lt'Nf' _'I:t'Mt'f"\ -('I __ ~~~:Q~C:;~~$! dcicicicidcicici OOOlU ~~~ " " " 'innl " " " tl tl tl - - - C C C " " " '<:J;:V'<:f" V"lNoO M '" '" r- '" r- V> '" '" ddd ",or- Cltf"Jt'-- o . . . . . u'" U...... 00l U U Il:l Il:l ~~ "" '" 'i!dl;:;lo; l:::S l:::S N V"l t1 ~ - ~~t--N "''': o '" V> o Nr--O'Ir-VO'lM\O oOoc:i..od..odN~ V'l \0 M-- \Ovv N -: ~ t'-- r--- d d oououuuouuuu...o Nex:! ~ Nv")O'I~V")t'--M"d"~ oOl.rla\ ci~No\V')N r--:N..o MMNvMNMMNN_MOOV MN\Oo:::t\ONN\Of' \O\OV'lOO\O V lOr-\OV"l dddddddddd uou ~~~ " " " rrl OM ~r...:v1 M "" '" - - - o c C s:::s:::s:::\OO\V) V> 00 "" cidd """"'" oo_r- d d uu uu...O ~~ " " 'ii1'ii1 " " tl tl o 0 " " '" 0 ~..o '" '" V>"'M r'NoOM MV>V> "" V> '" V> dd o 00 O'IC!:\O d d '" 0.'" '" 0. " oJ .. '" ." !a >" =:.. ~~5~ ~~8~~];;] ~;S'-~ ~....:l'Oog5[; v]...~~;; 4) =E.~g ]~~'3 d)tf}..c~g....:l.t -;;~ OCl)~~ .::CI)a....ao.otf}~.~u ~::s:w~ en ~ i .~ ~ S == ;; ~ ~ ~ 0 0 i ~~~~ ~.~~l~] ]]~:g EE5fi;;~~~~~ ~~~~ >>>>5g<<<<<<<~ <<<<]C:::d,)OUU oOOr:/) aaaati~gggg ~ggo" eeee~e~~~~ ,dltj~ 0) 0 U iU 'i= 4) 0 0 4) 8. &. 8.. Q to1a<<i<<ioa8:8:~g; '0 ~~~~:;::I:i=i=i=i= ~~~~ .. .51 - .. III i: III - .. - ......NM"d'l,f')\Or---OOO'\O......NM~ . . $: = = = .2.2 .2 .2 tl tl tl tl o 0 0 0 fI:l en en en ... ... ... ... ]] ] ] " " - - a a ;:I ;:I ...... ~ ~ ;:I ;:I ... ... " -0 ~ g E::: 0: " !a !a] .5 .~ Q.. ~-8 a !a ~ == :: e '" " ~ 'e 8 " o c-= 0 E 8;;: < 'e < ~ - c-= _o~tE II g 6 en ~ < " '" o ..l . o 'E ~8 '1U 0. " " '" -!,!..... " 0 go; '0 Ei ;>..l II II ~~ >..l ;,; ~ z " ,9 U " t .5 "0 " .!::l -; ~ .;;; " ;:l Vi o -J N o o ~ " '" . {i .... ... c .g o . '" .. UJ "' .!1 " ~ o " co <,! ~ " ~ ~ - - ... .. .. V1 0 CI CI r.<.. CI CI CI CI CI U U U U U U U ~ ... .... ... " .. .. .... e 5.:! 00 '" - t- N 00 N '" ~ V) '" '" N '" '" ~ Il.o t- t- ~ 00 00 t- OO t- '" '" t- '" '" V) V) V) ... '" ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci = .. is: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... t- V) '" '" M V) ~ V) ~ 0 V) '" '" 0 t- t- = r. 0; 00 '" 00 '" N 00 N '" '" t-. '" t- ~ N '" t- = :: ~ ~ 00 ...:- ...:- ~ ...:- ~ vi" ~ vi" vi" vi" -.i" -.i" ... .... ~ V) ... Il.o .. .. .. ;;.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OJ V) N 0 0 0 M 0 N V) M 0 - M - 0; '" t- '" ~ 0 '" 0 t- ~ "1. ~ '" M 0 00 '" ... ~ ~ 00 ...:- ...:- ~ ...:- ~ vi" ~ vi" vi" vi" -.i" -.i" ... Q ~ V) ... .. '" ";; ;.. .. .. OJ = V1 .. -< ... " 0 CI CI .... CI CI U CI CI U U U U U U U ~ .. .. .: .... .... e ... = Il.o "; ... U 00 00 0 '" t- OO ~ ~ ~ V) 00 '" M .. ::E = - t- t- ~ 00 00 t- OO t- '" '" t- '" '" V) V) V) Q ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ;.. .c .. ... ... ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. r. 0; N '" t- '" ~ '" V) '" '" M M N '" 0 '" 0 .. .... := 00 00 t- V) - t- - 00 V) ~ V) t- "1. - 00 t- .. ... ~ ~ 00 ...:- ...:- ~ ...:- ~ vi" ~ vi" ~. -.i" r. = Il.o ~ V) V) V) = ... .... .. = ... OJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q .. 0 '" 00 ~ 0 ~ N '" 0 V) - ~ - ~ M V) := .. ... 0; '" '" ~ M '" V) '" '" ~ ~. M V) N '" t- V) ;;.. Q ~ ~ 00 ...:- ~ ~ ~ ~ vi" ~ vi" vi" -.i" -.i" -.i" .. ..: ... ~ V) .. .. ... Il.o ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 .. c.: .. 00 00 00 00' 00' 00 00 00' 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 .... U = - = '" .... .. .. ... = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. .. .. .... ;;.. ... , ~ iii - -.i " " ~ .. = " = " ~ = = = = "" ... " C " = .. " > " " > " 8 ... = -< > = -< > .. " c ~ -< ... c " -< ~ " " " 0 " = > " .. " > ~ " c -< ;;: 'e ~ -< la = ~ " " ... .!! ii ... > " @ .l:l r/l = u ~ .~ :0 = " ~ -< V) 0 'OJ r/l oS " oS Co > .... .... .. c -;; oS = E ~.5 -< ,!l = N oS ... E = c E= oS .;::: ... 0 " c U Z .. , = " " ... c E - " " oS > V) ... c 'e " .2 0 = Co 0 0 ..c 0 = -0 z " 0 Co ::E ... oS 0 -< ~ ... 1:> ... ~ ... c 0 ... N 0 ;g ... "0 u " E= " ::;: M , " ::E " '" " " > 0 = , " c .. 0 = " ..c " ... = ... c ~ = 0 ... c -;; .l:l '" .. . c ii -< 0 " 0 c E 0 " 0 r/l ~ Ul e '" = ... " > ... r/l " ... " > ... u ~ ... 0 > la " = -< " > " " = -< " .. ..c <0 0 = ::E -< = c = 0 -0 -< ~ = c = 0 ~ ... e .. -0 E c " c ... c " c ... -0 C ... 0 E > ~ ... = ... > ~ ... = 0 c " " c " " " 6 " " > -< " > " = c > -< " > " ..c " " .. = ... 0 ~ 0 = ~ M ... -< ;;: Q -< ;;: oS U .. < " Q ... E oS -< E 0 -< ::;: 8 " " ..c " ... " < V1 ..c " " ~ c 0 oS r/l ... " ::E c 0 oS r/l " '" " ... c '" c " ;.. '" .l:l ~ oS la "Iii 'e oS .. ~ oS la 'OJ 'e oS 0 r/l Y .. .. r/l 0 E ~ s E E ... ... ~ f;I;l ... ... u ~ ... u ... 0 ~ -s 3 V) ,!l " c ~ c V) ,!l " c ~ oS 0 ....l .. = - Co = ..c = = - Co = ..c M .. t ... c 0 N oS Co 0 -;; oS ... 0 N oS Co 0 -;; oS ~ g Z ::E ~ E= ::E ::;: ::E ~ E= ::E ::;: ~ r. , ~ u , ~ U r/l ~ - - .. ... - .. .. .. .. . . , , t" .~ I C/) > '" ~ ?\ .. ~ I ~ "- ~ ~ '1 . ANOl;FtSg" ~"" +-0-0 WATERMAN AVE \ ~ i r7~-" " ( 1 0) 0 ~ ~ ~ f- . ~ ~ m H eeese-o_____ LLL '-0 o 0- o ~ " m '" :I: o :< :ll o o I " ?' ~ '" .... ~ m TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I :ll m o ~ o '" '" ~ II ~ ~ :-'" - -I :I: ~ l>> -e' 3. CD 1il l35 3 l79 3 l188 !;l '" l>> """ ~ "''''~ ::> l>> ::> 8l '" CD 0 ::> ...."'.... - 2175 "" "''''~ -12 0>.... '" - 1226 0 ~ CD '" .J!L. .J!L. .J ( 20 :I: ( 33 (164 ~ 0 ~ en ~ "0 ;;C i?f ~tr- ~ ~tr- ~ 2118- r- ~ 299 J 189 J ~ 16, ~ r-- 8- o~~ 1436- t:....~ ::> "'.... 8. 115, '" 0> 316, CD '" '" s;;> ~ :-' !'> !'> -I -I ::E -e' -e' 1il l>> "0 CD CD !;l 3 !;l ::> "'~'" ll50 ~~~ l240 ::> lil l>> 0 l641 '" '" CD ::> '" .... CD -1412 0> '" 0 -1299 CD ~ ~ -1971 ~ .J!L. ( 253 .J!L. (154 CD a ,. ~ OJ <5 ~tr- ::> ~tr- ~ 710 J ~r- ~ 152 J "" 250 J CD a 1618 - ....'" 1622- 0> '" '" en 1212 - ........CD g- O> '" '" '" CD :F 0> '" .... "'''' 742 , '" 0> ~ 96, '" ::> ~ 0. "l? 3 "lil ~ !>> !'" !'" ::! ~ -I -e' "0 "0 CD 1il CD !;l !;l ll18 3 l16 ::> l>> ::> 0> '" lil S;~~ ::> ~~'" lil ~~ - 1332 '" '" CD -1647 ~ "'00 -1388 ~ .JL. ( 1064 ~ .J!L. ( 604 ~ .J!L. ( 301 1\5 l>> ::> <:> ::> 0. ~tr- ~tr- CD 35 J m OJ 190 J ~ l>> 1388_ CD a 3 1193- CD 0> .... g 544, l>> 1754 - ~"'.... ~ .... '" a. ....0.... 190, '" c 176, ...."'0 ::> 5' 0. 0 "l? ~ 3 ." en ~ !D ~ ~ -I ~ )> -e' ::> 1il 0. CD !;l 3 iil l402 l 264 l264 0 '" CD .... ::> g:t:3~ l>> CD.... '" ::> ~~~ lil ::> "''''''' en - 1080 "'''' -1541 ~ CD '" '" - 910 :ii .J!L. ( 441 ~ .J!L. (117 ~ .J!L. ( 176 CD ~ :I: 0. 0 or 0 en ::> ~tr- en ~tr- "0 ~tr- 0. 213 J "0 509 J i?f 491 J en i?f OJ ~ ~ 975- ~ 0>.... ~ 1396- ~~'" r-- 758- "''''~ ~"'.... 0"'<0 0"'''' 66, -<0 r-- 124 , "'~ ::> 1144 , "'....'" ::> ;0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ p ::: (tlllll:>l ::! Ill"'''' "0 <:> :o;"N~.;;1 1il ~ ::x::O~" !;l '" l 46 en ~ l87 ::> 6' ~"'''' N"';t:: lil '" CD '" 0 0> o O::i:: "'....'" - 2203 0 ........'" - 443 c s::~""'" ~ .J!L. ( 14 ::> .J!L. ( 114 0. Iooot ::S_. ~ ;;C ~_.S;: r-- l>> l>> 3 s:::f""to--Y:l "Tj c: ~tr- ~tr- a 5~~ Cil 247 J "0 333 J .... Ie. CICl I :I: S::"1::l b:l e; 1966- ~ '" 0> 0 131- .... CD <0 ~-I:> CD en ...."'<0 o "'CQ!l1 23 , "E. 144 , 0<0 -'"1~::S (tl s;;> ![ s:: 0 I:> ~ ~ 3'""'~~ ..... r-- (tl 0-' ::> CD (j ""t ::s 00 CI:l l""'f'-_C r~ ,. .. ~ ~ .. .. . , . , .. .. I C/) > '" ~ Q " 0; :;: ~ ~ .0. Ii ~ ~ o NvOE~SQtv ~E +-0 \ ~ I r7~~~ ( 1 0) 0 ~ j ~ - .1\11 7mi z o "' '" I: o WATERMAN AVE o ~ G> m "' r o :E :ll o o m z .... ~ " ?' .... "' .... ~ m TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I ~ ,... p ~ ::l "0 lO ~ l50 3 """ '" l 308 ~I\.,)~ 0> ::> ::> 0_.... li: - 2153 00 '" 00 - 785 ~ ~~l. ( 9 ~ ~~l. (126 i: 0 ..t,- '" ..t,- 318 J "0 391 J <:: ![ Cil ~ 1809- "''''''' ~ 674- ........- '" ~~ct 10 t r- 872 t 0- ::> 0 ~ ~ ?' ~ -I , ~ :g' 0 '" ::;;: @ l3 '" - l121 ::> '" '" -0'" lil C;; 8' 00 '" '" -1983 "'-- -255 I <:: ~ ( 33 ::> .J~l. ( 83 0- :>:l 0> '" 3 595 J ..t,- ~ 2087 - ,- "0 12 t .... ~ 170 - ~~N 0 0 !;? '" 602 t '" 00 00 "0 ![ ~ r- ::> ~ !" ::l :r 0> "0 3. 1;: 3 @ 0> l 55 ::> ::> ....'" lil l881 " '" '" en "''''0 -31 ~ ~ ~~l. -1588 0 ( 22 !!!.. '" .. "0 <5 ![ ..t,- ~ 660 J ..,- ~ 304 J '" r- ~ 1478 - '" en ::> 32- -"'''' 00 '" -"'''' en en 139 t 00 00 ::> 0- :>:l 0> 3 "0 '" ~ ,... -I -I -e' -e' 1;: 1il @ @ l163 ::> ::> ....-.... 0 ~~ li: "'....'" '" "'''' - 1053 "''''.... - 1633 l ~l. ( 927 ~ ~~l. ( 202 <5 ~ m 51.? 161 J ..t,- 0> 1407_ '" 8' 151 t 1818- en 00 '" ~ 0"'''' <:: 672 t .... '" .... is. Q.. ?r I CI 3 ~ "lil "'C~ :.: ~ ::l (tl1ll1:>1 > "0 Ill""'" ::> "0 ~N;;.;;1 0- '" '" " :I:O~" iiJ l225 0> l174 NO';" ::> .... N"';t:: ::> 0 '" "''''- '" ffi~!'g 00::1>::: en 00 '" 0 -654 ~ -1434 s::~""'" :ii ~~l. ( 214 ~~l. ( 71 """I ::s_. '" !!!.. ~_.S'::s 0- :r ii> 0 s:: :;.-", "Tj ::> -d ,- '" -d ,- 8 o~!i 0- 195 J "0 495 J .... '" ![ S::"1::l b:l CICl OJ ~ ~-I:> s:: ~ 659- '" en '" 1350- -....'" "'....'" 0"'00 o "'CQ ~ "" 112 t "'....0 r- 53 t '" (tl ::> -""'1::tl::S s:: 0 I:> ~ 3 '-'"{l it ..... C'D c-. (tl ("l" '" '-0 CZl f""t-_O - - ... ... ... ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. ... ... .. ... iii ... .. .. .. ... ... II" .. ... .. ... ... .. .. .. " -E .. 00 ... .. '" .. .. .. ...l = _S! - " .. '" .. .. - = - = .... = .... .. to .. ;.- "" ,..; ~ .. :c to E- u z ~ . c -.. .. '" '" " a: "'" 00 060 a=...l ....... .. " >. " .. " ~=-'ii ;.. >.i:l " i:l ~~ rI.l ..0 '" "...l = .. .S Iopol ~ .. >. :a.::.c. =tlQS cl.Q U t:~u .OJ =-._> E '" ~ " .. ... ~~(S o=...l S.::.c____ N !l! ~ -.!! ;: =- OJ .. >.i:l ;..~ -=~ :;:> . . . . . . t<l....OOt<lu........O.... 0............ uu co co . . . oo~ ~MV')l"'"lI'\OM MOO\O~ 01/") ~ N ..oOOOMoO..oOo\o'M o:...,j-..o- r-.:..o _..,j \,QO~v)\ON~~M~ N~::q-.:t -M __ -.:to\M-.:tO\--.:tNQ"IV'l 0\~0\0\0\"""rr:!V"I0\~ d dddd d ...."'0 ~~rf1 O....u ~~~ ., ., ., 'E'E'E::~ " " " t1t1~MOON C C C ::::::;::OOO"lM I.Oc:r- d d . . . .. .. .. __ it 0"" t<l............ uuco co "1:l"1:l '" '" .,., ~ 's 's ~..:f "" ~ ~t1M- C C s:: ::: V") N ~~ e r---:r---: ~V) NV) 0", ~oo 00 '" '" "'!"'!Q"I e t<l....ooou........ou................ . . .. << .. << NV'lOO~\Or; vidoci NM \OO\MV"lV"lN N~ 0;- N N N NM\OClC! dr-.:r-.:M V):::~M ""--: cO_ M M ::;t\O\OMNI"O 01'- '..n~OOO\O\V')r:V")O\OO d dddd -dd Ot<lU ~~~ ., ., ., 'inn ~ ~ ~ .... ~ '" .nO"'; M '" N ~ - - " " " Iii: ::: Ii: \0 0-. 0 "'~V) ddd - 0 '" t"!ClC!!'1 . . it . .. u 0 ................ ~~ ::: II:: 0 V) t"" ro N '<:t: 0\ o' ....: t"'! '~'~~f;l ~-O\oo t1 ~ C5 C s::: lii: M-.:t ~ .... dci M M ~ "d:'<:t;oo e '" c..l!l. o ~ ~ ~ -g ; <<:" -" i>:: i>:: ~ ~ 0 ~ 8 ~ ~ .~ ] -g ] " ; .- ...l 0 ~ " .. -",-=,,"0"00 ~ '" ;... ; " .~ ~ 0 "0 -S 2 -3 "8 ~ :E'- ~...J ~ E ] ~ g ~ ~ ~ J:: d) .... '3 0 ~ ci:i ~ .- 4) ~ ~ ~ ~ en ::p.g '6,.::r:: ~ = ~ 9 ~ 0 0 "2 ac:v.I~".._;o<<l 0 -... - ~ " 0 c...... ~ '" ~ t::l e:: ' ~ oS ~~~~~!g] g g g] g~ ==::s=-~==c= eec':;:;:. 5555]o~~~~ ~~~~ ,.....,.=al<<:<<:<<:<<:<<:<<:<<:E <<<<.,gS:'UiUQ)Q) 'U'UQ)cI) s:::s:::s::: S:::-s::: 0000 000s::: .C':IC:=C:=C:=~c:=aaaa aaa~ EEEE~eoo~o 000"", ~ ~ ~ ~ 0_'" '0; 8. 8. Q. 8. 8. 8. 8. " :;::;::;::;:~~~~~~~~~~ = .S! ~ " .. c " ~ = .. _NM~V)\Clr-OOQ'lO - N M "" - M '" e 00 V) 00 r...: ci N -.:i _ M N .... e c c c c .9 0 0 .9 -o"-e '-e -0 'U 'U iU Q) v.I v.I v.I v.I !i!ibb .s.s :s :s 'U Q) e e SSE E = = = = (.L. (.L. (.L. (.L. -" al ii: ; E .~ ~ '" " " " <<: " al ii: ; 8 E " 'e ~ " " ~ .~ " " 8~ < v.I e ri g ~ :;: <<: u Q) ~ ~ ]'2 ] 0.. 0.. 0.. -" al ii: ; E 'e " ~ '" " " " <<: i t<l V)\Clr-oo - - ,; .c " 'C " "0 "0 .c '" ~ '" "0 " " " >< " '" o ...l . o "~ ~8 .~ 'E c.. " ,,'" ~... " 0 go; - .. o " >...l II II ~~ >...l ;,; .!l o Z C .>1 tl " ~ .!l .5 "0 "~ OJ ;, .;;; " :J "' o ..J <> M <> M .. "" " . ~ .. c o "is . '" '" Iii '" g <5 ~ <> o '" y ~ " ~ '" - ... UlA ASSOCIATES. INC. - .. As indicated in Table 4.I.E, all analysis intersections are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service under year 2020 without project conditions, with the exception of: ... - .. Waterman Avenue/Mill Street (p.m. peak hour) Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road (p.m. peak hour) 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane (mid-day peak hour) Tippecanoe Avenue/Mill Street (p.m. peak hour) Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue (p.m. peak hour) Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive (mid-day and p.m. peak hours) Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps (mid-day and p.m. peak hours) Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps (mid-day and p.m. peak hours) Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard (mid-day and p.m. peak hours). III' .. .. iii ill iii Table 4.I.F summarizes the forecast year 2020 without project p.m. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table 4.I.F, all freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 without project conditions, with the exception of: ... .. ill 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue 1-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Avenue 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215. .. .. .. Existing Policies and Regulations - General Plan Policies .. The City of San Bernardino General Plan contains programs designed to implement the goals, objectives, and standards of the Circulation Element. The applicable programs contained in Chapter 6.0 of the General Plan include: .. ... ill 16.3 Ril!ht-of-Wav Dedication .. Through the Site Plan Review process, the City shall require the dedication of appropriate rights-of-way to allow for the construction of roadways shown on the Circulation Plan in accordance with the roadway standards established by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. .. II. .. 16.4 Access Standards .. .. The City shall develop access standard guidelines for use in the Site Plan Review process which specifY appropriate locations for driveways in relation to adjacent intersections and driveways, the minimum number and size of driveways per site based on the level of intensity of development, and appropriate locations for median openings to provide left turns int%ut of driveways. These guidelines shall be developed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and reviewed and updated at least once every five years. .. .. .. .. ... .. 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-18 ... - - * * * * * * * * - rI:J 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~ ~ Q Q Q Q - ..l - " .. - .... f u "" a- .... a- r- 0 "" 00 a- a- V\ .... N r- "" 00 =- ;> ~ ~ "l ~ ~ ~ ~ a- 00 00 ~ a- a- 00 00 r- .. .. - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " 6: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... = ~ "" 00 r- a- 00 r- OO 0 a- N "" "" a- r- 0 a- .... e "" V\ r-. V\ "" r- 0 "" r- OO N N 0 "" "" 00 = = ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 ,..: ,..: ~ 00 00 ,..: ,..: ..., .. .... > - =- - .. .. ... .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... - "" r- OO r- r- OO 00 N .... "" "" a- N N "" r- .. e 0 N "". N 0 .... r- "" V\ V\ a- a- 00 .... O. "" .. - ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 00 ,..: ,..: 00. r-. ,..: ,..: ..., = > - r- Eo- - .. .. * * * * * * * .r!l .. ... rI:J .. OJ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~ Q Q Q Q Q " - " ..l ... <( .. .... .. = .:: .. = =- ~ "" 00 N 00 V\ a- N r- OO 00 .... "" "" N 00 .. - ~ ~ "l ~ ~ a- ~ a- 00 00 ~ a- a- 00 00 r- .; " > - - 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ = ..c - ... ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. r- N V\ N 00 00 0 .... .... "" .... a- a- 00 N "" .. ~ e "" V\ "". V\ N "" 0 V\ r- r- - a- V\ N 00 .. = = ~ a-. - ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 ,..: ,..: ~ 00 ,..: ,..: ,..: ..., f .... =- > - .. = r- .... .. .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " .. - - "" - 00 a- 0 "" a- 0 .... N "" "" 00 - .. .. = ... .. e 0 N N. N a- "" r- N .... V\ 00 a- r- "" a- "" = - ~ ~ ~ 00 00 00 00 ,..: ,..: 00 ,..: ,..: ,..: ..., ..., = > - .. .:oi Eo- - .. .. .. =- ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 .. 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 = U .... .. = .... .. .. .. .. .. .. " .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ... .. ..l ... ~ ... ..... ~ ~ .. ... :;;; " " .. ;:l " ;:l " 0 .. " ;:l " ;:l M Eo- 0 .. " " " " M " > " " > " ... ;:l <( > ;:l <( > .. " ~ <( " " <( ~ " " - " ~ ... ;:l > " oS - " > = ~ " :0 " g ~ " <( ;;;: 'S " .b <( " ;:l .. f-o " ~ ;;;: " > ell 0 .;::: .. " " @ g " " ... <( 0 ell -5 Q. > " V\ " ',. " 5 0. .5 <( - .g u " - oS - OJ oS " ;:l .;::: N S ~ " f= .. 0 ~ 0 0 U Z - oS " ... E . " " - " 's "C:l ~ - " Q. 0 B ~ V\ oS 0 '" 0 ;:l .g 0 ;:l -0 0; . " " .9- ::E 0 ~ - 0 ~ " .. . > - " < - N " ::E ..c OJ ~ " " Eo- 0 ;:l "" " " , ;:l " '" > , - 0 < - ;:l <( 0 - " ~ ;:l 0 - " OJ .b ~ <0 U " " " 0 " E 0 " 0 ell e '" ;:l - " - ell - " - u -5 ... 0 - 0 " g " ;:l > " " " ;:l > 0 " > <( " 0 > <( " 0 oS 6 . ::E <( ;:l " ;:l "C:l <( > ;:l " ;:l E "C:l . .. "C:l E " " " - " " Ii - " ~ .. < E " > ~ - " - " > ~ - oS " 8 " 0 " " " ;:l " " " .g < OIl ;:l - 0 ~ > <( " > ~ 0 ;:l > <( > ~ 0 co . .. = - E <( ;;;: <( = E <( ;;;: <( < >< y ~ " ..c 0 " - " rI:J of " ~ ell ell ~ " g 0 oS - " ::E g 0 oS ell ~ ... " " .. g " ... .. > ',. 'S oS .. > ',. 'S oS 0 0 oS .. ell 0 5 oS ~ ~ B E E - 52 ~ r.l - - 0 - - 0 - 0 ....l .. S " S ~ " " " ~ oS .. -5 V\ 8: .g ;:l V\ ~ 8: ;:l ..c "" !Q = - = - .. f ..... " 0 N oS 0 OJ ..... 0 N 0 OJ oS ~ ~ . Z ::E , ~ f= ::E u < , ::E ....!. ~ f= ::E u < ell * ... .. - .. .. - - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - 16.7 Infrastructure Cost AllocationlReimbursement PrOI!11llTl ... - The City shall develop a program for the equitable allocation of costs of infrastructure improvements amongst developments which generate the need for said improvements and shall establish a program to reimburse developers who pay more than their pro rata share of said costs at the time of their project's development when additional funds are contributed to the City by subsequent developers. ... - .. .. 16.8 Traffic Svstems Fee .. The City of San Bernardino Municipal Code (Chapter 3.26) required that all new development and any substantial improvement which results in a net increase in the number of vehicle trips generated by a development pay a Traffic Systems Fee to the City to assist in financing improvements to the City's traffic network. The City shall annually review the Traffic Systems Fee to determine that it adequately reflects the current cost of financing the traffic network improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by new developments and that it not exceed the pro rata share of said developments for the cost of traffic system improvements to which the fee will be applied. .. - .. .. - 16.13 Traffic Imuact Analvsis Standards .. .. The City shall establish guidelines for the preparation of traffic impact studies related to new developments in the City of San Bernardino. These guidelines shall include, at a minimum, the methodology for calculating trips generation by land use category, the methodology for calculating peak hour level of service, the approach to development of project trip distribution assumptions, and cumulative traffic projections. The guidelines shall also establish the definition of a significant traffic impact including downstream impacts and shall provide for the review and approval by the City Engineer of all key assumptions to be utilized in the traffic impact analysis prior to its completion. . .. .. iii .... 16.14 SecondarY Access Guidelines iii iii The Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall develop guidelines for use in the site plan review process which specifY the requirements for multiple access routes to development projects. These guidelines shall include the maximum allowable length of a cul-de-sac (simple access street) and the maximum number of dwelling units to be accommodated by a single access route. These guidelines shall also establish the parameters for design and use of emergency-access-only secondary access routes. ... .. ... .. iii San Bernardino County CMP Policies ... The San Bernardino County CMP contains the following policies and applicable action items regarding assessment of project-specific traffic impacts: ... ... ... ... ... 3/28/01 (\\RJV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-20 ... .. - - LSA ASSOCIATE-S, INC. - .. - Policy 4.1.1 - Identify and quantify the direct and cumulative impacts of proposed land use decisions on the regional transportation system. .. ... Action - Implement the Land Use/Transportation Analysis Program through preparation of TIA Reports on projects which exceed the applicable thresholds, and certify that the analysis is consistent with the CMP guidelines. - .. .. Policy 4.1.3 - Develop and implement a program which apportions fairly the responsibility for mitigation of deficiencies on the CMP system among local jurisdictions and State agencies. .. Action - Prepare areawide deficiency plans in accordance with the CTP, and use the TIA Report process as the phasing mechanism for it. .. ... Action - Include intCIjurisdictional notification and opportunities for potentially impacted jurisdictions to provide responses to TIA Reports into the local land use decision and impact mitigation process. .. .. ... Action - In association with the CTP, develop a program to provide fair, consistent, areawide mitigation of impacts and funding of improvements on the regional transportation system needed to support economic development and local land use decisions. .. .. .... Policy 4.2.1 - Forecast the regional transportation impacts ofland use plans and projects, and identify needed improvements or mitigation strategies and their costs through the CTP process. .. .... , , Action - Implement and maintain a countywide database of existing and future land use or socioeconomic data on which to base CTP and deficiency plan updates, as wel1 as land use consistency determinations for the Land Use/Transportation Analysis Program. .. .... ... Policy 4.2.2 - Implement the program local1y, using consistent analytical procedures and methodologies, and consider inteIjurisdictional as well as local impacts and solutions based on strategies developed through the CTP. .. .. Action - Implement the CTP through areawide deficiency plans and the TIA Report process. ... iii Action - Require traffic monitoring programs for certain development projects to confirm fol1ow- through of commitments made to the agencies impacted by that development, and establish guidelines for such monitoring programs as needed. - .. - Action - Identify mitigation programs which can be implemented locally through the CTP, to address cumulative development impacts which may cause deficiencies on the CMP system. Such programs should reflect the resources and administrative mechanisms currently and potential1y available to local jurisdictions. - - - .. .. 3/28/01 (\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSectioo 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-21 - .. - UiA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... ... Policy 4.3.1 - Identify the effect of specific land use changes on the transportation system, regardless of jurisdictional boundaries, and communicate the information to all affected jurisdictions. - ... Action - Implement the Land Use/Transportation Analysis Program through preparation ofCMP TIA Reports when a project or group of projects meet the threshold criteria specified in this chapter. - . Action - Participate as needed in discussions on the potential inteljurisdictional impacts of land use decisions, mitigation of potential deficiencies, and fair apportionment of responsibility for mitigation. The CMA and Caltrans may participate at the request of a lead agency or potentially impacted jurisdiction. .. .. ill .. iii Policy 4.3.2 - Provide a process to monitor and forecast the cumulative, incremental impacts of all projects, and identify measures and costs to mitigate the incremental impacts. ... Action - Identify the cumulative transportation impacts of projects through the CTP planning process, and use the Land Use/Transportation Analysis Program as a mechanism to monitor growth and its impacts on the transportation system. .. .. .. Policy 4.3.4 - Provide credit to local jurisdictions and project applicants within the jurisdiction who provide improvements to the regional transportation system which exceed the level of improvements required to mitigate deficiencies caused by the jurisdiction's land use decisions. .. .. ... Action - Through the CMPT AC, develop a process to define conditions under which credit shall be provided, the form the credit shall take, and the amount of credit to be provided for provision of improvements to the regional transportation system which exceed those required to mitigate deficiencies caused by a jurisdiction's land use decisions. . - .. Policy 4.4.1 - Identify the transportation impacts of significant land use changes, regardless of jurisdictional location or political boundaries. .. .. Action - Prepare CMP TIA Reports when a project or group of projects meets the threshold criteria specified within this chapter. ... .. ... Policy 4.4.2 - Provide a mechanism for consistent communication of impact analysis results, possible mitigations, and mitigation costs to potentially impacted jurisdictions, Caltrans, and the CMA. .. .. Action - As indicated in Policy 4.4.1, CMP TIA Reports shall be provided to the CMA and adjacent jurisdictions so that information exchange and communication can occur in concert with the permitting jurisdiction's project review schedule and prior to any approval or permit activity. Local jurisdictions which receive TIA Reports shall provide any comments within three weeks of the date the TIA Report is mailed by the permitting jurisdiction. Should the comments received from adjacent jurisdictions, the CMA, Caltrans, or transit agencies recommend changes to the TIA Report, the permitting jurisdiction shall consider comments ... .. ... .. - 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIR.doc) 4.1-22 ... .. - ... !.SA ASSOCIATES. INC. ... "'" ... received and make changes deemed necessary by the permitting jurisdiction. Should the changes be such that the permitting jurisdictions chooses to recirculate the document, the commenting agencies will complete the review of the revised document within two weeks of receipt. This process is intended to be consistent with any actions required under the local Land U se/Transportation Analysis Program. "'" ... .. ... Action - Participate as needed in discussions on the potential inteIjurisdictional impacts of land use decisions, mitigation of potential deficiencies, and fair apportionment of responsibility for mitigation. The CMP and Caltrans may participate at the request of a lead agency or a potentially impacted jurisdiction. - ... ... Policy 4.5.1 - Require consistent application of the specified methodology for analyzing the impacts of land use decisions, evaluating mitigation measures, and estimating mitigation costs by all jurisdictions. iii .. .. Action - Implement the Land Use/Transportation Analysis Program and certifY that analyses are consistent with the CMP guidelines. - ... Policy 4.6.1 - Develop and implement a notification process for identifying right-of-way acquisition, lane addition, and access control opportunities on the CMP roadway system, concurrent with development. .. ... .. "'" Action - In federally designated urbanized areas, notifY Caltrans and the CMP of any proposed traffic generating projects (other than a single family residence) where any portion shares a property line in common with a State highway, or is on a roadway which intersects a State highway, and is within 500 feet of that intersection, including interchange ramps. .. ""' Thresholds of Significance ... ... The CMP standard level of service (LOS) is LOS E. This LOS standard is used for area freeways, and may be used for intersection levels of service. However, the CMP also allows local discretion in determining the standard level of service to be used to determine project impacts and appropriate mitigation. In the City of San Bernardino, LOS D is the standard level of service. Therefore, any intersection level of service condition in excess of LOS D is considered an impact requiring mitigation. ... .. .. Impacts and Mitigation ... .. Project Trip Generation ... Trip generation for the proposed project were developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (6th Edition). The specific rates used were selected for the individual uses contained in the proposed project as discussed in Appendix B. .. ... It should be noted that lTE provides trip generation rates for p.m. peak hour conditions, but does not contain mid-day peak hour rates. For the p.m. peak hour, the lTE rates for p.m. peak hour of adjacent .. ... .. 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-23 ... .. - - ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. - - ... street traffic (corresponding to 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) were used. For the mid-day peak hour, ITE rates for the p.m. peak hour of generator were used, as the peak hour of generator typically occurs during early afternoon. - - Table 4.I.G summarizes the daily, mid-day peak hour, and p.m. peak hour trip generation for the proposed project. This summary presents the trip generation for each of the project phases, as well as for the total project (phase I plus Phase II). For each phase, trip generation is presented in terms of total trip generation, pass-by trips, and net new trips (total trips less pass-by trips). As this summary indicates, the total project will generate 16,537 daily trips, of which 1,811 trips will occur during the mid-day peak hour and 1,336 trips will occur during the p.m. peak hour. The net new trip generation (excluding pass-by trips) will be 12,334 daily trips, of which 1,343 trips will occur during the mid- day peak hour and 1,000 trips will occur during the p.m. peak hour. - ... .. ... 1Io .. Distribution and Assignment .. Trip distribution patterns for the proposed project were developed using the p.m. peak hour select zone trip assignment for the traffic analysis zones (T AZs) containing the project site. These modeled . trip distribution patterns represent the distribution of new trips generated by the proposed project site. Figure 4.1.10 illustrates the distribution patterns for the proposed project. Figure 4.1.11 illustrates the detailed assignment patterns through off-site study area intersections. Figure 4.1.12 illustrates the assignment patterns at project access locations. In this figure, the assignment patterns are presented separately for the Phase I and Phase II development. ... .. '"' .. ,.. ... As noted in the Project Trip Generation section, pass-by trips are attracted from the passing stream of traffic along the roadways immediately adjacent to the project site. Appendix B contains a detailed discussion of how the pass-by trips were incorporated into the analysis. Figure 4.1.13 illustrates the pass-by trip assignment patterns for the off-site study area intersections (i.e., along Tippecanoe Avenue between Laurelwood Drive and 1-10). Figure 4.1.14 illustrates the pass-by trip assignment patterns for the project access driveways. In this figure, the assignment patterns are presented separately for the Phase I and Phase II development. .. ... .. .. Figure 4.1.15 illustrates the total project p.m. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. These volumes represent the addition of new trips and pass-by trips. Figure 4.1.16 illustrates the total project mid-day peak hour turn volumes for the study area intersections. ... .. .. Less Than Significant Impacts .. ... The addition of project traffic to year 2002 and year 2020 conditions will not have a significant impact on the project access driveways on Harriman Place. As the year 2002 plus project and year 2020 plus project intersection analyses indicate. all project access driveways will operate with satisfactory levels of service based on the turn restrictions proposed as part of the project. Consequently, impacts at the proposed project driveways are considered to be less than significant. .. - .. . Project Access Considerations - .. Operations of the intersections of the project access driveways along Harriman Place have been analyzed as part of the overall intersection level of service analysis. As shown in Tables 4.I.C - .. 3/28/01 (\\RIV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-24 ... ... - - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - Table 4.1.G - The Hub Trip Generation .. ... .. - Land Uses Units Mid-Day Peak HourI In Out Total ... Phase 1 ... Trip Generation Pass-By Trips' Net New Trips 711 191 520 ... ... 678 178 500 1,389 369 1,020 P.M. Peak Hour In Out Total 529 141 388 514 131 383 1,043 272 771 Daily 12,646 3,366 9,280 .. Phase 2 ... Trip Generation Pass-By Trips' Net New Trips 219 52 167 .. 203 47 156 422 99 323 150 34 116 143 30 113 293 64 229 3,891 837 3,054 ... - Total Project Trip Generation Pass-By Trips' Net New Trips 930 243 687 ... .. 881 225 656 1,811 468 1,343 679 175 504 657 161 496 1,336 336 1,000 16,537 4,203 12,334 ... .... 1 Mid-day rates are based on p.m. peak hour of generator for the respective uses. , Pass-by percentages from ITE Trip Generation Handbook. .. ... ... .. ... .. ... ... ... .. ... .. ... .. ... ... ... 4/5/01 (R:\CBD030IDraftEIR\Section 4.1 Tables.xls\TripGen) .. - ... - ... 6% 5% - 1% MILL ST 4% ... - ... 7% 9% - - CENTRAL AVE w ~ 8% w 0 9% z <( (.) w 5% c.. c.. i= ORANGE SHOW RD w 1% ~ 10% z 13% <( ::;: 0:: W ~ s: 14% 13'10 10% 6% VANDERBILT WY 19% 6% 4% LAURElWOOD OR 19% HOSPITALITY LN 25% 3% 1% 6% 2% 5% .. ... ... ... lOa ... .. ... .. .. .. - ... - .. ... .... ... - .. - .. - 1/30/01 (CBD030/ElR/J'raffic-Section) Figure 4.1.1 0 .. - L SA lOa .- 0' o 1,750' 3,500' N The Hub in San Bernardino Environmental Impact Report Project Trip Distribution Patterns .. r" .. .. .. ." , . .. , . " " . I C/) > '" c i! Q " c ~ '< ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ , . ;; o-e \ ~ i '7'~~ ( 1 Q , I WATERMAN AVE o 0- ANOEIlS~E II 89989-0----..... tlL '-0 o ?i z " m U> J: o ::;: :ll o o m :!i ~ ~ " ?' ~ U> .... TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I :ll m o > z o '" '" I: o " ~ !" :-'" ~ --l :I: ~ 0> ;:;' 3. ~ 1il 3 3 !;l 0> '" ::> .... 0> ::> "" .. ::> .. li :f .J l .J l -(44%) 0 -6% U> ~ -0 :>0 ~ li: 44%~ ~ (37%) J fa (1%) J CD ::;: r- 0 ::> (6%)- 0 0- 0 ~ ~ :-' !'> !'> --l --l ~ ;:;' ;:;' 1il 1il ~ !;l !;l 3 ::> ::> l (13%) 0 ... 0> '" li CD .. ::> .. )> )> .J ~ .J ~ -(31%) ~ -5% CD -8% a ~ ill C> ::> ~ 25%- ,.. fa co (5%) J (5%)_ CD !<l. ~ (4%) .. en (8%)- g '" :::r .. 0 :e ::> ~ 0- :>0 0> 3 -0 U> ~ !>' ~ ~ ::1 ::1 ~ -0 -0 -0 ~ 1il CD !;l !;l 3 ~ ::> 0> ::> li ::> :;: .. -(12%) ~ ~4% ~ L. f (19%) ~ -9% ~ f 10% S!!. S!!. ~ g> ::> C> ::> 0- m "" CD ,.. 0> 12%_ CD (9%)_ ~ 2: (4%)_ U> 3 .. ET 0> (1%) .. ~ ;:; 0 a .. <= t3. ::> ~. 0- :>0 ~ 0> 3 -0 U> ~ !" ;l>- --l ~ ~ ~ ;:;' .. l"l 0- 1il ~ ... Cl CD !;l 3 ~ .. l"l Ul l (1%) 0 ::> 0> "'C z ::> ~ 0 ::> 0> '=' 5@ .. -(5%) CD l .. "" ~ ~. ~ S' :>0 L. f (6%) CD -13% ~ f 4% (tl 5- or ~ :E :I: 0 0 C'l g " ii> 0 U> - ~ ::> U> -0 ~ Q. 0- ,.. -0 ~ ~t,.. S Q. '0 U> 5% ---.. ~ (13%)_ ~ 17% .. . ~ ""il .2. "" 0> ~ .2. n ~ (6%) .. 0> UiOi-:i:: "0 .. .. r- n ~ r- ::> ~~:i:. )- p. ::> ~ '" :r. 06' '" '0 ., ., '" _. ~ CICl ~ ~. ~ 13 ~. ~ 3 ~ ~ n a !" (tl a '0 ::1 , ::s~ ~ "ll n -0 C> - ~ . -0 n ~ O"'C~.::>-, <l " CD n ~ !;l :t:-a ;;llIllO" ~ ;; !<l. '" I ::I:"';t:: ;; '" ::> ~~ <:T .... ~ n 0 0 .. CJ)(tl::i>:: CD l13% <= -'3" "'" ~ .J L. ::> ~ f 10% ~ :s_. 0- ('b r.n E' ::t S!!. :>0 "Tj r- 0> a~~ 0> 3 _. <= ~t,.. CICl iil 44% J -0 re. (tl(tl s:: ~ :I: ""::EI:>b:l "" 0 '" ,," (tl U> NtnO (tl _... 0- 12. "#.<f!.* ~ --3~~ ~ !;l 1!1: ....::l" ... ..... ~ O"O"'c:ll:i.. r- ::s '" 0 S' ..... ::> 00 "-' ~ c ..... .. .. .. it-< .. r . . r .. , . I C/) > <:: ~ 7l ~ '< ~ ~ ~ ~ -9 ~ '\ :I: e- II z .6_ e "tl r- % ~ !i WATERMAN AVE ANOERSQIv AVE ~~ il ~ o ~ " m '" :J: ~ :ll o o m z .... ~ ~ m " ?' ~ ~ TIPPECANOE AVE :ll m o ~ o '" '" I: o " :z: ,. (II m N " :z: l: m .... ~ - ~ ~ "tl "tl "'" "'" ll> ll> U> U> C1l '" C1l '" .... ...'" ~ .. ~ .... !!l. ~ !!l. .J~ [ [ t (4%) J ~t ~ ~ :r <:l :r (6%) ... en- ll> ll> ..l:l 3. .... 3. 3 ~ 3 ~ ll> ll> ::l ::l :!1 :!1 ~ ~ ?> ?> "tl "tl ::l. ::l. ... 3 3 ll> ll> .. -< '" l -< ",- .... (29%) > ",en... ~ .. ..~.. &l L. r (63%) ~ ..J~L. r (7%) ~ U> :r ~ ll> t ll> ~t ::> ,- 3. J 3' 3 (29%) ll> ll> ::l -'" ::l (32%) 8:* co", ... :!1 ~.. :!1 ..- ... ~ ~ ~ :-' :-' ~ "tl "tl "'" "'" ... ~ l"l ll> ll> .. Cl l4l U> ~ ... 0; C1l ~ .. l"l '" '" '" '" '1:1 z () ~ () ~ .., '=' C1l C1l ..9. ~ ;- ::l ~ l (6%) ::l ~ l (tl <>" ei ei (2%) (') g. g ~ > 0 - c 0 t,- ~ t >-3 0 Q. lil Q. '0 U> U> ::J. "El . l!!. l!!. .2. :r ",en :r 8l "0 .2. n ~.. " P. 0> ll> .. ;I> ~ <t 3. " 3. ~ 3 3 '" :1. -S' ll> ~ ll> ~ '" '0 ., ::l ::l ..... ., ~ :!1 :!1 ~ CICl ~ ~. ~ '1:1~ ~. a ~ ~ a n n a ?> !'" ..,(tll:>l a '0 m m ..9. a ~ ;;1 '0 n ll> ll> n a !!l. !!l. . " (tl'1:l-' " 0 > 0; ~ ~ (') III ~" " li1 ~ 0 '" lil .,..~ ;;::+~~ li1 ,. ~ ,. n U> U> ..- " U> l (2%) l!!. l (tl""," 3: ~ ..J~ (2%) g a ~-. :r ll> ll> (tl '" I:> '" "Tj 3. 3. "'~~ 3 t,- 3 t,- ..... ll> ll> '" ::i '" ~ ::l ::l (18%) ... t""(tl b:l :!1 :!1 O~I:> .., "'''' "'.... ~~ en"" ,," (tl "". n ....~ . a >-3~1:> ~ o.::J{l il ..... ::s~ os' ..... fI) '-"~ c N - - ",,,, ","i' ..J~ ... - (7%) J (93%) .. -d "'''' ~r-; - - MILL ST - 10. Tippecanoe Ave/laurelwood Dr - - .. "' ~ - CENTRAL AVE .. ~ w ~ w o z '" " w .. .. e: - t .. "' ~ .. - ORANGE SHOW RD .. 11. Tippecanoe Ave/Rosewood Dr w ~ z '" '" a: w ~ s: ... .. .... ..,N ~::!:. - .. ~EGIe:DR ..J~ l43% ,......,,,, ~ ... t '" N v .. HOSPITAUTYLN ... 10 .. 12. Tippecanoe Ave/I-1 0 Westbound Ramps - ~ '" g OJ FE o '" '" .. ... .. N ~ .. L.. ... 42% J .. LEGEND ... 4% Inbound project trip assignment percentage .. (4%) Outbound project trip assignment percentage 13. Tippecanoe Ave/I-1 0 Eastbound Ramps ... 1/30101 (CBD030/EIR/TTtJfJic.Section) '"' Figure 4.1.13 ... II1II The Hub in San Bernardino Environmental Iml!..act Report Project Trip Assignment Patterns (Pass-Hy Tnps) Off-Site Intersections L SA ... .. ~ , ,.. , ~ .. ~ r r ~ . ~ ~ ., I C/) > '" ~ ~ i'l g '< ~ ~ ~ .0. -$ \g ;\ :I: El- I I Z .6_ 'I:ll' "tJ r- I ~ . ANOEITSQIy AVE WATERMAN AVE o ~ " m '" :I: ~ ~ o m :!i ~ ~ " ?' ~ ~ TIPPECANOE AVE :ll m o S; z o '" '" I: o "Ill :z: 1: m ~ "Ill :z: 1: m ... ~ ~ ~ !-" LI LI =>. ~ 3 '" '" $ -< ~ > ~ ~ f (100%) U> !Il. ~ ~ '" 3. ~ U> ~ 3 II!. 10% -. '" co I => '" c '" 3. :!l '" 3 '" '" ::l :!l ~ ~ ,... ~ LI LI ~ =>. '" 3 U> Cll C '" '" 0 -< (") ~ f Cll ::l t f (11%) ei II!. ~ I t~ '" ~t 3. U> 3 (50%) -. II!. '" I co "' ::l ....~ ~* ",0 '" :!l "'''' 3. 3 '" ::l :!l ~ ~ !" ,... ~ !;!' LI ~ "'d ~ l"l !Il. '" ... Cl U> .., ~ '" 1: Cll :t S. l"l 0 '" Z ~ 0 (tl '=' U> ~ (") ~ n II!. Cll ~ " t => t - I ei or '" S e- o 3. g 0 f ~ 3 "0 8- Q. '" t~ t '0 => > '0 ~ :!l . .2. II!. co .2. n "' co I en n n ~~ '" "' en p. ~ 3. '" _. q CICl :r. 05' 3 '" S '0 ., => ., ~ ~ :!l '" ~. '" g ~. 3 "'d- ~ n ~ 3 !" .., "'dt>:! 3 -g m S'~~;;1 -g ;:l '" ;:l n !Il. ('D ('D-' n ~ > "S! n:3 ~" ~ ... 0 g "" ~ - "';t:: n ~ >en::is:: n U> U> ("'),.-...~ 0- I t ("') ~:!.-' '" (tlllll:> '" "Tj 3. 00 tI) ......~ _. 3 t~ en en ~I:> CICl '" t'"" I '" => (29%) -. s:: :!l O~b:l .., co ~ n'< '" ~ (tl "'~ Ill...,-'" :t:. ?ft-;fl -..,~I:> O'-~a.. ..... ::s~ 0 S. ..... rJ'J,,-,,::tc ~ ,... ,... ... .,. ",. .... IF- .... "" ... I C/) > ~ '" ~ ~ &l ~ ! ~ "- -9 V '\ :I: e- I I z .a. e "U r- o ~ ~ ~ o WATERMAN AVE o 0- 0 m 0 ~ " ?' ~ r :; Z ~ > I " m ~ ~ '" :I: 0 ,. :ll 0 ANDERS ~E 8esa .-0------.. ~'i '---. :ll ~ ~ ~ i 8 ~ o '" '" ~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I ~ ~ !" ~ !" ~ "tI .... :I: :E II> ::l. -;:;' 3. II> 3 lil lD II> 3 3 -< g II> ~ l33 ::l II> ~ .0 ,,"" ::l co ::l ....0.0 ~ "tI ... '" .J!L. f 142 ~ -356 ~ .J ~ .J - 30 U> 0 l!!. U> ~ CD "0 :I: :0 !if II> 3. -d r- 0 184 J ~ 5J 111 J U> 371 - ~ 3 CD II> ~ r- 30- ::l 189 ) '" '" co ::l 0'" co J1 '" Q. C ~ ~ ~ :-' !" :-' !" "tI ::I .... ~ -;:;' =r "0 "0 II> lil CD lD 8: g g 3 '" '" ::l ::l ::::; ~ II> '" () co ~ ll34 ::l '" '" CD '" ~ ::l ~ l15 ~ ~ .J -40 81 .J -222 - 25 CD i 0 > iil ~ tr- 0 ::l ~ 199- ~ 25 - ., '" 25 J U> CD U> !<l. en :;: ...~ 20 ) ~ 40 - "'0 g =r II> .0 ~ 3. c: 3 => ;;0 Q. II> ;;0 Q. ::l II> J1 3 "0 U> ~ ~ !" ~ ?' ~ m .... .... ~ II> -;:;' -;:;' !<l. lil ~ lD ~ g 3 '" => W ::l II> ~'" ~ ~ ::l U> "'''' co - 60 ~ - 21 ~ .J! l10 ~ L. f 162 ~ -45 CD f 51 II> ~ l!. ~ 3. en 3 II> ::l tr- 0 => Q. II> m '" CD r- ::l 107 ) 61_ ., ~ 20- J1 II> CD 44- U> 3 ...'" 6' 5) '" ... ...'" II> :E .0 0 a 0 c: '< => :r Q. 0 ;;0 ~ II> 3 "0 U> ~ ~ ,... ,... > ::I :E "0 => ~ II> Q. lD CD 3 (;l l5 0 ::l II> => 0 ::l '" en '" - 25 CD l 0 "" ~ ;;0 L. f 30 -65 ! f 21 CD l!. :I: Q. :I: 0 ii> 0 U> => U> "0 .,tr- Q. r- "0 ., !if U> 25- !if 65- 86 ) '" ~ ;:- '" ~ 30) ~ "''''''' Q. 0 r- "'00 r- => => ~ ~ $1' $1' P ~ "tI .... . ~ =r -;:;' 0 II> ~;;.;;1 U> "0 :E CD CD g CD O~" lsl... U> ~ ~... ::l l79 6' ~ c..;;..", ;t:: "'~ ~ .0'" 0 (t)::i::: c: '"00""," !<l. .J! ~ .JL. -.14 ::l ! f 51 i'f Q. . .....;:s_. l!. ;;0 ~."HP' "Tj @ r- II> II> 3 . s::;:;~ .... U> .,t c: .,tr- ~ l!!. 15 J iil 383 J "0 '"O:3::i'" :I: ~ Ie. (t) '15b:l II> 36 ) "'~ :I: fa 3. .12- 0 "'...... ~~~~ ...'" U> 0"'.0 3 co Q. "0 .....~'" ~ II> !;i' !if ::I:S:: I:> ::l 3~~ ..... J1 ~ o c-. r- ..... => s:: (t)... '" VI ""1 t/:I_O ... , r ~ .. . r . .. ,- .. ,. ~ ,.' ... ~ ~ ~ !'> - -0 -; ~ ::!. -S' 3 1il !D '" 3 -< l45 1.1 '" [ wc:.noo ::! ::l :!:: 0-'" 0 [ ..J~L.. r 200 CD ~ r 28 I -480 !!!. :I: :I: 0 '" '" -, tr- 3. -,t~ "0 3 145 J ~ 508- ![ 116 -. '" ~ ::! 249 -. .... co_ "''''''' -"'''' 0 '" <D CD :!l - 0 Co ::! 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ :-oJ !'-' -0 ::! ::;: ::T "0 co '" "0 ai' '" g CD '" ~ ::l 60 ;;; ('") ..... ~ l182 U> CD 0 ::! ~ l19 :>- c: ~ r 69 ![ ~ -298 ::l Co ~ ::;: ;;c '" t~ co 3 -,t~ lil ai' 274- ~ "0 '" !!!. !!!. CD - ~ '" :I: ;a~81 :I: -U> '" 0 '" .... U> '" 3. c: "0 ::! ![ 3 Co '" ;;c ~ ::! '" :!l 3 0 Ii: ::l ~ ~ !'> ~ !'" m ::! :I: '" '" ~ 3. !e- 3 ~ 1.1 '" " .... ~ is ::l '" CD ~~ ~ ~ '" -79 '" ..J~ l13 l 3: L.. r 220 0 ..J '" '" 3. "0 3 t~ ;5 ![ '" m ~ 243 J ::! 142 -. '" 82 _ :!l !e- o CD CD g- ::l g<D c: ::! Co ;;c '" 3 "0 '" ~ !D ~ ?: ::! "0 Co 1il CD 1.1 fil l7 ::l ::l ~ ~ ..... - 33 ;;c L.. r 39 ~ - 90 CD 3: Co or 0 ::! '" Co ~ "0 -, '" 34- ![ 85- '" ~ :!:: ~ 39 -. :!:: 0 ::! ~ ~ ~ !::l ~ -0 ::! ::T "0 "t:I<:~ '" "0 $ CD ~_.:>, " O~" - '" '" ....- ::l 5..(tl'~ ~ ai' ~~ 0 ~~ l150 CD IOrtlt:t- !e- ..J~ ~ ..JL.. -.19 =,-", -. [ ~ :.> -liS '" "Tj 0 <: s::-'" '" _. '" -,t c: -03 ~!i CICl '" 20 J a; 526 J s:: 3: ! ~ ~]~ @ '" 48 -. g:~ .17- 3. 0 ~O Q~ 3 '" Co .....~'" ~ '" !O' ::I:S:: I:> ::! 3{5 i:l.. ..... :!l ::;l c-. ..... :::: ('p ""t::S 0\ "'1 tI'J_O - 1.SA ASSOCIATES. INC. - - and 4.I.E, the year 2002 plus project and year 2020 plus project analyses indicate that all project access driveways will operate with satisfactory levels of service based on the turn restrictions discussed in the project description. The turn restrictions and the overall intersection geometrics at the project driveways are described as follows: ... ... """ - West Access to Phase I - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). The level of service analysis indicates that full ingress and egress can be accommodated at this location. .. - Primary Access - To maintain satisfactory operations, this location will need to be signalized. - - Central Access to Phase II - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). Analysis indicates that providing for full ingress and egress at this location would result in unsatisfactory levels of service. Therefore, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. - .. .. East Access to Phase I - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). Due to the proximity to Tippecanoe Avenue, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. .. - East Access to Phase II - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). Due to the proximity to Tippecanoe Avenue, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. .. ... .. Potentially Significant Impacts - .. . Year 2002 Plus Project Intersection Conditions - Impact 4.1.1 Five intersections are forecast to fall below the minimum LOS D under 2002 plus project conditions in the mid-day and/or p.m. peak hour. These intersections are: - - /-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane Tippecanoe Avenue/Laurelwood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/I-l 0 Westbound Ramps Tippecanoe Avenue/I-lO Eastbound Ramps Anderson Street/Redlands Boulevard. ... ... ... - The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions. which is considered to be a significant impact. ... - The year 2002 plus project condition considers the addition of traffic generated by the proposed project at opening day to the roadways in the project vicinity. As discussed previously, this analysis examines build out of the proposed project (Phases I and 2) under year 2002 conditions. ... ... Figure 4.1.17 illustrates the year 2002 plus project p.m. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. Figure 4.1.18 illustrates the year 2002 plus project mid-day peak hour turn volumes. The year 2002 plus project levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in previously referenced Table 4.I.C. - - - 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal ElR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIR.doc) 4.1-33 - - ....-., If' ''''I , , . ... ... ,. .... I C/) > ;:, ~ ?\ .. " i;: '< ~ ~ ~ ~ -9 'v '\ :I: 9- I I Z .<l!l>_ V \l r- ~ ~ , " IVvOEFlSg" ~E WATERMAN AVE o 0- o ~ z " m '" :I: o :Ii :ll o o m :!i ~ " ?' ~ '" .... ~ m TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I ~ ~ !" ,.. !" ~ I ~ " -I .. ". ~. 3. 3 1il a; .. 3 l67 3 l150 -< l33 !il .. ~~oo ~w~ ",:t:", " .. [ " " '" '" en ....."'''' 0 - 1882 " en '" '" -16 "'~'" - 965 -0 '" ~ .J~I.. ~ .J~I.. .J~I.. ( 142 ~ ( 18 5l ( 31 ~ ( 110 ~ ill "0 ~ .. :il ~ ~tt+" ~tt+" 3. ~tt+" 0 t+" ~ 408 J ~ 106 J 111 J '" 1562- 3 ~ .. 15, w r- 14- ....."'w 1116- "'w~ " 0- ww"" w " ....."'~ .....~'" 0"'''' 104 , '" 144 , en '" '" ::!1 189, "'- 0. !<' ~ ~ :-' '" :-' '" -I " -I ~. ~ ::r ~. "0 .. "0 '" a; '" '" !il '" !il l150 3 l111 '" ..... ~ " '" '" .. ~...- C) "" l 663 0 "''''... " en ..... '" "" '" -0'" - 861 "'.....w -1025 '" l15 ~ ~ .J~I.. " ~ ! .J~I.. ( 25 ( 115 ei -1443 ~ ~ OJ tt+" <> ~tt+" " ~tt+" ~ 465 J ~t+" ~ 88J <C 123 J '" '" '" '" en :I: .....- 1103- "'... 974- """'''' 971- '" - en 00 go :t:8:l w '" ::r "''''..... .. '" 94, 0 59, ... 3. c :Ii &l " ;C 0. ;c 0. " .. ::!1 3 1il ~ !'D !'" !'D !'" -I ~ !;r =i ~. !!l. "0 1il a; 1il ~ !il !il l41 3 l11 " .. ..... " ........ al ~w- " - ~ -'" al ow ~~::: '" en '" .....- -811 - 824 ~ "'''''''' -1157 ~ .J~ l10 ~ ..II.. ( 839 ~ .J~I.. ( 362 .J~I.. (198 < 17; .. ~ 3. 3 .. " ~tt+" <> " 0. ~tt+" .. m tD 67 J ~tt+" '" 36 J " 107, 914 _ e: ::!1 .. '" '" 3 ;; -- Er 307 , .. 836- ~~gj ~ 876- "'",w en '" 0 en w "'''' c a. 109, 135, '" '" " 5' 0. 0 ?? ~ 3 '" "0 '" ~ ~ ~ ~ -I ~ ~ ~. 0. 1il a; '" !il 3 Ul l172 ll44 l186 0 -...'" " w '" .. .....w'" " ;5$!il al ~~~ " ~w~ en - 639 - 1035 { -822 '" .J~I.. ( 358 I .J~I.. .J~I.. ;c ( 36 (136 ~ I 0 or 0 '" " ~tt+" '" ~tt+" "0 ~tt+" 0. 102 J 12. 352 J i[ 350 J '" !it tD ~ ~ 643- :::~!ll ~ 824- ........'" r- 538- "'...- "'-0 -"'- 58, wwo r- 79, " 866 , "''''''' " ;0 ~ ~ ~ !-" '" !-" P " -I , f& ~~ ~ ::r ~. <> .. "0 ::;; ?<;"(tl ;;.;;1 '" '" '" !il '" ::c:1ll~" '" ..... l145 '" l 75 -..... " Er "'''''- "'''';t:: ~ "'..... al 0 - 0"'''' o N::!l:: w",... - 1407 0 "'...'" -404 .J~ c S::O""," !!l. ~ .J~I.. ( 16 " .J~I.. ( 116 0. ""'t 0::1:-. ~ ;C >-3 Nt; '" "Tj lil .. ~t .. 3 s:: -'" .... '" 15 J c ~tt+" ~tt+" 9 ::g~!i ~ '" Cil 533 J "0 405 J :I: S!!. S::"1::l b:l .. 36, w... I 1132- -"'''' I .., 3. .....'" 0 86- w..."" ~U>I:> (tl ..... '" '" ..... ..... en o "'~!:; 3 21, 12. 115, "'..... -..,~'" ~ .. a !it " ~ s:: 0 I:> ..... ::!1 ~ 3=~~ r- ('t) c-. ..... " (tl (')... '" -....I rJ'J ~_c ~ , ... . ~ , r ~ . . . . . . , I C/) > '" c ~ Q ~ '< ~ ~ ~ .0. -e ~ '\ :I: 9- I I z -8- "U r- ~ " ~ . ANOERS~ WATERMAN AVE ~ I iI ~ ~ o . o . o ~ z " m rn J: o :< :ll o o m z .... ~ ~ " ?' ~ rn .... TIPPECANOE AVE o- j ~ - ~ !-" ~ ~ "tl .... :r -0' CD ll> "tl '" 11l l149 3 l264 11l fil oo - en ll> 8lw", "'''' " ~~~ " ....- ::E -oo - 1303 en - oo -591 11l .J! a: .J!'- (8 ~ .J!'- ( 131 !!l. ~ 3: ~ ~ 0 <> ~t r- ~t,.- '" ~t,.- 11l 20 J ll> 805 J "2. 335 J '" c ![ !!!. iil :I: 481 ~~ [ 1071- ",woo ~ 478- w..._ ll> 0 ~~~ ~ '" 101 r- 8501 3' " ll> s;> " J2 ~ ~ !-" !" .... , "tl ~ -0' 0 ". 16 ::E 3 ll> l45 0 11l l105 -< -... ll> '" -0'" ~....oo " 8' ...."'''' [ ",w -0 lil - 1927 '" 0 en -229 I c .J!'- .J!'- ( 200 ( 30 " ( 140 '" Q. '" ?r 3: 0 ll> ~t,.- ~ 3 538 J ~t,.- 3. 145 J 1642- ,.- "tl 3 Ie. ll> 0- ......- 8. 121 w is: 152- w",_ " -ww .... w"'.... __0 S? '" 5401 ...oo", J2 2491 "tl ![ ~ r- " ~ ~ !" :-< :I: "tl .... ll> -e' 3. :r 16 ll> 3 '" fil ll> l49 11l '" '" ~ " en '" ~ l716 "tl - en '" (") "" '" en '" - 31 ~ ! l19 l :I: .J!'- -1348 0 ( 20 !if '" T "tl )> t,.- <3 ![ ~t,.- ~ ~ 443 J ~,.- ~ 483 J '" '" r- '" ~C;; 6' 1264- tlSl " 31- -"'''' 3: 0....... ll> W g "'- 1211 ",w 3. " Q. 3 ::<l ll> ll> " 3 J2 "tl '" ~ ~ :-< po> ~ .... m ::l -0' ll> "tl "tl !!l. 16 ~ ~ '" fil " l152 ~ ~:;;! 0 w_w "'''' &8~ 11l -0 11l -1420 "'''' -815 Ie. .J! l13 ~ .J'- ( 767 ~ .J!'- (188 :I: ll> ~ 3. 3 t,.- 0 ~t,.- ll> 1421 m 52 99 J " ll> 1017_ J2 '" en !!l. 1592- .......'" "'''' :s- 1781 ........- ~ '" c 536 1 oo '" " _. Q. Q.. ::<l I ll> CI 3 "tl III '" '< ~ ~ '"t1 .... (tl t>l ~ -0' III ':<:'" "tl Q. 11l ::>;"(tl ;;.;;1 11l <> Ul l176 ll> l161 ::r:1ll~" 0 -....'" " ... '" 0 ..,,,,::.: " ~8~ 11l -...'" ON::iI:: en - 610 w__ - 813 c:: .J!'- ~ .J!'- S::O""," i!i' ( 269 ~ ( 41 ""i O::s_. Q. :I: -3NiS"'" "Tj or 0 s:: -'" " ~t,.- '" ~t,.- _. "tl a ~~~ ~ Q. 110 J ![ 431 J '" S::"'<::l b:l '" ~ .., ~ 562 - -...'" 793- "'w- ~"'I:> ...."'... w 0 en (tl 911 -o- r- 681 o '"t1~ ~ " -t-oot::e::S :I'> s:: 0 I:> ..... a '-'"{l it C'tl 0-' ..... (tl (')... '" 00 en f""fo-_C - LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. - - - As indicated in Table 4.I.C, all intersections examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service with the addition of project traffic to the year 2002 background conditions, with the exception of: - - 1-10 Westbound Ramps/HospitaIity Lane - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. .. - Tippecauoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. .. - Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. .. .. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps - This locationll is projected to operate at LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F under both existing and 2002 without project conditions. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. .. ",. i.. "" , iii Auderson Street/Redlands Boulevard - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. .. The project's effect on operations at these intersections in year 2002 is considered to be a significant impact. - ... .. Mitigation Measures 4.1.1A The project proponent shall make a fair share contribution to the following improvements: .. 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane - Modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the northbound right turn movement. ... ... Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane and a separate eastbound right turn lane, and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the eastbound right turn movement. .. - Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps - Addition ofa westbound free right turn lane. .. ... Tippecanoe A venue/I-I 0 Eastbound Ramps - Addition ofa separate northbound right turn lane and a second southbound left turn lane. In order to accept the dual southbound left turn lanes, Tippecanoe Avenue under the freeway bridge would need to be widened. Widening of the roadway cannot be accommodated within the space available under the 1-10 bridge. Improvement of operations at this intersection would require the reconstruction of the Tippecanoe A venue/I-I 0 interchange. While plans for the interchange reconstruction are currently being prepared by Caltrans, SANBAG, and the City of San Bernardino, the reconstruction will not be completed by 2002. .. .. ... - - Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane. - .. 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-36 - .. - - LS.A ASSOCIATES, INC. - .. Level of Service After Mitigation - - Table 4.I.H shows the resulting levels of service with the mitigation measures described above for the four impacted intersections. As shown in Table 4.1.H, implementation of the mitigation measures will improve intersection operations at these locations to LOS D or better, reducing the impacts to a less than significant level. However, as noted above, improvement of operations at Tippecanoe AvenuelI-IO Eastbound Ramps would require reconstruction of the interchange. Although interchange reconstruction will occur by 2020, it will not be completed by 2002. Therefore, the proposed project will have a temporary significant and unavoidable impact at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps. ... - .. .. . Year 2002 Plus Project Freeway Conditions "'" .. Impact 4.1.2 1-10 Eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue isforecast tofall below the minimum LOS E threshold under 2002 plus project conditions in the p.m. peak hour. The project contributes to this unsatisfactory condition, which is considered to be a significant impact. - .. - Previously referenced Table 4.I.D summarizes the forecast year 2002 plus project p.m. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table 4.I.D, all freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 plus project conditions, with the exception ofI-IO eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue. This freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2002 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. This is considered to be a significant impact. .- - .. - .. Mitigation Measures - 4.1.2A As shown in Table 4.1.1, the addition of an eastbound HOV lane on 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue would improve freeway operations with year 2002 plus project traffic volumes to LOS D. Improvements to 1-10 are under the authority ofCaltrans. However, there is no mechanism for development project proponent to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards improving mainline freeway lanes, and even if there were there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. Consequently, there is no feasible mitigation measure for this impact. - - .. .. .. Level of Service After Mitigation - There is no feasible mitigation measure for this impact. The impact remains significant and unavoidable. .. ... . Year 2020 Plus Project Intersection Conditions .. - Impact 4.1.3 Ten intersections are forecast to fall below the minimum LOS D under 2020 plus project conditions in the mid-day and/or p.m. peak hour. These intersections are: .. - Waterman Avenue/Mill Street Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road .. - .. 3/28/01 (\\RlY5IPROlECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-37 - .. - - - - ... - ... .. .. .. .. - ... .. .. "" .. - ill \till .. ... .. ... .. ... ... - ... ... .. - ... - ... - ... .. '" oE .. '" ... = '" ;; ~ ...l " .S! ... '" .. '" ... 1J " .. " .S! ... " .':1' ... ~ ... ... oi ... '" .. .- f: ~ '" = is: ... = = ... ... " .. ... , =; ... .; .. :c " ... u z . " f- . Q >-Cl -c.u .- - ::;]> '" ...0 =..:1 o ~= g.:.r: ~ ~~';3 :a=-l:l :s~ U~u ~ ;> e =- ~ = 6: ... '" '" ... ... " .. >- ...'" =0 ~..:I "" lE ~Q l:l , ~~ U U UOO '" 0; '" '" -D N "'!.... o-r--: N....'" N r-- 0; = '" r-- 00 0'> r-- odo '" '" 0; o alOO o o ~ '" 0'> N ""':oON -"'.... r-- ,..; '" '" 00 0; N '" 0; "'.... '" 00O'>r-- dod * * * OOUOUUUOU"- al"-"-O alU al al NO'If"'-:C::(""lOO\l"1~r--: 1,,0 00-.6 MO..oN-..nM ~ MMM~MNM<o:tNr--- r--O.... r"iN"",= ...."'''' o::::I"V'lMV'lNr"Nl'O\-.:t 1"C\O\Ooot-I/')I/')t'"--\O- ddddddddd NOr-- c::r-:r- 0; * * * * * O<<lU r; l/') 0\ I/') M I.Ci d M _ N - '" '" 0; U"-U"-"-<<lUUalal ~"'gl " " " '11 '11 '11 " " " ill ill ill - c " ........ .... v1NoO '" '" N """" ~ ~ '11 '11 ~ a '" '" - - c c " " N\O Nr--O\r- 0::::1"0\ M \0 -.:io\oooo"'d..oor-,j..,j. NI/') I/')-\O-M- C Q " " r-- '" 0; r-- N "'''': 0; "'........ -:C'1r-- 0; 0'> r-- 0'> '" dd " o '.c: il C .. - " .. '" <>.'" " ~,,~ ~ ]t;-ll,,~ g~~~~]::;] ~~...J:=" 'E...J"Ooi5g~ o ",.~a"il"OO "0..9..,"3 Q) .c .= .... c. ~ Q,) E .- 0 0 fIl t:) 0 Q)tI:l:E;'::fIl .:: aiat O~~CQ 1:: " -:l ~O 0'" &:l';::";i ~... <<l ~ tn on Q) .- .- _ c.... 4,) 0"0 _c'g~ ];::crn= mO C == 5 " 0 <>..- ~ ~ ~ ;! ~ ...!. ...!. " ~_~~~~~GJ=Q)o lUOO~ Q)Q)I1)O.....;;: == ==,,=~ :::s===""" cccc c C cccc"'O UIl)I1)O O(!JQ) Q,)Q)oo=B>;>;>;> ;>;;'>Q) >>>>="<<<<<<<1:: < <r: 0( -< 0 is: Q) Q) Q) Q) Q,) Q) Q) r.n aaaa~cgggg gggc eeee~e11BBB B1111~ ~ ~ .!! ~ 'j: 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. Q,) cd cd cd CIS 0 ca Q., Q., Q., Q., Q., Q., Q.,"'O ~~~~:::;::I:i=i=i=i=i=i=i=~ " al li: " a al E::- .~ i ] '~ ~;;: < ~ - " '" <J " <J ~< ~ " .. ] ,~ 0..0.. N r-- 0; " al li: c .. E .~ -~ ~ li: ~ a ~ E < .~ ] ;;: " '" " '" U 8 N <J " < ~ ~ if <<l _Nf""l"lt'Vl\Or--OOO\O NMo::::I" 1/')\0 l"""-OO - oj 'C ~ 'C <J "0 "0 .c '" " - oS '" "0 " " <J " " '" o ...J . ;,; " "0 Z o .~ - 08 .~ 'E Cl. " ..'" ~'O E";i ~ ~ >...J II II u'" :;;3 " .51 - <J " iJ .5 "0 .~ ;; e, ';;; " :> Vi o ...J ~ N g ~ X ~ u :;; . f-o .. c .g y u '" '" Iii '\j @ M 8 '" y ~ ;;;; ~ . - - - .. - .. - .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .... .. ... - ... .. - .. - .. ... .. ... .. .... too ... .. .r!l ., ;... '" = < .. .S ;: 'OJ ~ ;... .. ~ .. .. ~ .. " = = ~ .. .. Il. :;1 =.: = .S: .. .. ~ ;: ~ ..c .. .~ .. " .. .- f g. ., " is: N <:> <:> N .. .. .. ;.. u z , -: .. ~ .. :E .. E- . . .. ..c...l .. .~ .. " .. ..... f g. ., " is: N <:> <:> N .. .. .. ;.. Q. .. :l u = .. ...l;;. go ;:= .. .~ .. .- "Cl ~ ~ ~ .. " .. ';' .. g. ., " is: N <:>~ ~=C; loll.;;' .. .. ;.. '" ..C; ~;;. '" o ...l Cl '" 00 o o o '<T o '<T * ClClIOoClClClClCl !;,! ;;. 000\ I:""--NOONO\ r-r-~OOOOr-OOr- dd 00000 00000000 r---V)O\\OM\I)~V) 00 0\ oo\O('\IooN 0"1 ...0 'C)... 00 r-: r-: v5 r-: \0" 00000000 \l)NOOOMON \Ot-\O'It'O\OOr- v5...o00r-:r--:v5r:-:-..c Q. .. U 00000000 00000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ., .. = .. ...l 'V-v 'V 'V 'V 'V 'V 'V .. " = .. > <'" c o E .. ;;. II = .. E ~ .. '" ;... .. ~ ~ ~ N , - .. o " .. C " " .. " > C C < 5 ~ e "Cl::E < .. = 0 c E = ... 0 u ~t) E~ .s " " 3= ., J:l ;;. 0 . c:.f.) ... ... r..l -5 c '" <:> = " - .. 0 N ..:.Z~~ " " " Ii " > c 1l < ~ Ii ~ < > u C':S - < ;;'s al u 0 l:: o c ~ cI'J c 'a <<s ... t; C':S " cuE ,," .. Q., 0 0 .D Q.::E .. .. 0 E= 0 1l ::;: ,., o ... coO:: ... u Q.) ... C/'J u ;s > u ::I C <( ;:S S 5 ~ ~ 5 t) ~<~~~ "'" ,^ c: 0 t':S vu .. ;j .S .- .. E " :l E e ~8.5~~ C':S Q., 0 - to 3=E=::E8::;: UUUUUUUCQ 'V\I)\O\ONO\\O~ \0 \0 r-\O\O \I) V) I.() cidddcicicici 00000000 'O::tOV'lO"lO\Or-r- \0 r- \0 r--- 'V.. C'i 0\ r- .nv)...ovl\l)V)~'V" 00000000 V) MO M-- 'V V) oq-\OMOOO \0 .,)'lI"i v:>..,.)'..,).,.) 'V.. 'V.. 00000000 00000000 0000000000000000 00" 00 00 00" 00 00 00 00 'V 'V 'V 'V 'V 'V 'V 'V .. " ~ .. '" ..c " C " z Ii > B< " c " 0 Ii !j "Cl~;;' S !5 g ~ E 0 'Wl " ::E .. ;;. 0 ~ .. .. c '" <:> " - .. 0 N ..:.:E~ " " " c ;::I OJ ~ 5 ;::I < > C " < ~ 0 ~ u < ;j .2 S c 3 > u a g;.s ~ E E= S C':S iii ;j B 5 's ~~g~~H o-c:oc;.t= ... iU ~ ... U en gs<gSe.. 5 ~ ~ 5 u ~ < .2 > ~ {l .... ,,;;. < .. .... co.. '" ::: .. c c .- .. 0 =~LsEE" t: u c c.S C':S 0 B Q. ::s ._ ..c ("f') ~t:l.O-~~ 3=E=::E8::;:~ .; .;:: " .. .;:: " "0 "0 ..c '" " ... -5 "0 " " " " " '" o ....l :; ~ "" '" o o ';;! .. ~ u :0 ~ .... ..,; c o .~ '" '" Iii '" @ M 8 '" y ~ Q ~ :;, * - ... LSA ASSOCiATES, INC. - ... .. [-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane Tippecanoe Avenue/Mill Street Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue Tippecanoe Avenue/Laurelwood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive Tippecanoe AvenuelI-1O Westbound Ramps Tippecanoe Avenue/I-[ 0 Eastbound Rilmps Anderson Street/Redlands Boulevard. - - ... . ... The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions. which is considered to be a significant impact. ... ... The year 2020 plus project condition considers the addition of traffic generated by build out of the proposed project to the roadways in the project vicinity. Figure 4.1.19 illustrates the year 2020 plus project p.m. peak hour intersection turn volumes. Figure 4.1.20 illustrates the year 2020 plus project mid-day peak hour volumes. The levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in previously referenced Table 4.I.E. ... - ... - As indicated in Table 4.I.E, all intersections examined are projected to continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service with the addition of project traffic to the year 2020 background conditions, with the exception of: .. . Waterman Avenue/Mi11 Street - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS E during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. - ill .. Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... .. 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS E during the mid-day peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will-result in the degradation of mid- day peak hour intersection operations from LOS E to LOS F and the degradation of p.m. peak hour intersection operations from LOS D to LOS E. - ... - - Tippecanoe A venue/Mill Street - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... - Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... - - Tippecanoe A venue!Laurelwood Drive - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. ... ... - ... 3/28/01 (\\RJV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-40 - ... ... r r .. ... , !" . r . . ~ r ~-.. ~ ~ !" ,.. !" ~ :I: ::E "'0 -I .. ". -e' 3. .. 3 1il CD .. 3 l 79 3 l188 -< l33 !;l .. ...."'~ "''''~ '" " .. ~ "''''''' " "''''''' " "''''... - 2775 "'0 "''''~ -12 "'....'" ...."'''' -0 0 ~ -1251 C1> :f ..J~L. ..J~L. .. ..J~L. ( 142 ~ ( 20 0 ( 33 ~ (164 ~ .. -0 .. :;; ~ -d ,- -d,- 3. -d ,- 0 ,- ~ 461 J fa 193 J 111 J .. 2455 - 3 ~ .. 16, '" r- 8- ~"'''' 1462 - 0- "'''''''' " :t...~ " "''''''' 0 '" "''''''' "'... :!l 189, "'~ 0. 115, "'''' 316, "''''''' c ~ ~ ~ :-< !" :-< !" -I "'0 -I -e' ::E ::T -e' -0 .. .. 1il C1> CD .. CD !;l !;l l150 3 l 240 '" '" " " ~~"" .. ~~~ () '" 1il l769 0 r.c~~ " '" C1> - 1437 ~"'''' -1332 C1> l15 )> )> ..J~L. " ~ ~ ..J~L. ( 253 ~ (154 [ ~ - 2174 ~ ~ ~ iil t,- 0 -d ,- " -d ,- lil ~ 710 J ~,- fa 150 J co 275 J .. CD .. !<l. en :E ....- 1798 - ...'" 1647- ~"'''' 1247- ......'" ....'" g ~~ ","'81 ::T "''''.... .. '" 762 , i! 96, '" 3. 3 is. :n .. :n 0. " .. :!l 3 -g ~ ~ ?> f" ?> f" -I ;f m -I -e' .. -e' !<l. 1il 1 CD )> !;l ll18 3 l16 ~ " .. '" " "'''' 1il "''''''' " ~~'" -.... 1il "'''' "''''... "'''' "'''' -1364 "''''''' - 1689 ~ "''''''' - 1402 ~ ..J~ l10 ~ ..JL. ( 1216 ~ ..J~L. (604 ..J~L. ( 352 ll> ~ ~ 3. 3 .. " ~t,- 0 " ~t,- 0. ~t,- .. m OJ 190 J C1> 35 J " 107, 1437 _ ~ :!l .. C1> .. 3 ....'" go 544, 1796 - ~~t 1208- "''''... "'''' .. ~ .... ~ '" c:: a. 180, """'''' 190, " 5' 0. 0 :n ~ .. 3 C1> -0 .. ~ !O ~ ~ =! ;f ?;" -0 0. -0 CD C1> C1> !;l 3 ;;! l 406 l264 l264 0 "'''''... " "''''... .. ~:t~ " g:~~ 1il ~~~ " en -1102 -1600 l """'''' - 910 "" ..J~L. ( 466 ~ ..J~L. ( 117 ..J~L. :n ( 190 ~ :I: :I: 0 ii> 0 .. " ~t,- .. ~t,- 12. ~t,- 0. 213 J -0 509 J ![ 491 J .. ~ OJ ~ [ 996- ~"'g: ~ 1457 - --'" 758- "''''- ~~w "''''''' r- ~~~ 66, r- 153, "'- " 1210, " ;0 ~ - ~ ~ "tI ~ ~ (tl t>1 "'0 -I ~ ::T -e' 0 III ':<:'" .. -0 ::E ~(tl;;.;;1 .. ~ C1> C1> :I:el~" .... '" - l152 !<l. l87 ~ m~ " ffi.....8J g ~"'''' o N~~ 0 "''''''' C1> - 2155 ...."'''' -443 ..J~ c:: S::O""," !<l. ~ ..J~L. " ..J~L. ( 14 0. ( 165 ..... N::S-. )> C1> :n --loiS'" <> r "Tj lil .. s:: "tI;::f;' ~t .. ~t,- 3 .... .. 15 J c:: ~t,- ~ !!!. Cil 596 J -0 333 J 3 .....::i'" !!!. :I: ~ :I: S::"1:j b:l .. 36, "'... 1954- ~"'I:> ;:a 3. ....'" 8 -"'''' 0 131- "''''- .... "" .. -"'... o "tI~~ 3 0. 23, -0 144 , "''''''' -.....::tI::! ~ .. c ~ s:: 0 I:> " ~ ~ a'-;;;;"'~ it ..... :!l r- eD c-. ..... " (tl () ... '" \0 t/) f""t-_C ... , r .. . .. r ~ .... .... " .. ... I C/) > ~ '" ~ ?\ ~ ~ ~ a '% " -6) ~ '\ :x: e- II z ..t!l>_ "'" "1J r- i\ ~ , . ANOE;RSQIv ~\It; WATERMAN AVE ~ ~ ~ ~ o $! z " m '" :J: o :< :ll o o m z .... ~ " ?' ~ '" .... ~ m TIPPECANOE AVE .- I ~ ~ ,.. !'" P ~ ." -t ::r "'C. CD 0> 1il U> l 157 3 l 308 '" !ll CD ""oO '" ",8l 0> '" .... ... '" 0"'''' ~ -... "''''''' -2130 CD-CD - 785 0 ~ ..J~ '" ..J~l. f 9 ..J~l. f 149 !!l. ~ ~ !f ~t r- ~t~ ~t~ '" 20 J 0> 822 J .., 391 J U> c: @: <e. Cil ::I: 48, "'''' [ 1792- "''''''' ~ 674- ......- 0> 0'" '" "''''''' 3. .... 10, r- 975 , "''''''' 3 '" 0> 0 '" ~ 31 ~ ~ !'" ~ f'l =l , 4' ~ .., 0 3' .., ~ '" 0> l45 !ll - l121 -< -'" '" U> --'" '" 0 CD li: g CD CD '" ~ 0-'" -0 - 2759 "''''- - 255 ..J~l. ~ c: ..J~l. f 200 f 33 '" f 152 U> <P- Q. ~ ~ :>:J 0> 0> 145 J ~t~ ! 3 595 J ~t~ 3. 2573 - ~ .., 3 U> 0> 0- ......- 12 , ... 3: 170- "''''- '" ::g;~ 0 0 "'....'" 249, I<' U> 602 , .......... 31 .., @: ~ r- '" - ~ f'l :-' ::I: ." =l 0> .., 3. ::r "lil 0> 3 U> !ll '" 0> l 55 '" '" ~ '" "'''' '" l1058 ;g "''''''' n .... "''''0 -31 '" ~ l19 l ::I: ..J~l. '" - 1850 0 f 22 ![ U> .., )> t~ <5 @: ~t~ Il ~ 660 J ~~ ~ 528 J '" U> U> r- U> lll- g 1740 - "'''' '" 32 - -"'''' 3: CD'" CD '" -"'''' 0> c: "'''' 139, CD CD 3. '" Q. 3 ?r 0> '" 3 31 1;: - ~ :-' !" f" =l m =l .., .., 1 0> 1il !!l. ~ "'~ !ll '" l163 '" "'''' 0 ...-... li: 0.... '" "'....'" _'" "'''' -1125 ...."'... - 1667 U> ..J~ l13 ~ l ..J~l. <e. ..Jl. f 1138 f 202 ::I: 0> ~ 3. 3 t~ 0 ~t~ 0> 142, m !'a 159 J '" 0> 1482_ !!l. 31 "'''' g 151, 1851- '" CD '" CD '" "''''''' a::: 0 c: 698, '" '" '" .... Q. Q.. ?r I CI 3 .., III U> '<: ;. ~ ""C -t (tl t>J S- "'C. .., Ill~'" Q. '" :>;"(tl ;;.;;1 '" !ll (;l l 232 l174 ::I:1ll~" 0 ~O... '" ... '" "'''';t:: '" "'- a: ffi~~ o IV::!!: en CD '" .... -684 - 1520 "" ..J~l. ~ ..J~l. S::O""," $' f 249 f 71 '"1 N:::t_. ..,oi:;::l Q. ::I: "Tj is) 0 s:: -'" '" U> .... ~t~ .., ~t~ 9 ::g~~ CICl Q. 195 J @: 495 J U> s:: al S::"1:j b:l .., ;;:- 690- "''''''' ~ 1431 - -...'" ~cnl:> (tl Q. "'....'" "''''CD o ""C~~ 112, "'........ r- 92, ... '" -.....::tI::s ~ s:: 0 I:> ..... 3=~~ ('tl 0-' IV (tl n... '" 0 r.t.:I t"'f-_C ,... - ~ ASSOCIATES. INC. - ... .. Tippecanoe A venue/Rosewood Drive - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Due to changes in the intersection (i.e., elimination of the west leg) that would occur with implementation of the proposed project, intersection operations would be improved in the 2020 plus project condition. However, this location would operate at LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. ... - .. ... Tippecanoe Avenue/I-1O Westbound Ramps - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. - .. ... Tippeeanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. .. . ... III Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... I. ,. III The project's effect on operations at these intersections in year 2020 is considered to be a significant impact. Mitigation Measures ~ 4.1.3.A The project proponent shall make a fair share contribution to the following improvements. The fair share contribution provided below is based on the percentage of project traffic relative to total future traffic in year 2020 as described in Appendix B. r III Waterman Avenue/Mill Street - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 3.6 percent. .. .. Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - Addition ofa second northbound left turn lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, and a separate southbound right turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 5.6 percent. .. .. ... l-lO Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane - Addition ofa second westbound left turn lane and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right turn movement. Project's fair share responsibility is 25.0 percent. ill loa Tippecanoe A venue/MilI Street - Addition ofa northbound free right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, lIIItI a separate westbound right turn lane, and modification of sil!Dalllhasinl! to Drovide ril!ht turn overlaD Il!msinl! for the northbound ril!ht turn movement. Project's fair share responsibility is 2.3 percent .. .... ,... .. .. 3/28/01 (\\RlVSIPROJECTS\CBD030IFioal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIR.doc) 4.1-43 .. iii - - UA ASSOCIATES, INC. ... ... - Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 2.3 percent. .. ... II .. .. Tippecanoe Avenue/Laurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, use of the center eastbound lane as a shared through/right turn lane (resulting in one eastbound left turn lane, one shared through/right turn lane, and one dedicated right turn lane), and addition of a fourth southbound through lane. The additional southbound through lane will connect to the dedicated southbound right turn lane on Tippecanoe Avenue from Laure\wood Drive to the 1-10 westbound ramp that is to be built as part of the 1-10 freeway interchange reconstruction. Project's fair share responsibility is 29.7 percent. pi .. .. .. pi .. Tippecanoe A venue/Rosewood Drive - Elimination of southbound left turn lane (i.e., restrict traffic to/from Rosewood Drive to right-inlright-out only). This modification will be accomplished by completing the landscaped median along Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and the 1-10 westbound ramps. Project's fair share responsibility is 27.7 percent. '" lit !I" i. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps - Addition ofa second northbound left turn lane, a southbound free right turn lane, and a westbound free right turn lane. It should be noted that the recommended improvements for the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps and Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps cannot be accommodated within the space available under the 1-10 bridge. Therefore, improvement of operations at these intersections would require the reconstruction of the Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO interchange. Project's fair share responsibility is 19.9 percent of the overall Tippecanoe /I-I 0 Interchange Reconstruction. '" ill '" .. Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, and a free southbound free right turn lane (i.e., construction of a loop ramp to replace the existing southbound left turn lane). As noted above, this improvement would require reconstruction of the entire interchange. Project's fair share responsibility is 19.9 percent of the overall Tippecanoe /I-I 0 Interchange Reconstruction. .. .. .. .. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a separate southbound right turn lane, and a second eastbound left turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 4.0 percent. II .. Level of Service After Mitigation .. Table 4.1.1 shows the resulting levels of service with the mitigation measures described above for the nine impacted intersections. As shown in Table 4.1.1, implementation of the mitigation measures will .. .. .. - ... 3/28/01 (\\R1V5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSectioo 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-44 .. .. - - - - - .. ... .. ... - ... lilt - .. .. - ... III ... - ... .. - .. .. - - .. - .. ... ... ... .. ... .. - ... .. .- oE .. rIl .... .. '" Ql ~ ..l C oS: ... .- .. '" .. .. ... C .. C oS: ... os o':l ... ~ .c ... oi ... .- .. ... .. .. =- '" = is: = .... = .... .. os .. ;:0. '"! ... ~ .. :is os ... o z " " ... < o o " " < < " " '" o ....l = C .. ~= ..,.>Il .. ;e d:: ~ ::;J .Ql .c::;Ji::! .-= =-= ~ u ~ :> .. .. .. Il. ., = i5: = .... '" .... .. .. .. ;:0. ..", =0 :!..l ,.>Il .. .. >> Il. .. >>"il "i::! i::! , ~ ~~ ~ '" ..0 =..l ., .. C := ~..\IC ~ :;~Gi CIl.i::! .. U::>1 ts=-=~ .. ~ .. .. Il. ., = S:...OO egO a:=..l ....,.>Il .. .. >> .. .. .. Q,)=--~ ;:0. >>i::! .. i::! .c~ ~~ 00 '" a, NN ....'" OM 00 a, cid ~~ " " 'U'1 " " ~ ~ '0 '5 " " * * o 00 cO M M 00 0; 00 ~ ~~ a, r- oo a, cici o .... ...: .... ~~ " " 'n1 " " ~ ~ ~ ~ UUUOO N OOO\OOM 0; cO"; vi .,: M ...... M M-q- -0 00 0; -0 00 a, 00 a, 00 ddd o a, 0; * * * o UalUO I.C! 0 V) r--- V") V) ooOor-i <o:t N""" N-.:t V"'l \0 "'f' ...... 0\ r--- r--- l""'- e> cicid ~....OO~U........O.... 0............ UU al al * * * * 00.... ...00 -00 ...."'''' 00 M 00-.0 <o:tl/"l\CIN M r- d~ M '" '" '" \CIl""':! M Q\Mo' M -0 '" OO\CIC'! <o:t"o...... M "'.... _ M- o V") ~ N r..:...o ...... ~ - '" - r--oO r-"Ja::~ M -0 0; "':t"O\f'f"I'<:tO\ "':t"NO\V'l 0\~0\0\0\r-1"f1V:0\~ d deidci ci ~~~ " " " 'U'1"i'1 " " " ~ ~ ~ C '0 C " " " O....U "':t"r--:oo 00-0\ MOO'" ooa,M \CI~t- d 0 * ~'"g "" a, 'i 'i ~ ~ "" a, tj t1 M_ c '0 l::: :;:: ~ N ~, 'C! 0; ***** O....~............UUalal r--- NV) oolnoo v)r..:d-.or..:dN~ M~~OO M-- ClO\CIM N \C! ~ 0-. r--- ci d '" Q. '" ~ 0. "0 ~ g (I) ~~ ca .....J -< (I) .~ -0 "t:I .0::: "t:I -0 ~ ~ ~ c 8 a 0 .~ 5 ""8 a ~ ~at.....J~Q.) ~.....J"O::]s1!C:G) _ 0 _ ,...._ [;j " l;l k;> 00 ~ _.c = c " o ..c .... c:l.,.....J 0 E ;..= O!(j t:i 0 Cd ca ~"'.c;':'" b.."''' i;:o>,~al eo: 11,} .... S 0 ~CI:I c:l'~ '0 ;;>';;> _ J: 00 tIi)..g .- ~ .- ...... c...... ~ 0 0 ~ 'as a [;j=~",]:=[;j:g;o [;j'" "> 0 '" 0 0.._ ~ '" ;:: >:::l ~ ..l. ..l. - "" .~ ~_;C:~ ~ ~ol:i 0 0 l:il:il:i""g ~ ca gg~g.o:::t;66EE 5EE~ g~ fi5E5-go~~~~ >~~2<~ Cd .=;.=;.=;.=; = ~o(o(o(o( 0(0(0( ~ <;;i <Ll ~= .................................]c:::oooQ) oooci5 11)8 (I) [;j[;j[;j[;j<;;i[;jgggg ggg=~o(u EEEE<Lletitititi tititi~ ~'" 11) 0 lU 0,) ~ 'E Q) 0 8. 0 lU U (I) 0 lU ca U ~ <;; ;j ;j 0 ~ ~ c.. g: g; ~ g:"O ~.s ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f~f c .51 ~ u .. C .. ~ = - -<Ll " '" 0: [;j e .~ ~ '" <Ll " " 0( _Nr<"'l~lI"'l\Or-OOO\O _Nf"")~ Vl\O r- 00 - - - " ~ 0: [;j E 'E '" ~ '" <Ll " U 0( ~ ~ .~ ~ <Ll .j;; " ~ "0 ..c '" <Ll ~ ;S '" '" <Ll <Ll " II '" o ...J . o .~ k;>S .~ 'E 0.<Ll "'''' ~..... <Ll 0 e- = <Ll - > o <Ll ~...J II II u'" -0 ~...J u; .!! o Z d .!2 U <Ll ~ <Ll .5 ~ <Ll .!:l '" &, .;;; = :> ;;; o -' ~ o '" o ~ " ,; u :E = .... .. = .g u u '" Oi Iii '" e Cl <5 M 8 co y g '< ~ '" - ... UA ASSOCIATES. INC. - .. improve intersection operations at these locations to LOS D or better, reducing the impact to a less than significant level. ... - - . Year 2020 Plus Project Freeway Conditions ... Impact 4.1.4 Four freeway segments are forecast to fall below the minimum LOS E threshold under 2020 plus project conditions in the p.m. peak hour. The four freeway segments are: - - /-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue /-10 Eastbound between Mountain View Avenue and California Avenue /-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Street /- 10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and /-215. ... - ... The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions, which is considered to be a significant impact. .. "'" .. Previously referenced Table 4.I.F summarizes the forecast year 2020 plus project p.m. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table 4.1.F, all freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 plus project conditions, with the exception of: ... iIlI "'" iii 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... 1-10 Eastbound between Mountain View Avenue and California Avenue- addition of project traffic will result in the degradation of operations along this freeway segment to LOS F. .. ill 1-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Street - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... ... ... 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215 - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. ... .. Mitigation Measures - .. 4.1.4A As shown in Table 4.I.K, the addition of the following freeway lanes would improve freeway operations with year 2020 plus project traffic volumes to LOS D: - 1-10 between Ninth Street and 1-215 - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. - - 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane, one eastbound mixed-flow lane, and one westbound HOV lane. - - .. 3/28/01 (\\RJV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-46 - .. - ... ~ '" = ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... oS ...l _ ..c .. - .. 0Il- '= ~ U 0 N M N 0 .... r- a- ~ '" > a- a- a- a- a- 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... ..c ...l - .. .~ - 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 '" ci. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. .... .... '0 .... .... .... .... .... - .;- .. <:5 <:5 N <:5 <:5 <:5 <:5 <:5 ., U .. .. - - - - .. =- = .. ., ...l ., = ;;- -;; is: = ,." ... = 0 - - - - - - - -; 0 '= ::t: = ..... .. ... 0 < ..... .~ .. .. - ." ... = .. ~ .. .- .. .. .... .... V) .... .... .... .... .... ;: ;.- ~ - -; ~ ... * * * * * * * * ... .. ~ .. .. '" t - 0 "- "- "- "- "- "- "- ~ 0 0 "- ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ '" ...l .. .. ... ..... = = = .. ~ '0 a- .... a- r- 0 00 a- a- .... N r- M 00 .. ::t: =- M V) ~ ~ "l ~ ~ ~ ~ a- 00 00 ~ a- a- 00 00 r- .>l ., - - - - - 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 = .. is: - .. =- = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ..... ~ '0 00 r- a- 00 r- oo 0 a- N '0 '0 a- r- 0 a- .. = ;: M V) r-, V) M r- 0 '0 r- OO N N 0 '0 M 00 ..... ::t: ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 r-' ,..: ~ 00 00 ,..: ,..: ~ =-: =- ;;- - .. - = .. "" .2 .. ;.- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - -; '0 r- oo r- r- oo 00 N .... '0 '0 a- N N '0 r- .. .. - 0 N M, N 0 .... r- M V) V) a- a- 00 .... 0 '0 OIl - = '= = ;;- ~ ~ - ~ ~ 00 00 00 ,..: ,..: 00 ,..: ,..: ,..: r-' ~ .- ... - ... ~ ..c .. - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .~ ci. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 - .. 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 '" U ... .. ..... = . .. =- ., .. ., = .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... = .. ... is: ...l = .. ..... ~ = ..... ~ .. - .. .. 0.> "" .. ::s = '" ;.- 0.> 0.> N Ii ::s '" ::s '" .. '" 0.> '" ~ .. > 0.> 0.> ~ .. ::Il: < " ::s > ::s > ~ - ... 0.> '" ~ ..: ~ '" .. ..: . .; 0.> 0.> = ~ ::s > 0.> '" - > .~ 0.> '" ..: :> 's 0.> .. ..: t;i ::s lot .. .. 0.> l:: '" .; :E > l:: '" '" ;;- 'C 0.> '" @ t;i .. 0.> .. .. ..: = '" > .. V) 'a .:; .. 0. - . u ... '" -; '" ::s e c.. .: ..: 'C .~ '" '" - '" ... ~ C N '" '" U e Z '" .- '" '" '" II , ::s 0.> 0.> E- 1:i E - .. 0.> '" > V) t;j 's "0 '" . ::s 0. C C .0 - C ::s ] 0; .. " 0.> c .9- ::E - '" c ..: ~ - C - ;;- - '" 0 - N @ OJ f- 0.> .. :;;: M , .. ~ .. < .. > E- c ::s ~ 0.> '" - c ::s .. '" <0 - ::s ::s c -; l:: ~ u 3 Ii < c - '" .9 '" E c - '" c e - .:l - .. 0.> '" - 0.> 0.> - U '" .:; " 0 c '" .. ::s > 0.> .. 0.> ::s ~ 0; . '" > ..: .. c > .. c '" . ::E ..: '" ::s '" ::s ." ..: ;;- ::s Ii ::l e "0 ~ .. < .. ." e '" 0.> '" - Ii '" - 0.> 8 e 0.> > ~ - '" - > ~ - '" 0.> < '" .9 '" .. 0.> '" '" .. .. oil . OIl = C ~ > ..: .. > 0.> = C ::l > ..: .!! > ~ '" co . .. = - E ..: :> ..: l:: = E c ..: ;;- ..: :;;: >< y 0.> 0.> .c 8 0.> ... '" .c ~ 0.> ~ t;i C '" '" - 0.> ~ t;i to '" g ... - ;;- t;i '" ., ;;- t;i '" '" ., 'a 's '" .. 'a 's '" c 0 .. .. '" c e ~ .9 ~ ~ - .. ~ r.iI - - '" - ~ - '" - ...l " .:; '" 0.> '" ~ '" 8- 3 .s 0 ~ .. ::l V) 0.> 8: ::l .0 ::l V) oil M '" = - t;j = t;j .- .. '" c c -; '" C 0. C -; ~ .. - z ~ N ~ i= ::E :;;: - ::E N ~ i= ::E :;;: ... ~ , , u , , u '" * - - - - .. .. l3A ASSOCIATES, INC. ... .. 1-10 between Waterman Avenue and Alabama Street - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. ... .. Improvements to 1-10 are under the authority ofCaltrans. However, there is no mechanism for development project proponents to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards improving mainline freeway lanes, and even if there were such a mechanism, there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. Consequently, there are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts. ... .. .. Level of Service After Mitigation .. ... There are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts. The impacts remain significant and unavoidable. ... ... . ... III .... .. .. III .. .. .. .. ... .. ... ... - .. - ... ... .. ... 