Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout28- Planning & Building Services CITY OF SAN BERNA►.DINO - REQUEST FO., COUNCIL ACTION Subject: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO . 91-01 From: Al Boughey , Director INLAND CENTER MALL EXPANSION Dept: Planning & Building Services - Mayor and Common Council Meeting Date: April 9 , 1993 of April 19 , 1993 Synopsis of Previous Council action:The Mayor n Council received public input and ced Development Agreement No . 91-01 toNovember2 , 1992 for staffu to respond to the comments . 9 :_? 93 l i 11/02 92 -- The Mayor and Common Council , at the request of the applicant , continued Development Agreement No . 91-01 to December 7 , 1992 . 12/07/92 -- The Mayor and Common Council continued Development Agreement No . 91-01 to January 11 , 1993 . 01 / 11 /93 -- The Mayor and Common Council continued Development Agreement No . 91-01 to April 19 , 1993 . Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and the resolution be adopted . n� Signature (Note : There have been no changes to the Al Bou he previously distributed staff report dated 11 /30/92 . ) g y Contact person: Al n �8'' Phone: x5357 Supporting data attached, Staff Report Resolution Ward: 3 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: (Acct No.) (Acct Description) Finance: Council Notes: „_�„ Agenda Item No �� 0 o 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING 3 THE MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 (INLAND CENTER MALL 4 EXPANSION) . 5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 6 SECTION 1. Recitals 7 (a) Development Agreement No. 91-01 was considered by the 8 Planning Commission on September 8, 1992 after a noticed public 9 hearing, and the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval 10 has been considered by the Mayor and Common Council. 11 (b) An Initial Study was prepared on March 19, 1992 and 12 reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning 13 Commission who both determined that Development Agreement No. 91-01 14 would not have a significant effect on the environment and 15 therefore, recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be 16 adopted. 17 (c) The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration received a 30 18 day public review period from March 24 , 1992 to April 23 , 1992 and 19 all comments relative thereto have been reviewed by the Planning 20 Commission and the Mayor and Common Council in compliance with the 21 California Environmental Quality Act and local regulations. 22 (d) The proposed Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program was 23 reviewed by the Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council in 24 compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and local 25 regulations. 26 27 28 1 0 1 (e) The Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public 2 hearing and fully reviewed and considered proposed Development 3 Agreement No. 91-01 on October 19, 1992 . 4 (f) The adoption of Development Agreement No. 91-01 is deemed 5 in the interest of the orderly development of the City and is 6 consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the existing 7 General Plan. 8 SECTION 2 . Negative Declaration 9 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the 10 Mayor and Common Council that the proposed Development Agreement 11 will have no significant effect on the environment, and the 12 Mitigated Negative Declaration heretofore prepared by the 13 Environmental Review committee as to the effect of this proposed 14 Agreement is hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted. 15 SECTION 3 . Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program 16 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council that 17 the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is hereby ratified, 18 affirmed and adopted. 19 SECTION 4 . Findings 20 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council of the 21 City of San Bernardino that: 22 A. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the 23 goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. 24 B. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the 25 Development Code. 26 C. The proposed Development Agreement will promote the 27 welfare and public interest of the City. 28 2 O 1 SECTION 5. Development Agreement 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council that: 3 A. Development Agreement No. 91-01 will govern the 4 development of the Inland Center Mall as specifically described in 5 the Development Agreement labeled Attachment 1, a copy of which is 6 attached and incorporated herein by reference. 7 B. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute on 8 behalf of said City, Development Agreement No. 91-01. 9 C. The authorization to execute the above referenced 10 agreement is rescinded if the parties to the agreement fail to 11 execute it within sixty (60) days of the passage of this 12 resolution. 13 D. Development Agreement No. 91-01 shall be effective 14 immediately upon adoption and execution of this resolution. 15 SECTION 6. Notice of Determination 16 The Planning Division is hereby directed to file a Notice of 17 Determination with the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino 18 certifying the City's compliance with the California Environmental 19 Quality Act in preparing the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 20 SECTION 7 . Recordation 21 The developer shall record the Development Agreement in the 22 Office of the County Recorder no later than ten (10) days after it 23 is executed by the parties. 24 25 26 27 28 3 1 RESOLUTION. . . ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION 2 MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 (INLAND CENTER MALL EXPANSION) . 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly 4 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 5 Bernardino at a meeting therefore, held on the 6 day of 1992 , by the following vote, to 7 wit: 8 Council Members AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 9 ESTRADA 10 REILLY 11 HERNANDEZ 12 MAUDSLEY 13 MINOR 14 POPE-LUDLAM _ 15 MILLER 16 17 City Clerk 18 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day 19 of 1992 . 20 W. R. Holcomb, Mayor 21 City of San Bernardino 22 Approved as to 23 form and legal content: 24 JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney ' n 25 By* 26 27 28 4 I CITY OF SAN BER. kADINO - REQUEST O'COR COUNCIL ACTIO! From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: Development Agreement No. 91-01 , Inland Center Mall Expansion Dept: Planning & Building Services Mayor and Common Council Meeting Date: October 1 , 1992 October 19 , 1992 Synopsis of Previous Council action: None Recommended motion: That the hearing be closed and the resolution be adopted. ignature Al oughe Contact person: Al Boughey Phone: 389-5357 Supporting date attached: Staff Report, Development Ward: 3 Agreement, Resolution FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A AZT Source: (Acct. No.) : Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: lv— z- z CITY OF BAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Development Agreement No. 91-01, Inland Center Mall Mayor and Common Council meeting of October 19, 1992 REQUEST AND LOCATION The applicant/developer requests approval of a Development Agreement (DA 91-01) to govern the development of a phased expansion project at Inland Center Mall. The mall is located east of the I-215 Freeway, south of Inland Center Drive and west of "E" Street. MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. The Mayor and Common Council may approve Development Agreement No. 91-01. 2 . The Mayor and Common Council may continue Development Agreement No. 91-01 to a date certain and direct staff to prepare additional information. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the resolution which adopts the Negative Declaration, adopts the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program and approves Development Agreement No. 91-01. SPECIFIC PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND The applicant/developer proposes to add an additional 776,465 gross square feet consisting of 540, 000 square feet in up to three new department stores and 236,465 square feet in a second level to the mall. Up to four parking structures are included to accommodate required parking. Inland Center Mall was built in 1965 and consists of approximately 985, 883 square feet. It includes three department stores that are connected by a one level mall. The site consists of 62 .5 acres with 4400 parking spaces. The total gross square feet upon project completion will be 1, 762,348 with a total of 7420 parking spaces. The Inland Center Mall consists of 4 parcels. Parcel 1 contains Sears, Sears Auto Center and parking areas; Parcel 2 contains Broadway and parking areas; Parcel 3 contains the mall portion itself and parking areas; and Parcel 4 contains May Co. , the theater complex and parking areas. There is a reciprocal easement over all of the parcels. The applicant/developer owns Parcel 3 and intends to upgrade and expand the mall portion and to add two new 0 0 DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 2 major department stores. The applicant/developer also intends to use their best efforts to induce the other parcels to upgrade and remodel and to construct a third major department store on Parcel 2. The applicant is seeking a commitment from the City in terms of approval of the expansion project. This is required in order for them to solicit commitment from the prospective new department stores and in-line tenants. However, they are not to the point of having all of the specifics required to obtain approval of a Development Permit. Some of these specifics would change based on future tenant needs, especially the major department stores, and will be defined with each phase. Staff was unable to approve a project without having the specifics. Therefore, a Development Agreement was determined to be an appropriate tool to give the applicant the commitment they needed from the City, while giving the City the comfort level that the project will comply with development requirements. The Development Agreement incorporates, by reference, the requirements of the Development Code. The main issues are summarized in this report. ANALYSIS The mall is designated CR-1, Commercial Regional. This designation was established specifically to address the two malls in the City. General Plan Land Use Element goals, objectives and policies address Inland Center Mall (and Central City Mall) as principal region-serving retail centers and the need to encourage intensification and upgrading. The economic analysis for the General Plan projected the need for an additional 2+ million square feet of regional and subregional space by 2010. This project would provide almost 800, 000 square feet of regional retail space. The Economic Development Element goals, objectives and policies address the provision of regional retail space as necessary to help the City retain its role as a region-serving center. The General Plan establishes an F.A.R. of 1. 5 with a height of 4 stories or 52 feet for development in the CR-1. The ultimate project has an F.A.R. of . 65 with a height not exceeding 52 feet. The Development Code permits lot coverage of 75% and the ultimate project is approximately 65% lot coverage. hasin The Development Agreement is proposed for a 30 year term. The intent is that the mall will continue as legal, conforming structures for that period of time. The actual expansion is o DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 3 proposed as four phases, ranging from 1994 to 2000. Each project, by phase, will be processed through a Development Permit, consistent with established processing procedures. At that time, the specific Development Code requirements will be addressed. Each phase will include the necessary improvements such as parking, landscaping, etc. Other applications such as parcel maps or lot line adjustments may also be processed concurrently. Although the Development Agreement addresses the proposed timeframe for development, by phase, (approximately an 8 year buildout) , additional language has been included that commits the applicant to show substantial progress toward actual development within that timeframe. The Development Agreement provides for completion of Phase I within 10 years of approval of the agreement and pulling building permits for Phase II within 15 years of approval of the agreement. This should ensure that the actual development occurs in a (relatively) timely manner and that the environmental analysis remains valid. I-215 Improvement Project CalTrans is in the process of preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed widening of I-215 from the interchange with I-10 up to where I-215 splits from the Cross-Town Freeway. Several alternatives have been identified, but the analysis of impacts has not been completed. This presents an awkward situation for projects such as the Inland Center Mall expansion which are proposed to occur over several years. All of the alternatives will have some impact on the mall, but the extent is not known at this time. The Development Agreement contains language that commits the City to supporting an alternative that provides directs access to Inland Center Drive and/or from any collector distributor road. Staff concurs that the I-215 Improvement Project should not adversely impact access to and the ultimate functioning of the mall and supports the language in the agreement. An example of an alternative preferred by the applicant is also included. Staff recommends that a commitment to the applicant's preferred alternative not be made at this time. Parking The applicant will provide parking, by phase, in conjunction with proposed development. The proposed parking added to the existing parking, will exceed the Code requirement at buildout. The 0 0 DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 4 Development Agreement contains language that addresses the loss of parking due to the s fre not antic pated that the lfreeway widening will if necessary• remove parking to the extent that it falls below Code requirements. One of the mitigation measures requires the establishmen= ximately of a 100 park and ride f inathbuildout, this will not imp ct parking. 371 extra parking ng spaces Landscaoina provisions The Development Agreement incorporates o the requirements of The Development Code pertaining existing landscaping will be maintained as much as possible and that have to be removed to accommodateethe adevelopment will be trees ed relocated on-site as much as possible. The mall maintains landscaping along the eastern perimeter of the parking lot that is located on Flood Control District right-of-way. The Development Agreement provides for continued maintenance of the landscaping and partial credit for meeting the overall landscaping requirements. Freeway Corridor Overly Chapter 19 . 14 of the Development Code contains additional requirements for those properties that are adjacent to to the ensure ethyt The intent of the Freeway Corridor overlay a cen pleasing view to projects adjacent to the freeway P r addressed freeway travelers. The key requirements are signage later in this report) and landscaping. The Development Agreement addresses the provisistent with foot of a 25 landscaped setback along the freeway, the Development Code, and acknowledges that the location of the buffer could impact the mall perimeter road and/It parking,ing,proposed depending the ultimate freeway widening Project.royal of placing the buffer City will not unreasonably withhold app rivate property. on public property or a combination of public/p he Staff concurs with this proposal because wezwantt to c ensure th t the buffer is completed while not impacting p j feel that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the Development Code. Traffic and Circulation The Initial Study prepared for the project identified potential � o DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 5 impacts to traffic and circulation. several substantial mitigation measures were identified to reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. These mitigation measures are required at each phase of development and some continue after buildout. The Development Agreement contains language pertaining to a possible westerly extension of Central Avenue. While staff would prefer that all reference to Central Avenue be deleted from the agreement, the Development Agreement does not require commitment on the part of the City. The perimeter road around the mall is proposed to remain upon ultimate development which staff concurs with. The road provides access to all areas of the mall and parking lot. It may be impacted by the freeway widening, however, but the extent is not known at this time. As addressed in the I-215 Improvement Project section of this report, staff concurs that the City should support an alternative which has the least overall impacts. We feel that the perimeter road is an important consideration. Design Considerations - The Development Agreement incorporates the General Plan policies and Development Code requirements pertaining to design. The applicant has prepared a concept plan, included as an exhibit, which meets the intent of the Development Code. Specific design issues will be addressed through the Development Permit process for each phase. Signage The applicant proposes to process an amendment to the Development Code pertaining to signage in CR-1, Commercial Regional land use districts as addressed in Exhibit "H" of the Development Agreement. The Development Code does not differentiate between uses within the freeway corridor overlay, not does it differentiate between CR-1 and other commercial land use districts. Staff concurs that Inland Center Mall can be looked at differently from other freeway adjacent uses because of its region serving function and its size. Staff also concurs that sign opportunities for the CR-1 designation should be different from other commercial designations. The changes being considered have not been fully identified at this time, however, staff would support an amendment to Code requirements, within reason. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUS Tom Dodson and Associates prepared Ow Initial Study for this DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 6 project. The Environmental Review Committee recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration at their meeting of March 19, 1992. The Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration were available for public review from March 24 , 1992 through April 23 , 1992 . The key areas of concern were traffic and circulation (previously addressed in this report) and air quality. Potential impacts to air quality were identified in the Initial Study due to the overall poor air quality in the area. The Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program contains substantial measures that address construction related impacts and project impacts. The proposed Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review since it met CEQA criteria for potential regional significance. Comments were received from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the San Bernardino County Transportation/Flood Control Department pertaining to the requirement for an NPDES permit. The Flood Control District also commented on drainage. Comments were also received from Caltrans, District 8, questioning the adequacy of the traffic study and its conclusions. The South Coast Air Quality Management District submitted comments questioning the air quality impact analysis. The comments received and the responses are included as Attachment "E" to this report. Additional analysis and/or mitigation measures were included where deemed appropriate. Copies of the responses were distributed to the commenting agencies and no further comments have been received. A Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program was prepared and is addressed in the text of the Development Agreement and is included as Exhibit "G" in the agreement. CITY REVIEW The Development Agreement has been revised throughout the review process to include recommendation of the various departments. The Development Review Committee recommended approval. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments were received other than those addressed in the CEQA Status section of this report. DA 91-01 MCC 10-19-92 Page 7 CONCLUSION The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan in that it provides regional shopping opportunities and will help the City to maintain its lead role in the Inland Empire. It is also consistent with the density/intensity policies and design policies in the General Plan. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the standards and design guidelines in the Development Code. Compliance with the mitigation measures will ensure that all potential adverse impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8, 1992, took public input, approved the project, in concept, and continued to enable the applicant to revise the Development Agreement to incorporate staff's recommendations. On September 22 , 1992 the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program and approval of the Development Agreement. Attachments: A - Owner/Applicant List B - Resolution C - Development Agreement D - Initial Study E - Environmental Comments and Responses Prepared by: Valerie C. Ross Acting Principal Planner for: Al Boughey, AICP Director Note: The applicant will submit 5 originals of the Development Agreement to the City Attorney's Office, for signature, after Council action. The originals will have the typographical errors corrected. One original will be filed with the City Clerk after all signatures have been obtained. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 APPLICANT: Mano Management Company, Inc. c/o General Growth Development, Inc. 15821 Ventura Blvd. , Suite 525 Encino, CA 91436 OWNERS: Mano Management Company, Inc. 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 Sears, Roebuck and Company 900 South Fremont Avenue Alhambra, CA 91803 Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc. 550 South Flower Street Los Angeles, CA 90071 May Stores shopping Centers, Inc. 611 Olive Street, Suite 1701 St. Louis, MO 63101 ATTACHMENT "A" c o RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: n D Mark A. Ostoich, Esq. ILII�1JLlJl GRESHAM, VARNER, SAVAGE, SEP 2 41992 NOLAN & TILDEN 600 N. Arrowhead Avenue CITY Suite 300 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING& San Bernardino, CA 92401 BUILDING SERVICES DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND MANO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC. EFFECTIVE: Attachment "C" 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS RECITALS..........................................................................................1 OPERATIVE PROVISIONS .....................................................................2 1. Term........ ...........................:....................................................2 2. Development and Operation .............................................................3 3. Additional Permits and Approvals ......................................................6 4. Public Improvements......................................................................7 5. Third Party Permits and Approvals and Utilities .....................................8 6. Other Matters ..............................................................................8 7. Developer Failure to Perform ......................................................... 11 8. City Failure to Perform................................................................. 11 9. Permitted Delays ........................................................................ 11 10. Developer Compliance and Release................................................... 11 11. Superseding State or Federal Law .................................................... 12 12. Condemnatijn............................................................................ 12 13. Successors, Assigns and Beneficiaries................................................ 12 14. Equitable Servitudes .................................................................... 12 15. Negation of Agency, Joint Venture or Part nership................................. 12 16. Notices and Other Communications .................................................. 13 17. Estoppel Certificates .................................................................... 13 18. Applicable Law.......................................................................... 13 19. Venue ..................................................................................... 13 20. Attorneys' Fees.......................................................................... 13 21. Paragraph Headings..................................................................... 13 22. Construction.............................................................................. 14 23. Survival................................................................................... 14 24. Calendar Periods......................................................................... 14 o 25. Severability............................................................................... 14 26. Further Actions .......................................................................... 14 27. Covenant of Good Fait h................................................................ 14 28. Count erparts.............................................................................. 15 29. Incorporation of Recitals ............................................................... 15 30. Incorporation of Exhibits............................................................... 15 31. Amendment............................................................................... 15 32. Municipal Code.......................................................................... 15 33. Recordation............................................................................... 15 TABLE OF EXHIBIT Exhibit "A" Depiction of Parcels Exhibit "B" Description of Parcels Exhibit "C" Site Plan Exhibit "D" Phasing Plan Exhibit "E" Permitted Uses Exhibit "F" Filing Requirements Exhibit "G" Mitigation Monitoring Program Exhibit "H" Existing and Proposed Signage and Landscaping Exhibit "I" Public Improvements Exhibit "J-1 CalTrans Design Alternative No. 3 Exhibit "J-2 Developer's Concept of Impact of 1-215 Freeway Design Alternative Exhibit "K" Certificate of Completion C Q DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into effective 19_, between the City of San Bernardino, a municipal corporation, ("City") and Mano Management Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Developer"). RECITALS A. The City is authorized by its Municipal Code ("Municipal Code") to enter into binding development agreements for the Development of improved real property in its municipal limits, with persons who have legal or equitable interests in that real property. B. The Developer owns a parcel of real property in the municipal limits of the City and in the redevelopment project area of the Inland Valley Development Agency ("IVDA"), which is depicted in Exhibit "A" ("Mall Parcel No. 3") and described in Exhibit "B". Mall Parcel No. 3 is improved with a retail shopping mall facility and with parking and other facilities which are incidental to the retail shopping mall facility. C. Three other parcels of real property (individually, "Existing Anchor Parcel" and collectively, "Existing Anchor Parcels") are contiguous to Mall Parcel No. 3 and, together with Mall Parcel No. 3, function as an integrated regional shopping mall ("Inland Center Mall"). The Existing Anchor Parcels are also located in the municipal limits of the City and in the redevelopment project area of the IVDA and are also depicted in Exhibit "A" and described in Exhibit "B". The Existing Anchor Parcels are improved with major department store facilities and parking and other facilities which are incidental to those major department store facilities. The Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels have rights, obligations and equitable interests in the parcels which are owned by the others, by virtue of a reciprocal easement agreement ("Reciprocal Easement Agreement") which provides reciprocal access rights and obligations, parking rights and obligations, utility service rights and obligations and maintenance rights and obligations, which was recorded in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, on April 23, 1966, in Book 6685 at Page 414, and which has been amended from time to time. Although the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels are not signatories to this Agreement, the parties intend that the Existing Anchor Parcels and their successors and assigns be express third party beneficiaries of this Agreement. D. The Developer intends to upgrade, expand and remodel (as used in this Agreement, "Develop", "Developed" and Development" will be deemed to refer to the planned upgrading, expansion and remodeling) Mall Parcel No. 3 and to use reasonable efforts to induce the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels to upgrade, expand and remodel the Existing Anchor Parcels. The Developer also intends to use reasonable efforts to create new legal parcels in Mall Parcel No. 3, if financially feasible, and to induce the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels to create new legal parcels in the Existing Anchor Parcels, at the locations depicted as "Proposed Major No. 1", Proposed Major No. 2" and "Proposed Major No. 3" in the site plan ("Site Plan") which is attached as Exhibit "C" (individually, "New Anchor Parcel" and collectively, "New Anchor Parcels"), for the purpose of facilitating the location of up to three additional major department stores at the Inland Center Mall (individually, New Major Department Store" and collectively, "New Major Department Stores"). The Developer also intends to use reasonable efforts to Develop a second level in the existing retail shopping mall facility and to Develop up to four multi-level parking structures at the Inland Center Mall. The Developer also intends that the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall will occur in several phases, according to the phasing plan ("Phasing Plan") which is attached as Exhibit "D". E. The Developer has applied to the City for approval and enactment of this Agreement as the primary governing instrument for the proposed Development and Operation (as defined in paragraph I.) of the Inland Center Mall and the City's Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") and the City's City Council ("City Council") have conducted public hearings with respect to this Agreement and have found that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the City's General Plan ("General Plan") including, without limitation, the provisions of the General Plan which address permitted uses, design and development guidelines, streetscapes, public improvements, transportation, circulation and the expansion, intensification and upgrading of the Inland Center Mall. The Planning Commission and the City Council have also found that the provisions of this Agreement implement the goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. On , 19 the City Council adopted Resolution No. which enacted this Agreement ("Enacting Resolution") and the Enacting Resolution became effective on the date of its adoption ("Effective Date"). F. By adopting the Enacting Resolution, the City Council has elected to exercise certain governmental powers at the present time rather than deferring those actions until an undetermined future date and has done so intending to bind the City and future City Councils and intending to limit the City's future exercise of certain governmental powers. This Agreement has undergone extensive review by the City, the Planning Commission and the City Council and has been found to be fair, just and reasonable and in the best interests of the citizens of the City and the public health, safety and welfare. G. By adopting the Enacting Resolution, the City Council approves the Developer's proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall, on a basis which recognizes the uniqueness of the Inland Center Mall and which provides maximum flexibility to the Developer with respect to Development of the Inland Center Mall. The City Council intends this Agreement to be the primary governing instrument for the proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall, in lieu of any other permit or approval, except for those permits and approvals which are specifically identified in this Agreement. IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and conditions in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: OPERATIVE PROVISIONS 1. Term. Unless earlier terminated as provided in this Agreement, this Agreement will commence on the Effective Date and will continue until the earlier of (a) 30 years from the Effective Date or (b) until the improvements which exist at the Inland Center Mall as of the Effective Date, or which are subsequently Developed as provided in this Agreement, no longer exist. After completion of the Development of the Inland Center Mall, the effect of this Agreement will be to govern the Operation of the Inland Center Mall, to the extent of ensuring, for land use purposes, (A) that the Inland Center Mall continues as a group of legal, conforming structures, (B) the Developer's ability to upgrade, expand and remodel the Inland Center Mall in accordance with this Agreement, and (C) the Developer's ability to repair or rebuild the Inland Center Mall as one or more legal conforming structures, in accordance with this Agreement, if the Inland Center Mall is damaged or destroyed. In this Agreement, any capitalized reference to "Operate" or "Operation" will mean the concepts which are described in the immediately preceding sentence. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, no total or partial termination of this Agreement will act to cancel, limit or alter, in any way, any of the development entitlements which the Developer has previously obtained or may in the future obtain with respect to the Inland Center Mall. © O 2. Development and Operation. (a) The proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mail will be governed by this Agreement. Although this Agreement refers to certain provisions of the Municipal Code for details which are not provided in this Agreement, this Agreement will govern the proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall and, to the extent that it is inconsistent with any provision in the Municipal Code, this Agreement will supersede and control. (b) The Developer will have the vested right to Develop and Operate Mall Parcel No. 3 and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels will have the vested right to Develop and Operate their respective Existing Anchor Parcels and New Anchor Parcels, in accordance with this Agreement, without regard to future ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and policies of the City which conflict with any of the terms of this Agreement. (c) The proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall will be according to the Site Plan and will include (i) up to three New Major Department Stores which will add, in the aggregate, up to 540,000 square feet of new retail area, based on gross building area, (ii) a second level in the existing retail shopping mall which will add up to 236,465 square feet of new retail area, based on gross building area, (iii) up to four multi-level parking structures, (iv) on completion of all phases of the proposed Development, landscaped areas which, in the aggregate, will constitute a minimum of 15% of the gross surface area of the parking facilities at the Inland Center Mall (in accordance with Section 19.24.060.6 of the Municipal Code) and (v) design elements which are architecturally consistent with the applicable standards in Section 19.06.060 of the Municipal Code. (d) Subject only to compliance with the procedures in Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code, the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels, as the case may be, may make modifications in the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall which are determined by the City's Director Planning and Building Services ("Director") to be non-material including, without limitation, the following modifications: (i) increase or decrease the square footage of each New Major Department Store, provided that the 540,000 square foot aggregate in subparagraph 2.(c) is not exceeded, (ii) decrease the aggregate square footage of the New Major Department Stores and the second level in the existing retail shopping mall and (iii) increase the parking capacity of the additional four multi-level parking structures. (e) To the extent not inconsistent with this Agreement, the proposed Development of Mall Parcel No. 3, the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels including, without limitation, the density, intensity and type of use, the maximum height and size of buildings, building setback requirements, parking requirements, landscaping requirements, loading zone requirements and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, will be governed by the following: (i) The Commercial Regional Retail (CRA) land use designation of the General Plan, as it exists on the Effective Date. (ii) The permitted uses in Exhibit "E". Municipal Code. (iii) The applicable signage standards in Chapter 19.22 of the 7 C 0 (iv) The applicable on-site landscape standards in Section 19.24.060.6 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code. (v) Other standards in Title 19 of the Municipal Code, which are applicable to the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall. (vi) Other standards in the Municipal Code which are applicable to the permits and approvals described in paragraph 3. (f) As provided in the Phasing Plan, the Developer intends that the Development of the Inland Center Mall will be phased as follows: Phase Improvements Expected Completion Date I Construct Proposed Major No. 2 with 1994-1998 approximately 140,000 square feet of gross building area, and adjacent parking structure accommodating approxi-mately 725 autos. lI Construct a portion of the second level retail 1994-1998 shopping mall improvements with approxi- mately 154,415 square feet of gross building area, and adjacent parking structure accommo- dating approximately 650 autos. III Construct Proposed Major No. 1, with 1994-1998 approximately 160,000 square feet of gross Luilding area, and additional second level retail shopping mall improvements with approxi- mately 61,050 square feet of gross building area, and adjacent parking structure accommo- dating approximately 845 autos. IV Construct Proposed Major No. 3 with 1998-2000 approximately 240,000 square feet of gross building area, and additional second level retail shopping mall improvements with approxi- mately 21,000 square feet of gross building area, and adjacent parking structures accommo- dating approximately 800 autos. The Developer will use reasonable efforts to Develop Mall Parcel No. 3 and to induce the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels to Develop the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels, according to the foregoing schedule. Notwithstanding the provisions of the immediately preceding sentence and without increasing the level of the Developer's commitment with respect to the Development of Phase III and Phase IV, if by the 10th anniversary of the Effective Date, the Developer fails to obtain a certificate of occupancy from the City (or the equivalent approval by the City, if the City no longer issues certificates of occupancy at that time) with respect to the construction of the improvements in Phase I, or if by the 15th anniversary of the Effective Date, the Developer fails to obtain a building permit with respect to the improvements in Phase II, then at the election of the City, the City may require the Developer to agree to an amendment of this Agreement to provide that, during the remainder of the term of this Agreement, the 0 Development of the Inland Center Mall will be governed by the land use provisions of the City's Development Code (Title 19 of the Municipal Code), as they exist at the time of actual Development. (f) Inasmuch as the proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall are being approved by enactment of this Agreement, the parties acknowledge and agree that all of tlie studies, reports and other bases for the enactment of this Agreement including, without limitation, the traffic impact analyses, geotechnical studies, liquefaction studies, title reports, preliminary environmental description forms, initial studies, owner authorizations and other matters which are described in Exhibit "F" ("Filing Requirements"), the environmental findings and mitigation measures (individually "Mitigation Measure" and collectively "Mitigation Measures") which are imposed in connection with the enactment of this Agreement and the mitigation monitoring program which is described in Exhibit "G" ("Mitigation Monitoring Program"), are deemed to satisfy the requirements of the City with respect to the additional permits and approvals which are described in paragraph 3., provided that the scope of the proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall does not change in a manner which will materially exceed the scope of any of the Filing Requirements, the Mitigation Measures or the Mitigation Monitoring Program and provided further that State law does not prohibit the same. (h) The parties acknowledge that the landscaping and signage at the Inland Center Mall on the Effective Date, may not be consistent with the applicable standards in Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code, and that the landscaping and signage which is proposed in connection with the Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall may also not be fully consistent with those standards. As soon as is reasonably possible after the Effective Date, the Developer will prepare all documentation required by the City to enact amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code, and submit the same to the City. On submission, the City will accept that documentation for filing, and subject to the completion of such investigations, public hearings, findings and other procedures as are required by State law and the Municipal Code, the City will use its best efforts to enact the proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code. The proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code will ensure that the existing landscaping and signage at the Inland Center Mall and the landscaping and signage which is Developed in accordance with this Agreement, will be legal and conforming, based solely on their conformance with this Agreement and the applicable plans and specifications which are approved by the City and that landscaping and signage will, for all purposes, continue to be governed by the standards in this Agreement including, without Limitation, standards with respect to the subsequent alteration or modification of that landscaping or signage or any rebuilding of that landscaping or signage if it is totally or partially destroyed. The general elements, characteristics and requirements of the proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code are described in Exhibit "H". If, after using its best efforts, the City does not enact the proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code, then the parties will cooperate with one another in good faith in taking such steps as may be necessary to carry out the intent of this Agreement, notwithstanding that the City has not enacted the proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code. (i) From and after the Effective Date, the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels will have the right to further upgrade, expand and remodel the improvements on Mall Parcel No. 3 and the Existing Anchor Parcels and New Anchor Parcels, as the case may be, provided that the subsequent upgrading, expansion and remodeling are in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. In o 0 addition, if any of the improvements at the Inland Center Mall are subsequently totally or partially destroyed, then the Developer or the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels, as the case may be, will have the right to rebuild those improvements in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. 3. Additional Permits and Approvals. The only additional City permits and approvals which will be required for the Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall, will be as follows: (a) When the architectural plans, floor plans, internal building and parking structure circulation and construction design details, landscaping and signage plans ("Final Design Details") for each improvement at the Inland Center Mall or each phase of the Development become known, then those Final Design Details will be subject to the issuance by the City of Development Permits, as provided in Chapter 19.44 of the Municipal Code, as modified by this Agreement. The scope of the City's review and approval of each Development Permit will be limited to the Final Design Details in the applicable phase of the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall which are the subject of that Development Permit and the City will not consider or condition its approval of the applicable Final Design Details in such a manner as to impact any other phase of the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall. (b) The Final Design Details for each improvement at the Inland Center Mall will be subject to the issuance by the City of construction permits. (c) Any subdivision or lot line adjustment and any parcel map which may be necessary to change the size or configuration of Mall Parcel No. 3 or any Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel, will be subject to approval by the City. (d) The ocldpancy" of"unprovements at the Inland Center Mall will be subject to the issuance by the City of certificates of occupancy. (e) The operation of businesses at the Inland Center Mall will be subject to the issuance by the City of business registration certificates. (f) The matters in subparagraph 6.(a) and subparagraph 6.(c) will be subject to the issuance by the City of Development Permits, as provided in subparagraph 3.(a), and to the issuance by the City of construction permits, as provided in subparagraph 3.(b). (g) On the request from time to time of the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel, the City will accept applications for and process on a priority basis, in accordance with this Agreement, any Development Permit, construction permit, subdivision or lot line adjustment, parcel map, certificate of occupancy or business registration certificate which is described in this Agreement, and will make all required inspections, on a priority basis. Without limiting the effect of the foregoing, the parties acknowledge and agree that the Developer and any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel will have the right to cause any department of the City to hire additional dedicated personnel as may be necessary to expedite the processing and inspection as provided in this subparagraph 3.(g); provided, however that financial arrangements are made with each such department which are mutually agreeable to that department and the Developer, to defray the cost of the additional dedicated personnel. Any additional dedicated personnel will be assigned exclusively to Inland Center Mall matters. Further, without limiting the effect of the foregoing, except with regard to conditions of approval which are imposed by the City's Development Review Committee or the City's Environmental Review Committee and unless waived in any given case by the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel, as the case may be, the City will notify the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels, as the case may be, in writing, of any proposed conditions of the City's issuance or approval of any Development Permit, construction permit, subdivision or lot line adjustment, parcel map, certificate of occupancy or business registration certificate, at least 10 days before the date on which the City otherwise intexds to take action on the matter. The parties acknowledge that the City's Development Review Committee and the City's Environmental Review Committee frequently do not issue their proposed conditions of approval until the applicable Development Review Committee meeting or the applicable Environmental Review Committee meeting and, therefore, the City cannot commit to make those conditions of approval available before the applicable meeting. However, the City will use its best efforts to obtain any applicable Development Review Committee conditions of approval or Environmental Review Committee conditions of approval, as soon as is reasonably possible before the applicable Development Review Committee meeting or the Environmental Review Committee meeting. (h) The parties acknowledge that the approval of subdivisions, lot line adjustments and parcel maps and the issuance of Development Permits, construction permits, certificates of occupancy and business registration certificates as contemplated by this Agreement may result in the imposition by the City of conditions of approval and standard requirements. If any of the above-mentioned conditions of approval or standard requirements conflict with or are inconsistent with any provision of this Agreement, then the applicable provision of this Agreement will supersede and control. Without limiting the effect of the foregoing, although the Inland Center Mall consists of several parcels of real property and has multiple owners, the effect of this Agreement and the Reciprocal Easement Agreement which is referred to in Recital "C", is to interlock those parcels together as one property, and all of the legal parcels which make up the Inland Center Mall are deemed to be the same property for purposes of interpreting the Uniform Building Code. (i) Subject to the provisions of subparagraph 2.(d), with respect to minor modifications under Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code, all Development Permits, construction permits, subdivisions and lot line adjustments, parcel maps, certificates of occupancy and business registration certificates will be issued or approved by the City, in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. 0) To the extent not inconsistent with this Agreement, the review of subdivisions, lot line adjustments and parcel maps and the issuance of Development Permits, construction permits, certificates of occupancy and business registration certificates, will require the exercise of discretion by the City and that those aspects of the proposed Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall will be subject to the City's reasonable review as provided in its ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations; provided, however that the City exercises its discretion consistent with the provisions and objectives of this Agreement. 4. Public Improvements. Subject to the Development of Mall Parcel No. 3 and the Existing Anchor Parcels, as provided in this Agreement, the Developer will construct or cause the improvements which are described in Exhibit "I" to be constructed, in connection with the proposed Development of Mall Parcel No. 3 and the Existing Anchor Parcels (individually Public Improvement" and collectively "Public Improvements"). All of the Public Improvements will be constructed to the standards of the public agency or public agencies which have jurisdiction and the determination of whether a specific Public Improvement meets those standards will be within the discretion of the applicable public agency or public agencies. The parties agree that construction of the Public Improvements is deemed to satisfy all of the requirements of the City for Public Improvements in connection with the Development or Operation of the Inland Center Mall as provided in this Agreement, and that neither the Developer nor any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel will be required to construct any additional public improvements in connection with the Development or Operation of the Inland Center Mall as provided in this Agreement, unless otherwise required by State law. The parties also agree that the benefits of the construction of the Public Improvements will be deemed to satisfy the objectives and policies in Section 6.1.11 through Section 6.1.14 of the General Plan. 5. Third Party Permits and Approvals and Utilities. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement does not bind third party government and non-government agencies which are not under the City's control. The City will use its best efforts to assist the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels in obtaining all permits and approvals of third party government and non-government agencies, which are necessary for the Development or Operation of the Inland Center Mall, including, without limitation, permits and approvals which are required for the installation of driveways and utility connections and services such as electrical, gas, water, sewer, storm drain, telephone and cable television and other permits and approvals which may be issued by third party government agencies such as the California Department of Transportation ("CalTrans") and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. In addition, at the request of the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel, the City will use its best efforts to assist that person in negotiating with third party government agencies and non- government agencies with respect to any processing fees or charges and any development impact fees or development linkage fees which are levied by those third party government agencies and non-government agencies. In addition, the parties acknowledge that the Developer or the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels may be obligated to make payments to third party utility providers to defray the cost of utility extensions to the Inland Center Mall and agree that, at the request of the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel, the City will process all proceedings with those third party utility providers that may be necessary to implement those utility extensions. 6. Other Matters. (a) The parties acknowledge that CalTrans presently plans to expand the Interstate 215 Freeway ("I-215 Freeway") in the vicinity of the Inland Center Mall and that, in so doing, may take a portion of Mall Parcel No. 3 and/or portions of the Existing Anchor Parcels and/or the New Anchor Parcels. In order to preserve the maximum number of parking spaces at the Inland Center Mall and to preserve the existing 1-215 Freeway off-ramp at Inland Center Drive, the City will use its best efforts to induce CalTrans to design the expansion of the portion of the I-215 Freeway which is adjacent to the Inland Center Mall, in a manner which retains direct north and south access between the 1-215 Freeway and Inland Center Drive and which will also provide for "right in" and "right out" access between the Inland Center Mall and any collector-distributor road which is developed as part of the I-215 Freeway expansion. An example of a design alternative which is acceptable to the Developer is Design Alternative No. 3 as modified, which design alternative is depicted in Exhibit "J-1". If CalTrans takes a portion of Mall Parcel No. 3 or any of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels and that taking results in a reduction in parking spaces at the Inland Center Mall, then the City will not require the replacement of those lost parking spaces provided that the total number of parking spaces lost does not result in a reduction in the total number of parking spaces, provided at the Inland Center Mall, below (i) the minimum number of parking spaces which are required for the Inland Center Mall by the Municipal Code as it exists on the Effective Date or (ii) the minimum number of parking spaces at the Inland Center Mall which are required by the Municipal Code as it may exist in the future, whichever is less. In addition, if CalTrans takes a portion of Mall Parcel No. 3 or any of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels, at the request of the Developer or any other owner of an 0 affected Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel, the City will process, in accordance with the Municipal Code subject to the provisions of subparagraph 2.(d) with respect to minor modifications under Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code, such Development Permits and construction permits as may be necessary to replace the lost facilities. (b) - The parties acknowledge that, in connection with the expansion of the I- 215 Freeway, CalTrans may relinquish or otherwise dispose of certain land which is contiguous to the Inland Center Mall, which is depicted as "2.6 acres" in Exhibit "I-2" and which is presently part of the CalTrans right-of-way ("CalTrans Right-of-Way"). Irrespective of whether CalTrans takes any portion of Mall Parcel No. 3 or any of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels, the City will use its best efforts to cause CalTrans to relinquish or otherwise dispose of the CalTrans Right-of-Way by a conveyance to the Developer, at no cost or otherwise at the lowest possible cost, and the Developer will pay or cause to be paid the cost of any such relinquishment or disposition, if there is a cost associated with the same. (c) The parties acknowledge that Central Avenue may, in the future, be extended from its west terminus across property owned by others and adjacent to the Inland Center Mall, to an ultimate intersection with the I-215 Freeway. If any extension of Central Avenue results in a loss of facilities at the Inland Center Mall including, without limitation, parking facilities, then at the request of the Developer or any owner of an affected Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel, the City will process, in accordance with the Municipal Code subject to the provisions of subparagraph 2.(d) with respect to minor modifications under Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code, such Development Permits and construction permits as may be necessary to replace the lost facilities. Nothing in this subparagraph 6.(c) will be deemed to obligate the City to extend or modify Central Avenue in any respect. (d) The parties acknowledge that streetscape requirements which may be applicable to streets adjacent to or adjoining the Inland Center Mall, will be implemented as part of a capital improvement project, by the City or the IVDA. Participation in any such improvements, by the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel will not be a condition of this Agreement or of any future permit or approval for uses or rights with respect to the Inland Center Mall, but will instead be subject to the consent of the Developer or the applicable owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel. (e) The City will use its best efforts to assist the Developer and the owners of any Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel in ensuring that they assume no responsibility including, without limitation, financial responsibility, for the construction of any improvements which are required by the expansion of the 1-215 Freeway or by the extension of Central Avenue. (f) Notwithstanding any subsequent review by the City of any aspect of Development of the Inland Center Mall, to the extent not prohibited by applicable State law, no aspect of Development of the Inland Center Mall will be subject to the requirements of the State mandated congestion management program including, without limitation, the requirement to prepare a traffic impact analysis. (g) The parties acknowledge that, pursuant to an agreement with the San Bernardino County Flood Control District ("Flood Control District"), the Developer maintains landscape areas which are owned by the Flood Control District, which are contiguous to the Inland Center Mall and which are depicted in the Site Plan ("Flood Control Landscape Areas"). The parties agree that the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels will receive credit for the Flood Control Landscape Areas in n meeting up to 1/3 of the 15% landscape coverage requirement which is referred to in subparagraph 2.(c). (h) The parties acknowledge and agree that in calculating the maximum height of buildings, the calculation will be measured from grade at the main entrance of the building and will not include parapets or roof structures which house mechanical systems. (i) The parties acknowledge that, when the Development of the Inland Center Mall has been completed, Chapter 19.24 of the Municipal Code will require a total of 7,049 parking spaces (I parking space per 250 gross square feet of building). Based on the Developer's estimates, at the completion of the Development of the Inland Center Mall, a total of 7,420 parking spaces (4,400 existing parking spaces plus 3,020 new parking spaces) will be provided, resulting in 371 parking spaces beyond the requirements of Chapter 19.24 of the Municipal Code. The parties further acknowledge that the Inland Center Mall, as it now exists, includes approximately 985,883 gross square feet of buildings and 4,400 parking spaces. The parties further acknowledge that, based on Chapter 19.24 of the Municipal Code, only 3,943 parking spaces are required and, therefore, as of the Effective Date, 457 extra parking spaces are being provided. The parties further acknowledge that, based on the Developer's estimates, approximately 776,465 gross square feet of buildings and an additional 3,020 parking spaces will be provided in connection with the Development of the Inland Center Mall. The parties further acknowledge that, if the additional parking spaces are evaluated independently of the existing parking spaces, on completion of the Development of the Inland Center Mall, Chapter 19.24 of the Municipal Code would require 86 additional parking spaces. The parties further acknowledge, however, that the additional parking spaces which the Developer intends to add with each phase of the Development (as provided in subparagraph 2.(f) of the body of this Agreement), when evaluated in conjunction with the parking spaces which exist at the Inland Center Mall as of the Effective Date, exceeds the requirements of Chapter 19.24 of the Municipal Code, with respect to each phase of the Development. The parties therefore acknowledge and agree that the proposed number of parking spaces at the Inland Center Mall, both individually (by phase) and cumulatively, meets the requirements of Chapter 19.24 of the Municipal Code. The Developer will maintain the existing 4,400 parking spaces throughout each phase of the Development of the Inland Center Mall and will provide additional parking spaces, as provided in subparagraph 2.(f). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties agree that the 4,400 parking spaces which exist at the Inland Center Mall on the Effective Date, may be rearranged to accommodate the needs of any phase of the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall. The Developer may reduce the total parking, by phase, in Phase 1, Phase II and Phase III, by 10%, provided that such parking is provided in the next succeeding phase and provided further that at least 7,420 total parking spaces are provided at the completion of the Development of the Inland Center Mall (a reduction of 10% will not decrease the parking to below standard [I parking space per 250 gross square feet of building] for Phase I and Phase II. A reduction in Phase III will result in a temporary shortage of 47 spaces, but this shortage will be made up by the parking which the Developer intends to provide in Phase III and Phase IV). The parties acknowledge that Mitigation Measure No. 18 requires that the Developer provide 100 parking spaces, as a park and ride facility, in connection with Phase I O of the Development of the Inland Center Mall. The parties agree that these 100 spaces will be included in the total parking space count for Phase I and will not be considered an addition to the total parking space count for Phase I. 7. Developer Failure to Perform. If the Developer fails to comply in good faith with the provisions'of this Agreement, then the City will have the rights and remedies which are provided in Section 19.40.070 of the Municipal Code. In order to monitor the Developer's performance under this Agreement, beginning on the first anniversary of the Effective Date and continuing on each anniversary thereafter, the City will review the Developer's performance under this Agreement, as provided in Section 19.40.070 of the Municipal Code. The parties acknowledge that the Developer has agreed to use reasonable efforts to Develop the Inland Center Mall according to this Agreement; but that numerous factors including, without limitation, financial feasibility, could prevent the proposed Development from occurring. If after making reasonable efforts to cause the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall according to this Agreement, the Developer and/or the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels fail to do so, then the City's ultimate remedy will be to terminate this Agreement, in which event the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels will lose the benefits of this Agreement. In addition, if this Agreement is terminated, then the parties will take such steps and execute and acknowledge such documents as may be necessary to evidence the termination of this Agreement. 8. City Failure to Perform. If the City fails to perform any of its obligations as provided in this Agreement and fails to cure its nonperformance within 10 days after notice of nonperformance is given by the Developer or by the owner of any Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel, then the City will be in default. In that event, the parties agree that any remedy at law that the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel, as the case may be, may have, would be inadequate and that the Developer or the owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel, as the case may be, will pursue only the available equitable remedies including, without limitation, the remedies of temporary and permanent injunction and specific performance and excluding specifically any compensation in damages. In any such action, the Developer or the owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel, as the case may be, will not be required to prove the inadequacy of remedies at law, as a condition of pursuing its equitable remedies. 9. Permitted Delay. Without limiting the effect of paragraph 11., the Developer and any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or New Anchor Parcel will be excused from performing any obligation in this Agreement during any period of delay which is caused by matters which are not within the Developer's reasonable control including, without limitation, casualty; acts of God; civil commotion; war; insurrection; riots; strikes; walkouts; picketing or other labor disputes; except that neither the Developer nor its contractors or subcontractors will be required to settle any labor dispute on terms other than those which are satisfactory to them in their sole discretion; market factors; unavoidable shortages of materials or supplies; damages to work in progress by reason of fire, flood, earthquake or other casualty; litigation which prohibits or delays any aspect of the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall; initiatives or referenda; moratoria; acts or the failure to act of the City or any other government agency (except that acts or the failure to act of the City will not excuse performance by the City); unanticipated restrictions which are imposed or mandated by government or non-govemment agencies or enactment of conflicting City, County, State or Federal laws, regulations or judicial decisions. 10. Developer Compliance and Release At such time as the Developer advises the City that any phase of the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall has been completed, the Director will issue a certificate of completion ("Certificate of Completion") with respect to that phase of the Inland Center Mall and the Developer may, at its cost, record that Certificate of Completion in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California. The purpose and effect of the Certificate of Completion will be to evidence that the Developer and/or the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels have completed the applicable phase of the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall. Each Certificate of Completion will be substantially in the form of Exhibit "K". 