3/28/01 (\\R1V5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4.1 Traffic DEIRdoc) 4.1-48 .. - .. - ~ASSOClATES.INC. - - 4.2 AIR QUALITY ... The air quality assessment for the proposed project includes estimating emissions associated with short-term construction and long-term operation of the proposed project. Regional air quality impacts include stationary (direct) and mobile (indirect) emissions. Stationary emissions include electricity and natural gas usage. Mobile emissions include vehicle trips associated with the proposed project. In addition, localized air quality impacts, i.e., higher carbon monoxide concentrations (CO hot spots) near intersections or roadway segments would potentially occur due to project generated vehicle trips. ... ... ... - The URBEMIS 7G (Urban Emissions Model) computer program is used to estimate emissions associated with land use development projects such as residential neighborhoods, shopping centers, office buildings, and hotels in California. URBEMIS 7G calculates stationary emissions and mobile emissions based on the number of trips generated by the proposed land uses, size of the development, and type of development. .. - .. - The CALINE4 model is used to assess air quality impacts near transportation facilities. The air model estimates the CO concentration near intersections or along roadway segments based on traffic volume, roadway geometry, topography, and meteorological data. To assess the impact on local air quality resulting from the proposed project, a comparison was made between the future (2020) condition with project versus the future (2020) condition without project scenarios. ill ~ .. '" t II! The results from the air quality models URBEMIS 7G and CALINE4 are essential components in determining the level of significance and impact on regional and local air quality from the proposed project. Output sheets from the air quality model runs are contained in Appendix C. '" t ill The potential air quality impacts of the proposed project were assessed using guidelines described in the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993) and Caltrans Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (December, 1997). "" ... Environmental Setting "'" Regional Air Quality .. - The project site is located in the City of San Bernardino, an area within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) that includes Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. Air pollutant emissions in the Basin are regulated by the SCAQMD, a regional agency that regulates stationary sources of pollution in the Basin. Emission standards for motor vehicles are regulated by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). However, the SCAQMD has authority under the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) to manage transportation activities at indirect source locations. Indirect sources are facilities that do not have equipment that directly emits substantial amounts of pollution, but that attract large numbers of mobile sources of pollution. ... .. - ... .. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal and State governments have established ambient air quality standards, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Both the State of California and the federal government have established health based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for six criteria air pollutants: CO, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, and suspended particulate matter. Table 4.2.A shows both federal and State standards for these criteria pollutants. The Basin does not attain State and federal AAQS for three of the six criteria air pollutants. The Basin is in compliance with federal sulfur dioxide and lead standards and in maintenance status for nitrogen dioxide; however, CO, ozone, and particulate levels (PMIO) exceed the standards. The State AAQS are more stringent than the federal AAQS. .... - ... - - .. 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSectioo4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-1 - .. ... LSAASSOClATES. INC. ... ... Climate/Meteorology ... ... The Basin climate is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The Basin is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills. The Pacific Ocean forms the southwestern border, and high mountains surround the rest of the Basin. The region lies in the semipermanent high pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. The resulting climate is mild and tempered by cool ocean breezes. This climatological pattern is rarely interrupted. However, periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana wind conditions do exist. ... .. ... .. The annual average temperature varies little throughout the Basin, ranging from the low to middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit. With a more pronounced oceanic influence, coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas. The climatological station nearest to the site that monitors temperature is the San Bernardino Stationl. The San Bernardino station monitored annual average temperatures ranging from a minimum of 49.3"F to a maximum of 80.1"F between the years 1927 and 2000. January is typically the coldest month in this area of the Basin. .. - - ... l"" The majority of annual rainfall in the Basin occurs between November and April. Summer rainfall is minimal and is generally limited to scattered thundershowers in coastal regions and slightly heavier showers in the eastern portion of the Basin and along the coastal side of the mountains. The climatological station nearest the site that monitors precipitation is the San Bernardino station. Rainfall measured at the San Bernardino station during the period 1927 to 2000 varied from 3.50 inches in February to 0.67 inch or less between May and October, with an annual total of 16.49 inches. Patterns in monthly and yearly rainfall totals are unpredictable. .. .. III .. .. Even though the Basin has a semiarid climate, air near the surface is generally moist because of the presence of a shallow marine layer. With very low average wind speeds, there is a limited capacity to disperse air contaminants horizontally. The dominant daily wind pattern is an onshore 8 to 12 miles per hour (mph) daytime breeze and an offshore 3 to 5 mph nighttime breeze. The typical wind flow pattern fluctuates only with occasional winter storms or strong northeasterly Santa Ana winds from the mountains and deserts north of the Basin. Summer wind flow patterns represent worst case conditions, as this is the period of higher temperatures and more sunlight, which results in ozone formation. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. ,., ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 Western Regional Climatic Center, June, 2000. ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Sectioo 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-2 ... ... - LSAASSOClATES,INC. - ... - Table 4.2.A - Ambient Air Quality Standards .. - STATE Pollutant Averagin!! Time Concentration Primary Secondary Ozone (0,) I Hour 0.09 ppm 0.12ppm Same as (l801'g/m') (235 I'g/m') Primary Std. 8 Hour - 0.08 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) Annual Average - 0.053 ppm Same as (IOOI'g/m') Primary Std. I Hour 0.25 ppm - (470 I'g/m') Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 Hour 9ppm 9ppm - (lO~m') (10 ~m') I Hour 20 ppm 35 ppm - (23 ni2tm') (40 ni2tm') Suspended Particulate Annual 30 I'g/m' - - Matter (PM..) Geometric Mean 24 Hour 50 I'g/m' 15OI'g/m' Same as Primary Std. Annual - 50 I'g/m' - Arithmetic Mean Suspended Particulate 24 Hour - 151'g/m' - Matter (PM2..) Annual - 65 I'g/m' - Arithmetic Mean Sulfur Dioxide (S02) Annual Average - 80 I'g/m' - (0.03 DDm) 24 Hour 0.04 ppm 365 I'g/m' - (l051'g/m') (0.14 ppm) 3 Hour - - 1,3OOI'g/m' (0.5 ppm) I Hour 0.25 ppm - - (6551'g/m') Lead 30 Day Average 1.51'g/m' - - Calendar Quarter - 1.51'g/m' Same as Primary Std. Sulfates 24 Hour 25 I'g/m' - - Hydrogen Sulfide I Hour 0.03 ppm - - (42 !'g/m') Vinyl Chloride (chloroethene) 24 Hour O.OIOppm - - (26 I'g/m') Visibility Reducing Particles 8 Hour . - - (10 a.m.-6 p.m. PST) - .. - - - .. ... .. ... .. - .. ... .. ... .. ... .. - ... ... - - - ... ... Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB), 1999. Notes: ppm ~ parts per million mglm' = milligrams per cubic meter Ilglm3 == micrograms per cubic meter * In sufficient amount to produce an extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer due to particles when the relative humidity is less than 70 percent. Measurement in accordance with ARB Method V. ... .... ... .... ... lSAASSOClATES, INC. - - During spring and early summer, pollution produced during anyone day is typically blown out of the Basin through mountain passes or lifted by warm, vertical currents adjacent to mountain slopes. Air contaminants can be transported 60 miles or more from the Basin by ocean air during the afternoons. From early fall to winter, the transport is less pronounced because of slower average wind speed and the appearance of drainage winds earlier in the day. During stagnant wind conditions, offshore drainage winds may begin by late afternoon. Pollutants remaining in the Basin are trapped and begin to accumulate during the night and the following morning. A low morning wind speed in pollutant source areas is an important indicator of air stagnation and the buildup potential for primary air contaminants. With persistent low inversions and cool coastal air, morning fog and low stratus clouds are common. Cloudy days are less likely in the eastern portions of the Basin and about 25 percent greater along the coast. - - ... - .. .. - - The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the Basin is limited by temperature inversions in the atmosphere close to the earth's surface. Temperature normally decreases with altitude, and a reversal of this atmospheric state, where temperature increases with altitude, is called an inversion. The height from the earth to the inversion base is known as the mixing height. ... .. - Inversions are generally lower in the nighttime, when the ground is cool, than during the daylight hours when the sun warms the ground and, in turn, the surface air layer. As this heating process continues, the temperature of the surface air layer approaches the temperature of the inversion base, causing heating along its lower edge. If enough warming takes place, the inversion layer becomes weak and opens up to allow the surface air layers to mix upward. This can be seen in the middle to late afternoon on a hot summer day when the smog appears to clear up suddenly. Winter inversions typically break earlier in the day, preventing excessive contaminant build up. .. .. .. ",. .. The combination of stagnant wind conditions and low inversions produces the greatest pollutant concentrations. On days of no inversion or high wind speeds, ambient air pollutant concentrations are lowest. During periods of low inversions and low wind speeds, air pollutants generated in urbanized areas are transported predominantly onshore into Riverside and San Bernardino counties. In the winter, the greatest pollution problems are CO and oxides of nitrogen because of extremely low inversions and air stagnation during the night and early morning hours. In the summer, the longer daylight hours and the brighter sunshine combine to cause a reaction between hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen to form photochemical smog. .. - ... - - ... Air Pollution Constituents - - Both the State of California and the federal government have established health based AAQS for six air pollutants (ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, reactive organic compounds, and particulate matters). In July, 1997, the U.S. EPA adopted a new NAAQS for particulate less than 2.5 microns in diameter (pM2.s) and an eight hour ozone standard. In addition to the air quality standards established for the six criteria air pollutants, the State has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. ... - .... ... - - - 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-4 - - LSAASSOClATES.INC. - - ... - Furthermore, the State of California has also established a set of episode criteria for ozone, CO, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter. These episode criteria refer to the different levels representing periods of short-term exposure to air pollutants that actually threaten public health. Health effects are progressively more severe as pollutant levels increase from Stage One to Stage Three. ... ... .. Described briefly below are adverse health effects of the six criteria pollutants monitored in the Basin. ... .. . Ozone ... Ozone (smog) is formed by photochemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen and reactive organic gases rather than being directly emitted. Ozone is a pungent, colorless gas typical of Southern California smog. Elevated ozone concentrations result in reduced lung function, particularly during vigorous physical activity. This health problem is particularly acute in sensitive receptors such as the sick, elderly, and young children. Ozone levels peak during the summer and early fall months. .. ... .. ... . Carbon Monoxide .. ... Carbon monoxide (CO) is formed by the incomplete combustion offossil fuels, almost entirely from automobiles. It is a colorless, odorless gas that can cause dizziness, fatigue, and impairments to central nervous system functions. CO passes through the lungs into the bloodstream, where it interferes with the transfer of oxygen to body tissues. .. ... . Nitrogen Oxides .. ... Nitrogen oxides contribute to other pollution problems, including a high concentration of fine particulate matter, poor visibility, and acid deposition. Nitrogen dioxide (N02), a reddish brown gas, and nitric oxide (NO), a colorless, odorless gas, are formed from fuel combustion under high temperature or pressure. These compounds are referred to as nitrogen oxides, or NOx. NOx is a primary component of the photochemical smog reaction. N02 decreases lung function and may reduce resistance to infection. .. ... .. ... . Sulfur Dioxide .. ... Sulfur dioxide (S02) is a colorless, irritating gas formed primarily from incomplete combustion of fuels containing sulfur. Industrial facilities also contribute to gaseous S021evels in the Basin. S02 irritates the respiratory tract, can injure lung tissue when combined with fine particulate matter, and reduces visibility and the level of sunlight. ... ... . Reactive Organic Compounds .. ... Reactive organic compounds (ROC) are formed from combustion of fuels and evaporation of organic solvents. ROC is a prime component of the photochemical smog reaction. Consequently, ROC accumulates in the atmosphere much quicker during the winter, when sunlight is limited and photochemical reactions are slower. ... ... ... ... ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-5 ... ... lSAASSOClATE.S,INC. - .. . Particulate Matter .... Particulate matter is the term used for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Coarse particles (larger than 2.5 micrometers, or PM 10) come from a variety of sources, including windblown dust and grinding operations. Fine particles (less than 2.5 micrometers, or PM2.s) often come from fuel combustion, power plants, and diesel buses and trucks. Fine particles can also be formed in the atmosphere through chemical reactions. too ... .. ... .. Local Air Quality ... The site is located within SCAQMD jurisdiction. The SCAQMD maintains ambient air quality monitoring stations throughout the Basin, as shown in Figure 4.2.1. iii ... The air quality monitoring station closest to the project site is the Central San Bernardino Valley 2 station, located on E. 4th Street, which monitors the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matter, and nitrogen dioxide. Air quality trends identified from data collected at the San Bernardino air quality monitoring station from 1995 to 1999 are discussed below. .. "" ... As shown in Table 4.2.B, CO and N02 levels monitored for this period were below the relevant State and federal standards. There have been no exceedances of the one hour or eight hour standards for CO and nitrogen dioxide. Sulfur dioxide is not listed because it has not been exceeded for over ten years. However, ozone and PMIO concentrations exceeded the State and federal standards during the past five years. Ozone exceeded the State one hour standard from 45 to 113 days a year during this period and exceeded the federal one hour standard from 14 to 63 days a year. PM,. levels exceeded the State standard from 22 to 35 days each year during this period, and the federal PM,. standard was exceeded twice in 1995. po .. .. ... .. .. Existing Policies and Regulations .. III Regional Air Quality Planning Framework .... The 1976 Lewis Air Quality Management Act established the SCAQMD and other air districts throughout the State. The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 required each state to adopt an implementation plan outlining pollution control measures to attain the federal standards in non- attainment areas of the state. .. - .... The CARB coordinates and oversees both State and federal air pollution control programs in California. The CARB oversees activities oflocal air quality management agencies and is responsible for incorporating air quality management plans for local air basins into a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for federal Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) approval. CARB maintains air quality monitoring stations throughout the State in conjunction with local air districts. Data collected at these stations are used by the CARB to classify air basins as "attainment" or "non-attainment" with respect to each pollutant and to monitor progress in attaining air quality standards. .. .. - ... .... ... - ... 3/28101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-6 .... ... - ,- - - ... - .. ... .. ... ... ... .. ... .. ... .. .... .. ... .. ... .. ... - ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... - ... - ... c:i .~ i:; i; 0 .. 0 ~ gj t; 0 Cl:l !:l :: < .;s ..... <> c:i ~ - ., ~ -..: ~ "-1 ~ ~ u ~ z < en <> c:i ~ .~ ~ ii:: o 15 ;J <en ~~ Ill..... ~zQ ~ z~gj ;; ~<>. fo; S V ~ <>;Q "" '" '" <> e:i<> > Q < ;: z 0 ~~ j ~ ::..f,jQ Q., f-oi .;,'. E ::> Z U~er\. 0 a'"' + ~~< o z @ ~. '" 0 ..... '" '" O. ~ ~ <<> ",- en >;I: ~ ;:::=. 0<> Q ~ <> ~ <>~ !:l~<> ~ <> ~<> ~ 15 .....::c ~ ~ <>~ ~ < '" 0 '" en << III Q Z '"' "'~o-o ~ en ~t:~ gj. ~ ~ ~ ..... '" < < ::c o en::c!2 ~ g 0 en fo; :z: o en ..... ~ [;; ~ ::c . <> '" ~ ~ ~ 15 '" ..... '" '" ~ j . j ::> u "' :::0 ~<> ~ ril ~~ '': J;: SO .- on 5.= ~ ~ >> -- " ,- J;: td 5 0 "8 ~ gp .- - ..... ~[;j]. ~ :; j;;; ..,-'" =000 '" p.. " U} tn td " ,,- .. 0 0 = ~ ~ ~ .2 t300~ ~<>.+ ~ 1;; <:i .., IS e --- ~ ~ ~ ~Z - N ..,f <I) ~ .- ~ t>;::.:.c I:: :: c ......- ~~~~ Eo ~ .,"'Z'= Cl:l"'- < ~.sl gp.... t"oj-'- ~ .':1""0 .5:: 0 .<:> .,..;:::U ~~6-P ~.~~ 5 N;' ",,'" ~._~" <<I) o-P ~,E ~ u~ CJ) o N 1l :i e .$ ~ u '" o < (/) --I - - ... - .. ... .. ... ... ... .. ... ... II'" .. "" iii fill' .. ... ... ... '" - ... ... ... - ... ... ... - ... - ... - ... .. = ~;: :5S ..00 "' CIl 0'.. - .. .. .- = <::: ... .. .. = .~ :a .::> .. a .- << , = = .! .." '" .. . .. "'" .. OJ .. - OJ i= Eo< .. .. 00 " ~ ~ ~ o C ~ ~ .. OJ OJ." CIl._ = ~ .. = ... .- z~ ...~ll ~ ~1 ~Q~ '" - 5 :I: ~ 8: e oo ::I" .- C"'! Eg~~ ~=at "- - " .. OJ ; :a = OJ II :! 'il B= .- ..... 1:: .. ll. ~ ~"" " .. ell .. .. . .. ~'" '1 ;::l .. tJ 0 _c:_ II') - ~E = U"U ="';0 =.!P_ <::c OJ .. = a ~ ~ll ell .. .. ... ~'" ~ e 8: ::I'" . - 0'1 Eg~:E q '~=at ^ "- - " ~ ~ll ell .. .. . .. ~'" OJ ." ";l = .. = :a .. = ;: .. u e ::II" .- ES~:E -;;=ct llICl1l:lU_ " ~ ~ll ell .. .. . .. ~'" 1 E... cJ- 0 =:::::Ia:E N 5000. 'M = U e:.. ^ " " - ^ is o :I: g :I: 00 '8 8: '" " g :I: ~ '" ~ '" o o 0 0 0 .... - - ''It lI) r--- ~ - - - - ~ '" '" N r-... I.f"I V') N N r<"l t'i') .... '" - ~ 00 \0 00 0Cl _ 0 M r--- r-- - - - - '1"""1 oo .... oo N "" ::; '" - - - - - "" - 0 t"! C"'! .... N .... ~ C"'! "'" -: o o 0 0 0 o ... \OO\ClM"1 ~ ...0 ~ ...0 \C o o 0 0 0 ~ oo 0000= ...0 00 ...0 oc:i 00 o, o, o, - S oot'--\OV"Is"' o, o, o, o, 0'\ 01 0\ 0'\ "0 ----. :>1 OJ 0 ebO ""~ ""~ M_ oo .. o " o ~ '1 ;::l o oo - g :I: ~ 8: N - ^ g :I: 00 '8 8: oo '" " g :I: ~ 8: oo M ^ ~ '" ] OJ .... 000 0 "" M o o ~ ~ ~ N t: o 0 0 ~ = o c::i 0 d = o o 0 0 N .... M - "'I:t 00 \0 00 OC _ 0 r<"l r- t-- ----- .... - 0'\ N tf") - MM\O\O "" - - 0 ~ N ~ C"'! t"! t"'! t"'! "'1 o 000 0 o ... .,; '" \0 0 \0 M f") 0\ -.i ...0 -o:i ...0 \C B o o 0 0 0 o vi 0'0000 ...0 oci ...0 oci 00 o, o, o, - 00 r-- \0 V'l 0'\ 0'\ 0\ 0'\ 0\ 0'\ 0\ 0'\ - - - - '" '" '" ~ Cl .j;' 0; " 0' ~ :< ~ ~ " s ~ " u S '" '.. .. :>1 u u ~ " o en 00 , N ... g '3 ~ ~ - OJ .0 ... o <= ~ s -i;" ~ " ..!! "0 " ~ ." ""' = -5 ~ N - i " :.( "I ... 15 u u ~ Iii Oi ~ ~ ~ 8 ell So! ~ ~ <:! ~ J '" '" OJ ....l LSAASSOClATES, INC. ... - ... ... The CARB has divided the State into 15 air basins. Significant authority for air quality control within them has been given to local air pollution control districts (APCD) or air quality management districts (AQMD), which regulate stationary source emissions and develop local non-attainment plans. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources and regulate stationary source emissions. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. The CARB regulates emissions from motor vehicles and fuels. .. ... .. ... .. Regional Air Quality Management Plan ... The SCAQMD and SCAG are responsible for formulating and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the Basin. Regional AQMPs were adopted for the Basin for 1979, 1982, 1989, 1991, 1994, and 1997. The SCAQMD's effort to update the AQMP is delayed by the CARB's delay in the emission model EMF AC2000 and related control strategy plan. The SCAQMD expects to start up efforts to update its comprehensive AQMP in spring 200 I. .. .. .. ... .. The most current adopted AQMP, the 1997 AQMP, was prepared pursuant to federal and State clean air legislation, and addressed 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements with respect to particulate matter standards. Under the CAA, the AQMP must demonstrate attainment ofPMIO standards by 2006 for both 24 hour and annual average ambient air quality standards. The 1997 AQMP responded to this requirement, relying primarily on the control measures outlined in the 1994 AQMP. ... .. iii Under the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), air districts that would not attain State air quality standards by 2000 were required to prepare a comprehensive plan update by December 31, 1997. The 1997 AQMP served as the comprehensive plan update for the South Coast Air Basin. .. ... The 1997 AQMP carried forth the approach and key elements in the 1994 AQMP by focusing on market based strategies and incentives versus command and control regulations. New elements to the 1997 Plan included: (I) improved emission inventory and current air quality information; (2) refmed control strategy, which allows for alternative approaches; (3) elimination of future indirect source measures; (4) amendments to the federal post-1996 Rate of Progress Plan and Federal Attainment Plans for ozone and CO; (5) a maintenance plan for NOx; and (6) an attainment demonstration and SIP revision for PMIO. .. .. .. .. lilt Implementation of the AQMP is based on a series of control measures that vary by source type, such as stationary or mobile, as well as by the pollutant targeted. Similar to the 1994 AQMP, the Plan proposed two tiers of control measures, based on the availability and readiness of technology. Short- term and immediate-term measures relied on known technologies and were expected to be implemented between 1997 and 2005. Long-term measures rely on the advancement of technologies and control methods that can be reasonably expected to occur between 2000 and 2010. ... .. ... .... ... The SCAQMD governing Board approved the 1997 AQMP on November 15, 1996. After approval, the AQMP was submitted to the CARB for its review and approval. CARB approved the ozone and PMIO portions of the 1997 AQMP on January 23, 1997, and submitted the plan to U.S. EPA as proposed revisions to the SIP. The EPA rejected the District's revision of its 1997 AQMP. The rejection, however, covered only the provisions ofthe AQMP designed to attain the federal ozone standard. As a result of the rejection, SCAQMD prepared a draft "Proposed 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone SIP Revision for the South Coast Air Basin" on October 7, 1999, for public review and comment. The 1999 Amendment proposed to revise the ozone portion of the 1997 AQMP that was ... ... ... ... ... 3/28101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-9 - ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - ... ... submitted to the U.S. EPA as a revision to the South Coast Air Basin portion of the 1994 California Ozone SIP. The SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the "1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone SIP Revision for the South Coast Air Basin" on December 10, 1999. In addition, the SCAQMD Governing Board settled with three environmental organizations on its litigation of the 1994 Ozone SIP. ... ... ... .. Thresholds of SignifICance ... ... A project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutants concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community in which it is located. .. .. ... Specific criteria for determining whether the air quality impacts from a project operation are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. .. ... .. ,. .. Thresholds for Construction Emissions The following significance thresholds for construction emissions have been established by the SCAQMD: ,. .. . 2.5 tons per quarter or 75 pounds per day of ROC 2.5 tons per quarter or 100 pounds per day of NO x 24.75 tons per quarter or 550 pounds per day of CO 6.75 tons per quarter or 150 pounds per day of PM 10 6.75 tons per quarter or 150 pounds per day of SOx. . ... . .. . . ... .. Projects in the Basin with construction related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds listed above are considered significant by the SCAQMD. ... .. Thresholds for Operational Emissions ... The daily operational emissions "significance" thresholds are as follows: ... . Regional Emissions Thresholds ... ... 55 pounds per day of ROC 55 pounds per day of NO x 550 pounds per day of CO 150 pounds per day of PM 10 150 pounds per day of SOx. ... ... ... ... Projects in the Basin with operation related emissions that exceed any of the above listed emission thresholds are considered significant by the SCAQMD. ... - 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal E1R\Section 4.2 Air.doc) 4.2-10 - ... - LSAASSOClATES,INC. - - - . Local Emission Standards - California State one hour CO standard of 20.0 ppm California State eight hour CO standard of9.0 ppm - - The significance oflocalized project impacts depends on whether ambient CO levels in the vicinity of the project are above or below State and federal CO standards. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have significant impacts if project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project emissions are considered significant if they increase one hour CO concentrations by 1.0 part per million (ppm) or more or eight hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. There are no local emission concentration standards for other criteria pollutants. .. - .. ... .. - Impacts and Mitigation - Less than Significant Impacts - Long-Term Microscale Projections - ... .. The increase in traffic volume resultingfrom the proposed development of the retail commercial center would result in an increase in carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. CO hot spot analyses were conducted for the future condition with and without the project. The future cumulative condition shows that the project area would not have CO hot spots with projected traffic volumes. The proposed project would not have a significant impact on local air quality for CO, and no mitigation measures would be required. ... .. ... The primary mobile source pollutant oflocal concern is CO. CO is a direct function of vehicle idling time and, thus, traffic flow conditions. CO transport is extremely limited; it disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations proximate to a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels affecting local sensitive receptors (residents, school children, the elderly, hospital patients, etc). Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service or with extremely high traffic volumes. In areas with high ambient background CO concentration, modeling is recommended in determining a project's effect on local CO levels. .. - .. ... l. .. An assessment of project related impacts on localized ambient air quality requires that future ambient air quality levels be projected. The proposed project would contribute to an increase in traffic volume at intersections and along roadway segments in the project vicinity, thereby causing a deterioration in the level of service (LOS) at adjacent intersections. The LOS deterioration has the potential to result in a carbon monoxide (CO) hot spot. Therefore, the future with and without project conditions were analyzed to determine the project's impact and whether a CO hot spot would occur. ... ... ... ... ... Existing CO concentrations in the immediate project vicinity are not available. Ambient CO levels monitored at the San Bernardin0-4th Street station, the closest station with monitored CO data, showed a highest recorded one hour concentration of 8.0 ppm (State standard is 20 ppm) and a highest eight hour concentration of 6.3 ppm (State standard is 9 ppm) during the past five years (see Table 4.2.B). ... ... ... - 3/28/01 (Ro\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-11 - ... - - - - - .. ... .. ... - .. - .. .. '" . '" ill .. III ... i. - io. ... III ... .. .. io. ... .. .... .. .... .. - \00 LSAASSOCIATES,INC. The highest CO concentrations would occur during peak traffic hours, hence CO impacts calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst case analysis. Modeling of the CO hot spot analysis was based on traffic volumes generated by the project traffic study (LSA Associates, Inc., November 2000), which identified the peak traffic levels generated in the project area with and without the proposed project for the year 2020. The impact on local carbon monoxide levels was assessed with the CARB approved CALINE4 air quality model, which allows microscale CO concentrations to be estimated along roadway corridors or near intersections. This model is designed to identify localized concentrations of carbon monoxide, often termed "hot spots." A brief discussion of input to the CALINE4 model follows. The analysis was performed for the worst case wind angle and wind speed condition and is based upon the following assumptions: . Selected modeling locations represent the intersections closest to the project site, with the highest project related vehicle turning movements and the worst level of service deterioration; . Twenty receptor locations with the possibility of extended outdoor exposure from 8 (approximately 26 feet) to 22 meters (approximately 72 feet) of the roadway centerline near intersections were modeled to determine carbon monoxide concentrations; . The calculations assume a meteorological condition of almost no wind (0.5 meter/ second), a suburban topographical condition between the source and receptor, and a mixing height of 1,000 meters, representing a worst case scenario for CO concentrations; . CO concentrations are calculated for the one hour averaging period and then compared to the one hour standards. CO eight hour averages are extrapolated using techniques outlined in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, October 1993, and compared to the eight hour standards; a persistence factor of O. 7 was used to predict the eight hour concentration; . Concentrations are given in ppm at each of the receptor locations; . The "at-grade" link option with speed adjusted based on average cruise speed and number of vehicles per lane per hour was used rather than the "intersection" link selection in CALINE4 model. (Caltrans has suggested that the "intersection" link should not be used due to inappropriate algorithm based on outdated vehicle distribution.) Emission factors for all vehicles based on the adjusted speed for the year 2020 were used for the existing vehicle fleet; and . The year 2000 projected CO concentrations for the San Bernardino station, as shown in Tables 5-2 and 5-3 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, were used as background concentrations. The "background" concentrations are then added to the model results for future with and without the proposed project conditions. The projected CO concentrations are 5.3 ppm for the one hour CO and 3.9 ppm for the eight hour CO. No rolled back factor was applied for future scenarios for a worst case scenario, as suggested by the SCAQMD staff. 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-12 - LSAASSOClA-re8,INC. - - ... ... Data in Table 4.2.C show the projected CO levels under the future condition with and without the proposed project. For the future condition with project traffic, there is no exceedance of either the State or federal CO standards for the one hour or the eight hour durations. The one hour CO concentration near aU ten intersections analyzed ranges from 7.2 to 9.7 ppm, much lower than the 20 ppm State standard. The eight hour CO concentration ranges from 5.2 to 7.0 ppm, also lower than the 9.0 ppm State standard. The increase in CO concentration as a result of the project ranges from up to 0.5 ppm for the one hour and from up to 0.3 ppm for the eight hour, respectively, CO concentrations. These project related increases are less than the 1.0 ppm/0.45 ppm measurable changes identified by the SCAQMD. In addition, under future with project scenario, five intersections would be mitigated or improved to level of service (LOS) D or better from the LOS E or F under the future without project scenario. Therefore, these intersections would have higher vehicle speed and lower CO concentrations compared to the future without project scenario. No CO hot spots would occur. ... .. ... .. .. ~ .. Mitigation Measures .. III ... . No mitigation is required. Air Quality Management Plan Consistency Only new or amended General Plan elements, Specific Plans, and significantly unique projects need undergo a consistency review, since the AQMP strategy is based on projections from local General Plans. CEQA requires that environmental documents assess a project's consistency with local plans such as the AQMP. As such, the AQMP includes criteria for judging the consistency of projects against the State required General Plan. . . "" .. .. Consistency with the AQMP is one factor used by the SCAQMD to assess the significance of a project's cumulative impact on regional ozone levels. Consistency of indirect emissions associated with a commercial project intended to meet the needs of the population as forecast in the AQMP is determined by comparing the estimated current population of the city in which the project is to be located with the applicable population forecast in the AQMP. If the estimated current population does not exceed the forecasts, indirect emissions associated with the project are deemed to be consistent with the AQMP. .. - .. ... The proposed project site is located in an area that is designated as Commercial and Medium Residential in the City of San Bernardino General Plan. The project site is in close proximity to residential homes to the south and east. By developing a large commercial center with a varied product mix at one location, the residents would not have to travel across the City to shop, thereby reducing traffic congestion and emissions. There are no population increases anticipated as a result of the proposed project, because there is no residential development proposed. Hence it is still within the population forecast in the City's General Plan and in the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project is deemed to be consistent with the City of San Bernardino's General Plan. Because the proposed project is consistent with the population projections incorporated in the General Plan (and therefore the AQMP), the project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan. No significant impact would occur as result of the proposed project; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. "" .. .. .. ... ... .. - ... - ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-13 ~ .. LSAASSOClATES,INC. ... - .. Table 4.2.C - Carbon Monoxide Concentrations (ppm)' (1 hourIS hour) Distance to Future Fnture Project ... Roadway Baseline With Project Related ... Intersection Centerline1 Condition Condition Increase Waterman Avenue & 16 7.8/5.7 7.8/5.7 0.0/0.0 ... Mill Street 16 7.7/5.6 7.7/5.6 0.0/0.0 15 7.7/5.6 7.7/5.6 0.0/0.0 .. 16 7.6/5.5 7.6/5.5 0.0/0.0 .. Waterman Avenue & 14 8.7/6.3 7.8/5.7' -0.9/-0.6 Orange Show Road 14 8.6/6.2 7.6/5.5' -1.0.1-0.7 - 14 8.4/6.1 7.5/5.4' -0.9/-0.7 14 8.3/6.0 7.5/5.4' -0.8/-0.6 "'" Waterman Avenue & 14 7.3/5.3 7.3/5.3 0.0/0.0 .. Vanderbilt Way 8 7.2/5.2 7.3/5.3 0.1/0.1 15 7.2/5.2 7.3/5.3 0.1/0.1 15 7.2/5.2 7.3/5.3 0.1/0.1 .. Waterman Avenue & 14 8.2/5.9 8.3/6.0 0.1/0.1 iii Hospitality Lane 14 8.0/5.8 8.1/5.9 0.1/0.1 17 8.0/5.8 8.1/5.9 0.1/0.1 !I' 17 8.0/5.8 8.1/5.9 0.1/0.1 .. Tippecanoe Avenue & 17 8.9/6.4 8.0/5.8' -0.9/-0.6 Mill Street 19 8.7/6.3 7.9/5.7' -0.8/-0.6 ... 22 8.5/6.1 7.8/5.6' -0.7/-0.5 22 8.5/6.1 7.7/5.6' -0.8/-0.5 .. Tippecanoe Avenue & 14 9.7n.0 7.9/5.7' - 1.8/-1.3 San Bernardino Avenue 14 9.2/6.6 7.8/5.7' -1.4/-0.9 ... 14 9.2/6.6 7.6/5.5' -1.6/-1.1 .. 14 9.0/6.5 7.6/5.5' -1.4/-1.0 Tippecanoe Avenue & 8 7.9/5.7 8.0/5.8 0.1/0.1 .. Hospitality Lane 16 7.9/5.7 7.9/5.7 0.0/0.0 8 7.6/5.5 7.7/5.6 0.1/0.1 .. 16 7.6/5.5 7.6/5.5 0.0/0.0 - Tippecanoe Avenue & 16 7.8/5.7 7.6/5.7 -0.2/-0.2 Laurelwood Drive 12 7.7/5.6 7.6/5.7 -0.1/-0.1 .. 12 7.7/5.6 7.6/5.5 -0.1/-0.1 16 7.7/5.6 7.6/5.5 -0.1/-0.1 ... Tippecanoe Avenue & 13 8.2/5.9 7.8/5.7' -0.4/-0.2 .. Rosewood Drive 13 8.2/5.9 7.7/5.6' -0.5/-0.3 8 8.1/5.9 7.7/5.6' -0.4/-0.3 8 8.1/5.9 7.6/5.5' -0.5/-0.4 JIll 7.8/5.7' Anderson Street & 14 8.9/6.4 -1.1/-0.7 ... Redlands Boulevard 14 8.9/6.4 7.7/5.6' - 1.2/-0.8 14 8.7/6.3 7.6/5.5' -1.1/-0.8 - 14 8.5/6.1 7.5/5.5' - 1.0/-0.6 ... Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 2000. - .. 1 Include ambient 1 br/8 br CO concentrations of 5.3/3.9 ppm for future years. ",... Distance in meters to the closer of the two roadway segments. , Future with project scenario assumes that LOS would be mitigated/improved to D or better; therefore, ... vehicle speed is 5 mpg higher than the future without project scenario. Consequently, the CO levels ... are lower under the future with project compared to the future no project scenario. ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-14 ... ... --,._- ~- LSAASSOClATES,lNC, - - ... Mitigation Measures. ... No mitigation is required. .. ... Stationary Sourees. Existing on-site uses include 95 single family and multifamily dwelling units, a motel with 30 rooms, and a 1,040 square feet fast food restaurant. These existing on-site uses consume natural gas and electricity. .. ... The long-term occupancy of the proposed development of a commercial center would consume natural gas and electricity. The site for the proposed development consists of a total of 24.5 acres. The project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of approximately 17.57 acres. Phase II will consist of approximately 6.93 acres. These land uses would consume natural gas and electricity. Based on Table A9-11, Emissions from Electricity Consumption by Land Uses, in SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook and the natural gas consumption calculated by the URBEMIS7G model, the proposed project would generate criteria pollutant emissions as shown in Table 4.2.E. - .. .. III" - '"' .. Table 4.2.E shows that emissions from on-site stationary sources (i.e., energy consumption) under the proposed project would be below the emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD for all criteria pollutants. The project will comply with the mandated building code requirements contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations established by the California Energy Commission regarding energy conservation standards, resulting in further reduction of air emissions from on-site stationary sources. No further mitigation for on-site stationary sources is required. "" .. "" .. Potentially Significant Impacts Short-Term Construction Related Impacts ~ .. Impact 4.2.1. Peak grading and construction emissions would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for the criteria pollutants of NOx and PMlf. which are 100 pounds per day and 150 pounds per day, respectively. Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the standards. Implementation of mitigation measures will minimize air quality impacts; however, the impacts will remain significant. .. .. ... Air quality impacts would occur during the site preparation including grading and equipment exhaust as it is used on site. Major sources of emissions during grading and site preparation include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces, as well as soil disturbances from grading and filling. NOx and PMIO levels will be exceeded on a daily basis during construction and are significant. Implementation of mitigation measures will minimize air quality impacts; however, the impacts will remain significant. .. .. .. ... ... Grading and construction activities would cause combustion emissions from utility engines, heavy- duty construction vehicles, haul trucks, and vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions during grading and construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. It is assumed that construction or building erection would not begin until after mass grading on the project site is completed. Therefore, there would be no overlap in emissions from grading or building erection/construction. It is anticipated that peak grading days would generate a larger amount of air pollutants than during peak building erection days. The following assesses peak emissions during grading of the project site. "" - (",~ ... ... - 3/28101 (RoICBD030IFinal EIR\Sectioo 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-15 ,.. ... lSAASSOCIATES. INC. - ... .. ... Based on the methodology outlined in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook and analysis of similar projects, construction emissions associated with grading of the proposed project have been estimated and are shown in Table 4.2.D. .. "'" Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with demolition, land clearing, exposure, vehicle and equipment travel on unpaved roads, and dirt/debris pushing. Dust generated during construction activities would vary substantially depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Nearby sensitive receptors and workers may be exposed to blowing dust, depending upon prevailing wind conditions. - .. .. "'" .. Because fugitive dust emission levels associated with demolition activities are less severe than that resulting from on-site grading/construction activities as the "worst case" for fugitive dust analysis. ,., The SCAQMD estimates that each acre of graded surface creates about 26.4 pounds ofPMIO per workday during the construction phase of the project and 21.8 pounds of PM 10 per hour from dirt/debris pushing per dozer. The site for the proposed development consists of a total of 24.5 acres. The project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of approximately 17.57 acres. Phase II will consist of approximately 6.93 acres. It is not expected that the entire project site would be graded or disturbed at the same time. Therefore, it is assumed that up to a maximum of five acres ofland would be under mass grading on anyone day. It is also assumed that two dozers would be used up to eight hours a day each. It is assumed that a maximum of 0.5 acre of open stock piles would occur on the project site, which will generate 42.8 pounds per day (ppd) of PM,.. Therefore, approximately 544.65 pounds ofPMIO per day would be generated from soil disturbance before mitigation during peak construction phase. This level of dust emission would exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 150 pounds per day. lflii .. .. flit .. "'" .. "'" The project will be required to comply with regional rules, which would assist in reducing the short- term air pollutant emissions. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off site. Implementation of these dust suppression techniques as required by the SCAQMD can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PMIO component) by 50 to 75 percent. .. III .. - Assuming a mitigating efficiency of 50 percent by implementation of the standard mitigation, daily PMIO emissions from soil disturbance would be reduced to approximately 262 pounds. Compliance with these rules would reduce impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. .. .... .. ... ... ... ... - ... ... ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFioal EIR\Sectioo 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-16 .... ... - ... LSAASSOCIATES,INC. ... - ... Table 4.2.D - Peak Grading Day Construction Emissions Number and Equipment Hours of Pollutants Type' Operation CO ROG NOx SOx PM,. 4 - Scrapers 8 40 8.64 122.88 14.72 13.12 1 - Motor Grader 8 1.2 0.31 5.7 0.69 0.49 1 - Tracked Loader 8 1.6 0.76 6.64 0.61 0.47 2 - Tracked Dozers 8 5.6 1.92 20.16 2.24 1.79 1 - Wheeled Tractor 8 28.64 2.88 20.32 1.44 2.24 2 - Miscellaneous' 8 10.8 2.4 27.2 2.28 2.24 Worker Commute Exhausf 6.0 1.1 1.9 0.3 0.7 Subtotal Exhaust Emission 122.48 18.01 204.80 22.28 21.05 Fugitive Dust Emissions Open Stock Pile' 42.8 Dirt/Debris Pushing' 348.8 Graded/Exposed Surface" 132.0 TOTAL GRADING 122.48 18.01 204.80 22.28 544.65 NO MITIGATION SCAQMD Threshold 550 75 100 150 150 Significant? NO NO YES NO YES ... .. .. .. lilt ... - If" .. "" lilt ". .. .. .. .... .. ... .. ... III ... .. ... , 3 , S " Emission factors provided by SCAQMD, J 993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Tables A9-8-A andA9-9. A water truck and a utility dozer. Based on 25 miles each way commute length for 14 workers. Emissions from one-half acre of open stock piles. Emissions by two dozers operating eight hours a day each. Emissions from five acres of graded/exposed surface. ... - - - ... ... 3/28101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-17 ... ... - - LSAASSOClATES,INC. - - .. It is further assumed that on a peak grading day, a total of 14 workers would be working on the project site. Assuming an average 25 miles each way commute length for every worker, emissions from the daily 700 miles of travel by workers would generate approximately 6.0 ppd of CO, 1.1 ppd of ROC, 1.9 ppd of NOx, 0.3 ppd of SOx, and 0.7 ppd ofPMIO from vehicle exhaust and tire wear. .... .. As shown in Table 4.2.D, peak grading day construction equipment emissions would exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for the criteria pollutant of NO x and PMIO. Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the standards. .. ... ... Building erection or construction would have different types of equipment being used on the project site. Similarities do exist in terms of equipment exhaust emissions and fugitive dust emissions. However, it is anticipated that emissions during building erection phase would be below peak grading day emissions. Therefore, mitigation implemented for the peak grading day emissions would be adequate to reduce emissions during the building erection phase. .. .. II" .. The application of architectural coatings would emit VOCs that are part of the ozone precursors. Emissions associated with architectural coatings can be reduced by using precoatedlnatural colored building materials, water based or low VOC coating, and using coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. Furthermore, SCAQMD Rule 1113, Architectural Coating, restricts the amount of VOC allowed in architectural coating to control VOC emissions in the Basin; therefore, the combination oflow VOC architectural coating and a high transfer efficiency coating equipment would reduce this potential impact to less than significant, and no further mitigation is necessary. .. "" ... .. iIf/I' Mitigation Measures . ... The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the numbered impact statements in the impact analysis discussion and reduce air pollutants generated during the project construction phase: .. .. 4.2.1A The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. ... .. 4.2.IB The Construction Contractor shall limit the operation of grading equipment to two bulldozers at anyone time with no more than 5 acres graded in anyone day. .. ... .. 4.2.1 C The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. .. .. .. 4.2.1D The Construction Contractor shall time the construction activities so as to not interfere with peak hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. .. - 4.2.1E The Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. ... - .. 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-18 ... .. - - LSAASSOClATES, INC. - - ... 4.2.1F Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on site and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed below: .. a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. - .. - b. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. .... .. - c. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. .. .. '" d. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. .. ,... .. e. Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. ... ... 4.2.1 G The Construction Contractor shall utilize precoated/natural colored building materials, water based or low VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. ... .. Level of Significance after Mitigation - Short-term construction emissions would exceed the SCAQMD's daily thresholds for the criteria pollutants of NO x and PMIO. Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the standards. Short-term construction emissions would remain significant with implementation of mitigation measures. - - Ia - - - .. - .. - .... - - 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Sectioo 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-19 - - - UlAASSOClATES, INC. .. .. .. Long-Term Regional Air Quality Impacts - .. Long-term air emission impacts are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources related to any change in permanent usage of the project site. Stationary sources include anyon-site emissions and emissions associated with the usage of electricity and natural gas. Mobile source emissions result from vehicle trips associated with the proposed project. Because there are existing uses on the project site, including single family and multifamily residential, motel, and fast food restaurant uses, emissions associated with these uses should be considered the baseline levels. The net increases from these baseline levels are compared to the SCAQMD emissions thresholds for the project's contribution. 110 - :. .. - Impact 4.2.2. Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with changes in permanent usage of the project site. Area sources include on-site emissions such as natural gas consumption and emissions associated with consumer products. Mobile source emissions result from vehicle trips associated with the proposed project. These impacts would be potentially significant. 110 .. .. Mobile Sonrees. Existing on-site uses generate vehicular trips onto roadway segments in the project area. These existing uses are estimated to generate a total of 1,418 daily trips. "'" .. Vehicular trips associated with the proposed on-site uses are provided in the traffic report (LSA Associates, Inc., November 2000). The project would create approximately 268,600 square feet of retail space and restaurant use. Approximately 12,099 net increase in vehicular trips would be associated with the project after project build out (section 4.1 of the Draft EIR). Using the latest URBEMIS7G (Urban Emissions Model) air model in conjunction with the traffic data, criteria pollutant emissions are calculated for both scenarios and illustrated in Table 4.2.E. Table 4.2.E shows that emissions from project related mobile sources alone would exceed the operational threshold for the NOx pollutant established by the SCAQMD. There are no feasible mitigation measures available to reduce the project's impacts on long-term regional air quality. The following measures would help minimize the project's long-term operational emissions. .. .,. , .. ". .. .. - .. ". .. ~ - .. .. ... ... - ... - ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-20 - ... - lSAASSOCIATES. INC. .. ... - - Table 4.2.E - Total Emissions from Proposed Project (pounds/day) Land Use CO ROC NOx SOx PMI0 Existing Uses Natural Gas Usage 0.80 5.28 1.87 Nd 0.00 Electricity Usage 0.35 0.02 2.02 0.21 0.07 Mobile Sources 70.94 7.27 22.16 Nd 0.82 Subtotal Existing Uses 72.09 12.57 26.05 0.21 0.89 Proposed Uses Natural Gas Usage 1.67 0.30 4.18 Nd1 om Electricity Usage2 2.26 0.11 12.98 1.35 0.45 Mobile Sources 495.66 46.20 171.63 Nd 6.19 Subtotal Proposes Uses 499.59 46.61 188.79 1.35 6.65 Net Project Emissions Increase 427.50 34.04 162.74 1.14 5.76 SCAQMD Threshold 550.0 55.0 55.0 150.0 150.0 Significant? No No Yes No No Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 2000. - .. "'" .. .. - - III "" .. ". .. ... .. .. .. - - .. ... .. .. .. - ... - ... - ... 2 SOx data is not provided by the URBEMIS7G model. Calculated with SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook emission factors. - - 3/28101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIRlSection 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-21 ... ... - LSAASSOCIATES.INC. - ~ ... Mitigation Measures ... .. 4.2.2A Use of transportation demand measures (TDM), such as preferential parking for vanpooling/carpooling, subsidy for transit pass or vanpooling/carpooling, flextime work schedule, bicycle racks, and on-site cafeteria, shall be incorporated in the design of the commercial land uses. - .. Level of Significance after Mitigation .. - Total emissions from long-term project operations would be the stationary sources added to the mobile sources. The emissions for NOx would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for daily operations of 55 pounds. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce long-term NOx emissions from project related vehicles to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project would have a significant impact on air quality after mitigation. .. .. ... . Cumulative Impacts .. The cumulative study area for air quality impacts encompasses the Basin, which is designated non- attainment for ozone, PMIO and carbon monoxide. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project are consistent with the City of San Bernardino's General Plan. Emissions of NO x and PMIO from construction of the proposed project and the project operations would cumulatively contribute to the non-attainment ofPMIO and NOx. Emissions of fugitive dust from construction activity would result in primarily localized air quality impacts in the project vicinity. .. .. ... "... - Construction of other commercial and residential projects in the general vicinity of the proposed project would result in air pollutant emissions in the project area over and above those calculated for the project. However, other commercial and residential projects will be required to comply with the same construction dust mitigation measures prescribed by the SCAQMD. Although the implementation of these measures at all of the construction sites would reduce emissions, overall emissions would likely be greater than the SCAQMD significance thresholds for NOx and PMIO, while emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the air quality significance thresholds. .. .. - ... '" III Both long-term stationary (on-site energy consumption) and mobile (vehicular traffic) sources would contribute to regional criteria pollutant emissions. Considering the Basin is in a non-attainment status for three of the five criteria pollutants and the project would result in significant impacts, these emissions would cumulatively contribute to significant regional air quality impacts. ... ... ... ... ... .. - .. .... - 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-2 Air.doc) 4.2-22 ... ... - - LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. ... ... 4.3 NOISE .. This noise assessment follows City of San Bernardino guidelines on the preparation of noise studies, which include the City's Noise Element of the General Plan. This study assesses noise impacts by discussing the current noise environment, evaluating short-term construction noise, assessing long- term noise effects from project related mobile and stationary sources, and identifying mitigation measures and their effectiveness. .. - .. ... Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The fIrst is audible impacts that refer to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3.0 decibels (dB) or greater since this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1.0 and 3.0 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category is changes in noise level ofless than 1.0 dB that are inaudible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant. The assumptions described later for analyzing decreases in noise level due to distance were also used to analyze the effects of construction associated with the proposed project. .. ... . "'" .. ,.. .. Environmental Setting ,.. ... Characteristics of Sound P' .. Sound is increasing to such disagreeable levels in our environment that it can threaten our quality of life. Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep. - fI" ... To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is generally an annoyance, while loudness can affect our ability to hear. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations or cycles per second of a wave that result in the tone's range from high to low. Loudness is the strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment, and is measured by the amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity refers to how hard the sound wave strikes an object, which in turn produces the sound's effect. This characteristic of sound can be precisely measured with instruments. The analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area in terms of sound intensity and its effect on adjacent sensitive land uses. .. .... .. ... .. Measurement of Sound .. .. Sound intensity is measured through the A-weighted scale (i.e., dBA) to correct for the relative frequency response of the human ear. That is, an A-weighted noise level de-emphasizes low and very high frequencies of sound similar to the human ear's de-emphasis of these frequencies. Unlike linear units such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale, representing points on a sharply rising curve. ... .. - ... ,... ... 3/29101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-1 ... "" - LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. - ... For example, 10 dBA are 10 times more intense than I dBA, 20 dBA are 100 times more intense and 30 dBA are 1,000 times more intense. Thirty dBA represent 1,000 times as much acoustic energy as I dBA. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than zero dBA. The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10 dBA increase in sound level is perceived by the human ear as only doubling of the loudness of the sound. Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). ... - .... Iloo - Sound levels are generated from a source and their decibel level decreases as the distance from that source increases. Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. For a single point source, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment. If noise is produced by a line source such as highway traffic or railroad operations, the sound decreases 3 dBA for each doubling of distance in a hard site environment. Line source noise in a relatively flat environment with absorptive vegetation decreases 4.5 dBA for each doubling of distance. - ... - .. ... There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods; however, an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the equivalent continuous sound level (40) and community noise equivalent level (CNEL) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). Leq is the total sound energy of time varying noise over a sample period. Unlike the 40 metric, the CNEL noise metric is based on 24 hours of measurement. CNEL also differs from 40 in that it applies a time weighted factor designed to emphasize noise events that occur during the evening and nighttime hours (when quiet time and sleep disturbance is of particular concern). Noise occurring during the daytime period (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) receives no adjustment. Noise produced during the evening time period (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) is adjusted by five dBA; nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise is adjusted by ten dBA. Other noise rating scales of importance when assessing annoyance factor include the maximum noise level, or L.n.x, and percentile noise exceedance levels, or LN' L.n.x is the highest exponential time averaged sound level that occurs during a stated time period. It reflects peak operating conditions and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. LN is the noise level that is exceeded "N" percent of the time during a specified time period. For example, the LIO noise level represents the noise level exceeded ten percent of the time during a stated period. The Lso noise level represent the median noise level. Half the time the noise level exceeds this level and half the time it is less than this level. The Loa noise level represents the noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the lowest noise level experienced during a monitoring period. It is normally referred to as the background noise level. .. ... .. ... .. .... .. .. .... .. ... .. ... Psychological and Physiological Effects of Noise Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA. Exposure to high noise levels affects our entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure, functions of the heart, and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear even with short-term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear. This is called the threshold of pain. A sound level of 190 dBA will rupture the eardrum and permanently damage the inner ear. .. - ... .. -- .... ... The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying less developed areas. ... - 3/29101(R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-2 ... .. LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. ... ~. - Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity ... There are existing residences on site and to the east of the proposed project site. The residences off site are approximately 250 feet from the property line of the project site across Tippecanoe Avenue, which is a six-lane thoroughfare. Part of the on-site residences would be demolished in Phase I of the project. However, the remaining residences that would be demolished during Phase II of the project would be affected by the Phase I construction and operation of the project. ... - .. - Overview of the Existing Noise Element .. ,.. ill The primary existing noise sources in the project area are transportation facilities. Traffic on 1-10, Tippecanoe Avenue, Laurelwood Drive, Rosewood Drive, and Orchard Drive near the site is the primary source contributing to the ambient noise levels. Noise from motor vehicles is generated by engine vibrations, the interaction between the tires and road, and the exhaust system. The existing noise levels generated by these noise sources in the vicinity of the project site are described below. "" .. "" Existing Traffic Noise. The FHW A Highway Traffic Noise Model (FHW A-77-1 08), currently used throughout the United States, was used to evaluate traffic related noise conditions in the vicinity of the project site. This model requires various parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytime, evening, and nighttime hours. ... ... .. .. The existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes in the area were taken from the traffic report prepared for this project by LSA (LSA, November 2000). The resultant noise levels are weighted and summed over 24-hour periods to determine the CNEL value. CNEL contours are derived through a series of computerized iterations to isolate the 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL contours for existing traffic noise levels in the area. ,.. .. ... .... Table 4.3.A provides the current noise levels adjacent to roads near the project site. These noise levels represent the worst case scenarios, which assume no shielding is provided between the highway traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. The specified assumptions used in developing these noise levels and model printouts are provided in Appendix D. ... ".. . "" Currently, traffic noise levels along Waterman Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue are high, with the 70 dBA CNEL extending beyond 50 feet from the roadway centerline. Traffic noise along other roadway segments is low to moderate, with the 70 dBA CNEL confined within the roadway right-of- way. .. - ... .. .. .. ... .... .. 3/29101(R:\CBD030IFinaJ EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-3 ... ... LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. ""' - - Table 4.3.A - Existing Traffic Noise Levels in the Vicinity of the Proposed Project Site ... CNEL (dBA) 50 ft - Centerline Centerline from to 70 Centerline to to 60 outermost ... Roadway Sej!1Dent ADT CNEL (ft) 65 CNEL (ft) CNEL (ft) lane .., Waterman Avenue Between Orange Show and Vanderbilt 22,594 64 130 276 68.9 - Between Vanderbilt and Hospitality 20,760 61 123 261 68.6 .. Between Hospitality and 1-10 36,962 90 181 383 70.3 ,.. Tippecanoe A venuel Anderson Street . Between Orange Show and Hospitality 18,481 57 114 242 68.1 Between Hospitality and Laure1wood 24,624 72 140 293 68.6 ... Between Laurelwood and Rosewood 25,710 74 144 302 68.8 - Between Rosewood and 1-10 27,136 76 149 313 69.0 Between 1-10 and Redlands 21,332 62 125 266 68.7 - Vanderbilt Way ... West of Waterman 901 <50 I <50 <50 53.2 ... East of Waterman 6,424 <50 <50 80 61.7 .. Hospitality Lane/Coulston Street West ofWatennan 21,709 <50 105 222 67.5 "" Between Waterman and 1-10 ramps 20,421 <50 101 213 67.2 .. Between 1-10 ramps and Harriman 14,358 <50 81 169 65.7 - Between Harriman and Tippecanoe 9,200 <50 63 127 63.8 Ik East of Tippecanoe 2,173 <50 <50 <50 58.4 .. Laure1wood Drive .. East of Tippecanoe 657 <50 <50 <50 48.9 ... Rosewood Drive - East of Tippecanoe 657 <50 <50 <50 48.9 Redlands Boulevard ... West of Anderson 12,582 <50 75 155 65.1 ... East of Anderson 15,699 <50 86 179 66.1 - ... Note: I Traffic noise within 50 feet of roadway centerline requires site specific analysis. ... Source: LSA Associates, Inc., November 2000. .. ... ... ..- iii> 3/29101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Sectioo 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-4 ... ... - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. ,.- ... Ambient Noise Monitoring in the Project Vicinity. Measurements of ambient noise levels were taken in the project area on November 21,2000. Four measurements were taken on or near the perimeter of the project site to represent the existing ambient noise levels. Figure 4.3.1 depicts the noise monitoring locations. 'IM - .. Table 4.3.B summarizes noise measurement data for these monitoring locations. As shown, the ambient noise levels range from 49.0 to 64.4 dBA I.e.. Location I was on the project site, in front of 930 Laurelwood Drive. The residences in the vicinity of this monitoring location will be demolished during Phase II of the project. Location 2 was at the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Laurelwood Drive. There are existing single family residences behind this monitoring location, approximately 100 feet east of Tippecanoe Avenue. Location 3 was on the project site in front of 1013 Laurelwood Drive, approximately 15 feet from the roadway. This monitoring location is on the boundary between Phases I and 2. Location 4 was at the intersection of Orchard Drive and Rosewood Drive. - ... ... .. .. .. '" Table 4.3.B - Ambient Noise Monitoring Results Start L.. Location Time (dBA) Nolte Sources Remarks 1. In front of 930 9:15a.m. 49.0 Traffic on Representative of Laurelwood Drive, 15 Laurelwood existing noise levels at feet from roadway edge. Drive, birds. residences within Phase II. 2. Intersection of 9:55 a.m. 64.4 Traffic on Existing single-family Tippecanoe A venue and Tippecanoe residences behind noise Laurelwood Drive. A venue and monitoring location, Laurelwood approximately 100 feet Drive, buses, car from Tippecanoe horns, heavy Avenue. trucks. 3. In front of 10 13 10:32 50.9 Traffic on Located at boundary Laurelwood Drive, 15 a.m. Laurelwood between Phases I and 2. feet from roadway edge. Drive, birds. 4. Intersection of Orchard 11:12 63.9 Traffic on Located at the Drive and Rosewood a.m. Orchard Drive and residences within Phase Drive, 15 feet from edge Rosewood Drive, I. of both roadways. car alarm, music, plane. Source: LSA Associates, Inc., November 2000. - .. - III ... .. - III - .. - .. ... .. - .. - Locations 2 and 4 are near a major roadway; therefore, traffic noise contributed the majority of the higher noise levels to the ambient noise during the monitoring periods. As locations I and 3 were not near major roadways, the ambient noise levels were 13 to 15 dBA lower than at the other monitoring locations. .. - ... - ... 3/29/01(R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Sectioo 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-5 - ... ... LEGEND &1>1 N' M . . L . 'ill' - OlSe omtonng OCa110n ... - ... ... .' t.. ..' . . . - ~. ~ .J!: r. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -..- : 1 @3 '1 PROJECT LOCATION w o z <w frl:( a. a. t::: - .. - - ... ..... .. I. - . . "" .. . . "" .. 1 . II" HARRIMAN PL I ROSEWOOD DR .... .. .. ... tIo '" .. ... .. - .... ... .... - J/301O/(CBD030/Initful Study) Figure 4.3.1 - - L SA ... LSA Associates, Inc. 0' 125' <'lo 250' N The Hub Ambient Noise Monitoring Locations - ... - UA ASSOCIATES, INC. .. Existing Policies and Regulations - Threshold of Significance ... A project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to noise if it will increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas by 3 dBA or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located. The applicable noise standards governing the project site are the criteria set forth in the City of San Bernardino Noise Element of the General Plan. - .. ... .. City of San Bernardino Noise Guidelines ... The City of San Bernardino adopted a Noise Element (December, 1993) in its General Plan. One of the general goals of the San Bernardino City Noise Elernent is to develop and adopt specific policies and an effective implementation program to abate and avoid excessive noise exposures in the City by requiring that effective noise mitigation measures be incorporated into the design of new noise generating and noise sensitive land uses. - '"' .. ... Specific policies have been adopted by the City to accomplish the goals of the Noise Element, including the following: .. 1. Areas within San Bernardino City shall be designated as "noise impacted" if exposed to existing or projected future exterior noise levels from mobile or stationary sources exceeding the standards listed in Tables 4.3.C and 4.3.D. .. .. p 2. The City shall enforce the State Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) and Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). ... 3. Subdivision approval adjacent to any developed/occupied noise sensitive land uses shall require the developer to submit a construction related noise mitigation plan to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The plan must depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of this project, through the use of methods such as the following: .. .. ... .. . Temporary noise attentuation fences . Preferential location of equipment . Use of current technology and noise suppression equipment. ... iii ... Construction, repair, or demolition activities are limited to between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. of any working day, and are not allowed on Sundays and federal holidays. .. ... Table 4.3.C - Hourly Noise Level Performanee Standards Locally Regulated Sourees .. ... Land Use Category 7 a.m. - 10 p.m. Leq Lmax 10 p.m. - 7 a.m. Leq Lmax -, ... Residential or other noise sensitive receivers 55 75 45 65 ... ... Source: City of San Bernardino, Noise Element, 1993. .. 3/29101(R:\CBD030IFina! EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-7 - ... An exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA CNEL (or L..) will be allowed provided exterior noise levels have been substantially mitigated through a reasonable application of the best available noise reduction technology and interior noise exposure does not exceed 45 dBA CNEL (or L..) with windows and doors closed. Requiring that windows and doors remain closed to achieve an acceptable interior noise level will necessitate the use of air conditioning or mechanical ventilation. ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... - ... Land Use CatCllories Residential Commercial .... .. ... .. .. iii ... Institutional .. Open Space ... L Note: "" .. .. 1M Table 4.3.D - Interior/Exterior Noise Level Standards - Mobile Noise Sources CNEL or Ldn Land Uses Interior Exterior Single and multi-family, duplex, mobile homes 45 601 Hotel, motel, transient lodging 45 60' Commercial retail, bank, restaurant 50 nla Office building, research and development, 45 65 professional offices Amphitheater, concert hall, auditorium, movie 45 nla theater Hospital, nursing home, school classrooms, 45 65 church, library Park nla 65 Source: City of San Bernardino, Noise Element, 1993. ... Impacts and Mitigation 1M ... Implementation of the proposed project would result in short-term construction and long-term traffic noise impacts. The following focuses on the increases in noise associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project. .. .. Less than Significant Impacts The following potential land use impacts were analyzed and found to be less than significant. Representative parking activities, such as customer conversing or door closing, would generate intermittent, maximum outdoor noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet. The parking areas for Phase I of the proposed project will be located adjacent to residential uses located in Phase II. As these residences will be located approximately 50 feet from the Phase I parking areas, they will be exposed to noise levels of 60 dBA Lm.,.. Once Phase II of the project is completed, the closest residential use to on-site parking areas will be located on the east side of Tippecanoe Avenue, approximately 250 feet east of the project site. Distance attenuation will reduce the noise level at these residences to 46 dBA Lm.,.. Traffic noise on Tippecanoe Avenue will mask this noise from the project site. The noise levels at both on- site and off-site residential land uses will be below the City's nighttime Lm.,. of 65 dBA. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the parking lot activities will have any significant impact on the residences adjacent to the project site. .... .. . Parking Lot Activity "'" .... .. ... "'" .... .... .... .. 3/29101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-8 .... ... - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... Mitigation Measure - No mitigation is required. .. .. . Truck Delivery and Loading/Unloading .. Noise levels from the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities for the proposed project may range up to 59.5 dBA Lnua at the closest residential uses to the east of the project site. Noise impacts from the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities at the loading docks on the east side of the 130.400-square-foot warehouse discount center would be less than significant. .. ill ... - The closest on-site loading/unloading activities of semi-trucks, including trucks that contain compressors for refrigeration units, to any sensitive residential uses would be the loading docks on the east side of the 130,400-square-foot warehouse discount center. The loading docks will be, at the closest points, approximately 300 feet from the nearest residences to the east. Based on noise readings from loading and unloading activities for other similar projects, a noise level of 75 dBA Lm.x at 50 feet was used in this analysis. The noise attenuation of loading/unloading activities provided by distance divergence at 300 feet is approximately 15.5 dBA compared to the level at 50 feet. Therefore, residences to the east of the project site would be exposed to loading/unloading noise levels of 59.5 dBA Lm.x. The closest loading dock to the existing residences in Phase II area is at a distance of approximately 500 feet. At this distance, the noise level will be attenuated to 55 dBA Lm.x. These noise levels are below both the daytime Lm.x of75 dBA (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and the nighttime Lm.x of 65 dBA (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). Therefore, the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities will not have any significant impact on the residences on or adjacent to the project site. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. Mitigation Measures ... No mitigation is required. - . Long-Term Traffic Noise Impacts ... ... .. The FHW A highway traffic noise prediction model (FHW A RD-77-108) was used to evaluate traffic related noise conditions in the vicinity of the project site. The existing plus project daily traffic volumes were taken from the traffic report prepared for this project by LSA (LSA, November 2000). The resultant noise levels were weighted and summed over a 24-hour period in order to determine the CNEL values. CNEL contours are derived through a series of computerized iterations to isolate the 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL contour for traffic noise levels in the project area. The future year 2020 traffic noise levels with and without the project are shown in Tables 4.3.E and 4.3.F. .. ... ... .. ... ... ... - ... 3/29101(R:\CBD0301Final EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-9 - ... UA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Table 4.3.E - Future Year 2020 Cumulative Trame Noise Levels Witbout Implementation oftbe Project Ceuter- Ceuter- Ceuter- CNEL Chauge - line to line to line to (dBA) from 70 65 60 50 ft from existing - CNEL CNEL CNEL outermost level .. Roadway Sej!meut ADT (ft) (ft) (ft) lane (dBA) Waterman Avenue - Between Orange Show and Vanderbilt 32,602 79 165 352 70.5 1.6 .. Between Vanderbilt and Hospitality 27,393 72 147 314 69.8 1.2 Between Hospitality and 1-10 47,039 103 211 450 71.4 1.1 - Tippecanoe A venue! Anderson Street .. Between Orange Show and Hospitality 40,039 94 191 405 70.7 2.6 - Between Hospitality and Laurelwood 42,494 97 198 420 70.9 2.3 .. Between Laurelwood and Rosewood 45,467 101 207 440 71.2 2.4 Between Rosewood and 1-10 46,681 103 210 447 71.4 2.4 - Between 1-10 and Red1ands 38,843 88 185 396 71.3 2.6 .. Vanderbilt Way West of Waterman 978 <50' <50 <50 53.5 0.3 - East of Waterman 10,276 <50 52 109 63.7 2.0 .. Hospitality Lane/Coulston Street - West of Waterman 29,368 63 127 271 68.8 1.3 - Between Waterman and 1-10 ramps 28,108 61 124 263 68.6 1.4 - Between 1-10 ramps and Harriman 24,296 57 113 239 68.0 2.3 - Between Harriman and Tippecanoe 17,826 <50 93 195 66.6 2.8 - East of Tippecanoe 8,066 <50 54 115 64.1 5.7 Laurelwood Drive ... East of Tippecanoe 714 <50 <50 <50 49.3 0.4 - Rosewood Drive .. East of Tippecanoe 713 <50 <50 <50 49.3 0.4 - Redlands Boulevard ... West of Anderson 29,108 63 127 269 68.8 3.7 - East of Anderson 26,898 60 121 255 68.4 2.3 - Note: ' Traffic noise within 50 feet of roadway centerline requires site specific analysis. - Source: LSA Associates, Inc., November 2000. - - - - 3/29/01(R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Sectioo 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-10 - - LSAASSOClATES. INC. - ...