11. Superseding State or Federal Law. If any state or federal law or regulation which is enacted or adopted after the Effective Date or any other action of any governmental entity which is not under the City's control, prevents or precludes compliance with any provision of this Agreement, then that provision of this Agreement will be modified or suspended only to the extent and for the time necessary to achieve compliance with that law, regulation or other governmental action and the remaining provisions of this Agreement will continue in full force and effect and the parties will negotiate in good faith for such amendments to this Agreement as may be necessary to achieve its intent, notwithstanding the existence of such state or federal law or regulation or other governmental action. On the repeal of any such law, regulation or other governmental action or on the occurrence of any other circumstance which removes the effect of the same on this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement will be automatically restored to their full original effect and any amendment to this Agreement which the parties have entered into as a result of any such law, regulation or other governmental action, will terminate. 12. Condemnation. The City will not exercise its right to acquire by condemnation, fee ownership of any part of the Inland Center Mall the loss of which would affect the Development or operation of the Inland Center Mall in accordance with this Agreement. In addition, the City will not exercise its right to acquire by condemnation, any easement or other right which would impact the Development or operation of the Inland Center Mall in accordance with th,-s Agreement. 13. Successors. Assiens and Beneficiaries. All of the provisions of this Agreement will inure to the benefit of and be binding on the respective successors and assigns of the parties. Without limiting the effect of any other provision in this Agreement, the parties acknowledge that the provisions of this Agreement which are for the benefit of the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels will inure to the benefit of the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and that the provisions of this Agreement which are for the benefit of the owners of the New Anchor Parcels will inure to the benefit of the owners of the New Anchor Parcels, and that the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the Existing Anchor Parcels themselves and the owners of the New Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels themselves are third party beneficiaries of those provisions and will have the same rights with respect to their respective parcels as if they were signatories to this Agreement. 14. F4uitable Servitudes. All of the provisions of this Agreement will be enforceable as equitable servitudes and will constitute covenants running with the land to the extent allowed by applicable law; provided, however that, after transfer by the Developer of any New Anchor Parcel, each remaining legal parcel of Mall Parcel No. 3 will be burdened only by the obligations in this Agreement which relate to that legal parcel and, under no circumstances, will the Developer be liable for the obligations in this Agreement which relate to the applicable New Anchor Parcel. 15. Negation of Agency. Joint Venture or PartnershiQ. The parties acknowledge that in entering into this Agreement, they are acting as independent entities and not as agents of the other in any respect. The parties hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership among or between them and agree that nothing in this Agreement will be construed as making them joint venturers or partners. 0 0 16. Notices and Other Communications. All notices or other communications which are required or permitted to be given to the parties will be in writing and will be given either by personal service or by mailing the same by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or overnight mail delivery service, addressed as follows: CITY City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Attn: City Administrator DEVELOPER Mano Management Company, Inc. c/o General Growth of California, Inc. 15821 Ventura Boulevard Suite 525 Encino, CA 91436 Attn: Orval F. Papon If any such notice or other communication is given by personal delivery, then it will be deemed given as of the date of delivery. If any such notice or other communication is given by mail, then it will be deemed given as of the date of receipt or rejection. Addresses to which notices or other communications may be delivered, may be changed from time to time by a notice which is given as provided in this paragraph 16. 17. Esto,)oel Certificates. At the request of either party, the other party will, within 10 days, certify in writing that, to the best of its knowledge, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the certifying party, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified, except as is expressly provided in that estoppel certificate and (c) no default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations as provided in this Agreement exists, except as is expressly provided in that estoppel certificate. 18. Applicable Law. This Agreement will be construed and enforced as provided in California law. 19. Venue. Any legal action with respect to this Agreement will be brought, at the election of the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel, as the case may be, in either San Bernardino County Superior Court or in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 20. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is taken to enforce or interpret any provision of this Agreement, then the prevailing party in that action will be entitled to recover from the losing party all attorneys' fees, court costs and necessary disbursements in connection with that action. 21. Paragraph Headings. The paragraph headings of this Agreement are for convenience only and are not a part of and are not intended to govern, limit or aid in the interpretation of any provision of this Agreement. 0 O 22. Construction. (a) In all cases, the language in this Agreement will be construed simply, according to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against either party, it being agreed that the parties or their agents have participated in the preparation of this Agreement. Without limiting the effect-of the foregoing, the parties acknowledge and agree that the City is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract and that the limitations in this Agreement are intended to reserve to the City all of its police powers which cannot he so limited. This Agreement will be construed, contrary to its stated terms if necessary, to reserve to the City all police power which cannot be restricted by contract including, without limitation, the power to respond to compelling public necessity where a failure to do so would place residents of the City in a condition dangerous to their health or safety or both. To that end, notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, the City may condition or deny any permit, approval, extension, or entitlement sought pursuant to this Agreement by Developer or any of the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels or the New Anchor Parcels, if the City determines either that (i) a failure to do so would place residents of the City in a condition dangerous to their health or safety, or both, or (ii) the condition or denial is required in order to comply with state or federal law. (b) The parties acknowledge that Exhibits "A", ""C", "D", 'TV and "J-2" are reductions of scale drawings which are on file with the City Clerk of the City and the Department of Planning and Building Services of the City, and the parties agree that Exhibits "A", "C", "D", "J-1" and "J-2", in their reduced form, are attached to this Agreement for convenience only, and that in construing this Agreement, the scale drawings which are on file with the City Clerk and the Department of Planning and Building Services will supersede and control. 23. Lu.Ly ivgl. Each and every covenant in this Agreement will survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement for the benefit of the parties and the third party beneficiaries of this Agreement. 24. Calendar Periods. All references in this Agreement to "years", "quarters", "months" and "days" will be deemed to be to references to calendar years, quarters, months and days. 25. Severability. Every provision of this Agreement is and will be construed to be a separate and independent covenant. Without limiting the effect of paragraph I1., if any provision of this Agreement or the application of the same is, to any extent, found to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever, then the remainder of this Agreement or the application of that provision to circumstances other than those to which it is invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected by the same and each provision of this Agreement will be valid and will be enforced to the extent permitted by the law and the parties will negotiate in good faith for such amendments to this Agreement as may be necessary to achieve its intent, notwithstanding such invalidity or unenforceability. 26. Further Actions. Whenever and as often as it is requested to do so by the other party, each party will execute, acknowledge and deliver or cause to be executed, acknowledged or delivered, any and all such further documents as may be necessary, expedient or proper in order to achieve the intent of this Agreement. 27. Covenant of Good Faith. In exercising their rights and in performing their obligations as provided in this Agreement, the parties will cooperate with one another in good faith, so the intent of this Agreement can be attained. 28. CounteMarts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original for all purposes and all such counterparts will constitute one and the same agreement. 29. Incorporation of Recitals. The "Recitals" in this Agreement are material and are incorporated by-reference as though fully set forth hereat. 30. Incorporation of Exhibits. The Exhibits to this Agreement are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth hereat. 31. Amendment. on the City unless and un n o until it has approved by the f City Council ilnandt has e become effective, or on the Developer unless and until it has been executed by the Developer. (b) The parties acknowledge that the passage of time may demonstrate that changes are necessary or appropriate with respect to the details of each party's performance as provided in this Agreement. Because the parties wish to retain flexibility with respect to the details of their performance, if and when the parties determine that changes are necessary or appropriate, they will unless otherwise required by law, effectuate those changes or adjustments through operating memoranda which are approved by the Director, the Planning Commission or the City Council, depending on how material the applicable change is, and the City's City Attorney will determine how material the applicable change is. After execution, each such operating memorandum will be attached to this Agreement as an addendum and will become part of this Agreement. 32. Municipal Code. Except where otherwise expressly provided, all references in this Agrecment to the Municipal Code or any section of the Municipal Code, will be deemed to be references to the Municipal Code, as it exists on the Effective Date. 33. Recordation. No later than 10 days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Developer will, at its cost, record this Agreement in the Official Records of the San Bernardino County Recorder. SIGNATURES FOLLOW is CJ CITY City of San Bernardino, a municipal corporation By: Its: ATTEST: By: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL CONTENT: /� By: �X�/ ity Attorn DEVELOPER Mano Management Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation By: Its: �r STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On 19, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satin actory evidence to be the of the City of San Bernardino, a municipal corporation, and acknowledged to me that such municipal corporation executed the within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On 19_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared _ , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satin actory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public d � _ DEPICTION OF PARCELS �? Q W cc rrz�n YYYYYY,///. y�.' .s f'./�/�/�/A• G nom__ N i YY. ee \ r _\ a LLI Q EXHIBIT "A" o c� DESCRIPTION OF PARCELS o 0 PARCEL NO. 1 THAT PORTION OF BLOCKS 29 AND 54 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 2, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF COLTON AVENUE WITH THE WEST LINE OF "E" STREET AS IT NOW EXISTS, SAID POINT BEING MONUMENTED WITH A 6" X 6" CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE SOUTH 390 16' 43" WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTHEAST LINE 1046.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 390 22' 40" EAST, 15.30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 390 16' 43" WEST 779.77 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 390 15' 55" WEST, 553.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 390 15' 30" WEST, 115.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 500 44' 05" EAST, 561.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 390 15' 55" EAST, 650.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 890 27' 35" EAST, 461.03 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2305.05 FEET, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL BEARING OF SOUTH 810 33' 50" WEST; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 220 18' 52", A DISTANCE OF 897.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 300 45' 02" WEST 73.17 FEET; THENCE NORTH 391 22' 40" WEST 84.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF OSBORN STREET 50 FEET WIDE AS VACATED BY THE RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OCTOBER 7, 1963, BY DOCUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 10, 1963, IN BOOK 6005, PAGE 877, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL NO. 2 THAT PORTION OF BLOCKS 29 AND 54 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 2, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF COLTON AVENUE WITH THE WEST LINE OF "E" STREET AS IT NOW EXISTS, SAID POINT BEING MONUMENTED WITH A 6 X 6" CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE SOUTH 390 16' 43" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHEAST LINE, 1046.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 39" 22' 40" EAST, 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 30° 45' 02" EAST, 73.17 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2305.05 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 220 18' 52", 897.73 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89° 27' 35" WEST, 461.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 390 15' 55" WEST, 190.65 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 501 44' 05" EAST, 165.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 32' 25" EAST, 735.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 890 27' 35" EAST, 378.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 151 43' 54" EAST, 26.61 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2305.05 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 240 10' 04", 972.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT "B" PARCEL NO. 3 THAT PORTION OF LOTS 35, 36, 37 AND 38 IN BLOCK 54 TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF LOTS 5 AND 6 IN BLOCK 29 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, A3 SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 7, PAGE 2 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINES OF "E" STREET, INLAND CENTER DRIVE AND MILL STREET AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 39, PAGES 29 TO 32, INCLUSIVE OF RECORD OF SURVEYS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF INLAND CENTER DRIVE, SOUTH 390 16' 32" WEST 1171.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 500 43' 28" EAST 50.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF INLAND CENTER DRIVE, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 21, PAGE 45 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE DESCRIBED AS HAVING A BEARING AND LENGTH OF NORTH 390 22' 40" WEST 100.00 FEET IN THE DEED TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 13,1965, IN BOOK 6471, PAGE 333, OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE DESCRIBED AS HAVING A BEARING AND LENGTH OF "SOUTH 390 16' 43" WEST 1046.85 FEET" IN THOSE DEEDS ALL RECORDED AUGUST 23, 1966, IN BOOK 6685, PAGE 491, OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN BOOK 6685, PAGE 493 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AND IN BOOK 6685, PAGE 495 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID FIRST MENTIONED CERTAIN COURSE, SOUTH 390 22' 40" EAST 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 300 45' 02" EAST 73.17 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2305.05 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 460 28' 56" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1870.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 150 43' 54" WEST 26.61 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 890 27' 35" WEST 378.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 32' 25" WEST 735.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 500 44' 05" WEST 65.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 390 15' 55" WEST 459.70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 390 15' 55" EAST 459.70 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 500 44' 05" EAST 165.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 32' 25" EAST 735.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 890 27' 35" EAST 378.31 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 150 43' 54" WEST 210.92 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1311.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 190 52' 49" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 454.92 FEET TO A POINT, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 540 23' 17" EAST; THENCE NORTH 400 20' 45" WEST 413.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 490 39' 15" EAST 11.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 400 20' 45" WEST 295.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 490 39' 15" WEST 155.87 FEET; THENCE NORTH 400 20' 45" WEST 537.36 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED MARCH 5, 1956, IN BOOK 3875, PAGE 50, OFFICIAL RECORDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE TO AND ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED NOVEMBER 27, 1956, IN BOOK 4095, PAGE 197, OFFICIAL RECORDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, AS FOLLOWS: NORTHERLY ALONG A CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 350.00 FEET FROM WHICH A TANGENT LINE BEARS NORTH 130 03' 36" EAST THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 210 11' 45" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 129.48 FEET EXHIBIT "B" o TO A POINT, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 810 51' 51" EAST; NORTH 340 34' 23" WEST 178.22 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 350.00 FEET; NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 150 51' 04" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 96.83 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 820 11' 12" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 107.58 FEET; AND NORTH 310 45' 45" EAST 185.95 FEET TO THE ORIGINAL SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID INLAND CENTER DRIVE; THENCE ALONG SAID INLAND CENTER DRIVE NORTH 390 16' 16" EAST 113.08 FEET AND NORTH 390 16' 32" EAST 1336.43 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF SAID CERTAIN COURSE HEREINBEFORE DESCRIBED AS HAVING A BEARING AND LENGTH OF "NORTH 390 22' 40 WEST 100.00 FEET"; THENCE ALONG SAID CERTAIN COURSE SOUTH 390 22' 40" EAST 15.30 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST OF INLAND CENTER DRIVE AS DESCRIBED IN THE GRANT OF EASEMENT TO THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, RECORDED APRIL 1, 1966 IN BOOK 6600, PAGE 620, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID INLAND CENTER DRIVE SOUTH 390 16' 32" WEST 1333.42 FEET AND SOUTH 390 16' 16" WEST 115.09 FEET TO A LINE WHICH BEARS SOUTH 500 44' 05" EAST AND WHICH PASSES THROUGH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 500 44' 05" EAST 561.39 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL NO. 4 THAT PORTION OF LOTS 29 AND 54 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 2, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF COLTON AVENUE WITH THE WEST LINE OF "E" STREET AS IT NOW EXISTS, SAID POINT BEING MONUMENTED WITH A 6" X 6" CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE SOUTH 390 16' 03" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHEAST LINE, 1046.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 390 22' 40" EAST, 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 300 45' 02" EAST, 73.17 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2305.05 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, FROM A TANGENT BEARING SOUTH 300 45' 02- EAST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 460 28' 56", A DISTANCE OF 1870.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 150 43' 54" WEST 237.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1311.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, FROM A TANGENT BEARING SOUTH 130 43' 54" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 190 52' 49', A DISTANCE OF 454.92 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID CURVE; SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 400 20' 45" WEST 413.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 490 39' 15" EAST 11.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 400 20' 45" WEST 295.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 490 39' 15" WEST 155.87 FEET; THENCE NORTH 400 20' 45" WEST 537.03 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 350.00 FEET, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH 760 47' 58" WEST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 140 32' 08", A DISTANCE OF 88.79 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 270 44' 10" WEST 154.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE EAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 180.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 500 52' 52", A DISTANCE OF 159.85 FEET; EXHIBIT "B" 7 c 0 THENCE SOUTH 230 08' 42" EAST, 251.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 290 08' 47` EAST 770.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 600 55' 21" EAST 60.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 610 56' 03" EAST 30.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 600 55' 21" EAST 50.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1311.10 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, FROM A TANGENT BEARING NORTH 600 55' 21" EAST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 250 18' 38', A DISTANCE OF 579.18 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THEREFROM A PORTION OF THOSE PARTS OF BLOCKS 29 AND 54, RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 2, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID PARTS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT RECORDED IN BOOK 6685, PAGE 491, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID PORTION BEING ALL OF SAID PARTS LYING WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND: BEGINNING AT A 6" X 6" CONCRETE MONUMENT MARKING THE MOST NORTHERLY POINT OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE DESCRIBED AS SOUTH 280 35' 05" EAST, 156.31 FEET, IN DOCUMENT TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED IN BOOK 3855, PAGE 385, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA PARCEL OF LAND, NORTH 390 55' 34" WEST (RECORDED NORTH 390 55' 34" WEST) 42.