- ... Table 4.3.F - Fnture Year 2020 Cumnlative Traffic Noise Levels With Implementation of the Project ... Center- Center- Center- CNEL Change - line 10 line to line to (dBA) from 70 65 60 50 ft from existing ... CNEL CNEL CNEL outermost level .. Roadway Sej!menl ADT (ft) (ft) (ft) lane (dBA) Walerman Avenue ... Between Orange Show and Vanderbill 34,094 82 170 363 70.7 0.2 .. Between Vanderbill and Hospitality 27,735 72 148 316 69.8 0.0 Between Hospitality and 1-10 48,128 105 214 456 71.5 0.1 ... Tippecanoe Avenue/Anderson Street .. Between Orange Show and Hospitality 41,425 96 195 413 70.8 0.1 ... Between Hospitality and Laurelwood 44,296 100 203 432 71.1 0.2 .. Between Laure1wood and Rosewood 55,992 114 236 505 72.1 0.9 Between Rosewood and 1-10 54,871 113 233 498 72.1 0.7 .. Between 1-10 and Redlands 40,067 90 189 404 71.4 0.1 .. Vanderbilt Way WeslofWaterman 978 <50' <50 <50 53.5 0.0 ... East of Waterman 11,486 <50 55 117 64.2 0.5 .. Hospitality Lane/Coulston Streel - West of Waterman 30,024 64 129 275 68.9 0.1 .. Between Waterman and 1-10 ramps 30,195 64 130 276 68.9 0.3 ... Between 1-10 ramps and Harriman 28,162 61 124 263 68.6 0.6 .. Between Harriman and Tippecanoe 17,826 <50 93 195 66.6 0.0 ... East of Tippecanoe 8,778 <50 57 121 64.5 0.4 .. Laure1wood Drive East of Tippecanoe 714 <50 <50 <50 49.3 0.0 ... Rosewood Drive .. Easl of Tippecanoe 713 <50 <50 <50 49.3 0.0 - Redlands Boulevard .. Wesl of Anderson 29,214 63 127 270 68.8 0.0 - East of Anderson 27,496 61 122 259 68.5 0.1 ... Note: ' Traffic noise within 50 feel of roadway centerline requires site specific analysis. ... Source: LSA Associates, Inc., November 2000. - ...- - - - 3/29101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-11 ... - - ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... Table 4.3.E shows that there would be traffic noise level changes along roadway links in the project vicinity under the future year 2020 no build scenario. The changes range from a increase of 0.4 dBA along Laurelwood Drive and Rosewood Drive east of Tippecanoe Avenue to an increase of 5.7 dBA along Coulston Street east of Tippecanoe Avenue. These changes are due to the area's future growth and planned development in the region. ... - - ... The data in Table 4.3.F shows that there is very little change in the traffic noise levels associated with the implementation of the project. The largest increase in traffic related noise is on Tippecanoe Avenue between Laurelwood Drive and Rosewood Drive, which has a 0.9 dBA increase over the no build scenario. This range of noise level increases is much smaller than the 3 dBA significance threshold. Since the project does not create a significant increase in traffic noise, no mitigation is required for off-site residential areas. - .. - - The proposed commercial on-site land uses are not considered noise sensitive; therefore, the operation of these uses within the 70 dBA CNEL is acceptable. No significant noise impact would occur on the project site. - - - Mitigation Measures .. No mitigation is required. - . Transportation to Constrnction Site Impacts .. - Transport of construction equipment/materials to the project site and worker commute would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Although there would be relatively high single event noise exposures (up to 87 dBA L.n.x at 50 feet from passing trucks), when averaged over a longer period of time such as one hour or eight hours, the effect in long-term ambient noise levels would be small and negligible. Therefore, short-term construction noise impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport would not result in significant adverse impacts on noise sensitive receptors along the access routes leading to the proposed project site. ... .. ... - .. Mitigation Measures - .. No mitigation is required. - ... Potentially Significant Impacts - The following impacts that would result from implementation of the proposed project were evaluated and considered significant. ... . Construction Activities - - Impact 4.3.1. Noise levels from grading and other construction activities for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA at the closest residential unit located in Phase II. and up to 77 dBA at off-site residential uses located east of the project site for very limited times when construction occurs near them. Construction noise impacts of the proposed project would be potentially significant. .. ... - .. 3/29101 (R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-12 - ... - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Construction is completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on the site and, therefore, the noise levels surrounding the site as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. - .. - ... - Table 4.3.G lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. Typical noise levels range from 76 to 90 dBA at 50 feet from construction equipment during the noisiest construction phase. The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and grading the site, tends to generate the highest noise levels, because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving and compacting equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backfillers, bulldozers, draglines, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. .. - .. - .. - .. Table 4.3.G - Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels .. Range of Sound Levels Suggested Sound Levels for Type of Equipment Measured (dBA at SO feet) Analysis ( dBA at 50 feet) Pile Drivers, 12,000 to 18,000 ft-Ib!blow 81 to 96 93 Rock Drills 83 to 99 96 Jack Hammers 75 to 85 82 Pnewnatic Tools 78 to 88 85 Pumps 68 to 80 77 Dozers 85 to 90 88 Tractors 77 to 82 80 Front-End Loaders 86 to 90 88 Hydraulic Backhoe 81 to 90 86 Hydraulic Excavators 81 to 90 86 Graders 79 to 89 86 Air Compressors 76 to 86 86 Trucks 81 to 87 86 - - .. - .. - ... - .. - - .- - - ... Source: Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants, Boll, Beranek & Newman, 1987. - - - ... 3/29101 (R:\CBD030IFina! EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-13 - - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. ... - .. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of earthrnovers and compacting equipment, water, and pickup trucks. Noise typically associated with the use of construction equipment (earthrnovers and compacting equipment, water and pickup trucks) is estimated between 79 and 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the construction effort for the grading phase. As seen in Table 4.3.G, the maximum noise level generated by each grader on the proposed project site is assumed to be 88 dBA at 50 feet from the grader. The maximum noise level generated by water and pickup trucks is approximately 86 dBA at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual noise source, the worst case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA L",.,. (88 dBA + 3 dBA = 91 dBA) at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area. As these noise sources are point sources, the noise decreases at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Therefore, at 100 feet from the project site boundary, the construction noise would be decreased to 85 dBA; at 200 feet, the dBA would be decreased to 79 dBA; at 400 feet, the dBA would be decreased to 73 dBA; at 800 feet, the dBA would be decreased to 67 dBA; and at 1,600 feet, the construction noise would be decreased to 61 dBA. .. .. .. - .. .. ... .. - .. .. The nearest off-site residences to the project site are located to the east. These residences are approximately 250 feet from the project boundary, and may be subjected to short-term noise approaching 77 dBA L",.,. (worst case) generated by construction activities on the project site. The nearest on-site residences in Phase II area of the project site are approximately 25 feet from the boundary of Phase I. These on-site residences will be subjected to short-term construction noise exceeding 91 dBA L",.,.. Compliance with the City's Noise Control Ordinance will be required to mitigate the noise impact. ... - .. - .. Temporary, portable sound barriers with an effective height of 6 feet shall be placed along the boundary between Phase I and Phase II. These noise barriers will provide approximately 6 dBA of attenuation, and will reduce the construction noise level to 85 dBA L",.,.. To further reduce the impact of the construction activities all mitigation measures listed below should be implemented. However, even with mitigation, the temporary construction noise will remain significant and unavoidable. .. .. .. .. Mitigation Measures - too 4.3.1A Construction shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday; no construction shall be allowed on Sundays and federal Holidays. - .. 4.3.1B During all project site excavation and grading on site, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturer's standards. - .. - 4.3.1C All stationary noise generating sources, such as air compressors and portable power generators, shall be located as far as reasonably possible from the existing sensitive receptors. - 4.3.1.D Prior to the commencement of on-site construction activities, temporary noise attenuation fences (portable sound barriers) with an effective height of 6 feet shall be placed along the boundary between Phases I and 2. .. ... - - 3129/01(R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-14 ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - .. Level of Significance after Mitigation ... Implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce the magnitude of noise impacts during construction of Phase I on residences located in Phase II to a less than significant level. ... ... ... Cumulative Impacts .. The cumulative study area for noise impacts is the City of San Bernardino. The long-term operational noise impacts (parking lot activity, loading/unloading activity, and traffic noise) associated with the proposed project were determined to be less than significant. Noise impacts associated with short- term construction activities are significant and unavoidable, but are confined to the northwest boundary of Phase I. The proposed project's short-term construction activity and on-site stationary sources are localized noise sources and would only affect land uses immediately adjacent to the project site with direct line of sight (along the northwest Phase I boundary). These noise sources are not considered cumulative. Construction and operations (excluding vehicular traffic) at other off-site locations would not cumulatively add to project related noise impacts, especially to residences to the east of the project site. ... .. .. - ill "" .. "" ill - ... ... ... "" ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... .. - .. 3/29101(R:\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-3 Noise.doc) 4.3-15 - .. lSAASSOCIATES, INC. - - ... 4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES ... A cultural resource study of the project site was conducted between September and November 2000. As mandated by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the purpose of the study was to provide the City with the necessary information and analysis to determine whether the proposed project would have any effect on historic properties that may exist in or adjacent to the Area of Potential Effect (APE). The following discussion summarizes the findings and conclusions stated in the cultural resources report, which is included in its entirety as Appendix E of this document. .. ... .. ... .. Environmental Setting ... ... Situated between 1,044 and 1,060 feet above sea level, the APE lies on the outskirts of the City, bounded on the east by Tippecanoe Avenue, on the south by the 1-10 freeway, on the west by Orchard Avenue, and on the north by existing commercial development. The northern two-thirds of the APE, along Laurelwood and Rosewood Drives, has been developed with single-and multiple- family residential units. A drive-thru restaurant and a motel occupy several lots fronting Tippecanoe Avenue. The southerly third of the APE consists of an open field that extends to the edge of the freeway. The soil in this area is a fme powdery sand with some scattered small rocks. The open field has been recently disked to control weeds and surface vegetation. Vegetation within this portion of the project site includes low grasses, some large bushes near the western boundary of the APE, and a few trees near the corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Rosewood Drive. Also at this corner is a patch of sand covered asphalt that runs west along Rosewood Drive. This area is utilized for vehicle parking. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .. Archaeological/Historical Records Search ... .. A records search was conducted by the Archaeological Information Center (AlC) at the San Bernardino County Museum, Redlands. The AlC, a component of the California Historical Resource Information System, is the cultural resource records repository for San Bernardino County. The records search included a search for previously identified historical/archaeological resources located on or near the APE, as well as existing cultural resource reports conducted and/or pertaining to the project site and its vicinity. In addition, a historical background search was conducted. Sources consulted during the background research included published local and regional histories, historic maps, San Bernardino (City and County) archival records, and materials on file at the California Room of the Norman F. Fledheym Central Library in San Bernardino. .. ... .. ... ... - According to the AlC, the project area has not been previously surveyed for cultural resources, and no archaeological sites or other cultural resources have been recorded within or immediately adjacent to the APE. Five previous cultural surveys conducted within 0.5 mile of the APE, resulted in the identification of two historic era archaeological sites and four pending historic sites. The two archeological sites, CA-SBR-6847H and CA-SBR-7168H, represent the Gage Canal and the remains of the Atchinson, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad's Redlands Loop, respectively. While both of these sites are significant to local and regional history, neither lies within or adjacent to the APE. None of the four pending sites namely, the Arrowhead Motel/Cafe, the Loma Linda Academy, a historic district extending eastward from Lorna Linda University to California Street, and the northern branch of the Southern Emigrant Trail (the San Bernardino-Sonora Road), are located on or adjacent to the project site. ... - ... - ... ... - ... 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-4<ultuntl.doc) 4.4-1 - ... -. UA ASSOCIATES. INC. - - ... Field Survey - ... The field survey of the cultural resource study was carried out in two parts, with the developed and undeveloped portions of the project site surveyed separately. The northern (developed) portion of the APE was surveyed to identify and record structures that date to the historic period (i.e., 45 to 50 years before present time.) Among the structures located along Laurelwood and Rosewood Drives, 28 structures (22 single-family homes and 6 multiple-family buildings) were determined to be more than 45 years old and retained at least some historic integrity. These structures were resurveyed. Detailed notations of the structural and architectural characteristics and current condition of these structures were compiled into standard site record forms, for inclusion in the California Historical Resource Information System. All of the buildings recorded during the field survey are characterized by their moderate size and simple, unpretentious appearance (exemplified by the general absence of any notable ornamental elaboration in design). Overall, the neighborhood presents a fairly typical picture of a mid-20" century residential development catering to the needs of a less affluent population. ... ... - ... ... .. ... .. An intensive-level archaeological survey of the southern (undeveloped) portion of the project site was conducted on October 27, 2000. This area was inspected by walking parallel east-west transects spaced 15 meters (ca. 50 feet) apart, to facilitate the inspection for any evidence of prehistoric or historic human activity. This survey did not reveal any surface features of archaeological interest. Modern trash, including old toys, broken glass, car parts, and pieces of concrete was scattered throughout the vacant portion of the project site. No buildings, structures, sites, objects, or artifacts from the historic or prehistoric eras were observed. ... .. ... .. ... .. Existing Regulations and Policies ... iii Historic properties are comprised of prehistoric or historic archaeological resources. The National Register of Historic Places defmes an archaeological site as "the place or places where the remnants of a past culture survive in a physical context that allows for the interpretation of these remains" (National Register Bulletin 36, Guidelines for evaluating and Registering Historical Archaeological Sites and Districts, 1993, p.2). ... .. .. Historic properties and resources are protected under a wide variety of policies and regulations including CEQA, the Federal Register (36 CFR Part 800), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (33 CFR 325, Appendix C), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (33 CFR Part 325, Appendix B). ... ... - The quality of significance in American History, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. In the protection and management of the cultural environment, CEQA guidelines provide defmitions and standards for cultural resource management. The term "historical resource" is defined as follows: ... ... - 1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. A resource included in a local register of historical resources or identified as significant in an historical resource survey . . . shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that is not historically or culturally significant. .. 2. - .. - .. 3/28101 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-4-cultural.doc) 4.4-2 ... ... - - - ... .. .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. ... iii "" .. - .. ... .. "" .. .. .. ... .. .... .. ... - - iIooo - - ,.. ... LSAASSOClATES, INC. 3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript, which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, education, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be "historically significant" if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. . . including the following: A. That is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yield, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history. The term "unique archaeological resource" has the following meaning under CEQA: An archaeological artifact, object, or site about, which it can be clearly demonstrated that without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. 2. Has a special and particular quality such as the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type. 3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person [Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g)]. Thresholds of Significance Criteria for determining the significance of impacts to cultural resources are based on Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the Guidelines for Nomination of Properties to the California Register of Historic Resources. Impacts to cultural resources are significant if the following occurs: . Alteration or destruction of any known significant archaeological and historical resources that are on, or eligible for, the California Register of Historical Resources. . Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to any significant archaeological and historical resources that are listed on, or potentially eligible for, the California Register of Historic Resources . 3/28101 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFinal EIRlSectioo 4-4-cultural.doc) 4.4-3 -, !.SA ASSOCIATES. INC. - - .. Impacts and Mitigation - Less than Significant Impact - - Implementation of the proposed project will not adversely impact historic and/or archaeological resources . .. - None of the structures located within the APE distinguishes itself as an important example of a type, period, or method of construction; nor do they demonstrate any other architectural or aesthetic merit required by the previously referenced significance criteria. In addition, historical research into their past has not revealed any identifiable events or persons of recognized as significant to local, state or national history. None of the buildings, or groups of building recorded during the cultural resource study meets the criteria for inclusion in the National Register. No buildings, structures, sites, objects, or artifacts from the historic or prehistoric eras were observed during the field survey of the vacant portion of the project site. While the AIC, indicated that the APE is highly sensitive for cultural resources, each of the previously recorded sites is located at least 600 feet from the APE. Since no other potential historic/archaeological resources were identified during the cultural resource study, the construction and operation of the proposed on-site uses will not adversely impact historic and/or archaeological resources. - .. - - - ~ - ... .. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. - .. Potentially Significant Impact ... ... .. Impact 4.5.1 Undetected subsurface historic/cultural materials and/or burials may be present within the limits of the proposed project site. Destruction or disturbance of such resources during project construction would be a potentially significant impact. .. ill While no historic or archaeological resources have been identified on site, the AIC has stated that the APE is highly sensitive for cultural resources. Implementation of the proposed project will require a substantial amount of on-site earthmoving activities. This activity may disturb previously undetected historic/archaeological resources and mitigation is proposed to reduce any potential impact associated with this issue to a less than significant level. ... ,.. - Mitigation Measures - - 4.4.1A In the event construction activities expose a cultural or archaeological resource, a qualified archaeologist shall be notified to ascertain the significance of the fmd. The qualified archaeologist shall be empowered to halt or divert earthmoving activities in the vicinity of the find to allow for the adequate recordation and/or recovery of the find. .. ... - .. - .. 3128101 (\\RlV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIR\Section 4-4-<:ultural.doc) 4.4-4 ... ... ... UAASSOCIATES, INC. - - - 4.4.1B If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or hislher authorized representative, the descendent may inspect the site of the discovery. The descendent shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. - .. ... .. .. ... ... Level of Significance after Mitigation .. Adherence to the aforementioned mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to cultural resources to a less than significant level. .. ... Cumulative Impacts .. .. Because the project site is located within an area which has been extensively disturbed and modified, the construction and operation of the proposed on-site uses are not expected to result in a significant cumulative impacts to cultural, historic and/or archaeological resources within the City or region. The construction and operation of proposed on-site uses will not require the removal of any structure that has a significant historic value. Adherence to the proposed mitigation will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level. ... - .. - ... ... .. ... .. ,.. .. ... .. .. .. - ... - .... 3/28101 (\\RlV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIRlSection ~ultural.doc) 4.4-5 ,.. ... - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. .. - .. 5.0 ADDITIONAL TOPICS REQUIRED BY CEQA - 5.1 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED - ... The following significant unavoidable impacts are anticipated to result from the proposed project, even with implementation of the project specific mitigation measures identified in Section 4.0. - - . Traffic: Improvement of operations at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps would require reconstruction of the interchange. Although interchange reconstruction will occur by 2020, it will not be completed by 2002. Therefore, the proposed project will have a temporary significant and unavoidable impact at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound. Because it is no possible to ensure that required improvements (year 2020) will be in place when needed, this impact remains significant even with the implementation of the mitigation measures. Future development projects will be required to make "fair share" contributions toward needed improvements, but that will not ensure adequate funding will be available to construct the improvements at the time development occurs. - - ... - .. - . Air Quality: PMlOand NOx emissions resulting from project construction and emissions of NO x, resulting from operation of the proposed project, would remain significant after implementation of mitigation measures. .. ... .. 5.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES .. The CEQA Guidelines mandate that the EIR must address any significant irreversible environmental changes which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented [CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.2(c)]. An impact would fall into this category if: .. .. ... . The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources. . The primary and secondary impacts of the project would generally commit future generations to similar uses. ... ... . Irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project. - . The proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project results in wasteful use of energy). .. - Determining whether the proposed project may result in significant irreversible effects requires a determination of whether key resources would be degraded or destroyed in such a way that there would be little possibility of restoring them. While the project represents a permanent commitment of the site to new uses, no significant agricultural, biological, cultural, scenic or mineral resources will be lost as a result of project implementation. Natural resources in the form of construction materials and energy resources will be utilized in the construction of the proposed project, but their use is not expected to negatively impact the availability of these resources. ... .. - - .. Emissions resulting from project construction would exceed established thresholds for NOx and PMIO, while emissions resulting from operation of the proposed on-site uses will exceed thresholds for NOx. These air quality impacts would remain significant after implementation of mitigation measures. ... - - .. 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 5 ADDITIONAL TOPICS.DOC) 5-1 - ... - LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. - - ... Construction of the proposed project will commit the project site to specific uses for the foreseeable future, thereby limiting the range of future uses for the project site. Existing on-site uses include single- and multi-family residential, motel, and restaurant uses. Development of the proposed project represents a logical extension of retail and restaurant uses in an area, which has been designated for such uses since 1989. The introduction of new and productive uses to the project site could be considered a benefit to the surrounding area, resulting in long-term benefits for the City and surrounding communities. As previously stated, no significant existing natural resources will be affected by implementation of the proposed development. .. - ... - - - 5.3 GROWTH INDUCEMENT .. CEQA requires a discussion of the ways in which the proposed project could induce growth. The CEQA Guidelines identify a project as growth inducing if it fosters economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment [CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d)]. New employees from commercial and industrial development and new population from residential development represent direct forms of growth. These direct forms of growth have a secondary effect of expanding the size oflocal markets and inducing additional economic activity in the area. ... - .. ... .. A project could indirectly induce growth by reducing or removing barriers to growth, or by creating a condition that attracts additional population or new economic activity. However, a project's potential to induce growth does not automatically result in growth. Growth can only happen through capital investment in new economic opportunities by the public or private sectors. Development pressures are a result of economic investment in a particular locality. These pressures help to structure the local politics of growth and the local jurisdiction's posture on growth management and land use policy. The land use policies oflocal municipalities and counties regulate growth at the local level. ... ... ... .. - .. Under CEQA, growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental, beneficial, or of significance to the environment. Typically, the growth-inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent general plans, land use plans, or in projections made by regional planning agencies such as the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Significant growth impacts could also occur if the project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently permitted by local or regional plans and policies. In general, growth induced by a project is considered a significant impact if it directly or indirectly affects the ability of agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth significantly affects the environment in some other way. - - - .. .. - .. The creation of new jobs may have a direct growth-inducing effect. The extent to which the new jobs created by a project are filled by existing residents is a factor, which tends to reduce the growth inducing effect of a project. As presented in Table 5.A, anticipated construction and operation of Phase I of the proposed project would create approximately 289 FTE construction jobs and approximately 497 FTE retail positions; and, indirectly create an additional 315 jobs. Construction and operation of Phase II would directly and indirectly create 277 and III jobs, respectively. At full build out, the construction and operation of the proposed project will result in the creation of approximately 1,489 FTE jobs. The construction of the proposed project (phases I and II) would create 602 temporary construction-related jobs, while the operation of the proposed project would create 887 FTE retail jobs. A portion of these jobs may be filled by Sam's Club employees if the Sam's Club currently located west of the project site in the Tri-City Center area of the City of San - .. ... ... - - - 3/28101 (\\RlVSIPROJECTS\CBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 5 ADDITIONAL TOPICS.DOC) 5-2 .. .. - LSA ASSOCIATE.S, INC. .. - - Bernardino relocates with the proposed project. Although approximately 300 existing Sam's Club employees may be transferred (instead of hired), the existing building will be reoccupied by another employer. Therefore, the proposed project will result in approximately 887 FTE retail jobs - some of which are attributed to employees hired by business that reoccupies the existing Sam's Club site. If a large number of the jobs created, either directly or indirectly, by the proposed project are filled by current local residents, then there would be relatively little in-migration to the area and, consequently, little effect on local population size. If a large number of people were to relocate to the area because of employment opportunities created within the project area, then the effect on the size of the local population could be substantial. .. ... - ... .. - .. Table S.A - Estimated Employment Direct Indirect Direct Indirect Construction' Retail' Subtotal Construction' Retail' Subtotal Total Phase I 289 497 786 156 159 315 1,101 (198,600 square feet) Phase II 102 175 277 55 56 111 388 (70,000 square feet) Total 391 672 1,063 211 215 426 1,489 ... .. .. .. .. .. ... Notes: 'Based on a construction cost of$80.00/square foot and an average construction wage of$55,000/year. 'Based on one employee per 400 square feet of retail space. 'Based on a multiplier of 0.54 "spinoff' jobs created for every full-time equivalent position. 'Based on a multiplier of 0.32 "spinoff' jobs created for every full-time equivalent position. - .. - The jobs-to-housing ratio measures the extent to which job opportunities in a given geographic area are sufficient to meet the employment needs of area residents. This ratio identifies the number of jobs available in a given region compared to the number of housing units in the same region. SCAG's most recently adopted (May 1998) growth forecasts for the City of San Bernardino, the SANBAG (San Bernardino County) Suhregion, and SCAG (the Southern California region) are reflected in Table 5.B. For example, a region with a jobs-to-housing factor of 1.5 would indicate that 1.5 jobs exist for every housing unit within that region. The standard used for comparison is the jobs-to-housing ratio of the Southern California Association of Govemment's (SCAG) region, which is 1.37 jobs for every household. This standard is used because most residents of the region are employed somewhere in the SCAG region. A City or sub-area of the region with a jobs-to-housing ratio lower than the overall standard would be considered a 'Jobs poor" area, indicating that many of the residents must commute to places of employment outside the sub-area. The current and potential jobslhousing ratios for the City, SANBAG, and SCAG are shown in Table 5.C. The City's current jobs-to-housing ratio is higher than that of the SANBAG Subregion and SCAG. The City's future jobs-to-housing ratio is higher than both the subregional and regional ratios. By comparison to the region, the City of San Bernardino provides jobs for a grater percentage of its local residents. So City residents are less likely to commute to work outside the City than employees in the surrounding regions included in the SANBAG and SCAG surveys. .. .. ... - .. .. ... .. .. - ... The project site is located within a rapidly developing area of the City and can be considered "redevelopment." Properties near and/or adjacent to the project site have been developed with a variety of commercial uses. The commercial site will meet existing demand for commercial uses in the City; and, the potential for growth inducement beyond that anticipated by the city is minimal. .. - - - 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 5 ADDITIONAL TOPICS.DOC) 5-3 ,.. ... Table S.B - Population, Housing, and Employment Foreeasts 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Population City 193,589 208,179 223,417 239,854 256,418 SANBAG 1,772,539 2,005,402 2,239,578 2,512,670 2,830,050 SCAG 16,999,453 18,234,328 19,490,659 20,825,541 22,352,394 - ... l3A ASSOCIATES, INC. - .. - .. - .. - - .. - Housing .. City SANBAG SCAG . ... . .. Employment iii City SANBAG SCAG fI" - 62,187 67,053 564,962 639,057 5,434,377 5,793,994 96,614 105,180 617,055 734,724 7,441,154 8,205,803 72,291 77,661 716,609 805,650 6,275,176 6,746,379 114,931 123,997 860,707 983,496 9,018,394 9,746,484 83,841 904,942 7,320,286 134,633 1,103,362 10,573,759 .. Note: SCAGprojections, May 1998. .. ... Table S.C - Current and Potential Jobs/Housing Ratios Current (2000) Potential (2020) JobsIHouslng JobsIHouslng Ratio Ratio City 1.55 1.61 SANBAG 1.09 1.22 SCAG 1.37 1.44 - - too .. .. - .. - .. - .. ... - ... 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 5 ADDITIONAL TOPICS.DOC) .. 5-4 - .. UA ASSOCiATES, INC. ... - 6.0 ALTERNATIVES ... - The CEQA requires that an EIR includes a discussion of reasonable project alternatives that are "capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects on the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly" (CEQA Section 15126(d)(I)). The analysis determined short-term air quality construction emissions would exceed daily thresholds for NOx and PMIO. Long-term air quality project emissions would exceed thresholds for NOx. Both the short-term and long-term air quality impacts of the project were determined to be significant and unavoidable even with implementation of mitigation measures. Traffic impacts will remain significant on 1-10 because there is no mechanism for development project proponents to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards improving mainline freeway lanes. Even if there were such a mechanism, there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. All other impacts are considered less than significant or reduced to below the level of significance with mitigation. .. ... ." - - ... .. .. "'- . If the environmentally superior alternative is determined to be the No Project Alternative, the EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives, if the analysis indicates that significant impacts can be avoided by one or more alternatives. The Removal of All Residential Units During Phase I Alternative was found to be the environmentally superior alternative. The following is a discussion of alternatives to the proposed project. ... Ii. "" .. 6.1 ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION .. .. The following development scenarios have been identified as potential alternatives to implementation of the proposed project. .. ... Alternative 1 - No Build .. ... Under this alternative, the project site would remain in its current condition. The existing residential and commercial uses would not be removed or relocated. Land adjacent to 1-10 would remain vacant. Roadway and/or other improvements to the project site would not occur. ... ... Alternative 2 - No Project .. ... This alternative does not preclude development of the site. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed project would not proceed, but another project may be proposed at a later date. As defmed in the CEQA Guidelines, the no project alternative includes "what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project was not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6). Based on current zoning, the entire 24.5-acre site could be developed for many types and intensities of commercial uses. ... ... .. .... - The current City FAR standard for commercial uses is 0.70. Under this alternative, future maximum permitted development of the 24.5-acre project site would yield 747,054 square feet of commercial/retail uses under this alternative. ... - 3/28101 (\\RlVSIPROJECTS\CBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 6 ALTERNA TIVES.lXlC) 6-1 - - - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - - Alternative 3 - Office-Commercial Alternative ... Implementation of this alternative would result in development of office uses on the 6.93 acres located north of the Harriman Place extension, while the site's southern 17.57 acres would be developed with commercial uses. The current City FAR standard for office uses is 3.0. The maximum level of development permitted under current City standards would total 905,612 and 535,744 square feet of office and commercial space, respectively. ... ... - ... .. Alternative ;/ - Removal of All Residential Units During Phase I (Environmentally Superior Alternative) - Under this alternative, residential units located north of the proposed Harriman Place extension would be removed concurrent with the removal of residential units located on land slated for development during Phase I of the project. The development of the HUB project as proposed would proceed. (Ill .. "" Alternative 5 - Harriman Place Improvements and Relocation of Drive- Thru Restaurant ... ... Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project. With the exception of the relocation of the existing drive-thru restaurant to the southwest corner of the Tippecanoe A venue/Harriman Place intersection, development of proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place. Existing residential and commercial (the existing motel) structures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant. All other residential structures within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain in place, but will terminate in a cul-de-sac, thereby eliminating an existing through traffic route to Tippecanoe Avenue. .. .. .. .. lilt ... Alternative 6 - Harriman Place Improvements and Retention of Drive-Thru Restaurant at Present Location .. ill Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project. The existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained in its present location. Development of proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place. Existing residential and commercial (the existing motel) structures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the improvements to the Harriman Place/Tippecanoe Avenue intersection. All other residential structures within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain a through roadway to Tippecanoe Avenue as it currently exists. - .. ... .. .. ... Alternative 7 - Proposed Project with Relocation of Drive-Thru Restaurant to Northwest Corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue .. ... Under this alternative the existing drive-thru restaurant will be relocated to the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place (the location of the proposed "Pad B"). Development of other commercial uses and roadway improvements would proceed as envisioned in the proposed project. Existing residential and commercial structures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the construction - ... .. 3/28/01 (\\RlV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 AL TERNA TIVES.OOC) 6-2 ... ... - ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - of the proposed commercial uses. Rosewood Drive west of Tippecanoe Avenue will be vacated. - - Alternative 8 - Proposed Project with Retention of Drive- Thru Restaurant at its Present Location - ... Under this alternative, the existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained at its present location. All other commercial and roadway components of the project would be developed as proposed. As with the proposed project, acquisition and demolition of existing residential and commercial structures will take place to accommodate the proposed commercial uses and roadway improvements. Harriman Place will be extended to Tippecanoe Avenue and Rosewood Drive will be vacated west of Tippecanoe Avenue. .. - ... ill 6.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED ... iIIl In determining an appropriate range of alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR, a number of possible alternatives were initially considered and, for a variety of reasons, rejected. Alternatives were rejected because they could not accomplish the basic objectives of the project, would not have resulted in a reduction of potentially significant impacts, or were considered infeasible. The reason for not selecting each of the rejected alternatives is discussed below. "'" .. .. .. The site currently proposed for development is designated for commercial uses. The applicant is not requesting a zone change or general plan amendment to any other use; however, the EIR considers a development code and general plan amendment in order to accommodate the relocation of the existing drive-thru restaurant. The project site is located within Tri-City Redevelopment Project Area and is designated CR-3 (Commercial Regional-Tri City/Club) land use district in the City of San Bernardino General Plan. This district is intended to permit a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants, hoteVmotels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar uses. Only alternatives that can be accommodated by the current CR-3 designation were considered. .. ... ,'a .. ... - The primary goals of the HUB in San Bernardino are as follows: .. . Ensure that development of the site is in accordance with established functional standards and design and aesthetic standards contained in the City's Development Code. iIIl - . Develop land uses, which represent a logical extension of adjacent development. - . Assure the commercial development will attract businesses, which will strengthen the economic viability of the City by providing a productive mix of tax generating uses. - ... . Establish a well-balanced and carefully planned collection of specialized and general retail outlets, which can take advantage of the site's established accessibility. .. .. . Provide adequate amenities, facilities, infrastructure, and services to support the activity created by the proposed project. - ... . Create employment opportunities for citizens of the City and surrounding communities. .. . Eliminate existing blighted areas, which have had a negative impact on the surrounding ... 3/28101 (\\RlV5\PROJECTS\CBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-3 ... ... - - I3A ASSOCIATES, INC. ... ... area and develop uses that will enhance the area's image. - ... Off-Site Alternative ... The off-site alternative analyzes the impacts of the proposed project in a different location. Any alternative site would require adequate land, access and services, must be compatible with adjacent uses, and be consistent with the General Plan and zoning. .. ... ... A number of factors must be taken into consideration in determining the feasibility of alternative sites. The CEQA Guidelines indicate that factors to consider include site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, regulatory limitations, and jurisdictional considerations. It must be reasonable for the project applicant to acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site. In addition, only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the proposed project need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR. .. - .' .. ... The project site is part of a redevelopment area of the IVDA and redevelopment goals under the cooperative agreernent among the IVDA, the City and the RDA are specific to this site; therefore, an alternative that does not address redevelopment at the site does not meet project goals set forth by the lead agency. .. ... .. - Retention of Existing Housing and Uses with Commercial Development of Remaining Vacant Land - ... Retaining existing uses and developing only the southerly (predominantly vacant) 1/3 portion of the project site along the freeway right-of-way would not meet the goals of redevelopment. One of the objectives of the project is to "eliminate existing blighted areas, which have had a negative impact on the surrounding area and develop uses that will enhance the area's image." Ifthe existing uses remain, and only the remaining acres are developed for commercial uses, the elimination of blight is unlikely to occur and the new commercial development may not be sustainable. In addition, the amount of developable area for new commercial development will be significantly reduced eliminating the option to "establish a well-balanced and carefully planned collection of specialized and general retail outlets" on the site. Road improvements associated with the proposed project will also not occur. ... .. ... ... ... ... .. Specialty Retail ... The Specialty Retail Alternative would allow the construction of small individual retail shops. Uses such as, farmers' markets, cafes, bakeries, delicatessens, gift shops, and sit-down restaurants are typically located in specialty retail areas. The development of specialty retail on the project site does not meet the objective to "develop land uses which represent a logical extension of adjacent development." Adjacent development is regional "big-box" retail. In addition, specialty retail development would not necessarily meet the objective to "attract businesses which will strengthen the economic viability of the City" and was, therefore, rejected. - .. .. ... ... ... .. 3/28101 (\\RlVSIPROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNA TIVES.DOC) 6-4 ... ... - - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. -'"",,, .. - Hotel and Commercial Uses - Implementation of this alternative would result in development of a hotel on the 6.93 acres located north of the Harriman Place extension, while the site's southern 17.57-acre area would be developed with commercial uses. This alternative would eliminate two 25,000- to 30,000-square foot retail spaces and may not meet the objective to "strengthen the economic viability of the City by providing a productive mix of tax generating uses." The economic viability of a new hotel on site has not been compared with that of regional retail uses, but does not meet the criteria for retail redevelopment. The project objectives do not include establishing a new hotel on the site, but seek to "establish a well-balanced and carefully planned collection of specialized and general retail outlets." As this alternative would not achieve the objectives of the project, the alternative was rejected. ... .. - . - - - .. 6.3 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS .. The following discussion compares the impacts of each alternative with the impacts of the proposed project, as detailed in Section 4.0 of this EIR. A conclusion is provided for each impact as to whether the alternative results in one of the following: (1) reduction or elimination of the impact; (2) a greater impact than the project; (3) the same impact as the project; or 4) a new impact in addition to the proposed project impacts. Table 6.A compares the impacts of the alternatives with those of the proposed project. .. lit .. .. .. Alternative 1 - No Build Alternative .... Under the No Build Alternative, the project site would remain in its existing condition, and the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project would be avoided, especially the proposed project's impacts on traffic, air quality, and noise. ... - ... Traffic ... The No Build Alternative would have no impact on traffic. The traffic impacts associated with the proposed project will not occur and there will be no trips generated by this alternative. However, because improvements associated with the proposed project would not occur under this alternative, traffic will remain the same and over time traffic will worsen around the project site. Analysis of traffic conditions under the no build or existing conditions is detailed in Section 4.1 and analyzes traffic conditions in 2002 without the proposed project and in 2020 without the project. .. ... ... - .. ... Air Quality .. No air quality impacts would occur as a result of this alternative. No vehicular trips, fugitive dust, or emissions from construction traffic would be generated as a result of the No Build Alternative. However, as there will be no opportunities to make road improvements at this site with the No Build Alternative, long-term air quality impacts associated with future projects in the surrounding area may be greater than they would be with the proposed project. - - - ... 3/28/01 (\\RIV5\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 6 ALTERNA TIVES.DOC) 6-5 - ... ... ~- ... - - ... .. ... .. - '" .. ;. .- ... 01 E .. ... < ... .. .. .is' .. i:l. .. -=... ... .. ... .. Q .... = e Qi:l. "'''l:l .C cu 01 '" !:l.Q ~ go u, .. .. -=-= ... ... 'Q.s ~ 01 e e = tI:l ... - ... - .. .. . - .. ... .. .. ... ... -< '-lS .. :E 01 ... ia ... .. ... ia - - ... - d 3 ... .; . ~ o ~ ~ . ~ .. ... ... co Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj - < ... Qj .. ::: .. = .. Qj ~ '" Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj - < N Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj - < ... Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj ~ 1- '" II .. c,.. .. .. ct;"" ... Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj ~ '"' Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj ~ lI'l Qj .i!: - .. = .. Qj - < * t * t L L * t + t + t L t <.l IE os ~ * t * t L L * t + t + t L t .~ ~ .l:l -< * L * L + L + L .l. + t + t .l. .l. " '" 'S Z * L * L * L * L * .l. * .l. * ~ " U) r,j ~ " '" " -5 ~ ~ .~.:a .~ .t)o- 5 coJ 8. ~ ,p::l ~=... o gj,.=.=.5 'i:= ~ ~ oS .= e JJ . '::l ... u (.)- = 2 .u .~ ~ ... - 0' 0 .~ U tU ... ... 8 ~ua.a.a. t'CICli"1:l"O"'O oa.u~u ~os.5 8. 8. is - 0 0 Q., . a'" ~ e -yQ. a. ~ <<-= u u U <.l 'a i3 i3 i3 S .~.s .s 0 = '" - 00="0"0"0 .- S! u ~ 0 "'", l; os l; ~!l~~~ ~ ~ 0 0 (.) ~t5<<< II II II II II .l. t * ,+ .j. .j. .l. '" " ~ o '" ~ ] ;3 ;,; " o Z '0 , '0 " Ii .. -< " ~ ~ E:: -0 [; " ~ P:: 8 g '5 's g:I: ....l... dO " ~ n e ~ 8 -~t; [; - " ~ [; ~ tl~~8 u U) Z ''::: ~~o~ ~!;~~ b ~ !3 5 :> 0 .s U1 'C :> U1 ~ 'C u ~ ~e~~ _.g g~~ Q,) coJ'':::: U I U1 0 = > u tU 0 U'C > f~~e~ .S "0'" 0 "E .:J [; [; 8 = ~ ~:J :J'~.g '.dl-'==o= !-UUou t='~5SulS .BE>~~~ ,,-_ 0 0..<'-" u .:: -(.~ l:i. l:i.:E :E .~"ij-;Jj==~~ tU e'o _ ..= ..::l - - eO....=lUu~H lU'= lU~ -:::I::I:"""" I I I I I I I I _Nf'f1~V")\Ot"--OO U IU II) Go) U lU IU U .i; .~ .~ .~ .Ei .Ei .i; .Ei co co tU co tU is to e ii~~iBi.B <<<<<<<< ~ gj > ;:: < ~ OJ .... .... < '" ~ ;:: u OJ ~ iii .... < z ~ .., 8 '" y '" .... frl ~ So ~ > ~ ~ ~ .., - UA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... Noise - ... The noise level at the proposed project site will not change as a result of this alternative. There are existing residences on site across Tippecanoe Avenue, which is a six-lane thoroughfare. The primary existing noise sources in the project area are transportation facilities. Traffic on 1-10, Tippecanoe Avenue, Laurelwood Drive, Rosewood Drive, and Orchard Drive near the site is the primary source contributing to the ambient noise levels. Engine vibrations generate noise from motor vehicles, the interaction between the tires and road, and the exhaust system. Currently, traffic noise levels along Waterman Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue are high, with the 70 dBA CNEL extending beyond 50 feet from the roadway centerline. Traffic noise along other roadway segments is low to moderate, with the 70 dBA CNEL confined within the roadway right-of-way. ... .. ... ... ... - Cultural Resources - .. As there will be no new development, there will be no new disturbance of vacant land or destruction of any cultural resources as a result of implementing the No Build Alternative. Therefore, there will be no impact to cultural resources. - .. ... Conclusion ... The No Build Alternative does not result in any environmental impacts in, and of, itself. However, because improvements associated with the proposed project would not occur under this alternative, traffic will remain the same and over time, traffic will worsen around the project. In addition, the No Build Alternative does not meet any of the project objectives for redevelopment which seek to "attract businesses which will strengthen the economic viability of the City," "create employment opportunities," or "eliminate existing blighted areas." - - - - - Alternative 2 - No Project Alternative .. .. This alternative would allow development of the site according to the relevant policies stated in the City's General Plan. Development of this vacant land would result in impacts ranging from less substantial, to similar, to significantly more intense than that associated with the proposed project depending on the development. The current City FAR standard for commercial uses is 0.70. Maximum permitted development of the 24.5-acre project site would yield 747,054 square feet of commercial/retail uses under this alternative. ... ... .. - Traffic ... - Based on development traffic generation factors, it is estimated the No Project Alternative would generate approximately 40,714 ADT, and 3,303 p.m. peak hour trips. As stated in Section 4.1 of this document, implementation of the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 16,537 ADT, and 1,811 p.m. peak hour trips. Table 6.B compares estimated traffic resulting from implementation of this alternative and the proposed project. - ... - - ... 3/28101 (\IRJVSIPROJECTSICBD030IF1NAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-7 ... ... - ... l.SA.ASSOClATES, INC. - ... ... Table 6.B - Alternative I-No Project Estimated Traffic Generation - ... Square ADT ADT PM PM Land Use Foota2e Factor (per tsO Trips Factor (per tsO Trip Alternative 1 Discount Club/Big Box 391,000 41.80 16,344 3.80 1,486 Free Standing Discount 280,000 56.63 15,856 4.24 1,188 Specialty Retail 40,000 40.67 1,627 2.59 104 Restaurant 30,000 130.34 3,910 10.86 325 Fast Food 6,000 496.12 2,977 33.48 200 Total 747,000 40,714 3,303 Proposed 268,600 sq ft Project Total commercial 16,537 1,811 Note: tsf = thousand square feet ... ... ... ... .. .. .. .. When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in a greater number of daily and peak hour vehicle trips. P.M. peak trips under this alternative would be approximately 180 percent of that anticipated by the proposed project. The No Project Alternative will increase traffic in the vicinity of the project site would and, therefore, result in greater impacts related to traffic than generated by the proposed project. .. .. - "" Air Quality .. ... Because a similar amount of on-site grading and construction is required for either the No Project Alternative or the proposed project, similar short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions would be expected. It has been determined pollutant emissions resulting in short-term construction activity will exceed SCAQMD thresholds for nitrogen oxides (NO,j and PM,.. Implementation of mitigation measures will minimize air quality impact, but the impacts will remain significant. ... .. .. .. Under this alternative, traffic volumes would be approximately 246 percent of that anticipated for the proposed project. When compared to the proposed project's significant long-term air quality impacts, this alternative would increase vehicle emissions resulting from the project related traffic and, therefore, increase long-term operational air quality impacts. - ... .. Noise ... .. Development under this alternative would require on-site grading and construction activities, thereby generating short-term noise impacts similar to that resulting from the proposed project. Vehicle noise is a primary contributor to urban noise level. As previously stated, the No Project Alternative would significantly increase vehicle trips in the vicinity of the project site. Under this alternative, daily vehicle trips would be increased by 146 percent, which will correspondingly increase noise impacts in the vicinity of the project site. ... .. ... ... ... .. 3/28/01 (\IRJVSIPROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-8 - ... - L5A ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... ... Cultural Resources ... As the same amount of area is disturbed in this alternative as in the original project, there is no change in impact to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. - .. Conclusion ... ... The proposed project's impacts on air quality, traffic, and noise would be increased with implementation of the No Project Alternative. The proposed project's impact to cultural resource would remain the same as the proposed project with implementation of the No Project Alternative. This alternative was rejected because irnpacts related to the No Project Alternative are greater than those of the proposed project. .. .. .. .. Alternative 3 - Office-Commercial Alternative ... Implementation of this alternative could result in development of office uses on the 6.93 acres located north of the Harriman Place extension, while the site's southern 17.57 acres would be developed with commercial uses. The type and intensities of uses associated with this alternative will vary, as will the environmental impacts, depending on the specific development scenario. The maximum level of development permitted under current City standards of 3.0 floor to area ratio (FAR), would total 905,612 and 535,744 square feet of office and commercial/retail space, respectively. This approximately 1.4 million square feet of development, that includes almost twice the commercial space provided by the proposed project, includes office space not considered in the proposed project. .. ... .. ... .. II" Traffic .. ... Based on development traffic generation factors, it is estimated the Office-Commercial Alternative would generate approximately 30,029 ADT, and 3,250 p.m. peak hour trips. As stated in Section 4.1, of this document, implementation of the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 16,537 ADT, and 1,811 p.m. peak hour trips Table 6.C compares estimated traffic resulting from implementation of this alternative and the proposed project. II" .. ... ... Table 6.C - Alternative 2-0ffice-Commercial Estimated Traffic Generation .. - Square ADT ADT PM PM Land Use Foota2e Factor (per tsO Trips Factor (per tsO Trip Alternative 2 Officc 905,612 11.01 9,971 1.49 1,349 Commercial 535,744 37.44 20,058 3.55 1,901 Total 1.4 million 30,029 3,250 Proposed 268,600 sq ft Project Total commercial 16,537 1,811 Note: Isf = thousand square fect - ... ... - - - ... 3/28101 (\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD0301FINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-9 - - - LSA. ASSOCIATES, INC. ... - The ADT and p.m. peak trips would increase under this alternative. This increase is the result of office workers arriving during normal office hours versus fewer workers/patrons at commercial establishments during the same time period. P.M. peak trips under this alternative would be approximately 179 percent of that anticipated by the proposed project. The traffic generated by this alternative would be greater than that generated by the proposed project. .. - - - Air Quality .. ... This alternative would increase the number of morning peak trips and the potential for congestion in the vicinity of the project site (with corresponding increases in vehicle emissions resulting from vehicle idling) and additionally, increase the overall ADT since this alternative also has a larger amount of square footage for community commercial uses. The number of daily vehicle trips is 182 percent of that anticipated from the proposed project. While levels of construction emissions resulting from development of office and commercial uses would generally be similar as that resulting from implementation of the proposed project, the increase in the number of ADT would increase the overall air pollutants resulting from development of the project site. ill - .. - .. ... Noise .. ill Development under this alternative would require on-site grading and construction activities, thereby generating short-term noise impacts similar to that resulting from the proposed project. Vehicle noise is a primary contributor to urban noise level. As previously stated, the Office- Commercial Alternative would significantly increase vehicle trips in the vicinity of the project site. Under this alternative, daily vehicle trips would be increased by 82 percent, which will correspondingly increase noise impacts in the vicinity of the project site. ... .. .. ... Typical uses under this alternative would generally consist of executive, management, administrative, or clerical uses including the establishment of branch offices, data processing centers, and the provision of consultation establishments of a professional nature. It is anticipated that such uses would result in a reduction of delivery, loading or unloading activities. .. - .. Cultural Resources - ... The impacts to cultural resources will be the same with the Office-Commercial alternative as with the proposed project. No impacts to cultural resources are anticipated. ... .. Conclusion - - The Office-Commercial Alternative would result in the development of approximately 1.4 million square feet of commercial uses on the 24.5-acre project site. Implementation of this alternative would substantially modify the project site, resulting in the loss of existing residential development replacing vacant land with urban uses. While impacts to cultural resources would be similar to those resulting from the proposed project, implementation of this alternative would result in a 82 percent increase in ADT, and a corresponding increase in vehicle emissions and noise sources. Because this alternative increases traffic, air quality, and noise impacts (as in ... - ... .. 3/28101 (\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD0301FINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-10 .. ... - UA ASSOCIATES, INC. - ... comparison with the proposed project, this alternative increases traffic, air quality, and noise impacts and does less to further the third primary goal of the Hub, to strengthen the economic viability of the City by providing a productive mix of tax generating uses. For these reasons, this alternative is rejected. - .. ... - Alternative 4 - Removal of All Residential Units During Phase 1 (Environmentally Superior Alternative) .. .. Under this alternative, those residential units located north of the proposed Harriman Place extension would be removed concurrent with the removal of residential units located on land slated for development during Phase I of the project. All other aspects of the project would remain the same. .. .. .. .. Traffic ... The traffic impacts would be the same or less than those experienced during Phase I of the proposed project as the residential traffic on the site would not occur. The long-term impact on traffic would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. .. ... .. Air Quality .. The air quality impacts would be the same or less than those experienced during Phase I of the proposed project as fugitive dust and other construction-related impacts to the residences on the site would not occur. The long-term impact on air quality would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. ... .. .. .. Noise .. Under this alternative, the noise impacts to residents would not occur. Noise levels from grading and other construction activities during construction of Phase I for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA for the residential units located north of Harriman Place. There will be no noise impacts to residences in Phase II if those residences are dcmolished before construction of Phase I. .. .. - .. Cultural Resources ... ... As the same amount of area is disturbed in this alternative as in the original project, there is no change in impact to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. .. ... Conclusion - This alternative meets all project objectives and implements the same development plan. It has the same long-term impacts, but reduces the short-term impacts. It is, therefore, the environmentally superior alternative. .. - ... 3/28101 (\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD0301FINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNA TIVES.DOC) 6-11 - ... - LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Alternative 5 - Harriman Place Improvements and Relocation of Drive- Thru Restaurant - ... Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project, with the exception of the relocation of the existing drive-thru restaurant to the southwest corner of the Tippecanoe A venue/Harriman Place intersection, no other development of proposed on- site commercial uses would take place. Existing residential and commercial (the existing motel) structures along Harriman Place to the west of the intersection with Tippicanoe Avenue will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant. All other residential structures within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain in place, but will terminate in a cul- de-sac, thereby eliminating an existing through traffic route to Tippecanoe Avenue. - .. - .. ... .. ... Traffic ... - Under this alternative, development of the proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place; therefore, increases in the number of average daily trips (ADT), A.M./P.M. peak hour trips attributable to the proposed project would not occur. Consequently, potential project-related traffic impacts identified in Section 4.1 of the EIR would not occur. Construction of the Harriman Place extension and improvements to the Tippecanoe Avenue/Harriman Place intersection will improve the flow, pattern and safety of traffic over that which currently exists. Additionally, the closure (by installation of a cul-de-sac) of Rosewood Drive would eliminate the passage of non-residential traffic through a residential neighborhood, thereby improving traffic conditions on this roadway. Traffic related impacts resulting from implernentation of this alternative would be reduced from that identified with the proposed project. .. ... .. - .. ... .. Air Quality ... Section 4.2 of the EIR identified a significant air quality impact associated with construction of the proposed on-site uses. The levels of PM,. and NOx emissions resulting construction and earthmoving activities exceeded established air quality thresholds. Despite the implementation of mitigation, this impact remains significant. Under this alternative, the amount, extent and duration of earthmoving and construction activities would be significantly reduced from that envisioned by the proposed project; therefore, the emission of air pollutant would be proportionally reduced. Rosewood Drive currently serves as a through route between commercial areas west of the project site and freeway access. The closure of Rosewood Drive (by installation of a cul-de-sac) would limit the passage of non-residential traffic through this residential neighborhood; thereby eliminating vehicle stacking at the intersection of Rosewood Drive and Tippecanoe Avenue and concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) which are a product of vehicle idling. ... ... ... - ... - ... - Under this alternative mobile emissions from project-related traffic and stationary emissions from on-site commercial uses would be eliminated; thereby reducing operational air quality impacts. While mobile emissions from non-project traffic will be similar to what currently exist, impacts will be reduced from that identified with the proposed project. ... - .. - .. 3/28/01 (\1RJV5\PROJECTSICBD030IF1NAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-12 - .. ,- - UA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Noise - - While the extent and duration of construction activities will be reduced from that identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR, activities associated with the construction of the Harriman Place extension and the intersection improvements, the demolition of the motel and the demolition/relocation of the drive-thru restaurant will generate short-term noise impacts at adjacent residential uses. Adherence to mitigation measures identified in Section 4.3 will reduce construction-related noise impacts to a less than significant level; therefore short-term noise impacts under this alternative would be similar to that stated in the Section 4.3. ... ... ... ... ... Although construction of the stated roadway improvements will necessitate the demolition of residential and commercial (the existing motel) uses, other residential uses will remain within the limits of the project site. These residential units would be located in the vicinity of a roadway (Harriman Place) which connects a major commercial area with Tippecanoe Avenue (which in itself provides access to Interstate 10). Engine vibrations generate noise from motor vehicles, the interaction between tires and the road, and vehicle exhaust systems. While the increase in ADT or peak hour trips associated with the proposed project would not occur, traffic on the Harriman Place extension would generate long-term noise sources which (because all residential units would be eventually demolished) would not occur with development of the proposed project. While long-term noise impacts on residential units within the limits of the project may be similar to that which currently exists, noise impacts would be greater than that which would occur under the proposed project. ... ... ... .. ... ... .. .. Cultural Resources .. ... While no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, Section 4.4 of the EIR identified impacts associated the potential presence of undetected subsurface historic/cultural resources. Though the amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project impacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. ... ... .. ... Conclusion .. ... Implementation of this alternative would retain many of the existing on-site residential uses. Traffic related impacts would be reduced through a reduction in vehicle trips and roadway improvements. Because project related traffic and the operation of on-site commercial uses would not occur, the level of mobile and stationary emissions of pollutants would be similar to that which currently exists. This represents a reduction from the level of pollutant emissions resulting from development of the project site as proposed. The amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project. Though no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, impacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. While noise levels during short-term construction would equal that of the proposed project, long-term noise levels, because of the proximity of residential units to a roadway connecting a major commercial center and freeway access, would exceed existing levels. ... .. - ... ... - ... ... ... 3/28/01 (\IRJVS\PROJECTSICBD030IF1NAL EIRISECTION 6 AL TERNA TIVES.DOC) 6-13 ... - UAASSOCIATES, INC. - ... Because long-term noise impacts to residential units remain, and because development of this alternative fails to meet the objective of eliminating blight, this alternative is not viewed as environmentally superior. - ... - Alternative 6 - Harriman Place Improvements and Retention of Drive-Thru Restllurant at Present Location .. - ... Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project. The existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained in its present location, but development of proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place. Existing residential and commercial structures along Harriman Place to the west of the interscction with Tippicanoe Avenue, including the existing motel, would be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the improvements to the Harriman Place/Tippecanoe Avenue intersection. All other within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain a through roadway to Tippecanoe Avenue as it currently exists. .. - .. .. ... .. Traffic ... ... Under this alternative, development of the proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place; therefore, increases in the number of average daily trips (ADT), or A.M/P.M. peak hour trips attributable to the proposed project would also not occur. Consequently, the potential project-related traffic impacts identified in Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR would not occur. While development of the project site under this alternative would allow the practice of vehicle queues extending onto Tippecanoe Avenue (from the drive-thru restaurant) to continue, public safety issues are no greater than that which currently exist. Construction of the Harriman Place extension and improvements to the Tippecanoe Avenue/Harriman Place intersection will improve the flow and pattern of traffic over that which currently exists in the vicinity of the project site. Traffic related impacts resulting from implementation of this alternative would be similar (public safety) or reduced (traffic volumes/traffic patterns) from that identified with the proposed project. .. - too - too .. - .. Air Quality ... Air quality impacts associated with the proposed project for construction activities would include exceeding NOx and PM,. during peak grading and construction activity. Because a similar amount of on-site grading and construction is required for the roadway for either this alternative or the proposed project, similar short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust and construction equipment emission would be expected. .. - .. ... Under this alternative, development of the proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place; therefore, increases in peak trips for both A.M. and P.M. would not exist. There will be no operational impact from this alternative sincc the proposed on-site commercial uses will not be built. Additionally, traffic volumes will be similar and even less than what currently exist once roadway improvements are complete air quality impacts will be no greater than what currently exists. - .. .. - .. 3/28/01 (\IRIVS\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-14 - - ... l.