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 601 50' 25" EAST, 74.70 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES, SOUTH 290 09' 35" EAST, 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 690 50' 25" WEST, 67.45 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID STATE OF CALIFORNIA PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE, NORTH 280 35' 05" WEST, 58.73 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED JULY 17, 1972, IN BOOK 7978, PAGE 105, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXHIBIT "B" SITE PLAN _ '. . /I �II : � d ' .� III'• 33539 11 1 bill l Ine W \ EXHIBIT "C" 0 0 PHASING PLAN EXHIBIT "D" O 4 n ` q " � •l a � ' s wv v.un J IL ow H / R yy • ,f' SJ �' e r 'a � , \g 1 i 3 V k S! rvT-rmTf' nnw © O PERMITTED USES EXHIBIT "E" C 4 PERMITTED USES Except where otherwise expressly provided below, the following uses will be permitted at the Inland Center Mall through Development Permit review but without a conditional use permit. General merchandise stores Apparel and accessory stores Home furnishings, furniture and equipment stores Eating places Sale of alcoholic beverages on-site (except that liquor stores and convenience stores will require conditional use permits) Sale of alcoholic beverages off-site, where the off-site sale is ancillary to the main or primary use (notwithstanding the foregoing, liquor stores and convenience stores will require conditional use permits) Miscellaneous retail Banks and lenders Brokers Dry cleaners Watch, jewelry and clock repair Movie theaters Video rental Amusement/recreation Day care facilities Art galleries Automobile dealer showrooms Travel agencies Such other uses which are occurring in any regional mall in southern California F.XHTRTT ^r^ O 4 FILING REQUIREMENTS CV21TDiT "L FILING REQUIREMENTS 1. Traffic Study, dated October 21, 1991 - prepared by Don Frischer and Associates. Final report submitted to the City on October 21, 1991. 2. Geotechnical Study, dated September 6, 1991 (Liquefaction Report) - Prepared by Law/Crandall. Submitted to the City on November 6, 1991. 3. Preliminary Title Report, dated October 9, 1991 - Issued by First American Title Insurance Company under its Order No. 10720. Submitted to the City on November 6, 1991. 4. Reciprocal Easement Agreement, dated October 8, 1965, and recorded in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, on August 23, 1966, in Book 6685 at Page 414, as amended - Addresses internal access and circulation, development, expansion and common area maintenance of Inland Center Mall. Submitted to the City on November 6, 1991. 5. Preliminary Environmental Description Form, dated October 22, 1991 - Prepared to address overall conceptual development plan for expansion of Inland Center Mali as provided in this Agreement. Submitted to the City on November 6, 1991. 6. Environmental Findings and Mitigation Measures (a) Initial Study, dated March 23, 1992. (b) Environmental Determination, dated 19_. 7. Owner Authorization, dated October 24, 1991 - Compiled and submitted by the Developer as owner of Mall Parcel No. 3. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE INLAND CENTER MALL CASE FILE, AT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES OF THE CITY. F.YHrRTT "P" o MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM FOR CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO INLAND CENTER MALL EXPANSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 1992 INTRODUCTION This mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) has been prepared for use in monitoring and reporting mitigation measures adopted as part of the City of San Bernardino's Inland Center Mall Expansion Development Agreement Negative Declaration. This MMRP has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure the mitigation measures adopted for the project are implemented by the City of San Bernardino. Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code, Section 21031.6), effective January 1, 1989, requires adoption of a reporting or monitoring program for those measures or conditions imposed 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. The monitoring program contains the following elements: 1) The mitigation measures are recorded with the action(s) that must be taken to implement them and the method that will be used to document or verify fulfillment of the measure or condition. In some instances, one action may be used to verify implementation of several measures, such as landscape plan review. 2) A procedure for determining and recording compliance has been outlined for each action that must be implemented by the project to mitigate impacts to their lowest level. This procedure identifies what action(s) will be taken and when, designates who will be responsible for implementing the action, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3) The program contains a separate Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Record for each action called a Mitigation Measure Checksheet (MMC). On each of these checksbeets, the pertinent actions and dates will be logged, and copies of permits, correspondence or other relevant data will be attached. Copies of the records will be retained by the City's Planning Department. 4) The program is designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to monitoring and reporting of mitigation measures may be necessary based upon recommendations by the City staff implementing the monitoring program. As Mitigation Measures Identified In The Negative Declaration PROJECT: City of San Bernardino: Inland Center Mall Expansion Development Agreement PROJECT ATTON: City of San Bernardino PROJECT APPLICANT: General Growth Development, Inc. MITIGATION MEASURE #1: All excavated material shall be transported in trucks with the surface wetted by water and the material a minimum of two feet below the trailer or with a cover to minimize fugitive dust. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION ACTIONS During excavation activities the City building inspectors shall conduct one random inspection per week to verify the transport of excavated material is being conducted in accordance with the requirements outlined above. The inspector shall place a note in the project file documenting compliance. COMPLIANCE RECORD WTMN REQUIRED: The inspection note shall be placed in the project file within one week of the inspection. NOTE PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 3 0 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #3 The excavated material shall be tested to ensure it is not contarmnated and shall be transported to a fill location or a disposal site that can legally accept the material. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Test results from areas being excavated shall be provided to the City. At least one chemical contamination test shall be conducted for each individual excavation area. Test results shall be provided prior to covering an excavated area and if any contamination exists, the developer shall provide the City with a copy of the disposal location of any contaminated fill. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: All test results and any disposal documentation shall be provided to the City Planning Department within one week of receiving test results or receipt of disposal slips. TEST RESULTS/DISPOSAL SLIPS SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: DATE ACCEPTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 5 O MITIGATION MEASURE #5 Permanently exposed soils not covered by impervious surfaces shall be stabilized through the installation of landscaping and irrigation systems. A landscape plan identifying plant materials, density, and size shall be reviewed and approved by the City. After the landscaping is established it shall be maintained in a manner that does not cause result in significant local fugitive dust or sediment generation to surface runoff. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Landscape plans for disturbed areas shall be submitted for review and approval to the City. A copy of the approved plans shall be retained in the project file. The City shall verify that landscaping is being maintained by inspecting landscaped areas one time per year and placing a note in the file verifying the landscaping is being maintained. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The landscape plan shall be completed prior to breaking ground for any specific project constructed at the Mall in the future. A copy of the plan shall be placed in the project file within two weeks after the approved plan is submitted to the City. The inspection note shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. LANDSCAPE PLAN SUBMITTED BY: PLAN APPROVED BY: DATE COMPLETED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 7 MITIGATION MEASURE #7 A temporary vehicle wash station shall be established at the project site for trucks leaving construction areas. All vehicles with tires shall be wash prior to leaving the site. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFI AT7ON The City shall conduct one random inspection during construction of future facilities to verify that the wash station is in place, functional, and being used by trucks leaving the site. A note verifying implementation of this measure shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The inspections shall be conducted at least one time during each construction effort. The note to file shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 9 0 Q MTTMGATTON MEASURE #9 Unauthorized traffic shall be controlled at the project site by posting signs that indicate access is restricted to reduce fugitive dust emissions. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall conduct one random inspection during construction of future facilities to verify that the access control signs have been installed. A note verifying implementation of this measure shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The inspections shall be conducted at least one time during each construction effort to verify the posted signs. The note to file shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. NOTES SUBMITTED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 11 d 4 MITIGATION MEASURE #11 Earthmoving and soil disturbing activities shall be terminated when wind speeds exceed 20 mph averaged over one hour at the project site or at Norton Air Force Base. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall conduct one random inspection during windy conditions to verify that construction activities are being terminated. A note verifying implementation of this measure shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The inspections shall be conducted at least one time during each construction effort (when windy conditions exist) to verify the water is being implemented. The note to file shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. NOTES SUBMITTED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP R_QUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 13 i O 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #13 Remove any loose, eroded material from paved or graded areas following storm events that cause erosion on the project site. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Following a rain storm, the City shall inspect the project to determine that all disturbed areas have been swept and sediment deposits removed. A note shall be placed in the project file to verify stabilization. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The inspection shall be conducted within two days of the rain storm. The note shall be placed in the project file within two days of the inspection. NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP RFQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 15 o MITIGATION MEASURE #15 Construction equipment shall be maintained in good condition and properly tuned as per manufacturers specifications and low sulfur diesel fuel shall be used for construction equipment onsite. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall place a condition in the construction contract that requires proper tuning and use of low sulfur diesel fuel. A copy of this clause in the construction contract shall be provided to the City for retention in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The contract condition shall be submitted to the City prior to ground disturbance and placed in the project file when received. DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 17 MITIGATION MEASURE #17 The ICM management will establish a ride-share coordination office and will include active participation by all lessees within the mall through contracts with individual lessees. For those businesses that are under existing leases at ICM, the management will include this participation clause when the contract is next renewed. The ride share coordination office shall maintain information on individuals that are willing to participate in a ride-share program and that will match ride share participants with available rides. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall submit a copy of the contract clause from the ride-share office and the name of the ride share coordinator to the City. A copy of the contracts and the name of the ride share coordinator shall be retained in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The contract clause and name of the coordinator shall be provided to the City prior to occupancy of new space at the Mall. DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 19 0 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #19 The developer shall coordinate the installation of electric vehicle outlets to serve future electric vehicles that are anticipated to be used within the South Coast Air Basin. The number of outlets will be installed incrementally based on agreements with the City, SCAQMD and SCE. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION A copy of the agreement shall be placed in the project file. The City shall inspect the completed outlets following each installation. A note shall be placed in the file verifying the installation. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The agreement shall be completed prior to construction of the first addition to the Mall. Inspection shall be completed within one week of completing construction and the note shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. AGREEMENT PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 21 MITIGATION MEASURE #21 The developer shall allocate management personnel time to participate in Regulation XV coordination for implementing these mitigation measures and assisting individual mall businesses in meeting Regulation XV requirements and other similar requirements that may be adopted by SCAQMD in the future. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall submit documentation of attendance at Regulation XV training session and consultations with Mall businesses that fall within Regulation XV requirements. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The documentation shall be submitted within two weeks of attending training sessions or within two weeks of consulting with new Mall businesses. DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 23 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #23 Construction related activities which utilize odorous,toxic, or hazardous materials which can be released into the air and can expose the public to health or nuisance odors shall be controlled to less than hazardous levels for the chemicals being utilized. This can be accomplished by preparing a Materials Handling and Procedures Plan which shall identify hazardous odor sources, materials and quantities present on site, potential health effects, proposed special handling and isolation containment devices or mechanisms to prevent significant human exposure to airborne chemicals or odors. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to use of such chemicals at locations where humans may be exposed. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION A copy of the plan approved shall be placed in the project file. The City shall inspect the facility during construction to verify that the emission controls have been implemented in accordance with the Plan. Copies of inspection notes shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The plan shall be completed and approved prior to initiating construction. The notes shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. PLAN PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE PLACED IN FILE: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 25 MITIGATION MEASURE #25 The existing trees on site impacted by the project should be examined by a knowledgeable landscape professional to determine their ability to be transplanted. Those trees that are deemed good candidates for successful transplantation shall be relocated on the project site. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall submit a landscape plan that identifies the those trees that will be transplanted. A copy of the plan shall be retained in the project file. The City shall inspect the completed landscaping to verify transplanting of the specified trees and a copy of the inspection notes shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The plan shall be submitted to the City prior to disturbing the ground. The note verifying the transplanted trees shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. PLAN SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE PLACED IN FILE: FURTHER ACT10N REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 27 o 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #27 Facilities that store or use hazardous/toxic materials or generate hazardous wastes shall provide the City with a Business Plan, in conformance with the Tanner Bill, which outlines the materials, storage containers, volumes, and locations and an emergency response program in case of accidental release of material. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall include a clause in space rental contracts requiring preparation and submittal of a Business Plan of all businesses that store or use hazardous/toxic materials. A copy of the contract clause shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The clause shall be provided to the City prior to any new space being occupied in the Mall. CONTRACT CLAUSE SUBMITTED BY: DATE PLACED IN FILE: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 29 MITIGATION MEASURE #29 Prior to any demolition activities a Hazardous/Toxic Materials Site Survey shall be conducted to evaluate the potential for presence of hazardous or toxics materials at the demolition site. If hazardous materials are present, the Survey shall identify measures required to ensure humans are not exposed to such materials at thresholds that exceed a hazard to humans. This shall include compliance with all asbestos removal regulations. These measures shall be implemented. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION A copy of a site survey shall be submitted to the City for retention. If measures must be implemented, the City shall inspect the project when the hazardous materials are being removed and verify the measures are being implemented. An inspection note shall be placed in the project file for verification. (COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: A copy the survey shall be placed in the project file prior to construction. The inspection notes shall be placed in the project file within two weeks after the inspection. SITE SURVEY PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE PLACED IN FILE: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 31 MITIGATION MEASURE #31 The developer shall provide a minimum of one covered drop-off facility when future development phases are implemented to ensure that public transit riders have a protected location adjacent to the Mall for access to buses or other public transit vehicle. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Plot plans submitted to the City for review shall identify the location of drop-off facilities. The City shall inspect the facilities after construction is completed and place a note in the file verifying completion. COMPT TAN E RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: A copy of the plot plan shall be submitted prior to construction. The note shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. PLOT PLAN PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE PLACED IN FILE: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 33 4 MITIGATION MEASURE #33 During construction the developer shall require all contractors to maintain traffic flow on the project site and on adjacent roads or detours with a minimum traffic hazard. This shall be accomplished by using personnel to control traffic, traffic signs, flashers, and other items to warn vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians of hazards and solutions. Appropriate signs and other traffic hazard equipment shall be included with these measures to reduce potential for accidents. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall inspect construction areas to verify safety measures are in place. A note shall be placed in the project file verifying their implementation. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The notes shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 35 MITIGATION MEASURE #35 Upgrade and modify the following traffic signals: • E Street/Central Avenue • E Street/Benedict Street • Inland Center Drive/Adell Street • Inland Center Drive/G Street The following features shall be incorporated into the design of the above signals: • Interconnection/coordination along "E" Street from Orange Show Road to Mill Street, and also on Inland Center Drive from 1-215 to Mill Street • Replacement of non-standard poles and mast arms with standard poles, mast-arms and signals • Removal of existing median Poles/islands from all signalized intersections modified by the project • Add detection loops on all phases of all signals IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall verify these traffic facilities are installed by inspecting the site and placing a note verifying installation in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The note shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 37 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #37 The project shall contribute, at each phase, an amount equal to 10% of the cost to mitigate/improve the intersection of Orange Show Road and "E", as identified in the traffic study. This equates to a fair-share cash contribution of $30,000, each phase The project is estimated to generate an additional 9,400 ADT on opening of Phase I; this translates to approximately $125,000 (1991 dollars) in Traffic Systems fees. The traffic system fees may be credited from the off site mitigations. Proposed structures shall be kept away from anticipated widening of I-215 (at worse-case scenario) IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Payment of the fees shall be verified by placing a copy of the receipt in the project file. The City Planning Department shall monitor and verify that no structures are placed in the area considered for 1-215 widening. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The receipt shad] be placed in the project file within two weeks of payment. Staff review of structures shall be ongoing until a decisions is made regarding widening I- 215. RECEIPT SUBMITTED BY: DATE COMPLETED: STAFF REVIEW OF FACILITY SITING: DATE WIDENING IS ELIMINATED OR COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 39 MITIGATION MEASURE #39 Contribute the second $30,000 towards the mitigations identified measure #37 (Orange Show Road and E Street. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION Payment of the fees shall be verified by placing a copy of the receipt in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The receipt shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of payment of the fee. RECEIPT SUBMITTED BY: DATE COMPLETED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action 'he responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 41 MITIGATION MEASURE #41 Require that the project construction meet the standards referenced above related to type of construction, materials and installation of sprinklers during the review of planning, building, and construction drawings. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall inspect construction plans and verify that fire protection requirements are being met. A copy of approved plans shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The construction plans shall be submitted and approved prior to initiating construction. PLANS SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 43 O MITIGATION MEASURE #43 The Developer shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and enforcement of adequate access to all facilities for fire equipment. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall inspect construction plans and verify that fire protection requirements are being met. A copy of approved plans shall be placed in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The construction plans shall be submitted and approved prior to initiating construction. PLANS SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 45 a 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #45 The developer shall pay required school impaction fees to mitigate potential indirect population growth impacts to the San Bernardino City Unified District from development of this project. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The City shall place a copy of receipts in the project file for any school impaction fees paid. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The receipt shall be placed in the project file within two weeks of payment of any fees. RECEIPT SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 47 MITIGATION MEASURE #47 The developer shall work with the City Public Services Department to integrate its waste management efforts with a program of recycling activities by new businesses at ICM consistent with City's adopted Source Reduction and Recycling Element. This program shall include the identification of methods to reduce wastes at the source and recyclable materials that can be delivered to markets for reuse. Specific types of programs include waste segregation (cardboard, plastic, metals, etc., delivery of waste to the City's proposed Materials Recovery Facility, and delivery of compostable materials to the City's proposed composting facility. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall submit to the City a document identifying any source reduction or recycling programs implemented at the Mall. The document shall be retained in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The document shall be submitted to the City within two weeks of reaching agreement with the City Public Services Department. DOCUMENT SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 49 C 0 MITIGATION MEASURE #49 The developer shall confer with the City Municipal Water Department regarding the ability to utilize local geothermal resources for space heating and cooling. If judged feasible by the City and developer, the geothermal resource shall be developed and used at the site as an energy source. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall document conferences with the City Municipal Water Department regarding use of geothermal resources for space heating and cooling. A copy of the documentation shall be retained in the project file. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The documentation shall be provided prior to construction of the first addition to the Mall. DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP F.EQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 51 0 4 MITIGATION MEASURE #51 Utilize existing power sources or power poles during construction where feasible. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION The developer shall submit the report indicating which power sources will be utilized during construction. The City shall verify the use of these power sources during inspections at the project site during construction. COMPLIANCE RECORD WHEN REQUIRED: The report shall be submitted prior to construction and the note shall be filed in the project file within two weeks of the inspection. REPORT SUBMITTED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: NOTES PREPARED BY: DATE SUBMITTED: FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED: FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED: DATE FOLLOW-UP COMPLETED: For each action the responsible individual shall supply the following information: personal signature, date, and title. 53 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM rynm T n!_n EXISTING AND PROPOSED SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING RYTTMTT "H" r ! F EXISTING AND PROPOSED SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING Signage and landscaping at the Inland Center Mall on the Effective Date, may not be consistent with the applicable standards in the Municipal Code and the landscaping and signage which is proposed in connection with the Development and Operation of the Inland Center Mall may also not 6e fully consistent with those standards. As provided in subparagraph 2.(h) of the body of this Agreement, the Developer intends to prepare and the City intends to enact amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code which will ensure that the landscaping and signage at the Inland Center Mall on the Effective Date is legal and conforming and that any landscaping and signage which is Developed in accordance with this Agreement will be legal and conforming, based solely on their conformance with this Agreement and the applicable plans and specifications which are approved by the City. The proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code will also ensure that landscaping and signage at the Inland Center Mall will, for all purposes, continue to be governed by the standards in this Agreement including, without limitation, standards with respect to the subsequent alteration or modification of that landscaping or signage or any rebuilding of that landscaping or signage if it is totally or partially destroyed. The following text discusses the general elements, characteristics and requirements of the proposed amendments to Chapter 19.14, Chapter 19.22 and Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code. SIGNAGE Sign criteria which identify sign type, size, height and general location, will be incorporated in the proposed amendment of Chapter 19.22 of the Municipal Code, as provided in subparagraph 2.(h) of the body of this Agreement. The sign criteria will include a new, cohesive signage program for the mall portions of the Inland Center Mall, for the major and minor entrances to the mall and for the New Major Department Stores in the Inland Center Mall; provided, however that the sign criteria may, at the Developer's election, retain existing Major Department Store signage and permit signage on building and/or parking structure facades which address the needs of mall tenants. Detailed sign face elevations and colors will be the subject of an application by the Developer or any owner of an Existing Anchor Parcel or a New Anchor Parcel. The Developer intends to retain the existing pylon sign at the Inland Center Mall, subject to replacement and upgrading of the sign face, and the Sign Criteria will specifically provide for the same. The Developer may provide a freeway oriented monument sign for project identification. Internal signage will not be addressed in the sign criteria and will not be subject to regulation by the City. LANDSCAPING In recognition of the uniqueness of the Inland Center Mall (including, without limitation, its land mass and its proximity to the Flood Control Landscape Areas which are described in subparagraph 6.(g) of the body of this Agreement), the landscape component of the Development of the Inland Center Mall will integrate existing elements of planting and landscape amenities with new elements for the purpose of providing identity for the Inland Center Mall and linkages for its various elements. Existing specimen trees will be retained when possible and, where impacted by construction, will be relocated, if that specie of tree can be transplanted. new plantings will use materials compatible with the existing plants and, when appropriate, will reinforce and add EXHIBIT "H" 1 o to existing varieties. New planting will be used to bring identity to circulation patterns and to highlight points of entry. As contemplated by Section 19.24.060.6 of the Municipal Code, existing parking areas which are not impacted by the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall will not have new trees planted at every 4th parking space and, instead, this condition will be offset by appropriate clustering of trees in the parking areas. Even though they may not be impacted by the proposed Development of the Inland Center Mall, the existing parking areas will have parking islands at the end of aisles, subject to the provisions of this paragraph. Parking islands will be installed in the existing parking areas in phases, in proportion to the square footage of buildings which are being constructed in the same phase (e.g., if 50 parking islands in total are required in the existing parking areas and, in a given phase, 20% of the total planned square footage of buildings is being constructed, then 20 parking islands will be installed). Consistent with the "clustering" concept in Section 19.24.060.6 of the Municipal Code and to enhance the visual impact of the Inland Center Mall, the Developer, with the consent of the City (which consent will not be unreasonably withheld), may disproportionately allocate parking islands in the existing parking areas (i.e., denser and/or larger and/or more frequent parking islands in certain existing parking areas and less dense and/or smaller and/or less frequent parking islands in other existing parking areas). The 25% permanent shading requirement in Section 19.24.060.14 will be met by the roofed parking spaces within parking structures and not by natural shading. Landscaping along the existing Lytle Creek flood control channel will be upgraded and maintained by the Developer. As provided in subparagraph 6.(g) of the body of this Agreement, the Developer and the owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels will receive credit for that landscaping, in determining compliance with the 15% landscape coverage requirement which is referred to in subparagraph 2.(c) of the body of this Agreement. Pending widening of the I-215 Freeway, the landscape areas adjacent to the existing I- 215 Freeway are deemed to satisfy Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code. At such time as the proposed widening of the I-215 Freeway occurs, in order to provide coordinated landscaping and ensure a landscape buffer between the 1-215 Freeway and the Inland Center Mall, landscaping will be replaced adjacent to the new freeway alignment between the proposed collector-distributor (frontage road) and the Inland Center Mall parking area as is agreed among the City, CalTrans and the Developer or its successor or assign. The Developer will be responsible for the maintenance of the landscape buffer, but may transfer this responsibility to others including, without limitation, CalTrans, by agreement with the transferee. The existing parking space layout at the Inland Center Mall will be revised concurrently, as is necessary to accommodate the new property boundary and still maintain internal circulation which is acceptable to the City and the Developer or its successor or assign. To the extent possible, the perimeter driveway will be retained as part of the redesign concept. If locating the above- mentioned landscape buffer entirely on Mall Parcel No. 3 and/or any Existing Anchor Parcel would adversely impact the Developer's ability to maintain a perimeter driveway or would reduce the number of parking spaces below the minimum level which is provided in subparagraph 6.(a) of the body of this Agreement, then the City will not unreasonably withhold its approval to locate part of the landscape buffer on the public right-of-way of the I- 215 Freeway. The landscape buffer will be installed no later than 1 year after the completion of the widening of the I-215 Freeway. EXHIBIT "H" 1) PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT "T" 0 Q PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BY OPENING DAY OF PHASE I OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AS DEFINED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY WHICH IS REFERRED TO IN EXHIBIT "F": 1. Signalize the mall driveway located between "G" Street and Adell Drive on Inland Center Drive. This signal will include pedestrian signal heads/push buttons, painted crosswalks, internally illuminated street name signs and all the hardware/software necessary for interconnection with adjacent signals. 2. a) Upgrade and modify the following traffic signals: "E" Street/Central Avenue "E" Street/Benedict Street Inland Center Drive/Adell Street Inland Center Drive/"G" Street b) The following features will be incorporated into the design of the above signals: Interconnection/coordination along "E" Street from Orange Show Road to Mill Street, and along Inland Center Drive from 1-215 to Mill Street Replacement of non-standard poles and mast arms with standard poles, mast-arms and signals Removal of existing median poles/islands from all signalized intersections modified by the project Add detection loops on all phases of all signals 3. Mitigate the intersection of Inland Center Drive at Mill/"E" Streets as follows: Restripe southbound "E" Street approach to intersection to accommodate an additional through lane. Widen EB Mill Street (south curb) approach to intersection to provide an additional lane Restripe EB Mill Street to include a left turn, one through, a shared through/right, and a right turn lane Widen Inland Center Drive (north curb) to obtain an additional approach lane to intersection Restripe Inland Center Drive approach to intersection to provide a shared west/northbound, a northbound, an eastbound, and a shared east/southbound lanes EXHIBIT "I" 1 O O 4. Project will contribute, at each phase, an amount equal to 10% of the cost to mitigate/improve the intersection of Orange Show Road and "E", as identified in the traffic study. This equates to a fair-share cash contribution of $30,000, each phase. 5. This project is estimated to generate additional 9,000 Average Daily Traffic (ADT). On opening of Phase I, this translates to approximately $125,000 (1991 dollars) in traffic systems fees, although the actual amount of the traffic systems fees will be determined in accordance with the Municipal Code. The traffic system fees may be credited from the off-site mitigations. 6. Proposed structures will be kept away from anticipated widening of I-215 (at worst case scenario). 7. The project will develop a landscaped median along Inland Center Drive. BY OPENING DAY OF PHASE 11, AS DEFINED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY WHICH IS REFERRED TO IN EXHIBIT "F": A. Contribute the second $30,000 toward the mitigations identified in Condition No. 4 (Orange Show Road and "E" Street). B. The second phase is estimated to generate an additional 5,550 Average Daily Traffic (ADT). This equates to approximately $73,000 (1991 dollars) in traffic systems fees, although the actual amount of the traffic systems fees will be determined in accordance with the Municipal Code. If the Development of Phase I is broken into sub-phases, then items 2. and 7. above will be implementeJ by the opening day of the first sub-phase. All other required mitigation and traffic system fees will be pro-rated and timed according to the number of trips generated. If either of the fair share cash contributions identified in Condition No. 4. or Condition A., have not been paid in full by the 3rd anniversary of the Effective Date, then the unpaid part of the applicable fair share cash contribution will be adjusted as of the 3rd anniversary of the Effective Date and on each anniversary thereafter, until those fair share cash contributions have been paid in full, according to the percentage change during the previous 12 months, in the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim average subgroup "all items" (1982-1984=100) ("Index"). The most recent Index publication on the 2nd anniversary of the Effective Date will be the 'Base Index". On each Adjustment Date, the unpaid fair share cash contribution will be adjusted by a percentage equal to the percentage change, if any, in the most recent Index in publication prior to the Adjustment Date ("Comparison Index") over the Base Index. After any adjustment as provided in this paragraph, the adjusted amount of the unpaid fair share cash contribution will be applicable until the next Adjustment Date. If the 1982-84 base of the Consumer Price Index changes after the Effective Date, then the new base will be converted to the 1982-84 base and the base as so converted will be used. If at any time the Index does not exist in the format which is described in this paragraph, then the parties will substitute any official index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics or successor or similar governmental agency, as may then be in existence and is most nearly equivalent to the Index. EXHIBIT "I" 2 CALTRANS DESIGN ALTERNATIVE NO. 3 EXHIBIT "J-In a�I/aLf/19 I I<rj.� ojrt ljM[J i I w M'MJV° j \J7A•JY• I 9 1 i f 1 r 1 1 '1 1 li 1 4 � t i Ootr y o , to , E c co I > t cn Wo � y-1, 4 , �., 1 , t . 1 1 ,• 1 .. 1 I ' 5 , ti 1 1 1 1 •' 1 � EI 1 =gym k ..Cy ) . .. a . ,.lr En .0 4 IuFO LI[ M L T o • 1 7 i(6 r` DEVELOPER'S CONCEPT OF IMPACT OF I-215 FREEWAY DESIGN ALTERNATIVE F.XTTTRTT ^T-7^ R\ \ W � ! LU y i EXHIBIT "J-2" CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION CVTT , .11. RECORDING REOITUTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION The City of San Bernardino, a municipal corporation, hereby certifies as follows: Section 1. This Certificate of Completion will constitute a conclusive determination that the Developer and/or the present and future owners of the Existing Anchor Parcels and the New Anchor Parcels and their respective successors and assigns, as provided in that certain Development Agreement which was entered into between the City of San Bernardino and Mano Management Company, Inc., effective , 19_, which Development Agreement was recorded on _, 19 , in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, as Instrument No. — ("Development Agreement"), have completed the Development of one or more phases of the Inland Center Mall, in accordance with the Development Agreement. Section 2. The phase or phases of Development of the Inland Center Mall to which this Certificate of Completion relates are more particularly described as follows: (INSERT DESCRIPTION OF APPLICABLE PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT) Section 3. The real property to which this Certificate of Completion relates is that certain land located in the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California, which is more particularly described as follows: (INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PARCELS COVERED BY THIS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION) DATED AND ISSUED THIS _ day of City of San Bernardino, a municipal corporation By: Its: EXHIBIT "K" - ° _ _Y3.�y.a-•`-.#'• 7 ?fix�� 1 .-F.4 ,#�E �.. �i tm �t.."���.+�S.i Z R.�._ ��"�MF t .P� 4+s��fYWw't m� �."y�. s .ri T�.^� [w•R rte. r..4''a-!+� _ . � 4c- �-j, T4,1• 1 t" � _ _ - Tfr TtS�) it aN +H�a� .b +�:-.Y�a�1� '- •�- r n ,c�y.'s. -,1lyy�a .��Ts#'s'�•'\ b.S �17U a •�-. � ��*�-2. [s '4.+�',�i _ ,fEbP,OSED P�. 4 y -. .x to .'... .f� VN -.e,.. r sl k• r Y... �: _♦ _�. S �•.a?.�'tA+rN.r :f..♦ \ CM v.♦7t1. 45y -.__{ +r � _ .Y�` C, -e.+ Iir -�.r. •.'r _ ..L:.E s y�iti'L# A �, hF• ' - `4'J �_ A \y .c' ..4r\1 _ a. C i K TCAi/i�.l\/\1.(r MALL.l��tll\aS2�iY,...• 1 _ a9 t R MEN�'AGREEMENT - r-� Prepared for the ' M :Ct[y of .San Bernardino Join D. end AssociatcS \ ~ _��� v �� � �.S.Y}��'R_�e �Z.Six -.•�"'^ �+."fir x �_•:x r +'v{E.s • :� tea, y,i'. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Introduction The City of San Bernardino has received a Development Agreement Application from General Growth Development, Inc.which would permit expansion of the Inland Center Mall located in the soutbwestern portion of the City (see Figures 1 and 2 for regional and site locations). The most recent version of"California Land-T Jse & Planning Law" (Curtin 1992) describes a Development Agreement as "an agreement between a property owner and a city under which the city agrees to apply to the subject property, unless provided otherwise by the agreement, the policies, rules and regulations in effect at the time the development agreement was entered into." (Curtin 1992, page 211) Thus, a development agreement establishes a the "ground-rules" for future development of a property, in this case the proposed expansion of the Inland Center. A development agreement is a legislative action (approved by ordinance) which requires approval by the City Council, based on a recommendation from the City Planning Commission. An agreement can be approved by the City Council if it is consistent with the City's General Plan. The City's Development Code (Title 19.58.010, copy provided as Appendix 1 to this document) establishes the contents of a development agreement and also indicates a development agreement is a discretionary decision that requires an environmental determination under the California -Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Project Description and the attached Environmental Checklist serve as the Initial Study for the "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND MANO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC." (Agreement). A copy of the proposed Agreement is provided as Appendix 2 to this Initial Study. B. Project Location The project site is generally located on the east side of the Interstate 215 Freeway at 500 Inland Center Mall in the southwestern portion of the City of San Bernardino as shown in Figures 1 and 2. The project site consists of approximately 62.5 acres located within the boundaries of Rancho San Bernardino (an area not divided into sections). The site can be found on the San Bernardino South Quadrangle (7.5 Minute Series, Topographic) at the following approximate location: Longitude: 117° 17' 45" and Latitude: 34° 05'. See Figure 2. C. Project Characteristics The proposed project consists of specific facilities proposed for development and the text of the proposed Development Agreement (Agreement) which contains commitments on the part of both the City and the project proponent that may affect the environment. This section of the Project Description summarizes those characteristics of the project that have the potential to affect or change the physical environment if the Agreement is approved by the City. In most instances the potential for physical impact is related to one of three stages of activity: site preparation, facility construction, and site occupancy and operation. This is 7 Exhibits section provides supporting graphics and information for the Operative Provisions. Neither of these sections contain any specific commitments to physical changes. The contents of the Operative Provisions are summarized below. Adoption of the Agreement by the City will establish the primary instrument governing future development and operation of new businesses at the Inland Center Mall (ICM). The commitments in the Agreement are in lieu of most future permits and approvals (exceptions are noted below). The summary follows. L Create three new legal parcels to facilitate location of up to three additional major department stores at ICM. 2. Development is proposed to occur in up to four phases as outlined in Tables 1 and 2. 