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - ... Noise - Activities associated with the construction of the Harriman Place extension and the intersection improvements would generate short-term noise impacts to adjacent residential uses. Because only roadway improvements will take place under this alternative, the extent and duration of construction activities will be reduced from that required for implementation of the proposed project. Adherence to mitigation measures identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR for the proposed project will reduce construction-related noise impacts to a less than significant level; therefore short-term noise impacts under this alternative would be no greater than that stated in the Section 4.3. - .. ... ... ... ... Although construction of the stated roadway improvements will necessitate the demolition of residential and commercial (the existing motel) uses, other residential uses will remain within the limits of the project site. These residential units would be located in the vicinity of a roadway (Harriman Place) which connects a major commercial area with Tippecanoe Avenue (which in itself provides access to Interstate 10). Engine vibrations generate noise from motor vehicles, the interaction between tires and the road, and vehicle exhaust systems. While the increase in ADT or peak hour trips associated with the proposed project would not occur, traffic on the Harriman Place and Rosewood Drive would generate long-term noise sources which (because all residential units would be eventually dcmolished) would not occur with development of the proposed project. While long-term noise impacts on residential units within the limits of the project may be similar to that which currently exists, noise impacts would be greater than that which would occur under the proposed project. .. .. ... .. .. .. II" .. Cultural Resources ... ... The impacts identified with the proposed project to cultural resources included the potential through grading and construction activities for the disturbance of undetected subsurface historic/cultural materials and/or burials that may be present at the project site. The impacts to cultural resources will be less than the proposed project since only a portion of the existing residences will be removed for the extension of Harriman Place and the motel will be demolished to accommodate the widening of Harriman Place and the intersection improvements at Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue. As there will be no new development other than the roadway, no impacts greater than those identified in the proposed project to cultural resourccs are anticipated. .. .. ... ... ... .. Conclusion ... ... Implementation of this alternative would retain many of the existing on-site residential uses. Traffic related impacts would be reduced through a reduction in vehicle trips and roadway improvements. Because project related traffic and the operation of on-site commercial uses would not occur, the level of mobile and stationary emissions of pollutants would be similar to that which currently exists. This represents a reduction from the level of pollutant emissions resulting from development of the project site as proposed. The amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project. Though no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, impacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. While noise levels during short-term construction would equal that of the proposed project, long-term noise ... - .. ... - - 3/28/01 (\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD030IF1NAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNA TIVES.DOC) 6-15 - - - UA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - levels, because of the proximity of residential units to a roadway connecting a major commercial center and freeway access, would exceed existing levels. The proposed project would eliminate all residential units during Phase II and the noise impacts to residents along Harriman Place will disappear with implementation of Phase II of the proposed project. This alternative increases long- term noise impacts on residents and fails to meet the objectivcs of the City's Redevelopment Agency, which is to "attract businesses, which will strengthen the economic viability of the City," "create employment opportunities," and "eliminate existing blighted areas." Therefore, this alternative is not viewed as being environmentally superior to the proposed project. - - ... ... - .. ... Alternative 7 - Proposed Project with Relocation of Drive-Thru Restaurant to Northwest Corner of Ha"iman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue - Under this alternative the existing drive-thru restaurant will be relocated to the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place (the location of the proposed "Pad B"). Development of other commercial uses and roadway improvements would proceed as envisioned in the proposed project. Existing residential and commercial structures will be demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the construction of the proposed commercial uses. Rosewood Drive west of Tippecanoe Avenue will be vacated. ... .. .. - ... Traffic .. ... The type and scale of development implemented under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project; therefore, no change in the number of average daily trips, or A.M/P.M. peak hour trips would occur. As with the proposed project, the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant to the northwest corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue would eliminate the practices of vehicle queuing extending onto Tippecanoe Avenue from drive-thru's existing location, and (drive-thru) patrons parking vehicles on undeveloped land south of Rosewood Drive. Long-term traffic impacts associated with this alternative would similar to that which would occur with the proposed project. II" .. ... .. .. Air Quality - ... Short-term air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would include exceeding NOx and PM,. during peak grading and construction activity. The air quality impacts would be the same as those experienced during construction of the proposed project because the same amount of acreage would be disturbed. Nearby sensitive receptors and construction workers may be exposed to fugitive dust and other construction-related emissions depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. .. - - - - Long-term operational air pollutant emission impacts include natural gas consumption, emissions associated with consumer products, and mobile source emissions from vehicle trips. The long-term impact on air quality would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measures that were identified undcr the proposed project (Section 4.2) will lessen impacts related to both short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) activities. But, under either this alternative or the proposed project implementation of mitigation measures would not reduce impacts from emissions of NO x and PM.. to a less than significant level. ... ... - - - 3/28/01 (\IRJVS\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 ALTERNATIVES. DOC) 6-16 - - - ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Noise - ... Activities associated with the construction of the proposed project would generate noise levels in excess of91 dBA at residential units located north of the Harriman Place extension during Phase I. While this impact was identified as significant, implementation of mitigation measures reduced construction noise impacts to below a level of significance. Because the extent of construction envisioned under this alternative is similar to that required for implementation of the proposed project, short-term noise impacts under this alternative, with implementation of mitigation measures outlined in Section 4.3 of the EIR, would be similar to that associated with development of the proposed project. ... ... ... ... ... Under this alternative, the drive-thru restaurant would be relocated to the northwest corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue. Currently, a 10,000 square foot retail use is proposed for this location. As with the proposed project, parking areas under this alternative will be located approximately 50 feet from residential uses during Phase I. With the exception of noise from menu board speakers, operational noise levels generated by a drive-thru restaurant would not significantly differ from that associated with retail uses. Maximum outdoor noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet will be intermittently generated by uses envisioned under the proposed project and this alternative. As stated in Section 4.3 of the EIR, this noise level is below the City's nightime L.... of 65 dBA; therefore, opcrational noise impacts would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. .. ... .. II" .. ... .. Implementation of the project as proposed would result in very little change in the traffic noise levels. As stated in Section 4.3 of this document, the range of traffic-related noise increase is smaller than the 3 dBA significance threshold. Because development of the project site under this alternative would not alter the type or scale of on-site uses, traffic-related noise impacts will be no greater than that which would occur with implementation of the project as proposed. - .. ... .. Cultural Resources ... ... The impacts identified with the proposed project to cultural resources include the potential through grading and construction activities for the disturbance of undetected subsurface historic/cultural materials and/or burials that may be present at the project site. As the same amount of acreage is disturbed with this alternative as with the proposed project, there is no change in impacts to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. Impacts to cultural resources would not be significant with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section 4.5 in the EIR. .. ... .. ... ... Conclusion .. ... Under this alternative, the same amount of acreage is disturbed as with the proposed project. The type and scale of development implemented under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project with the only change being the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant to the northwest corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue instead of the southwest corner. Therefore, all short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) impacts are the same as with the proposed project and no additional significant impacts not identified for the proposed project will occur. This alternative would not be environmentally superior to the proposed project but it is still viable. It allows the drive-thru restaurant to relocate and does not cause additional impacts to the environment that were not already identified for the proposed - ... ... - ... 3/28101 (\IRJVS\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 6 AL TERNATIVES.DOC) 6-17 - ... - UAASSOCIATES, INC. - - project. Implementation of the mitigation measures proposed for the project would reduce environmental impacts of this alternatives on cultural resources, traffic, air quality and noise; however, significant unavoidable short-term and long-term impacts to air quality and traffic identified for the proposed project will still remain if this alternative were implemented. ... ... ... ... Alternative 8 - Proposed Project with Retention of Drive- Thru Restaurant at its Present Location ... Under this alternative, the existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained at its present location. All other commercial and roadway components of the project would be developed as proposed. As with the proposed project, acquisition and dernolition of existing residential and commercial structures will take place to accommodate the proposed commercial uses and roadway improvements. Harriman Place will be extended to Tippecanoe A venue, but Rosewood Drive will only be vacated west of Tippecanoe Avenue thus allowing for ingress and egress to the existing drive-thru restaurant from the open section of Rosewood Drive. ... ... ... ... ... ... Traffic ... The type and scale of development implernented under this alternative would be that identified with the proposed project; therefore, no change in the number of average daily trips, or A.M/P.M. peak hour trips would occur. The construction of the Harriman Place extension and the Harriman PlacefTippecanoe Avenue intersection improvements will facilitate the flow of project related traffic onto and along area roadways. Long-term traffic impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to that which would occur with the proposed project. ... ill ... .. .. Under this alternative the current practice of vehicle queuing extending onto Tippecanoe Avenue from drive-thru restaurant's current location would continue. Development of the project site as proposed would eliminate this condition by establishing on-site queuing. While traffic safety impacts under this alternative (resulting from vehicle queuing on Tippecanoe Avenue) would be no greater than that which currently exists, they would be greater than that which would occur with development of the proposed project. ... ... ... ... Air Quality ... ... Short-term air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would include exceeding NOx and PM.. during peak grading and construction activity. Under this alternative, the air quality impacts would be the same to incrementally smaller, since the existing drive-thru restaurant will not relocatc as those experienced during construction of the proposed project. Nearby sensitive receptors and construction workers may bc exposed to fugitive dust and other construction-related emissions depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. .. ... ... ... - Long-term operational air pollutant emission impacts include natural gas consumption, emissions associated with consumer products, and mobile source emissions from vehicle trips. The long-term impact on air quality would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measures that were identified under the proposed project (Section 4.2) will lessen impacts related to both short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) activities. ... ... - ... 3/28/01 (\IRJVS\PROJECTSICBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 6 ALTERNATIVES.DOC) 6-18 - ... - tsA ASSOCIATES, INC. - - Noise - - Dcvelopment of this alternative would not alter the type or scale of uses within the limits of the project site. As with the proposed project, development of the project site under this alternative would generate short-term noise impacts at adjacent residential uses. Adherence to mitigation measures identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR will reduce construction-related noise impacts to a less than significant level; therefore short-term noise impacts under this alternative would be no greater than that stated in the Section 4.3. .. ... .. ... Under this alternative, noise levels resulting from vehicle traffic and the operation of on-site commercial uses would be similar to that identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR. Noise impacts to residential units within Phase n similar to that identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR. .. - ... Cultural Resources .. .. The impacts identified with the proposed project to cultural resources include the potential through grading and construction activities for the disturbance of undetected subsurface historic/cultural materials and/or burials that may be present at the project site. As the same amount of acreage is disturbed with this alternative as with the proposed project, there is no change in impacts to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. Impacts to cultural resources would not be significant with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section 4.5 in the EIR. II" '" .. ... - Conclusion "" With the exception of retaining the drive-thru restaurant in its present location, the type, scale and configuration of uses envisioned under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project. Development of the project site under this alternative would result in short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) impacts similar to that identified with the proposed project. However, an existing traffic safety condition caused by vehicle queuing on Tippecanoe Avenue, would remain. This condition will be corrected with the future widening of the west side of Tippecanoe Avenue to four through lanes which will necessitate right-of-way acquisition of a portion of the parcel on which the drive-thru restaurant is presently located. .. .. .. II" .. "" Also. northbound traffic on Tinnecanoe Avenue would be nrohibited from turninl1: left into the existinl1: restaurant because of the reouirement to extend the existinl1: median in Tincecanoe Avenue from 1-10 to the extension of Harriman Place (Laurelwood Drive). Because the median would be constructed. no left turns from northbound Tinnecanoe Avenue to the drive-thru restaurant would be allowed. Further. the U-turn would not be nermittcd because it would interfere with ,the svnchronized neh! turn from Harriman Place to southbound Tinoecanoe Avenue. This effectivelv eliminates anv northbound traffic from accessinl1: the existinl1: site. Northbound traffic on Tinnecanoe Avenue would be reouired to travel further north on Tinnecanoe Avenue to find a notential U-turn or turn onto Harriman Place and reenter southbound Tinnecanoe Avenue to access the site. ... ... ... "" ... - ... Retaining the drive-thru restaurant at its present location will reduce the initial costs of the project. While not the environmentally superior to the proposed project, this alternative satisfies the stated project objectives and allows the retail commercial and the Harriman Place extension and realignment components of the proposed project to proceed until such time as full funding ... - 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFINAL EIRISECTION 6 AL TERNA TlVES.DOC) 6-19 - ... --~--~- - - - .. ... ... ... - ... III - .. .. .. II" .. .. .. "" .. ... .. ... .. ... ... ... .. - .. ... ... ... .. ... .. - ... LSAASSOClATES, INC. for the freeway interchange and Tippecanoe Avenue improvements are ready to proceed. 6.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE The No Build Alternative is the Environmentally Superior Alternative since no development would occur on the project site. Unlike the proposed project or the project alternativcs, the No Build Alternative would not result in traffic, air quality, or noise impacts, nor would this alternative disturb or otherwise alter any potential buried cultural resources. As required by CEQA (Section 15 I 26(d)(4), ifa No Build Alternative is selected as the environmentally superior alternative, the EIR shall also identifY an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Among the alternatives considered, the Removal of All Residential Units During Phase I Alternative would reduce noise impacts on residences that would remain on site until implementation ofPhasc II of the proposed project. When compared to the proposed project, both the No Project and the Office-Commercial Alternatives would increase traffic and air quality impacts. Based on the preceding analysis, the Removal of All Residential Units During Phase I Alternative has been selected as the Environmentally Superior Alternative as compared to Alternatives 2 and 3. 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFINAL EIRISECTlON 6 AL TERNA TlVES.DOC) 6-20 LSAASSOClATES. INC. - - ... 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS - CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - Valerie Ross ... Principal Planner ... Development Services Department ... Margaret Park, A1CP Project Manager .. Economic Development Agency - - LEAD CONSULTANT ... LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) .. Environmental/Planning Consultants - Lloyd Zola, Principal-in-Charge . Lynn Calvert-Hayes, AlCP, Associate/Project Manager Kevin Fincher, Associate, Traffic .. Tony Chung, Associate, Air Quality Study . Keith Lay, Assistant Engineer, Noise Study Carl Winter, Assistant Project Manager .- Joanna Crombie, Environmental Analyst Karen Jordan, Environmental Analyst . Elsa Brewer, Word Processor ... David Cisneros, Graphics Technician Sheryl Schumacher, Document Production .. - .. - .. - ... ... ... - too - ... - ... 3/28/01 (\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIR\Sectinn 7 Prepan:B.doc) 7-1 - ... - LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - - ... 8.0 CONTACTS - Joe Bellandi, Associate Planner, City of San Bernardino Ron Blymiller, Traffic Engineer, City of San Bernardino Cynthia Harris, Planning Technician, City of San Bernardino John Hoeger, Project Manager, City of San Bernardino Economic Development Agency Tim Porter, Traffic Engineer, City of San Bernardino Anwar Wagdy, City Traffic Engineer, City of San Bernardino Gabriella Gamino, Assistant Planner, City of Lorna Linda Robert R. Wirtz, P .E., Traffic and Transportation, San Bernardino Association of Governments Tom Dodson, Principal, Tom Dodson & Associates .. - .. - .. .... - - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. - . .... .. .... .. ... - - .. - ... - ... - ... 3128/01(\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD030IFinal EIRlSection 8 Contacts.doc) 8-1 ... ... - - LSAASSOClATES. INC. - - 9.0 REFERENCES ... CEQA Air Quality Handbook, South Coast Air Quality Management District, April 1993 ... City of San Bernardino Development Code, Title 19, Jacobson & Wack, Revised June 1997 ... .. City of San Bernardino General Plan, Envicom Corporation, 1988 - City of San Bernardino General Plan Update Technical Background Report, Envicom Corporation, February 1988 - .. Population, Housing and Employment Projections, Southern California Association of Governments, May 1998 - .. SCAG Subregion Household Projections, Southern California Association of Governments, May 1998 - .. SCAG Subregion Population Projections, Southern California Association of Governments, May 1998 .. .. SCAG Subregion Employment Projections, Southern California Association ofGovenments, May 1998 . Trip Generation, 6'" Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997 .. .. .. . "'" . ... .. - ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... 3/28101 (\IRJVSlPROJECTSICBD030IFinal ElRlSection 9 References.doc) 9-1 ... ... - UIA ASSOClAn:s, INC. - - APPENDIX A - - NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND INITIAL STUDY, MAILING LIST, RESPONSES TO NOTICE OF PREPARATION - ... - There are no changes in Appendix A since circulation of the Draft EIR. .. Appendix A is available under separate cover at the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department. - - - .. - .. .. .. - - ... - ... .. ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... - - - ... ... .... - ... lSAASSOCIATES. INC. ... ... - APPENDIX B TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS .. - .. ... - .. - ... .. .. ., fill' . ... .. ... III ... .. .. .. ... .. - - ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ~" ... .. - - - .. . ... - - CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ,.. .. .. THE HUB .. .. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO II" SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA .. .. .. .. ... II" .. ... .. ... ... - .. ... ... .. L SA ... ... ... March 29. 2001 - ... - ,.,.... - - - CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - ... - ... THE HUB CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA - ... .. LSA Project No. CBD030 ., "" . . .. SUBMITTED TO: .. ... City of San Bernardino Economic Development Agency 201 North E Street, Suite 301 San Bernardino, California 92401 .. .. ... .. PREPARED BY: ... ... LSA Associates. Inc. 3403 10'" Street, Suite 520 Riverside, California 92562 909.781.9310 .. - - ... ... .. - L S ^ - -- ... March 29, 2001 - ... - LSAASSOCIATES.INC. - - .. TABLE OF CONTENTS - PAGE INTRODUCfION ................................................................ I - ... PROJECfDESCRIPTION ......................................................... I ... - ANALYSISMETliO[X)LOGY ..................................................... 5 DEVELOPMENT OF FORECAST TRAFFIC VOLUMES ......................... 5 STUDY AREA DETERMINATION ........................................... 7 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS AND PROCEDURES ....................... 9 LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLD CRITER1A ............................... 12 ... - - - EXISTING CONDmONS ........................................................ 12 EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM ........................................... 12 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDmONS ......................................... 12 ... ... PROJECf TRAFFIC ............................................................. 17 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION............................................. 17 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20 CURRENT DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................ 30 - ... '" YEAR 2002 OPENING DAY CONDmONS ......................................... 30 YEAR 2002 WITHOUT PROJECf CONDmONS .............................. 30 YEAR 2002 PLUS PROJECf CONDmONS . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . ... 37 - .. '" YEAR 2020 BUILD OUT CONDmONS ............................................ 40 YEAR 2020 WITHOUT PROJECf CONDmON ............................... 40 YEAR 2020 PLUS PROJECf CONDmONS . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. .. .. 45 PROJECf CONTRIBUTION TO TOTAL NEW VOLUMES ...................... 48 .. ... PROJECf ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 50 "" ... CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS ................................................ 50 YEAR 2002 IMPROVEMENTS ............................................. 50 YEAR 2020 IMPROVEMENTS ............................................. 52 LEVEL OF SERVICE WITH IMPROVEMENTS ............................... 55 COST ESTIMATES .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 56 - ... ... SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 62 - .... APPENDICES - A - EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TURN VOLUMES B - TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECAST METHO[X)LOGY WORKSHEETS C - INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS D - PROJECT TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS E - CURRENT SITE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES F - CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES - ... ... - - 3/29101 '<R:\CBD030\TnfficIThc HublCMP TIA.wpd>> ...' ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - - - LIST OF FIGURES PAGE - I - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7A - 7B - 8 - 9A - 9B - IOA- lOB - llA - llB- 12A - 12B - 13A - 13B - 14A - 14B - 15A - 15B - 16A - 16B - 17 - - - - - ... - - .. "" .. ""' III ... .. ... ... .. .. ProjectLocation ........................................................... 2 Proposed Site Plan ......................................................... 4 Study Area Deterrnination ................................................... 8 Analysis Intersection Locations .............................................. 10 Existing Circulation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 Existing Intersection Geometrics ............................................. 14 Existing (2000) Turn Volumes - P.M. Peak Hour ................................ 15 Existing (2000) Turn Volumes -Mid-Day Peak Hour ............................. 16 Project Trip DistributionPattems .............................................23 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (New Trips) - Off-Site Intersections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (New Trips) - Project Access Locations ............ 25 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (Pass-By Trips) - Off-Site Intersections. . . . . . . . . . . .. 26 Project Trip Assignment Patterns (Pass-By Trips) - Project Access Locations. . . . . . . . .. 27 Project Turn Volumes - P.M. Peak Hour. . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. 28 Project Turn Volumes - Mid-Day Peak Hour .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... 29 Current Development Turn Volumes - P.M. Peak Hour ........................... 31 Current Development Turn Volumes - Mid-Day Peak Hour ........................ 32 Year 2002 Without Project Turn Volumes - P.M. Peak Hour. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33 Year 2002 Without Project Turn Volumes - Mid-Day Peak Hour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 34 Year2002PlusProjectTurnVolumes-P.M.PeakHour .................. ........38 Year 2002 Plus Project Turn Volumes - Mid-Day Peak Hour . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . ... 39 Year 2020 Without Project Turn Volumes - P.M. Peak Hour ....................... 41 Year 2020 Without Project Turn Volumes - Mid-Day Peak Hour. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42 Year 2020 Plus Project Turn Volumes - P.M. Peak Hour .......................... 46 Year 2020 Plus Project Turn Volumes - Mid-Day Peak Hour. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 47 Future Intersection Geometrics with Mitigation . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .. . . .. 54 LIST OF TABLES - - A - B - C D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M - - - ... - - ... - - - - Existing (2000) Intersection Levels of Service. . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. 18 Existing (2000) P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 The Hub Trip Generation ................................................... 21 Year 2002 Intersection Levels of Service. . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 36 Year 2002 P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis ........................... 37 Year 2002 Intersection Levels of Service. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. 43 Year 2002 P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis ...........................44 Project Contribution to Total New Traffic Volumes at Study Area Intersections . . . . . . .. 49 Year 2002 Plus Project With Mitigation Intersection Levels of Service ............... 56 Year 2002 Plus Project With Mitigation P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis ... 57 Year 2002 Plus Project With Mitigation Intersection Levels of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 58 Year 2002 Plus Project With Mitigation P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis ... 59 Project Contributions to Circulation Improvement Costs .......................... 60 3/29101 <<R:ICBD03O\Traflic\1be HubICMP T1A.wpd>> ii - ... LSAASSOCIAT-ES.INC. - - THE HUB TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ., INTRODUCTION .. ... This traffic impact analysis has been prepared to assess the potential circulation impacts associated with the proposed development of The Hub project. This report is intended to satisfy the requirements for a traffic impact analysis (TIA) established by the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP), adopted November 3, 1993 and revised November, 1999, as well as the requirements for the disclosure of potential impacts and mitigation measures per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). - - ... - ... This report analyzes project related traffic impacts for the anticipated completion of the proposed retail center (year 2002 opening year), and for the long-range forecast year 2020 condition. Consistent with CMP requirements, this analysis examines existing and forecast future traffic conditions for the p.rn. peak hour. - .. . PROJECT DESCRIPTION - "" The proposed project is located on the west side of Tippecanoe Avenue, immediately north of the 1- 10 freeway, in the City of San Bernardino (see Figure 1). The project site is bounded by Tippecanoe Avenue on the east, the 1-10 freeway on the south, Orchard Drive on the west, and the Costco Retail Center on the north. The proposed project site consists of approximately 24.5 acres that is currently developed with 95 residential units (55 single family units and 40 multi-family units), a 30-room motel, and an In-N-Out Burger restaurant. The existing uses will be removed prior to project construction. - .. - ..... ... The project proposal consists of development of a 263,621-square-foot of retail uses. The proposed land use project will be constructed in two phases. The fIrst phase is the southerly 17.57 acres of the project site (i.e., the area south of the future extension of Harriman Place). The remainder of the site (i.e., the area north of Harriman Place) comprises the second phase. Specific uses proposed for each phase are as follows: .. .. - - Land Use Phase I Sam's Club Free-Standing Discount Store Specialty Retail Restaurant In-N-Out Burger Gas Station Phase II Free-Standing Discount Store Specialty Retail Restaurant Intensity ... ... 130,421 s.f. 45,000 s.f. 10.000 s.f. 10.000 sJ. 3,200 s.f. 8 positions - .. "'" ... 50,000 sJ. 10,000 s.f. 5.000 s.f. - - ... 3129/01 <<R:ICBD030\Traflic\1be HubICMP TIA. wpd>> ... ... 0;"'''' - - - - .. '" - ... .. - .. .. "" ill ... - "" ... "'" - ... ,!a ... ... '"' .. ... ... .. ... - - r- , ... a. 1I. , . I... .;;-~ - ~~.. .: :1.~'----r.' San Bernardino County <> N ,Ii ..~..: : .:"r\'. -.~., j ".~'" ~;~~;'t:; I 1t.~~~,,_,~_::~ i~ ,,'.r.- · II : 1'_",I,nl I. . .. ,;.... j; .~~.:-: \~~...;r.!_.f i! '..~""""""___' ".", t,.., I '~~. :"'-:-'-;'''''.:' '110'. Mariiold ~....~M~rA~",;,;, ,! Z : r .. ....-. .-. I IA.~ .. .j ..J frti ::i\ ;1_. '.t.--. . hi ~ If'W~. if J' '. ~?-hl' ~ C. "',f.". y'~ f::~' -t l'i.,.-" I, . . . i ~ :rn:::.l-.t;=_ f~"'~"1 ,-,C 8 ... , , __,L"_ I II ... < l'I.l ... 'i ~:~~ ... l'l\ ') \ \. ',fro, \o\.h, V/ ~ .., ;::: ~/".~~9 ....,.,' "').. ~'~o. ,,~~:-;!f?, \ ~ .'. . \ . 'q"":"'/ - - . -:~, , . ~ ?iit-.. '''''', ',. " , . '''" Ii Source: USGS 7.5'Topo Quads: Rcdlands, CA. ",v 1988: San Bernardino, South, CA. ",v 1980. 1/30/01 (CBD030/EJRnraffic) Figure 1 - L SA .. - .. LSA Associates, Inc. The Hub eMP TIA Regional/Project Location <> N O' 1.000' 2.000' - - - - - ... ... ... - .. .. .. ... '" .. - .. - ... ... ... ... .. .. - .. .. .. ... .. ... ~ ... .... ... ... ... .. LSAASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 2 presents the conceptual site plan for the proposed project. In addition to the land use development, the project will realign Harriman Place from Orchard Drive to Tippecanoe A venue at Laurelwood Drive. Harriman Place will be constructed as a four-lane divided roadway with a raised median between Tippecanoe Avenue and Orchard Drive. The realignment of Harriman Place will be completed as part of the first phase of project development. In addition, Rosewood Drive will be vacated between Orchard A venue and Tippecanoe Avenue. These roadway modifications are included as part of the project design. Access to the site will be provided via five driveways located along Harriman Place: , The primary access driveway will be located on Harriman Place, 960 feet west of Tippecanoe Avenue (measured curh-to-curb). This driveway will have one inbound lane and one outbound lane, and will provide full ingress and egress (with left turns in and out and right turns in and out) to both the Phase I and Phase IT portions of the project. This location will be controlled by a traffic signal to be installed as part of project development. The second driveway on Harriman Place will be 1,325 feet west of Tippecanoe Avenue. This driveway will have one inbound lane and one outbound lane and will provide full ingress and egress to the Phase I portion of the project. . . The third driveway on Harriman Place will be 190 feet west of Tippecanoe Avenue. This driveway will have one inbound lane and one outbound lane, and will be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. This driveway will provide access to the Phase I portion of the project. , The fourth driveway on Harriman Place will be 190 feet west of Tippecanoe Avenue. This driveway will have one inbound lane and one outbound lane, and will be restricted to right-in and right -out movements only. This driveway will provide access to the Phase IT portion of the project. . The fifth driveway on Harriman Place will be 550 feet west of Tippecanoe A venue. This driveway will have one inbound lane and one outbound lane, and will be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. This driveway will provide access to the Phase IT portion of the project. It is important to note that the cities of San Bernardino and Lama Linda, Caltrans, and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) are currently in the process of planning future improvements to the Tippecanoe A venue/I-1O interchange. At this time, three preliminary design alternatives for the interchange reconstruction have been developed, although a preferred plan has not been selected and there are currently no approvals related to the interchange reconstruction. Two of the potential interchange designs are partial cloverleaf interchanges, and one is an off-set urhan interchange (with the intersection of the freeway ramps at Tippecanoe Avenue being located north of the freeway mainline). The Hub project design has attempted to accommodate the planned interchange improvements based on the designs available at the time that the land use plan was prepared. The two partial cloverleaf designs could be accommodated within the land use plan with no impact to right-of-way or site 3/29/01 {<R:ICBD03O\TraflicIThe HubICMP TIA.wpd>> 3 -, ... lIllll 1 II Ii i I ili! /; ; \ ~'- . ._. ,====:f)! '-- :;:--=-.. ,::iJJ~~ -:-=37\~~eii~~II-- I ! l!--- ! 1......-- ==I --~I;i:7(}-:- - -';:'lLlullW.uilli~~,"\ --1 - ~l!' ,l;'l ~j/~ 1a.-1rj'j'"~I~ flU .~, \ \ , ~ , .. ~ ~, I 'I.' I ", '~' m= I ".' , JO \ \ ~:::;f 'f'gi I".:, 'II ':i'if.!; ~~I " r~ " II \ \ .. , II I'JI! ,F '~..- UfTlTilf'1' ~ . \~ \ - - - - I, 'Q I I l - I \ \ ~ ,______'-\1. " ~q,pr: II" ,\ ~~ \;;;--- \' \ ::J!I: III '1'1, ,; Ii,>: ~ Ll.Lillf: c::::' __ ,~.'" \1 \ = '=-~ J.- ':z:-' 1 _____ .J.' _____ _ , ~ ~ \ -~. 1"'II.,--.itJi--l-- \,~ \ \ ~ t r-..:I!.-....' '~L ~"" \' 11 ' ::i ,~" iii, rt', b ~>fl_ ,I ,I'U 'I; \ \ ...; c: / II j ~\' II ~'\ \ \, \ ~ I 11lO1.llJ t"i'Ptttj , \\ 1\11 \ \ \ \ \ ':.. ,':.""'=:-,n 11'11 '1-' ~'.-\-\\W;\" \ \ \'. " ~ i \ 1 , I c_ _" 'I ' '1'-' I,\\ill " \ , 'P I.L \', ':::II' ", _'1 '~I''''''' I'"~ , , .. If) I \, I ~: 1':::::1, l'r,~, !Ie:: I ,,;\"\ ,'....\ \ \ \ , .=;. :: :-;11'11'111,1=, '11'.'.""".",\ Kg \I \ : -; ....- _J !.l 1;...-. ,\ \ \ H \ , i \ , 0 "l:f~ \ \ \ '~( C' "'1 "b I'" .~,' , ' '=i ;: ::: ill=:' , "\~~' \' ., ~ \ ' ; ~ f, :3:1 ,IE: ~'.i\,'0A\;t':';;\""~)! . = :; \ \ \ : ~ ,F: ~~il ~ ii~ :0"\'.1". I'll; i; ~ \ \ \ ?f"'" 0', Z li~" ~i'" '..' ". \ ___ \ \ :Elul::~.n ~~II ~ q "'\'.M~~N2&'\ ''-, \~G\\ \, ii' A, ;:'t----"-.::., w, 'ill\.\,\\,,"'" ", \ '~::\ -,.. --------.2l--; p ~\\\ ~l\\ \ \, .-~ \~' ,.,.. ---- ~-.\ I l't'::, \\~\,' :\i\1 '~--- c::::.'\ ~ "'l"~u'hU '-:/Ijl \ \'\~ J\.\;',\\1 '" ...;'" \'~.... ~., \ '3 :tl -= ' "1 \ ,>-I \';, 'I" '\I~'~ ',\ ~.-::;J;:- - '\1\ '\-" ~ :: ? i ',I /'\--\., P \ ,e:q" '~" :;' ...:;..l;::", ,':.\\ :::1 ~": -..:: "\ \ ,,0;:0 ~", ", ,," ",./&\-.:::<-\\,..J~ :r1f:' =+-= "I \,\=", \ "I' "", Z~ ~" \- :!l\ :E -=::E: \\~ ~^\'\(:.) i\" ,I \\.,q'\., ~ ,:::-~ L.-!-- ~ :r'l'= ~ '. \~ 'I\~. .,11"'." "",,, ".. "'~'\ ~"..,.- ~ :::\ :;l"' -'-. '" \ C/. ",,, " 'W'~ ~ '::\C- '-~ ;q ~= . \ ~I \\'0- '\"L,,-,-~ \\\~ V;\\,\\' \ \ _ ~:........-: ::l. ~IL'::_~u_~;2 \\~ ~ \<<;-, '0~t-'\\\\!! : ,,\u,') \ ,-' cd> -~'-~N =n .--------~: \ \ \ \"\~ 'llLij....... I' .....J..\-\\-\tr,\...:, , \ _ -.----:-~..r~l--'S). ? j , 'c:N I I' ":-:~" :"Iu....-:I: ""." , "...~...w-I\,,~ \_-1 W.. '" ~'" "t~'I'A' - '!F l\"rl.\\J"-, "".... ~ "I .., I, '" "" vI" ---"",,,,,' F" \J_' '";\;:J;" :::1- ;:: 11:::111 ~;:.... \ '0~ '" ~::---:),___ '1\\\~\ \ ~ ~,' ir:-~-~~ -: I ....::1)6 ~ \', :\'o...~~// .:~,..,\~\\\\ \'~\I\\I"I ,\ h\.,.~t~. ~II. \ __ c ~ I .. -~......,.~.. \,~. '.(.. 1"\11'" '\..."" W 1.--\ I I ...':......D~/... \"~~ ,;> "." \\R\~ 1\' -a 5ii! \~ '-=\ ':: :>>':::I:~\''';'~", ~'&""'\"\~1,(,(\\\'.\\" ~u~ ~ C-i'\, ""A'~" .,1,,'" ~ '\-\,-"\'"" "",-_. \ -: I:~ -::-:.~\ \ <\..0-...... .. ,::/~ \\1\\\\\1 \" \ II ~~.L -<'" m'PI:--, I ...._____...J~: :;:; \ ~ v.... "'.... ...... \,\;:::\ . ,,' dl\\\\i..U\ \ \ _'i.f:~::::'~::='::"?_-~-~/c~" ~,\\% '\:\\W,"~~II~ 'II ~N ", \ ~ -- , ',. \ \ \ "'-} l;':i' , \8 u. v"" ", "........rr'l"'r""> ~ !WIIII!llCi ',.,' \ \ .\.... ' '1\ \ 1\ . \ L:, I:=~=====::==~=~ , i ".......+hlJ' " I' \ \' ~~) I'\""\'\\"'~\' II i .. ~If) _ I 'I' ",11111111 \ \ \\, \, -J11\i,y I ~ I , I I ' \ \" \ \\ -' 1Io) 0 \, I 'I I '-lllllllll\1IA \ \\'\ \ \\'2:' \ \\'IU \ ~ ~ iii i I "l1,""l-i-H~Ho..HU~\ \" \......," "\\oJ' "l:f \ 1 '11 UIIII,1111 I \ \ \\~' \';:.-;, II \1" I +l - \ \ I, 'II \. I' \ '~, ~ \ I :! ~l-~-f111111'lllll'rt\\'\ '\ \'- '~'\\' \11 IIIIIii 1\ , ' 1 ~!-+HH;oH+-......H""" \ \ ,\!o"- 1 ~ ,,1 , \ : 1;1 I J U',1111,lltIIIIUI ' \ .t='"' I , ::...~t L ========..!.. /~Oltll~WJjo~': & " \hll:U' 11.1I~"T;1IT[lmlJill.mTITITITIIlTmnJ ~ --.. --- . ',-- Lz' \1 111 ~ I:: ~ 1"-'; lli!il!!1I1ijIJl~ \ \ Ilj~~! i= f\\\'J \ \ ... / \ ",l ----1 --..... )II 1 \ \ \ \ ... - .. - .. ... - .. .. .. - .. . - .. .. - - ... ... .. - .. - .. ... - - - - - \ \ ~ "'-- ~ t"- t \ : \ \ ~ I ~~ \ UJ~ ,,~ ~~ I ~ It \ '&.~ \ I i% \ I w ~ \ ctl- ~ \\\ \ \ \ I , , , \ , \ \ \ i , , 1 o g N 00 N b ~ ~ .. ~ '~ <: "<l l:l .~ e " ~~ d ~ ~ ." ., - !S ~ '" \.i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ =' b() .- ~ <~ .ll . ui~ -< ....J~ ;:ss:: f..;~ Q.,t:l. G.~ .:;,tr.l :tee ...a ~o.. IlJ U s:: o U ~z e:. ~ N ;.., !:! " LSAASSOCIATES.INC. - - design. The off-set urban interchange design could not be accommodated within the current site plan for The Hub. This interchange design would require significant right-of-way requirements that would preclude development of The Hub. - - ANALYSIS METHODOWGY ... ... This traffic impact analysis was prepared consistent with the requirements of the County of San Bernardino CMP. This study evaluates existing conditions, opening year conditions (year 2(02), and forecast year 2020 conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project, with and without project devel- opment. Per the requirements of the CMP, the analysis examines p.m peak hour traffic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project. In addition, the City of San Bernardino has requested that mid- day peak hour conditions be examined for selected locations. - ... ... '"" Existing traffic conditions are based on p.m peak hour intersection turn movement counts collected by LSA during August and September. 2000 (count sheets are contained in Appendix A). .. "'" Development of ForecflSt Traffic Volumes As noted above, the future year analysis includes examination of forecast conditions for years 2002 and 2020. The following sections discuss the methodologies used to develop forecast traffic volumes for each of these time frames. ... "'" IiII - Year 2020 Conditions .. ... The CMP focuses on examination of project traffic impacts under forecast year 2020 conditions. The CMP TlA procedures require that an analysis be conducted utilizing the year 2020 traffic data from an approved local or regional traffic model. In the case of The Hub project, the East Valley Traffic Model was utilized. .. - ... Traffic volume data for the 2020 without project condition are based on forecasts supplied from the East Valley model for year 2020. Base year 1994 and future year 2020 mid-day peak period and p.m peak hour arterial segment volumes were available from the East Valley model. To determine the mid-day and p.m peak hour intersection turn movements for the year 2020 conditions, the following methodology was discussed and approved with SANBAG staff, and used for this TlA. - .. - 1. The difference between the modeled 1994 and 2020 peak period directional arterial traffic volumes (for each intersection approach and departure) was identified from loaded network model plots. This difference defines the growth in traffic over the 26-year period. .. ... .. 2. The incremental growth in peak period approach and departure volumes between 1994 and 2020 was factored to develop the incremental change in peak hour volumes. The modeled volumes obtained for the p.m. peak were peak hour volumes (i.e., the model had already converted the peak period volumes to peak hour volumes). Therefore, no further factoring was necessary. For the mid-day peak, the East Valley model uses a six-hour peak period. Examination of information obtained from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) indicates that the peak hour comprises 17 percent of the total mid-day "'" ... - ... - - 3129/01 <<R:ICBD030\Traffic\The HubICMP TIA. wpd)) 5 - ... - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - ... 3. peak period traffic. Therefore, the incremental changes in the mid-day peak period volumes were multiplied by 0.17 to develop incremental changes in mid-day peak hour volumes. The incremental growth in approach and departure volumes between 1994 and 2020 was factored to reflect the forecast growth between 2000 and 2020. For this purpose, linear growth between the 1994 base condition and the forecast 2020 condition was assumed. Since the increment between 2000 and 2020 is 20 years of the 26-year time span, a factor of 0.77 (i.e., 20126) was used. - ... - ... 4. The forecast growth in approach and departure volumes from 2000 to the future 2020 condition was added to the observed 2000 counts collected by LSA, resulting in "post- processed" forecast year 2020 link volumes. ... .. 5. Forecast year 2020 turn volumes were developed using existing turn volumes and the future approach and departure volumes, based on the methodologies contained in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report (NCHRP) 255: Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design (Transportation Research Board, December. 1982). ... ... .. ... Appendix B contains the worksheets used to develop the forecast year 2020 traffic volumes. ... ... Truck Traffic Adjustments Due to the relatively high proportion of truck traffic in the vicinity of the project site, adjustments were made to account for the effects of truck trips on roadway conditions. To account for truck traffic, all traffic volumes are presented in terms of Passenger Car Equivalent (PCB) volumes. The Highway Capacity Manual defmes PCB as "the number of passenger cars that are displaced by a single heavy vehicle of a particular type under prevailing roadway, traffic, and control conditions. This concept recognizes and accounts for the fact that heavy vehicles (i.e., trucks, buses, etc.) occupy more space and require greater amounts of time for acceleration and deceleration than do passenger vehicles, thereby having an effect on traffic flow conditions such as levels of service." Under the PCB concept, passenger cars have a PCB value of 1.0 and heavy vehicles of varying types are assigned PCB values depending on terrain and traffic conditions. SmaIl trucks generally have a PCE of 1.5 per truck, while larger trucks with four or more axles may have a PCB of 3.0. For purposes of this analysis, an average PCB of 2.50 was applied to all trucks and a PCB of 1.0 was used for all remaining vehicle types. ... .. ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... - Based on information for the Tippecanoe AvenuelI-1O interchange obtained from SANBAG, it was determined that 4 percent of the existing vehicles in the vicinity of the project site are trucks. Therefore, 4 percent of the existing traffic volumes were treated as trucks, and as such, these volumes were multiplied by the 2.5 PCB factor. The remaining traffic was treated as passenger cars, with a PCB factor of 1.0. The sum of truck PCB volumes and the passenger car volumes comprise the total PCB volume for the existing condition. For purposes of this analysis, all volumes are in terms of PCB trips (unless otherwise noted). ... ... ... - - According to SANBAG, it is not reasonable to assume that truck traffic would increase at the same rate as passenger cars. For year 2020 conditions, SANBAG assumes that future truck trips will be 50 percent greater than the existing level of truck traffic. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the ... ... 3129/01 <<R:ICBD030\Traffic\1be HubICMP TIA. wpd>> 6 - ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - existing number of trucks were multiplied by 1.5 to develop the ambient truck traffic volume for year 2020. The 2.5 PCE truck factor was then applied, and these PCE truck trips were added to the remaining year 2020 passenger car volumes to develop total PCE trips for the year 2020 condition. - ... - San Bernardino International Trade Center Specific Plan Truck Trips ... ... In addition, traffic generated by future development of the San Bernardino International Trade Center and Airport Specific Plan was added to the roadway system in the project vicinity. The employment projected for the Trade Center Specific Plan is included in the East Valley Traffic Model, so the model is generating trips for this development. However, current projections indicate that much of the future development expected for the Trade Center Specific Plan will be industrial, warehousing, and distribution uses, which have a high truck component. The East Valley Traffic Model does not generate truck traffic. Therefore, PCE truck trips attributable to development of the Trade Center Specific Plan were developed in consultation with SANBAG staff and manually added to the post- processed volumes. .. ... .. ... .. ... Trip assignment procedures for the Trade Center Specific Plan truck trips are contained in Appendix B. .. ... Year 2002 Conditions .. Base condition volumes for the year 2002 without project traffic were developed by interpolating between 2000 and 2020 background volumes, assuming linear growth. The year 2020 volumes used in the interpolation process include the truck traffic attributable to the San Bernardino International Trade Center Specific Plan. ... .. ... .. Study Area Determination The study area for the traffic analysis was defmed based on criteria in the CMP TIA guidelines. These guidelines require that all CMP arterial segments and intersection locations be included in the study area when the anticipated project volume equals or exceeds 80 two-way trips during the peak hour. The CMP requirement is 100 two-way peak hour trips for freeways. The study area limits are not to exceed a 5-mile radius from the project site. ... .. - .. .. Based on these requirements and the distribution of project generated trips, as defmed in the Project Traffic section of this report, the p.rn. peak hour two-way traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 3. Comparison of Figure 3 with the San Bernardino County CMP indicates that the following CMP intersections will have project volumes exceeding the CMP's 80 trip threshold. While the CMP only requires examination of p.rn. peak hour conditions, the City has requested that mid-ilay peak hour conditions be examined for selected locations. Analysis intersections, and the time periods examined are: ... ... .. ... .. ... ... ... .. 3129101 <<R:\CBD030\Traffic\1be HublCMP TIA.wpd>> 7 ... ... '" N ,~ o '" ~ C ~ 2~ en ..... :::: 0.. '< :> ~ ~ O~ '" ~::t: l'1l_ ..... - -,," ::l", :n::: Ql.... ..... ~ -..... "'.... :;~ r- C/> > 'Tl _. Otl :::: ..... l'1l W . '" ~ ~ .. " := ~ '" ~ "" ~ ~ CD ~ CD m '" Z ~ 51 i5 ~ 47 130 0;: ~~ ... ~ - 50 130~~" ." ." ~ ..2. .2. n n :l :l ." go i= 5. '< ." > n = <l ,.,. = :c 0 = ~ :;l .;;' ~ \ \ , \ '" \ m \ ~ \ z .... 5: '8 CD i ~ i I I ! i ... ... 99 - CD" ~. !U I i ~ <= ~ :> ~ ~ z CD m '" ~ o ~ ~ m Q - ... ... I ;;;: S E ST g WA"-AIIE 80 ~ m ~ o ::e i!l T1I'I'ECANOE _ 91 CAlIFORNIA AVE AlAS AMA ST ~~~ 'l'$9 o ~ ~ ~ m 91 70 . - ... I 60 '" i" ~ !!1 - , ... - 'SO - - - - ... ... ... ... ... - ... ... ... ... .. - ... ... .. - .. ... .. - ... ... .. ... .. - - - - - ... LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. , Waterman A venuelMill Street - p.rn. peak hour only Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - p.rn. peak hour only Waterman A venuelVanderbilt Way - p.rn. peak hour only Waterrnan A venuelHospitality Lane - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours I-IO Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Harriman PlaceIHospitality Lane - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Tippecanoe A venuelMill Street - p.rn. peak hour only Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Avenue - p.rn. peak hour only Tippecanoe A venueIHospitality Lane - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Tippecanoe A venuelRosewood Drive - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Tippecanoe AvenueJI-I0 Westbound Ramps - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours. , , . , . , . , , , . , , In addition, the following intersections in the immediate vicinity of the project site need to be examined as these locations will provide future access to the project site: . Westerly Phase I Project AccesslHarriman Place - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Primary AccesslHarriman Place - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Phase II Central AccessJHarriman Place - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours Easterly AccessJHarriman Place - mid-day and p.rn. peak hours . . , Figure 4 illustrates the locations of the analysis intersections. In addition to arterial intersections, comparison of Figure 3 with the San Bernardino County CMP indicates that the proposed project volumes will exceed the CMP's 100 trip threshold on the sections of I-IO between Ninth Street and SR-30. Therefore, an analysis of p.rn. peak hour levels of service on this portion ofI- IO is included in this TlA. Level of Service Definitions and Procedures Roadway operations and the relationship between capacity and traffic volumes are generally expressed in terms of levels of service (which are defined using the letter grades A through F). These levels recognize that. while an absolute limit exists as to the amount of traffic traveling through a given intersection (the absolute capacity), the conditions that motorists experience rapidly deteriorate as traffic approaches the absolute capacity. Under such conditions, congestion is experi- enced. There is general instability in the traffic flow, which means that relatively small incidents (e.g., momentary engine stall) can cause considerable fluctuations in speeds and delays. This near capacity situation is labeled LOS E. Beyond LOS E, capacity has been exceeded. and arriving traffic will exceed the ability of the intersection to accommodate it. An upstream queue will then form and continue to expand in length until the demand volume again reduces. A complete description of the meaning of level of service can be found in the Highway Research Board Special Report 209, Highway Capacity Manual. The Manual establishes levels of service A through F. Brief descriptions of the six levels of service, as abstracted from the Manual, are as follows: 3129/01 <<R:\CBD03IJ\TrafficIThe Hub\CMP T1A. wpd>> 9 ,- - - ... - .. - ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... .. ... .. HOSPITALITY LN ... .. ... ... ... ... LEGEND ... 0 CMP Intersections ... . Non.cMP Intersections - J/3010J(CBD030/EIRITNJlfic) ... ... L S A ... - <> 1.750' 3.500' N 0' ... MILL S1 CENTRAL AVE . w ~ W o Z <( (,) W Q. Q. ;::: ORANGE SHOW RD w ~ Z ~ a: w \< ;: . LAURELW(J DR .... ............1 ROSEWOOO: PL .~ILT REDLANDS BLVD Figure 4 The Hub CMP TIA Analysis Intersection Locations ,,~ - - - - ... - ... - ... - ... ... ... ... ... - ... ... .. LSAASSOCIATES.INC. Level of Service Definitions LOS Descriotion No approach phase is fully utilized by traffic and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Typically, the approach appears quite open, turns are made easily and nearly all drivers fmd freedom of operation. This service level represents stable operation, where an occasional approach phase is fully utilized and a substantial number are approaching full use. Many drivers begin to feel re- stricted within platoons of vehicles. A B This level still represents stable operating conditions. Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication, and backups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted, but not objectionably so. c This level encompasses a zone of increasing restriction approaching instability at the intersection. Delays to approaching vehicles may be substantial during short peaks within the peak period; however, enough cycles with lower demand occur to permit periodic clearance of developing queues, thus preventing excessive backups. D Capacity occurs at the upper end of this service level. It represents the most vehicles that any particular intersection approach can accommodate. Full utilization of every signal cycle is seldom attained no matter how great the demand. This level describes forced flow operations at low speeds, where volumes exceed capacity. These conditions usually result from queues of vehicles backing up from a restriction downstream. Speeds are reduced substantially and stoppages may occur for short or long periods of time due to the congestion. In the extreme case, both speed and volume can drop to zero. E F .. The level of service criteria for unsignalized and signalized intersections are as follows: ... ... ... ... ... ... ... - Level of Service A B C D E F UnsipR1i7.ed Intersection Average Delay per Vehicle (sec.) :510 > 10 and:5 15 > 15 and :5 25 > 25 and:5 35 > 35 and :5 50 >50 SlpRIi7.ed Intersection Average Delay per Vehicle (see) :510 > IOand:520 > 20 and :5 35 > 35 and:5 55 > 55 and :5 80 >80 For the signalized and unsignalized study area intersections, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) analysis methodologies were used to determine intersection levels of service. All levels of service were calculated using the Trafflx version 7.1 software, which uses the 1997 HCM methodologies. .. - - - ... - ... 3/29101 <<R:ICBD03O\Traffic\1be HubICMP TIA. wpd>> 11 - LSA ASSOCIATES. INe. ... While the level of service concept and analysis methodology provide an indication of the performance of the entire intersection, the single letter grade A through F cannot describe specific operational deficiencies at intersections. Progression, queue formation, and left turn storage are examples of the operational issues that affect the performance of an intersection, but do not factor into the strict calculation of level of service. However, the Traffix software does provide an output that quantifies operational features at intersections, such as vehicle clearance, queue formation, and left turn storage requirements. For freeway segments, levels of service are based on the comparison of traffic volumes to freeway mainline capacities. The LOS is based on volume/capacity (v/c) criteria documented in the HCM. - - - - - ... - ... Level of Serviee Threshold CriJerill The CMP standard level of service (LOS) is LOS E. This LOS standard is used for area freeways, and may be used for intersection levels of service. However, the CMP also allows local discretion and requirements to be used to determine project impacts and appropriate mitigation. In the City of San Bernardino, LOS D is the standard level of service. Therefore, any intersection level of service condition in excess of LOS D is considered an impact requiring mitigation. - .. ... ... - EXISTING CONDITIONS ... Existing Roadway System - .. An inventory of the existing study area street system was conducted by LSA during August and September, 2000. A summary of the existing traffic counts is provided in Appendix A. The existing street network, number of mid-block lanes, and intersection traffic control are presented in Figure 5. The number of mid-block arterial lanes indicates the average number of through travel lanes. Widening at intersections and acceleration/deceleration lanes are not included in the number of arterial lanes. - .. - .. Figure 6 illustrates the existing turn lanes at study area intersections. All existing intersections are currently signalized, with the exception of Tippecanoe A venue/Rosewood Drive, which is stop sign controlled with the stop signs on the minor street (i.e., Rosewood Drive). Regional access is provided via the 1-10 freeway, located immediately south of the project site. Access to the project site is provided via an interchange at Tippecanoe Avenue (access to/from the east and west on 1-10). Access to and from the west on 1-10 is also provided via the 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane. ... - ... ... - ... Existing Traffic Conditions - The existing p.rn. peak hour turn volumes for the analysis intersections are illustrated in Figure 7 A, and existing mid-day peak hour volumes are illustrated in Figure 7B. Base traffic counts were collected by LSA during August and September, 2000. An intersection level of service analysis was conducted for this condition to determine current circulation system performance. .. - - - ... 3129101 <<R:\CBD030\TnfficIThe HubICMP TIA.wpd>> 12 ... r'- r.' r- C/) > tTl ;.: (ii' ::to ;:l (JQ - ;:l .... (1) ..., CIl (1) n .... -.:--J 0"" ;:l" O~ (1) - O<:l- 3C] !:P.~ :!.~ ~s;: .. ,..- "' ". ~ .... ... ., -.. ....... " "Il t;-' .. f' .... ~ ... ., ~ 'Tj OQ s:: ..., (1) 0\ ~ ~ , , o . WATERMAN AVE 0 0- I\I~~ ~~ .~. ( ~ 0 m I: 0 ~ F -. G ~ ~ 01 ~L '" !!l m ~ ~ m ,. H '" 0 'WO€RSQIy U --.:.4..~ e&Je98-.~O TIPPECANOE AVE a~ . 0- I '> z 0 en .. ~ " - !" ,... - :I: ~ =I .. ~ .!... 3. ar .!... 3 3 0 .. .. .. - ::0 l ::0 - ::0 " I ~ - if - I ..J f ..JU'- ,... -'U'- f .. '2. i: J -d ~ fI.! J -dt,- .. - ,- ~ I - ..... .J.. - ::0 - -r -. -r c ~ - :-< !'> '" =I ~ =I 1 ." l ar 1 l i 2 - .!... ::0 - ::0 ~ - l - ~ ~l'- - l - .. ,l'- f f ~ ~ - .a J ~t~ '" J fI.! J ~~ ~ ~~,- .. - '" - t - ::T - - ~ -r ::0 -r ;0 0. 0. S' 3 1;: - !" ~ ~ =I ~ =I ~ ." ~ 1 ~ .!... .!... 2 .. ::0 - ::0 - ~ - - ~ ~ + - ~ -J.... '- f ,l'- f ~ f ~ V; .. ::0 - ::0 0. J ~.f,- '" J ~t~ i m - "" .. .. .. -r 3 - - ~ .. ~ - a -r ::0 =r -. 0. 0 ;0 ~ .. 3 ." .. ~ !O ,.. z =I ~ 0 > ff ::0 1 ar l 0. .!... 0 .. i 0 ~ .!... 2 - ." - ::0 - . ~ " en - ~ - - <; "" '..Jl~'- ..JH'- ~ -'~'- '" ii' f ~ f f ~ 0. ar 0 ~. c' .. j ~~t~ ::0 J ~t t,-. '2. J i: 0. + 3 .. i: r- "" - ~ J ~ . ;[ ..... 0 -r ..... ::0 - P ::0 - - - -. -r -. - ?' !" , =I - ." <:> a: .!... ~ l ~ .. 2 - ~ - - c:: - ~ ,'- f ::0 ..J~~'- 0. f 1& ;0 .. .. J 3 ~t~ c:: ~~ ." J @ !f I - 0 .J.. - .. ." - C -r ![ -. ~ ~ ..... ::0 - 0; :; ~ ~ o '" ~ ~ .0. r . I C/) > tIi :>< _. '" .... _. ::s (JQ - N 0 0 0 '-' :-0 3:: '"1:1 ~ ~ ;>;'" ::I: 0 C ... -l:;l C '" 3~ 'Tl <:>- liQ' e:n C -~ ... C"tl ~ 3 -...J ~:::j ;l> "'"'" ,. , , ,... ~ ,. " . . '" .. .' .. ~ " ~ g . z +-0-. WATERMAN AVE 0 0- 1f7~ ~~ 0-," ( 1 (') m 0 z I: ...,1 G ~ ;= i r OJ ~ > I 11 ~ m -" :l; n '" 0 ANOE~SQfv H ~E e9~8@-e~ ~ ~ G TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I z 0 In '" ~ " ~ !" - ,.. :I: ~ ::f 0> i 3. CD l 32 3 l66 ~ ll46 !il '" 0> "'''' ;;~c;) ~ .... '" .......... '" ... -1204 "tl "'-... -17 ~ -"'.... -908 ~ ..J ( 18 ~ ..J~'- ( 31 i ..J~'- (104 l!. '" '2. ;;a !!I 0 241 J -d ,.. ~ 92 J .,t,.. l 1126- ,.. ~ 15, '" ,.... 15 - ..."'''' 1052- "''''- '" '" "'-- ~~~ 103, '" 125, ~ - :'"' !" !" ::f ::f '0 ~ '0 al al CD !il !il l151 3 196 '" '" '" -....- ~ li: ... '" 0> "''''... l 524 "'0'" -n2 '" "''''0 -958 l -1159 ~ ..J~'- (0 ~ ..J~'- ( 110 ~ ;:; .,t,.. '" .,t,.. ;: 438 J .,,.. ~ 83 J (Q 81 J CD '" 846- "'''' 875- 000 en 905- ~cng ~ -0 ~ "'... 0, 55, 0 '" ~ a. ~ 3 lil ~ !>' ~ ~ .g ::f ~ 1 ~ l 33 ~ III ~ 0> '" ~ 8l ;:;~~ '" li: "'0'" -695 "'''' -686 ~ cn......~ -1116 ~ ..J~'- (846 ~ ..J~'- ( 335 ..J~'- (130 ~ 0> 0 '" ~ .,t,.. m ~ 53 J .,t,.. g 38J 0> 807_ '" 3 ~ 281, 0> 687- ...-'" ~ 825- ~U'I~ a 98, .....~N 129, '" '" S' a. 0 ;;a ~ 0> 3 CD '0 '" - !" ~ z ~ . ::f ~ ff > ~ '" 0 a. CD CD 3 n ~ l142 0> l128 lm ~ ....- ~ '" '" 0> ..."'''' ~tR;3 ..."'- '" gj"'- c ~ -566 "''''- - 914 I -... -812 '" ..J~'- ( 321 I ..J~'- ( 27 ..J~'- ( 116 ,;;' ~ ;r ~ ;;' ., ~ '" .,t,.. .,t,.. '0 3 a. 90 .1 "2. 335 .1 i!t 334.1 .,t,.. '" Iii r- '" _. ~ ~ ~ 583- -~'" -=< 692- ...."'- ,.... 513- ....8i'" lil ~ 0-'" '" 0> " 57, ,.... 41 -. '" 762 -. '" '" ~ ~ !'> ::f , ~ 1 0 l 40 ~ l73 ~ ~4loo~ 8' "'...- -....'" - 1370 " 0"'0> -400 l ..J~'- ( 16 '" ..J~'- ( 59 a. ~ 0> 3 " .,t,.. .,t,.. Ol 177J '0 413 J [ ~ 1053 - -"'''' 0 81- "''''''' '" '" -"'0 21, '2. 112, "'0 c !!I ~ ~ ,.... '" '" ~ ?i .. ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ r r- C/) > tI'l :>< _. '" - 5' (Jt; ,-... N o o o -- ~ 5: I t::I ll> '< 'i:l (1) ll> ;>;" :r: o t: ..., ....,:;J t:" 33= 6- ~n E~ .... .... ....., (1).... "':... ~. ~ (Jt; t: ..., (1) -.J c:l ~ .. '; i 0 WATERMAN AVE \ ~! r.>'e-, E ( 1 1 I '" G ;= ~ ;; !!l '1 ~ ~ '" m :r 0 ~ i =: '" I 0 AtvDE"SQN ~"" eg99@-.~ TIPPECANOE AVE ~~ z 0 '" .. ~ 1\ - ,.. ,.. ::l ~ 1 S' '" l3 ~ Sl"'''' l 259 ~ ... ,..,~. '" -1083 ~ -569 i .J (30 l!. .J~L. (106 [ 5l 1275- ,... i 329 J ~t,... l 12 -. '" ~ 456- ~....- .... "'- ,.... 734 -. -"'- " C ~ - f1' !" ::l . - "" c ~ ~ &l l103 ~ '" -...'" lS01 ~ ....-'" "''''.... -226 ~ c:: ';~L. - 1010 " ( 70 ~ Q. ?l c 3 ~t,... ~ 419 J ~,... "" 532 J ~ ~ 949- "'.... 149- lllgo tl!il ~. 533 -. '" .... " Q. !i1: ::c ~ II> 3 ,.... "" " '" ~ !" ::l ::J: II> ~ 3. il l49 " !HJ " ~lll~ lil - 708 I ...'" -31 [ .JL. ( 515 .J~L. ( 20 T' 0 if m = ~t,... II> 890_ .:e- 254 J !!l. ,.... [ 181 -. " 31- -"'''' " 119 -. ~lll"" Q. I ;;: !D ~ ::l g. 1 ~ ~flll l163 i .... '" l160 '" '" '" <- 571 5:~~ -649 ::a .J~L. ( 236 ~ .J~L. (38 II ~ or i 5- 101 J ~t,... 424 J ~t,... '" '" ~ 517 - -"'''' ~ 641- ...."'- ~~:1 ,.... .......'" 89 -. " 27 -. - ~ ::l 1 l41 i '" .... -"'''' - 1233 ~ .J~L. (7 l!. ,.... II> c:: ~t,... i 29 J 1008- "''''.... '" C 10 -. ~ ;:, ~ ~ t> Q ~ Q 0; ~ ~ ~ - ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - - Table A presents the existing condition intersection level of service analysis summary. Level of service calculation worksheets are contained in Appendix C. As this summary indicates, all study area intersections are currently operating within the City's LOS D threshold, with the exception of: .. ... , Tippecanoe Avenue/I-1O Eastbound Ramps (mid-day and p.rn. peak hours) Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard (mid-day peak hour). ... . - - Table B summarizes the existing p.rn. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. Peak hour volumes were taken form the San Bernardino County CMP freeway analysis. As seen in Table B, all freeway segments examined are currently operating at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better). ... ... .. PROJECT TRAFFIC ... 100 Project Trip Generation Trip generation for the proposed project was developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (6'" Edition). The specific rates used for the proposed project are as follows: ... ... ... , Discount Club - rates were taken from the ITE rates for Land Use 861 - Discount Club uses. .. , Free-Standing Discount Store - rates were taken from the ITE rates for Land Use 815 - Free- Standing Discount Store. ... ... , Specialty Retail - rates were taken from the ITE rates for Land Use 814 - Specialty Retail Center. ... .. , Restaurant - rates were taken from the ITE rates for Land Use 832 - High-Turnover (Sit- Down) Restaurant. - ... . Fast Food Restaurant - rates were taken from the ITE rates for Land Use 834 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through. ... . Gas Station - rates were taken from the ITE rates for Land Use 844 - Gasoline/Service Station. .. ... ... It should be noted that ITE provides trip generation rates for p.m. peak hour conditions. but does not contain mid-day peak hour rates. For the p.rn. peak hour, the ITE rates for p.rn. peak hour of adjacent street traffic (corresponding to 4:00 to 6:00 p.rn.) were used. For the mid-day peak hour, ITE rates for the p.rn. peak hour of generator were used, as the peak hour of generator typically occurs during early afternoon. .. too ... In its trip generation research, ITE notes that land uses "such as retail establishments, certain restaurants, banks, service stations, and convenience markets attract traffic from the passing stream of traffic." This traffic is referred to as pass-by trips. Pass-by trips are counted in the total trip generation for a project site, but are not new trips in the adjacent roadways. ITE has performed research to determine the approximate amount of project generated traffic that are pass-by trips. ... ... ... ... .. 3129/01 <<R:\CBD030\Traftic\1be HubICMP TIA. wpd)) 17 ... .. - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - Table A - Existing (2000) Intersection Levels of Service .. ... Mid-Day Peak Honr P.M. Peak Hour Intersection V/C Delay LOS VlC Delay LOS I . Waterman AvenuelMill Street not examined 0.65 38.8 D 2. Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road not examined 0.63 36.4 D 3 . Waterman A venuelVanderbilt Way not examined 0.66 33.5 C 4. Waterman AvenueIHospitality Lane 0.59 34.5 C 0.94 50.6 D 5 . 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane 0.94 50.6 D 0.74 32.7 C 6 . Harriman PlaceIHospitality Lane 0.48 26.0 C 0.42 24.5 C 7 . Tippecanoe A venuelMill Street not examined 0.51 18.0 B 8 . Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Ave. not examined 0.78 40.2 D 9 . Tippecanoe AvenuelHospitality Lane 0.67 24.8 C 0.68 25.6 C 10. Tippecanoe AvenuelLaurelwood Drive 0.54 25.5 C 0.50 22.5 C II . Tippecanoe A venueIRosewood Drivel 16.9 C 17.8 C 12 . Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps 0.84 28.2 C 0.80 29.8 C 13 . Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps 1.07 54.4 F * 1.05 61.8 F * 14 . Anderson StreetIRedlands Boulevard 0.68 55.7 E * 0.76 37.3 D - .. - - - .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. * LOS exceeds threshold criteria. .. Notes: V/C = Volume/capacity ratio LOS = Level of Service .. ... .. UnsignaIized intersection. - .. - .. .. ... ... .. - ... .. .. ... 3/29101 (R,ICBD030\Traffic\'Jbe HubIModel.xlslExis1 LOS) iooo - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - - Table B. Existing (2000) P.M. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Analysis P.M. Peak Hour Total Freeway Segments Lanes Cap. Vol. PHF vIe LOS 1-10 Eastbound Ninth Street to Mount Vernon Avenue 4 8,800 6,330 6,550 0.74 C Mount Vernon Avenue to 1-215 4 8,800 6,380 6,600 0.75 C 1-215 to Waterman Avenue 4 8,800 8,170 8,450 0.% E Waterman Avenue to Tippecanoe Avenue 4 8,800 7,130 7,370 0.84 D Tippecanoe A venue to Mountain View Avenue 4 8,800 6,670 6,900 0.78 D Mountain View A venue to California Avenue 4 8,800 6,330 6,550 0.74 C California A venue to Alabama Street 4 8,800 6,720 6,950 0.79 D Alabama Street to SR-30 4 8,800 6,480 6,700 0.76 C 1.10 Westbound Mount Vernon A venue to Ninth Street 4 8,800 5,170 5,350 0.61 C 1-215 to Mount Vernon Avenue 4 8,800 5,220 5,400 0.61 C Waterman Avenue to 1-215 4 8,800 6,030 6,240 0.71 C Tippecanoe Avenue to Waterman Avenue 4 8,800 5,270 5,450 0.62 C Mountain View A venue to Tippecanoe Avenue 4 8,800 4,930 5,100 0.58 C California A venue to Mountain View Avenue 4 8,800 4,670 4,830 0.55 C Alabama Street to California Avenue 4 8,800 4,480 4,630 0.53 B SR-30 to Alabama Street 4 8,800 4,320 4,470 0.51 B - - .. - - .. - - .. .. .. .. - - - .. ... .. - .. - ... - - ... .. ~ .. .... .. ... .. ,... 3129/01 (R,ICBD030\TnfficIThe HublFr<eway.xIslExist Fwy) ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. ... Pass-by trip percentages for each of the proposed land uses were taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. Further considerations regarding pass-by trips are discussed in the Trip Distribution and Assignment section, below. - ... .. Table C summarizes the daily, mid-day peak hour, and p.rn. peak hour trip rates and resulting trip generation for the proposed project. This summary presents the trip generation for each of the project phases, as well as for the total project (Phase 1 plus Phase m. For each phase, trip generation is presented in terms of total trip generation, pass-by trips, and net new trips (total trips less pass-by trips). As this summary indicates, the total project will generate 16,537 daily trips, of which 1,811 trips will occur during the mid-day peak hour and 1,336 trips will occur during the p.rn. peak hour. The net new trip generation (excluding pass-by trips) will be 12,334 daily trips, of which 1,343 trips will occur during the mid-day peak hour and 1,000 trips will occur during the p.rn. peak hour. ... - - ... .. ... - Trip Distribution and Assignment Trip distribution patterns for the proposed project were developed using the p.rn. peak hour select zone trip assignment for the traffic analysis zones (T A:b.) containing the project site. These modeled trip distribution patterns represent the distribution of new trips generated by the proposed project site. Figure 8 illustrates the distribution patterns for the proposed project. Figure 9A illustrates the detailed assignments patterns through off-site study area intersections. Figure 9B illustrates the assignment patterns at project access locations. In this figure, the assignment patterns are presented separately for the Phase 1 and Phase II development. .. .. - . - .. It should be noted that the select zone assignment produced by the East Valley Traffic Model indicates that 25 percent of project traffic would travel to and from the west on 1-10, with 17 percent accessing 1-10 via Hospitality LanelWatennan Avenue and eight percent accessing 1-10 via Tippecanoe A venue. Since the Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO interchange is located immediately adjacent to the project site, it is anticipated that a greater proportion of traffic to and from the west on 1-10 would actually use the Tippecanoe Avenue interchange as indicated by the model. Therefore, the trip assignment patterns for this traffic to and from the west on 1-10 was adjusted to assume 12 percent using Hospitality LanelWatennan Avenue and 13 percent using Tippecanoe Avenue. ... .. - too ... As noted in the Project Trip Generation section, pass-by trips are attracted from the passing stream of traffic along the roadways immediately adjacent to the project site. In the case of the proposed project, the major roadways immediately adjacent to the project site are 1-10 and Tippecanoe A venue. Based on the projected volumes in the vicinity of the project site. it is projected that 15 percent of the traffic passing the site will be along Tippecanoe A venue and 85 percent will be along 1-10. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that only 15 percent of the pass-by traffic would actually be attracted from the flow of through traffic along Tippecanoe Avenue. The remaining 85 percent was assumed to be "pass-by" traffic from 1-10. Figure lOA illustrates the pass- by trip assignment patterns for the off-site study area intersections (i.e., along Tippecanoe Avenue between Laurelwood Drive and 1-10). Figure lOB illustrates the pass-by trip assignment patterns for the project access driveways. In this figure, the assignment patterns are presented separately for the Phase I and Phase II development. ... ... ... .... .. ... .. ... ... - .. 3129/01 <<R:ICBD030\TnfficIThe HubICMP TIA.wpd>> 20 ... .. LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. - ..... Table C - Tbe Hub Trip Generation -. 1 P.M. Peak Hour - MId-Day Peak Hour Land Uses Units In Out Total In Out Total Daily ... Phase 1 - Discount Club 130.42 TSF ... TripslUnit' 2.38 2.38 4.76 1.86 1.94 3.80 41.80 .. Trip Generation 310 310 620 243 253 496 5.452 Pass-By Trips' 17.20% 53 53 106 42 44 86 938 ... Net New Trips 257 257 514 201 209 410 4,514 .. Free-Standing Discount 45.00 TSF .. TripslUnit4 2.76 2.76 5.51 2.12 2.12 4.24 56.63 Trip Generation 124 124 248 95 95 190 2,548 ill Pass-By Trips' 21 438 17.20% 21 42 16 16 32 ... Net New Trips 103 103 206 79 79 158 2.110 .. Specialty Retail 10.00 TSF TripslUnit' 2.81 2.12 4.93 1.11 1.48 2.59 40.67 .. Trip Generation 28 21 49 11 15 26 407 ill Pass-By Trips' 17.20% 5 4 9 2 3 5 70 Net New Trips 23 17 40 9 12 21 337 .. Restaurant 10.00 TSF "- TripslUnit6 10.66 8.72 19.38 6.52 4.34 10.86 130.34 ... Trip Generation 107 87 194 65 43 108 1,303 Pass-By Trips 7 43.00% 46 37 83 28 18 46 560 .. Net New Trips 61 50 111 37 25 62 743 ... Fast Food Restaurant 3.20 TSF .. TripslUnit' 24.07 22.21 46.28 17.41 16.07 33.48 496.12 Trip Generation 77 71 148 56 51 107 1,588 ... Pass-By Trips. 50.00% 39 36 75 28 26 54 794 Net New Trips 38 35 73 28 25 53 794 .. Gas Station 8.00 Positions - TripslUnit'. 8.09 8.09 16.18 7.43 7.13 14.56 168.56 .. Trip Generation 65 65 130 59 57 116 1,348 Pass-By Trips 11 42.00% 27 27 54 25 24 49 566 ... Net New Trips 38 38 76 34 33 67 782 .. Total. Phase 1 ... Trip Generation 711 678 1,389 529 514 1,043 12,646 Pass-By Trips 191 178 369 141 131 272 3,366 .. Net New Trips 520 500 1.020 388 383 771 9,280 ... .. ... ... ... 3/29101 (R:\CBD03O\Traflic\1be HubIModel.xlslTripGen) .. ~~~ .... .... ... ... ... ... ... - - ... .. ... .. ... ... ... .. - .. ... .. ... .. ... ... ... ... ,... .. ... ... .... ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. Table C - The Hub Trip Generation MId-Day Peak Hour' P.M. Peak Hour Land Uses Units In Out Total In Out Total Daily Phase 2 Free-Standing Discount 50.00 TSF TripslUnit' 2.76 2.76 5.51 2.12 2.12 4.24 56.63 Trip Generation 138 138 276 106 106 212 2,832 Pass-By Trips' 17.20% 24 24 48 18 18 36 487 Net New Trips 114 114 228 88 88 176 2,345 Specialty Retail 10.00 TSF TripslUnit' 2.81 2.12 4.93 1.11 1.48 2.59 40.67 Trip Generation 28 21 49 11 15 26 407 Pass-By Trips' 17 .20% 5 4 9 2 3 5 70 Net New Trips 23 17 40 9 12 21 337 Restaurant 5.00 TSF TripslUnit6 10.66 8.72 19.38 6.52 4.34 10.86 130.34 Trip Generation 53 44 97 33 22 55 652 Pass-By Trips 7 43.00% 23 19 42 14 9 23 280 Net New Trips 30 25 55 19 13 32 372 Total - Phase 2 Trip Generation 219 203 422 150 143 293 3,891 Pass-By Trips 52 47 99 34 30 64 837 Net New Trips 167 156 323 116 113 229 3,054 Total Project Trip Generation 930 881 1.811 679 657 1,336 16.537 Pass-By Trips 243 225 468 175 161 336 4.203 Net New Trips 687 656 1,343 504 496 1.000 12,334 I Mid-day rates are based on p.m. peak hour of generator for the respective uses. 2 Rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE) Trip Generation (6th Edition) rates for Land Use 861- Discount Club. , Pass-by percentage from ITE Trip Generation Handbook percentage for Land Use 815. , Rates from ITE Trip Generation (6th Edition) rates for Land Use 815 - Free-Standing Discount Store. , Rates from ITE Trip Generation (6th Edition) rates for Land Use 814 - Specialty Retail Center. 6 Rates from ITE Trip Generarion (6th Edition) rates for Land Use 832 - High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 7 Pass-by percentage from ITE Trip Generation Handbook percentage for Land Use 832. 8 Rates from ITE Trip Generation (6th Edition) rates for Land Use 834- Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window. . Pass-by percentage from ITE Trip Generation Handbook percentage for Land Use 834. ,. Rates from ITE Trip Generation (6th Edition) rates for Land Use 844 - Gasoline/Service Station. II Pass-by percentage from ITE Trip Generation Handbook percentage for Land Use 844. ... 3129101 (R:\CBD03Il\Traflic\The HubIModcl.x18\TripGcn) ... - - - - - ... .. - .. ... .. ... .. .. - ... ... ... ... - .. ... .. ... .. ... ... - .. ... "" ... J/30/O/(CBD030/ElR/Trtlffic) - - L S ^ ... - .0- 1,750' 3,500' N 0' ... 6% 5% 1% 4% MILL ST 7% 9% CENTRAL AVE w ~ 8% w 0 9% z 5 5% w ll. ll. i= ORANGE SHOW RO w 1% ~ 10% z 13% <( ::ii a: w !cc ::: 14% 13% 10% 6% VANDERBILT wr 19% 8% 4% lAURElWOOO DR 19% HOSPITALITY LN 37% ROSEWOOD 25% 3% 1% 8% 2% 5% Figure 8 The Hub eMP TIA Project Trip Distribution Patterns r~ r"" I c.n > "T:! ..., .5:. (t) n .... :;3 -0' >- '" '" ciQ' =s 3 (t) =s .... O"T:! ~~ I .... CJ:l;- -.., ;-=s;;a -"'" aZ:!: (';) ('il , "T1 ~ ~ ~ ciQ' n -l~ ~ :=-.""t '" (tl 0-' _-0...., \0 ~e,~ > ..'.H....' ~ 4 '4 . . ~ . r- ...~ 4 . ~ 4 " ... ;- ... . . 4 i! 5 ~ ; . +-0-. WATERMAN AVE 0 0- \ ~ I ~~~! ( 1 n m ~ ~ !: -I . ~ ~ OJ ~ I " !!l m ~ i -r- n :0 0 'WOi;FlSQIv ~ ~1fE e&J&98-0~ tlL CD TlPPECANOE AVE O- il! I 0 ~ 0 en .. ~ 1\ ~ !" =- ~ ::t ::I: ~ .. "0 3. . CD "0 !.1 3 3 .. to> :0 .... .. :0 ." oO :0 oO lil :e .J l .J ~ -(44%) 0 -6% CD .. ~ :xl "2. 0 ~ (37%) J ~ (1%) J 8l 44%- ~ I r- :0 (6%)- c ~ ~ '" !'> !'> ::t ::t "0 ~ "0 1il 1il CD !il !il 3 :0 :0 0 ... .. '" 16 l (13%) CD oO :0 oO ~ ~ .J ~ .J ~ -(31%) !P- -5% ~ -8% 0 ~ i ,- ~ ~ (5%) J 25%- (5%)_ CD ;E (4%) t g1 (8%)- oO i] :0 ~ Q. :;c .. 3 "0 .. ~ !" !'" !'" ::t ::t ~ "0 "0 ~ CD ~ 3 <Z :0 .. ~ lil :0 oO -(12%) ~ _4% l l. ( (19%) ~ -9% i (10% 0 :0 Q. m g> CD .. 12%_ (9%)_ ~ 2: (4%)- ,- .. 3 .. ~ .. (1%) t .. ~ 0 a is. li. t; :;c ~ .. -8 CD on ~ !" ~ ~ ~ ::t ~ r" "0 .. '" Q. ~ CD ... t:'l a 3 t; oO '" l (1%) ~ .. 2 .. :0 '" " ~ -(5%) i f oO 0 ;- l. ( (6%) -13% ~ ( 4% = <:r '" e- o Q. 0 = or lil = = :0 "2. = 0. Q. ,- I !it ~t,- 0. ... on 5%- (13%)_ ~ 17% t 'Sl .s. a> ~ ~ .2. n i[ '" (6%) t '" r- (itcn. n P- oO r- oO :0 t;t;t; P- :0 . .. -S' -S' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ';;;' ~ ';;;' = = 3 3 n ;:> ~ n ;!. ;!. il ::t . ~ ... "0 0 n ~ ~ ~ ~ n n = ~-a = ;;; :0 8' .. ;;; .. lil t;t; .... .. n .. n l13% c { .Jl. :0 ~ ( 10% Q. ::tl r- .. .. 3 c ~t,- I 44% J "0 l/!. ::I: 0 on .. '" 0 "0 C i[ <:f!-fIi!.'#- ~ ~ r- :0 ;:; '< " ~ ~ '< r:l ~ ~ "- r- ... . ... .. ... r _ , .. .. . .. .. r- C/) > ;;, ~ '" Q " Q W Q '" ~ .. '" "- -e V '\ :J: e- I I Z .6_ V 'U r- il !Ii . 'i z WATERMAN AVE iVvOERSQrv ~VE ~I o ~ III In ~ ;0 o " m ~ ~ " i= In .... l! m TIPPECANOE AVE ;0 ~ In .. < o ." Z ~ UJ m N ." Z ~ UJ m ... ~ ~ ?' ?' " " :r :r '" '" en en CD CD .., .., .... ......, 1f .... 1f ........ !!l. ~ !!l. ..J~ )> ~ ~ t ~ -d ~ ~ (4%) J :I: :I: (;l '" (6%) ... "'- '" ....tl 3. .... 3. 3 ~ 3 ~ '" '" ::> ::> Jl Jl ~ ~ !" !" " " ". ". 3 3 .... '" '" .... -< .., l (29%) -< ",- .... )> "''''.... ~ .... ~ ....~.... L. r (63%) ';~L. r (7%) m ~ :e '" tr+ '" -d 3. 3. (29%) J 3 i! '" (32%) ... " Cii~ " 8:'" Jl ~-oe Jl ....:-:. .... ~ ~ ~ =-' =-' " " !'" :r :r .... .. ~ '" '" .... ~ .... Cl $ as $ .. .... ~ .., .., .., '" '"l:I 2 &> ~ C"> ~ '=' CD .... " ~ l (6%) " ~ l ..9. 0 " I[ I[ (2%) c '" CD Er 0 )> ~ C'l 0 c - c " ~ tr+ t " 0- ::;3 0- 'C en en 'C ~ ~ ~ ~ .2. "'''' 8l _. .2. n ~~ "0 !l '" '" .... " 3. 3. > !l :; 3 " 3 .. :i. -6' '" ~ '" ~ Vl 'C .. " " Vl .. ~ Jl Jl _. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ::l ~. 3 '"l:I3 3 " ~ ~ " "- !'" !'" ....CD "- 'll m l.r ~.a 'C '" " ;; !!l. !!l. ~ n CD'"l:I " " ~ as )> .. n &' " C'l~ a .., ~ .0.# -- .. '" ~ '" " '" '" ....- >0- " re.. ~ l (2%) ~ ..J~ l (2%) :I: g3;;a '" '" 3. 3. CDVl" 3 tr+ 3 tr+ ~Z~ '" '" " " (18%) ... 'Tl Jl Jl r'l'll6- _. 8:'" "'.... g~(j ~ ........ ~* t: ~ -3:::: .... :=.""1 '" CD 0';'" \0 ::lVlS;: c:l Vl ___ - - ".", ..'I' .J. ... ... (7%) J (93%) t ~t ".". "'.... '" ' ... - MILL ST ... 10. Tippecanoe AvelLaurelwood Dr - ... .. '" e. - CENTRAL AVE . - ~ ~ o w .. .. ;: - t .. '" e. - - ORANGE SHOW RD - 11. Tippecanoe AvelRosewood Dr ~ ~ 0: ~ ., - .. .... <'>'" ::!:.::!:. - .. .J. l43% ........., ON ... LNJIE.WOOGD DR m ~ t ". '" ... - """"'""'~ .. '0 ... REOI..ANDS BLVD .. 12. Tippecanoe Avell-l 0 Westbound Ramps - ~ '" ~ fJj f .. .. '" :!- ... ... L. - 42% J .. LEGEND 4% Inbound project trip assignment percentage - ... (4%) Outbound project trip assignment percentage 13. Tippecanoe AveII-l0 Eastbound Ramps ... J/30101(CBDOJO/ElR/TrlljJic) - Figure lOA - ... The Hub CMP TIA Project Trip Assignment Patterns Q>>ass-By Tr:ips) Off-SIte Intersections L SA ... ... c- - ... .. ... . ... ... ... ... - ... ~ ...... I C/) > '" ~ ~ Q ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ -8 V '\ :I: e- II z -e- 'll r- ~ . ; . WATERMAN AVE ANOERSQrv AVE ~I ! ~ m U> ~ i!i o ~ ~ ~ ;0: ;= ~ U> .... nPPECANOE AVE " m o ~ o U> .. <: o ." :z: = m N ." :z: = m ... ~ ~ !" ?' ~ "tI :::r 3 ., ., U> -< .. [ r (100%) ~ ~ !!l. ~ ., lil 3. r- U> ~ 3 ~ 10% .. "' " '" "' ;:; :s! '" 3. '" 3 '" "' " :s! ~ ~ :-"' !" "tI "tI :::r ". "' 3 s: ;:; "' '" <:> -< n ~ [ CD a ~ f (11%) iil U> ~ [ tr- "' ~t 3. U> 3 (50%) .. ~ "' '" <D " ....- "' ~'" :s! <D <:> 3. "'''' 3 "' " :s! ~ ~ !>' :-"' ~ m "tI "' :::r "'C -.:: t"i !!l. m .., ~ A C'l [ .E. '" t"i j -:::; z '" .. 0 '" U> ~ n ~ .... 0 5' ~ [ ~ ~ = g- "' Er 3. " ( = " 3 -6' " Q. "' tr- t Q. -g " > ." :s! - a. a. " <D '" ::t: '" 00 " II ~'" "' <D 00 II 3. '" _. - 0tI " -6' 3 ::l -6' ~ "' " 3 ~ ~ ~ :s! ~ ;<' ~ 0 ;<' " ::l " ;; "'C.... ;; " ~ " ;a !>' ..,"'C ;a ~ m t.9.!a ." ., " " !!l. 0.... ~ " " [ n('t) " ~ ::1 " ....3 ~ 00 >00 00 " U> ~ " ~ n ,-.. ~ n "'C;;l ., ('t)~", 3. en 00 3 enoo::t: 'Tj ., tr- " rl :: _. :s! (29%) .. o c:l::,- 0tI ::: "'- n'<n "'- .., #'# ~ -l~ ('t) ::=."'1 "'t:l - o-6'~ 0 ::lens;: c:l en '-' ... ... - , ,....'''~ . , ... ~ . r -- ... ~ :"" ... ...~ ~ ~ , r- C/) > '" '< ~ '" .. '" ::: " ~ ~ ~ ~ -9 'v '\ ::t e- I I z -e- 'U r- i E :; . WATERMAN AVE " 0- ~ ~ U> :J: ~ n I " ;= ~ ~ U> -< 4JyOE~s ~. '" o 8e9B --.~ ~ ULl- '-0 z o U> .. ~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I - - f" - f" - 'tJ ::t :I: ~ ., :I. '0 3. iO 3 ~ ., 3 3 -< !il ., l33 ::l 0: ., i!;> <0 <0> '" ::l ::l .... <0 <0 a: 'tJ .... ~ '" '" !il ..J~L.. [ 142 ~ -356 if ..J ..J "' i -30 II!. U> '0 :I: ::c ![ ., -,f ,.. 0 ~ "l 111 J "' 371- ~ 184 J 5J 3' CD ., I r- 30- ::l 189, ~~~ ::l ::2 '" 0 - - - :-' !" :-' !" 'tJ ::t ::t ~ '0 :::T '0 ~ ., ~ iO U> CD 3 "" ::l ~ ::l - l134 a: ., '" C'l '" 5l .... ::l '" CD l15 '" ~ ~ 3- ~ ~ ..J -222 - 25 ..J -40 PJ. ~ ~ :>- ~ iil n <5 ~ !il t,.. ~ 199- ~ 25- .., 25 J "' II!. ...- U> 20, en 40- :I: ~ ~ :::T ., "'0 i "l <0 c::: 3. ::l ~ Q. ., ::c ::l ., ::2 3 '0 U> - - !'" ~ !'" ~ m ::t ::t ~ ., '0 '0 ~ !!l. ~ iO i!;> 3 ::l ll> !il -~ ::l ~ a: ::l U> "'''' 5l - 60 ~ - 21 II!. l10 l ~ :I: ..J~ L.. [ 162 -45 CD [ 51 ., ~ 3. 3 <5 ., ::l ::l Q. ., t,.. m W CD => 107 , .., a- 20- ,.. ::2 ., 61_ 44- ~ 3 ;0; ...'" ll> 5, '" ~ ... ...'" a <0 0 c::: ::l i3. Q. '{t ~ 3 co '0 U> - !C f" f" ?: ::t ~ Q. I ~ CD is l5 ~ ., ::l ::l l!l en '" - 25 ~ '" ~ ::c L.. [30 -65 ~ ~ [ 21 CD :I: Q. :I: 5l i>> 5l ::l i Q. ,.. i .., ..,t,.. U> 25- 65 - 86, '" ~ ~ l!l ~ 30, l!l r- ~~~ r- ::l ::l - - ~ ~ ? 'tJ ::t , - :::T '0 0 ""0 ., ~ ~ U> .., co ~. - ~.... U> ~ -.... ::l l 79 ~ W (1l "'- 5l <0'" '" c::: '"CU !!l. ..J~ ~ ..JL.. --14 :I ~ [ 51 :>- Q. ~-3~ g ~ ::c r- ., ,.-It ll> 3 . -...,., "' ..,t c::: ..,t,.. 'T] II!. 15 J Ol 383 J '0 ""03::- _. :I: I II!. g ~"'" (JCI ., 36, <0>- -12- :I: 3. 0 "'....... t: ....8,l U> 0"'''' ;>;'"~~ .., 3 '0 (1l ., 0 ~ ::l - ::::=~ ::2 ~ o:j r- t:(1l::j > ::l ..,"':... ~ ~- ~..--' , .. - '" "" ... ...... , , . . . ~ . ~ ~ r- C/) > '" Q " ,;j g '< ~ ~ ~ 10. -e V '\ :I: e- I I Z .6_ W "tl r- j ~ , . 'WDERSQN ~E WATERMAN AVE o 0- i en :>: o ::;: ~ " m ~ ~ ~ '" ;= ~ ~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I - - ~ !" - ." =I ~ ~. ~ 3 lD II> 3 -<! - l45 f;l II> [ '" '" co ~ ~ ~ 0_'" ~ ~ "' ..J~1.. f 200 ~ -480 l!. ~ f 28 ~ ~ ~ II> "' 3. .,t,- 0 't:l .,t,- 3 145 J I 508- !it 116.. II> ~ ::J 249.. ... co_ "''''''' ~N(") r- '" """ ::!1 0 ::J 0 ~ - ~ ?' =-' ." =I :!: iir 't:l 0 "' Ii ~ co g '" ~ ::J "' a; n ~ l182 [ co .... '" ::J ~ l19 ~ ~ f 69 [ ~ -298 is. [ ;;c c; II> t,- 3 .,t,- ~ 274 - ,- 't:l la. "' ~ ::J: "'- ~ '" Ul3il81 II> - '" '" ~ 3. ... '" '2. ::J 3 CL !it II> tl ~ ::J ::!1 3 r- 't:l ::J "' - - !" !" ~ m =I ::J: II> II> 1 3. l!l. [ 3 II> ... ::J iO ::J '" "' !:i:~ 16 '" - 79 ~ ~ II!. ..J~ l13 ~ ::J: I.. f 220 0 ..J II> :r ~. 3. - 3 t,- 0 !it II> m ~ 243 J ::J 142 .. III ::!1 82 _ r- ~lll ~ ::J ::J CL ~ 'lil - !O ~ ~ =I ~ r l7 f;l 2 en .... -33 :6 I.. f 39 I -90 co CL or ~ ~ CL ,- "' 34- if 85- ., lJl ~ ~ ~ 39 .. ~ S" - - ?' P ." =I ::r ~ ""d II> ~. l\: '" ::J ...- ~ !:i:~ lil "'... l150 Q..ell "'0 .(") l!l. ..J~ 3> ..JI.. -.19 ~~;;l < [ ~ '< C '" II> "' .,t <: ""d3~ 'Tj ~ 20 J ~ 526 J g ~o- Oti' II> 48.. !!l~ I .17- C 3. ,,~~ .... 3 '" ell II> S? :I:E'1l ::J o ::L'-l - ::!1 Cell.... c:I ...."':,.: - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - - The project trip generation was applied to the trip distribution patterns for the proposed project to develop trip assignments for the new and pass-by trips. Detailed calculations of the assignment of new and pass-by trips are contained in Appendix D. Figure IIA illustrates the total project p.rn. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. These volumes represent the addition of new trips and pass-by trips. Figure liB illustrates the total project mid-day peak hour turn volumes for the study area intersections. The project trips illustrated in these figures are for build out of the entire project. - ... - ... - - Current Development Traffic Volumes As discussed in the Project Description section, the project site is currently developed with residential uses. a motel, and a fast food restaurant. The existing uses will be removed prior to construction of the proposed project uses. Therefore, to analyze traffic conditions with implementation of the proposed project, traffic attributable to these existing uses needs to be subtracted from the future traffic volumes. ... ... ... ... ... Trip generation for the existing uses was generated using appropriate ITE trip generation rates. The trips assignment patterns were developed using a select zone model run for the existing uses, obtained from the East Valley Traffic Model. Appendix E contains the worksheets used to detennine the trip generation and assignment for the current uses on-site. - ... .. Figure 12A illustrates the p.rn. peak hour traffic volumes attributable to the current site development. Figure 12B illustrates the mid-day peak hour volumes for this existing development. - ... YEAR 2002 OPENING DAY CONDITIONS - This section discusses forecast traffic conditions, with and without the proposed project, under year 2002 conditions. Phase I of the proposed project is expected to be completed in mid-2002. Specific timing of Phase n is not currently known, although given current interest in the project site, it is possible that Phase n could be constructed immediately following completion of Phase I (i.e., by the end of 2(02). Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the year 2002 plus project condition includes build out of the project site (i.e., Phases I and m. Year 2002 traffic volumes were developed using the approach discussed under the Analysis Methodology section. Appendix B contains the volume calculations for analysis intersections. ... .. - ... ... ... The analysis of 2002 condition is based on existing circulation system, as there are no committed improvements in the vicinity of the project site. - - ... Year 2002 Without Project Conditions Figure 13A illustrates the year 2002 without project p.rn. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. Figure 13B illustrates the year 2002 without project mid-day peak hour turn volumes. The year 2002 without project levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in Table D. The level of service calculation sheets are contained in Appendix C. ... .. - .. - .. 3/29/01 <<R:ICBD030\TrafficIThe HubICMP T1A. wpd>> 30 - .... r- -- or . I C/) > (J .: ::! 0 ::s ..... 0 0 <: 0 0- '0 :3 0 '"t:I;:;' 2;::-l;;:l . ~ ~ 'Tl '"t:I::s:: -. o ~ (Jt; ~~rj .: ..., :tC~ 0 -~ - o ::L.., N .:n,... ;> ...,"':..: ... p p ..... .~ ~h p ~ . ~ ~ . p ~ p ; . '; . 0-. WATERMAN AVE . 0- \ ~ ~ f/O-. = ( 1 " m !I: ~ z _I G ~ F OJ ~ I Gl !!1 m ~ '" m =-~ ~ II :0 0 ""O<ltsQJ; ~V< e&J'(88-.~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- ~tlL · I z 0 '" .. <' ~ 0 - !" :-' - =I :I: ~ ., '" 3. ~ ~ 3 ., :l ., ~ " ~ :l - "" i _5 I _24 :I: .J .J 0 ~. ![ 22J ~ I 34- .:l 1J ..... :l 4- c ~ - :-' '" '" =I =I ~ '" '" ~ ~ CD :l 3 :l lil ., lil l6 '" :l l -19 ~ .J ~ -7 i !!. ~ 0 ~ r- ~ 2J c5 19 - CD 5- ., '" [ :;: "'" 0 IE ~ :;0 ., 3 '" ., - !" ~ ~ if =I ~ '" ~ ~ ~ :l :l ., lil lil :l '" -8 ~ ~ ~ '- ( 10 ~ -3 ~ -7 7' 0 :l :l Q. m CD CD ., 12_ CD 2- ~ 2: 5- !!l. 3 .. g- ., 1, - ~ c: a :l ~. Q. :;0 ~ ., 3 CD lil - !" :'" :'" ~ =I f '" Q. ~ CD ~ II :l lil :l U> - -3 ~ ... ;a '- ( 5 I -6 ~ ~ (7 l!. ;;; 5l a "2. ., 4- r- I 4- ~ ![ 20, ~tr- '" ~ .:l ~ '" 1, - ..... "''''''' ..... :l :l - $>' !" =I . - :g 0 ~ !.1 ~ N ~ ~ ...'" l 7 c: l .J'- :l ~ Q. ?r ., 3 c: ~t a; 34J '" [ ~ 0 ., -- 12. c ![ ~ .:l ..... :l '" " ~ Q c o ~ o i;; ~ ~ ~ r'~ r' r- C/) > n c ::j (1) ::I .... t:I (1) < (1) 0" ~ 0..(1) ,::I t:I ~~ ~c'" ""Oa~ (l) "" co 'G (J ;>;"'-:::: :I:C"tl o3~ C(1)~ ...."';,.: po .~ , "rj _. (JCl c .... (1) - N tIl ... , '" ~ ?\ .. is ~ c '" ~ ~ ~ . . , . AiyOEItS~. ~IIE ; ;; 'l . "il\ t-O \ ~ I l7r'~ 0) ~r !ii-a ~~ s; z o en .. ~ WATERMAN AVE ~ I o ~ ~ en :I: ~ '" o n m ~ ~ ~ ~ en .... TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I - ~ p f :t '<> 1 II> '" '" i '" ~ ~ [s -'" [ .J'- ls ~ ~ -Ill -d r- II> ~ 13 t c: 22J c; ~ "''''''' [ ~ '" !O' - - $1' :t '<> '<> .. fll '" ~ ~ ~ I . - o ~ t '" Q. ~ 3 '<> ~ o -Ill ~ ~ ~ '" - .. c '" c - 21 ~ 22- ~t !O' ~ P' :I: II> 3. 3 II> '" ~ o ~. ![ ~ ~ '" 19 J f !i l <5 ~ ~ c: &. ~ 3 1il '" c ls -16 .J 12- r- .. - ~ :t 1 ~ ~ <5 m II> ~ c: '" Q. ~ 3 '<> "' :-' :t I ~ '" '" -7 > .; '- [9 { ~ sa 2J 7_ - ~ ?: Q. CD S '" en "" :0 CD Q. or '" Q. "' CD <' Q. !" :t '<> ~ fll i -3 ~ _4 [4 ~ 0 "' '2. 3- r- ![ 4- ... ~ ~ '" r- (f) > :-c 3: :.o~ (Ilpo po"" ~N ::cO 00 =N ~~~ = .....'" a ::r::.t 0" ~s.""" 2.:,o~ =3~'~ (1)..., (1)n::- '" .....- ~ 1 ~ ~ - '''lIII 'Tl _. Otl = ..., (Il t . , . +-0-. WATERMAN AVE 0 0- 11~~ !i .-.....~ ( 1 n m 0 ;!j ~ :s) G ~ ~ F '" 'I ... ~ ~ n " 0 IWoc"Sp.; U ~~ 9~t9@-G~ ~ ~ . TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I ~ 0 '" lD ~ \\ I ~ !>' ,.. ,.. :l: ~ ::t ll> '0 3. lD 1 l 32 3 l67 ~ ll50 '" ll> "'''' -"'- " .... " 8.....'" " '" <n '" !;l ... -1301 .., <n ... -16 ~ "'~'" -940 ~ ...J ( 18 ~ ...J~l.. ( 31 i ...J~l.. ( 110 '" '" ~ '0 iif ~t,- fI.1 ~t,- '" 1225- ,- ~ 246 J 102 J I 15, '" ~ 14- ....."'''' 1090- "''''- '" " ..... <n- ~Ui~ 104 , '" 144 , c ~ ~ :-' !'> !'> ::t ::t ~ '0 "0 -g -g lD lil lil ll50 11 llll " " '" '" ll> -....- li l535 0 ~"'.... " "'........ '" o <n -836 ..........'" - 992 ~ -1240 ~ ...J~l.. ( 25 ~ ...J~l.. ( 115 ~ !!. ~ C ~ ~ 465 J ~,- fI.1 90 J ~t,- .Z! 98 J ~t,- '" ~ 523 - "'''' 949- "'...'" en 936- "'-'" ~ ~~ '" ... fi ........... 74 , 59, .... " ;g Q. ::0 Q. ll> 3 "0 '" ~ !'" ~ ~ f ::t ~ 1 lD l41 11 ll1 2 ll> " ~!!l -"'- " u.=Ui li .....- -759 ~s::: -782 ~ -1143 ~ ...Jl.. ( 687 ~ ...J~l.. ( 362 ~ ...J~l.. ( 147 ~ C ll> ! " ~t,- ~t,- m f 67 J 36J ll> 865_ '" .. ~ 307 , a 794- 8flll ~ 861- :iUl~ c: 105 , 135 , ... &. &' ::0 ~ ll> 3 '0 '" ~ !<' ~ ~ ::t ~ ~ '0 Q. 1 lD '" 11 is -....'" ll68 " '" '" ll44 ll> ....."'''' l186 " Q~2 li lS~l!! " """ '" ~ ..- 6i7 I ....- 976 ~ "'........ -822 $' ...J~l.. ( 333 ...J~l.. (36 ~ ...J~l.. (122 Q. 0 or ~. a. 102 J ~t,- ~. 352 J ~t,- i: 350J ~t,- '" i: IX> ~ ~ 622- -~'" ~ 763- ~~~ ~ 538- ........- ...00 58, ww~ ~ so, " 800 , "''''- " P !" . ~ ~ '" -g ~ ~ ~UI~ l41 ~ "'.....- l 75 li 0"'.... - 1453 c: ......'" -404 l ...J~l.. ( 16 " .J~l.. ( 65 Q. ::0 ll> ll> 3 c: ~t,- ~t,- t 184 J '0 405 J Ie. :l: 1144- -"'''' li: 86- "'....'" '" "'-..... 21, '0 115, 0.... ~ i!! ~ ~ " '" '< " Q " Q ~ :;: ~ ~ "- - V.J :> r- en > ~ 0: I o ~ '< "d~ (1)~ ~... ~N :I: 0 00 s::N ~~~ s:: ..... '" 3 5iF ~S.o- :2.:::?~ 3~'"o (1)~:::! CIl ....."'- r . ,. " ~ OQ' c ... (1) ~ ~ :/ . t-O I WATERMAN AVE \ ~ r?~-. ~ ( 1 " m l:: 0 ~ F @ G ~ ~ ... ., ... -I ~ ., m :r r- ~ .1\ U ~ IVvOEF/SQfv -.:...i.VE ~i TlPPECANOE AVE ~ 0 ., '" ~ ~ ~ ,... !=' ~ ::t 1 lD !lJ"'''' l264 3 !lJ"'''' l264 .. " "'- " "'- ~ "''''''' -591 ~ "''''''' -591 ~ .J~'- ( 108 l!?. .J~'- ( 108 ~ ~ .. .. 335 J -d r- I 335 J ~tr- <= 01 I 478- ~...- ~ 478- ~...- "'- "'- 747 1 '" '" '" r- 7471 '" '" '" " c ~ ~ ~ ~ ::t . ~ .., 0 al ~ lil l3 ll05 i '" .. - "'''' '" 8' ....."'''' '" -1083 '" '" '" -229 i .J ( 30 <= .J~'- " ( 71 0. I ~ r- 3 538 J ~tr- 1275 - .., 12 1 '" ~ 152- lllg- !O' ..... 5l ",,,,il '2. 5401 ~ ~ r- " !'l !'> ::t :I: .. l 3. 3 .. l 49 " " !;l~", 5l l501 ~ '" '" -31 f -1010 0 .J~'- ( 20 i" .. '2. c; ~ ~tr- ~ 419 J ~r- ~ 259 J t r- 949- "'... " 31- -"'''' "'0 0........ "'''' 1211 "'''' is. ~ ~ ~ :" ~ f ::t ~ ~ l152 " 8~ ~ "'-'" 5l lSl!l~ -1386 ~ -708 ~ .J~'- .J'- ( 515 i (188 <> t !II 101 J -d r- 890_ 181 1 1559 - ........'" is. 510 1 ~""'N :;J;l .. 3 .., .. ~ !" ,... ..... ?: '6' 0. al ~ l163 ~ l161 :::illl 2 ... '" -...'" '" '" '" -571 f "'-- -727 :e .J~'- ( 236 .J~'- ( 41 ~ ~ or " ~tr- ~. ~tr- 0. 101 J 431 J .. ~ '" ~ < 517- -"'''' 712- ~~C;; 0. ~"'O -- r- 89 1 " 291 ~ ~ " " '" " Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - w I:l:l - LSAASSOCIATES.INC. .... ... As indicated in Table D, all intersections examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service under year 2002 background conditions. with the exception of the following: ... ... . Tippecanoe A venueJI-1O Eastbound Ramps (mid-day and p.rn. peak hour). ... Table E summarizes the projected year 2002 without project p.rn. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table E, all freeway segments examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 without project conditions. with the exception of: ... .. .. , 1-10 Eastbound between 1-215 and Watennan Avenue. ... .. Year 2002 Plus Project Conditions The year 2002 plus project condition considers the addition of traffic generated by the proposed project at opening day to the roadways in the project vicinity. As discussed previously, this analysis examines build out of the proposed project (Phases I and IT) under year 2002 conditions. Figure 14A illustrates the year 2002 plus project p.rn. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. Figure 14B illustrates the year 2002 plus project mid-day peak hour turn volumes. The year 2002 plus project levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in previously referenced Table D. The level of service calculation sheets are contained in Appendix C. As indicated in Table D, all intersections examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service with the addition of project traffic to the year 2002 background conditions, with the exception of: .. ... .. ... .. ... , .. fill .. .. , 1-10 Westbound RampIHospitaIity Lane - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. .. .. , Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. ... , Tippecanoe AvenueJI-IO Westbound Ramp - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hour. .. ... , Tippecanoe AvenueJI.lO Eastbound Ramp - This location is projected to operate at LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2002 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. - ... .. . Anderson StreetJRedlands Boulevard - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. ... .. .. Previously referenced Table E summarizes the forecast year 2002 plus project p.rn. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table E. all freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 plus project conditions, with the exception of: .. .. .. 3129101 <<R:ICBD03OITraffic\1be HubICMP TIA.wpd>> 35 ... .. - - -, ... - ... .... ... .... ... .... ... - ... .... .. - ... ... ... - .. .... .. ... ... .... ... - .. ... .. - .. .- .. - .. .. '" .;;: " .. "-l ... .. ., il .. ~ II .. :: '" .. ., " .!l II - 8 N " co .. ~ Q .. - .&>. co ... o z " ~ ~ o C " " < < v. rn !jgS == :lis ll~ = Q 1.1' _::;;1.1 fljDo> e Do rg a::~fI'J ...=0 8='" ...... .. " &I ~ Do- ~ ..... .... "Q Q '1.1 "'- ;j> rn !j"0 =5'" :1= lis C iI W tJ-Q il~tJ ~Do> 'S = -S"rn -=0 ~:!... 81 "'ls l;; ...~ .."Q ...Q '1.1 ~> * * * QQUQUUUQU~ lQ~~Q lQU lQ lQ NO\r-Ot""lOQ\t""l"lltr- oO\6-:f"'io..ot"i...:.ntf'i t""lt""l('l")~t""lNt""l"'Nr- "ltlrlt""llrlMr-Nr-C\"'lt ...o\clrQoor-lI"'lli"lr-IrQ- oooooodoo"": * Q~U U~ 111 11 :r::r: r::: II: s:::: "jE"jE'jE",:",:",:'jE"jE<,!"< "!l!lVl"'OO!l""'~ ~\l\l'->"''''\l~'''- ........ ... ........ ~~~r-O\r--~~!;:N lnO\\C _"It ddci d-: \Cr-q"l:t . ON . "'ltNt""lt'-- _'tt_t"") !:l?\!=:: "':""0 * * * * U~~~ UU lQ lQ r-- II') 0\ ." M..Q ci N -N -- '" VI o Nr--"'lr---...O\ ('f'l \C ocioci\Dci..od N oo::t_' -lI"l=..c _f"")_ "'...... -"'.... "';"";0 QQUQUUUQUUUU~Q NCO_O\_NV'lO\'o:t'Irlr-t""l"=too ociv)o\"';ci~No\.,.jNr--:N..o"'; t""lt""lN"'t""lC"lt""lMNN-('f")OO"'l:t .->"''''...''''''''''''....- \c\OII')OO\C"'ltll1r-\CV'l ciciddciddooc UQU uu 111 11 II: :r: Ii::': :r: r:: 'jE "jE 'jE ~ C! "1 'jE 'jE <'! c! ~~p;~:q~~<!i~ CQC 0"6 ;:1:::r:~~~:r:I:::Z::::: ddd eid ......'" 00_.... o"";d UU~Q lI""lO\ t""l_ r-:t"ioOM _t""lll1l1"l 0-00 "'0'" d"":d '" .... o * * c c c c .2.S! .2 .S! iliiil ~ ~ ~ ~ .!l.!l .!l .!l c c c c -- -- 12 12 12::1 !! ::I ::I ::I - - - - ~~ ~ ~ ~ ""~ " e"" "" e c > u ~ cG -u ] j < !!"> -" ~ '" -" ~ ~"'l:!?;> g..i!S.~"8]:;~ is: ell co._ .- ....:I ~ = :s > ~ c ~~....l;;;!!_'E...;! .Bo..!! "" _ ] _ >>.~ = R <<S.;: ~ "'0 <;'i;9 :s ; i! e ~ '" il::: ~ o~-:: s !j]j ~ ~ ~ ::l dl e is: "e-OJ ... u ... .-oCf.) CCl .- - ~ ~ tlJ .- = u rJ') trIJ"O "a:C; = c.. ~ ~ C C ~ ; ; :c ~ =cc~";>,g._c~~ o--c:t:e";>,- ~ 5 ~ ~o ~"~~ ~ '5 ~ ~ '5 '5:6 ~"E il Ii "ij"i)"i) .0==== :::I==U uiiJ u e ::1::1::1 ~~cccc ccc~ 1:j:t:<'-t: cccC"O uuuuuuu'::i<";>, uuuUc >>>> >>>ti u:le4'! <<<<]~<<<<<<<l:l~8~~ cccc_".;;8888 888C:;~~c:l:l ....~.cccc cCCQ u ~~~~~.!siigiigi5~~r;:~ ....ccc..c.8:c..c..8:c."tJ.e ~ ct.I ~~~~:Z~E=E=E=E= E=E=E=~ if it if ~ = = :I ! .!l = - -NI:""l-.:tl,f')\Of'OOo-.5: :::~~:t~:::: ~ ~ ,; 'C .~ ~ " "0 "0 ..c ~ !! .:; o "! ~8 "~ "S: ""l:! ..'" ~'O e- ::I" -> ~~ II II u'" >9 ~ ~ 1 " " OJ '" o ... * c o i .!l "S: Iii g i ;; ~ ~ = :>: ~ '" ~ ~ ~ 8 "' y g ] :a &, ".. c :l ~ .. - .. - .. - .. .. - .. ... .. - .. ... .. - .. ... .. - .. .- .. - .. - .. - .. ... .. - ... - - .- .. !IJ OJ .... 'i c: -< .. .5 = 'ij :!l .... .. ~ ! "" .. ~ .lol .. ~ ~ == N 8 N .. .. .. .... f;I;1 .. :2j .. E-o z .. . < c .. .. < < .. " ... ... .. 0- ~ !IJ I: 15: N"" . 8== Nil." .. ll_ .....5..: = = E-o" ... ~ 0- .. Il. ... j ... ~""..: N== 81l." N ..- :IS": .... = = E-o" * fI) o ... OOP-OOOOO ~ OCC\-t"-f:".IOONo\ l""'-t"'-OOOClOt"'-OOf"'o 00"';00000 ooo~oooo f"o-lrlO\ f'l")lri"ltlrl 000\00 NOONO\ ...o..ooOr-:r-:\l5r-:1J:S s:: i::P;;~ 8 $( ~ $( ~ \Or--\Z5"'tt~\CC5r-- v:S'1506r-:r-:-.6r-:...o * fI) o ... OOP-OOUOO ~ 00 00 8 1oO-r---OO f'r"'-- OOOOl""-OOr- 00-':;00000 ~a;~a;Si~S::a; QOOOf"'-lrl-t'---OO \lS\&JoOr-:r-:-.or-:IJS ~~~~~~~~ ltCS..ooO"':vSloCS...o..Q d. .. U 88888888 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 !IJ :!! .. ... ~~~~~~~~ :l = .. i .. fI) .... .. ~ .. t "" " = " = = " = " > " = -< > 5 ~-< g > U tU ... 5 <(:>'E~ .( on ~.5 ~ cii c - CIS.!! ";j = 0'" ,,= U e e"'!'!!l8.5o~ -> B c .~:e ~ ..! 0 ......u~E-o=<~ =S-<o-=oCl:: =0,) -UU_tI.) ~.([;gS.(!!lB "go=E5>~~5<s = ... 0 u ~ u > ~ j<se=-<g:>-<- 'lil ~ ~ ~ [; = = .!:! ~ .. cii B c: .. .; e e ~..c=l/")5rrlctEca cc=__lS..=._..o ...._.g"'~.eo.g-;..!:! ":'Z~~.-..~..cU< UUUUUUUlll ~on\O\O"''''\O~ \C\Ct"-\C\OlI")lt"'IU"1 00000000 S:8S::a;a;8~~ ~t""'\Cl"""'''d"NO\r-- .n.n..cv-ivi'''';~~ ooo~oooo lI')-('f") _f'l")__ "'ttV')"d" ('1")000\0 .,-)v)IotS.n.n.n";"; UUUUUUUlll ~~~on-oo\O'" \0\0 r--\O \OV"lV')V') 00000000 a;~~~a;8a;8 lri\C)II')l"""f'f1-oot-- .,.).,.)'..o.,.;.,.;vi''';''; 80000000 I/")-"d"-"It('f")"l "It"'ttf'l")V')No\t"'-lT'I ";";...0":;"';";";"; 88888888 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ~~~~~~~~ " = " = = " = " > " = <( > 5 g-< ~ .( ;.~ g en c u> u -=" ..8.=> = = E c..._ -< .- = u e:: ::! CIS Z U 11")'" = .- >_cao=E B<N>-OO'" IP'U~~U V=-O=tICi;'::lU :::100_= ",.::I 5E"'uuSucn > U OJ :::I > U CIS 'l:I<(;>==-<=Be = ... c ~ ~ c _ CIS g 5 5 ~ -< .!:! ~ ~ ~ -=eo....";>....-- ... ":!l = 0 .. on-< :! ;> 0 l!! [; .~ 'f! ~ B ....c;;5~=rBca~ = ::I _ _ is.. ::I ._.c I ~ .g '" ~ .eo.g -; ::! Cl:: .....~~::;~tll!!:iu"'""'"CI) .; '1: B '1: " '1:l "0 ..c !IJ ~ '1:l " " " >< " on g r N 8 !ii! ;; ,:. ~ !! !Ii: ~ :>: ~ " IS ~ ~ .. y ei ~ '" * ... ,.. ,. "1 I C/) > s ~ Q l< ~ c '" ~ \'l, .0. -9 V '\ :I: 8- I I z .a_ e " r- i . ; o IVvOERS9fy ~IIE WATERMAN AVE . 0- \\ o . !i ~ m U> :I: ~ i!l o ~ !I: F ~ !!j ~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I - - p> ,... p> - :l: ~ 'tl :t ., ". ." 3. S- 3 'i ., 3 l 67 3 l150 -< l 33 !;l ., ~~QI) -"'- ... " ., > ......'" " " ..."'''' 0 ....."'... -0 5: - 1882 'tl "''''... -16 I "'-'" -965 !il .,I p.. ( 142 ~ ( 18 :e -'~'- ( 31 -'~'- ( 110 U> 0 U> I!. U> :E ." ., -d ,- ~ ~ -d ,- f!,! -d ,- 3. 111 J 8l 1562- ,- ~ 408 J 106 J 3 ., I 15, !:l r- 14 - ....."'''' 1116- "''''- " 0- l!l"'''' " ....."'- .....-'" ::!1 "'''' 104 , '" 144 , "''''... 189, "'- 0 ~ - - :-' !" :-' !" 'tl .g :t ~ ." ". ~ ., 1 S- U> co l'50 3 llll '" ..... " " '" '" ., -...- (") '" lil l663 5: ..."'... " "'........ '" -0'" -661 "'.....'" - 1025 co l15 ~ ~ ~ -'~'- " ~ -1443 -'~'- ( 25 ( 115 [ ~ co ~ > ~ 0 t,- 0 -d ,- " -d ,- !il l 465 J ~,- f!,! 88J <g 123 J U> Ie. :l: .....- ~ 1103- "'... 974 - "'...'" g1 971 - "'-'" ., 00 ~~ '" ... 0 ...Ie..... 3. '" 94, :e 59, " 3 Q. ::c ., ::c Q. " ., ::!1 .g U> - - !" !'" !" !'" m f :t ~ ." ., 'i !!l. S- it !;l l41 3 III 8 ., ..... " ........ -"'- " co -'" 5: 0'" ~~:: ~QI)~ U> "'''' .....- -811 -824 ~ -1157 ~ -'~ l'0 ~ -'I.. ( 839 ~ -'~'- ( 362 ~ -'~'- (198 ., ~ I!. 3. en 3 0 ., " " Q. ~t,- ., ~t,- m g' ~t,- co 36 J " 107, ., 914 _ 67 J a- ::!1 t 3 .. c;)tn 307 , ., 836- Ie-'" ~ 876- 8"'''' lB'" a 109 , ~~ 135 , l:: a. S' 0 ::c ~ ., 3 lil :0: !" ~ > :t ~ " 1 Q. ~ co ~ -...'" l172 " '" '" l'44 ., ....."'''' ll86 <;;lBS: 5: lS~l!l " ~~~ ~ -639 .~ .0-- 1035 ~ -822 -'~'- ( 358 -'~'- (36 ~ ..J~'- (136 II ~ 0 or g U> " -,f ,- ~t,- ." Q. 102 J ." 352 J ~ 350 J -d,- U> 5' tD ~ ~ <' 643- =~~ 824- ........'" ... 538- "'...- Q. "'-0 -"'- 58, "'''' ... 79 , " 866, "'...'" " :-0 s:: - - ~ ." ~ !" (1) ~ :t - ~~ ., :g co U> co ~ co !;l =~ '" ..... l145 ~ l75 ~ -..... " "''''- ON "'..... 5: o - g~;!:; "''''... -1407 -404 -'~ c: Co !!l. i -'~'- ( 16 " -'~'- ( 116 .., o~ [ Q. -IN'''' ::c ., C '" ~t ., 3 U> 15 J c: ~t,- 3 3!~ 'Tl ~ I 533 J ." 405 J ~t,- _. ~ Co- 0Cl ., 36, "'... 1132- -"'''' ~~(j 3. .....'" 0 86- ~~~ C ..... '" U> ~ 3 21, ." 115, ........ -..,"" ., 0 ~ Co::t; " ~ - ::!1 ~ 3..... ~ ... (1)~:::j > " "'....:..: r- C/) > 3: 5: I o l'O '< 'i:I C'l ~~ ::c:!:; ON S:::o ""0..., -iN"" s::: 'i:I~ 32"" --"",::>- O''i:ln -...,~ 3~'~ C'l~::::l "'....:..: '" i!: ?; .. to Q ~ Q i>; ~ ~ "- 'Tj _. (JQ s::: ..., C'l - .j::o. tl:l -8 V '\ :I: e- I I Z .<I!l>_ 'IIil1 "1J r- Ii ~ 'i z WATERMAN AVE ANOEIlSg" ~"< ~ ~ '" ~ .. CD ~ ~ !!l. ~ ~ II> 3. 3 II> " ::l! ~ !" '" ::!. 3 II> -< ~ ~ II> 3. 3 II> ::! ::l! ~ :-' '" =r II> 8l N n ! ~ CD .. ~ 3. ill " ::l! ~ !'" m II> !!l. ~ ~ 3. ill ::! ::l! "'~ _ CD .J~ 20 J 48, -... "'... CD """ '" .J!'- 145 J 0- 249 , ",IS _0 .J~ 142, !I -,f l!l~ '" l45 -0 ( 200 -d ,. ......- ::::~~ ~ ~ l19 t,. If:~ '" l13 t,. "'.., "'''' '" ~ !=' :t I i ~ ~ II> <: I 5<' :: :t I i ~ ~ ~ l Si' ~ :t 1 i [ .,.. i5 ~ t ii ~ ~ ~ f" f ~ c:> PI' [ ;:c ~ .. ~ ~ I en ~ or ::! Q. '" ~ < Q. I ~ :0 C TIPPECANOE AVE CD _ ~N~ .J~'- 805 J 1071- 10, 1842- 12 , 443J 1264- ~~ "'''' .J'- 1017_ 178, -...'" ~8~ .J~'- 110 J 562- 91, l149 -1303 (8 ~t,. I:!l"'CD - 1927 (30 ,. '" ... l716 -1348 ~,. l:l81 "'- -815 ( 767 l176 - 610 ( 269 ~t,. -...'" ..."'... -0_ n I ~ { ~ i fI2 !" f ~ i ~ 'C ![ ~ ,.... ::! " ;= ~ '!l 0- I ~ ~ lB' i " I 'C ![ ~ ,.... ::! "''''''' ..,...- .., - CD .J~'- 335 J 478 - 850, ~ .,.. ~ c:> ~ t ::! Q. ~ 3 l '" '2. 6l' = ~ ,.... ::! - -0'" U::8~ ..J!'- 538 J 152- 540, !" :I: 3. 3 II> ::! i ~ ,.... ::! ..,'" i0818l .J~'- 483J 31- 121, :-' ~gi! ..J~'- 99J 1592- 538 , ... '" -...'" "'-- .J~'- 431 J 793- 68, l284 -591 ( 131 ~t,. "'...- U::~!Il l105 -229 (140 ~t,. "''''- "''''... ......'" l 49 -31 ( 20 ~t,. -"'''' 0...... "'''' l152 -1420 (188 ~t,. ......'" ......- CD '" l161 - 813 ( 41 ~t,. "''''- '" """ - - - .. - ... - ... - ... - - - .. - ... ... .. ... ... ... ... - ... ... .. - .. ... ... ... ... - .. - .. - .... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. . 1.10 Eastbound between 1.215 and Waterman Avenue - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2002 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. YEAR 2020 BUILD OUT CONDITIONS Forecast year 2020 traffic volumes were developed using the approach discussed under the Analysis Methodology section. Appendix B presents the 2020 refmement forecast procedure for both the without and with project scenarios. The same circulation improvements and stop control examined in the 2002 analysis are also used for the year 2020 analysis. Year 2020 Without Project Conditions Figure 15A illustrates the year 2020 without project porn. peak hour turn volumes for study area intersections. Figure 15B illustrates the year 2020 without project mid-day peak hour turn volumes. The year 2020 without project levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in Table F. The level of service calculation sheets are contained in Appendix C. As indicated in Table F, all analysis intersections are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service under year 2020 without project conditions, with the exception of: . Waterman AvenueIMiIl Street (porn. peak hour) Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road (p.rn. peak hour) 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane (mid-day peak hour) Tippecanoe A venueIMiIl Street (porn. peak hour) Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Avenue (p.rn. peak hour) Tippecanoe AvenueIRosewood Drive (mid-day and p.m. peak hours) Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps (mid-day and p.rn. peak hours) Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps (mid-day and porn. peak hours) Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard (mid-day and p.m. peak hours). . . , , , , , , Table G summarizes the forecast year 2020 without project p.m. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table G, all freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 without project conditions, with the exception of: . 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue 1-10 Eastbound between California A venue and Alabama Avenue 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215. , , 3129/01 <<R:\CBD03lJ\Traffic\1be HublCMP TIA. wpd>> 40 r- C/) > '" Q ~ Q " Q ~ ~ ~ ,g, "" " ANOERSQfv ~E 0-0 WATERMAN AVE \ ~ ~ '7.~ ~ ( 1 =) ~i 1\_ fI 1 e~~89-e_____ ~ \\ LL1- "--0 z o .. '" ~ . 0- o ~ '" m .. :J: ~ :0 o n m ~ ~ 0: ;= ~ ~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I \\ ~ !" :-" ~ =I :I: ~ .. ~ 3. ar l35 3 l 79 3 ll88 !il 8l .. "''''~ "''''~ ::l .. ::l "''''0 ::l ...."'.... lil - 2175 "ll "''''~ -12 ~ "'....'" -1226 ~ ~ ( 20 :E ~~L. ( 33 ~~L. (164 0 U> j;. '" ::0 i[ = 0 299J -d ,.. ~ 189 J -d ,.. lG 2118- ,.. ~ I 16 , III r- 8- o&:~ 1436- ........- ::l ...."".... 115, ""'" 316 , ..."'''' "" ~ :-' !" !" =I =I '" :E '" ~ .. ~ ar !il ::l "'-'" l158 3 I:ll~~ l 240 ::l lil .. lil l641 ~~~ -1412 ::l "'''''0 -1299 ~ - 1971 ~ ~~L. ( 253 ~ ...J~L. (154 !2. i a .,... ill 0 ~t,.. ::l ~t,.. ~ 710 J ~,.. ~ 152 J <C 250 J CD U> 1618- ....'" 1622- "'''''''' CJ> 1212 - ........... ~ :::r "'''' ~"'81 ~ "'''''.... "''''' 742 , 96, "" ::l ~ Co l? 3 '" U> ~ !>> ~ ~ =I ~ =I ~ I !il l118 3 l16 ::l .. ::l "''''' lil ~~~ ::l ~~'" lil l$~ - 1332 "''''... -1647 > "'00 -1388 ~ ~L. ( 1064 ~ ~~L. ( 604 ~ ~~L. ( 301 ~ 3; Dl 0 .. ::l ::l Co ~t,.. m ~ ~t,.. CD 35 J .. 1388_ 190 J 2: U> 3 .. g 544, .. 1754- :::!!lj:: ~ 1193- ..."'.... a .... '" c: 176, ...."'0 190 , '" is. S' 0 ::0 ~ .. 3 CD '" U> -;. !&' :1>- ~ =I ~ '" Co ~ I CD ~ "'....... l 402 ~ !!l"'.... l 264 ::l .......'" l 264 f!f ~~~ -1080 U1~~ -1541 > lit:l!:l - 910 ::0 ~~L. ( 441 ~ ~~L. ( 117 J ~~L. ( 176 E- AT 0 ::l -d ,.. {l ~t,.. '2. ~t,.. Co 213 J 509J ~ 491 J U> ![ '" ~ :;: 975- -"'.... ~ 1396- ~~'" r- 758- !!l"'- Co ~"'.... 0"''''' "'''' 88, ~"" r- 124, "'- '" 1144 , "'....'" '" ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ p , (1) po =I ~ po.... '" <:> :>;"N ~ :E ::to l46 CD l87 '" t ~ ~ -"'''' ON '" ... ~~m "'....'" - 2203 -443 ....0 ~~~ l ~~L. ( 14 is. ~~L. ( 114 ::0 .. c:: _ft Dl 3 c: ~t,.. ~t,.. 3 ::r::t; 'Tl ca 247 J '" 333 J 0_ ae" i' i ....- ~;::.()- 8- 1966- -"'''' 0 131- ...."''''' == ... U> ...."''''' ~::,t'~ .... 23, '2. 144 , 0"" (1) 0 lil' 5~.'"o ~ ~ - "'11l~ VI r- ons;: :> ::l "'.... r- C/> > s: 0.: I o co ~~ ~co co.... ;>;"'N :to ON s::0 ~~;;l s:: -0> ., ::r::t :::>0_ ~s.&- 2..~~ 3.2. "0 ~~::::J "'-:>.. 'Tj Oti' s:: @ 0 ~ ~ " . 0 WATERMAN AVE \ ~ I r7~-. . ( 1 n m 0 ~ '" F G ~ ~ ~ :;; !!l 'I fi1 ~ en m ~ ~ HJ :0 c JlNOEFlSQN ~E ege98-.~ TlPPECANOEAVE 0- tlL :0 I m c i c en .. ~ \\ ~ ,... !=' ~ :I 1 lso ~ 8l"'''' l308 .. ::l ~Ng: ::l -... 5: - 2153 ~ "''''''' - 785 ~ ..I! I.. (9 ..I! I.. (126 & 318 J -d ,- -l!l -d ,- c !it 391 J Cil [ 1809- '" '" <0 ~ 674- ......- '" ~~~ 10 ... ..... 872 ... ::l s;;r ~ "" ~ :I :!: ~ 0 l3 ~ - l121 ::l '" !!l. ~o'" 5: 0: ~ "''''''' -1983 <0- ~ -255 I ..I ( 33 is. ..IJL. ( 83 ;c .. 3 595 J -.t,- 2087 - ,- ~ 12 ... ... ~ 170- ~g:N 0 s;;r ~. 602 ... "''''''' Ii!' ~ ..... ::l ~ !" :I ar ~ 3. 3 .. l 55 ~ ::l ...'" ~ "''''0> l881 "''''0 -31 ~ ..I! I.. ~ -1568 ~ (22 0 !it -.t,- ~ 660J -.,- ~ 304J t ..... 1478- IU ::l 32- :::llllll 139 ... "'''' 8- ;c .. 3 ~ '" ~ :"" !'" :I f ~ I l163 ~ iaiS ...-... ~;;j~ -1833 [ -1053 I ..I! I.. -'I.. ( 927 ( 202 , 0 Lr sa 161 J -d ,- t 1407_ 151 ... 1818 - 8l"'''' "'''' :J 672 ... .... <0 C. ;c ~ ~ '" ~ !" ,... :I ~ 1 c. lD ~ ~O. l225 :J ... l174 5: '" "'- ~~lll en '" <0 0 -654 ~ -1434 "" ..I! I.. ;c ( 214 -'JL. ( 71 l!. ::L or C :J -.t,- .g, -.t,- c. 195 J 495 J '" ![ '" ~ < 659- "'0>", 1350 - ~...", c. ~::j~ ..... 0"'''' 112 ... :J 53 ... '" '" c ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ -0. - VI OJ - - .... - - - ... .. ... .. ... .. - .. - .. - .. .. ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. - .. - ... ... .. .... .. .. ... ~ '" .. '" ... Cl '" Ol .. ~ C Cl .. ... ... ~ ~ C - S .... '" co .. ... r-. .. :2i co ... " z ~ ~ ~ < " . ~ < < ~ ~ '"~ l!!5..l ..= 31S 1ll.! u' ~u ll~i> l !!l -'"", ll.50 ~=..l =... ..... lil&:s ;: ~! Q 'u "'- -> :;: '" l!!!iig .. .. == :a..llll II C._ = ~ a. u-Q -' ll~u ell.i> ll. i -S'"", -"0 ~~..l ~... = . ....&:s :i ~! "'Q ...u :ii> . . . . . I1lll.oClClI1lUll.oll.oClll.o Clll.oll.oll.o UU Q:l Q:l OO~-"I:tNlI")~I"";\CI1'f1 '8 . . . '0'" ..... \0 QOMClO"'fl"H"'1O\-C \O_'OII:tlt')\CINNNrt'l_ .."'......"'-.."''''''' Q\CCI\Q\CJ\I"""('I"l\f')O\'II:t 0"':0000"":"':0"": . Clll.oU III II l::;::: :::: 'i!'i!'i!",,:r.,.(di'i!"1~ !l!l"00-"'!l"00~ ilili;!....OO"'ili;!....- .......... ...... c c c c ::~::~S~::::~~ d"":d 0"': . . . . ell"l t"i N r'\Ci - ~ _N -- .... '0 o Clll.o ~ll.oll.oll.o UU Q:l Q:l . . . . I1lll.oClClClUll.oll.oClUll.oll.oll.oll.o * . * * NV'lOOo\\Qr--~~"I:t- .. .. .. .. .. .. 0\ - .. . VlOOO-NM_NOO- 10000('I''lll')lI'lNNN('f'')('f'') ..'0'0...."''0-0.....- O\QOOO\O\lI'lt'l"'lll')O\OO o"':c:idcio"";"";dc:i . ClI1lU UCl III 11 ;:::::: :::t: 'i!'i!'i! r., ~ >q 'i!'i! ~"": ~~~~~:q~~;;!;r;: (s(so (S ::;:;:~~~J: ddd ~...... "'..... dd ("")ClC!~~ .. "It \0- ~('f")lI')"lt -....- .....'00 tf1~~ ***** r--~t"ill') "t--O' lI')lI"lt--\O M_("\Ioo 00'0.... '0'0", "";"";0 N~"'!lX! "r---r--M OOOrr:l "'_M_ -0'0 ~CC!~ --- . . . . ll.oll.oll.oll.o O\q""!N 'O"lt . 0_0\- "1__00 ........'" ....00 "";"";0 _00\1')00 ~g~:! '" ..... o .9.~ .2 .9 IIII c c c c -- -- e e e e SEas tftf~tf ~ '''is. " oj ~ e "i ; <!;? - ~ ~ - -~ o '" ...J 0 g 'C ~ "0 ~ "E 8 llI:;;-lii.~ .5"'Cll=5c"'.!! 6: "~...l'ii" 'O...l]'-'lii"ii"- Iii _.cc_--._SRca- )i!-.8= c",'-' e 1l"']'E'e...:l; ei,. ~ rJ ~~ e~ '':-" ~ ~ ~ i ~ .~VJ ~ .6..] ~ ~ UJ W) oS '7; d! ai _ c:: "'0 Q..~ S = c 1S = en C C -g <>>>"m<<<<<<<g-,,~ ~~~~~6: II 888 88 8'" ~<~ 5 ~ <<I<<I<<I_accccc cccc;;> U u 1111~Jglglgll~;~~~ "'''''''mol:~",~",~",,,,'O:le:l :l ~~~~:Z:ih:i=i=i= i=i=i=~ fiE if III C 1 .!l Il - -Nt"'l'o:tIl"l\Qf"'-OOO\S ::::~~:!; ~~ ..... 00 - - .. 'C .!l 'C '-' "0 "0 .c ~ !! -s ~ 1l " u " " '" 3 og l! "''' - '-' OQ os: ",II "'''' ~'O e- .a ~ ~~ II II u'" ;;;3 J . c:i o 'J .5 "0 .~ ;; C co .;;; c ::> ~ I ~ ~ ~ = '" ~ &: e ~ 8 III Y ~ ~ ~ - ..., .- - - ... - .. ... .... - - ... '" .;; .... ;; c -< .. .S 'i .; ~ .... 01 ~ .. t '" .. = " = ..Ill 01 4: :!1 =-= ~ .. 01 .. .... . " .. :;s .. ... .. - ~ .. r .. ~ ... - ... - ... - ... - ... - ... - ... - .. - ... - ... ... .. .. .... i: ll. '" = is:: => '" . s== Nll.;> .. :i_ ....S..: ~~ ... .. .. .... i: ll. ... 8 ..c ... ~"'..: :=:=~ :=:ll..... ..- :is..: .... " " ...;> * * * * * * * rI.l o ...l l-.l-.l-.l-.l-.l-.l-.~ u i> 8~~~b88~ -"';"';"';"";"";""':0 ooooooo~ \0 00 t--O\ 00 r---oo f"l"'llrlf"oolr'lf"l"'l.......O C\C\-:O\O\oOC\oO - ~ooooooo r--OO......r-OOOON N('t')NO-.::tf"'oof""'l 0\0\-:-0\0\000000 - * * * * * * rI.l o ...l l-.l-.l-.l-.l-.~l-.~ ~ \OOONOOll")O\Nr-- OOf"l"'lOOO\OO\ "";"";"";"";"";0"";0 oooooo~o -(".111")('10000 -.:::t ('I'jln\ClI".lN\C In 0\0\-:0\0\000\00 - ~~S~;sa;8S ONNNO\f"l"'lt"-N 0\0\"';0;00000000 - =. a 88888888 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 rtl c 01 ...l -.t-.t-.t-.t-.t-.t-.t-.t :I c E OIl .. rI.l .... 01 ~ ~ '" " = " ~ 6 " > " ::l -< > " Iii ~-< := > II,) co - Iii -< >'e ~ < on ~.5 ~ '" c- CQ,S(;CQ Eo_~ \l3U~ giS..oo.Q -> g is .2-~ ;..! ~ _lI,)>fo-lo=au:s<uo ~~<(!:iilii ii: c 0 c C " > ~ " ~ :I-0,!d><.!E>t .j'ii5~~8"~Cii '" !l ;> '" c .5 .- '" OI"'_.8!:::lsEe r.l..c con;; " c..e '" = = ::s _ _ c. = ._ .Q ... ._ 0 N ~ .eo 0 ;; ..!! .:.z~.:.:>...~u<( .. ClCll-.~ClClClCl 0\ 0\ I/")"l:t N......('f")OO 00 00 0 0\0\0000r-- 00"";00000 a;~SSsiq:::8a; r--OONNC5\OfC")oo r:r-=o\oOoOr-:r-=..a ~SSa;~~~g I/")lr'lO\O\oo"'lto\C r-:"':orS...:r-=r-.:r:\tS .. ClCll-.ClClClClCl OOOO-.:tf""'l-\CNOO DQOOOO\O\oooor-- 00"';00000 ~S~a;a;;s~~ r--......--O\lI"lNOO r-:r:o\oO....:r:....:\tS 08~OOOOO '" Nf"l"'lf"l"'lOO- -.::tlr'l 0\t"-f"l"'l0\\C "":"':00"":"": r:..c \tS 88888888 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 -.:t"l:t-.:t-.::t"'l:!"vv'lllt " ::l " C ::l " C " > " ::l -< > Iii 8 <( ~ <;~g ~ a &> ~ .5 g E .9o.~ < Z II,) lI".l B E- c .~ o<-~.8i5E_ - N?,u~~u uc~o=~:.=!U ::s 0 0 _ c co.:::l 5E-u~gutl) > " " = <(" 8 l<("iiu~ii~," =cc~~i)~~.c CI 0 ::l.........._ .... " '" .lIlEO.....".......r.::::: ... ,,~ co'"~,..... => =c.5.-=0 .. OE'"sEe- ~ c';; u lccE.s~ =s-'tiJQ.s:.== I ::::~~~E=~~<e5 .,j 'C B .C U ." '0 ..c j - i I M ,;.. . j ~ :z: ~ i ~ ~ 8 '" ,. ~ ." " " u >< " '" o ...l .. ~ - ,- - .' - .. - ... - - ...... - - ... - ... ... - - - ... - - - - ... - ... - .... - .... - ... - ... LSAASSOCIATES, INC. Year 2020 Plus Project Conditions The year 2020 plus project condition considers the addition of traffic generated by build out of the proposed project to the roadways in the project vicinity. Figure 16A illustrates the 2020 plus project p.rn. peak hour intersection turn volumes. Figure 16B illustrates the 2020 plus project mid-day peak hour volumes. The levels of service for the key intersections in the project vicinity are summarized in previously referenced Table F. The level of service calculation sheets are contained in Appendix C. As indicated in Table F, all intersections examined are projected to continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service with the addition of project traffic to the year 2020 background conditions, with the exception of: , Waterman A venuelMill Street - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS E during the p.rn. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. . Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.rn. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. , 1-10 Westbound RampIHospitality Lane - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS E during the mid-day peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project traffic would result in the degradation of mid-day peak hour intersection operations from LOS E to LOS F and the degradation of p.m. peak hour intersection operations from LOS D to LOS E. . Tippecanoe A venuelMill Street - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. , Tippecanoe A venuelSan Bernardino Avenue - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. . Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.rn. peak hours. , Tippecanoe A venue/Rosewood Drive - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Due to changes in the intersection (Le.. elimination of the west leg) that would occur with implementation of the proposed project, intersection operations would be improved in the 2020 plus project condition. However, this location would operate at LOS E during the mid- day peak hour. . Tippecanoe Avenue!I.I0 Westbound Ramps - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.rn. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. 3129101 <<R,ICBD030\TraflicIThe HubICMP TIA,wpd>> 45 . .. ~ r- C/) > ~ " l'! ~ '" " c ~ c 0; ~ .0 "" " -8 V '\ :c e- II z -e- '"D r- i! ~ . ; . IlJv~RS ~E WATERMAN AVE o 0- \\ o . 1I ~ " m II> :r ~ ~ " i I: F ~ !!l ~ m npPECANOE AVE o- J - - ~ - ~ - 'tl =t :t: ~ .. =>. '0 3. f 3 1 3 .. l79 l'88 -< l33 .. ...."'- "''''- '" => ~ "''''''' => li:"'co g:"'.... ...."'''' -0 lil - 2775 'tl "'- -12 I ....'" -1251 lil .J~l. ( 142 ~ (20 ~ .J~l. (33 .J~l. (164 '" ~ It 12. :>:l ![ .. -d ,- 0 -d ,- fa -d ,- 3. 111 J ! 2455 - ,- ~ 461J 193 J 3 .. 16, f$ r- 8- o~~ 1462- => 0- !:!l~&l => t:....- "'.... :!1 189, "'- 115, "'''' 316 , "''''' '" C ~ - - :-< !" :-< !" 'tl =t =t :E '0 =>" '0 'lil !!l. .. ~ '" !ll ~ '" l'50 l240 '" '" 2 5 ~-'" .. ~~~ n '" l 769 CD~m => '" '" - 1437 - '" co -1332 '" l'5 ~ > => ~ ~ - 2174 .J~l. r 253 ! .J~l. (154 9i ~ i 0 > <5 ill g '" t,- ~ 710 J ~,- fa 150 J ~t,- .g 275 J ~t,- '" Ie. '" 1798- ~&l 1647- g1 1247- ........'" :t: ....- ~ ~"'''' .. .... co ","'!J: 0 "''''.... 3. '" c: "'.... 762 , " 96, '" " 3 CL ~ .. :>:l " .. :!1 3 '0 '" - - !'O fo' !'O fo' m f) =t ~ .. '0 !!l. '0 ~ '" ~ ~ !ll l'18 l'6 '" 2 ~c; 2 "''''''' .. '" -.... RJ ~~~ " --'" '" "'''' -1364 -1889 ~ '" co co -1402 ~ .J~ l'0 i .Jl. ( 1216 i .J~l. (604 ~ .J~l. ( 352 .. 3. 3 <5 .. is. " .. ~t,- m f ~t,- ~ 35 J -d ,- " 190 J :!1 107, .. 1437_ ~ .. ....'" 544, .. 1796- ~g:t: :E 1208- ~cni "'''' a. '" c: 180 , '" '" co '< 190 , is. e:' ~ ~ 3 '" '0 '" ~ !" ,.. > =t ~ " 1 CL I '" ~ "''''.... l 406 " Ill"'.... l284 .. l264 ~~~ lil <J~ " f8~~ ~ ~1102 -4-- 1600 J "''''''' -910 .J~l. (486 ~ .J~l. ( 117 .J~l. (190 II ~ ill g " ~t,- ~t,- '5!. CL 213 J '5!. 509J l>> 491 J ~t,- '" ![ OJ -. ~ "< ~ 996- -~l!l 1457- --'" r- 758- "''''- 88, ~- ~ 153 , ~~cc " 1210, ~~~ :-0 ~ - - ~ '"C ~ P ell ~ =t . - ~~ .. :g '" 8: ~ ~ :=2; - .... ~....8i l'52 '" _w~ l87 ~ ;;~ " 8' ON lil - 2155 ~~c.n -443 S::O !!l. .J~ ~ .J~l. c: ( 14 " .J~l. ( 165 ....N..., ~ CL ....,o;t ~ :>:l .. s:: '"C::x: ~t .. 3 ~ '" 15 J c: ~t,- ~t,- Ie. I 596 J '0 333 J 3 -- :t: ~ ,.... - OCI .. 36, "'.... 5::Cil"'" 3. ....'" 1954- -"'''' l 131- "''''- s:: .... '" -"'.... 2.~2 @ 3 23, 144 , "''''''' .. C ![ =oS: "tl " ~ - :!1 ~ := ell...., 0'1 r- ell OS;: ;> " CIl_ ,. ~ ~ ~ r- C/) > ;;: 1; ~ ~ ~ " ~ $ ,g, '" ~ -$ V '\ :c El- I I z -8- 'tI r- j .. :; . 'WDEFtSQry ~I'E WATERMAN AVE ~I ~ o . II i o m ~ ~ ~ F ~ ~ en 6 :l; ~ TIPPECANOE AVE 0- I - - ~ ~ !=' ~ ." :t :::r ~ CD 8l l157 ~ l308 ~!l &l 23 :;: ii~~ " ""'"'' - 2130 " - .. -785 ~ ~ > a ..J! l ..J!L.. f9 ~ ..J!L.. f 149 ~ 0 .. .,t CD 822 J .,t,- '2. 391 J .,t,- ~ 20J c: ~ 01 48 ") !!l1l!l I 1792 - ~ <."" ~ 674- ........- CD """ .. 3. ..... 10 ") r- 975 ") <,".. '" 3 " CD C " ~ ::2 - ::: ~ ~ :t . ;? - .., 0 .., ~ 3 CD CD l45 g l121 -< <;;!!l.. ~ .. ...._N ~ .... '" > c_", -0 - 2759 "'.. - -255 ~ ..J!L.. .. 200 ~ f 33 3 -'!L.. f 152 .. CD 0- 3: I ::0 CD .,t,- ~ 595 J ~t,- 3. 145 J 2573 - ,- 1 3 CD 0- ........- 12 ") .... 170- ~..- " =g;~ c 0 ::j~ ::2 249 ") !<' ~. 602 ") ~ ~ r- " - ~ ~ :"" :I: ." :t CD i' 1 3. .. 3 CD CD l55 '" ~ ~ " 8l~g: ." (') ..... ll058 ~ .. ., -31 !!l ! l19 i -1850 0 ..J!L.. f22 ![ .. '2. > - ~ t,- 0 g ~ 660J .,,- ~ 528 J .,t,- CD .. ~ !> II!. sa; 1740- lI:lS 32- ::llllll if .. c: .. ., 139 ") .... 3. is. 3 Ql CD " .a ::2 .. 1>> ~ :"" :t :t m 1 CD 1 a ~ .,~ " l':l~ ....-.... l163 ~ .,..... ., -'" ....."'.... ~ 1667 .. "'''' -1125 I 3: ..J! l13 ~ ..JL.. f 1138 ..J!L.. f 202 CD ~ 3. 0 il 142 ") t,- m fa 159 J .,t,- " CD 1482_ .. ::2 S" f 151 ") 1851- .... '" 3: c'" '" "'., :::l 698 ") '" '" 0.: 0- ::0 I CD 0 3 .., :>:> .. '< :;: !D '"1:1 :t (1) ~ I ~~ r ::r:~ ~O.... l232 " l174 i .... '" ON en Q;trg~ -684 ~ ~~~ - 1520 Co ;a ..J!L.. f 249 -'!L.. f 71 "'N~ ~ 3: ""0::'- or 0 ..... " :::l .. ..... '"1:1::t; ::! 0- 195 J .,t,- '2. 495 J .,t,- 3=-" .. ~ '" ~cn<::l- 0t1 ~ 690- ~~~ ~ 1431- -.... ., C r- .....,.. 2.~~ .., 112 ") "'.......... :::l 92 ") .... (1) E~"'c - ::l (1)'~ 0- (1)(')5:' t:l:I cn _ - - .. - ... - ... - ... ... .. .. .. - .. ... .. - .. - .. - - - .. - ... - .. ... ... - - - - ... - LSA ASSOCIATES. JNC. , Tippecanoe AvenueJI.lO Eastbound Ramps - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.rn. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. , Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.rn. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Previously referenced Table G summarizes the forecast year 2020 plus project p.rn. peak hour freeway mainline traffic volumes and levels of service for the study area freeway segments. As seen in Table E, all freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 plus project conditions, with the exception of: , 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. . 1-10 Eastbound between Mountain View Avenue and California Avenue - addition of project traffic will result in the degradation of operations along this freeway segment to LOS F. . 1-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Street - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. , 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1.215 - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Project Contribution to Total New Volumes As part of the CMP traffic impact analysis requirements, the contribution of project increment traffic to total new traffic was determined for all study area key intersections. Table H summarizes the project contribution to these intersections. The total existing and total year 2020 plus project peak hour traffic is the sum of all turn movements for each intersection approach. The total new traffic is the difference between the year 2020 and the existing peak hour traffic volumes. Total project traffic is the sum of the project increment peak hour traffic volume through the study area key intersections. The project contribution to total new traffic is calculated by dividing the project increment by the total new traffic. These calculations are required for a CMP traffic impact analysis, and consider only the growth in traffic up to the levels of the SCAG estimates for population housing and employment for 2015. In an ultimate General Plan build out horizon, growth in traffic may exceed these volumes, reducing the percentage of contribution of the proposed project. Therefore, these percentages should be evaluated in this context before application to mitigation costs to reflect the total project fair share contribution. 3129/01 <<R:ICBD030\TrafficIThe HubICMP TIA. wpd>> 48 - ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. - ... Table H - Project Percentage of Total New Traffic Volumes at Study Area Intersections - .. P.M. Peak Hour Total Total Total New Total Ratio Intersection Existina Year 2020 Traffic: Project ProjJNew I . Waterman AvenuelMill Street 3,784 5,577 1,793 64 3.6% 2. Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road 3,186 5,526 2.339 130 5.6% 3. Waterman AvenuelVanderbilt Way 2.661 3,819 1.159 141 12.2% 4. Waterman AvenueIHospitality Way 4,963 6,731 1,768 212 12.0% 5. 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane 2,954 4,433 1.479 370 25.0% 6. Harriman PlaceIHospitality Lane 1,491 2,830 1,338 371 27.7% 7. Tippecanoe A venuelMill Street 2,396 6.354 3.958 91 2.3% 8. Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Avenue 2,854 7,099 4,245 99 2.3% 9. Tippecanoe A venueIHospitality Lane 2,877 5,623 2.746 190 6.9% 10. Tippecanoe AvenuelLaurelwood Drive 2,837 6,010 3,174 941 29.7% 11. Tippecanoe AvenueIRosewood Drive 2,674 5,301 2,627 727 27.7% 12. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps 3,493 6,604 3,111 727 23.4% 13. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps 3.375 6,270 2,895 421 14.5% Total TippecanoelI-1O Interchange' 4,104 7,765 3,660 727 19.9% 14. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard 3,214 6,207 2,993 120 4.0% 15 . Harriman PlaceIPhase I Westerly Access 355 1.385 1.030 443 43.0% 16. Harriman PlacelPrimary Access 355 2,067 1,712 1,125 65.7% 17. Harriman PlaceIPhase 2 Central Access 355 1,798 1,443 856 59.3% 18. Harriman PlacelEasterly Access 355 1,933 1,578 991 62.8% ... - ... ... .., - ... - .. - .. ... ... .. ... .. - Sum of interchange approaches = Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps southbound and westbound approaches. plus Tippecanoe AvenuelI-I0 Eastbound Ramps northbound and eastbound approaches. Project contribution percentage used for calculating contribution to cost of reconstruction of Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO interchange. .. ... ... ... ... - ... ... ... ... ... ... .. _ 3/29101 (R:ICBD030\Traffic\1be Hub\Model.xIsICOIltrib) .. - ... - ... ... .. ... .. - .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... ... .... .. .... .. ... .. ... ... - ... - - LSAASSOCIATES.INC. PROJECT ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS Operations of the intersections of the project access driveways along Harriman Place have been analyzed as part of the overall intersection level of service analysis. As the year 2002 plus project and year 2020 plus project analyses indicate, all project access driveways will operate with satisfactory levels of service based on the turn restrictions discussed in the project description. Analysis performed for each of the project access driveways indicates that the following restrictions and stop control will need to be included in the project design: . West Access to Phase I - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). The level of service analysis indicates that full ingress and egress can be accommodated at this location. , Primary Access - To maintain satisfactory operations, this location will need to be signalized. . Central Access to Phase II - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (Le., the driveway). Analysis indicates that providing for full ingress and egress at this location would result in unsatisfactory levels of service. Therefore, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. , East Access to Phase I - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (Le., the driveway). Due to the proximity to Tippecanoe Avenue, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right -out movements only. , East Access to Phase II - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (Le., the driveway). Due to the proximity to Tippecanoe Avenue, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS For those intersections forecast to exhibit an impact by project development, improvements have been identified as mitigation measures to bring peak hour operations into conformance with the minimum level of service standards (Le., LOS D). For potentially impacted freeway segments, mitigation has been provided to achieve the CMP LOS E standard. Year 2002 Improvements Intersection Improvements Under year 2002 conditions, five locations will exceed minimum thresholds. Modifications to intersection lane improvements are recommended as mitigation measures to achieve minimum level of service thresholds for these locations, as follows: . 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane - Modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the northbound right turn movement. 3129/01 <<R:\CBD030\TnfficIThc HublCMP TIA.wpcI>> 50 - - - ... ... ... - ... ... ... - I'" .. II" - ... ... ... ... ... '"" ... .. ... ... ... - ... - ... .. - .. ... ... LSAASSOCIATES, INC. . Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane and a separate eastbound right turn lane, and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the eastbound right turn movement. . Tippecanoe AvenueJI.I0 Westbound Ramps - Addition of a westbound free right turn lane. , Tippecanoe AvenueJI-I0 Eastbound Ramps - Addition of a separate northbound right turn lane and a second southbound left turn lane. In order to accept the dual southbound left turn lanes, Tippecanoe Avenue under the freeway bridge would need to be widened. Widening of the roadway cannot be accommodated within the space available under the 1-10 bridge. Improvement of operations at this intersection would require reconstruction of the Tippecanoell-IO interchange. While plans for the interchange reconstruction are currently being prepared by Caltrans. SANBAG, and the City of San Bernardino, the reconstruction will not be completed by 2002. Therefore, the proposed project will have a temporary significant and unavoidable impact at Tippecanoe A venueJI-1O Eastbound Ramps. , Anderson StreetJRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane. Roadway Improvements Under year 2002 conditions, the following roadway improvements will need to be implemented: . Harriman Place - Construct the realignment of Harriman Place from Orchard Drive to Tippecanoe Avenue at Laurelwood Drive as a four-lane divided roadway with a raised median between Tippecanoe Avenue and Orchard Drive. The design of Harriman Place will need to include the improvements identified for the Tippecanoe AvenuelLaurelwood Drive intersection. above. . Rosewood Drive - Vacate Rosewood Drive between Orchard Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue. Freeway Improvements Under year 2002 conditions, one freeway segment will exceed minimum thresholds. Lane additions to improve freeway operations to LOS E or better are: , 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. Under Caltrans policy, it is likely that Caltrans would desire to have also have a westbound lane constructed to provide for balanced lanes in each direction. However, for purposes of this assessment, only one eastbound lane is included, as this is all this would be required to provide satisfactory operations. 3/29101 <<R:\CBD03O\Traflic\1be HubICMP T1A. wpd>> 51 - - - - ... - ... - ... - ... - ... - - - .. - ... ... ... ... ... - ... - ... ... ... - .. - ... - - LSAASSOCIATES. INC. Year 2020 Improvements Intersection Improvements Under year 2020 conditions, ten locations will exceed minimum thresholds. Modifications to intersection lane improvements are recommended as mitigation measures to achieve minimum level of service thresholds for these locations, as follows: , Waterman A venueJMill Street - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane. . Waterman A venue/Orange Show Road - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second southbound left tum lane, and a separate southbound right turn lane. , 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitaIity Lane - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right turn movement. , Tippecanoe A venueJMill Street - Addition of a northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, a separate westbound right turn lane. and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for the northbound right turn movement. . Tippecanoe A venueJSan Bernardino Avenue - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane. a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane. . Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, conversion of the eastbound through lane to a shared through/right turn lane (resulting in one eastbound left turn lane, one shared through/right turn lane, and one dedicated right turn lane), and addition of a fourth southbound through lane. The additional southbound through lane will connect to the dedicated southbound right turn lane on Tippecanoe A venue from Laurelwood Drive to the 1-10 westbound ramp that is to be built as part of the 1-10 freeway interchange reconstruction. . Tippecanoe A venueIRosewood Drive - Elimination of southbound left turn lane (i.e., restrict traffic to/from Rosewood Drive to right-inlright-out only). This modification will be accomplished by completing the landscaped median along Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and the 1-10 westbound ramps. . Tippecanoe AvenueJI-IO Westbound Ramps - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a southbound free right turn lane, and a westbound free right turn lane. , Tippecanoe AvenueJI-IO Eastbound Ramps - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, and a free southbound right turn lane (i.e., construction of a loop ramp to replace the existing southbound left turn lane). 3129/01 <<R:\CBD030\TrafficIThe HubICMP TIA. wpd>> 52 - - - - - - ... - - ... .. - - - - ... ... - .. - ... ... .. - ... - - - ... - - - ... - ... - - LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. , Anderson StreetJRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a separate southbound right turn lane, and a second eastbound left turn lane. Figure 17 illustrates the resulting intersection geometrics. It should be noted that the recommended improvements for the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps and Tippecanoe Avenue/I-I0 Eastbound Ramps cannot be accommndated within the space available under the 1-10 bridge. Therefore, improvement of operations at these intersections would require the reconstruction ofthe Tippecanoe Avenue/I-I0 interchange. Roadway Improvements Under year 2020 conditions, the following roadway improvements will need to be implemented: , Harriman Place - Construct the realignment of Harriman Place from Orchard Drive to Tippecanoe A venue at Laurelwood Drive as a four-lane divided roadway with a raised median between Tippecanoe Avenue and Orchard Drive. The design of Harriman Place will need to include the improvements identified for the Tippecanoe A venueJLaurelwood Drive intersection. above. , Rosewood Drive - Vacate Rosewood Drive between Orchard Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue. Tippecanoe A venue Median - At the request of the City, the project shall construct. in conjunction with the City, a landscaped median along Tippecanoe Avenue between Laurelwood Drive and the 1-10 westbound ramps. , Freeway Improvements Under year 2020 conditions, one freeway segment will exceed minimum thresholds. Lane additions to improve freeway operations to LOS E or better are: . 1-10 between Ninth Street and 1-215 - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. Under Caltrans policy, it is likely that Caltrans would desire to have also have a westbound lane constructed to provide for halanced lanes in each direction. However. for purposes of this assessment, only one eastbound lane is included, as this is all this would be required to provide satisfactory operations. . 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. one eastbound mixed-flow lane, and one westbound HOV lane. Under Caltrans policy, it is likely that Caltrans would desire to have also have an additional westbound mixed-flow lane constructed to provide for balanced lanes in each direction. However, for purposes of this assessment, only two eastbound lanes and one westbound lane area included, as this is all this would be required to provide satisfactory operations. 3/29/01 <<R:ICBD030\Traffic\1be HubICMP T1A.wpd>> 53 r - ,... , ... ... . ... .. . , , , . . ~ r- " ~ :: -8 ; C/) Q ~ ~ . ~ > :;; . ~ 0-. WATERMAN AVE . 0- ~ '\ "- \ ~ I . . :I: $- ~ , I I " m i z 0: ~ .... " ~ ,.. Z Cl !!l -e- m ~ .. "tJ ~ r- ~ ~ AAlOEFlSQIv ~E TIPPECANOE AVE O- J - - !" :-" !" - ~ :I: .., ::i .. "'. -0 3. ar 3 al 3 3 .l. .. ~ .l. .. -< '" l .. - '" '" 1;- -4 1il .., ~ - - ~ .J~~l., lil <1~b ~ .J - i .J~~l. r en en II!. ~ -0 :I: <1 Ho:> i[ J .,t~ ~ J <1.,tt,- .. ~ " 3. en - ,- ~ CD 3 I - .- .J. - .. '" '" ... - :>! c -. ... ~ - - :-' !" :-' !" ::i l .., ::i -0 ~ ~ :::r 1 al .. l"T1 <l= ar en ~ - 3 - CD '" '" '" - .. - ("') 1il - 1il r '" CD ~~ ~ - ~ <:>I~~l.b ~ ~~l.b r '" ~ [ ~ - i .IJ (5 .IJ > ;:; iil ~ J <1.,tf> '" ~ .,t~ ~1)c. ~ ~ .,., ,- ~ ., en CD en t J "T1 - en J :r - ~ .. - 3. - - " '" - 3 Q. - i} Q. .. '" i} '" .. :>! 3 1i: - ~ !" f" !" ::i ~ m ::i ~ .l. .. -0 ~ fa. ~ <l= ~ !l .l. C:"T1 - .. ~ 1il '" - CD r ~ en <1~ ~ - ~ ~ - <:>I ~ ~ l.b + ~ -A-l. <j CD .. ~ - 3; ~ r 3. .. ! 3 ;:; '" J <1" t t f> J .,.f,- .. i} ~~ m 9>- f " .. :>! t - - = - - .. - ~ - a. a. i} 3' 9>- -. " i} '" ~ .. .g CD en - !D ,... z ,... ~ ::i ~ 0 ?:' ;; ~ <l= ~ ~ l . tol Q. i? ~ ~ I:l CD - ~ .l. 'Tj Ul - tol g - ~ .. s:: "' 2 - '" r - ..... n Cl en ~ :: " ;a ~ ~ l.b ~ .JHl. - - '" ,. ~ m :.,; <j r ~ .J~l. ell ;;' ~ ~ ~ r - 51: ciQ' E" or lil lil 0 .. !!: or " J .,t t,-. J "2. j .,~t~ o' oo Q. '2. m: ..... 3 S' .. m: + ell = J ~ '" r- ~ lD - ~ en ~ ~ .- ell n 9>- .- '" - " " - (';) g ... - ...... o' - -. _. = 0 Cl ... -. 0 n 0 a 3 n ell =r - - !" 0 ;;. !" !" , 3 ~ .., ::i - :::r ~ .l. Q ell .. ~ en l ..... CD - '" - en 0' ~ " - ~ - en 1il <l= - ~~ !!!. <1~ l <:>I~ l. r '" .J~~l. > Q. r fl '" .. ......'" CD <1~~ .. ~ 3 <1 ., t ,. ;:l"::z:: en ~ c: .,~ II!. Cil -0 ?;:g. :I: [ J ~ !l .. a-:n (JCI 3. - en 3 -0 (JCI~ s:: .. !;O' - i[ " !a"tl ..... :>! ... ~ ell O'::::J .- - '" 0:>" -...l LSA ASSOCIATES. tHe. ...... - - , 1-10 between Waterman Avenue and Alabama Street - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. Under Caltrans policy, it is likely that Caltrans would desire to have also have a westbound lane constructed to provide for balanced lanes in each direction. However, for purposes of this assessment, only one eastbound lane is included, as this is all this would be required to provide satisfactory operations. ... ... ... .. ... Levels of Service with Improvements Table I presents the levels of service with the recommended intersection improvements for the 2002 plus project conditions. In addition, the levels of service without the improvements are included for comparative purposes. With the implementation of the recommended intersection improvements, the minimum level of service standards are maintained at the study area key intersections where a significant project impact is identified. Table] presents the levels of service with recommended freeway improvements for the 2002 plus project conditions. ... .. .. ... ... Table K presents the levels of service with the recommended intersection improvements for the 2020 plus project conditions. In addition, the levels of service without the improvements are included for comparative purposes. With the implementation of the recommended intersection improvements, the minimum level of service standards are maintained at the study area key intersections where a significant project impact is identified. Table L presents the levels of service with recommended freeway improvements for the 2020 plus project conditions. ... ... ... .. .... Cost Estimates .. ... Cost estimates have been developed for the recommended intersection and freeway mainline improvements. The detailed cost estimate calculations are included in Appendix F. The year 2020 improvement costs and project contributions to these improvements are summarized in Table M. .. ... The unit costs are based on standard preliminary construction cost estimates for CMP improvements. The cost estimates include unit costs for pavement striping and signing changes. These cost estimates do not include preliminary engineering, and are intended solely for the CMP stated purpose of discussion with the local jurisdiction and with neighboring jurisdictions. They do not imply any legal responsibility or formula for contributions to mitigation. Total estimate costs are provided below. II" ... ... ... Intersection and Roadway Improvements ... , Waterman A venuelMill Street - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane - total cost of $181,250 with the project's fair share being $6,471. - ... , Waterman A venue/Orange Show Road - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, and a separate southbound right turn lane - total cost of $400,200 with the project's fair share being $22,240. ... ... ... .. ... ... 3/29101 <<R:ICBD030\Traflic\1bc HubICMP 11A.wpd>> 55 ... .. - - ... - ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... - ... ... ... ... ... .. ... .;; " ~ .. = .lIl .. ;> ~ = .2 - ... ~ .!l = - = = ;: ~ ;: :i -= - 'Ii - ~ 0- It ., = is::: .... ~ " :I ;.. , - .. :c ~ z . " e < o . " < < . - <ll ="0 "=..l ;l .. :: --=..1 ~&:c!l ~. -:E(,J t;=-:_ II ;.. e '" !!I~<ll -..0 "'::..l ~-= ....&:S ii ~c!l >OQ .,,(,J ~;;; <ll "0 !!Ig..l ..:: =-=s lGolU .."'Q (,J' -~(,J ~"';;; e '" !!I -"<ll "'go ~::..l ......lll ,,:IS :I'" ~ >0 ~~ Q '(,J ~;;; U .... o .... ... .... o Q o 0> .... .... 00 o U UQQ on .,; ... -0'<1' o...;r-: ...'<1'.... .... on o o on.... 00"'.... ddd Q l'lQQ .... ,..: .... "'...- r-:oor--i -....'<1' ~ o ....'<1'.... 00"'.... doC::> QQUQUUUQUt1. l'lt1.t1.Q l'lU l'll'l * * * NO\I:"'-Ofl"lOO\t""l"'l$'f"'- OO"'....;~d"'N....;.,.;M r'1Mt""'I~MNM'lll:tNr--- ~lrlf")lrlNr--Nf"o-O\"I:t \0\0\0001:'1111111:"'-\0- ddddddddo""; * QIllU Ut1. 111 11 :: s::r:: s: s: 'in;-il'<l;'<l;"d1'E<'!"1 s....on...OOSS'<l'''' Q~t1t""l\ONQQN~ ............ ........ 000 co r::s:s:::r--O\r--::::r---N 1r)00\O \C-.:t ddd d""; ..cr---C?-.:t . "N . "I:tNr'1f'-- -"l:t_t"") r--- "'" 0\ It'''l rri", d N -("\I -- ...0.... 0........ "";"";0 '" on o * * * * Ut1.t1.1ll UU l'll'l Nt'~r-- "I:t0\ M \C ocicci~d..oo N_' ..._' -lI'l_...o -fI") \0 "It "It N -Nr-- f""- "";"":0 0 ~ ...~ u u ~E' "i i .( u - ~ ~ -8 o...:l u.~~"O -00 fti ~~~~ g;c~c]a ~ s: iq~':Hil!_'E-;'"ll ..85~~,,!i _ .,g _ ~.-= <<I ~ eo _ 0: "'Si! _.&J:; = u e II '" :S.,. ~....l l:: E'3 " ~ :l i 0 E.!! 'E-" ::. " .. ]I '5]0 ~ri5 ~ '-...<l "~Ill ~ '-t: "'0 ~ ~ fI) OOU._ .-- ~ ~oo"Oo <>>>5..<<<<<<<.5 _:l~:: <<<~~it8888 888'" :ltlli~ ;;;=:l;==== =c=6at<u g ~~~~~jllllgll~i~i~ .CUCI:I<<lotc.c..c..Cl.8:Q.Q."O caE '" VJ ~~~~;:;:=E=E=E=E= E=E=E=~ if~ if Il'l = o ;: ! .!l = - _NfI")'o:f'II"l\Cr---OOO\~ :::~~:!; ~~!::; ~ .; 'j 'C '-' '" "6 .c ~ !! -s 1 " " '" o ....l * .. " '0 Z .g f >,,, - '-' "~ "> ...ll ..'" ~~ E- = " - > ~~ II II u'" ;;3 c:i .52 U l! - B .5 ~ :i .... ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ :c ~ is e ~ 8 '" S,/ ~ ] -; o 00 .;;; c ::> ~ .. - ... - ... ... .. ... '" 'liJ ... iii = -< ~ .. - = .. IS ::ll ... IS ~ .. t r. " 5 = .:ol IS ~ ~ =-= = = ;: .~ - ~ .c - 'i .. .. - .. .. ... - ... .. ... .. ... .. II" - .. .. .... :: =. '" ::I it ~ " IS .. "" .. - .. ... .. - ... .. ~ IS ... .. ... ... - .. - ... - - =...Jt/J .s~o i~..:l ;:- - ~ ::llrl.l~ ~o> _..:l ~ - ~ . .... =- = '" IS !t ~ u ;':! it = > ",,go 8 :.,= "';:.., ,,- III ij::lljl "" ::ll - ~ C' !t '" ::I it '" 8r...: "'== "=.> IS .. ""- s..: = = ...> Q ." 00 o 8 .,. o - - .,. * rI.l o ..l QQ~QQQQQ ~ OOCJ\-r--NDONo\ r--r--OOOOOf""'OOt' 00""';00000 ooo~oooo t--lI"'IO\ ('f")V")~li") 000\00 NOONO\ vS\lSr.er-:r-:..tSr-:..o ~?:l28;q;;2?:l \01""-~-.::t~\O~r-- ..o\lS<<5r-:r-:\lSr-:..c &:i. IS U 88888888 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 '" ~ ,:! .,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,. .:l I .. rI.l ... IS ~ .. t r. " = " C ::I " C " > .. ::I -< > " ii~-< ::s > Go) cO .... ii -<;;'Eg <." g.5@{/} c- cU:!C;cU ON ....CUE E~!l~i5.9~ .;; .9 C .=-:::a " ..!l! 0 _U~r-O::S<~ c::I<o-Co~ :Ie ""UU_f./J O~CU::l.(uo ..,:::a-<l!!~ii,.~:: = 0 = eGo)> ~ Go) u =-o~><.!i!>12 Jtle"-<,,>-<- 1: ~~~ 1; g Co!!!{/}.. ~ Vi -:: .9 e "~'s e E .sC'I'")Q,) =cS<<t =c5-~Q.S=~ ...._ "" N::.._ "" .._ ':'Z,.t:j~~~ooCiU< uuuuuuu~ .,.." >0 >0 No\>O.,. \0 \0 r-..\O \Ott"')I/"')V") 00000000 08~&;&;8~~ :::!l->Ol-.,.No\l- -nv)..ovi'v).n~~ ooo~oooo lI"'I-tf"l - ("fj -- -.::tV'l'Ol:t tf"lOOO\O vi'v-)..o.n"';.n-.:i~ 88888888 0000000000000000 cO 00 00 000000 00 00 .,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,. g " C ::I " C .. > .. ::I -< > C -< ~ ~ 8 ~ " - -< ; .~ s ~ ; 8-.> ~ .5 ~ E .~.~ < ZUlI"'I.!dE-c'! o<-~.9::1e - Nj;>uOcSg- uc~o::s~:.: = 0 0 .... C cO 5E-oUSutI'J >UU::I<>" .. ..,<>::IC ::I.9E = c u ~ c _ ~ j~~~<~~g..!l! - .. "" C 8 .. {/} < "'..........ooCicuCC._..o ....oe....e - ~ =.;:;" ~~.aj~ =S-<<iQ.S=cU' ::::::a:1~E=:::a~<~ oi 'C .!l 'C .... .., '0 .c "' ~ .., " " .... " " {/} 9 o :i .f '" 8 :6 ~ ,;. . ! . :: ~ 'G '" e l5 ~ 8 "' Sol ~ ~ 1>\ * - - ... - ... ... .. ... .. .. .. .. 'E .. [/.l ... .. ., Ql ~ .. .... c .5: ~ .!! c - 5 :c :m .. .. ~ -= 'Ii .. a: .... :: =- ., = 5: ~ ~ " co >: . ild .. :is co ... ... .. .. .. .. ... - .. .. .. lilt II" .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... - ... ,.. ... ", C"O ~S...l = ... -:I- ill.;$ 3~u !~;;: II .. .. Il. f!l5'" _..0 Il.=.:l i!l... =co ...It..!! .. ... J! :I_c::l ....qu "'- -> ,. ", "0 [!!S...l ..= =1. ... ..- Cll.! .. . ::::!1u llll.;:; e Il. f!l -"", Il."o i!l::l!...l =... ... co mlt..!! .... r;>! Q ..,u i;:; 00 o 00 u uuoo "'''' MN ~'" co "I''' 00 c:~ '" ~'" N OOQ\OOrt'l ci 00"'; vi ..,: ('I"l -NM"'lt" 0'" co", cid ('I"l O\r--- \CI 00 000\ 00 d 00 c::i '" co '" co '" co ood o o Ul%lUO "il " " 'n ~ ~ '6 ., " " II " " 'E 'E ~ ~ ~~ \f') \0 "It r- Q\ r-- f"'- r-- d odd ~ ...: ~ \0 01l"H'....lt') vi OoOOM "It N-N"I:!' ~ ci * * * * * * * * * l>l~OOl>lU~~O~ O~~~ UU l%ll%l OO'o::t:_"I:tNlI"')f'f"Jr-:\O~ '8 . . . .='" .'" \0 CIO('I"lClO\O NO\ \O_"I:tIl1\ON~N('I"l~ rt'l~IoC!~ .... \0- 0\ Mil")'" N_M_ 0'1') r'! N r...:1.Ci - "I:t_' -N - ~"''''~'''-''''N'''''' Q\Oo\Q\O\!"--MltjQ\"l:t d~dddc::i"":"":d"": ...."'0 r<'"!0'l<<"1 '" '" ci * ***** O~U O~ 111 11 ::::::;;: :::::: "- ... '" '..".. 0\ EEE":":"!EE"1..,: ~~~~C;;;~~~~2: ....... ... ...... t::l C C Q C :r::::::;;:ooO'\t""l::::r:lI"lN \Oor--- 0\\0 d"":d d"": l>l~~~UUl%ll%l f"'o-~r'!\I"l "f"'-.O . V'l\f')f'\O f"i_NOO _ ClO II") 00 ~~~:t co",,,, "''''''' "":"":0 N .... ci ~ ! ~ " - ~ o.~ Q V 5; E lij > - .. -.. 11 ..l < .. ~ -.. I": I": - :;l o u oc'c>"O"O"8:::", 1":",,,'" ""olS""=" - &0 CiS.-:: .- ..J ::I > - c ~~.l";;l!_1!",>! ,86..!!1l..... - .,g - .......~ CIIS R ..-:: c:s ~ ;j..e ::I a ~ e II "':5 == lZ'...l E ~ S ~ IS ~ :(l ~ E s:: 'E-.. t;; ~ Ii .~ :l! .~~ l%l "a1! ~... l>l ~ 'E " .;l :;l _ c"O Q.";;J i - c rg ::I VJ 0 0 'i · <<' 'i lS:::: ~ g ~ ~ ~.~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ 8 lij "i)"il1)"'i)tOc==== ===0) u= u E """""'i;"""" """~ l:j:t<"E 5555"i8~~~~ ~~~u<~- a ~~~~ "05<<<< <<< g rJ 8 ~ ~ """,,~1l.,,8888 888"',,>~u" rl ClSClSCIS<<JfI) ccc::c ===;;;.- 0 eeee"~"""" ......~-i:'N" !l!l.!I.!!~"E~~~~~i!~"1;l"E 1;l~ CIS ca to <<IS CIS Q.Q.Q.Q. Q.8:Q.1!! CIS._ CIS v.I ~~~~..:.:tE=E=E=E= E=E=E=< il:c: il: &l _(,,'H''''~lI'')l,Q'''''''ClOO\:: =~~~ lI':l '.0 ....... 00 -- - - .. "C "~ - " ... "6 ..c: ~ !! .:; 1 " .. 9 * ;,; !l ~ .9 e ~!l l~ ..'" ~... E~ ..: ~ ~~ II II I:!~ >..l C .9 i - !l .5 ] ~ &. 'in " ::> .. g i I'l => ~ i ~ = :: ~ IE e Is 8 Ol >I ~ ~ - - - ... .. ... ... - '" .. '" ... 1 -< .. = .. = .; ~ ... '" ~ .. t r. .. 5 = .lll '" ct ~ ~ = = :: :., :: ~ .s .; ... .. .. ..... ~ '" ::l is: ~ ~ .. '" .. '" ...l .. :2i '" ... ... ,. ... .. .. II" ... ... .. - .. .. . II" .. II" ... ... ... - 100 ... 100 - - - ... - - =;:l(/J ~~o :".s ... ~i ~(/J~ .so~ 'Ii ... ... [G . 'eo rl =- Il.=U '" '" ::l...l is::=~ = .20 ......= =:., N="C ..- .. g! ~.!:S '" ~ ... [G ..... ~ '" ::l is: = S~...: ...== "Il.~ '" .. "'- S..: = = ...~ QQQQQQQ o """"',,",,0 'Ot'..... O\C\O\O\O\OODO 0000000 ~~~~~~~ oor-ioooo ------- ------- ~"I1'lI"')oo:too:too:too:t * * * * * * * (/J S tl.tl.tl.tl.tl.tl.tl.lll ~ 88~8888~ "";"";""';"";""';"';""';0 ooooooo~ \000 t'--O\ 00 t"--oo ~lnr--lI"')r"')r--O o\o\..;o\a:.~o\~ - 00000000 \Qr-OOI"""'I"""OClOON ON~NOoo:tf"'--('t') o\o\-:o\o\cxSrx)oO - Co a 88888888 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 '" ~ ~ 'Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot' :l = .. j ... '" ~ ~ r. " '" " c '" " c " > " '" -< > fa ~-< g >u=- fa -<;>'E~ ~ 8 cJ2ti.i ";;;~ ii's:;;.. Eo_":' ~3U~ :g is.. 0 O.c .;. g is .eo ~ ~ .5 0 _u>~o=<~ c"'....o-Col:l<: =C.......-UU_tI) ~~ii!lS~!lB "8ocE5~~5u 5:::e~~~~;;~~ .c u~cc ~tI) ~ ~;>.. c.5 .- .. ilv.i_Be~:lEe ~.cC1l'1uc..c~.! c'C6-<<ic.S:'::= :::z~~~j:;~a< Q 0\ 00 o ~ o - - 'Ot' * QQtl.lllQQQQ O\O\l/")"l:tNl"'--f"")OO OOOOOO'\O\ClCOOr-- 00"';00000 ~?:l~~2~8~ I""-OONNO\of"")OO r-:r-:o\'OtS0t5....:r-:\IS ~~~2?:l?:l~~ tnll"')o\~oo~o\C r-:r:oOr-:r-:r-:....:v;; 88888888 0000000000000000 00 00 000000 00 00 cO 'Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot''Ot' " ::I " C '" " c g < ~ - fa ,,<( " > g ~ " ~ -< =.!l ~ <Il c l.J ~ " ..su =8. > c'" eQ,.5<( .- C u E= .s = ZUll"')_ C'- B~N~B5~- ,;> "....... " uC_o=.,cjo-u =oo-=o"ii= 5E-uQ,)-utl) >uu=';:'u CIS 'C<(~",c....",BE = _fa~~c_] 5 6 3 ; <( .!l ~ ~ .. .ClEO......~....:::::::;: ... ,,~ co..~,.... ~ > ca c c .- CIS 0 >_Be"'sEE- ~Cl.f"lU~cJ2Cl:SO ==__cs..=._.&:J~ '":' .g """ ~ .s-.g OJ ::Jll:l<: _~~~fo-IjlI!:jU.......tI) .; .c .. ''2 l.J 'C -0 -= ~ <> :E ~ ... ~ " f ~ " :I: 6 ~ ~ 8 III )I ~ ~ '" 'C " " .. '" .. <Il :3 * - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - Table M . Project Contributions to Cin:u1ation Improvement Costs ... - - Total Improvement Cost - RoadwaylIntersection IiII Intersection and Roadway Improvements .. IiII Waterman AvenueJMill Street Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road I-I 0 Westbound RarnpsIHospitality Lane * Tippecanoe A venueJMill Street Tippeccanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue Tippecanoe AvenuelLaurelwood Drive * Tippecanoe AvenueIRosewood Drive TippecanoelI -I 0 Interchange Reconstruction 1 * Anderson StreetIRedlands Boulevard * Harriman Place Construction ** Primary Access/Harriman Place ** Total Intersection and Roadway Improvements $181,250 $400,200 $181,250 $511,130 $585,080 $292.1 80 $170,000 $18,000,000 $438,630 $2,000,000 $130,500 $22,890,220 ... - ... .. ... .. - l1li ".. Freeway Improvements .. 1-10 Eastbound 1-10 Westbound Total Freeway Improvements $9,120,000 $1,200,000 $10,320,000 ... .. Project Fair Share Percent. 3.6% 5.6% 25.0% 2.3% 2.3% 29.7% 27.7% 19.9% 4.0% 55.3% 100.0% Project Fair Share Cost $6.471 $22,240 $45,355 $11,751 $13,645 $86,632 $47,047 $3,574,989 $17,587 $1.106.000 $130,500 $5,062,216 $308,762 $48,754 $357,516 ... .. Total Off-Site Improvements $33,210,220 $5,419,732 ... - ... , Includes $56,000 for continuous right turn lane on soutbhound Tippecanoe Avenue between Laurelwood Avenue and the 1-10 westbound on-ramp. The project's fail share of the right turn lane would be $11,144. IiII - ... * Partial improvement required by project opening (year 2(02). ** Full improvement required by project opening (year 2(02). ... ... - ... - ... ... 3129/01 (R,ICBD03lJ\TrafficIThe HubIModel.xlsICostSum) ... - - - - - - "" .. - - "" - "" .. .. .. - .. "" .. - .. "" .. .... .. "" - - - - - - - - ... - ... LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. , 1-10 Westbound RampIHospitality Lane - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right turn movement - total cost of $181,250 with the project's fair share being $45.355. . Tippecanoe A venuelMill Street - Addition of a northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, a separate westbound right turn lane, and modification of signal timing to provide right turn overlap phasing for the northbound right turn movement - total cost of $511,130 with the project's fair share being $11,751. , Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Avenue - Addition of a third northbound through lane. a separate northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane. a separate eastbound right turn lane. a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane - total cost of $585,080 with the project's fair share being $13,645. , Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane. a separate eastbound right turn lane, use of the center eastbound lane as a shared through/right turn lane, and addition of a fourth southbound through lane - total cost of $292, 180 with the project's fair share being $86,632. , Tippecanoe A venuelRosewood Drive - Elimination of southbound left turn lane (i.e.. restrict traffic to/from Rosewood Drive to right-inlright-out only). This modification will be accomplished by completing the landscaped median along Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and the 1-10 westbound ramps - total cost of $170,000 with the project's fair share being $47,047. , Tippecanoe AvenueJI-I0 Interchange Reconstruction - As noted in the above, the recommended improvements for the Tippecanoe AvenueJ1-1O Westbound Ramps and Tippecanoe A venueJ1-1O Eastbound Ramps would require the reconstruction of the Tippecanoe A venueJ1-1 0 interchange - total cost of $18,000,000 with the project's fair share being $3,574,989. , Anderson StreetJRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a second southbound left turn lane. a third southbound through lane. a separate southbound right turn lane, and a second eastbound left turn lane - total cost of $438,630 with the project's fair share being $17,587. , Harriman Place - Construct the realignment of Harriman Place from Orchard Drive to Tippecanoe Avenue at Laurelwood Drive as a four-lane divided roadway with a raised median between Tippecanoe A venue and Orchard Drive - total cost of $2,000,000 with the project's fair share being $1,106,000. . Primary Accesslllarriman Place - Signalization - total cost of $130,500 with the project's fair share being $135,000. , Rosewood Drive - Vacate Rosewood Drive between Orchard Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue. There are no construction costs associated with the street vacation. 3129/01 <<R:ICBD030\TrafficIThc HubICMP TIA. wpd>> 61 - ... ... - ... - ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. .. - .. .. .. - .. ... .. ... ... - .. ... .. - ... - ... ... ... ... ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. The project's fair share contribution to the off-site intersection improvements is $5,062,216. Freeway Mainline Improvements , 1.10 Eastbound - Addition of lanes along selected sections - total cost of $9,120,000 with the project's fair share being $308,762. , 1-10 Westbound - Addition of lanes along selected sections - total cost of $1,200,000 with the project's fair share being $48,754. The project's fair share contribution to the freeway improvements is $357,516. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This section of the report summarizes the results and conclusions of the traffic analysis for The Hub project. The key results are summarized below. 1. Based on CMP criteria, the study area is comprised of 14 intersections. This report aniuyzed p.rn. peak hour traffic operations for all study area intersections and mid-day peak hour operations for selected locations. The analysis included examination of the following conditions: a. b. c. d. e. Existing conditions Year 2002 without project conditions Year 2002 plus project opening day conditions Year 2020 without project conditions Year 2020 plus project build out conditions. 2. The existing mid-day and p.rn. peak hour intersection turn volumes for analysis locations were collected by LSA. All analysis intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. with the exception of: a. b. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard. 3. All freeway segments examined are currently operating at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better). 4. At build out, the proposed project is estimated to generate 16,537 daily trips, of which 1,811 trips will occur during the mid-day peak hour and 1.336 trips will occur during the p.rn. peak hour. 5. Under 2002 without project traffic conditions, all study area intersections will operate with satisfactory levels of service, with the exception of the following: a. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps. 3129/01 <<R,ICBD030\Traffic\The Hub\CMP TIA. wpd)) 62 - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - .. 6. - - ... 7. - - ... .. ... ... ... II" .. ... ... II" .. ... , ... ... .. ... - .. - - .. ... ... - ... - .. 8. 9. 10. 11. All freeway segments examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 without project conditions, with the exception of: a. 1-10 Eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue. With the addition of traffic generated by project opening to the year 2002 condition, ail intersections examined for the opening year analysis will operate with satisfactory levels of service, with the exception of: a. b. c. d. e. 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard. All freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 plus project conditions, with the exception of: a. 1-10 Eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue. Under 2020 without project traffic conditions, all study area intersections will operate with satisfactory levels of service, with the exception of the following: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. I. Waterman AvenueIMiII Street Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane Tippecanoe A venueIMill Street Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Avenue Tippecanoe A venueIRosewood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard. All freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 without project conditions, with the exception of: a. b. c. 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue 1-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Avenue 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215 Peak hour intersection impacts have been identified for the 2020 plus project horizon. The proposed project will result in contributing to unsatisfactory conditions at the following locations: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. Waterman AvenueIMiIl Street Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane Tippecanoe A venueIMiIl Street Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue Tippecanoe AvenuelLaurelwood Drive Tippecanoe AvenueIRosewood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/I-lO Westbound Ramps ,.. 3129/01 <<R:\CBD030\TnflicIThe HublCMP T1A.wpd>> 63 - - LSAASSOCIATES. INC. .. - .. - .. ... .. ... .. .... ... - - .. .. - ... - ... ... .. - ... - .. ... .. - .. - - - ... - ... 1. J. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-1O Eastbound Ramps Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard. 12. All freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 plus project conditions, with the exception of: a. b. c. d. 