3. The term of the Agreement is for 30 years or until the improvements no longer exist. 4. Adoption of the Agreement allows the development of facilities as described above and the operation of 1CM in accordance with the terms of the Agreement without regard to future ordinances,resolutions, rules, regulations and policies of the City. 5. The proposed development described in the Agreement includes: a. Three new major department stores with up to 540,000 square feet gross building area. b. A second level at ICM with up to 136,000 gross leasable retail area (236,460 GBA). c Up to four multi-level parking structures that will provide a minimum of four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross building area. d. landscaped areas which in aggregate constitute a minimum of 15% of the gross surface area of tht parking facilities at ICM to be in place upon completion of all development phases. C. Design elements consistent with standards in Section 19.06.060 of the Municipal Code (City of San Bernardino Development Code, List of Applicable Regulations). 6. The developer reserves the right to modify the following project components in the future within the existing developed ICM footprint. a. Footage of individual majors may be revised as long as the 540,000 square feet value is not exceeded. b. The aggregate square footage of the majors and the second floor of the mall may be decreased as needed. C. The capacity of the parking structures can be increased as needed. d. Developer can determine the ultimate location of the 15% landscaped area (this includes all landscaping around parking structures which will be in accordance with code). e. Make other facility or operations modifications that are administratively determined to be non- material by the City Director of Planning. 7. The Agreement provides that to the extent not inconsistent the following commitments are made: a. Future development will be governed by the CR-1 (Regional Commercial) General Plan land use designation. b. Permitted uses shall be as shown in the Site Plan and in Table 3. Conform with sign standards in the Municipal Code (Chapter 1922), see Exhibit F. 3 0 modifications to the infrastructure required to support this proposed expansion. The term of the Agreement and the additional procedural matters do not affect the environment. The additional legal parcels do not have any impact beyond the additional major department stores that would be constructed on them. Therefore, evaluation of the environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of these stores will address the potential adverse impacts of adopting the Agreement. Design of the new facilities will be consistent with the existing facilities, therefore, no potential for significant visual alterations is identified. Overall, then the Agreement does not contain any identifiable potential for additional environmental impact beyond that associated with constructing and operating the new facilities and their infrastructure support systems. The focus of this Initial Study will be on the potential adverse environmental impacts caused by developing the facilities as identified above. The Initial Study Checklist that follows addresses the broad range of environmental issues that may be affected by development and operation of the proposed ICM facilities. All issues in the Checklist are evaluated in the Substantiation section of the Initial Study regardless of the conclusion ("YES", "MAYBE", OR 'NO") checked. This provides the reviewer with a summary of the data used to reach the conclusion presented on the Checklist. Where a potential impact can be reduced by implementing mitigation, the Checklist is annotated with an arrow (------>) to indicate that the impact is reduced to a nonsignificant level. The substantiating text describes how this mitigation is accomplished. 5 2ND STREET RIALTO AVENUE } - b M1 W W Z 00 W 7 > Q = Q W w D W ~ Q W p Q Z 6 W N Q D w D W m f * y n m > C D 6 0 2 O Q W MILL STREET � W NVfF pEET Q f Z w V LLEG 5 DRIVE V W W 9 p I le f<< SITE t t JEFF STREET 9FF CENTRAL PAVENUE CENTRAL AVENUE GRANT AVENUE 9ENEDICT BENEDICT STREE NILLCREST NILLCR EST AVENUE O 0 9,L G E' ORANGE SNOW jOZ Pro ¢, ti0 ORANGE SNOW ROAD 0'9i BF .trV LF 9y 99 ♦ C ♦ y J SCALE IN MILES � r / AD / • Study IRtenwtim, CO VICINTITY MAP Tom Dodson& ASsocistes environmental consultants LouL--s : Donald Frischer & Associates FIGURE 2 2 Traffic & Transportation Engineers _ to TABLE 1 PHASING STATISTICS PHASE G.I.—AL S.F. REQ. PARKING PARKING (DESCRIPTION) (NET INCREASE) 4/1000 S.F. PROVIDED Eidsting Mall 883,829 3,535 4,400 Phase I 140,000 560 7� (Major 2) Phase H 88,405 354 (Mall Shops) 669 Phase III 191,600 766 J7,4521 (Mall Shops & Major 1) Phase IV 256,000 1,024 (Mall Shops & Major 3) Total 1,559,834 6,239 Notes: 7451 spaces equates to 4.8 spaces/1000 S.F. GLA TABLE 3 _ PERMITTED USES THE FOLLOWING USES WILL BE PERMITTED AT THE INLAND CENTER MALL General merchandise stores Apparel and accessory stores Home furnishings, furniture and equipment stores Eating places Alcoholic beverages Miscellaneous retail Banks and lenders Brokers Dry cleaners Watch, jewelry and clock repair Movie theaters Video rental Amusement/recreation Day care facilities Art galleries Travel Agencies Automobile Dealer Showrooms Such other uses which are occurring in any regional mall in southern California. INTERSECTION CONDITION 1 MIDDAY AFTERNOON PEAK HOUR PEAK HOUR Level Leval Delay' or Service Delay' of Service Inland Center driveway-Central Avenue/E Street 11 B 9 B Inland Center driveway-Benedid Sirwt/E Street 11 B 11 B Inland Center drivewayAdell StreetAnland Center Drive 12 B 13 B Inland Center driveway-G Street/Inland Center Drive 11 B 12 B E Street/Mill StreetAnland Center Drive— 38 D 34 D E Street/Orange Show Road 24 C 27 D Inland Center Drive/H Street-northbound Interstate Route 215 ramps 18 C 22 C Inland Center Drive/southbound Interstate Route 215 ramps 12 B 11 B Weighted average delay par vehicle,whole intaraacdon. The delay value¢are the weighted average delay per vehicle of the aA,,,l movertgnts. NOTES: Condition 1 Year tegi traffic LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA Weighted Average Delay Level Per Vehicle a Service (Seconds) A < 5.1 s 5.1 —15.0 C 15.1-25.0 D 25.1 —40.0 E 40.1-60.0 F > 60.0 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE Tm DOdsorr & A snciar s - environmental consultants LL:7: Donald Frischer & Associates TABLE 5 Traffic & Transportation Engineers a § . . 1 . 21 . . . h . ! . � l = = � = | 7 • = §j . , , . . . . | I p \ . . , . . . . ! < � i \i ) . . . . 1 . , . \ , \ | ) q! 'fit } \ \ } ! fS /� 1 ! fill ! ! ! f| � ! ! !�i .!!, ! ! ! ! | f ! ! !!= : `--- ! ! ! ! . . | ! > U£ o �» OF SERVICE � 1998 2m Ra_& 4 m ates environmental consultants Sower: Donald FriSCheT & Associates zG� , e� & m� eEngineers rr r«aw««Yrr ..rrw..«ral LJI uxvY u Ir« vM r• rr.� r.•. )11w xr x•r x.w old ,Yd Irl.r !t i.� ,Vj y`rj' � •In rr� tIJ Yr� „N� ]n,mil t..Y«r Y Iy Ill.rl 11Vl.p YJ Y.) ]II Y.1 hY 1 . ar Mr Y Irrr N YI _ \ nA ) Y Yr YIiJ1 U.l VA Y y R,a Y NA NLr1 \r\� Y WN.\I 4.I YA II W II,I I,Y LIr I xJ I I VA I rY. Y YI IIJI MY.II Yd ttA I I xYr Y Y W M.f I.Y I.Y n.1 a I III.r1 Y Itl Y1Y.11 Y.I tr.1 yt n.t _ n r\ v • r � v m WJ I I !.A I ^_`r u° ^ nTer oe YJ I I n.l la.q YI ^F = cell n.l Y IY«IYrr Y 4.1 n Wr. -r =aJ1 Wn.ar :I « n n tx LY LR I x M 1u.11 YIYJI Y ttl \ Y Y Ir1Y 4 Y IY.aI fi.t rt Y u y1T M Y n.t y 4F YA• 4nJ1 Y.l Y.f Y \pp Y f J• rte_ 1.II )4Y.rl ^1.1 lh xF v.r Y Y t 4.h rr'v'rlir m ntm nlY.0 Y.I n Mw IYr 1Y.1 IF 'aY.rM\!IYI�.Y rr� .YUrr4 NYratr. y� •uyr Y•r«wr Y Nr. MI Yrrr4 YS YII rYrr rrrlrY«.rlr«r.W Ir\N rn a YF rW rr r\rrrrlrrl«W r Nw rr 4r«Y�rrl II r A4 Mw Y Ilr Yr\MI«Nn wry.NrrF«Y«arrr r IYr • Irr rx 11 sour myrr yltrr.\rY. Y nrY.\r rw Y YID. 1990 AIR QUALITY DATA Tom Do IsnrP R Associates environmental consultants Source: South Coast Air Quality TABLE 8 (continued) Management District ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST AND SUBSTANTIATION CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND Application Number: Project Description: Development Agreement to allow expansion of Inland Center Mall by increasing commercial square footage by approximately 75% (660,000 square feet) . Location: Located between E Street and Inland Center Drive adjacent to the I-215 Freeway. Environmental Constraints Areas: Geolooic and seismic General Plan Designation: CR-1 Zoning Designation: CR-1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain answers,where appropriate, on a separate anached sheet. 1. Earth Resources Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe a. Earth movement (cut and/or fill)of 10,000 cubic yards or more? X b. Development and/or grading on a slope areaier than 15% natural grade? X c. Development within the Alquisi-Priolo Special Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0-Geologic & Seismic, Figure 47,of the City's General Plan? X d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical feature? X e. Development within areas defined for high potential for _ water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0- Geologic& Seismic, Figure 53, of the City's General Plan? X I. Modification of a channel,creek or river? X _ 0 b. Development of new or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe commercial or other uses which generate noise levels on areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities or other sensitive uses above an Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior? X c. Other? S. Land Use: Will the proposal result in: a. A change in the land use as designated on the General Plan? X b. Development within an Airport District as identified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Land Use Zoning District Map? X c. Development within Foothill Fire Zones A 8 B, or C as identified on the Land Use Zoning District Map? X d. Other? 7. Man-Made Hazards: Will the project: a. Use, store,transport or dispose of hazardous or toxic materials (including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X E - - - X b. Involve the release of hazardous substances? X E - - - X c. Expose people to the potential heahh/safety hazards? X E _ _ _ X d. Other? B. Housing: Wid the proposal: a. Remove existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? X b. Other? 9. Transportation/Circulation: Could the proposal, in comparison with the Circulation Plan as identified in Section 6.0-Circulation of the City's General Plan, result in: a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land use designated on the General Plan? X Id. Use of existing, or demand for new,parking facilhies/struaures? X - - X c. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? X _ _ _ 4_ d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation? X e. impact to rail or air traffic? X I. Increased safety hazards to vehicles,bicyclists or - pedestrians? X g. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvements? X It. Significant increase in traffic volumes on the roadways or intersections? X - - 1�X i. Other? ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MMGAT10N MEASURES DISCUSSION-CONTINUED F NATION is of this initial study, ed project COULD NOT have a significant etieG on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA•e prepared. O ed project could have a sgnAicam&ilea on the environment,although there will not be a signdicarn etlea in this case because the megaton measures described above have been added to the project A NEGATIVE DECLARATION win be prepared- The proposed project MAY have a signdiam ahem on the environmem, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Larry E. Reed, Assistant Director Name and I nle Sgnature Dais: March 19, 1992 ; INLAND CENTER MALL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (1992) INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST SUBSTANTIATION 1. Earth Resources: I.a. The primary concern related to movement of earth materials is the process of cut and fill grading and site preparation impacts and the alteration of topography as a result of earth movement to support development. Cut and fill activities and topographic alterations have already occurred at the project site in support of the current Inland Center Mall (ICM) facilities and improvements. The project proposes the development of a second floor at ICM, three additional major department stores, and up to four constructed parking facilities. Site preparation for these facilities will consist of minor excavations at each of the seven independent facilities to provide for new building structure footprints. Earth movement for each independent facility (the three department stores and four parking facilities) is expected to be substantiallv less than 10,000 cubic yards and no alterations to the site's topography is proposed. Small quantities of the existing fill materials at the individual facility sites shown in Figure 3 would be excavated beneath the proposed building footprints. Portions of this earth material would replaced on the site to meet foundation structural requirements as described in "Report on Foundation Investigation Proposed Inland Center Mall Expansion Interstate 215 Freeway and Inland Center Drive San Bernardino, California for General Growth of California Inc.", Jan 92. The remainder of the earth material will be transported to other locations requiring fill material. No direct adverse impacts are identified from excavation activities and from possible alterations in site topography because they will be below the City's threshold of significant excavation (10,000 cubic yards) and because no topographic alterations are proposed. No mitigation is proposed for these activities. Indirect impacts from managing the excavated material at the site and transport to an alternative fill location will occur. These include fugitive dust emissions (addressed below) and transport of excavated material from the site to another location. Two measures are proposed to ensure this transport occurs with no significant adverse impact. 1. All excavated material shall be transported in trucks with the surface wetted by water and the material a minimum of two feet below the trailer or with a cover to minimize fugitive dust 2. Trucks and tires shall be washed prior to leaving the construction site. 3. Ile excavated material shall be tested to ensure it is not contaminated and shall be transported to a rill location or a disposal site that can legally accept the material. o level terrain where deep alluvium is present. The Tujunga gravelly loamy sand (TvC) found on site are rapidly permeable containing a fine gravel content of 15-30%, this gravelly component and high permeability lead to very slow runoff and only slight erosion potential when disturbed. However, as noted extensive fill material has been placed at the site and it has been graded and paved in support of the current uses. Additional onsite excavations for infrastructure improvements or new facilities will be required to allow the proposed use. Some short-term potential for water and wind erosion is possible during construction activities. This potential can be mitigated to a level of non-significance by the City requiring that adequate erosion control measures be implemented during construction activities and by the City requiring that disturbed areas be recovered with pavement or permanent landscaping be installed immediately after construction activities are completed. Based on the above, it is judged potential soil erosion impacts can be reduced to a level of nonsignificance with implementation of the following measures. 4. Prior to construction on site, an erosion control plan shall be prepared which will control sediment laden surface runoff from leaving construction areas. This plan shall be submitted for City review and approval. This erosion control plan shall also contain provisions for control of fugitive dust from any stockpiled soils. Controls shall limit fugitive dust emissions to less than 150 lbs. per day based on SCAQMD thresholds of significance. S. Permanently exposed soils not covered by impervious surfaces shall be stabilized through the Installation of landscaping and irrigation systems. A landscape plan identifying plant materials,density,and size shall be reviewed and approved by the City. After the landscaping is established it shall be maintained in a manner that does not cause result in significant local fugitive dust or sediment generation to surface runoff. 1•9. The project site was once part of the natural drainage course of Lvtle Creek Wash. Historical records indicate that this area was a marsh, or wetlands. Depth to ground water at the project site is shown on Figure 75 of the General Plan Technical Background report as being less than 10 feet. The General Plan accordingly has designated this area a high liquefaction susceptibility area on Figure 48 as well as developing policies to mitigate this natural hazard. In response to this hazard, the developer has had prepared a detailed Liquefaction Report addressing the hazards as they relate to the proposed project. This Report is titled, "Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential Proposed Inland Center Mall Expansion Interstate 215 Freeway and Inland Center Drive San Bernardino, California for General Growth of California Inc.", Jan 92 prepared by Law/Crandall Inc.. This report summarizes results from soil borings and analysis of materials encountered beneath the project site. The Report concludes that the potential for significant liquefaction at the site is considered low. However, isolated relatively thin layers of potentially liquefiable soils were identified in some of the borings. The effect of liquefaction was concluded to not be significant because of the depth of the layers and the relative thinness of the liquefiable layers. The potential effects of the 3 indicates that no primary standards at the state or federal level are exceeded (Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide, and Lead. In addition, the state sulfate (SO4) standard is not violated. The maximum concentration of ozone in 1990 was .29 parts per million (ppm) which is a first-stage ozone alert. The state ozone standard (.09 ppm) was exceed 129 days at the San Bernardino monitoring station (approximately two miles from the proposed project site) and the federal standard (.12 ppm) was violated on 78 days. The 24-hour PM,o federal standard (see Table 8) was violated on 3.30/c of the days sampled and the state 24-hour PMto standard was violated on 58.37c of the days sampled. Both the state and federal annual averages (geometric and arithmetic means, respectively) were violated at the San Bernardino monitoring station. The proposed project does not include any proposed stationary sources of emissions; therefore, the construction and mobile source emissions related to the project implementation represent the only sources of additional emissions in the future. Construction Emissions The project can be divided into three types of construction activities. The addition of a second level at the mall (136,000 GLA) square feet will not cause the disturbance of any ground surface and no potential exists for fugitive dust generation. This project will be accomplished with the use of one or two pieces of construction equipment (a large crane) and periodic deliveries of construction materials. Using Emission factors for diesel powered trucks (Appendix L in the SCAQMD Handbook, ten delivery per day with travel of 50 miles in the basin (25 mile each direction average) in support of the proposed project) and one crane (operating eight hours as Miscellaneous Equipment under Appendix K to the SCAQMD Handbook) the daily emissions forecast would be as follows: ROG = 4.4 lbs; CO = 14.5 lbs; NO, = 32.4 lbs; PM = 4.7 lbs; and SO, = 4.6 lbs. All the above values are well below the thresholds established in the SCAQMD Handbook. The construction of the major department store will entail the disturbance of about 2 acres of area and is anticipated to involve the same type of equipment and emissions. In one instance the paved parking area may be ripped by a dozer or a gradall but the emissions are approximately equivalent to a crane which would immediately replace this equipment in support of constructing the structure. Emissions are approximately the same for equipment as in the first instance and the two acres of disturbed ground would be exposed to fugitive dust generation. Assuming watering to control dust emissions, daily particulate emissions would be approximately 55 lbs per working acre or 110 lbs. which is below the particulate threshold. Note that the project working areas are already compacted and paved, and potential for emissions is less than would occur on a totally undisturbed parcel. Mitigation is provided below to ensure that fugitive dust emissions are minimized: 5 emissions from the use of energy are all well below the Handbook threshold of significance, except for NO, which is 13 lbs above the threshold. The proposed project will have to reduce its energy consumption to reduce emissions below the threshold of significance. In the analysis of mobile sources below, it is demonstrated that sufficient NO, reductions will be achieved to more than offset the 13 lbs per day exceedance of the threshold. To address mobile source emissions, data from the Traffic Impact Study (Frischer & Associates 1991, see Appendix 3) and from a special study by Barton-Aschman Associates (see Appendix 4) has been evaluated. At full buildout of ICM under the proposed Development Agreement, the project will result in a maximum increase of 14,950 trips per day. Buildout was estimated to occur in 1998 in the traffic study and is forecast to occur in the year 2000 in the phasing plan of the Development Agreement. However, it is too simplistic to evaluate the proposed project in a vacuum because many trips to other malls in the region will be eliminated by the proposed expansion at ICM. To determine the net change in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) resulting from the ICM expansion, Barton-Aschman Associates conducted a detailed evaluation of the expansion, vehicle trips and capture of leakage trips to other malls based on a market study provided HSG/Gould Associates. The information from this study is discussed below, much of it quoted directly from Appendix 4. The Barton-Aschman study indicates that the proposed ICM expansion will reduce vehicle miles of travel in two ways: 1. A reduction in trip rates 2. Capture of leakage trips The reduction in trip rates is attributed to the fact that the expanded mall will have additional facilities which will reduce the shoppers' need to shop at other locations. Also, due to the increase in shopping facilities at a near-by mall, shoppers will no longer have to travel to distant malls for these facilities, thus reducing leakage trips, by as much as 50 percent. Based on these assumptions, Barton-Aschman forecasts that the expansion of ICM will reduce VMT from 232,470 per day to 185,370 miles per day. The reduction in future VMT is 47,100 miles daily which equates to an estimated reduction in future mobile source emissions (year 1998 and average speed of 30 miles per hour), see Appendix D of the SCAQMD Handbook) within the basin for the following pollutants: CO = -540 lbs/day; TOG = -48 lbs/day; NO, _ -114 lbs/day; and Particulates = -28 lbs/day. Based on the above analysis, the proposed project reduces VMT in a manner consistent with the greater balance achieved between jobs and housing described in the housing evauation section of this Initial Study. It is anticipated that 7 Traffic Sections of this Initial Study. Based on the forecasted reduction in air emissions and the additional emission reductions that will be achieved by this proposed project, the potential adverse impacts to SCAB air quality has been reduced to a nonsignificant level. 