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue 1-10 Eastbound between Mountain View A venue and California Avenue 1-10 Eastbound between Califomia Avenue and Alabama Street 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215. 13. Mitigation measures have been recommended for significantly impacted intersections in the future year 2002 plus project scenario. These improvements are as follows: a. 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane - Modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the northbound right turn movement. b. Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane and a separate eastbound right turn lane, and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the eastbound right turn movement. c. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-1O Westbound Ramps - Addition of a westbound free right turn lane. d. Tippecanoe A venue/I-1O Eastbound Ramps - Addition of a separate northbound right turn lane and a second southbound left turn lane. In order to accept the dual southbound left turn lanes, Tippecanoe Avenue under the freeway bridge would need to be widened. Widening of the roadway cannot be accommodated within the space available under the 1-10 bridge. Improvement of operations at this intersection would require reconstruction of the TippecanoelI-IO interchange. While plans for the interchange reconstruction are currently being prepared by Caltrans, SANBAG, and the City of San Bernardino, the reconstruction will not be completed by 2002. Therefore, the proposed project will have a temporary significant and unavoidable impact at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-1O Eastbound Ramps.. e. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane. 14. Mitigation measures have been recommended for significantly impacted freeway segments in the year 2002 plus project scenario. These improvements are: a. 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. 15. Mitigation measures have been recommended for significantly impacted intersections in the future year 2020 plus project scenario. These improvements, and the project's fair share contribution to improvement costs are as follows: a. Waterman A venueIMiIl Street - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane - total cost of $181,250 with the project's fair share being $6,471. ... 3129101 <<R:\CBD03O\Tnffic\1be Hub\CMP TIA.wpd)) 64 ... .- ... LSAASSOCIATES. INC. ... ... - .. ... - - - .... - "'" - .... .. ... .. .. .. - ... - ... ... .. ... - - ... ... - - loa - ... b. Waterman A venue/Orange Show Road - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, and a separate southbound right turn lane - total cost of $400,200 with the project's fair share being $22,240. 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane - Addition of a second westbound left turn lane and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right turn movement - total cost of $181,250 with the project' s fair share being $45,355. c. d. Tippecanoe A venueIMiIl Street - Addition of a northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, a separate westbound right turn lane, and modificational signal timing to provide right turn overlap phasing for the northbound right turn movement - total cost of $511,130 with the project's fair share being $11,751. e. Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane. a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane - total cost of $585,080 with the project's fair share being $13,645. f. Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, use of the center eastbound lane as a shared through/right turn lane, and addition of a fourth southbound through lane - total cost of $292, 180 with the project's fair share being $86,632. g. Tippecanoe A venueIRosewood Drive - Elimination of southbound left tum lane (Le., restrict traffic to/from Rosewood Drive to right-inIright-out only). This modification will be accomplished by completing the landscaped median along Tippecanoe A venue between Hospitality Lane and the 1-10 westbound ramps - total cost of $170,000 with the project's fair share being $47,047. h. Tippecanoe A venue/I-IO Interchange Reconstruction - As noted in the above. the recommended improvements for the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps and Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps would require the reconstruction of the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO interchange - total cost of $18,000,000 with the project's fair share being $3,574,989. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a separate southbound right turn lane, and a second eastbound left turn lane - total cost of $438,630 with the project's fair share being $17,587. L j. Harriman Place - Construct the realignment of Harriman Place from Orchard Drive to Tippecanoe Avenue at Laurelwood Drive as a four-lane divided roadway with a raised median between Tippecanoe A venue and Orchard Drive - total cost of $2,000,000 with the project's fair share being $1,106,000. .. 3129101 <<R:ICBD030\Traflic\The HubICMP TIA.wpd>> 65 ... - - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - ... k. Primary AccesslHarriman Place - Signalization - total cost of $130,500 with the project's fair share being $130,500. - ... The project's fair share contribution to the intersection and roadway improvements is $5,062,216. - 16. Mitigation measures have been recommended for significantly impacted freeway segments in the future year 2020 plus project scenario. These improvements, and the project's fair share contribution to improvement costs are as follows: - ... .. a. 1-10 Eastbound - Addition oflanes along selected sections - total cost of$9,120.000 with the project's fair share being $308,762. ". - b. 1-10 Westbound - Addition of lanes along selected sections - total cost of $1,200,000 with the project's fair share being $48,754. "" - The project's fair share contribution to freeway improvements is $357,516. ".. .. ". .. II" .. - .. ". .. .. - .... ... ... .. , .. - .. ... .. 3/29/01 <<R:\CBD03O\Traffic\1be HubICMP T1A.wpd>> 66 .. ... - - ;#j...... - MITIG8 - Mitigated Wed Mar 28, 2001 15:40:01 Page 1-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - The Hub Year 2020 Plus Project Conditions P.M. Peak Hour - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Level Of Service Computation Report 1997 HeM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** - Intersection #7 Tippecanoe Ave./Mill St. ******************************************************************************** - Cye1e (see): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.891 Loss Time (see): 8 (Y+R = 4 see) Average Delay (sec/veh): 49.2 Optimal Cycle: 95 Level Of Service: 0 ******************************************************************************** - ,. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Include Include Include Min. Green: 10 30 30 10 30 30 10 30 30 10 30 30 Lanes: 1 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 ____________1_______________1 I---------------II--n---n------I I-n----n------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 150 1647 762 253 1437 150 388 197 349 643 92 286 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 150 1647 762 253 1437 150 388 197 349 643 92 286 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 158 1734 802 266 1513 158 408 207 367 677 97 301 Reduet Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 158 1734 802 266 1513 158 408 207 367 677 97 301 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 158 1734 802 2661513 158 408 207 367 677 97 301 ------------I------n-------I 1______nn_____II_______________ 1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 Adjustment: 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.24 0.76 Final Sat.: 1700 5400 1800 3200 5400 1800 3200 3600 1800 3200 439 1361 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.32 0.45 0.08 0.28 0.09 0.13 0.06 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 10.3 31.3 52.0 10.0 31.0 31.0 20.7 30.0 30.0 20.7 30.0 30.0 Volume/Cap: 0.90 1.02 0.86 0.83 0.90 0.28 0.62 0.19 0.68 1.02 0.74 0.74 De1ay/Veh: 84.8 62.6 28.7 60.8 40.4 26.4 37.926.1 34.3 81.0 36.7 36.7 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 84.8 62.6 28.7 60.8 40.4 26.4 37.926.1 34.3 81.0 36.7 36.7 DesignQueue: 8 72 24 14 62 6 19 8 15 31 4 12 ******************************************************************************** ... - - - .. .. ... .. "'" .. ... .. eo .. - .. - - .. ". - Traffix 7.5.1015 (c) 2000 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to LSA, RIVERSIDE, CA ... .. - ... - c - .It1' .2... ... - - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. ..fl:." The Hub Off-Site Intersection Improvement Cost Estimates - - Intersection: Waterman AvenuelMiIl Street Improvements Add a second westbound left turn lane .. - 10% 10% 25% Total Cost S50,OOO S75,OOO S125,000 S 12,500 $12,500 $31,250 $181,250 Proj. Fair~ Share % Project Fair-Share - Items Lane Construct left turn lane WBL Upgrade existing signal Subtntal Minor Items/Supplemental Work Mobilization Contingencies Total Units I Unit Cost $50.0oo/lane $75.0oo/eacb - - .. 3.6% S6,47 I IiIIl ,. Intersection: Waterman A venue/Orange Show Road Improvements Add a second northbound left turn lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, and a separate southbound right turn lane - - Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Construct left turn lane NBL I $5O,ooo/lane S50,000 Roadway widening NBR 0.10 miles $180,ooO/mile $18,000 Curb and Gutter NBR 500 $I5/LF $7,500 Construct left turn lane EBL I $50,OOO/lane $50,000 Construct left turn lane SBL I $50,OOO/lane $50,000 Roadway widening SBR 0.10 miles $180,OOO/mile $18,000 Curb and Gutter SBR 500 $15/LF $7,500 Upgrade existing signal $75,OOO/each $75,000 Subtotal $276,000 Minor Items/Supplemental Work 10% $27,600 Mobilization 10% $27,600 Contingencies 25% $69.000 Tntal $400,200 5.6% $22,240 - - - ... . ,... .. ... .... ... Intersection: 1-10 Westbound RampsIHospitality Lane Improvements Provide right turn overlap for northbound right turns and add a second westbound left turn lane ... Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Upgrade existing signal NBR $75,Ooo/each $75,000 Construct left turn lane WBL S5O,OOO/lane $50,000 Subtotal $125,000 Minor Items/Supplemental Work 10% $12,500 Mobilization 10% $12,500 Contingencies 25% S31,250 Total $181,250 25.0% $45.355 ... ... .. .. ",. ... ... .. - ... ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030\Traffic\The HubIModel.xls\ArteriaICost) rl .... - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - The Hub Off-Site Intersection Improvement Cost Estimates - - Intersection: Tippecanoe A venuelMill Street Improvements Add a free northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane. a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane - ... ... Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Roadway widening NBR 0.10 miles S I 80.0oo/mile S18.OO0 Curb and Gutter NBR 500 LF SIS/LF S7.S00 Construct left turn lane SBL I SSO,ooO/lane SSO,OOO Roadway widening SBT 0.20 miles Sl80,ooO/mile S36,OOO Curb and Gutter SBT 1000 LF SI5/LF SI5,ooO Construct left turn lane EBL I SSO.Ooo/lane SSO,OOO Roadway widening EBR 0.10 miles S I 80.000/mile SI8,OOO Curb and Gutter EBR 500 LF SI5/LF S7.S00 Construct left turn lane WBL I SSO,OOO/Iane S50,ooO Roadway widening WBR 0.10 miles S I 80,ooO/mile SI8,OOO Curb and Gutter WBR 500 LF SI5/LF S7,5OO Upgrade existing signal S7S,ooO/each S7S,OOO Subtotal S3S2,SOO Minor Items/Supplemental Work 10% S3S,250 Mobilization 10% S35,250 Contingencies 25% S88,130 Total S511,130 2.3% SI1,7S1 Intersection: Tippecanoe A venue/San Bernardino Avenue Improvements Add a third northbound though lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane. a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Roadway widening NBT 0.20 miles SI80,OOO/rnile S36,OOO Curb and Gutter NBT 1000 LF SIS/LF SIS,Ooo Roadway widening NBR 0.10 miles Sl80,ooO/mile SI8,Ooo Curb and Gutter NBR 500 LF SI5/LF S7,5oo Construct left turn lane SBL 1 SSO,Ooo/lane S50,OOO Roadway widening SBT 0.20 miles S I 80.000/mile S36,OOO Curb and Gutter SBT 1000 LF SI5/LF SIS,ooO Construct left turn lane EBL I SSO,OOO/Iane S50,OOO Roadway widening EBR 0.1 0 miles SI80.0oo/mile Sl8,ooO Curb and Gutter EBR 500 LF SIS/LF S7,SOO Construct left turn lane WBL I S50,OOO/lane SSO,ooO Roadway widening WBR O. I 0 miles SI80,000/rnile Sl8,OOO Curb and Gutter WBR 500 LF SI5/LF S7,500 Upgrade existing signal S75,OOO/each S7S,OOO Subtotal $403,500 Minor Items/Supplemental Work 10% S40,350 Mobilization 10% $40,350 Contingencies 25% S 100,880 Total SS85,080 2.3% S13,645 - - .. .. .. "" .. ... .. .. ill .. .. ... ill ... .. ... ... .. - ... - .. .. .. - .. ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030\Traffic\The Hub\Model.xls\ArterialCost) ,.c:s - - - LSAASSQCIATES, INC. - The Hub Off-Site Intersection Improvement Cost Estimates - - Intersection: Tippecanoe A venuelLaurelwood Drive Improvements Add a second northbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, and a fourth southbound through lane .. Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Construct left turn lane NBL I $50,ooo/lane $50,000 Roadway widening EBR 0.10 miles $180,ooo/mile $18,000 Curb and GUller EBR 500 LF $IS/LF $7,500 Roadway widening SBT 0.20 miles $ I 80,000/mile $36,000 Curb and Guller SBT 1000 LF $15/LF $15,000 Upgrade existing signal $75,000/each $75.000 Subtotal $20 I ,500 Minor Items/Supplemental Work 10% $20, I SO Mobilization 10% $20, I 50 Contingencies 25% $50,380 Total $292, I 80 29.7% $86,632 Intersection: Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive Improvements Eliminate southbound left turn lane Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Construction ofmedian* N/A $170,ooO/each $170,000 Total $170,000 27.7% $47,047 "Estimate based on cost supplied by the City of San Bernardino Intersection: Tippecanoe AvenuelI-IO Westbound Ramps Tippecanoe AvenuelI-IO Eastbound Ramps Improvements Reconstruct Interchange Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Interchange Reconstruction I $ I 8,ooo.000/each $18,000,000 Total $18.000,000 19.9"10 $3,574,989 - - - - ... .. ... - ... - II" II ... .. - ill - .. "" ... ... .. - - ... .. ... IlK - .. - 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030ITraflic\The HubIModel.xlslArterialCost) r=~ ... - - LSAASSOCIATES, INC. - The Hub Off-Site Intersection Improvement Cost Estimates .. - Intersection: Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard Improvements Elimninate north/south split phasing, add third northbound through lane, second southbound left turn lane, third southbound through lane, separate southbound right turn lane, and second eastbound left turn lane - ,.. .... ... Proj. Fair- Project Items Lane Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share Roadway widening NBT 0.20 miles SI80.000/mile S36,OOO Curb and Gutter NBT 1000 LF SI5/LF S15,000 Construct left turn lane SBL 1 S50,OOO/lane S50.000 Roadway widening SBT 0.20 miles S180,OOO/mile S36,000 Curb and Gutter SBT 1000 LF SIS/LF SIS,OOO Roadway widening SBR 0.1 0 miles SI80,000/mile S18,000 Curb and Gutter SBR 500 LF SIS/LF S7,500 Construct left turn lane EBL I SSO.OOO/Iane SSO,OOO Upgrade existing signal S75,000/each S7S,000 Subtotal S302,500 Minor Items/Supplemental Work 10'10 S30,250 Mobilization 10'10 S30,2S0 Contingencies 25% S75,630 Total $43g,630 4.0% S17,S87 - .. ... .. .. "" .. .. ill Roadway: Harriman Place between Orchard Avenue and Tippecanoe Avenue Improvements Realign and construct 4 lane roadway - .. Items Construction of roadway. Total Lane N/A Proj. Fair- Project Units Unit Cost Total Cost Share % Fair-Share 1 S2,OOO.000/each S2.000,000 S2,000,000 55.3% SI,106.000 - - .Estimate based on cost supplied by the City of San Bernardino II" ... ... Intersection: Primary AccessIHarriman Place Improvements Signalization .... - 10'10 10'/. 25% Total Cost S90,000 S90,OOO $9,000 S9.000 S22,500 S130,SOO Proj. Fair- Share % Project Fair-Share - Items Lane Install new signal Subtotal Minor Items/Supplemental Work Mobilization Contingencies Total Units I Unit Cost S90,000/each ... .. 100.0'/. S130.500 ... .. TOTAL OFF-SITE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT COSTS $21,890,220 $5,062,216 ... - - .. ... 3/28/01 (R:ICBD030ITraflicIThe HubIModel.xlslArterlalCost) r:=-7 .. - lSAASSOClATES,INC. - ... APPENDIX C - - AIR QUALITY CALCULATIONS ... There are no changes in Appendix C since circulation of the Draft EIR. ..' ... Appendix C Is available under separate cover at the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department. - - .. - ... ... - ... .. ... .. .... - ... ... ... ... ... .. - .. ... .... .~ .. - .. ... - - LSAASSOClATES, INC. - - APPENDIX D ... - NOISE ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS - - There are no changes In Appendix D since circulation of the Draft EIR. - .. Appendix D is available under separate cover at the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department. - .. - - - - .. ill .... ... ... .. ... .. ... - ... ... ... .. ,.. ~ - - - .. .. .. - lSAASSOClATES, INC. - - APPENDIX E - .. CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT ... ... There are no changes in Appendix E since circulation of the Draft Em. ... Appendix E is available under separate cover at the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department. ... ... . - - - ... ... - - - - ... ... ... - , ~91 ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... - ... ~ASSOCIATES.INC. - .. APPENDIX F ... ... ARBORIST REPORT ... ... There are no changes in Appendix F since circulation of the Draft EIR. ... Appendix F is available nnder separate cover at the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department. ... - ... - ... - .. ... ... - - - .. II" .. ... ... ... .. ... loot ... loot ... ... - .. ... .. .. lSAASSOClATES,INC. - .. APPENDIX G - .. MARKET DATA ... ... There are no changes in Appendix G since circulation of the Draft EIR. ... Appendix G is available under separate cover at the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department. .. ... ... ... .. ... .. ... .. ... - ... ... ... .. ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... - .. - - LSAASSOClATES,INC. - - APPENDIX H RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE HUB DRAFT EIR - ... - ... - .. ... .. - .. ... .. - .. - .. - .. - 100 - - - ... - ... - ... - 100 - ... - "'" - lSAASSOClATES. INC. - - APPENDIX H - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE HUB DRAFT EIR - - The comments on The Hub Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) State Clearinghouse No. 200081074 and individual responses to each are included in this section. The primary objective and purpose of the EIR public review process is to obtain comments on the adequacy of the analysis of environmental impacts, the mitigation measures presented, and other analyses contained in the report. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the City respond to all significant environmental comments in a level of detail commensurate to the comment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088). Comments that do not directly relate to the analysis in this document (i.e., are outside the scope of this document) are not given specific responses. However, all comments are included in this section so that the decision-makers know the opinions of the commentors. ... - - - ... - ... In the process of responding to the comments, portions of the Draft EIR have been revised or deleted, and in some instances new material has been added. However, none of the changes to the Draft EIR are considered to be significant new information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 [a]). ... ... Comment letters are arranged by public agencies followed by letters received from the public by the City. Aside from the courtesy statements, introductions, and closings, the text of each letter has been divided into individual comments. Brackets and identification numbers in the right margin of each letter delineate each comment. Following each letter is a page(s) of responses associated with each letter. Each response is preceded by a number, which corresponds to the comment identified on the original letter. - ... - - LIST OF PERSONS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PUBLIC AGENCIES COMMENTING ON THE DRAFT EIR. ... - The persons, organizations, and public agencies that have submitted comments on the Draft EIR through March 19, 2001 are listed below and responded to in this section. Letter D from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) did not require comment since its purpose was to inform the City that it has complied with the State EIR review requirements. - ... ... A Southern California Association of Governments Jeffery M. Smith, AlCP Senior Planner, Intergovernmental Review - ... B State of California, Department of Toxic Substances Haissam Y. Sailoum, P.E. Unit Chief, Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office - ... - C Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP Jack H. Rubens ... - D State of California, Office of Planning and Research Terry Roberts Senior Planner ... - .. 3/28/0 I (R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDlX H _ RTC.OOC) H-l .. - LSAASSOClATES.INC. - - E San Bernardino Associated Governments Bob R. Wirtz, P.E. Traffic and Transportation ... - ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... - - ... .... .. .... ... .... ... - .. - ... - .. - .. - .. - .. 3/28/01(R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDIX H_RTC.OOC) H-2 - ... '- ~" - - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ... 4 ... ... ... ... ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS .. ... Mil. OIIlce ... 818 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Anleles, California 90(117-3435 ... ... ... 1(;113) 2]6-t800 f(21]) 236-t82S ... WWW.SCII.u.P - CJfIIan!..........,..-- .l."-'- CIl,ol~..........Itccw:l'id~; CMIIEIllIlnMet Hll an-. LoI .... . lIuw4lIw ... ~ Jupn""'" z.,. ~.IAA,..InC~ ....... c.-r:'bn ~ ....... eu-y . DoWI~IIC..... l.- ~ c-r: "- .-.- ..... LoIAoIpto~'z...~t..ABpln c-y......bIaft.~...... .......~.........--.c_. t'.-p.........w.I......LoI~. ClwII c:w- c-u . .... ...-... ~.lnr.a.l.I.CII,......eoe. D.iIb,~.Ja.....n-r.......Oari&O.. )olNI....-.LDo~..-...ah\lcf.too .........mcw-.too.........JIUlI ........._~...,Gr.....l""Ikldo .Dn~-...-................too """................LoI.....~ 1IIUI,.~....IrikCanllr.~. (Wr...........too~.....1UrplrIr. ~....o.c-s....~.NIdI PIl:....I.CII~.AIa......I.CIIMr'"'. ..... froo.1'ico &1_, . ..... ....,.,.,..,.... _~.............. tooAqcln'S- ---... o.-l' _..... c...-' ~'-~too~.hooITlJlMM:. ~.MwJr,Mr.Jr~........JodWMM. l.aoA,.r.e...............Allpla..DeuiI ..........CIiIlIoMs.Wt~lMII...a. ar-.~,a.rlII ~.Or-. CM$J' b.........~.IIIlpIo......~ 1nr\.""...........M.I\iIIbIdlc-.. c- ....CMIlIpO'................. kIIInIOhM.t"a.......P80,........ AiMy McCr.......... ... '"'" ... ~c-..........---c...,' ...lcMriItp.~.Gftt""'CIdM>I O"'.~IP\op.ec.n."."""...... T-w.'OMW~.""""'''''' .. knM6Io c-,: Joao NiHh. ktI ......... c.., . IilI ~.f. Alacllo c---..JiIIl-...,.f\onI)'aIIMPilIIlI.O"W ..........~.""_~.GnlIoI1lm_ .~......hny.QlIlOKiIo.}ulfidlv.aa. ...- ..... r-" JuolJ ....... .......,. (.-y . 0-0 De ....su.---..,. CIao )en,... ....Ydoy.1blIl......."-M ........c.-y ......d ~ ......~.-- .. ... - ... .... ... .. ... - - - .. - - - ... - ....... c-r'" r Ll.1I. c--.a-. IlIIDftII.!lJJrI'I'IIoJ ... .1'I'ioM<t_a.c,.JooI.... "'.1/11"1 - ... fD~rg@rnG\YJ[g[m !J1.~ M~J'.: ~Ofj\ .' Document A March 5, 2001 .-.:ii'y vi- SAN t:sl:i.RNA!:(JiNc- ~~t:"~LorMtNT SERV:CE~ ':'IE? .~. qTM::~T Ms. Valerie Ross PrinCipal Planner Development Services Department City of San Bemartlino 300 North -0" Street San Bemartlino, CA 92418 RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the HUB Commercial Project - SCAG No. I 20010061 Dear Ms. Ross: Thank you for submllllng the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the HUB Commercial Pro)ec:t 10 SCAG for review and comment. As areawide c:leartnghouse for regionally significant projec:lS, SCAG assists cIlIes, countieS and other aoencies In reviewing projects and plans for consistency with regional plans. The attached delaUed comments 818 meant to provide guldlll1Ce for considering the proposed project within the contelcI or our regional goals and po/lcIes. If you have any questions regarding the attached comments, please conlaCl me at (213) 236-1867. llIank you. SinCerely, 'J J_ .1ft1o/l ~l,fid . '~EF~. SMITH,AICP senior Planner, Intergovemmental Review ... - ... - - - ... - ... .. - ... liiio ... .. - ... ... .. ... - ... - ... .. .... ... ... liiio - - ... - - - ... - Document A March 5, 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 2 COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE HUB COMMERCIAL PROJECT SCAG NO. I 20010069 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Project considers the development of approximately 268,600-sq. ft. of commercial development on 24.5 acres. The proposed Project will be implemented in two phases. The proposed Project site is located at the northwest comer of the Tippecanoe Avenue and the Interstate 10 Freeway, in the City of San Bemardino. INTRODUCTION TO SCAG REVIEW PROCESS The document that provides the primary reference for SCAG's project review activity is the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG). The RCPG chapters fall into three categories: core, ancillary, and bridge. The Growth Management (adopted June 1994), Regional Transportation Plan (adopted April 1998), Air Quality (adopted October 1995), Hazardous Waste Management (adopted November 1994), and Water Quality (adopted January 1995) chapters constitute the core chapters. These core chapters respond directly to federal and state planning requirements. The core chapters constitute the base on which local govemments ensure consistency of their plans with applicable regional plans under CECA. The Air Quality and Growth Management chapters contain both core and ancillary policies, which are differentiated in the comment portion of this letter. The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) constitutes the region's TranspOrtation Plan. The RTP policies are incorporated into the RCPG. Ancillary chapters are those on the Economy, Housing, Human Resources and Services, Finance, Open Space and Conservation, Water Resources, Energy, and Integrated Solid Waste Management. These chapters address important issues facing the region and may reflect other regional plans. Ancillary chapters, however, do not contain actions or policies required of local govemment. Hence, they are entirely advisory and establish no new mandates or policies for the region. Bridge chapters include the Strategy and Implementation chapters, functioning as links between the Core and Ancillary chapters of the RCPG. Each of the applicable policies related to the proposed project are identified by number and reproduced below in italics followed by SCAG staff comments regarding the - - - .. - - .. lit .. ... - lit - - ,.. .. .. .. ... IiII ... .. .. ... ... - - ... - .. .. .. .... .. - ... - .. Document A March 5. 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 3 consistency of the Project with those policies. SUMMARY OF SCAG STAFF COMMENTS 1. The Draft EIR does not provide a discussion on the relationship of the proposed project to applicable regional plans as required by Section 15125 [d) of Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act. Discussion in Sections 4.1 (Transportation and Circulation) and 4.2 (Air Quality) is lacking of the consistency of the proposed Project with applicable regional plans, specifically the Regional Transportation Plan and the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. 2. The Final EIR should address the relationships (consistency with core policies and support of ancillary policies) to SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide, utilizing commentary from the following detailed SCAG staff comments. The response should also discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable regional plans. We suggest that you identify the specific policies, by policy number, with a discussion of consistency or support with each policy. CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND GUIDE POUCIES The Growth Management Chapter ~ of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide contains a number of policies that are particularly applicable to the HUB Commercial Project. Core Growth Management Policies 3.01 The population, housing, and jobs forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG's Regional Council and that reflect local plans and policies, shall be used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, on page 5-3 and Table 5.8 utilizes SCAG's growth projections for popUlation, housing and employment. The Project is consistent with this core RCPG policy. 3.03 The timing, financing, and location of public facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by SCAG to implement the region's growth policies. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, on page 3-3, includes a discussion on the proposed construction schedule of the proposed Project. The Project will be 1 2 3 4 - Document A ... ... ... March 5, 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 4 ... implemented in two phases. Implementation of the proposed Project will have no J impacts on public services or utility systems. Improvements are proposed for 4 transportation systems. The Project is consistent with this core RCPG policy. ... .. ... "" The Regional Transportation Plan ~ also has goals, objectives, policies and actions pertinent to this proposed project. This RTP links the goal of sustaining mobility with the goals of fostering economic development, enhancing the environment, reducing energy consumption, promoting transportation-friendly development pattems, and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents affected by socio-economic, geographic and commercial limitations. Among the relevant goals, objectives, policies and actions of the RTP are the following: .. "" .. ... ... .. Core Regional Transportation Plan Policies ... 4.01 Transportation investments shall be based on SCAG's adopted Regional .. Performance Indicators. .. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR does not address Transportation Investments based on the following SCAG adopted Regional Perfonnance Indicators: ... ... ... Mobility - Transportation Systems should meet the public need for improved 5 access, and for safe, comfortable, convenient and economical movements of people and goods. . Average Worlc Trip Travel Time in Minutes - 22 minutes . PM Peak Highway Speed - 33 mph . Percent of PM Peak Travel in Delay (All Trips) - 33% "" .. ... "" ... Accessibility - Transportation Systems should ensure the ease with which opportunities are reached. Transportation and land use measures should be employed to ensure minimal time and cost. . WorK Opportunities within 25 Minutes - 88% .. ... ... .. Environment - Transportation Systems should sustain development and preservation of the existing system and the environment. (All Trips) . Meeting Federal and State Standards - Meet Air Plan Emission Budgets Reliability - Reasonable and dependable levels of service by mode. (All Trips) . Transit- 63% . Highway - 76% ... ... ... "" ... ... ... ... Document A - - March 5, 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 5 ... ... Safety - Transportation Systems should provide minimal, risk, accident, death and injury. (All Trips) . Fatalities Per Million Passenger Miles - 0.008 . Injury Accidents - 0.929 Uvable Communities - Transportation Systems should facilitate Uvable Communities in which aJJ residents have access to all opportunities with minimal travel time. (All Trips) . Vehicle Trip Reduction -1.5% . Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction-10.0% ... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. Equity - The benefits of transportation investments should be equitably distributed among all ethnic, age and income groups. (All trips) . Low-Income (Household Income $12,000)) Share of Net Benefits - Equitable Distribution of Benefits ... .. ... 1M Cost-Effectiveness - Maximize retum on transportation investment. (All Trips) . Net Present Value - Maximum Return on Transportation Investment . Value of a Dollar Invested - Maximum Return on Transportation Investment ... .. ... The Final EIR should address the manner in which the Project is supportive of or detracts from the achievement of the eight core RTP objectives. Based on the information provided, we are unable to determine whether the Project is consistent with this core RCPG policy. - "" .. 4.02 Transportation investments shaJJ mitigate environmental impacts to an acceptable level. - .. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, in Section 4.1 (Transportation and Circulation), identifies traffic impacts and details the measures to mitigate these impacts. Four mitigation measures are proposed to address impacts to the proposed Project. Although there are mitigation measures recommended, two of the measures have no mechanism for fair share contributions towards freeway improvements. The Project is partially consistent with this core RCPG policy. ... .. - .. ... 4.04 Transportation Control Measures shaJJ be a priority. - SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, on page 4.2-22, includes a mitigation measure that recommends the implementation of measures that encourage carpooling, vanpooling, transit use, and/or other trip reducing strategies. The Project is consistent with this core RCPG policy. ... .. ... ... ... ... 5 6 } - - - .. .. .. - ... .. - ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ... ... - .. .. ... ... ... - ... ... ... ... ... Document A March 5. 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 6 4.16 Maintaining and operating the existing transportation system will be a priority over expanding capacity SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, in Section 4.1 (Transportation and Circulation), includes mitigation measures that address traffic related impacts. The existing transportation system will be maintained and improved. The Project is consistent with this core RTP policy. GMC POLICIES RELATED TO THE RCPG GOAL TO IMPROVE REGIONAL STANDARD OF LIVING The Growth Management goals to develop urban forms that enable individuals to spend less income on housing cost, that minimize public and private development costs, and that enable firms to be competitive, strengthen the regional strategic goal to stimulate the regional economy. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the following policies would be intended to guide efforts toward achievement of such goals and does not infer regional interference with local land use powers 3.04 Encourage local jurisdictions' efforts to achieve a balance between the types of jobs they seek to attract and housing prices. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, on page 5.2, provides information on the number of jobs that will be required to support the proposed Project. The Draft EIR also provides a discussion on the efforts to achieve a joblhousing balance. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. 3.05 Encourage pattems of urban development and land use, which reduce costs on infrastructure construction and make better use of existing facilities. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR on page 2-8, acknowledges that the proposed Project will maximjze the use of existing services and infrastructure. The proposed Project will have no impact on existing services and utilities. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. 3.09 Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to seek new sources of funding for development and the provision of services. SCAG staff comments. See SCAG staff comments on policy 3.05. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. 8 9 10 11 - - - ... - .. ... .. .... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .... .. ... .. ". - ... .. ... ... - - .. - ... ... - .. - .. Document A March 5, 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 7 3.10 Support local jurisdictions' actions to minimize red tape and expedite the pennitting process to maintain economic vitality and competitiveness. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR addresses subjects that may have environmental impacts. It is written in a manner, where all possible impacts are mitigated this will help minimize red tape, and help maintain the economic vitality and competitiveness of the City of San Bemardino. In addition, the Draft EIR, on page 3-5, includes discussions on project objectives that will also help to minimize red tape, and help maintain the economic vitality and competitiveness of the City of San Bemardino. A list of approvals and permits required to implement the proposed Project are on page 3-4 of the Draft EIR. The permits and approvals will also help to maintain economic vitality and competitiveness. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. GMC POLICIES RELATED TO THE RCPG GOAL TO IMPRPVE THE REGIONAL QUALITY OF LIFE The Growth Management goals to attain mobility and clean air goals and to develop urban forms that enhance quality of life, that accommodate a diversity of life styles, that preserve open space. and natural resources, and that are aesthetically pleasing and preserve the character of communities, enhance the regional strategic goal of maintaining the regional quality of life. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the following policies would be intended to provide direction for plan implementation, and does not allude to regional mandates. 3.13 Encourage local jurisdictions' plans that maximize the use of existing uTbanized areas accessible to transit through intill and redevelopment. SCAG staff comments. The proposed Project is an example of redeveloping an underutilized commercial site. However, the Draft EIR does not provide a discussion on the proposed Project's accessibility to public transit. It would be helpful if the Final EIR would provide a discussion and address the manner in which the Project is supportive of or detracts from the achievement of this policy. Based on the information provided in the Draft EIR, we are unable to determine whether the Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. 3.14 Support local plans to increase density of future development located at strategic points along the regional commuter rail, transit systems, and activity centers. SCAG staff comments. The proposed Project is an example of a major activity center use with access to transit systems. The Draft EIR discusses the proposed 12 13 14 - Document A - ... March 5. 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 8 - ... Project in Sections 2.0 (Introduction) and 3.0 (Project Description). These sections describes the proposed Project in relation to existing conditions, density, development along transit corridors and development of the proposed Project adjacent to surrounding uses. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. 3.16 Encourage developments in and around activity centers, transportation corridors, underutilized infrastructure systems, and areas needing recycling and redevelopment. .. .. .... .. - .. .. SCAG staff comments. The proposed Project is an example of redeveloping an underutilized commercial site. See SCAG staff comments on policy 3.14. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. lilt .... .. 3.18 Encourage planned development in locations least likely to cause adverse environmental impact. .. lilt SCAG staff comments. The Project is proposed in a manner that will minimize environmental impacts. Eighteen mitigation measures included in the Draft EIR have been recommended to address identified environmental impacts. The City of San Bemardino should carefully consider the adequacy of these measures. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. .. .. "" .. 3.21 Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. .. .. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR in Section 4.4 (Cultural Resources) and Appendix E, provides a discussion and information on archaeological and historical resources. The Draft EIR includes recommendations to mitigate potential impacts to archaeological and historical resources. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. - .. - ... 3.23 Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of biological and ecological resources, measures that would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans - ... - .. SCAG staff comments. See SCAG staff comments on policy 3.18. The Draft EIR in Section 4.3 (Noise) identifies noise impacts due to construction, traffic and on- site activities. Impacts associated with traffic and on-site activities are considered to be less than significant. Mitigation measures, however, are recommended to reduce impacts to construction noise. The Project is supportive of this ancillary "" .. ... ... - ... 14 15 16 17 18 - - ... ... .. ... .. .. - .. .- .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ". .. "'" .. .. .. ... ... .. ... .. - .. ill .. ... .. - - ... Document A March 5, 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 9 RCPG policy. GMC POLICIES RELATED TO THE RCPG GOAL TO PROVIDE SOCIAL, POLITICAL, AND CULTURAL EQUITY The Growth Management Goal to develop urban tonns that avoid economic and social polarization promotes the regional strategic goal of minimizing social and geographic disparities and of reaching equity among all segments of society. The evaluation of the proposed project in relation to the policy stated below is intended guide direction for the accomplishment of this goal, and does not infer regional mandates and interference with local land use powers. 3.27 Support local jurisdictions and other selVice providers in their efforts to develop sustainable communities and provide, equally to all members of society, accessible and effective services such as: public education, housing, health care, social services, recreational facilities, law enforcement, and fire protection. SCAG staff comments. See SCAG staff comments on policy 3.05. The Draft EIR on page 2-8 suggests that the proposed Project would not have impacts on police and fire services, and recreation facilities. The Project is supportive of this ancillary RCPG policy. AIR QUALITY CHAPTER CORE ACTIONS The Air Quality Chapter (ACC) core actions that are generally applicable to the Project are as follows: 5.07 Determine specific programs and associated actions needed (e.g., indirect source rules, enhanced use of telecommunications, provision of community based shuttle services, provision of demand management based programs, or vehicle-miles- traveled/emission fees) so that options to command and control regulations can be assessed. SCAG staff comments. See SCAG staff comments on policy 4.04. The Project is consistent with this core RCPG policy. 5.11 Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all levels of govemment (regional, air basin, county, subregional and locaQ consider air quality, land use, transportation and economic relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts. j 18 19 20 21 - - - .. .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ".. .. lOOt II ... ... ... ... ... - ... ... ... ... - ... ... - ... - Document A March 50 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 10 SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR, in Section 4.2 (Air Quality), addresses air quality impacts associated with the proposed Project. The analysis concludes that short term grading and construction emissions associated with the project can be reduced through the implementation of mitigation measures. Despite mitigation measures, long term mobile source emissions would still exceed daily thresholds. The impacts are considered significant. The Project is partially consistent with this core RCPG policy. WATER QUALITY CHAPTER RECOMMENDATIONS AND POLICY 0P110NS The Water Quality Chapter core recommendations and policy options relate to the two water quality goals: to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's water, and, to achieve and maintain water quality objectives that are necessary to protect all beneficial uses of all waters. 11.07 Encourage water reclamation throughout the region where it is cost-effective, feasible, and appropriate to reduce reliance on imported water and wastewater discharges. Current administrative impediments to increased use of wastewater should be addressed. SCAG staff comments. The Draft EIR does not address the subject of water reclamation. It would be helpful if the Final EIR would provide a discussion and address the manner in which the Project is supportive of or detracts from the achievement of this policy. Based on information provided in the Draft EIR, we are therefore unable to detennine whether the Project is consistent with this core RCPG policy. CONCLUSIONS 21 22 1. As noted in the staff comments, the proposed Draft Environmental Impact Report for ] 23 the HUB Commercial Project is consistent with or supports many of the core and ancillary policies in the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. Based on the infonnation in the Draft EIRo we are unable to detennine whether the Project is consistent with core policies 4.01 and 11.07. Based on the infonnation in the Draft EIR, we are unable to detennine whether the Project is supportive of ancillary policy 3.13. Based on the infonnation in the Draft EIR, the Project is partially consistent with core policy 5.11. 2. As noted in the General Staff Comments, the Final EIR should address the 24 125 - - Document A - .. March 5. 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross - Page 11 - relationships (consistency with core policies and support of ancillary policies) to SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable regional plans. .. .. .. 3. All mitigation measures associated with the project should be monitored in accordance with CEQA requirements. .. - .. - .. .. .. ... .. ,. ta po .. ". MIl - .. ",. ... ... - ",. .. ... - ... ... - ... J5 J26 - - - ... ... - ... .. "" - "" .. .. .. ... .. - . .. .. ... .. filii . "" .. ... - ... "" .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Document A March 5, 2001 Ms. Valerie Ross Page 12 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Roles and Authortties THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS is a Joint Powers Agency established under Califomia Govemment Code Section 6502 el seq. Under federal and slaIe law, the Association Is designated as a Council of Govemments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning A/;Jenr:f (RTPA), and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Among its other mandated roles and responsibilities, the Association Is: Designated by the federal govemment as the Region's Metropolitan Pfanning Organization and mandated to maintain a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process resulting In a Regional Transportation Plan and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program pursuant to 23 U.S.C. '134(g)-(h), 49 U.S.C. '1607(f)-(g) el seq., 23 C.F.R. '450, and 49 C.F.R. '613. The Association Is also the designated Regional TrensporlatJon Pfannlng Agency, and as such Is responsille for both preparation of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTlP) under Califomia Govemment Code Section 65080. Responsible for developing the demographic projections and the integrated land use, housing, employmenl, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of the South Coast Air QualIty Management Plan, pursuant to Callfomia Health and Safely Code Section 40460(bl-{c). The Association Is also designated under 42 U.S.C. '7504(a) as a Co-Lead Agency for air quality planning for the Central Coast and Southeast Desert Air Basin Dislricl Responsible under the Federal Clean Air I>d. for detennining Conformity of Projects, Plans and Programs to the S1ale Implementation Plan, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. '7506. Responsible, pursuant to Callfomia Govemment Code Section 65089.2, for reviewing all Congedon Management Plans (CMPs) for consistency with regional transportation plans required by Section 65080 of the Govemment Code. The Association must also evaluate the consistency and compatibility of such programs within the region. The authorized regional agency for Inter-Governmental Review of Programs proposed for federal financial assistance and direct development activities, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12,3n (replacing A- 95 Review). Responsible for reviewing, pursuant to Sections 15125(b) and 15206 of the CECA Guidelines, Envlronmentellmpact Reports of projects of regional significance for consistency with regional plans. The authorized A188wlde Waste T188tment Management Planning Agency, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. '1288(a)(2) (Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act) Responsible for preparation of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, pursuant to California Govemment Code Section 65584(a). Responsible (along with the San Diego Association of Governments and the Santa Barbara CountylCities Area Planning Council) for preparing the Southern Ca/Hom/a Hazardous Waste Management Plan pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 25135.3. Revised January 18. 1995 - ... lSAASSOClATES. INC. - ... RESPONSE TO LETTER A ... ... Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) .. Response to Comment A-I. Comment noted. .. Response to Comment A-2. Comment noted. ~.... Response to Comment A-3. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. - ... Response to Comment A-4. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion .. Response to Comment A-5. The proposed project is one development project within the entire Southern California region. It is, therefore, impossible to assess this project's specific impacts on the entire regional transportation system and the Regional Performance Indicators presented in the 1998 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). However, it should be noted that the traffic analysis was prepared in conformance with San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP) criteria for analysis of project specific traffic impacts, and uses forecast traffic data obtained from SCAG's Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) traffic model. The proposed project is in conformance with SCAG's regional Performance Indicators to the extent that the CTP model's socioeconomic data and resulting traffic forecasts are in conformance with the same. ill ... ill ... - .. .. The City agrees with SCAG's comment. While mitigation identified in the Final EIR would reduce impacts on local freeway segments, there is no mechanism for the project proponent to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards improving mainline freeway lanes. Even if there were there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. Consequently, there is no feasible mitigation measure for this impact, therefore the proposed project is only partially consistent with SCAG policy 4.02. - ... .. ... The City acknowledges that, with implementation of mitigation measure 4.2.2A, the proposed project is consistent with SCAG policy 4.04. .. The City acknowledges that, with implementation of mitigation measures that will serve to maintain and improve the existing transportation system, the proposed project is consistent with SCAG policy 4.16. ... .. ... Response to Comment A-6.. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. .. Response to Comment A-7. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ... Response to Comment A-S. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. .. ... ... Response to Comment A-9. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. Response to Comment A-tO. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. - Response to Comment A-H. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion .. Response to Comment A-t2. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ... ... 3/28/01 (R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDIX H_RTC.OOC) H-15 .. ... "'" .. LSAASSOClATES,INC. - .. ... Response to Comment A-13. Comment noted. Currently, Omnitrans has a bus stop on the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Rosewood which will relocated to Harriman Place. The project site will be accessible to public transit. ... .. Response to Comment A-14. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ... Response to Comment A-IS. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ""' - Response to Comment A-16. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ... Response to Comment A-17. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ... Response to Comment A-IS. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. ... Response to Comment A-19. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. .. Response to Comment A-20. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. .. .. Response to Comment A-21. Comment noted. Not all projects within the South Coast Air Quality Basin will be able to mitigate for all construction or operational impacts to air quality. Air quality impacts are a function of the type of fuel emissions created by vehicles that frequent the project site. Until there is a change in the emissions from vehicles (trucks and cars) there will continue to be air quality impacts in the Basin. The Hub project is implementing the best available mitigation to reduce air quality impacts to the extent feasible. The City's decision making body will need to make findings that the socioeconomic and economic benefits of the project outweigh the project's impacts on air quality prior to certifying the EIR and approving the project. .. ".. .. .. ,.. .. Response to Comment A-22. Comment noted. The City will condition the project in the future to use reclaimed water for landscaping and other uses where appropriate and if reclaimed water is available. ... .. Response to Comment A-23. Comment noted. The City concurs with SCAG's conclusion. .. Response to Comment A-24. See responses to Comments A-5, A-13, A-21 and A-22. 1M Response to Comment A-2S. See responses to Comments A-5, A-13, A-21 and A-22. ... - Response to Comment A-26. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared in accordance with Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code, Paragraph 201081.6) and is provided in the Final EIR as Appendix 1. .. .. ... ... ... ... .. ... 3/28/01(R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDIX H_RTC.OOC) H-16 ... .. - - - - .~ ~ Edwin F. Lowry. Director 5796 Corporate Avenue Cypress. California 90630 . D.ep~rtr:nent of Toxic Substances Control - '!, ;- .,. ... Winston H. Hickox Agency Secretary California Environmental Protection Agency - ... March 12, 2001 - .. - Ms. Valerie Ross City of San Bemardino 300 North D Street San Bemardino. Califomia 92418-0001 .. ... ... NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE HUB (SCH #2000081074) .. Dear Ms. Ross: .. ... The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your Notice of Completion (NOC) of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the above- mentioned Project. Based on the review of the document, DTSC's comments are as follows: .. ... - 1) The draft EIR needs to identify and determine whether current or historic uses at the Project site have resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances at the Project area. ... .. 2) The draft ErR needs to identify any known or potentially contaminated site within the proposed Project area. For all identified sites. the draft EIR needs to evaluate whether conditions at the site pose a threat to human health or the environment. ... .. "" 3) The draft EIR should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation for any site that may require remediation, and which govemment agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. An environmental assessment should be conducted at the site to evaluate whether the site is contaminated with hazardous substances from the potential past and current uses including storage, transport, generation and disposal of toxic and hazardous waste/materials. ... - - 4) .... .... 5) The NOC shows that although no significant hazard to the pUblic is expected with future uses of the site, the potential exists for the inadvertent release of "" - - .. "'" ... Document B v-.o...<..~ @ Gray Davis Governor J1 J2 J3 J4 15 - - - Ms. Valerie Ross March 12, 2001 Page 2 - - ... hazardous materials from the future uses and storage of hazardous material including, but not limited to: pesticides, fertilizers, paint products, petroleum products, and compressed gases (propane, butane, etc.) at the site. It should be addressed In detail in the final EIR. Remember to obtain a hazardous material's storage permit from an appropriate regulatory agency that has jurisdiction to regulate hazardous substance handling, storage, treatment and/or disposal. Contact the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) to evaluate the permit requirements. include that information in the Final EIR. If during construction of the project, soil contamination is suspected, construction in the area should stop and appropriate Health and Safety procedures should be implemented. If it is determined that contaminated soil exists, the draft EIR should identify how any required Investigation and/or remediation will be conducted, and which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight. .. ... ... .. - .. 6) ... - ""' .. DTSC provides guidance for the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) preparation and cleanup oversight through the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). For additional information on the VCP or to meat/discuss this matter further, please contact Ms. Rania Zabaneh, Project Manager at (714) 484-5479. Sincerel~, () /L /14-.:- ./.1..AJ .r Haissam Y. Sallourn, P.E. Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Brdnch Cypress Office ... .. ,,- .. ... .. ... cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044 - ... .. Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 - .. .. ... TIle ell8tl/y chellell/1f fIdng COMom1." MaJ. EwlyCelifomlen_1<> I. __ _I<> __"""""""'* Forelisloflimple _____ __cut __COlla, _...._et_._....IIOV. . Printed on Recycled Paper .. ... ... ... ,.. ... Document B J5 6 ~. LSAASSOClATES. INC. ~. - RESPONSE TO LETTER B ... - State of California, Department of Toxic Substances .... - Response to Comment B-1. The project site is not on the state's list for hazardous waste/substances (CORTESE State of California Hazardous Substances List). ... ... Response to Comment B-2. The Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a Draft EIR for the Hub project was transmitted to the State of California, Office of Planning and Research (the State Clearinghouse for all environmental documents) on August 17,2000. A copy of the Initial Study and NOP were included in Appendix A or of the Draft EIR. On pages IS-28 and IS-29 of the Initial Study a discussion on the release of hazardous substances and the exposure of potential health/safety hazards as well as the use, storage, and transport and disposal of hazardous and toxic materials is discussed. The City concluded that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on or from hazardous materials and that the issue would not be carried further for discussion in the Draft EIR. - - ... ... ... Response to Comment B-3. See response to Comments B-1 and B-2. .. Response to Comment B-4. See response to Comments B-1 and B-2. ,.. .. Response to Comment B-5. See response to Comments B-1 and B-2. .. Response to Comment B-6. During construction the appropriate measures will be taken to ensure that if hazardous materials are encountered that they will be handled and disposed of in accordance with state and federal laws. Also, see response to Comments B-1 and B-2. ... ... .. ... - ... ... ... ... - - - .... ... ... - .... 3/28/01(R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDIX H_RTC.OOC) H-19 ... .... ... Document C "'"" ... SHEPPARD, MULUN. RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP ... ._~--- ..- .' ""rrEI'I'. D'''CCT &.1101 IE ATTO"NC'f'S AT r..Aw ...".,- ......... 3:D SOtJ'nof tID~ al'RCCl' Loa AN_CLES. CI'LI..ofllN,^ eoo7t-+'148 ~O"E. I&ISI "'CM7~ OU... FILE Hu",eEA .. - "AC5.MI~ cmaJ .ao-1a_ - .. (213) 611-4116 jr""'- 4!l 1_ \ILL.6ll386 - MMCh 19, 2001 - - BY FACSJM1T.W. AND U.s. MAn. ... - City of San Bernardino Dcvclopment Serviees Depanmcnt 300 North "P" Sln:d 8mBc:matdino, Califomia 92418 Attm1ion: Ms. Valerie Ross. PriDcipal Planuc" ... .. ... - ... Re: Draft Enviromn....ml Impact Rqlort for Proooscd "Hub" nevelogmcnt .. - Ladies and Go-nt\,.n..,,,: II< This firm ~ In-N-Dut BlIIgC[S ("In-N-Out''). which owns aDd operales a drive-dm1 restaurant (tbe "EJdstiDg Rc$IuraDt") at 1944 South Tippecanoe A~ at tbe northwest comcr ofTippcl;lmoc Avenue and Rosewood Drive (tbe "Existing Site").. ... ... - - Our c1ieu1S ba~ ~ our assistmcc in rnnn"-"tion wiIh the proposed "Hub" development (the "Hub Ccutcrj. The OW of 8m BcmardiDo (the "City") bas c:ircu1ated a Draft Eaviromncntal bnpact Rqlort (tbe "OEm") for the proposed Hub Center that was prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. on bc:ba1f oftbc City. The project described in the PElR includes tbe demolition of the Existing Restanrmt and the eonstnJclion of a IICW In.N-Out ldllauoowt ("New Restaurmt") at the southwest CCJDICI" of the proposed Huri:man Place Extension IUd Tippecanoe Avenue (the "New Site"). .. ... '. - .. ... ... LO=' ANO~LE. . Oft",NGE CoufllTY. . _AN DIEGO . ....N ","""NC'.CO - .... .. ... .." Document C ...,.. - - ... SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMef.O/ll..... - - City of San Bcroardino Man;h 19, 20tH Page 2 .., .. ... In-N-Out is currentlyworkillg with the Redevelopml!lrt Agr:m:y of1he City of San 'eemardino the (" Apacy") to negotiab: 1he tam& of an Owner P8dicipfriQU Agreement (1be "Ia-N-Om OPA") with mpect to 1bc devc10pment of the New RcstauraDL The DEIR analyzed the aMroDmcntal 'ft\P""" assoeiated with this componcot of the redevelopment project. We have anc comment regarding the DEIll's lIIIlIlysis with IeSpeCt to the proposed New Reslaurant Tbe DEIR sppears to jftl!,,,-!bat wcr.tbu....d 1IafIic on the Harriman PIaa: &t-lion will DOt be pc:nnitted to tum left iJIto Phase I of the H1Ib Center. DBIR, p. 4.1-33. However, as the City aDd the AgetIr;y ue aware, the hl-N- Out OP A will require such lcft-tmn access in cmler to prvvidc ""fl';..iaJt .-ss for the New ~lIIi1. 11-d'o.e, the text and analysis in the DEIR, as wcllas the conceptual site plm an Figure 1.2 of1be DElR, should be revised to reflect the ~ . upon left-tum access. The DEIll also iDclndcs two a1tematiws (AltmJatM 6 and 8) which include the mll:Dtion of the Existing R.esumnmt at its present location. We have the fonowing comments n:gardiDg those alternatives: ... - - .. ... .. ... Iioo- - .. ... ... 1. The DEIR states !bat the project propouent shall make a fair slum: con1ribulion to c:c:rtain II3flic imprcM:ments, in"lmlB1g a _, fourth southbound through lane on T~anoe Avenue. DElR, p. 4.1-44. The DEIll also lIdmowledges that CODStIuCtion of the Idditioaallme will JequUe the COftdornmation of the caterly portion of the Existing Site. DElR, p. 6-19. Hawcvu, "[i]famitiVQao IIIeQ1IR: would cause one or IIlllR sipificant effects in addition 10 those tbat would be ClIDScd by 1bc project, as proposed, the effects of the mitigllliOll .......alR sball be cIiscusscd bot in Jess detail than 1bc proposecl si8";fl<:lll1t cff'ccts of the projec;t 1I$ proposed." State CEQA Qni"..!;....s ~ IS126.4(aXl)(D). If the City or 1he AgeDt:y successfully concIcmDs the easterly portion of the ExistiDg Site for the con.....q>l.V<l stre<< widening (as In-N-Out bas previously aclviscd the City aDd AtPJ.cY it will DOt whmtarily sell that ptopclty). that taking wonld preclude the iUr1ber opcratim1 of the F,,;dit11l Rcsbnmml Therefore, it is reasonably fo=ecable that tbe approximately 24,227 square-foot Existing Si1c will be rede\>elopcd for a new use IS part of !he Hub Cca1cr. The environmental impacts __""j..-l with that ra5C)ft_hly fon:sc:cab1c I~opmenl of the Existing Site following the comcmp1ated witl"'ing of soUIhbound T~''1'''' Avmuc: &hould ha~ been analyzed in the DEIR. 1 ... .. ... .. .. .... ... - "" ... - - .. ,- ... ... - - ... - SHEPPARD, MULUN, RICHTER & HAMPTON u.P - ... City ofSm Bernardino Mardi 19.2001 Page 4 ... - OIl We &9POeciate the uflPU<b.u1ty to COIIJIIICIIt on the DEIR. .. Yay truly yours, ~/L/ ~ . JaH. Ru~ for SHEPPARD. MULLIN. RICHTER &: HAMPTON l.II - .. .. .. .. .-.m~1 EnclOSURS ... .. ec: Mr. Fm! G. Pnr.m... (BY FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAlL) Ms. Mary Coppola (BY FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL) Mr. Mark S. LamOlll'llUli .. .. .. .. ... .- - ... ... ... .. .. ... ... ... ... ... ... .... Document C - lSAASSOCIATES. INC. - .. RESPONSE TO LETTER C ... .... Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP - .. General Response - the Redevelopment Agency and In-N-Out are negotiating the terms of an Owner Participation Agreement. At the time of the preparation of the response to comments on the Draft EIR for the Hub project, the Redevelopment Agency has not made any commitments to In-N-Out with regards to a left-turn access off Harriman Place to access the new location for the fast food restaurant. Another left turn median cut on Harriman Place (closer to the intersection of Tippecanoe and Harriman) would not be of because of the amount of future traffic projected for Harriman Place. Although, it may be feasible to move the signalized entrance into the project closer to Tippecanoe. .. .. - .. - Response to Comment C-l. The commentor is correct, mitigation is proposed on page 4.1-44 of the Draft EIR requiring a fourth southbound lane on Tippecanoe Avenue to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts of the project. With regard to right-of-way acquisition, the agency that acquires the right-of-way in the future must deal with the issue of whether the acquisition has resulted in obstruction of the business. - ... .. - Alternative 8 - Proposed Project with Retention of Dive- Thru Restaurant at its Present Location, on page 6-19 has been revised to state the following: .. "Conclusion ... ... With the exception of retaining the drive-thru restaurant in its present location, the type, scale and configuration of uses envisioned under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project. Development of the project site under this alternative would result in short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) impacts similar to that identified with the proposed project. However, an existing traffic safety condition caused by vehicle queuing on Tippecanoe Avenue, would remain. This condition will be corrected with the future widening of the west side of Tippecanoe Avenue to four through lanes which will necessitate right-of-way acquisition of a portion of the parcel on which the drive-thru restaurant is presently located. Also. northbound traffic on Tinnecanoe would be nrohibited from turnim! left into the existinl! restaurant because of the reouirement to extend the existinl! median in Tinnecanoe Avenue from 1-10 to the extension of Harriman Place CLaurelwood Drive). Because the median would be constructed. no left turns from northbound Tinnecanoe Avenue to the drive-l!lm restaurant would be allowed. Further. the U-turn would not be nermitted because it would interfere with the sYnchronized ril!ht turn from Harriman Place to southbound Tinnecanoe Avenue. This effectivel): eliminates anv northbound tmfli~ from accessinl! the existinl! site. N2rthbound traffic on Tinnecanoe Avenue would be reQuired to travel further north on TinDecanoe Avenue to find a ootential U-turn or turn onto Harriman Place and reenter southbound TinDecanoe Avenue to access the site. .. ... ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... ... ... Retaining the drive-thru restaurant at its present location will reduce the initial costs of the project. While not the environmentally superior to the proposed project, this alternative satisfies the stated project objectives and allows the retail commercial and the Harriman Place extension and realignment components of the proposed project to proceed until such time as full funding for the freeway interchange and Tippecanoe Avenue improvements are ready to proceed." .. .... ... ... 3/28/0I(R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDlX H_RTC.OOC) H-24 ... .. - - LSAASSOClATES. INC. - - - The Draft EIR does analyze the project site including the elimination of the existing In-N-Out restaurant and its replacement under Alternative 2 the No Build Alternative. ... - Response to Comment C-2. The median is referenced on page 4.1-44 of the Draft EIR as mitigation measure 4.1.3A as follows. ... - "4.1.3.A The project proponent shall make afair share contribution to the following improvements. The fair share contribution provided below is based on the percentage of project traffic relative to total future traffic in year 2020 as described in Appendix B. ... - Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive - Elimination of southbound left turn lane (i.e.. restrict traffic tolfrom Rosewood Drive to right-in/right-out only). This modification will be accomplished by completing the landscaped median along Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and the 1-10 westbound ramps. Project's fair share responsibility is 27.7 percent. .. .. - ... ... Because the median would be constructed, no left turns from northbound Tippecanoe Avenue to the existing In-N-Out site would be allowed. Further, the U-turn would not be permitted because it would interfere with the synchronized right turn from Harriman Place to southbound Tippecanoe Avenue. This effectively eliminates any northbound traffic from accessing the existing site. North bound traffic on Tippecanoe Avenue would be required to travel further north on Tippecanoe Avenue to fmd a potential U-turn or turn onto Harriman Place and reenter southbound Tippecanoe Avenue to access the site. '"' 1. - ... .. It should be noted that currently northbound traffic on Tippecanoe is not allowed to turn left onto Rosewood Drive. Also, please refer to response to Comment C-l in reference to analyzing additional alternatives to the proposed project. ... .. ... Response to Comment C-3. Please refer to response to Comment C-2. A U-turn on northbound Tippecanoe at Harriman Place (Laurelwood Drive) will not be permitted with the implementation of the Hub project. .. ... ... - ... - ... .' ... ... ... - .. 3/28/0I(R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDIX H_RTC.OOC) H-25 - ... - ... ~ .. Q STATE OF CAlIFOJ.NIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse ~ (~, ~.P ... ... Gray Davis GOVEllNOa Steve NisS<l\ ACI'lNG DlUcroI. ... ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT [ffi[g:~~~~ill) ... ... DATE: February 6, 2001 .. TO: Valerie Ross City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92418-0001 CITY OF snJ BE=Ht-:AnCil.!O DEVELor:,:t:NT Sil";.,,.ICES OEPARTMEf..lT ... .. ... RE: The Hub SCH#: 2000081074 .. ... This is to acknowledge that the State Clearinghouse has received your environmental document for state review. The review period assigned by the State Clearinghouse is: .. ... Rev.ie~ Start Date: RevieW End Date: February 2, 2001 March 19, 2001 .. We have distributed your document to the following agencies and departtnents: ... Il1o ... California Highway Patrol CaltranS, District Ii CaltranS, Division of Aeronautics Department of Conservation Department of Fish and Game, Region 6 Department of Housing and Community Develoj>ment Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Toxic Substances Control Integrated Waste Management Board Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8 Resources Agency State Lands Commission ... .. ... .. ... ... .... ... The State Clearinghouse will provide a closing letter with any state agency comments to yow attention on the date following the close of the review period. .. ... Thank you for your participation in the State Clearinghouse review process. .. ... ... 1400 TENTH STalET p.o. BOX)044 SAClAMENTO, CALlFOJ.NIA 9,8n-~4 916-44,-0613 FAX 916-)2)-)018 W'FI'.OPJ..CA.COV/CLEAJ.INGHOUSE.IITML ... - ... .. - - - @ ... ... Gray Davili - GOn.RSOR - - .. - ... - OIl .... ... .. ... ... - - ... .. - ... ... - - ... .. - .. - .. - .. - ... Document D STATE Of CALifORNIA <-- (.~, ~....':ii' Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse Steve l\issen March 20, 2001 fD)[g~[gDW~'6' lrU MAR 2 2 2001 [!lj Valeri. Ross City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92418-0001 Cl r'f lJr 5:\;\1 BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Subject: The Hub SCH#: 2000081074 Dear Valeri. Ross: Th. State Clearinghouse submitted the abov.1I8I1Ied o..ft EIR to selected Slate agencies for ",view. On the enclosed Document Dellils Report pI.... note that the Clearinghouse bu listed the state ageuci., tbIt ",vi.wed your document. The review period closed on Morch 19, 2001, and !be conunenlS from the responding agency (je,) is (are) enclooed. If Ibis comment packag. is not in order, please notify !be State Clearinghouse immediately. Pi.... ",fer to the project', ten-digit State Clearinghouse IlUDIber in future correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Pl.... note that Section 211 04( c) of the California Public Resources Code states that: "A responsibl. or other public ag.ncy shall only make substantive commenlS r.garding those activities involved in a project which are within an IreI of .xpertise of the Igency or which are required to be carried out or approv.d by the agency. Thos. conunenlS sball he supported by specific documentation." Thea. comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final environmental document. Should you need mo'" information or clarifiCltion of the enclosed comments, we reconnnend that you contact the conunenting agency directly. This letter acknowledges thaI you bav. complied with !be State Clearinghouse ",vi.w requimnenlS for draft enviromneDlal documents, pmsUlDt to the California Environmental Quality Act. PI.... conllcl tbe State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you bav. any questions "'garding the .nviromnental review process. Sincerely, T~~ S.nior PIInner, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Ag.ncy ]400 TE:\TH STRI:.I::T r.o. BOX }044 SACRAMENTO, CAl1fORNtA 9'SI2-jO.... 916-"'4\-0613 fAX 916-j2j-)018 ..........OPIl.CA.GOV/CLEARI"GHOIJSE.HTML . - .. Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data B_ ~ - .. - SCHI 2000081074 Projea TIlle The Hub Lead Agency San Bernardino, CIty 01 Type EIR DnIft EIR Description Implemenlation 01 the proposed project wiI resuIlln the development of appIOxImaIeIy 268,600 Illuare feel of commercial space, wI1hln the CR3 (Comrnen:iaI Regional- TrI CltyIClub 1lislrIcl). The pIlljecl site Is located wI1h a CIty of San Bernardino Rede.alopmenIAlea. PhaIe I will consIslof 17.57 acres and will Include alland south 01 the Harriman Place e>cIenSion and 1Iw peas at the ___ corMr of TIppecanoe AV8IlU8 and HaIrIman Place. - .. - ... .. ... Lead Agency Contact N..... v_ Ross Agency CIty of San Bernardino P/JOM 909 3&4-5057 tHfI8lI Add,..,.. 300 North D SIr8eI CIty San Bemardino Fax - .. ... Sta.. CA ZIp 9241&.0001 ... Project Loc:atIon Counfy San Bernardino CIty San Bernardino Re11IOII eross hNlS Parcel No. Township 1.......16 10 and Tlppecalloe Avenue vartous 15 Ringe 4W Section 23 Sa.. 5BB&M - .... ... - .. Proximity to: Hlflhways AIrports San Bemardlno International RaIlways Burlington North&Santa Fe RalIwa Wa_ys Santa Ana RIYer; Gage Canal: San Tlmol8o CIMk Schools VIclorIa ~y of the RodIands School Dlslrlcl.Loma Unda A Lind Use Current on-slle land US8I fo, the pIllposed pIlljecllndude single and muIlI-family IllIidentIlII dwelHng units (95), . drive tIvu restaurant. moIel, and undeveloped land. ... .. ... ... Project Issues ArdIaeoIoglc-HIsIoric; Nolle; TraflielCin:ulaIion; IU, Quality; CumuIaliYe Effects ReIMMng Resourcea Aganc:y; DepaIlmenI of eon.vatIon; Department of FIIh and GIme. RegIon 8; A__ DepartmenI of Parks and RecreatIon; CaIIr8nS. Division of 1\erDI18UlICS; CaIIfomIa Highway Patrol; Callr8nS. D1str1c:18; Deparlmant of HoUling Ind Community o...Blopmanl; Intagrated Wasl8 Management Board; Regional WalBr QuaIily Control Board, RegIon 8; Deparlmenl of Toldc Substances Control; Native AmerIcan Heritage Convnisllion; Public Utilities Commission; State Lands Commission - - - ... - .... De" Received 0210212001 Start of Review 02lO2l2OO1 Endof_ 0311912001 ... ... ... - - .. Note: Blanks In data fields rasuft from IlIIUIIicienl inIonnatlon provkled by lead Ill&ney. - ... - - LSAASSOClATES.INC. ... ... RESPONSE TO LETTER D - ... State of California, Office of Planning and Research ... ... No response is necessary. The purpose of the letter is to inform the City that it has complied with the State EIR review requirements. .. .. .. .. ... ... ... ... .. .. ... .. ... ... ... .. ... - ... ... .. ... .. ... .. ... - ... 3/28/0I(R:\CBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDlX H_RTC.OOC) H-29 .. ... - ... Document E .. ... Z(~ ~~ ~~ <.:' 'ill' .."..J'.,,. .'... ...: ,;:...,'.... ....., .' ,~'1~ f.~", ','~.~('[ll:': ;.'.,\.....l.'.!.l.;:.:.] . .:!\":". :.t""':'I~'. .....u ~.Io_~~.' ,~,.'.'" .-~..-.~ ... ............,.~.. .. . c;, '1\\'/1 \ _', '. ., ....1 . J . --":' , : --, ,/ . '.:.:c> '.':--' c= '., .j l.S D I San &nuurlillD Cmuuy TI'GIUpOIfIJlIon c-lu1Dn , } San B.rrwr/btD Ct1II1/Iy T........,..,,.,..,;..., AMIJtDrlly , ~; ,',', ,';,;: San &rrwr/btD Ct1II1/Iy Q,qut/DII M~ A,IJIC)' . . SIrvi<< AJIlhDrlt). for FrflWtZY u..,,1fIt:iu - - ... - . ,-'':. ,:.; .~.:: ,~:'; :'11) , :..' rc :,.,,,'JI<ll.'l2 Nonh ArrowhOld Avenue. SIn Bcmordillo. c.Jifomil9240J-142J ;." ,,';."I.m (909) 884-8276 FAX: (909) W-4407 .. - February 27, 2001 ... .. Ms. Valerie Ross Principal Planner City of San Bernardino Department of Planning and Building Services 300N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 RE: The Hub - Traffic Impact Analysis SANBAGFile-S~~S ... ... ... .. ... Dear Ms. Ross: .. .. Thank you for the opportunity to review the above refen:nced development project's revised CMF -TIA dated January 30, 2001 and the traffic model plots for 1994 and 2020 received February 14,2001. Our analysis indicates the following items need to be addressed in order for the stUdy to be in conformance with the 1999 CMP update. . We find the project roadway impacts have been mitigated to LOS "D" within the Oty of San Bernardino. It is requested the mitigation be revised to reflect the city's general plan LOS "c". Note: It is SANBAO's policy when reviewing 1arge development 1lAs, freeway interchange PSRs and intersection designs utilizing federal funds, that the LOS, as set forth in the impacted local agency's general plan is the standard used for mitigation. -- .. ... ... ... .. ... . In regards to Figure 9A, intersections 6 and II, we find the project trip distribution to be 41 and 39 percent respectively instead of37 and 44 pen:ent as shown. ... ... . In figure 17, intersections 7 and 12 have northbound and westbound free right tmn lancs respectively. Due to urban development at intersections, we feel this type of mitigation to be impractical. Please consider another mitigation such as a traffic sigoa1 overlap or an additional lane. ... ... ... . The word "contribution" in the title of Table H and its refen:nce at the bottom of the pege can be misleading by indicating a possible fair share cost contribution is needed. Consider revising to "traffic volume". ... ... ... Q:\VlOI0227-1lw.doc: - ... Olios of AtklGlw. Banrow. Bir /kG, UJU. 0Un0. Olillo HIUs. ColI.... FOftlIINI. GraNI T_. H,.ma. HiPJ-d. '- UNIa. /dorIIdJIir N.<<i/n. Ontario. Ra_ c...:..-.,.. Red/aftdI. &/zo. .\'aft 1ImtaIdIM. 7\00m",ww 1'_. Upland. V/clDnllIIr. Ya. T_ of: Appl. YOU.". YIfftlII yallry c-" of .\'aft IImtaIdIM ... ... - - Document E - .. - Valerie Ross February 27, 2001 Page 2 .. ... .. ... . Revise Table M to iDdicate any 2002 improvement COllI. AI80 show the Bile -=cess improvements Table H, their cost and project fBir are IS 100%. Should you have any questions please contact me at (909) 884-8276 when COIIVllIIieDl .. - .. ... Sincerely, . ~~~ ~bert R. Wirts, P.E. . Traffic and Transportation cc: Linda Grimes - Caltrans, District 08 Ray Casey . City of San Bernardino - .. ... .. .. ... .. - - ... .. ... ... .. ... - .. ... .. ... O:IVROI1l227......... ... ... ... ... .. - ... LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. - .. RESPONSE TO LETTER E - .. San Bernardino Associated Governments ... .. The comments included in this letter have been responded to by Anwar Wagdy, City of San Bernardino Traffic Engineer; Raymond Casey, City of San Bernardino City Engineer; and Valerie Ross, City of San Bernardino, Principal Planner (see following letter dated March 27, 2001) and by Kevin Fincher ofLSA Associates, Inc. (see following dated April 3, 2001). .. .. ... - .. ... ... .. ... ... .... - ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. ... .. - ... - ... 3/28/0 I (\\RIV5IPROJECTSICBD030IFlNAL EIRIAPPENDlX H_ RTC.OOC) H-32 - ... - .. ... DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT - .. ... .. 300 North "D" Street. San Bernardino' CA 92418-0001 Planning & Building 909.384.5057' Fax: 909.384.5080 Public Works/Engineering 909.384.5111 . Fax: 909.384.5155 www.ci.san-bemardino.ca.llS .. '" ... March 27,2001 File No. 13.47 .. - Mr. Robert R. Wirts P.E. San Bernardino Associated Governments 472 N. Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92401-1421 .. .. .. Re: Clarification on General Plan "Level of Service" Requirements - Dear Bob: .. - Staff has reviewed your comments dated 2/27/01 for the referenced TIA document. As always, we appreciate the time and effort spent on your thorough review process. We have the following comments on your assessment ofthis document. .. ".. .. We would like to clarify our interpretation of the Traffic Circulation Element in the City's General Plan, specifically as it applies to the mitigation of project roadway impacts. Staff acknowledges SANBAG's policy of adhering to the "Level of Service" (LOS) guidelines set forth in the General Plan. However, we would like to suggest that the General Plan is a plan that identifies and evaluates "general" categories of the City's transportation and traffic circulation needs. Staffs review of the General Plan, including the Technical Background Report (TBRt indicates that it is comprised of several components of the circulation system that include a) Streets and Highways, b) Public Transit, c) Bicycles and Pedestrians, d) Aviation, and e) Goods Movement. .. .... .. .. .. ... We typically would focus our review on the "Streets and Highways" component of the General Plan in analyzing project consistency. The Plan defines the various types of roadway facilities within the City by definition of facility type: freeways, expressways, arterials, and collectors. The roadways throughout the City are assigned a functional type based on the number of through lanes and the average daily traffic (ADT). The ADT Factor is tabulated as a two-way mid-block count that may vary from block to block. The General Plan describes the associated roadway classification as follows: "Tippecanoe Avenue is a four-lane, discontinuous major arterial that runs between the San Bernardino Freeway (1-10) and Mill Street near the San Bernardino Airport, and between Rialto Avenue and Base Line Street. It connects to the San Bernardino Freeway via an interchange and carries an ADT of between 9,000 and 14,000 vehicles. Tippecanoe Avenue provides primary access to Norton Air Force Base." .. - .. ... ... ... - ... - .. .. ... - - Robert R. Wirts Clarification on General Plan "Level of Service" Requirements March 27, 2001 Page 2 of2 - .. ... ... As you are aware, the TIA provided updated traffic counts. - .. An evaluation of the "Existing Conditions" of the Circulation Element is discussed in the TBR as a function of the roadway capabilities and capacity of existing major corridors to accommodate present and future transportation and development demands. From this analysis, priorities for future Capital Improvements Projects are evaluated. This evaluation process focuses on roadway capacity, which measures the ability of a street system to meet and serve the demands placed on it. The TBR states: "This is considered the most practical measure of how well the mobility needs of the City are met." In summarizing, all LOS analysis in the TBR/General Plan is related to "roadway street segments" along an entire length of roadway and is not related to the LOS at specific intersections. Additionally, (Report page 3-14): .. - .. .. ... .. .. "The City has established the Level "C" as an acceptable Level of Service (for roadway segments)". "However, a trade-off must be made between the cost of providing the infrastructure necessary to maintain the Level "C" and the delays/inconvenience associated with tolerating Level "D" on some portions ofthe network for limited periods of time." .. .. .. Attached for your perusal is Table 41 from the TBR which categorizes Functional Classification LOS based on lane configuration and mid-block ADT under "free flow" conditions. ... .. .. Staff has directed LSA Associates to resolve the project trip distribution percentage discrepancies, additional mitigation requirements at signals in lieu of free right turn lanes, and Table "H" and "M" revisions. Should you require any additional, please contact staff at your convenience. ... .. Sincerely yours, III .. /~ k<..:J" \"'. Anwar Wagdy Traffic Engineer ;1 I.' /' /{ ',/v,t /" L..A-<=7"1 . Rayfnond A. Casey City Engineer ii, . .1 11 fd;j!;.( ;".... K~41r Valerie Ross Principal Planner .. .. ... .. .. Attachment: Technical Background Report (Abridgement) ... .. ... ... - ... - S:"Public WorkslTrafficlTim's StumWi"sbub~iseddol: .. - JIll!"""""" - ""'" 000 000 00 000 000 00 ~ 000 000 00 III ... laIl . . . C 000 00'" ON 0 .....0..... ,Qojo'" <'I'" ... ...... tll - II .. ... C 0 oj( '0 ... In 000 000 00 II 3 000 000 00 .. <00<0 ojo,Q~ ^, ~ III .. "'I . . . ..Q Nojo<O 0<'1 ... ..Q ojo<O'" "'<'I .. C ... ... .... II .. 5 II ... -- ~ ... .. III g, 0 000 001 u ... > 000 00 .. '" <'10<'1 ojo,Q C II . . . . . 0 .. .. ~ UI ....."'<0 ........ .... ... .. u ...,Qojo ojoN ... .. ~ .... ... g- o .c ~ ... .. II .. f-< > .. U II ... . II ... ~ ~ ~ c .g u ... .... ... III '" .c '" ... u 000 000 00 II 0 . > g 000 000 00 II C <00<0 ojo,Q'" N'" .. ... >- ~ III I ... '0 ~ ...ojo..... N"'<O ,Q,Q .. .. ... .... l<I ","'<'I <'IN ... III III III ~ C '" lC .. .. .... U ... U .. III ojo tll III .. ~ ... ; .. ~ U In ~ 000 000 00 .... -1 000 000 00 .. IN f-< <'10<'1 ojo,Q<O .......... 0 0 :1 .. oCl . . . U , 0 ,Q"'..... <'I"'''' ...ojo >- ..! IN ,Q<'IN N'" ... ... ... 0 ... .' III C U .... .. .. .c II II ... ...; ... .s ... .... :J .. C .. U 0 '0 C .... C 0 g, ... U U II II U U II II III .... U III C C ~ C C C C C ... ... .... C .. II II III III II 111111 .. U .. III ~~~ ...~... ~~ II 3 II 0-3 I I I I I I I I g ... '" ... O,Qojo ,QojoN ~N 'n IN ... ~ C C g 0 0 U ... U ~ C .... ... ~ ... I .. ... II II II ... .. II . ... .... U ~ . 0 '" ... .. ... II .... U .. .. 0 . oC ~ II ~ C ... II ... ..QO In ... .. I.... lO: .. oC '0'" '" ... II ....g, ... ... ... :>. Ell ... .. .. U ... :>. oC ~ II .. >- ... U III ~ II ..Q III :J .. c i g, ... U 0 0 '0 - U 'n U ..... U .. II II II ~ ... lC In ..~ ... ... ........ t .c.. tOO U ... . 3-15 - .. L S ^ LSA ASSOCIATES. ISI"": 16~o SPRUCE STREET. SUITE ';00 .IYE.SIDE, CALIFORNIA 92';07 909.78L9Jl0 TEL 909.781..P;7 fAX OTHER OFFICES: FT. COLLINS _t..KELlY PT. RICHMOND IRVINE ROCKLIN - .. - ... ... - April 3, 2001 ... ... .. Robert R. Wirts, P.E. San Bernardino Associated Governments 472 North Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, California 92401-1421 .. ... Subject: The Hub Traffic Impact Analysis (SANBAG File S0000095) Response to February 27, 2001 Comments .. ... Dear Bob: .. ... LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) has revised The Hub Traffic Impact Analysis to incorporate responses to comments contained in your February 27, 200 I letter to Valerie Ross (City of San Bernardino). The specific revisions are consistent with those discussed and agreed upon at our March 20, 200 I meeting with Bob Porter (City of San Bernardino). The revised TIA, dated March 29, 2001 is attached. This letter provides a description of the specific revisions made. .. ... .. .. City Level of Service Criteria - The TIA was prepared using an LOS D criteria, per City of San Bernardino requirements. The City of San Bernardino will provide SANBAG with justification for use ofthis LOS standard. .. .... Project Trip Distribution/Assignment Patterns - You noted discrepancies between the modeled trip assignment patterns and those reported in the TIA for the intersections of Harriman PlaceIHospitality Lane and Tippecanoe A venuelRosewood Drive. As we discussed during our March 20 meeting, the select zone assignment produced by the East Valley Traffic Model indicates that 25 percent of project traffic would travel to and from the west on 1-10, with 17 percent accessing 1-10 via Hospitality LanelWaterman Avenue and 8 percent accessing 1-10 via Tippecanoe Avenue. Since the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO interchange is located immediately adjacent to the project site, it is anticipated that a greater proportion of traffic to and from the west on 1-10 would actually use the Tippecanoe A venue interchange as indicated by the model. Therefore, the trip assignment patterns for this traffic to and from the west on 1-10 was adjusted to assume 12 percent using Hospitality LanelWaterman Avenue and 13 percent using Tippecanoe Avenue. The resulting adjustments affected the trip assignment patterns at the referenced intersections. A discussion of these adjustments has been added to the Trip Distribution and Assignment section on page 20 of the TIA. ... ... .... .. ... .. ... .. .. Free Right Turn Lanes - You question the use of free right turn lanes for mitigation at the intersections of Tippecanoe Avenue/MiII Street and Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps. The northbound free right turn lane recommended at Tippecanoe A venue/MiII Street had been ... ... ... 4/3/01 ((R:ICBD030ITraflicIThe HublWirts-Response to TlA Commenls.wpd)) .. - PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DEIIGN - - ... l ~ ,\ }\ ~ ~ () <: f ., ! r ~. 1"'1. - ... - .. previously proposed in the San Bernardino International Trade Center Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (LSA, March I, 1996), and was included for consistency. However, examination of this location indicates that satisfactory levels of service can be achieved through the use of right turn overlap phasing for the northbound right turn movement. The discussion in the Intersection Improvements section on page 52 of the TIA has been modified accordingly. In addition, appropriate modifications have been made to Figure 17, Table K, page 61, and page 65. .. .. .. .. With respect to the westbound free right turn lane at Tippecanoe Avenuel1-IO Westbound Ramps, the TIA states that the overall improvements that would be necessary to improve operations to LOS D or better at this location are not feasible, and that interchange reconstruction would be necessary to provide improved operations. loa .. .. Table H - The title of Table H has been changed to "Project Percentage of Total New Traffic Volumes at Study Area Intersections." ... .. Table M - Table M has been revised to indicate which improvements will be partially or completely needed by project opening in year 2002. We have used a single asterisk ("0") to indicate improvements that will be partially needed by 2002 and double asterisks ("00") to indicate improvements that will be completely needed by 2002. In addition, we have included the costs for the realignment and construction of Harriman Place and for the signal at the Primary AccesslHarriman Place. In addition, discussions of these improvements have been added to pages 61,65, and 66. .. .. .. - .. "'" If you have any questions about the above modifications, please feel free to call me at (909) 781- 9310. .. Sincerely, .. . .. LSA ASSOCIATES, INe. 4/ M. Kevin Fincher Associate .. ... ... Attachment: The Hub Traffic Impact Analysis (March 29, 2001) .. cc: Margaret Park, San Bernardino Economic Development Agency Valerie Ross, City of San Bernardino Anwar Wagdy, City of San Bernardino .. .... - - ... - 4/3/0 I (<R:\CBD030\Traffic\The Hub\Wirts.Responsc to TIA Comments.wpd)) 2 ... .... .. - .. LSAASSOClATES, INC. - - - APPENDIX I MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN - ... ... ... .. .. ... .. .. ,.. .. .. .. - .. .. .. ,.. - ... III ... .. - .... ... - ... ... - ... - - - ... LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. MARCH 2001 MITlCATlON MONITORINO MATRIX THE HUB IN SAN BERNARDINO ... - .. ... APPENDIX I MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN .. - .. This mitigation monitoring plan has been prepared for use in implementing mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Report for The Hub project (SCH# 200081074). This program has been prepared in compliance with the State law to ensure compliance with mitigation measures adopted for the project by the City of San Bernardino. Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code, Paragraph 201081.6), effective January I, 1989, requires adoption ofa reporting or monitoring program for those conditions of approval placed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment. The law states that the monitoring or reporting program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. .. too - .. .. The monitoring program contains the following elements: ... .. I. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and procedure necessary to ensure compliance. In some instances, one action, such as plan review, may be used to verify implementation of several conditions of approval. .. .. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. - .. ... 3. The program has been designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based on recommendations by those responsible for the program. If changes are made, new monitoring compliance procedures and records will be developed and incorporated into the program. .. - .. .. - .. ... - - ... .. ... ... ... .. R:\CBD030\FinaJ EIR\Mitigation Monitoring Plan. wpd (3/28/01) I-I ... .. - - ....... .. " 0 ;; z .. - < 0 - . ~ o z z. - .. ... . . o z .. < z. ... o z . ~ Z 0 .. 0" ~.. < " 0" - .. . .. - .. - .. ,.. - ... .. ,.. .. ,.. ... ".. .. .... .. ... - - .. .... .. U Z ... . .. .. < - ;:,:; ;; o ~ ~ " ... < U < . . < " . - ... .. ., = .- ." .. " = .. .. = = " 00 ...s .C .c .. = "= ::!I .. .....c: .5 E-4 ;..: ;::; = "" ., .. ::!I~ =~ ., " .- "" .. Ei .~~ .. - .- " ::!I; .. Ei = ., .. .;: = f;ol -; = r.:: ~ :ii - ;; - - .. :is =~ e .. e-... .. '" --- - - .. - .. ,::l - "l! .s" .. e e_ "'l! ,,- e- :0::0: "'~ e .. · e ~... ;:.. e" ==t: " e e... :0:" '" -2 .. E ~ II .. C "SO C '" ~ u ,., ...... e ii 8 ~~u ii 8:a"'" ~6:S ~ .~ ~.c 0 ~~1!11 -Bt;<~ 09",...5 6 'f'; It) .- u ... c Q:u<28 e . " .. .~~l e.= r:: .c~Q,) "- .. ~".o ~-S ~ .c ~.. rn._..c i:u III .. .. C <'>"=.9 ~~:; ..._.0 <a,j ii 8:a"'" =0- en ~ '- 'S c ._ o.c 0 .,g.!!1!'B ~Bl.l:O :!"i-ll~ e - C "I: .... 0 j:l.,Ueu .. .. l!-g1l _enS- .S.... .~ .o;.!5";; a~.8-S ::;-S~:5 .c ~.. a; 1I.I._..c -u~8 ~~ S ti . ~ .....;;.= g 0. 0 ::s 0.._ i'~:D E ~ ..e~8"g> .c e 0 "- t-o.u.5E ~ C "SO .li ~ u ,., ...... o ii 8 g-fRu ~ 8:2"1ii 11.10,:; = '~'o.co ,.g'!!S"'B ;~I::U -",".5 .....- oS It) .9 ~ 1-0 r:: Q:u..s8 .. .. .. l!-g1l _IlnS- 's.... .~ .cJ!5'; a1U.8-= :a;S~:E -5.~~ ~ cU:g8 < .. '" e , co'= ... <<Ijd 1::'> E U"O ric.E ~ E .. C :leE .:: = to:; 0. 1!E E ~ ~ Q CO._ co ~"'E u'gi ,,- " E> ~g.E "'iiE>" o-&, ~ = 0 .0 "_ . .~ ~bIJ g- 0 c: - .. .. a ~ .. .. ~.E Q.._ 'C ~~ij.H ~~ :0: ~="'O " c.. ~.cc 0'" ..." :;:Ie: ~ - 0 e ~.5 "";; .8 j~~~E C ;: o ~ ~ g . ~c.c "1! s"C s ".0 .. ""0 ..t ;: E= .... 'u) 0 aga..ga "1ll ~ ""oS "'....c C .. 1:l.. co .. ~~i'~i !i ~ "c.c <( .. 's.oS 00- u ~'c o.'c ...... .. 0 ~.~ cE o C"O 0 "0 00 ""- a"O 5 ~ 5 C C 1.1 .. 5 .. " .. ~S~ f,,) c 0 c 0 f,,).:=: t: ~"'" U 0.0'-.0 ..- o-g~ c..f,,) =..... """- r... " "EHl~.c !(j ",,'" ~ ~E ~~~ E- co '" 0. u i=~ "':8 ... .... . . . .. II o "SO .li ~ u ,., ...." 8 ~~d ii ~:a"'" ao:s ~ .~ ~.o 0 .8B'!"'B ;~t;;o -",".5 S'E'; CI) ;EB.s8 .. .. l!-g1l -WEt; 's I- .- .o;f5"; ato~'; ~.;~:€ ~.~~ ~ cU:g8 ~.8oa . :.= .......;:.= 8 o.s] 0...; li',-'.6 E gb .. 0 C 8"", .c e 0 .- E-o.u.5E Co "0"': ~ "0 C ''''''0 a"O '';::0::1= -g =: Cl}U :.a u -0::1 ..... 0 '- lJ "O~uu .gd~ 0- < co';::I~ o~c bOi:-E I "Oo..fi 0 S'c,::: 8.8.5.- 0 s.cu>fiE.ooc-=,8Uu ~co8<"000~tU~......uu u tU u':; u _ I- H ,....c .0 ioo"'~..!.Bc..w'::""'- "o-.....cuuuco.i5"OO C S .. i.o.o..c'-'- - t: ii g ::I U 0 _wE-Q. as oa"E .....ol-:.EuuGcfu .0 ..... 0 0."9. = -8 .......c ~ '" < = ~ ~.5 E= ~ a 5 to ~ ~ ti ~ .:=: (.1J'c . W-o ~u:g c: c:Z U 0"0 g g=: as:E.::: 0 d.:=:< g ~ 5.!!.!! o~.!!lfti ~g~:g " 0 S S ~ ..".. .. " .. ., ~ 0 ::I~~~",o~g.::;-5C1)S~ 51::....00::; ,-:g~g-€I- >0~~~..c80o-Hasu < c.!!.!!..E'::!.c H~ I-U-S uB"O"O >,0 CI) u 1-_ u >'6 o ,. = = as 00 u E u I tlO.o = ii"""~c.c..-S'iic","- . u frjj 3'= ~ > ~::Ii! e"E~ !:! CI)..c..c: c.t:: u._ e.- = ~ as s" 0 -as-..... "O..c:o.::Iuuo. N ~~ 2 ~.s~'i.E e-<.$ ~~$ e t:: C l Ii 0; .. o "C B .~ " c o .~ .~ ~ Iii ;; c ~ ~ is .. y ,;,: - - - - '0 ;; z >- C < . ... . < o z z. - . - . . o z >- < z' ... o ~ . . ., z, 0% ~ . <% .. 0>- >- .. . .. . ... .. - - .. .. - .. - .. ",. .. .. - - .. - .. .. .. 0 % - . . >- ... < (3;; o ~ ~ % - < 0 < . . < " . - - .. o II - "Cl .. " II .. " = II " CI) ...!! .C .c ..= "= ~" Cll.cl .S (-l "J' S.. .~ 0 II '" o " ~1:II:i lit: o " .~ '" "to EI .i!J1I-l .. - .~ " ~= " EI II o .. ~ = f;I;l ;; II r:: ~ ~ " E .. =: .. - " J:l ~ ;; '" ;; ~ .. :;; H' 0" Irl'o .. =: ~ " " ~ .60 ~ '" ~ u "Il ~ " 1:0 0_ ~Il ,,- 0- ::;;::;; ....~ o Iii 8g-~~ ~8;g'~ =~:::l = ._ 0.0 0 lL~ e 'i -<<I~tj s~u.5 S 'foS UJ .- U ... = Q:u~g .. !;i.s ." .c.... -UJe- 'S.!:: ~ .o~5u :::l_u..e UJ <<1.0 - ~oS~~ -5l.~.! il -UrnU au = u .~ oS .S!.! c i5. o:i i5..S! fi'i: E e ~ u g = g.,;: ,c ~ 0 .- E-o..u.EE ~ '"'Il " .. " e :l'o 1:" 0" ~t: " 0 0", ::;;.. =: .. .... o ~ .g '6 ." < ! " ~ " .. ::;; " o '" " ~ ~ ~ > .. =~ o Iii CIl- ~ E 1!a " -<t: ll.!! ~." .. ~ .. " ~ 0 -.0 r/l- ~ :a 0" ~." " ~ ,",0 ~ u <l! . ~ " " ~ '60 ~ '" ~ u ,., .... u o ~ 8 g.~~ Iii" 8:si.'" UJO'Ej ~ .~ ~.o 0 ~B!'i - <<It;: tj S~u.5 5'e oS UJ 'C ii ... 6 c..U~u " " .hill -UJeu 's'" .- .o~5-;; 5J~]-5 ::::-5u.: .! ~ ~'i rn ._"C c:u~8 .~ .s .S!.~ C - -- 0 8:;S] 0...,;: <<I~'EEgb " 00 = g.::: ,c 0 .- E- IS. u.5 E u ,,~ 12 ...._ <<I .!~ .= rn U u e .!: ,c oS a ~t-C:::l <<I en 0::: ufila ~e.o~ e.. _ :::: ii;.~ u .! ail.:: ~E..e.!! =._ u u u 00.0 ... = =""0 u &:ii .s 12 00.- '" a:::: ~ J:l, tj4aa"g .U] ='0' e'-.ga o..S:::l'o-o . u=:Doo ,coS,,"" t-..; = 000 ::IO,SN ~~u=:a f"l.be8u -=<<1"'>- ... g -5i 8..5 ." ~ o lj o ~ e 0" ~... .S! ... :ij;f "'0 <'-' ,lj p,'e .bc..~ ~u~ ~.H. OlE"" =='" ~-0 ~ 't ';' <-- a]] E g'~ ".0 8. ~iiCl) ~ ~ e ~ " " ~ .60 ~ '" ~ u ,., .... u o Iii 8g-~. a u.-.B = ,,:E.;;; mO':; = .!:2~.o 0 ~B,!13 - Bt;< tj .9"'''5 S 'f-5 m 'C u ... 6 .o..U~u j"ll - 011;; 's'" .- .oJ! 5-;; iil~]oS ~-s~~ .c ~.. ~ m._ .c c:u~8 <<I u - a .~-s.g._ c i5. 0 ;:::I i5..S! fi'i::D e ~ "d8.~ ,c ~ 0 .- E-o.u.5e .... o ~ <t: .g ~ u .- ""0 =- ""0 u= <<I 5 ~~g-E~ !;i.o ~ " I o..li" 0.. all! il... "" a <<I ""0 bOlt"'l ~ u='c.!:2 ilig-g~ 0_ u =.- c55e=.8] ~au-s'~ a't.!~&. cs:o Ell I! 1J3.a~u :::la-aS ! ~ ~ ~~ ~ =~ ~~ ""O=um =.8 fa'" " 8.c - lj ~ut:E'O' ~=g2g: ~ ~ .;' ~ '" ~ u ,., ....u o Iii ""'OIl u :::l = u ~ u:;;.", mO:: ~ .~ <0] 0 " -ll oS.a~- aut;< u -"," 5 S'f oS m 'C U ... = c..u~g " .Hill .-:: w e ti e'" .- .g;a8~ cn~.o- =aoS~~ -5l.~.! il -UwU au = ~ .~ oS ..g.s C i5.S.E i5..g fi''o-o'~ e <.. Ul F= '"C e 1:';" iiI c 0. Cl().... ~ 6 S'C:; =.0 00""0 ~ ::I1i)==0 0"._ = ~ -s~:a.88. :!]o!'€ ~ ?' <<IOU =:~~~!;i ~ <<I'iij..s-5 ~ C I Ii 0: i!' .~ s .. o ::. o .s ;; .~ ~ Iii .. c ~ 8 '" Sol 0/ - ... - ... " 0 ;; . f- ;:; < . . < o' . . - . . . O. f- < z" o' .; ." o. ;:. <' Of- f- . .. .. .. - .. - - - .. .. - .. ... .. ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. - .. ... .. o . - " . f- < ;:; ;; o ~ " . < 0 < . " < ~ . - ... - ... .. => = :;; .. <C = .. .. l:Q = <C CI) ~.!! .C .c "" = "= ::;J.. ....-= .!~ .. . =>"" "" .. .~ .. CQ. ~~ =~ .. " .~ Q. ... e ... :c: .~ " ::;JOj .. e C => .. .~ .. C riIil - <C C r:; .l:I .. .. e ~ " - .. l:l w ;; E " - " ~ ~ :;; U U -;e = " .00 .00 .. .. = .a ..... '" ~ ~ ~ u u ..w " U -" .. .. ~li ,,- ..- :E:E >> .... " .. = ~ g.gpd l;j ~:o." =0- IIJ :g.... '3 c .- o.D 0 ]B'!'2 -;Bt;:~ _",uS 5 'e-= II) 'I: U 5 5 ~Uc.o;;;C,) U 1l~1l _mE- 's'" .!a .D~fi-;; ::1_ u..c en co.o'" -..cu. '"; ~>.~ -5.t::.~ ~ -Utt.lll.) .~ .s .~.~ c c.. 0 '$'Q..2 o.-.oe-", "'.....s ugc8'~ t:a8.s.s w 15 .. .. .... =.. U" =i: = .. ..... :E~ BC;uu c:::"g -.. ~ c::..c :a ~ o"fos...~:-5.; co] ~'c ~~~.= ....:::s "0 aI 0 tlQ4! 00""= ~CCIIJ g ~ ~ g ~.g 'rJ n ''::: 5 co.D,!! co..c u :.s o-i ~ Q.'O' "'0 I1J ~ U ~._ Q.~ <1l:::su-"'g.! loe1lict::eu.w -u..cau >1:: 3 ~ ... 0.:; 'E 0 f:! .bca]~!:ildEi).... (/'J "::I as = .. =' > s::: = _uo ou_ou ! ~.! ~ ~~ j i e ~ .. G:le:;.!!ue'ceo. .. "aoe""ua"! "; = ill "CI-"'O_N :E ~ 3"E .: s.:c 'S: ~.~ < ct: :s 1i ~.~ e 'C ~ u "0 co - IIJ c."O := gc .."'0 co...'E,gC;E COSiSU:lb05'V,j ~~-~jl~~ 8- ~g~BE~i.ge E " w II :E . >> ...." o l;j 8 go ~ G.i i 8:.a.~ :::s 0:- In :g.... :; c ._ o.D 0 .sa1!1J i:Ot::1) g~G,)E :5 'E-= II) 'C u 6 5 Q.,Uc.;:;Q j-llll _wEl;; 's.!:: ;:: .o4!fiu a1;J5.;l :;]';~:€ ii.~.!~ -U0U fa u 5 g . ~..s.=~ a Q. g.s c..;:: ieo...s E '" u 0 8'~ .ceac'~ t-o.u._E .c .. ::I .:: u e u u i .c_-__ I ~ - flI", F. uu..",,,,=CiIcE- =' = 0.::1 a " 5~8g~.&-k >.c~.D~t;;-&M < ~ ~ 'S oJ ~ 'C N 00 .. 0 C "'0 W C I-. U i1.a ca", =._ ~-5~"'O~ a 6 ~ CiI "'0 .!::::I ~ .....- E=E-S-;;;ii] ~ 6.a ca~ ca ~'iii ......D- ..- ..:;>0 = c..c~~"'O=~8~ ~ 1::._ ca ::l ca ca ;:;r (/) 0 1-._ - j.,;; u "'il C"'O E] E ca I-. ='"Ec='-airu 5.-6-~ w!;l >-5.Dct: ,:cca-5j < ca '€ .!:! ] .~"'g .!: g'Oo"'g8~=..tf! C=C:lUCUW ~.i~]:sib 8..:e CiI-5 oJ-B - .~ .!:-"'O< P.- g fa ~ ~ e f-o (); i1.a_ u_c.. ~ = .00 .a ~ u >> ...." o l;j 8 go ~ G.i l;j ~:o." ::10- W :g eo..'s = ._ 0.D 0 ~8!"'B ~~l.CU ~~.s~ 'C u I-. a c..utSu ~ -8"0 .c"u -Wet;; 's I-. .- .D~5-; ::1_ u..c Wca.D- :a-5~:E -5.~1 ji: -UwU l;j u 6 ~ . ~-5.=;= g 0. 0 " e..- il::~ 1:1; u e 6 8:E' t: ...".s e '- ,:c I I ~ "'8.E.~ lUg lUlU ..8 :I g>~", ~ - -= -s :eu~:E~i.~ g'o~ "'0-;=0 ..~c Ut: < e u e.sg..!! 8 6'~ 8.: I a.~- ca..c- uCl m'- u ~ _ u"'B - tlI)== i <<I r.f! '~"'8l;j!;lE6"-"S'=w Cl oJ cae-5i =.s i E ~]B "2 i '- ::l u..c." - a"ii U'~ 0- 0_ c tlOc..c-I-..D 0 ji: E ~.:c o..'c :::I tlO-& ~ 0 g;: ... "ii.a :I.tlI)~"i] s'c...J; .5 I-. u" C ca 1;..c I-. "'0 e'- c U ;f~ c:i:- u:;-5 c 01;;.52 r. ...J- ca tlOE:.a 0"'0 Slt:.c u D. ...,.,,"'O-:::IaOWC.D -;=r- ~=Ee "'O..c:::l..cgo..t:Q'\ c='.a-5ct:ut:]:;CE:gN ~.8 -"B.!! a 6-S ~ ~ e 8.~ <~~c:ti]"'g';g.,,<"'ge~ u 0 ..c:::l = '- i1.a B u =' >.;:: oC"'O'" 0 ..o-caOOca:E S"'O c caoS u c ~.~ fa oS ji:'- g 5 g = ~.!.g.g'B ~ ~ H ~8. 0. ~,e '" e .- ._"0 c:" <l:: .e. :(j l;j II ,,:g:g l! ;-: 0 0 l1 E-cau_O_c\lic\li_r---1-. '" l::: C 1 Iii c; .. c .C S .. o ::! g .~ .~ ~ iii ;; c i,!; o ~ 8 III Y " - .,,"'" .~ - <0 " z .. ;; < . - . < o z z. - . - . . o z .. < z. - o ~ . . .. Z 0 o z e: . < z ... 0" .. . .. ... - ... loa ... .. - ... .. ... ... .. .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... - 0 ~ ... . . .. ... < o ~ 0" :;:1: ... < 0 < . . < - . .. - ... .. = :;; .. " = .. .. = = " '" ...8 -C ,Q .... ::I "= :!1.. 0Il..c: .!~ .. . 31:: - .. = c. .. .. :!1=: lOt: .. " .. c. ... E .a".... ....- -" :!1i! .. E = .. .. '> = r-1 'i = ~ .=! .. . e ~ .. ~ = w l! - ii - .. :c ;t '" .. "'... r! =' ~ " " = 'bi> = '" ~ u "r! = = 1:", "'- ::1 =- ",- ::;;::;; >- ... u o !ii 8 g.~u a H~'~ :so=-= In :g~ = c ._ 0.0 0 ]~S"B ~ rjt:: '0 -"'''E IS 'eoS In .- " ~ = ~ucS8 " 1!.g1l .....lIJE..... 's'" .~ .oJ! 5";; SltO~05 ::;;..s~~ -5.~.! tt -UVJU au c g .~ -5 .,g.~ d -a 0::1 -a.S! fi'~~ E co u g i! 8'~ ... ~ 0 .- !-Q.u.5E "O~ = ... .. e &-... 1:" ~.= "';: " '" "'", ::;;~ E ill .. .. ::;; " oS ~ .. ;: ~ ... = <I) oS o ._ co "'0 .~ u~.E 5 .5 E . U u 0 E C'lI ~Q. g ..e :.= J::= E u fl...: ";"Et)'::8<~8 u ::l>.uou >::9.00"70. 'cl.o~,;C'Ca~t'-- Q "tlO.,g 8.oCr' 8~~~ o..;r;: ~ r;;: E'E= !ii';; ~-~B ~~ a '50 E'c u 0 C'lI.;j :::soC':l_....:I... ..... ..... U C'lI >"_ g4::"'Cl::i;::cf! u..!! g ::.... ,e...rIJ >." ~ ~ll'a.ll <cucElIlu ~ i52.5!"R~'2' =.c.... to c.. Q., "'.<: e u '" = us t::u~1I'i 8. 5l .g .- ~ ! Q. .e.... C5 "8e !ii " ~ f-oo..... _.D. ~ " = 'bi> = '" ~ u >- ...u o !ii 8 g.~u c u.-..... ~.s.?::s! 'w UJo':; c .!! CC;.o 0 .8BE"B -;;t1"=u -"'''E S 'f'; In 'C u ... S Q..uc2u 1h -we- "s.... .!! .o~F--;; SlCiJ]-5 =;-5~:E -5.~.!~ cU:g8 ~.,g 0 fa . :.= -'.=;.:: S Q. 0 :s 0.._ ~~:e E to uO~8'~ ... 0 8 .- f- l5. .5 E H u... g <t:i 8"B .s'CU'= ClS"O uc~ eo..';=u ~c 0~"O o~ flS2 ,U::J aU~Ii~cut3t; ~] .8 ~ 8: ~!! ._S! .g., >0 =0 E E t;i U is..'- 'C -::: u e u t'll u-=c.f-<o.D-;:::Sj:l..,~u cw:::.a:r: .- u u ClS J:: _ cw::: "Oc:::t'lI]f-<.::~~:g:g4.i'ou CUr.ll_~"Ou...!.o~tlO bO g:;; a'B:: 5~~'!~.2 5.2 of! s u'"o~ B,c:: Ku ~ ~ ~ ~~.8 a::1 E a~ o.::s 80B _-.....CClSU=eo..UI:.....c - E - U ... "" ::l O.!::'-"':- 01: "OE"OC. _::JOO-.O - 0 .a:; ~ c F= ~ c:: l:J"'- - - ..!.C_o>::Jca.D~O...!.r.Il...!. Gl "0 .c..c 0 0 ... t'll S ... Gl .- Gl ::J c::.~ r.Il aof! "0:: ~:!2 ::l ~::l e8....::E""c::~~::l5;.:c:: ~ ~ ~ .'- ~ g CIS a 0 >:E ~ < ClS c.t:: ~ "0 ~.D ~ E ~ -< 'r.;; -< ~eo.."05~~t:;~.-:g~c::~ oOe-l:, t'lIQ. "'00&.0 5C:::IE~-UJ~~'=i""i u .S! .8 .a Egg.c ~ u u ~ u ~~ s.c ~ 5 5 ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ._ "0 0 tlO ~ > >'-,!:. -= ,- .c .- f-< -< r.Il'C ... -< < ~ t- "_ f-o "" f-o ~ = 'bi> = '" ~ u ,., ... u o !ii fj go ~ 4.i 5 ~:.a.1:: ::l 0:: ""= ~ eo.. =' 0 .- 0.D ~B~'B ~~t;o -"'''E l5"f!':: r.Il 'C i) ... S j:l..,U~u " ~ " l!1l1l -""e- 'S'" ,~ .oJ!5"'Z a 10.8-= ::;-=~:€ -53 .~jg lit cU~8 .~ .s .S!.! = Q. 0 :; Q..S! fi''::::~ S 10 u8E8:E ~ 5. 8.5 E I: g .; = :~ c. ~-o "0 ~ E< -:]'fi "O::Je U>.E < u 0 c.-;;' e'g., 0 lfJ 'lO;goa'-~~C:: B,a :;..2_ ::Jg.,.:: ~ ~Q.o"'Eif .....!l ca u weo.. ... ~ 0_ ...:uo.a"O~-~ "0 ...e=oC::::;ClS5~ C~Cj;i ~o..c~", gaflS'fi-;t~ .c .o-"O;:::s"O_i) u -.cC.t:ec=O'I~ =bOCQr.Ils~e'- .- UJ S u'" C8.D ~ e~.E 0"'= '::>'=",,0 "",;".;.s :'6 e 5~"",;" ~] E.~ "" ~ ~ 0 1; =' =' .a 'U" ~.-.:: ~ ::I 5 ].E ;j'::.~ '0:: 5 >.c tlO_,~.:: c:e <> -< 1::';: E l< ~ 0 "" ~O"O::J~~'_C~ occ:-u>o&.o i'E='.E'::].ew;j u;.c]tlO8t'l1weU 80 - .c'C t'lI"O = ~ 8- c.t'lI't:u-BOa:c. .- eo.. 0 ~ fr 0 ~.c'- f-< 0 c c.t:: ... c ... wf-< i? t::: C l ~ s: " c ." S 'E o ::;: c o .~ .~ ~ iil .. c ~ '" M is '" y .. - - ... ... '0 ;; Z "0 <. . < OZ Z' - " .. o Z .. < z. o Z . ; Z" 0" ;: " < " 0" .. . ... lot ... .. ... ... .. .. ... .. .... .. - .. ... .. ... ... ". .. ... .. ... .... ... .. ... .. o z - . " .. < o ~ 0" : " < 0 ;:; ~ " . .... ... .. - ... o = .- -= .. '" = .. .. =:I = '" <I.l ...s .C .c ~ = ~~ Cll'= .5!~ .. . 0'" ... .. _ 0 =c. 0" ~~ lOll:: 0," .- C. ~e .!!fIt-( ...- .- '" ~-; .. e = o .. .:: = foil -; = rz M 'i'! .. E " Ill: " - .. Q M 1; - ;; ~ " := i~ " .. "'llo : ~ " " c ';;;, c "' l;> u ..~ " " 'C" ",S - ~ -" ,,- ",- lOlO >. .... y o lii 8 g.~~ a ~:.s:~ =0:: In ~_::s = .- o.D 0 ~u~'i -ll"'tl St;:uE 5 'f'; ~ 'C u ... s:: j:l.,ur.E8 " .H1l -lI.Ie- 'e.!:: ~ ..g~5u lI.I1iJ~'; ~.;~:€ -5.~] 3l: -u fI) U fa u C g .~ oS.52.! = Q. 0 '5 -a.S! fit.:::1i e ';l u g c 8'~ '" ~ 0 .- t- 0. u.5 E ~ -g! .. 0 ..~ "llo iff =~ " '" "'... lO&! ""0 ~ 9 =0=] .g ~ oJ 0 :.s:;a~u ~2~<<l~ "0 tlO"O 11.1 . c: ::J = ... "C 0 0 CIS'- ~ ; ~ 1: .;..f! - [; "'.... fa..'" i:;~]-1i . 0 U ::s E ''='I i a:1 5..8.a e....: u.l~-s -j:l., 5 .]bO::I~.~ ~ .!! g 2'c ~ 8- i ~~]lE;; i uc;.8.a.~ ~ g u"-5<5 ~ tn~ag-~ >- C t:- Ul"'O.o t: 20 E.!! 5 'in .oJ IooC::sF'lO= -< -8"E!-a..e8. ~ c .... t:= Co = II.l _ <-S..2~ue ..., Ill: :( .. c '6 =s ~ g ~~.- ::... ca.~ ...", > uolla .... o " . y ~ c.-=: H ,; 8- 0" - c .8~ 0..;' ~ g :2 _.~ ::s:": o .. 0 ::: '';; u:i u 'E'e-s5~ .g u.5 e g 1n-S~Gu = -"'00 In CIS J! ::s "'0 "t; -5-"i)SlS.. E 1::.5 '.c..9 ~ e.~ 2 ~ ~ ~"B 1;; -8 c..'l:: tj l5 u < u.- u oS g g 8 ,.g -J:: '';::: a -~IU~U"O tlo~..E15 ..2-;; II:lflltl Mo>.gg<<l -luUUC (; 5 tu='- .c ._.c ca13 II.l.oU-_cu.i BBSe,s-sa ~ -_ U::I C .- J: ~ 6a ~ E .;; H cOI-~EEt:: 8"B 5 -; B"C .~ c ;..c~ salt' o ClD I- tt:l"C .- E'- 0 = o_tt:l 1:)u..c-uc", "e"Olil"OE!! .. ... c .." " tt:l.... = cu U 1:) =::Itt:lO=..o~ (3 iSgU';;;::::c; " " lil 6 lii i< lii '" 0...._ - - e ~-'B=1:)Q.5u -< ".S! 2 ~ e .; .. :: tt:l t5.- Q. . ~,~ = "i-;..c ~ 8 5 8 bO is'~ .. c '6 1i ~ a cc ~-- =:o..al-!!3 ...", > uolla .... o 8J!i lii'- " E M" .~ Q. 0" -c ~.- ~l U = ~_ oS ,S! - 0'S ~o _ ClD tt:l- _''; U _ U .- ._.c Ii ~ ee;;ec .gU'-::IO ~oS13~~ -;~-g"'O~... ~oSus8. -....0 =.- 0 a 0-;;; 'U'U u ...._;:1 > .- Q."'O .t:: U i5..~u tt:l"'O Q..- 1;; s.c" < U'- u _ >. lii " _ c " " 0 oS~>. .'" :llii .5.g .5 ;31l ".D -g .;; 0 e: 6 l: e? ~.se J::E~ """" (3 [a s -; oS ''; B" e g .. 0 ~'15 ~ 6 c u .c U '-.-:: "," i< ....."" =.g e -:f!;>. f"! 8. c tIS ~ 0 0"'0 .. c '6 == ,",C "liO CC 11,::;.... >. al.~ -'" > uolla .... o 8!i lii'- " E _~ 8. .s~ ~.- il U C oS oS _S! .:;:..: 0'S ;;0-_0 -.. ~ _-.; U _ u 'S'S'; Ii ~ .gu,5~s ~oS"Bg~ "'i ~ -g "'0 ~r. ~oSus~ E co.5'.c..9 t1 e _!!3 ~y ~ .-...." " i5.>.0 "0 Q.,'l:: 1;; 1S.c" <u-- u_ .... ... 0 IS t>O..c ~ ';l i<'E biJ 01 oS~::Ifl ,gtt:l 2:!..c Q = >. >;~ =... "'i..o~- ~'E~be"O~ Uu=>u..c:oo _Eco-S~c: "'i 8-- U "U''; -liil!o.;1l.,,~ UJ c: ~"O" 6~c':'51;o -uuU_Q. g]i1 ~ 5,5 8=gco~~E .- u - 1;-E!- IS 5.~ ~~ ~ g. '.ci5..= e-g="O g ..If.;.c 0 lii UJ .5 t::: >. 8. ~ UJ ="00': -_..!! o~_.GcUJu U 6O.E-.g~:E ~IS~IS~~~ ......ii== lQ ill.S:l UE~1t6lQ'S "':1I.l~goue.cu f"!seeuH--E ~uull.l..s"OE-.; ~ ~ C l ~ 0: " . .. S '0 ~ . o :1 ~ iii .. . ~ ~ 8 '" y .. - - - ... " 0 ;; % .. - < 0 . - . < 0% % . - . ... . . 0% .. < Z. ... o ~ . . % , .. o. ;: . < . 0" - .. . la - ... ... .. ... - .. ... .. ... - ... .. .. - .. ... la .. ... - - 0 ~ ... . . .. < ... o ~ 0_ :;:t: - < 0 < . . < " . la - .. = c :s .. '" C .. .. = C '" fIl ~ .$ 'C,e 1;i =' ~~ ...c .5~ .. . .sl:: .- = c "" = .. ~g: at: = '" .- "" 1;i E .~- .. - .- '" ~= .. E = = .. - ;. = f;I;l - '" c r:: w ~ .. e ~ .. - .. t:l w :; - ;; - .. :is U' .. .. Co... ~ '" c '6 '" l;> c ~~.g ~C'lI.~ ...<IJ > uollO ..w = .. -c= sil -.. =- ..- :E:E .... o 8:i c.- H .~ 8- 0'" - c .. .- ,9 -g 0:1;0 w 1! .. .. .... c'" -C" 0.5 =1:: = .. "Co :E~ ue oS -5.= .- o ~ ~ ~ ::.~u :31:) 's 's oS 5 g ..g G,).E E a fn -s "0 i3 u _....Uorn -a ~] "O.~ ~C::::U58. '50.=.=.9 Cl S.ra ~ ~ .- 0."0 J:: U -a~ull'l"'O 0.._ 1ii 5 u <u;:u..s ,,= S '" ~=~ ~ 8,J:l 6 t:lO ""..c..c ~ c E'~ ~~'t; .= ~ e ...;< _ e..c~ u rl..]~~~g lIJ Ii ...- = ""'==~5 :: ~..:.g=~ u = 0 U 1I'l-= :E ~c.68al = 6g~~~ -! u~o~~ \I 60~u~ .y "fi :'s ';5.5 ;;:: ".!!.c":! ..e. ::.~._..c c ~.:: E -;'<<1 ot)"O-E uco;Eo uC u"" ~.gEn.,; u :.0-=>> t:l.6 g ".S ~ "": ~ !; :: e"i ~8~j]e '" = '6 ~~6 .c:a~.- >..C'lI.:a ...<IJ > uollO ..... o " . " ~ a"" " E .!!l 8- 0'" -c ...- 0'" .c '" ...1;0 uC :5_ -s.g ..,; o tl:l ~ 0 -.~u n ti '~'~-S5g .g OJ.5 ~ g UJ oS "B C,,) U -"""00 IIJ ii as =' "0..... '5-Sug8. .... '0.5 ':::.E ~ e.~ ~ ~ .- "-", ., " c.,e. U VJ"O 0...- 1ii 5 !! <U;:u't:: "8 '" " 1::.<: 8.';:: ,,-,2 f.il ~ = > "'.- -55 .. " S.5 ~::: ~ ~ 15~ u'" 5 a ',c t:lO " c E- ~ :a ~ :5 -5i e u-80 u'C :5 ,c "._ ..... "'- fol!Sg "":8:g ~58 " .s:> :;j~ .<:" ::: gj .~ E 's:- '::: g ~ :5 c" E~ "-'" .9" ".<: >- "'" "'= ",.- .s:>~ "'- B;S '" .. '" l;1.s:> " " tlO.":: - ~ . ~ c ~ 00- ",1l.8 ~.5"B "Hlt; T...;.:: '" C '6 '" '" = "liO co co::;.- ~~.~ uollO .... o " . " ~ c.~ H ~ " .~ c. 0'" - c n 0.'" uC oS ~'i 'i ~ ::.~u:l u .-.-=:..c c co Ss-"~ -gu.5~8 ~..s"'B(,)~ c; ~ -g .g .... ~..sug8. -....0 =.- 0 a 0';;; t)'U Co) ...._ ::I ... ._ 0.." .:: u "i5..~CLlVJ'" 0.._ 1ij g !:! <u.- u':: ... ~ u . o .;::::..c u = ..='" ~ .2:s ~ ~8 ~ VJ~'E ~ ff~ ~.!!''::: :l.6 ~ s:~ oi)B=~ ~ c co co... VJ '> ;.t 0. ~ ">, o .. U"O co E~~ ..."C ..c.! 0 5-5 t:Q>-"'CO ~~]~b ~- =' se:: ;stE~..c~ co 10._ bOw b'ooca=2 -.c0(,) oc.BUl5co '2'0 e 0. 2 ]6~ie U._ >."0 u ~~ ~ 5 s 'C o.!! S "0 ::l a-~ u a o ~'c > U ,,-0_ td In e'iij 11.1 Q. C ~ e = .- '" u a II) "0 ti "t:I :J u ~- CIS a-S .. ti _.<:" ~ti<~cE~ c> . I/)"'B ::I .co,,(:_o c.E'~ :s:,,!!..c ..~ 0"-8- ....!! U"O e 0".<: 1IJ:E~~8 ~ ,.:,( u C'- w- E" >.- .. .- .e- ,->u~ 0\"3 ::t ... '" Ii gj-" 0_ ;j u E"O :it rI) :J: ... 0.2 u"'B ..~c.t:: gc;:: U cc;u._t':S~ ,2 Q. =' "0"0 U t)u"O"3i." =u_o c :::.:w: C il ClQ'- ~ s!! V.I.S ~ 8'BK:S~~ ~~se"E5 'I: U,.c = li.c =.otlOE'S::. 0- ".-- ~ 'ii 0.5 ",'" .cii5s-si .!Oil sfi '.;::.b '" " ~.o ..: u= u::l =:i]'~ U ... II) ! g 0:,:: Ii)... 002-= g .5"0 ~- E;.e~i E =' Ii) C ..c1ii>o ~:a !.'i ~ 'o.!!a t; oCCOCOC cu~~ 1,-: ~ 1;; ...<: " ''::: _"'0 00 5::; 10 c C.<: 'I: U::s'" =: oS >. 0 u .._ In ~1.~1 ...-Il.9 < te ~ c; 8.5-8 ~ t:: o 1 ~ 0: " c .C S .. o ::Ii c o :~ ~ Iii ;;; c ~ ~ 8 ~ Ii< - - - - . 0 " z " ;; < " ... . < 0 z z " . - " . 0 z " < z . ... o z . ; Z" - 0. ~. < . 0 " - " . .. .. too ... .. .' ... ... .. !II'" .. .. - ...' .. .... .- .. ... ... .. ... ... 0 z .... . . " ... < u;;- 0:: ~ . .. < 0 < " . < . . ... - ""' e = :s ... " = ... .. = = " '" oc.5 "C..c ... = "= ~.. Cll.ol .S""' ... . ,at: ._ e ="" e .. ~=: =1: '" " .- "" ~ S .~~ ...- .- " ~= .. S = e ... .- ~ = f;oiI -; = ~ M ... ... . e ~ .. - . Q M ;; ;:: OJ - .. := H' o. ...". ~ "M ~ .. 1:~ oS .1011 ~- 0- ::;::; M ...:/ ~ ... . e :". 1:" o ~ :=:e ~ 0 "'... ::;.. II: ! " M II ::; ~ o ;:: . .. ;:: i c ... > e ... ,8s 'iiii -53] M._ >>.0 ~~ o 5l ~-= ~(i -=11 ~-; 0" 5l:: l5 6 "'", "'C.!!:! ~ 0 . 's. E 5 -tl a.- B~e M .. .~ :S] ~ m,,_ > M -ci 8-6 .r" ...0 '\:= .. .. ~: iE.ij Q-S '55 ... 0 .,;<1: c ~ . .. 0 ~ III 0'00 :,::";; "I:: i'c~ trO-ti 0 .5"0 C t: c.- 8.g 8. M U .. ~E-= M ~ 5 ",,00 2 ~l<l: "''0 .~ " .. .. ~ ;;; ~~g co ~ 'w ~lZl'> Wolle ... o 8.~ !j E h. .~ trO - ~ 1-o;S .g] 0...0 u c ::5_ -=.2 . o -; ~ l5 .... bQ u.t"" _'- 11,).... u 'E'~.;5g .g0,)'=~5 ~..s"ig~ 'ii 1ii -g "0 ".... ~-st:ig8. -"'0 c._ 0 fa 0';; UU u 6..... .6 > :.g,>."EII.l~ 0...-:: 1;) g II,) <u:.=u-S ... " ~ Ol .0 ..c:" b >"~ fa .!f ~~e!..c:::Eo .- ~ 0.:1 i-o ... := ~ Ill..c 0 "'C :i-a6u..oS = 'C ... ~ 0-= co u~ "-S .. ii;u.t~uiiu ~l:li~52" StrOl:.!!~..cg UCOOul,;;-o. g:a c S 0...5 II.l c-'- u II) co I- 0':; -; ....~o..o u.o8~..J=t:J) g"B-o ~>..c f .::: 0 a I-o::t: g ,,-" u- ,,""-en U E 8 ....c: e ~.o 1I.l_.5.~:s 0 iI c CO!iS..c ~'='1:l o;;o..cuBJ' u ~ u.-:: 0._- ucu!~8:~ t::'O>o~o"... Go) u- II.l II.l t.:) -; ~ E 4.)~-=- _ 0 0.2- e.... ~ .0_ :s:S 1Q;;o- ~ a 5 g-~ 8 g .. ~ ;;; :a ~ g l::Q~'- >.. Cl:l.~ ...m> Wolle .. ~ 'S !j ~ - 0 0.. .- M c';: we ... o " .; u:~ a E ~8- .~ tlO _ c ...:.0 .2~ .1:.0 ~... ~ o.~ _ ~ ~~ <uOU I:- i:l:I ~",=,.5 S .... -~ .~~ :E~ ~7i!i o 0 ..~.- c8.~B !:i :/ ~ ~8.'~ 5 ...-. II) S :s tlO . 0 ~.5 :; 6 u el~].s "g c::5 ..'0 E!:g-E~ u ... 0. f!'V,i "'='"Es:: U g Ol)!:~~ ',;.5 o.c~.; t:~ us:: 8. II ~ -;- M_ 0.1l11 gs::.!:.~..c 1li -II)U'" c: s:: II) 2 lo-o U <<I~ ~ o~.t:... 0 ~ K~ ~.~ ...: ::l-?;,e] ~-5]'~:; ~ ~iiac-5j~ .. ~ ;;; ::: c~ ~~.2 ~~.~ Wolle ... o " . U M !j'''' ~ E .!H. 0" - c ~.- 0'" 'c" o..~ u g oS ofj.- .;:...: o 1li .. 0 _ bO 11)- _ ''; u _ u 's's -= Ii g .g u.5 g g ~';'Bg~ 'ii1li"'=''''='..... ..c-s.:s::u II) uoo. 1: '0 .5 '= ,g <<10 II) U U .~ a,'- .E ;; ii.c1lM'" 0.._ 1;; g !! <U'- uO::: f;oiI '" .... o z 00 o~ t :>:] 0" 0 ~"E '.; ~ac: 0"." ..c:m~ u..c: .. -sg>~ o e <<I ~.s"g ::: i;'~ 5." ~ ~S::o ~~'E ~ ~ ]o,g lI)e'ii S ci.] 'fSg= ~~-5 g~g U e ''5 iii "':-=Ei;' "": E 2;g ~ ~ g] ~ o 'In oll';: ~Q '6~ ::~ " .. Cl)m ... o " . U M !j'''' " E .!a 8- 0" - c ~.- .211 ~ ~ 0.... U {5 ..c.__ oS .- o1li :t:!5 = ,~ u :3 U 's .~ oS is g .g u.5 ~ g ~-S"Bg~ 'ii 1li~ "'=' ~h -5j-:S(j.SQ. - '0 .5 .::;: ,g 50 II) U U .S! a'- E i; ii.C1lM'" 0.._ 1;; S u <U;.=u-= , ~ o ... ~6la '-''; co II g.S Ii 1;0.::: <<I... "'O;g U.a sgg-eM s:: - >. ~ .2 Ci 'i: a ;; .e-l!. 5 ~::se.c U :iT o..~ ~=.s :t: B1'i 1: 'V,i II) ..,!! U ~ .!:L~ uo;.octl 'O'ts 0 S ~ g 5 U p.S::"'~ =oOu :'~1le s:: U ~ ::l 'c.U t:: S ::l 0' ~ o a,c'B iii ,,~... "E'- i:l l:Q..c: a. <<I.;:;: - '":'_ c . " ".- 5; :;l'1ii if E tl ~ ~ c. l g ;;: " c '0 S '0 o :ll c o '; .~ ~ Iii .. c ~ ~ 8 '" SI .. ... - - - . 0 ;; % >- - < 0 . ~ 0% % . - . . . 0% >- < % . 0% . ; % " 0% ;: . < % 0>- >- . - ... ... - ... - - ... '.. ... - .. ... .. JIll' .. - .. If'" - ... - ... .. ... .. - .. o % ... . . >- < 0; o ~ : % < 0 < . . < " . .. ... .. ... .. c .. - 'C .. CO .. .. .. = '" CO ~ ~.= .C .c .. = CO= ::!1.. OIl.... .5~ .. . c" .. .. ._ c "'=- c .. ::!1= ",'tl c CO .- =- .. S .!!'..... .. - .- CO ::!1= .. s '" c .. ';; '" f;o;l - CO '" r:: .e .. E " i>: " - .. Q ~ :! - ;; - " :is :it '" .. "''' : .. " '6 := ~" ~~.!2 ~JJ'~ u~i5 "II .5" .. '" "'- - ~ -" ,,- ",- :0:0 ... '" 8 lI.i co'::: H .~ X- o .. - " .2 :g ~ ~ .... ~ -g5 .. '" .... ,," 1:::' "'- ;1::t: " '" "'", :o~ 4.1 C :=_ .s.2 ..: o ~ :it 0 ::.~ Il,) J!! ti .En~.;; ii ~ ..g u.5 E S ",.s '"0 B U __UOll.l ]~]'"O.U ","" u c c.. -"'0 -=.20 ~ 0";;; u'U .~ 0.:; E ~ Q.l;- u rn"'O Ao._ ~ 15 u <u.- u-:: E ~ ~ .. " :0: " .5! - .. .. '" ~ ~ " ....0 u= a~ ~ .. "'.- ~ ~.'E ~ 0 l< ::l't;i Il,) ~ ~ ~ Ollucf; "g ~u f!u::c u ~.- 5 &. ~ ~u&. u- '" .~ 'i::o g~~ ;>. 0.. 0 ~" [(j 15 i l!! r! 'j e? = a '" 2 a U =1.Il~u <l!!rnl!! 0.."" u ell.';; ""': 8 ~.;; f")...uC ..';..2 ~ .. " .C ~ " ~ " o "'5 8- ~ . " .. .- " " .- ...'g .- ~ "'.. .. " '6 =E ~ 6 a::I~'- ~~.~ u~i5 .. C _ :g ~ 5 .- .. ~ ~';j <Coo ~" 0.. u1;~ ... o .. u 1; . ~ ~ 11)::: .~ E -58- 0" - " .g~ ..60 ~.2 :E e1U ~..: t:l..~u In ~ '~'~-s5g ..g Go).5 ~ 6 (I) -s "'0 u u .........lOOrn 'ii .!]"'O..... ~-us8. .... ~=.... 0 fa-"'-'" 'U"i3 uu.!e.E > ~~13I1).g g,,-"" c u <g~8-s g] " ~::::N 60] .=~ <.0- 0''::: "'0 tU .... ~ c"B S c ::l u 'C 0 ~~ Q.. 'u u Q. QE~.8 -1I)t:- ~ g 8.] ~U_U) .. .~ E 1; .. ~t we ... o .. u 1; . ~ ~ U):~ .~ E .. " ';;0.. o .. - C ~.- .9 'g 0:60 '- 15 :s_ g.,c ...: .... as :t 0 Q...~ lI.I- ."'.'" 1l ii g !e~ec =' U._ =' 0 U)..s~ u u __OOll.l c; ~ "g -0 ...... -5S~ug8. _>.c._o ~a:;~~ ~~"'BU)~ Q..- _ c U <g~8-E '" 101 ~ o '" ~ ~ ,.. ;] v .. u ~ .s.~ t;::::; c ~ .- .-"'0 ~ ~ ~:5 8. .".8.", II x"'B u_.S; ... ut;::::;-Ec;.,c.!! fa;:: c.c ~ Cl:I ..;::: ~.c; .: be g. :E ~t::~ '6h.~-8 1S.. 00 Cl:I ".. '0 e" c~o"u.coS O='- t::.... .fl~"'B'5ficE ge~a....:t-o lI.I--"'O~oc crJou._=t:: 0.- C t;::::;"'O as ~~]~:5g.s c'O-='_"'O'- U u"; O"c; c 0 (;.a-5S~.ct:: ~ .s~:~~g.s~ 0'" "0-0"'2,- 8 _o_co:Ou -p."'~~~ < e ~ .. 0.- 6 ~ E.c oS Q...fi;:a . ~ 1'... e.- " ~u~OU...Cd 1 g 0: ~ .C g .c ~ = .2 1; .~ ~ Iii i ~ ~ 8 "' y ,;; " ~ ~ l::: C --~ ... .... - - " 0 ;; 2 .. - < 0 . ~ 02 2. - . " . 02 .. < i' 02 . ; 20 02 ~ . < 2 0" .. . - - ... ill - .. - ... - ... - .. - .. .... - - .. - - - - - too ... ... - ... 0 2 - . . .. .. < U~ 0" ~ 2 - < 0 <" . < .. .. - .. '" " :s :; " .. Cll =:I " .. (/J ... .! ;:~ 1;; " ::;]= Cll ell.c .S Eo< .. . .st: .- '" " =- '" Cll ::;]=: "t: '" .. '==- g'.E .- .... ;t=- ::;]~ " 5 " '" .. .- .. " f;.1 'i " ~ ~ ~ .. e ~ .!l .. Q ~ :! - ;; - .. :0 ;~ 0.. "'''' ~ oo .~ c a" -€ ... " .~ fr UCl OOfl .e" .. 0 0- =fl ,,- o .- ::0::0 .... o .. " " " , "Zl ~,- ,:13 E .s8. 0" - " it ~ ...fl " .. .. e =r... ;:00 0" =t! " 0 0", ::o~ ...." ..c,,,, g.8 a~ ~~ _-..::lu:Ju 'Ere -s Ii g ..g u.5 g 6 (I) oS "t:I C,,) to) =10-80(1) =..c ='."..... "5i""'-uc:8. c.e.5.8.,g flU fI) !oJ U :a]:g~~ Q,-_C:u <.s~8-s .. ..... u >.0,- Cl ~ ti ~ ~;:: ....~] ts 0 6...J u u..c ~ II) ::I _ U ~;.::j i .!:'! .- :E .2: ..c: ::ct:..cs8's'- o"iil'Huu.1:: ~ c2 ti Co u -t' 6 g ~ "O.s g.~ E ~ ~ g e,~ ~ ,! U _Q " .L.5 . ~] ..CO.'";:: luucauuuu-g.s ill! U ;S 00 ~.. >-. -S ~-S <:t 0 " rl ........ ~ Q.O\ C,) CO~''o-o C U C ~ 100 ~ U) if.1n r...: 'C s g 0._ - Z"'O = ;l ; ~ ::I -0 g ~ S '5 c g ~ -a u 5 (I) ! 8u81~5~::Cl'i=sE-s~e ~ Clnucacl.::::ucca.... o>o>.!:'! ..uc:>.S.5.g~ a.B ~ E'1~~ os:; = VI 101) U ..... u'C ... u - - ... .s ti 0 s.c u '-.D !I! '5- c.;:E..:g.g e i ';i W,I r-- c 0 CI) 0 0 t: ..c II) ca (,) VI IN) cc=,-u"'g-< _UQC,)l;:C ;. ';.!2'" 0 -g t;: "0 lS ~ oS ...J S ''; 'co ~ ;;:: S tl El "u '= g Ii ~ ....."'j" s,~ .c u u (,) 0 0 ._ .- _ . > .c cUe .... I- r:I.l 0 '.; 8 C E <<i 'i 0"'; III ,-'u .E ~i].5 g~ ~~"fi~ ~t: ~~ ~ ~ = u ~ E ~ ~"'O oS :E '-" II:l :;;':1 ~u :I'c . u~~=u~~_u~-o .U '+-o~uu~Eaco..~a6.u.c '+-oS ;~]~~~~~G~f8~~~< "",:OO.a u::s S'~-'=::C ~ ~.~.5 ~.~~ ..."'0 II:l "i Q.. S 'ii < ~ ~ "'O.c >'-'.c ..,; i:o E Bu ....-5eo:E..s.i e ~~ <1 t:: C I ~ 0: .. = '" s '0 o ::! ~ :1 ~ OJ ;; = ~ 8 '" r,I "' ,- '- ,... '-, ".-- "",, EXHIBIT 5 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Regarding the Environmental Effects from the Environmental Impact Report for the Hub (State Clearinghouse #200081074) I. INTRODUCTION The Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in approving the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Hub project, rnakes the findings described below and adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations presented at the end of the Findings. The "project" under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for purposes of the City's discretionary action is the approval of the Final EIR, which will now govern the development of the Hub project site as entitled by the City of San Bernardino, subject to the terms and provisions of the Final EIR. The project site is located within the City's CR-3 (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club) district. This district permits a diversity of regional-serving uses including corporate and professional offices, retail commercial, entertainment (theaters, nightclubs, etc.), financial establishments, restaurants, hoteVrnotels, warehouse/promotional retail, supporting retail and services, and similar services. In addition, this district allows single-family residential uses legally established prior to June 3, 1991 that are currently located on site. Implementation of the proposed project will require the removal of all exiting on-site structures. Development of the proposed project will occur in two phases, with the dernolition of existing structures to precede each stage of development. Residential units within the portion of the site to be acquired and later developed as Phase II, may be affected by the construction and operation ofretail and restaurant uses planned for Phase I (increased traffic, construction and vehicle emissions, increased noise, light and glare). These Findings are based upon the entire record before this Council. The EIR was prepared for the City of San Bernardino acting as the lead agency under CEQA. II. PROJECT SUMMARY A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is located within the Inland Empire Region of southern California in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County. The site is located adjacent to 1-10, a main east-west transportation corridor, and 2 miles east ofInterstate 215 (1-215), a rnajor north-south transportation corridor. The cities of Colton, Grand Terrace, Highland, Redlands, and Lorna Linda, the County of Riverside, and unincorporated pockets ot San Bernardino County are located within 5 miles of the project site. Theproject site is located in an area where the terrain is generally flat, with a slope ofless than I percent. No natural streams or major drainage courses are present on site. On-site vegetation consists ofruderal vegetation as well as non-native and/or ornamental vegetation. No unique The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ,- '-, geologic, biologic, or archeological/paleontological resources are located within the limits of the project site. The project site has been previously disturbed and occupied. Current on-site land uses include single- and multi-family residential dwellings (95 units), a drive-thru restaurant, a motel, and several parcels of vacant or unimproved lands. Of the 79 parcels within the project site, 20 have no existing structures or are vacant, while 54 are occupied with residential structures. Commercial structures have been constructed on two parcels. Adjacent land uses include commercial and residential uses to the east on the east side of Tippecanoe A venue, restaurant and retail and vacant disturbed land to the north and west, and I- 10 to the south. The north side of the project site is adjacent to a Staples retail center and a Costco store. To the west and adjacent to the project site, is an existing Sports-Mart and Sam's Club shopping center with smaller uses (pet store, nail salon, and small restaurant). Retail, office, and restaurant uses are located north and west of the proposed project site, within an area designated "CR-3" by the City's General Plan. Lands east and southwest of the project site are designated "CG-I" (General Commercial) in the City's General Plan and are developed with commercial uses (to the southwest) of a mixture of commercial and residential uses and vacant land (to the east). The area south ofI-10 located within the City of Loma Linda is developed with commercial uses along Anderson Street (Tippecanoe Avenue) and Redlands Boulevard. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the development of approximately 268,600 square feet of commercial space on 24.5 acres located at the northwest corner of Tippecanoe ",-. Avenue and the San Bernardino Freeway (1-10). The 24.5-acre site is located within the CR-3 '"-, (Commercial Regional- Tri City/Club District), lies adjacent to the freeway, and is contiguous with commercial property. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. Phase I will consist of 17.57 acres and will include all land south of the Harriman Place extension and five parcels at the northwest comer of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place. The gross square footage of Phase I buildings will be approximately 198,600 square feet, including a 130,400- square-foot warehouse discount center with an unattended gas station, a 45;000-square-foot general retail building, the relocation of a drive-thru restaurant from its present location at the northwest comer of Rosewood Drive and Tippecanoe Avenue farther to the north, and two pad buildings measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet each. A Disposition and Development Agreement between the applicant and the RDA of the City of San Bernardino will be completed prior to implementation of the proposed project. Phase II will consist of 6.93 acres, including the remaining land north of the Harriman Place extension to the western property boundary. The gross square footage of Phase II buildings will be a maximum of 70,000 square feet, including two 25,000- to 30,000-square-foot retail buildings and one pad building measuring from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet. Potential tenants of these buildings are undefined at this time. The proposed project will include 1,309 parking spaces. Portions of three existing streets, Rosewood, Laurelwood, and Orchard Drives, within the project site will be vacated. Harriman Place will be extended eastward across the project site, ,.-- intersecting with Tippecanoe Avenue at the eastern boundary of the project site. The City '-" recently installed a signal light at the intersection of Laurelwood and Tippecanoe Avenue. In the Page 2 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) d_~ future, this will become the intersection of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe A venue. The extension of Harriman Place will be built in phases, with the first phase consisting of the installation of a 62-foot wide roadway. The second phase of the Harriman Place extension will widen the roadway by an additional 22 feet. "'-, In order to accommodate the proposed commercial uses, existing on-site structures will be cleared from the site. Persons currently residing within the limits of the project site will be relocated. During Phase I of the proposed project, 49 residential units, the motel, and the existing drive-thru restaurant will be acquired and demolished and the drive-thru restaurant will be relocated adjacent to the southwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place. Phase 11 will include the acquisition and removal of the remaining 46 residential units frorn the project site and will complete build out of the proposed project. The construction and operation of Phase I of the proposed project would create approximately 289 full-time equivalent (FTE) construction jobs and approximately 497 FTE retail/commercial positions. Additional 315 jobs would be indirectly created during this phase of the proposed project. Construction and operation of Phase II would directly and indirectly create 277 and III jobs, respectively. At full build out, the construction and operation of the proposed project will result in the creation of approximately 1,489 FTEjobs. B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 1""'" \..,.. .. The primary goals of the Hub project include the following: Ensure that development of the site is in accordance with established functional standards and design and aesthetic standards contained in the City's Development Code. Develop land uses that represent a logical extension of adjacent development. Assure the commercial development will attract businesses that will strengthen the economic viability of the City by providing a productive mix of tax generating uses. Establish a well-balanced and carefully planned collection of specialized and general retail outlets, which can take advantage of the site's established accessibility. Provide adequate amenities, facilities, infrastructure, and services to support the activity created by the proposed project. Create employment opportunities for citizens of the City and surrounding communities. Eliminate existing blighted areas, which have had a negative impact on the surrounding area and develop uses that will enhance the area's irnage. -, Implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Inland Valley Development Agency to foster the reuse of the former Norton Air Force Base under the redevelopment cooperation agreement among the IVDA, the City, and the RDA. ,-" Page 3 of41 ,-, ,-. c: -, .... ' The Hub Projecl (SCH #200081074) III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The City of San Bernardino has conducted environmental review for the approval of the Final EIR, which provides for the development of the Hub project as follow: Notice of Preparation and Initial Study identifying the scope of environmental issues, were distributed to 10 state and federal agencies, and local agencies and organizations on August 18,2000, and notice was provided through publication on August 13,2000 in The Sun newspaper. A total of six comment letters were received. Copies of those comment letters are included in Appendix A of the Draft EIR (under separate cover). Relevant comments received in response to the NOP/lnitial Study were incorporated in to the Draft EIR. A Public Scoping Meeting was held on August 23, 2000 in the City of San Bernardino Council Chambers to give the public the opportunity to provide comment as related to the proposed project and the issues the public would like addressed in the EIR. A Notice of Completion (NOC) was sent with the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse on January 31,2001, and notice was provided on January 29, 2001 in the Sun, a newspaper of general and/or regional circulation. The Draft EIR was distributed for public review on January 31, 2001, for the 45-day review period with the comment period expiring on March 19,2001. Five comment letters were received at the close of the public comment period. The specific and general responses to comments are in the Final EIR, Appendix H. On April 5, 2001, the City of San Bernardino Environmental Review Committee recommended to the City's Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council, certification of the EIR. The Final EIR was distributed for a 10-day notification period beginning on April 6, 2001. On April 17, 2001, the City of San Bernardino Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on GPA 01-01 and DCA 01-03. On , the City of San Bernardino Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public hearing, and certified the Final EIR. A. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT FINDING The City of San Bernardino retained LSA Associates, Inc. to prepare the EIR. The EIR was prepared under the direction and supervision of the City of San Bernardino Development Services Department, Planning Division. Page4of4l ,.. \..,., ~, ......, ".." '-- The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) Finding: The Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgement. The City has exercised its independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code, Section 2I0821(c)(3) in retaining its own environmental consultant, directing the consultant in preparation of the Final EIR, as well as reviewing, analyzing, and revising material prepared by the consultant. B. FINDINGS ON THE FINAL EIR Finding: The City Council hereby declares that the Final EIR has identified and discussed significant effects, which may occur as a result of the project. -With the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the Final EIR, these effects can be rnitigated to a level ofless than significance except for unavoidable significant impacts as discussed in Section IV of these Findings. C. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES The City has reviewed the mitigation measures applicable to the Project. In the event that the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan do not use the exact wording of the mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR, in each such instance, the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan are intended to be identical or substantially similar to the recommended mitigation measures in the Final EIR. Any rninor revisions were made for the purpose of improving clarity or to better define the intended purpose. Findings: Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is the City's intent to adopt all mitigation measures recommended Final EIR. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Mitigation Monitoring Plan from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS The detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the Hub project presented in Chapter 4 of the Draft EIR. Responses to comments and any revisions or omissions to the Draft EIR are provided in Appendix H ofthe Final EIR. The Final EIR evaluated four major environmental categories (transportation and circulation, air quality, noise and, cultural resources) for potential significant adverse impacts, including cumulative impacts. Both project-specific and cumulative impacts were evaluated. Of these four environmental categories, the City concurs with the conclusions in the Final EIR that the issues and sub-issues discussed below can be mitigated below a significant impact threshold and for those issues which cannot be mitigated below a level of significance, overriding considerations exist which make impacts acceptable. In addition to the four major environmental categories addressed in the Final EIR, eleven other major categories were found to be non-significant in the Initial Study prepared for the Hub project. The City concurs with the conclusions on these categories as outlined in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the EIR) and finds that no significant impacts have been identified as to those categories identified in the Initial Study and no further analysis is required. PageS of 41 .~ ",. .- ",-, r' ......, The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) A. IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL EIR AS LESS THAN SIGNFICANT REQUIRING NO MITIGATION The following issues were identified in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the EIR) as having the potential to cause significant impact and were carried forward to the EIR for detailed evaluation. These issues were found in the final EIR as having no potential to cause significant impact and therefore require no project-specific mitigation. In the following presentation, each resource issue is identified and the potential for significant adverse environmental effects is discussed. I. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION a. Project Access Driveways Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project will contribute to future increased traffic volumes in the project vicinity affecting project access driveways. Findings: Potential impacts to future increased traffic volumes is discussed in Section 4.1 of the final ErR. The addition of project traffic to year 2002 and year 2020 conditions will not have a significant impact on the project access driveways on Harriman Place. As the year 2002 plus project and year 2020 plus project intersection analyses indicate, all project access driveways will operate with satisfactory levels of service based on the turn restrictions proposed as part of the project. Consequently, impacts at the proposed project driveways are considered to be less than significant. Facts and Analysis in Support ofthe Finding: Operations of the intersections of the project access driveways along Harriman Place have been analyzed as part of the overall intersection level of service analysis. The year 2002 plus project and year 2020 plus project analyses indicate that all project access driveways will operate with satisfactory levels of service based on the turn restrictions discussed in the project description. The turn restrictions and the overall intersection geometrics at the project driveways are described as follows: West Access to Phase I - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). The level of service analysis indicates that full ingress and egress can be accommodated at this location. Primary Access - To maintain satisfactory operations, this location will need to be signalized. Central Access to Phase 1/ - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). Analysis indicates that providing for full ingress and egress at this location would result in unsatisfactory levels of service. Therefore, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. East Access to Phase I - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). Due to the proximity to Tippecanoe Avenue, aC{:ess will need to be restricted to right-in and right-out movements only. Page 6 of41 The Hub Projecl (SCH #200081074) .'- '-, East Access to Phase II - This driveway will need to be stop sign controlled on the minor street approach (i.e., the driveway). Due to the proximity to Tippecanoe Avenue, access will need to be restricted to right-in and right-oul movements only. 2. AIR QUALITY a. Stationary Sources Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project would generate criteria pollutant emissions from stationary sources. Findings: Potential impacts caused by stationary sources from the consumption of natural gas and electricity is discussed in Section 4.2 of the Final ElR. The analysis concluded that impacts from stationary sources in the project vicinity brought about by the implementation of the proposed project would not be significant. No mitigation is required. /---' Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The site for the proposed development consists of a total of 24.5 acres of commercial uses. These land uses would consume natural gas and electricity. Based on Table A9-ll, Emissions from Electricity Consumption by Land Uses, in South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook, and the natural gas consumption calculated by the URBEMlS7G model, the proposed project would generate criteria pollutant emissions. Emissions from on-site stationary sources (i.e., energy consumption) under the proposed project would be below the emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD for all criteria pollutants. The project will comply with the mandated building code requirements contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations established by the California Energy Commission regarding energy conservation standards, resulting in further reduction of air emissions from on-site stationary sources. No further rnitigation is required. ',-, b. Long-term Microscale Projections Potential Significant Impact: The increase in traffic volume resulting from the proposed development of the commercial center would result in an increase in CO emissions. Findings: Potential impacts to a future increase in CO emissions is discussed in Section 4.2 of the Final ElR. The analysis concluded that the future cumulative condition at the project area would not have CO hot spots with projected traffic volumes. The proposed project would not have a significant impact on local air quality for CO, and no mitigation measures would be required. ,...." Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: An assessment of project related impacts on localized ambient air quality requires that future ambient air ql\ality levels be projected. The proposed project would contribute to an increase in traffic volume at intersections and along roadway segments in the project vicinity, thereby causing a deterioration in the level of service at adjacent intersections. The LOS deterioration has the potential to result in a CO hot spot. Therefore, the future with and without project conditions were analyzed to determine the project's impact and whether a CO hot spot would occur. The highest CO concentrations would . '..........- Page 7 of41 - ....... .- "-- .- ,-... The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) occur during peak traffic hours, hence CO impacts calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst case analysis. Modeling of the CO hot spot analysis was based on traffic volumes generated by the project traffic study (LSA Associates, Inc., January 30,2001), which identified the peak traffic levels generated in the project area with and without the proposed project for the year 2020. The increase in CO concentration as a result of the project range from 5.2 to 7.0 ppm for the one-hour and from 0.5 to 0.3 ppm for the eight-hour, respectively, CO concentrations. Because no future CO levels would exceed the federal and State one-hour and eight-hour standards, no CO hot spots would occur. No mitigation is required. c. Air Quality Management Plan Consistency Potential Significant Impact: The proposed development of the commercial center would result in an inconsistency with the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Findings: Potential impacts to the AQMP due to inconsistencies caused by the proposed project are discussed in Section 4.2 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that inconsistencies with the AQMP brought about by the irnplementation of the proposed project would not be significant. No mitigation is required. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: A consistency determination plays an essential role in local agency project review by linking local planning and unique individual projects to the AQMP. Only new or amended General Plan elements, Specific Plans, and significantly unique projects need to undergo a consistency review due to the AQMP strategy being based on projections frorn local General Plans. The proposed project site is located in an area that is designated as Commercial in the City of San Bernardino General Plan. The project site is in close proximity to residential homes to the east. By developing a large commercial center with a varied product mix at one location, the residents would not have to travel across the City to shop, thereby reducing traffic congestion and emissions. There are no population increases anticipated as a result of the proposed project, because there is no residential development proposed. Hence it is still within the population forecast in the City's General Plan and in the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project is deemed to be consistent with the City of San Bernardino's General Plan. Because the proposed project is consistent with the population projections incorporated in the General Plan (and therefore the AQMP), the project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan. No significant impact would occur as result of the proposed project; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. 3. NOISE a. Parking Lot Activity Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project would generate intermittent, maxirnum noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet from parking activities such as customers conversing or doors closing. Findings: Potential impacts frorn increased maximum noise levels are discussed in Section 4.3 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that impacts from increased maxirnum noise levels in Page 8 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - the project vicinity brought about by the implementation of the proposed project would not be significant. No mitigation is required. ......> Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: Representative parking activities, such as customer conversing or door closing, would generate intermittent, maximum noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet. The parking areas for Phase I of the proposed project will be located adjacent to residential uses located in Phase II. As these residences will be located approximately 50 feet from the Phase I parking areas, they will be exposed to noise levels of 60 dBA Lmax. Once Phase II of the project is completed, the closest residential use to on-site parking areas will be located on the east side of Tippecanoe Avenue, approximately 250 feet east of the project site. Distance attenuation will reduce the noise level at these residences to 46 dBA Lmax. Traffic noise on Tippecanoe A venue will mask this noise from the project site. The noise levels at both on-site and off-site residential land uses will be below the City's nighttime Lmax of 65 dBA. Noise levels associated with parking lot activities will be insignificant compared to the ambient noise levels produced by the traffic on the area roads. Therefore, it is not anticipated that noise associated with the parking lot activities will have any significant impact on the residences adjacent to the project site. b. Truck Delivery and Loading/Unloading Potential Significant Impact: Noise levels from the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities for the proposed project may range up to 59.5 dBA Lmax at the closest residential uses to the east of the project site; therefore, it could be considered a significant impact. ~" \",., Findings: Potential impacts from increased noise levels from truck delivery and loading/unloading activities are discussed in Section 4.3 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that impacts from increased noise levels to the closest residential units brought about by the irnplementation of the proposed project would not be significant. No mitigation is required. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The closest on-site loading/unloading activities of semi-trucks, including trucks that contain compressors for refrigeration units, to any sensitive residential uses would be the loading docks on the east side of the 130,400-square-foot warehouse discount center. The loading docks will be, at the closest points, approximately 300 feet from the nearest residences to the east. Based on noise readings from loading and unloading activities for other similar projects, a noise level of75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet was used in this analysis. The noise attenuation ofloading/unloading activities provided by distance divergence at 300 feet is approximately 15.5 dBA compared to the level at 50 feet. Therefore, residences to the east of the project site would be exposed to loading/unloading noise levels of 59.5 dBA Lmax. The closest loading dock to the existing residences in Phase II area is at a distance of approximately 500 feet. At this distance, the noise level will be attenuated to 55 dBA Lmax. These noise levels are below both the daytime Lmax of75 dBA (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and the nighttime Lmax of 65 dBA (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). Therefore, the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities will not have any significant impact on the residences on or adjacent to the project site. ,#"""~ ......" Page 9 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ..,,- c. Long-term Traffic Noise Impacts '-, Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project may contribute to increased noise level greater than 3 dBA along area roadways, therefore it could be considered a significant impact. Findings: Potential impacts from increased noise levels are discussed in Section 43 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that impacts from increased noise levels to residents located to the east of Tippecanoe Avenue brought about by the implementation of the proposed project would not be significant. No mitigation is required. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The FHW A highway traffic noise prediction model (FHW A RD-77 -108) was used to evaluate highway traffic-related noise conditions in the vicinity of the project site. The traffic volumes were taken from the traffic report prepared for this project by LSA (January 30, 2001) show that there is very little change in the traffic noise levels associated with the implementation of the project. The largest increase in traffic related noise is on Tippecanoe Avenue between Laurelwood Drive and Rosewood Drive, which has a 0.9 dBA increase over the no build scenario. This range of noise level increases is much smaller than the 3 dBA significance threshold. The increase due to the project on all other roadway segments in the project area will be less than 3 dBA and, therefore, insignificant. As the project does not create a significant increase in traffic noise, no mitigation is required for off-site residential areas. - 1,--" d. Transportation to Construction Site Potential Significant Impact: Transport of construction equipment/materials to the project site and worker commute would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Findings: Potential impacts from increased noise levels are discussed in Section 4.3 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that impacts from increased noise brought about by the transportation to the site during construction would not be significant. No rnitigation is required. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: Transport of construction equipment/materials to the project site and worker commute would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Although there would be relatively high single event noise exposures (up to 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from passing trucks), when averaged over a longer period of time such as one hour or eight hours, the effect in long-term ambient noise levels would be small and negligible. Therefore, short-term construction noise impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport would not result in significant adverse irnpacts on noise sensitive receptors along the access routes leading to the proposed project site. 4. CULTURAL RESOURCES a. Historic Resources .....~ "'"*-~ Potential Significant Impact: The proposed project has the potential to impact historic and or archaeological resources located at the project site. Page 10 of41 r \",., r' \"..- ,,-- \-.... The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) Findings: Potential impacts on cultural resources are discussed in Section 4.4 of the Final EIR. The Phase 1 archaeological survey of the proposed project site did not discover cultural resources of any kind. No mitigation is required. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: None of the structures located within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) distinguishes itself as an important example ofa type, period, or method of construction; nor do they demonstrate any other architectural or aesthetic merit required by the previously referenced significance criteria. In addition, historical research into their past has not revealed any identifiable events or persons of recognized as significant to local, state or national history. None of the buildings, or groups of building recorded during the cultural resource study meets the criteria for inclusion in the National Register. No buildings, structures, sites, obj ects, or artifacts from the historic or prehistoric eras were observed during the field survey of the vacant portion of the project site. Since no other potential historic/archaeological resources were identified during the cultural resource study, the construction and operation of the proposed on-site uses will not adversely impact historic and/or archaeological resources; and no mitigation is required. B. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES. The following issues from the environmental categories analyzed by the Final EIR; Traffic and Circulation, Air Quality, Noise, and Cultural Resources were found to be potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less than significant level, with the imposition of mitigation measures. The City finds that all potentially significant impacts of the project listed below can and will be mitigated, reduced or avoided by imposition of the mitigation rneasures, and these mitigation measures are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan adopted by the City. Specific findings of the City for each category of such impacts are set forth in detail below. Public Resources Code Section 21081 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report has been completed, which identifies one or more significant effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings: I. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which, mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. 2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make it infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the. Final EIR. The City hereby finds, pursuant to Section 21081 that the following potential environmental impacts can and will be mitigated to below a level of significance, based upon the implementation of the mitigation measures Final EIR. Each mitigation measure discussed in this section of the findings is assigned a code letter correlating it with the environmental category used in the Mitigation Page II of 41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ~ ........ Monitoring Plan included in the Final EIR, and adopted by the City to provide for the enforcement of such mitigation measures. 1. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION a. Year 2002 Plus Project Intersection Conditions Potential Significant Impact: Five intersections are forecast to fall below the minimum LOS D under 2002 plus project conditions in the mid-day and/or p.m. peak hour. These intersections are: I -lOW estbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane Tippecanoe Avenue/Laurelwood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/I-I 0 Westbound Ramps Anderson StreetIRedlands Boulevard. The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions, which is considered to be a significant impact. /_. '"-, Findings: The potential impacts to increased traffic volumes in the project vicinity are discussed in Section 4.1 of the Final EIR. An analysis of opening day plus project levels of service was conducted for the study intersections. This analysis examines build out of the proposed project (Phases 1 and 2) under year 2002 conditions. all intersections examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service with the addition of project traffic to the year 2002 background conditions, with the exception of: 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. Tippecanoe Avenue/LaurelwoodDrive - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-lO Westbound Ramps - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. The Final EIR analysis concluded that the project's effect on operations at these intersections in year 2002 is considered to be a significant impact. Conditions contained in the mitigation measures avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects analyzed in the Final EIR such that no significant impacts remain. r The following mitigation measures from the Final EIR will mitigate these irnpacts to below a .......' level of significance. Page 12 of41 ,- '- r ~, '-' ........ The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) 4.1.1A The project proponent shall make a fair share contribution to the following improvements: 1-10 Westbound RampslHospitality Lane - Modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the northbound right turn movement. Tippecanoe A venueILaurelwood Drive" Addition of a second northbound left turn lane and a separate eastbound right turn lane, and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap for the eastbound right turn movement. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Ramps - Addition ofa westbound free right turn lane. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: Implementation of the mitigation measures will improve intersection operations at these locations to LOS D or better, reducing the impacts to a less than significant level. b. Year 2020 Plus Project Intersection Conditions Potential Significant Impact: Ten intersections are forecast to fall below the minimum LOS D under 2020 plus project conditions in the mid-day and/or p.m. peak hour. These intersections are: Waterman Avenue/Mill Street Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane Tippecanoe Avenue/MiII Street Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue Tippecanoe Avenue/Laurelwood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive Tippecanoe Avenue/I-tO Westbound Ramps Tippecanoe Avenue/I-I0 Eastbound Ramps Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard. The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions, which is considered to be a significant impact. Findings: The potential impacts related to year 2020 plus project traffic impacts on area intersections are discussed in Section 4.1 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that all intersections examined are projected to continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service with the addition of project traffic to the year 2020 background conditions, with the exception of: Waterman Avenue/Mill Street - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS E during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Page 13 of 41 The Hub Project (SCH #20008 1 074) r '"-, Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. 1-10 Westbound RampslHospitality Lane - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS E during the mid-day peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will-result in the degradation of mid-day peak hour intersection operations from LOS E to LOS F and the degradation of p.m. peak hour intersection operations from LOS D to LOS E. Tippecanoe Avenue/MiII Street - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Tippecanoe Avenue/Laurelwood Drive - Addition of project traffic will result in operations at this location degrading to LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours. ,...-. Tippecanoe Avenue/Rosewood Drive - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Due to changes in the intersection (i.e., elimination of the west leg) that would occur with implementation of the proposed project, intersection operations would be improved in the 2020 plus project condition. However, this location would operate at LOS E during the mid-day peak hour. ,-.... Tippecanoe Avenue/I-l 0 Westbound Ramps - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-I0 Eastbound Ramps - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Anderson StreetlRedlands Boulevard - This intersection was identified as operating at LOS F during both the mid-day and the p.m. peak hours in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. __ Implementation of the mitigation rneasure stated below will substantially lessen the significant "'-... impact identified in the Final EIR to an acceptable level. Page 14 of 4t The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - 4.1.3.A The project proponent shall make a fair share contribution to the following improvements. The fair share contribution provided below is based on the percentage of project traffic relative to total future traffic in year 2020 as described in Appendix B of the EIR. "-~ Waterman Avenue/Mill Street - Addition ofa second westbound left turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 3.6 percent. Waterman Avenue/Orange Show Road - Addition ofa second northbound left turn lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, and a separate southbound right turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 5.6 percent. 1-10 Westbound Ramps/Hospitality Lane - Addition ofa second westbound left turn lane and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right turn movement. Project's fair share responsibility is 25.0 percent. Tippecanoe A venue/Mill Street - Addition of a northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, a separate westbound right turn lane, and modification of signal phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for the northbound right turn rnovement. Project's fair share responsibility is 2.3 percent ~" \,..,. Tippecanoe Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a second eastbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, a second westbound left turn lane, and a separate westbound right turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 2.3 percent. Tippecanoe A venue/Laurelwood Drive - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a separate eastbound right turn lane, use of the center eastbound lane as a shared through/right turn lane (resulting in one eastbound left turn lane, one shared through/right turn lane, and one dedicated right turn lane), and addition of a fourth southbound through lane. The additional southbound through lane will connect to the dedicated southbound right turn lane on Tippecanoe Avenue from Laurelwood Drive to the 1-10 westbound ramp that is to be built as part of the 1-10 freeway interchange reconstruction. Project's fair share responsibility is 29.7 percent. Tippecanoe A venue/Rosewood Drive - Elimination of southbound left turn lane (i.e., restrict traffic to/from Rosewood Drive to right-in/right-out only). This modification will be accomplished by completing the landscaped median along Tippecanoe Avenue between Hospitality Lane and the 1-10 westbound ramps. Project's fair share responsibility is 27.7 percent. -. ,"-,., Tippecanoe A venue/I-lOW estbound Ramps - Addition of a second northbound left turn lane, a southbound free right turn lane, and a westbound free right turn lane. It should be noted that the recommended improvements for the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Westbound Page 15 of 41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) "~ ,"-- Ramps and Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps cannot be accommodated within the space available under the 1-10 bridge. Therefore, improvement of operations at these intersections would require the reconstruction of the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-10 interchange. Project's fair share responsibility is 19.9 percent of the overall Tippecanoe/ I -10 Interchange Reconstruction. Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Ramps - Addition ofa third northbound through lane, a separate northbound right turn lane, and a free southbound free right turn lane (i.e., construction of a loop ramp to replace the existing southbound left turn lane). As noted above, this improvement would require reconstruction of the entire interchange. Project's fair share responsibility is 19.9 percent of the overall Tippecanoe /I-10 Interchange Reconstruction. Anderson StreetiRedlands Boulevard - Addition of a third northbound through lane, a second southbound left turn lane, a third southbound through lane, a separate southbound right turn lane, and a second eastbound left turn lane. Project's fair share responsibility is 4.0 percent. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: Implementation of the mitigation measures will improve intersection operations at the studied locations to LOS D or better, reducing the impact to a less than significant level. .""...~-. . 2. CULTURAL RESOURCES ......' a. Unidentified Human Burials Potential Significant Impact: The potential for historic burials and/or cultural rnaterials may be present in the project area. Destruction or disturbance of such resources during project construction could be a potentially significant impact. Findings: The potential impacts related to unidentified human burials are discussed in Section 4.4 of the Final EIR. The analysis concluded that there is the potential to encounter human burials on the project site during grading activities. Therefore, the State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 will be adhered to, to mitigate any potential for the accidental disturbance of human remains during grading. The following mitigation measure frorn the Final EIR will mitigate this impact to below a level of significance. .-- \"., 4.4.1A If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NARC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the descendent may inspect the site of the discovery. The descendent shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NARC. The MLD may Page 16 of 41 - L, ,-" '-, r' \..... The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Adherence to the above recommendations and state codes will reduce potential impacts related to potential cultural resources and burials to a level that is less than significant. c. IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE FINAL EIR AND DETERMINED TO BE SIGNFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE. With the implementation of all available and feasible mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR, the following adverse impacts of the proposed project stated below are considered to be significant and unavoidable, both individually and cumulatively, based upon information in the Final EIR, in the record, and based upon testimony provided during the public hearings on this project. These impacts are considered significant and unavoidable despite the mitigation rneasures which are imposed and which will reduce impacts to the extent feasible. I. TRAFFIC a. Year 2002 Plus Project -Tippecanoe and EastboundlI-IO Interchange Significant Unavoidable Impact: The proposed project will contribute traffic to the Eastbound I-IO/Tippecanoe Avenue interchange which currently operates at LOS F. Findings: Traffic related impacts of the Hub project are discussed in Section 4. I of the Final EIR. The Final EIR identified the following mitigation measures to reduce the impact ofproject traffic on the Eastbound I-IO/Tippecanoe Avenue interchange. Despite implementation of the stated mitigation, significant unavoidable impacts remain. The impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. The following mitigation measures frorn the Final EIR are applicable and will mitigate these impacts to the extent feasible; however, traffic impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 4.1.1A The project proponent shall make a fair share contribution to the following improvements: Tippecanoe Avenue/I-tO Eastbound Ramps - Addition of a separate northbound right turn lane and a second southbound left turn lane. In order to accept the dual southbound left turn lanes, Tippecanoe Avenue under the freeway bridge would need to be widened. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The year 2002 plus project condition considers the addition of traffic generated by the proposed project at opening day to the roadways in the project vicinity. The proposed project will contribute traffic to the Eastbound I-IO/Tippecanoe A venue interchange which currently operates at LOS F. Improvement of operations at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-IO Eastbound Rarnps would require reconstruction of the interchange. Although interchange reconstruction will occur by 2020, the interchange will not be completed Page 17 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ,- , by 2002. Therefore, the proposed project will have a temporary significant and unavoidable impact at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-l 0 Eastbound Ramps. '-" b. Year 2002 Plus Project - Freeway Mainline Significant Unavoidable Impact: The Hub project will add traffic along the eastbound 1-10 freeway mainline between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue which will operate at LOS F in 2002 without the project. Findings: Traffic related impacts of the Hub project are discussed in Section 4.1 of the Final EIR. The Final EIR identified the following mitigation measures to reduce the impact of project traffic on the eastbound 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue. Despite implementation of the stated mitigation, significant unavoidable impacts remain. The impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. The following mitigation measures from the Final EIR are applicable and will mitigate these impacts to the extent feasible; however, traffic impacts would rernain significant and unavoidable. ,,J!fI""*' ....., 4.1.2A As shown in Table 4.1.1, the addition ofan eastbound HaY lane on 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue would improve freeway operations with year 2002 plus project traffic volumes to LOS D. Improvements to 1-10 are under the authority ofCaltrans. However, there is no mechanism for development project proponent to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards improving mainline freeway lanes, and even if there were there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. Consequently, there is no feasible mitigation measure for this impact. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: All freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 plus project conditions, with the exception ofI-IO eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue. This freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2002 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Because there is no feasible mitigation for this impact, the impact remains significant and unavoidable. c. Year 2020 Plus Project - Freeway Mainline Significant Unavoidable Impact: All freeway segments analyzed are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 plus project conditions, with the exception of: 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. -, '-... Page 18 of4l - '-" ,,"'. '"-, (""'"" '", The Hub Project (SCH #2(0081074) 1-10 Eastbound between Mountain View Avenue and California Avenue - addition of project traffic will result in the degradation of operations along this freeway segment to LOSF. 1-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Street - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215 - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Findings: Traffic related impacts of the Hub project are discussed in Section 4.1 of the Final EIR. The Final EIR identified the following mitigation measures to reduce the irnpact ofproject traffic on 1-10 freeway segments Despite implementation of the stated mitigation, significant unavoidable impacts remain. The impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. The following mitigation measures from the Final EIR are applicable and will mitigate these impacts to the extent feasible; however, traffic impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 4.1.4A As shown in Table 4.I.K, the addition of the following freeway lanes would improve freeway operations with year 2020 plus project traffic volumes to LOS D: 1-10 between Ninth Street and 1-215 - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. 1-10 between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane, one eastbound mixed-flow lane, and one westbound HOV lane. 1-10 between Waterman Avenue and Alabama Street - Addition of one eastbound HOV lane. Facts and Analysis in Support ofthe Finding: Improvements to 1-10 are under the authority of Caltrans. However, there is no mechanism for development project proponents to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards irnproving mainline freeway lanes, and even if there were such a rnechanism, there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. Consequently, there are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts and the irnpact remains significant and unavoidable. 2. AIR QUALITY a. Short-term Construction Related Impacts Significant Unavoidable Impact: Peak grading and construction emissions would exceed the emissions thresholds for the criteria pollutants of NO x and PMIO, which are 100 pounds per day Page 19 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ,~._ and 150 pounds per day, respectively. Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the ......' standards. Implementation of mitigation measures will minimize air quality impacts, but the irnpacts will remain significant. Findings: Issues associated with the Hub project on air quality are discussed in Section 4.2 of the Final EIR. The Final EIR identifies that implementation of the mitigation measures stated below and identified in the Final EIR would not reduce the criteria pollutant emissions for NO, and PMIO associated with construction of the proposed project to a less than significant level under current standards. Despite implementation of the stated rnitigation measures significant and unavoidable impacts remain. The impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. The following mitigation measures from the Final EIR are applicable and will mitigate these impacts to the extent feasible; however, short-term air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 4.2.1A The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low emission factors and high-energy efficiency. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. 4.2.1B The Construction Contractor shall limit the operation of grading equipment to two _, bulldozers at anyone time with no more than 5 acres graded in anyone day. \".... 4.2.1 C The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equiprnent when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 4.2.1D The Construction Contractor shall time the construction activities so as to not interfere with peak hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. 4.2.1E The Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. 4.2.1F Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on site and kept to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed below: a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. ,- b. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a , \.." Page 20 of4l The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ~ ,"-- minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. c. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be treated immediately until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. d. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. e. Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. 4.2.1G The Construction Contractor shall utilize precoated/natural colored building materials, water based or low VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge. Facts and Analysis in Support ofthe Finding: Grading and construction activities would cause combustion emissions from utility engines, heavy-duty construction vehicles, haul trucks, and vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions during grading and construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. _. It is anticipated that peak grading days would generate larger amounts of air pollutants than '-_ during peak construction building erection days. The project will be required by law to comply with regional rules, which would assist in reducing the short-term air pollutant emissions. Implementation of these dust suppression techniques as required by the SCAQMD can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PMIO component) by 50 to 75 percent. Building erection or construction would have different types of equipment being used on the project site. Similarities do exist in terms of equipment exhaust emissions and fugitive dust emissions. However, it is anticipated that emissions during building erection phase would be below peak grading day emissions. Therefore, mitigation implemented for the peak grading day emissions would be adequate to reduce emissions during the building erection phase. Emissions associated with architectural coating can be reduced by using precoated/natural colored building materials, water-based or low- VOC coating, and using coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. Compliance with the SCAQMD Rules and Regulations for architectural coatings would reduce this potential impact to less than significant. Despite implementation of the above stated mitigation measures, a significant and unavoidable air quality impact remains. b. Long-term Regional Air Quality Impacts Significant Unavoidable Impact: Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those ....... associated with changes in permanent usage of the project site. Area sources include on-site \...~ emissions such as natural gas consumption and emissions associated with consumer products. Page 21 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ,-. Mobile source emissions result from vehicle trips associated with the proposed project. These \.." impacts would be potentially significant. Finding: Issues associated with the Hub project's impact on long-term air quality are discussed in Section 4.2 of the Final EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR would not reduce the criteria pollutant emissions NO, for the Hub project to a less than significant level. This air quality impact would remain significant and unavoidable after mitigation. This impact is overridden by the project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding consideration. The following measures from the Final EIR will not mitigate these impacts to below a level of significance. 4.2.2A Use of transportation demand measures (TDM) such as preferential parking for vanpoolinglcarpooling, subsidy for transit pass or vanpoolingl carpooling, flextime work schedule, bike racks, lockers, and showers shall be incorporated in the design of the commercial land uses as,appropriate. Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Vehicular trips associated with the proposed on-site uses are provided in the traffic report (LSA Associates, Inc., January 2001). Upon completion the proposed project will create approxirnately 268,600 square feet of retail and restaurant uses. A net increase of approximately 12,099 in vehicular trips is associated with the _ project build out. Using the latest URBEMIS7G (Urban Ernissions Model) air model in . '-, conjunction with the traffic data, criteria pollutant ernissions are calculated for both scenarios shows that emissions from project related mobile sources alone would exceed the operational threshold for NO" established by the SCAQMD. There are no feasible mitigation measures available to reduce the project's long-term impacts on regional air quality to a level of less than significant. 3. NOISE a. Construction Activities Significant Unavoidable Impact: Noise levels from grading and other construction activities for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA at the closest residential unit located in Phase II, and up to 77 dBA at off-site residential uses located east of the project site for very limited times when construction occurs near them. Construction noise impacts of the proposed project would be potentially significant. Findings: Noise impacts created by construction activities are discussed in Section 4.3 of the Final EIR. The development of the Hub project will result in a significant unavoidable impacts on noise levels from construction activities to the residents located to the north of the project site. These impacts are overridden by the project benefits set forth in the statement of overriding considerations. .- --.. Page 22 of4l The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - .....' The following rneasures from the final EIR will not mitigate these impacts to below a level of significance. 4.3.1A Construction shall be limited to the hours of7:00 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday; no construction shall be allowed on Sundays and federal Holidays. 4.3.18 During all project site excavation and grading on site, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturer's standards. 4.3.1 C All stationary noise generating sources, such as air compressors and portable power generators, shall be located as far as reasonably possible from the existing sensitive receptors. 4.3.l.DPrior to the commencement of on-site construction activities, temporary noise attenuation fences (portable sound barriers) with an effective height of 6 feet shall be placed along the boundary between Phases 1 and 2. ........ Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Construction is performed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, it's own noise characteristics. Typical noise levels range from 76 to 90 dBA at 50 feet from construction equipment during the noisiest construction phase. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of earthmovers and compacting equipment, water and pickup trucks. Noise typically associated with the use of construction equipment (earthmovers and compacting equipment, water, and pickup trucks) is estimated between 79 and 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the construction effort for the grading phase. The maxirnum noise level generated by each grader on the proposed project site is assumed to be 88 dBA at 50 feet from the grader. The maximum noise level generated by water and pickup trucks is approximately 86 dBA at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual noise source, the worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lmax (88 dBA + 3 dBA = 91 dBA) at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area. As these noise sources are point sources, the noise decreases at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. \,.... The nearest residences to the project site are located to the north during Phase I of the project. The nearest off-site residences to the project site are located to the east. These residences are approximately 250 feet from the project boundary, and may be subjected to short-term noise approaching 77 dBA Lmax (worst case) generated by construction activities on the project site. The nearest on-site residences in Phase II area of the project site are approximately 25 feet from the boundary of Phase I. These on-site residences will be subjected to short-term construction noise exceeding 91 dBA Lmax. Compliance with the City's Noise Control Ordinance will be required to mitigate the noise impact. .-.. r \..,.. Temporary, portable sound barriers with an effective height of6 feet shall be placed along the boundary between Phase I and Phase II. These noise barriers will provide approximately 6 dBA of attenuation, and will reduce the construction noise level to 85 dBA Lmax. To further reduce Page 23 of4l The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - the impact of the construction activities all mitigation measures listed below should be implemented. However, even with mitigation, the temporary construction noise will remain significant and unavoidable. '-, V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Four project alternatives are discussed in Section 6 of the Final EIR and the potential significance for all of the alternatives are analyzed in Section 6 of the Final EIR. The City has considered these alternatives for the development of the Hub project and makes the following findings. ALTERNATIVE 1- NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE Under the No Build Alternative, the project site would remain in its existing condition, and the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project would be avoided, especially the proposed project's impacts on traffic, air quality, noise, and water quality. Traffic _. , The No Build Alternative would have no impact on traffic. The traffic impacts associated with the proposed proj ect will not occur and there will be no trips generated by this alternative. However, because improvements associated with the proposed project would not occur under this alternative, traffic will remain the same and over time traffic will worsen around the project site. Analysis of traffic conditions under the no build or existing conditions is detailed in Section 4.1 and analyzes traffic conditions in 2002 without the proposed project and in 2020 without the project. '"-, Air Quality No air quality impacts would occur as a result of this alternative. No vehicular trips, fugitive dust, or emissions from construction traffic would be generated as a result of the No Build Alternative. However, as there will be no opportunities to make road improvements at this site with the No Build Alternative, long-term air quality impacts associated with future projects in the surrounding area may be greater than they would be with the proposed project. Noise r. ........ The noise level at the proposed project site will not change as a result of this alternative. There are existing residences on site across Tippecanoe Avenue, which is a six-lane thoroughfare. The primary existing noise sources in the project area are transportation facilities. Traffic on 1-10, Tippecanoe Avenue, Laurelwood Drive, Rosewood Drive, and Orchard Drive near the site is the primary source contributing to the ambient noise levels. Engine vibrations generate noise from motor vehicles, the interaction between the tires and road, and the exhaust system. Currently, traffic noise levels along Waterman A venue and Tippecanoe A venue are high, with the 70 dBA CNEL extending beyond 50 feet from the roadway centerline. Traffic noise along other roadway segments is low to moderate, with the 70 dBA CNEL confined within the roadway right-of-way. Page 24 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - Cultural Resources '-. As there will be no new development, there will be no new disturbance of vacant land or destruction of any cultural resources as a result of implementing the No Build Alternative. Therefore, there will be no impact to cultural resources. Findings: The No Build Alternative does not result in any environmental impacts in, and of, itself. However, because improvements associated with the proposed project would not occur under this alternative, traffic will remain the same and over time, traffic will worsen around the project. In addition, the No Build Alternative does not meet any of the project objectives for redevelopment which seek to "attract businesses which will strengthen the economic viability of the City," "create employment opportunities," or "eliminate existing blighted areas." ALTERNATIVE 2 - NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE Alternative 2 does not preclude development of the site. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed project would not proceed, but another project may be proposed at a later date. As defined in the CEQA Guidelines, the no project alternative includes "what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project was not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6). Based on current zoning, the entire 24.5-acre site could be developed for many types and intensities of commercial.uses. ,.... ,"-- The current City FAR standard for commercial uses is 0.70. Under this alternative, future maximurn permitted development of the 24.5-acre project site would yield 747,054 square feet of commercial/retail uses under this alternative. Traffic Based on development traffic generation factors, it is estirnated the No Project Alternative would generate approximately 40,714 ADT, and 3,303 p.m. peak hour trips. As stated in Section 4.1 of this document, implementation of the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 16,537 ADT, and 1,811 p.m. peak hour trips. Table 6.B compares estimated traffic resulting from implementation of this alternative and the proposed project. When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in a greater number of daily and peak hour vehicle trips. P.M. peak trips under this alternative would be approximately 180 percent of that anticipated by the proposed project. The No Project Alternative will increase traffic in the vicinity of the project site would and, therefore, result in greater impacts related to traffic than generated by the proposed proj ect. Table 6.B - Alternative I-No Project Estimated Traffic Generation _. ...., Page 25 of4l The Hub Projecl (SCH #200081074) - Square ADT ADT PM PM \"..., Land Use Footage Factor Trips Factor Trip (per tsO (per tsO Alternative 1 Discount Club/Big Box 391,000 41.80 16,344 3.80 1,486 Free Standing Discount 280,000 56.63 15,856 4.24 1,188 Specialiy Re1ail 40,000 40.67 1,627 2.59 104 Restaurant 30,000 130.34 3,910 10.86 325 Fast Food 6,000 496.12 2,977 33.48 200 Total 747,000 40,714 3,303 Proposed 268,600 sq ft Project Total commercial 16,537 1,811 Note: tsf = thousand square feet Air Quality Because a similar amount of on-site grading and construction is required for either the No Project Alternative or the proposed project, similar short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions would be expected. It has been determined pollutant emissions resuliing in short-term construction activity will exceed SCAQMD thresholds for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and PMIO. Implementation of mitigation measures will minimize air ,- quality impact, but the impacts will rernain significant. ......' Under this aliernative, traffic volumes would be approximately 246 percent of that anticipated for the proposed project. When compared to the proposed project's significant long-term air quality impacts, this alternative would increase vehicle ernissions resulting from the project related traffic and, therefore, increase long-term operational air quality impacts. Noise Development under this aliernative would require on-site grading and construction activities, thereby generating short-term noise impacts similar to that resulting from the proposed project. Vehicle noise is a primary contributor to urban noise level. As previously stated, the No Project Aliernative would significantly increase vehicle trips in the vicinity ofthe project site. Under this alternative, daily vehicle trips would be increased by 146 percent, which will correspondingly increase noise impacts in the vicinity of the project site. Cultural Resources As the same amount of area is disturbed in this alternative as in the original project, there is no change in impact to culiural resources compared with the proposed project. -, ,,--... Findings: The proposed project's impacts on air quality, traffic, and noise would be increased with implementation of the No Project Alternative. The proposed project's. impact to cultural resource would remain the same as the proposed project with implementation of the No Project Page 26 of41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) ...... Alternative. This alternative was rejected because impacts related to the No Project Alternative are greater than those of the proposed project. - i AL TERNA TIVE 3 - OFFICE-COMMERCIAL ALTERNATIVE Implementation of this alternative would result in development of office uses on the 6.93 acres located north of the Harriman Place extension, while the site's southern 17.57 acres would be developed with commercial uses. The current City FAR standard for office uses is 3.0. The maximum level of development permitted under current City standards would total 905,612 and 535,744 square feet of office and commercial space, respectively. Traffic Based on development traffic generation factors, it is estimated the Office-Commercial Alternative would generate approximately 30,029 ADT, and 3,250 p.m. peak hour trips. As stated in Section 4.1, of this docurnent, implementation of the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 16,537 ADT, and 1,811 p.rn. peak hour trips Table 6.C compares estimated traffic resulting from irnplementation of this alternative and the proposed project. Table 6.C - Alternative 2-0ffice-Commercial Estimated Traffic Generation Square ADT ADT PM Factor PM Land Use Factor _. Footage Trips (per tst) Trip .....,. (per tst) Alternative 2 Office 905,612 11.01 9,971 1.49 1,349 Commercial 535,744 37.44 20,058 3.55 1,901 Total 1.4 million 30,029 3,250 Proposed 268,600 sq ft Project Total commercial 16,537 1,811 Note: tsf= thousand square feet The ADT and p.m. peak trips would increase under this alternative. This increase is the result of office workers arriving during normal office hours versus fewer workers/patrons at commercial establishments during the same time period. P.M. peak trips under this alternative would be approximately 179 percent of that anticipated by the proposed project. The traffic generated by this alternative would be greater than that generated by the proposed project. Air Quality ,.... I '........ This alternative would increase the number of morning peak trips and the potential for congestion in the vicinity of the project site (with corresponding increases in vehicle emissions resulting from vehicle idling) and additionally, increase the overall ADT since this alternative also has a larger amount of square footage for community commercial uses. The number of daily vehicle trips is 182 percent of that anticipated from the proposed project. While levels of Page 27 of41 - '- ,......' \.../ ...-,. <~... The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) construction emissions resulting from development of office and commercial uses would generally be similar as that resulting from implementation of the proposed project, the increase in the number of ADT would increase the overall air pollutants resulting from development of the project site. Noise Development under this alternative would require on-site grading and construction activities, thereby generating short-term noise impacts similar to that resulting from the proposed project. Vehicle noise is a primary contributor to urban noise level. As previously stated, the Office- Commercial Alternative would significantly increase vehicle trips in the vicinity of the project site. Under this alternative, daily vehicle trips would be increased by 82 percent, which will correspondingly increase noise impacts in the vicinity of the project site. Typical uses under this alternative would generally consist of executive, management, administrative, or clerical uses including the establishment of branch offices, data processing centers, and the provision of consultation establishments of a professional nature. It is anticipated that such uses would result in a reduction of delivery, loading or unloading activities. Cultural Resources The impacts to cultural resources will be the same with the Office-Commercial alternative as with the proposed project. No irnpacts to cultural resources are anticipated. Findings:' The Office-Commercial Alternative would result in the development of approximately 1.4 million square feet of commercial uses on the 24.5-acre project site. Implementation of this alternative would substantially modify the project site, resulting in the loss of existing residential development replacing vacant land with urban uses. While irnpacts to cultural resources would be similar to those resulting from the proposed project, implementation of this alternative would result in a 82 percent increase in ADT, and a corresponding increase in vehicle emissions and noise sources. Because this alternative increases traffic, air quality, and noise impacts (as in comparison with the proposed project, this alternative increases traffic, air quality, and noise impacts and does less to further the third prirnary goal of the Hub, to strengthen the economic viability of the City by providing a productive mix of tax generating uses. For these reasons, this alternative is rejected. AL TERNA TIVE 4 - REMOVAL OF ALL RESIDENTIAL UNITS DURING PHASE I Under this alternative, residential units located north of the proposed Harrirnan Place extension would be removed concurrent with the removal of residential units located on land slated for development during Phase I of the project. The development of the HUB project as proposed would proceed. Page 28 of41 - ......c - ~, ,-' '-, The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) Traffic The traffic impacts would be the same or less than those experienced during Phase I of the proposed project as the residential traffic on the site would not occur. The long-term impact on traffic would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. Air Quality The air quality impacts would be the same or less than those experienced during Phase I of the proposed project as fugitive dust and other construction-related impacts to the residences on the site would not occur. The long-term impact on air quality would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. Noise Under this alternative, the noise impacts to residents would not occur. Noise levels frorn grading and other construction activities during construction of Phase I for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA for the residential units located north of Harriman Place. There will be no noise impacts to residences in Phase II if those residences are demolished before construction of Phase I. Cultural Resources As the same amount of area is disturbed in this alternative as in the original project, there is no change in impact to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. Findings: Alternative 4 meets all project objectives and implements the same development plan. It has the same long-term irnpacts, but reduces the short-term impacts. It is, therefore, the environmentally superior alternative. ALTERNATIVE 5 - HARRIMAN PLACE IMPROVEMENTS AND RELOCATION OF DRlVE- THRU RESTAURANT Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project. With the exception of the relocation of the existing drive-thru restaurant to the southwest corner of the Tippecanoe AvenuelHarriman Place intersection, development of proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place. Existing residential and commercial (the existing motel) structures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harrirnan Place extension and the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant. All other residential structures within the limits of the project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain in place, but will terminate in a cul-de-sac, thereby eliminating an existing through traffic route to Tippecanoe Avenue. Page 29 of 41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - Traffic --. Under this alternative, development of the proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place; therefore, increases in the number of average daily trips (ADT), A.M./P.M. peak hour trips attributable to the proposed project would not occur. Consequently, potential project-related traffic impacts identified in Section 4.1 of the EIR would not occur. Construction of the Harriman Place extension and improvements to the Tippecanoe A venuelHarriman Place intersection will improve the flow, pattern and safety of traffic over that which currently exists. Additionally, the closure (by installation ofa cul-de-sac) of Rosewood Drive would elirninate the passage of non-residential traffic through a residential neighborhood, thereby improving traffic conditions on this roadway. Traffic related impacts resulting from irnplementation of this alternative would be reduced from that identified with the proposed project. Air Quali()' .'-' i.".., Section 4.2 of the ErR identified a significant air quality impact associated with construction of the proposed on-site uses. The levels ofPMIO and NOx emissions resulting construction and earthmoving activities exceeded established air quality thresholds. Despite the implementation of mitigation, this impact remains significant. Under this alternative, the amount, extent and duration of earthmoving and construction activities would be significantly reduced from that envisioned by the proposed project; therefore, the emission of air pollutant would be proportionally reduced. Rosewood Drive currently serves as a through route between commercial areas west of the project site and freeway access. The closure of Rosewood Drive (by installation ofa cul-de-sac) would limit the passage of non-residential traffic through this residential neighborhood; thereby eliminating vehicle stacking at the intersection of Rosewood Drive and Tippecanoe Avenue and concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) which are a product of vehicle idling. Under this alternative mobile emissions from project-related traffic and stationary emissions from on-site commercial uses would be eliminated, thereby reducing operational air quality impacts. While mobile emissions from non-project traffic will be similar to what currently exist, impacts will be reduced frorn that identified with the proposed project. Noise While the extent and duration of construction activities will be reduced frorn that identified in Section 4.3 of the ErR, activities associated with the construction of the Harriman Place extension and the intersection improvernents, the demolition of the motel and the demolition/relocation of the drive-thru restaurant will generate short-term noise impacts at adjacent residential uses. Adherence to mitigation rneasures identified in Section 4.3 will reduce construction-related noise impacts to a less than significant level; therefore short-term noise impacts under this alternative would be similar to that stated in the Section 4.3. ~' ~, Although construction of the stated roadway improvements will necessitate the demolition of residential and comrnercial (the existing motel) uses, other residential uses will remain within the Page 30 of41 .~ '-, ~~' \.,..- The Hub Projecl (SCH #200081074) limits of the project site. These residential units would be located in the vicinity of a roadway (Harriman Place) which connects a major commercial area with Tippecanoe Avenue (which in itself provides access to Interstate 10). Engine vibrations generate noise from motor vehicles, the interaction between tires and the road, and vehicle exhaust systems. While the increase in ADT or peak hour trips associated with the proposed project would not occur, traffic on the Harriman Place extension would generate long-term noise sources which (because all residential units would be eventually demolished) would not occur with development of the proposed project. While long-term noise impacts on residential units within the limits of the project may be similar to that which currently exists, noise impacts would be greater than that which would occur under the proposed project. Cultural Resources While no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, Section 4.4 of the EIR identified impacts associated the potential presence of undetected subsurface historic/cultural resources. Though the amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project irnpacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. Findings: Implementation of Alternative 5 would retain rnany of the existing on-site residential uses. Traffic related impacts would be reduced through a reduction in vehicle trips and roadway improvements. Because project related traffic and the operation of on-site commercial uses would not occur, the level of mobile and stationary emissions of pollutants would be similar to that which currently exists. This represents a reduction from the level of pollutant emissions resulting from development of the project site as proposed. The amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project. Though no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, impacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. While noise levels during short-term construction would equal that of the proposed project, long-term noise levels, because ofthe proximity of residential units to a roadway connecting a major commercial center and freeway access, would exceed existing levels. Because long-term noise impacts to residential units remain, and because development of this alternative fails to meet the objective of eliminating blight, this alternative is not viewed as environmentally superior. ALTERNATIVE 6 - HARRIMAN PLACE IMPROVEMENTS AND RETENTION OF DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT AT PRESENT LOCATION Under this alternative the extension of Harriman Place and improvements to the intersection of Tippecanoe A venue and Harriman Place would proceed as envisioned by the proposed project. The existing drive-thru restaurant would be retained in its present location. Development of _ proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place. Existing residential and commercial "-- (the existing motel) structures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of Page 31 of 41 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - ,-"- the Harriman Place extension and the improvements to the Harriman Place/Tippecanoe Avenue intersection. All other residential structures within the limits ofthe project site will be retained. Rosewood Drive will remain a through roadway to Tippecanoe Avenue as it currently exists. Traffic Under this alternative, development of the proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place; therefore, increases in the number of average daily trips (ADT), or A.M!P.M. peak hour trips attributable to the proposed project would also not occur. Consequently, the potential project-related traffic impacts identified in Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR would not occur. While development of the project site under this alternative would allow the practice of vehicle queues extending onto Tippecanoe Avenue (from the drive-thru restaurant) to continue, public safety issues are no greater than that which currently exist. Construction of the Harriman Place extension and improvements to the Tippecanoe A venue/Harriman Place intersection will improve the flow and pattern of traffic over that which currently exists in the vicinity ofthe project site. Traffic related impacts resulting from implernentation ofthis alternative would be similar (public safety) or reduced (traffic volumes/traffic patterns) from that identified with the proposed project. Air Quality r... \...,;' Air quality impacts associated with the proposed project for construction activities would include exceeding NOx and PMIO during peak grading and construction activity. Because a similar amount of on-site grading and construction is required for the roadway for either this alternative or the proposed project, similar short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust and construction equipment emission would be expected. Under this alternative, development of the proposed on-site commercial uses would not take place; therefore, increases in peak trips for both A.M. and P.M. would not exist. There will be no operational irnpact from this alternative since the proposed on-site commercial uses will not be built. Additionally, traffic volumes will be similar and even less than what currently exist once roadway improvements are complete air quality impacts will be no greater than what currently exists. Noise While the extent and duration of construction activities will be reduced frorn that identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR, activities associated with the construction of the Harriman Place extension and the intersection improvements, the demolition of the motel and the demolition/relocation of the drive-thru restaurant will generate short-term noise impacts at adjacent residential uses. Adherence to mitigation measures identified in Section 4.3 will reduce construction-related noise impacts to a less than significant level; therefore short-term noise impacts under this alternative would be similar to that stated in the Section 4.3. _. Although construction of the stated roadway irnprovements will necessitate the-demolition of 1....., residential and commercial (the existing motel) uses, other residential uses will remain within the Page 32 of41 - \-- r',' \.." ,,-.. \.... The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) limils of the project site. These residential units would be located in the vicinity of a roadway (Harriman Place) which connects a rnajor commercial area with Tippecanoe Avenue (which in itself provides access to Interstate 10). Engine vibralions generate noise from motor vehicles, the interaction between tires and the road, and vehicle exhaust systems. While the increase in ADT or peak hour trips associated with the proposed project would not occur, traffic on the Harriman Place extension would generate long-term noise sources which (because all residential units would be eventually demolished) would not occur with development of the proposed project. While long-term noise impacts on residential units within the limits of the project may be similar to that which currently exists, noise impacts would be greater than that which would occur under the proposed project. Cultural Resources While no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, Section 4.4 of the EIR identified impacts associated the potential presence of undetected subsurface historic/cultural resources. Though the amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project impacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. Findings: Irnplementation of Alternative 6 would retain many of the existing on-site residential uses. Traffic related impacts would be reduced through a reduction in vehicle trips and roadway improvements. Because project related traffic and the operation of on-site commercial uses would not occur, the level of mobile and stationary emissions of pollutants would be similar to that which currently exists. This represents a reduction frorn the level of pollutant emissions resulting from development of the project site as proposed. The amount and extent of earthmoving activity necessary for implementation of this alternative would be reduced from that required for the proposed project. Though no historic or cultural resources have been identified on-site, impacts to undetected subsurface historic/cultural would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. While noise levels during short-term construction would equal that of the proposed project, long-term noise levels, because of the proximity of residential units to a roadway connecting a major commercial center and freeway access, would exceed existing levels. The proposed project would eliminate all residential units during Phase II and the noise impacts to residents along Harriman Place will disappear with implementation of Phase II of the proposed project. This alternative increases long-term noise impacts on residents and fails to meet the objectives of the City's Redevelopment Agency, which is to "attract businesses, which will strengthen the economic viability of the City," "create employment opportunities," and "elirninate existing blighted areas." Therefore, this alternative is not viewed as being environmentally superior to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVE 7 - PROPOSED PROJECT WITH RELOCATION OF DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT TO NORTHWEST CORNER OF HARRIMAN PLACE AND TIPPECANOE AVENUE Under this alternative the existing drive-thru restaurant will be relocated to the northwest corner of Tippecanoe Avenue and Harriman Place (the location of the proposed "Pad B"). Page 33 of 41 ,,- '"-, r' \..... _. '-... The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) Development of other commercial uses and roadway improvernents would proceed as envisioned in Ihe proposed project. Existing residential and commercial struclures will be acquired and demolished to accommodate the alignment of the Harriman Place extension and the construction of the proposed commercial uses. Rosewood Drive west of Tippecanoe Avenue will be vacated. Traffic The type and scale of development implemented under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project; therefore, no change in the number of average daily trips, or A.M/P.M. peak hour trips would occur. As with the proposed project, the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant to the northwest corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue would eliminate the practices of vehicle queuing extending onto Tippecanoe Avenue frorn drive-thru's existing location, and (drive-thru) patrons parking vehicles on undeveloped land south of Rosewood Drive. Long-term traffic irnpacts associated with this alternative would similar to that which would occur with the proposed project. Air Quality Short-term air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would include exceeding NOx and PMJO during peak grading and construction activity. The air quality impacts would be the same as those experienced during construction of the proposed project because the same amount of acreage would be disturbed. Nearby sensitive receptors and construction workers may be exposed to fugitive dust and other construction-related emissions depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Long-term operational air pollutant emission impacts include natural gas consumption, emissions associated with consumer products, and mobile source emissions frorn vehicle trips. The long- term impact on air quality would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measures that were identified under the proposed project (Section 4.2) will lessen impacts related to both short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) activities. But, under either this alternative or the proposed project implementation of rnitigation measures would not reduce impacts from emissions of NO x and PMIO to a less than significant level. Noise Activities associated with the construction of the proposed project would generate noise levels in excess of91 dBA at residential units located north of the Harrlrnan Place extension during Phase 1. While this impact was identified as significant, implementation of mitigation measures reduced construction noise impacts to below a level of significance. Because the extent of construction envisioned under this alternative is similar to that required for implementation of the proposed project, short-term noise impacts under this alternative, with implernentation of mitigation measures outlined in Section 4.3 of the EIR, would be sirnilar to that associated with development of the proposed project. Page34 of 41 (, r. \,." c: The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) Under this alternative, the drive-thru restaurant would be relocated to the northwest comer of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue. Currently, a 10,000 square foot retail use is proposed for this location. As with the proposed project, parking areas under this alternative will be located approximately 50 feet from residential uses during Phase 1. With the exception of noise frorn menu board speakers, operational noise levels generated by a drive-thru restaurant would not significantly differ from that associated with retail uses. Maximum outdoor noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet will be intermittently generated by uses envisioned under the proposed project and this alternative. As stated in Section 4.3 of the EIR, this noise level is below the City's nightime Lmax of65 dBA; therefore, operational noise impacts would be similar to that associated with the proposed project. Implementation of the project as proposed would result in very little change in the traffic noise levels. As stated in Section 4.3 of this document, the range of traffic-related noise increase is smaller than the 3 dBA significance threshold. Because development of the project site under this alternative would not alter the type or scale of on-site uses, traffic-related noise impacts will be no greater than that which would occur with implementation of the project as proposed. Cultural Resources The impacts identified with the proposed project to cultural resources include the potential through grading and construction activities for the disturbance of undetected subsurface historic/cultural materials and/or burials that may be present at the project site. As the same amount of acreage is disturbed with this alternative as with the proposed project, there is no change in impacts to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. Impacts to cultural resources would not be significant with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section 4.5 in the EIR. Findings: Under Alternative 7, the same amount of acreage is disturbed as with the proposed project. The type and scale of development irnplemented under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project with the only change being the relocation of the drive-thru restaurant to the northwest corner of Harriman Place and Tippecanoe Avenue instead of the southwest comer. Therefore, all short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) impacts are the same as with the proposed project and no additional significant irnpacts not identified for the proposed project will occur. This alternative would not be environmentally superior to the proposed project but it is still viable. It allows the drive-thru restaurant to relocate and does not cause additional impacts to the environment that were not already identified for the proposed project. Implementation of the mitigation measures proposed for the project would reduce environmental impacts of this alternatives on cultural resources, traffic, air quality and noise; however, significant unavoidable short-term and long-term impacts to air quality and traffic identified for the proposed project will still remain if this alternative were implemented. AL TERNA TIVE 8 - PROPOSED PROJECT WITH RETENTION OF DRlVE- THRU RESTAURANT AT ITS PRESENT LOCATION Under this alternative, the existing drive-thru restaurantwould be retained at its present location. All other commercial and roadway components of the project would be developed as proposed. Page 35 of41 ,-. "'-, r" "'"', "..... .....'" The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) As with the proposed project, acquisition and dernolition of existing residential and commercial structures will take place to accommodate the proposed commercial uses and roadway improvernents, Harriman Place will be extended to Tippecanoe Avenue and Rosewood Drive will be vacated west of Tippecanoe Avenue, Traffic The type and scale of development implemented under this alternative would be that identified with the proposed project; therefore, no change in the number of average daily trips, or A.M/P.M. peak hour trips would occur. The construction of the Harriman Place extension and the Harriman Place/Tippecanoe Avenue intersection improvements will facilitate the flow of project related traffic onto and along area roadways. Long-term traffic impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to that which would occur with the proposed project. Under this alternative the current practice of vehicle queuing extending onto Tippecanoe Avenue from drive-thru restaurant's current location would continue, Development of the project site as proposed would eliminate this condition by establishing on-site queuing. While traffic safety impacts under this alternative (resulting from vehicle queuing on Tippecanoe Avenue) would be no greater than that which currently exists, they would be greater than that which would occur with development of the proposed project. Air Quality Short-term air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would include exceeding NOx and PMIO during peak grading and construction activity. Under this alternative, the air quality irnpacts would be the same to incrementally smaller, since the existing drive-thru restaurant will not relocate as those experienced during construction of the proposed project. Nearby sensitive receptors and construction workers may be exposed to fugitive dust and other construction-related emissions depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Long-term operational air pollutant emission impacts include natural gas consumption, emissions associated with consurner products, and mobile source emissions from vehicle trips. The long- term impact on air quality would be the same as would occur with the proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measures that were identified under the proposed project (Section 4.2) will lessen impacts related to both short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) activities, Noise Development of this alternative would not alter the type or scale of uses within the limits of the project site, As with the proposed project, development of the project site under this alternative would generate short-term noise impacts at adjacent residential uses. Adherence to mitigation measures identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR will reduce construction-related noise impacts to a less than significant level; therefore short-term noise impacts undef this alternative would be no greater than that stated in the Section 4.3. Page 36 of 41 ~JIII"t'o "". r \",., -, ,.. The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) Under this alternative, noise levels resulting from vehicle traffic and the operation of on-site commercial uses would be similar to that identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR. Noise impacts to residential units within Phase II similar to that identified in Section 4.3 of the EIR. Cultural Resources The impacts identified with the proposed project to cultural resources include the potential through grading and construction activities for the disturbance of undetected subsurface historic/cultural materials and/or burials that may be present at the project site. As the same amount of acreage is disturbed with this alternative as with the proposed project, there is no change in impacts to cultural resources compared with the proposed project. Impacts to cultural resources would not be significant with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section 4.5 in the EIR. Findings: With the exception of retaining the drive-thru restaurant in its present location, the type, scale and configuration of uses envisioned under this alternative would be similar to that identified with the proposed project. Development of the project site under this alternative would result in short-term (construction) and long.term (operational) impacts similar to that identified with the proposed project. However, an existing traffic safety condition caused by vehicle queuing on Tippecanoe Avenue, would remain. This condition will be corrected with the future widening of the west side of Tippecanoe Avenue to four through lanes which will necessitate right-of-way acquisition of a portion of the parcel on which the drive-thru restaurant is presently located. Also, northbound traffic on Tippecanoe A venue would be prohibited from turning left into the existing restaurant because of the requirement to extend the existing median in Tippecanoe Avenue from 1-10 to the extension of Harriman Place (Laurelwood Drive). Because the median would be constructed, no left turns from northbound Tippecanoe Avenue to the drive-thru restaurant would be allowed. Further, the U-turn would not be permitted because it would interfere with the synchronized right turn from Harriman Place to southbound Tippecanoe A venue. This effectively eliminates any northbound traffic from accessing the existing site. Northbound traffic on Tippecanoe A venue would be required to travel further north on Tippecanoe Avenue to find a potential V-turn or turn onto Harrirnan Place and reenter southbound Tippecanoe Avenue to access the site. Retaining the drive-thru restaurant at its present location will reduce the initial costs of the project. While not the environmentally superior to the proposed project, this alternative satisfies the stated project objectives and allows the retail commercial and the Harrirnan Place extension and realignment components of the proposed project to proceed until such time as full funding for the freeway interchange and Tippecanoe Avenue improvements are ready to proceed. VI. PROJECT BENEFITS The benefits derived from the approval of the Hub project are related to the establishment of a commercial development that will provide convenient and a variety of shopping opportunities to Page 37 of 41 f ,"-- r" ',"-- -- , ......" The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) residents ofthe City and swrounding area. The Hub project will provide an accessible shopping venue, which is aesthetically compatible with adjacent uses, provides for improvements to local roadways, and fulfills the goals outlined in the City's General Plan. The following benefits will occur as a result of Project implementation: I. Implementation of the Hub project will result in new sources of income to the area through the generation of property taxes and sales tax revenue. 2. The proposed commercial use will capture retail sales that are currently lost to adjacent cities. 3. The construction and operation of the proposed project will provide new employment opportunities, both short-term construction positions, and long-term retail employment. 4. Establishment of the proposed project will provide additional shopping amenities to serve the residents of the City and adjacent cities. 5. Implementation of the Hub will contribute to the overall reduction ofvehic1e miles on the freeways as a result of well placed retail facilities in the market area. In turn, this will have positive impacts on highway maintenance, fuel savings, and air quality. 6. Development of the proposed project will provide a logical extension of convenient and aesthetically compatible uses, which will strengthen the economic viability of the City. 7. Development of the proposed project will result in the construction of circulation improvements in the Tippecanoe Avenue/I-1 0 corridor, an irnpacted area ofthe City. VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City of San Bernardino adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the Final EIR, specifically (1) traffic irnpacts related to (a) the addition of project traffic in the year 2002 to projected traffic at the TippicanoelI-lO interchange having a temporary unavoidable impact until the interchange is reconstructed; (b) year 2002 traffic impacts to the 1-10 eastbound between 1-215 and Waterman Avenue; (c) year 2020 traffic impacts to 1-10 freeway segments (2) air quality related to (a) short-term construction related impacts, (b) long-term regional air quality impacts, and (3) noise related to construction activities. This section of findings specifically addresses the requirements of Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which require the lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable significant impacts and to determine whether the impacts are acceptably overridden by the project benefits. The City finds that the previously stated major project benefits, see Section V and VI above, of the Hub project, outweigh the unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts noted above. Each of the separate benefits of the proposed development to be governed by the planned development cited in Section V above, is hereby determined to be, in itself and Page 38 of 42 .-' '......' .- ~, ,- '-, The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) independent ofthe other project benefits, a basis for overriding all unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR and in these findings. The City's findings set forth in the preceding sections have identified all of the adverse environmental impacts and the feasible mitigation measures, which can reduce impacts to less than significant levels where feasible, or to the lowest feasible levels where significant impacts remain. The findings have also analyzed four alternatives to determine whether there are reasonable or feasible alternatives to the proposed action or whether they might reduce or eliminate the significant adverse impacts of the proposed Project. The Final EIR, present evidence that implementing the development of the Hub project will cause significant adverse impacts, which cannot be substantially mitigated to nonsignificant levels. These significant impacts have been outlined above and the City makes the following finding: Finding: Having considered the unavoidable adverse impacts of the Hub project project, the City hereby determines that all feasible mitigation has been adopted to reduce or avoid the potentially significant impacts identified in the Final EIR and that no additional feasible rnitigation is available to further reduce significant impacts. Further, the City finds that economic, social, and other considerations of the Hub project outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts described above. The reasons for accepting these remaining unmitigated impacts are described below. In making this finding, the City has balanced the benefits of the Hub project against its unavoidable environmental impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those risks. Furthermore, the City has considered the alternatives to the project, and makes the following finding: Finding: Feasible alternatives to the Hub project, which are capable of reducing identified impacts have been considered and rejected because the alternatives offer a reduced level of benefit when compared to the Hub project project. The City further finds that the Hub project's benefits are substantial and override each unavoidable impact ofthe project, as follow: 1) Findings Regarding Traffic Impacts a. Year 2002 Plus Project -Tippecanoe and EastboundJI-10 Interchange The year 2002 plus project condition considers the addition of traffic generated by the proposed project at opening day to the roadways in the project vicinity. The proposed project will contribute traffic to the Eastbound 1-1 O/Tippecanoe Avenue interchange which currently operates at LOS F. Improvement of operations at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-10 Eastbound Ramps would require reconstruction of the interchange. Although interchange reconstruction will occur by 2020, the interchange will not be completed by 2002. Therefore, the proposed project will have a temporary significant and unavoidable impact at Tippecanoe Avenue/I-10 Eastbound Ramps. These traffic impacts are overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the Hub project. Page 39 of 42 The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) - b. Year 2002 Plus Project - Freeway Mainline \...... All freeway segments examined are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2002 plus project conditions, with the exception ofI-lO eastbound between 1- 215 and Waterman A venue. This freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2002 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Because there is no feasible mitigation for this impact, the impact remains significant and unavoidable. These traffic impacts are overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the Hub project. c. Year 2020 Plus Project - Freeway Mainline All freeway segments analyzed are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service (LOS E or better) under 2020 plus project conditions, with the exception of: 1-10 Eastbound between Ninth Street and Mountain View Avenue - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. 1-10 Eastbound between Mountain View Avenue and California Avenue - addition of project traffic will result in the degradation of operations along this freeway segment to LOSF. _. l~,," 1-10 Eastbound between California Avenue and Alabama Street - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. 1-10 Westbound between Waterman Avenue and 1-215 - this freeway segment was identified as operating at LOS F in the 2020 without project condition. Addition of project generated traffic will contribute to this unsatisfactory condition. Improvements to 1-10 are under the authority ofCaltrans. However, there is no mechanism for development project proponents to pay fees or make fair share contributions towards improving mainline freeway lanes, and even ifthere were such a mechanisrn, there is no way to ensure that such payments would be directed to a specific freeway improvement project. Consequently, there are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts and the impact remains significant and unavoidable. These traffic impacts are overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the Hub project. 2) Findings Regarding Air Quality Impacts a. Short-Term Construction Emissions Impacts Construction activities occurring at the Hub project area, including mass grading, will result in ,...." short-term increases in air emissions that exceed applicable thresholds ofthe SCAQMD, despite '-.. the imposition of mitigation measures. Short-term increases in air emissions from construction Page 40 of 42 /,-.. 't....... ,....., ,,,.... ,- '-' The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) can be mitigated but are not entirely avoidable, as construction activities within this region will continue to provide necessary and vital retail and commercial activities. This impact is overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the Hub project proj ect. b. Long-term Pollutant Emission Impacts The impacts from the Hub project on air quality will increase local and regional pollutants despite the imposition of several mitigation measures and implementation of Best Available Control Technology. Increases in local and regional pollutants are not entirely avoidable, as development activities within this region will continue to provide necessary and retail and commercial activities. This impact is also overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the project. The Hub project's related long-term pollutant emission impacts may contribute to increased NOx concentrations from on-site uses and mobile sources from increased vehicle trips associated with the project, which already exceeds the State's threshold of significance. The Final ErR identified mitigation to control these long-term pollutant emissions but it remains a significant and unavoidable impact. This impact is overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the Hub project. 3) Findings Regarding Noise Construction activities occurring at the Hub project area, will result in noise levels up to 85 dBA for the closest residential uses to the north of the project site during the construction of Phase 1. By following the mitigation measures described in the Final ErR increased noise levels from construction activities can be mitigated ,but are not entirely avoidable, as construction activities within this region will continue to provide necessary and vital retail and commercial activities. This impact is overridden by the new retail and commercial activities and jobs provided by the Hub proj ect VIII. ADOPTION OF A MONITORING PLAN FOR THE CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires the City adopt a monitoring or reporting program regarding the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed to lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan included as Appendix r in the Final ErR, (MMP) is adopted by the City as rnodified, because it fulfills the CEQA mitigation monitoring requirements: I. The MMP is designed to ensure compliance with the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed on the project during project implementation; and Page 41 of42 ,,-- \\~ ,'- '- /,.... '- The Hub Project (SCH #200081074) 2. Measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreernents or other measures. Page 42 of 42 , . ** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - NOT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT ** RESOLUTION AGENDA ITEM TRACKING FORM Meeting Date (Date Adopled): 5- 21-0\ 2<1 Item # Vote: Ayes 1-, .e Nays Change to motion to amend original documents: Reso. # On Attachments:"/ Contract tenn: - Note on Resolution of Attachment stored separately: ~ Direct City Clerk to (circle I): PUBLISH, POST, RECORD W/COUNTY Date Sent to Mayor: 5, Z s -() \ Date of Mayor's Signature: .5' ~S~6\ Date ofClerk/CDC Signature: ..5',;;lS-c,\ Dale Memo/Letter Sent for Signa 60 Day Reminder Letter Senl on 30th day: 90 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 45th day: See Attached: See Attached: See Atta ed: Request for Council Action & Staff Report Attached: Updated Prior Resolutions (Other Than Below): Updated CITY Personnel Folders (6413, 6429, 6433,10584,10585,12634): Updated CDC Personnel Folders (5557): Updated Traffic Folders (3985, 8234, 655, 92-389): Copies Distributed to: / / City Attorney Parks & Rec. Code Compliance Dev. Services Police Public Services Water Notes: Resolution # 'ZooH2.~ Absenl -e- 2epl- 1"2.4 Abstain -Gr ~ NullNoid After: - By: - Reso. Log Updated: Seal Impressed: ./ ./ Date Returned: _ Yes / No By Yes No --L.. By Yes No ,/ By Yes No ./ By Yes No -y- By EDA Finance MIS Others: BEFORE FILING. REVIEW FORM TO ENSURE ANY NOTATIONS MADE HERE ARE TRANSFERRED TO THE YEARLY RESOLUTION CHRONOLOGICAL LOG FOR FUTURE REFERENCE (Contract Term, etc.) Ready to File: fl'tr Date:,')" (;>'1 JC;)I Rev ised 0 1112/0 I . . ** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - NOT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT ** RESOLUTION AGENDA ITEM TRACKING FORM Meeting Date (Date Adopted): 6'"2 \~ \ Item # Vote: Ayes 1-' Nays k:1 Change to motion to amend original documents: ~ C) Resolution # Z(j() \- \"2- L\ Abslain.e- Absent-6 SEE -Z <:J;:wl<2 Reso. # On Attachments: ,r' Contract term: - Note on Resolution of Attachment stored separately: --= Direct Cily Clerk to (circle I): PUBLISH, POST, RECORD W/COUNTY By: NullNoid After: Date Sent to Mayor: S-Z3- C:>) Date of Mayor's Signalure: Date of Clerk/CDC Signature: Reso. Log Updated: v/ Seal Impressed: Dale Memo/Letter Sent for Signature: 60 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 30th day: 90 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 45th day: See Attached: See Attached: ..- Date Returned: Request for Council Action & Staff Report Attached: Updated Prior Resolutions (Other Than Below): Updated CITY Personnel Folders (6413, 6429, 6433,10584,10585,12634): Updated CDC Personnel Folders (5557): Updated Traffic Folders (3985, 8234, 655, 92-389): Yes ./ No By - Yes NOL- By Yes No ./ By Yes No ./ By N07 Yes B Copies Distributed to: ./ City Attorney Parks & Rec. Code Compliance Dev. Services ,./ EDA Finance MIS Police Public Services Waler Others: Notes: BEFORE FILING, REVIEW FORM TO ENSURE ANY NOTATIONS MADE HERE ARE TRANSFERRED TO THE YEARLY RESOLUTION CHRONOLOGICAL LOG FOR FUTURE REFERENCE (Contract Term. etc.) Ready to File: CYT\ Date: 5/.9.9 ~ Revised 0 III 2/0 I