2.b. Current use of the site results in both interior and exterior odor releases. Current interior public exposure to odors results from activities associated with commercial retail uses (cooking odors, perfumes, floral odors, etc). These odor sources are not known to have resulted in any significant objections or adverse impacts. Exterior odors released from the site are primarily associated with vehicular emissions, such as diesel fumes. The project being evaluated is the development of additional uses which are essentially identical in nature and potential for odor releases to current uses of the site. The proposed project will not cause a change in odor sources and no significant odor impact is forecast from developing the proposed additional uses. No mitigation is proposed or required. Many temporary or short-term odor releases that may be objectionable are also of a toxic or noxious nature. These are potentially associated with the construction activity . Potential sources include but not limited to applications of glues, paint, and other architectural coatings. Because commercial activity will continue during construction, there is a need to lessen the potential for unwanted air borne releases and human exposure during construction "activities. The following mitigation is judged sufficient to reduce potential adverse odor effects to less than significant. 23. Construction related activities which utilize odorous, toxic,or hazardous materials which can be released into the air and can expose the public to health or nuisance odors shall be controlled to less than hazardous levels for the chemicals being utilized. This can be accomplished by preparing a Materials Handling and Procedures Plan which shall identify ham,dous odor sources, materials and quantities present on site, potential health effects, proposed special handling and isolation containment devices or mechanisms to prevent significant human exposure to airborne chemicals or odors. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to use of such chemicals at locations where humans may be exposed. 2.c. According to data provided on Figure 59 of the General Plan, the project site is not within a high wind hazard area. No other climate effects are predicted for the proposed project based in its small size and lack of components that can change climate. No potentially significant impacts are identified. References City of San Bernardino. 1989. Ciro of Son Bemardino t' newt Plan. City of San Bemardino. 1989. Ciro of Son Bemardino 9Sn r t Plan En dmnmenm/Impact Reason City of San Bemardino. 198& CI"N of San Bemardino anCn2l Plan Undare TecLLiiCol Background Report 9 meet the water quality objectives for Storm Discharge Permits by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 3.d. The City of San Bernardino water supply is stored in the Bunker Hill Groundwater Basin. Inflow to the basin occurs as runoff from the Santa Ana River, Mill Creek and the surrounding mountains in the east San Bernardino Valley. Recharge is supplemented by imported sources through artificial recharge basins that have been constructed on coarse alluvium at the foot of the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Bernardino Municipal Water Department recharges this water to the basin for urban water users. Currently, about 43,000 acre feet are delivered for City uses. The General Plan EIR determined that providing future water supply as the City builds out is not a significant impact, with the demand at ultimate buildout of the General Plan, including current users, resulting in the use of up to 59,000 acre/feet per year. Buildout of the General Plan was judged to be non-significant owing to the vast underground supplies currently, and historically, available to this region. The existing Mall uses approximately 95,000 gallons of water per day (City Water Department current use figure), or approximately 108 gallons per 1,000 square feet of mall space. The proposed project's incremental increase use of groundwater resources about 71,000 gallons per day and this falls well within the forecast within the General Plan. Thus, the increased water consumption is not considered significant based on the above analysis. 3.e. Existing flood control improvements in and around the project site have been designed and installed for a Corps of Engineers standard project flood with a recurrence interval which exceeds a 200 year frequency which will adequately protect the existing, as well as the proposed uses, on the project site. Flood hazard exposure no longer exists due to these improvements, thus no impact is identified. Reference City of Son Bemordlno. 7988 ON n(__Son Bernardino Genentl Plan /Ddote Te hnt of Bockrrnund Repo.+ Ciry of San Bemardino. 1989. QM of San Bernardino wl plan Son Bernardino County Transportation Flood Control Distnc4 pets. comm. 4. Biological Resources: 4.a, b & c. The project site prior to being altered in 1966 (prior to enactment of the Porter- Cologne Water Quality Control Act in 1969, and CEQA in 1972)was partially within the active ephemeral stream courses of Lytle and Warm Creeks, with marsh areas present. Surface water and soil moisture derived from high ground water levels, were 11 o 25. The existing trees on site Impacted by the project should be examined by a knowledgeable landscape professional to determine their ability to be transplanted. Those trees that are _ deemed good candidates for successful transplantation shall be relocated on the project site. 26. In the Iandscape and Irrigation Plan required in #5 adequate new trees shall be planted to compensate for the loss of the approximately 57 mature trees. With implementation of these two measures the potential loss of trees can be reduced below a significant level. References- City of San Bemardino. 1989. City of San Bemardino General Plan. City of San Bemardino. 1989. City of Son Bemardino General Pion Environmental Impact Report City of San Bemardino. 1988 City of San Bemordino General Plan Update Technical Background Report 5. Noise: 5.a & b. The State of California Planning Zoning and Development laws have developed specific land use compatibility criteria related to assessing effects of noise. The Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environment chart (City Noise Element) defines land uses and their sensitivity to noise; it divides land uses into ten categories and defines the sensitivity to noise for each, with commercial uses being the ninth and secone most tolerant land use to noise impacts. According to this definition of noise impact, levels of up to 70 dB CNEL are normally acceptable for the proposed use. The Initial Study requires an analysis for exposure of people to exterior noise levels of 65 dB and interior levels of 45 dB or greater; however these criteria are normally associated with sensitive land uses to noise impacts and by the definition above do not pertain to the commercial use proposed. Therefore, the following analysis is based upon exposure of persons to noise levels which exceed 70 dB as defined to assess potential significant noise impacts. The project site is already developed for commercial uses and is subject to three distinct noise sources: low level aircraft overflights from Norton Air Force Base; rail traffic along Inland Center Drive; and traffic or vehicular noise on adjacent streets and in the parking areas. The Noise Element quantifies these noise levels as follows at the project site. Exterior noise levels from aircraft range between 60-65 decibels from planes approaching Norton Air Force Base to the east. Railroad tracks parallel the northern right of way for Inland Center Drive, or approximately 100 feet from the project site. Noise levels measured at 200 feet along the Santa Fe Rail Line are projected to be 56 dB. Both of these noise sources are intermittent, and proposed closure of Norton will likely result in further reduced noise levels as military planes are exempt from domestic noise standards. 13 be added to the City when build-out occurs in the future. The addition of 36 million square feet includes the 22 million square feet of Regional Commercial development, including the proposed project. On pages 437 through pages 452, the General Plan EIR contains an evaluation of land use impacts from developing the additional 36 million square feet of commercial square footage. No significant adverse impact were identified. The City projects a demand for the commercial square footages outlined above and the proposed project is within these forecasts. The conclusions in this Initial Study is that the development of 676,000 square feet of commercial space (about 317o of the 22 million square feet of Regional Commercial and 1.8%of the 36 million square feet of total Commercial square footage) are not significant and this finding is tiered on the findings in the General Plan EIR as permitted in the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15151 The General Plan EIR can be reviewed at the City's Planning and Building Department during normal working hours. The most relevant General Plan Land Use polices applicable to the project site and proposed project are as follows: Polity 1.15.10 Permitted Uses Permit and encourage the intensification of the Central City and Inland Center Malls and adjacent properties designated as Commercial Regional Retail (CRQ) for region-serving commercial, entertainment, restaurant, supporting retail, professional offices and similar uses. Policy 1.15.20 Densiry/Intensity, and Height Permit a maximum floor area ratio of 15 and height of four stories (52 feet). Policy 1.1530 Design and Development Guidelines Require that new development in the region-serving malls be designed to visually and physically 'open onto' periphe-a] parking areas, rather that oriented exclusively to interior pedestrian areas; which may incorporate exterior store fronts, restaurants, major entries, and other similar design elements. Policy 1.1536 Work with the owners of Inland Center to encourage their installation of landscape,berms, decorative walls, well designed signage, and other aesthetic elements to improve the visual and physical quality of the site's periphery. The General Plan includes an Economic Development Element to define a set of policies which will assist the City's elected leadership and management in the formation of deliberate initiatives for the maintenance and enhancement of the City's economic development. Existing Regional Commercial space totals 1,890,000 square feet of gross leasable area in the two city malls. The analysis of retail activity indicates the current primary regional market area is defined as lands in San Bernardino Vallev east of Fontana to Redlands, limited on the west by proposed regional mall proposed in Rancho Cucamonga/Ontario. The share of planning area expenditures would support an estimated 833,000 square feet of regional mall space currently. By the year 2010, including adjustments for regional space based on other project, the above defined region is forecast to support an additional 2.2 million square feet of regional space which the City hopes to capture. 15 Both areas occur at the urban/foothill interface at the San Bernardino Mountains. The project site is 3.4 miles away from these areas and no impacts are expected based on the project's location. References: Ciry of San Bernardino. 1989. Ci y of San Bema dino General Plan. City of San Bernardino. 1989. Qtv of San Bernardi,70 QL nmrRl Plon En dmnmenml Impact Re City of San Bemardino. 1988 Ch),of San Bemardino gSneral Plan Update T hnicol Backiound R pox 7. Man-Made Hazards: 7.a. The proposed project and its potential for use or release of hazardous or toxic materials is divided into two analysis components. The first assesses the project after it is occupied and is discussed below, followed by an analysis of the temporary potential environmental effects of construction/demolition activities and anv man' made hazards. Hazardous Materials/Uses is addressed in Chapter 13 of the General Plan which provides an overview of issues and puts forth goals, objectives, and policies once the use is established. There is also a strong city, county, state and federal mandated regulatory network of agencies responsible for the transportation and handling of hazardous materials, with strict guidelines and procedures which must be followed. These agencies include the City Fire Department, County of San Bernardino Department of Environmental Health Services Department, Regional Water Quality Control Board, the State Department of Health Services and in the case of the work environment, CAL OSHA. The site currently retails substances which by definition are considered to be hazardous materials, but are common substances in use by every household and vehicle owner. Activities at the site will also likely result in generation of wastes which require special handling and disposal. The presence of these substances on the current site has not resulted in any known adverse effects on the environment or exposure of the public to serious health hazards. Nonetheless, there is always the possibility that accidental spills, or other temporary situations, could be caused by the activities that will occupy the new commercial space. To ensure that potential health risk impacts of new commercial businesses are mitigated to a level of non-significance, the City shall review each proposed activity within this development, including construction plans, to ensure that its implementation does not create a significant threat to human health and safety. This review should ensure that site and building design provides adequate provisions for reasonable evacuation routes in the event a hazard is present. 17 - o San Bemardino County. 1990. Hazardous Waste Manaecme,t Plan 8. Housing: 8.a. Existing residential uses located closest to the project site are predominantly single family neighborhoods located to the west of I-215. The freeway serves as an effective barrier between the intense commercial east of I-215 and residential to the west. North and east of the site are existing commercial, industrial and public land uses with many vacant or under utilized parcels. A few older single family residences exist in these areas but the General Plan designates these areas as commercial/industrial and they are not expected to remain. The project will not remove or will it adversely effect existing residential uses. The Project site contains no housing, nor do any of the City General Plan's policies call for housing or residential dwelling units at or near this location. No impacts to existing housing are identified and no mitigation is required. Evaluation of potential demand that implementation of the project will create for housing is related to family incomes for future employees at the Inland Center who do not already live in the area. The Inland Empire is a housing rich and job poor area according to SCAG. However, this regional trend is less severe in the City. Local employment Opportunities in 1980, according to the Housing Element, were high with 88% of the working residents in the City being employed in the Riverside- San Bernardino-Ontario SMSA, with 57% of those employed within the City. SCAG defuses households paying over 30 percent of family income for housing as "in need". The 1988 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) estimated that 1988 median City housing price was $91,500 (family income = $28,600), with the median point for rents at $330 per month. The Housing Element identified 21% or 11,755 of City households meeting this "in need" definition Citywide, of which renters comprised 76% of the "in need" category. This high percentage of households overpaying is thought to be attributable to several factors; one is the limited range of white collar job opportunities in the City, and the high number of service sector jobs. The RHNA 1988 concluded there is a current need for an additional 1,159 housing for very low income families, 1,865 units for low income fan-lilies, and 1,799 units for moderate income families within five years. The General Plan identifies opportunities for the production of affordable ownership in the more intense land use classifications, with a target area north of the project site between the two City Malls. Citywide the General Plan land use designations would result in allocating approximately half of all potential new multi-family units being constructed in the southeast quadrant of the City, which is proximate to the project site. 19 status of the CMP, this document does not evaluate the relationship between the proposed project and the CMP since it would be speculative at this stage of its preparation. Following adoption of the CMP, the City can integrate specific mitigation proposals to meet the CMP goals and objectives. This can be accomplished when specific development projects are submitted for future City review. 9.b. The proposed project will create a demand for substantial additional parking area and the developer has included an additional 3,051 parking spaces in the project design. This will provide a total of 7,451 parking spaces, or 4.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable commercial area. This exceeds the City's requirements and no significant impact is forecast and no mitigation is required. 9.c. By increasing the size of ICM (676,000 square feet), the proposed project will increase demand for public transit resources. At present two local transit routes serve the project, one on "E" Street and one on Inland Center Drive. These two routes provide access to the adjacent public street system and the E Street route provides access onto the Mall site itself at the present time. To enhance public transit use the applicant will implement the following mitigation measure. 31. The developer shall provide a minimum of one covered drop-olr facility when future development phases are implemented to ensure that public transit riders have a protected location adjacent to the Mall for access to buses or other public transit vehicle. 32. The developer shall cooperate with the City of San Bernardino in establishing and operating a locvl shuttle service to highly urbanized portions of the City to reduce trip generation in the downtown area of the City. If ridership increases as a result of the increased commercial square footage and the enhanced public transit facilities, Omnitrans will be able to expand service on these lines based on the increase in revenues. Because of this ability to expand to meet existing demand, the proposed project is not identified as having any significant adverse effects on the public transit system. 9.d. The proposed project is presently served by an effective circulation pattern that will not be altered as a result of implementing the project. The possibility exists for Caltrans (I-215) and the City (Central Avenue) to modify the local circulation system with proposed road improvements which are beyond the control of the project. The text of the Development Agreement would require the City to assist ICM in maintaining a circulation system that will protect the best interests of the ICM's future operations. No adverse impact to the present pattern of circulation is forecast as a result of implementing the proposed project and no mitigation is proposed. 9.e. The proposed project has no potential to affect existing rail or air traffic systems based on the proposeed improvements and expansion which are contained on the 21 r cumulative traffic growth on the local road system. Table 4 provides a summary of the proposed development by phase in the future that was used to make traffic impact forecasts. Current traffic volumes were counted manually from June 4 through June 12, 1991. During this same period daily traffic volumes at the seven ICM driveways were automatically counted. The local road system of concern includes the following roads (see Figure 2): Riverside-Barstow Freeway (I-215) Inland Center Drive Orange Show Road E Street H Street G Street Adell Street Mill Street Central Avenue Benedict Street The latter two roads are driveways that cross the Lytle Creek Flood Control Channel and connect ICM with E Street. Table 5 depicts the current Levels of Service (LOS, see Table 5 for an explanation of the six LOS, "A"-"F') that occur at the eight intersections of concern during the midday and afternoon peak hours. All intersections were determined to operate at LOS D or better which is consistent with the City's General Plan goal. Estimates were made for average weekday traffic (total, miday peak hour and afternoon peak hour) for the 60% of development scenario and for full development (see Table 6). The maximum impact to the circulation system from the project was forecast as follows: Additional Vehicle Trips: 14,950 trips per day Midday Peak Hour Increase: Entering 815 trips Exiting 815 trips Afternoon Peak Hour Increase: Entering 760 trips Exiting 760 trips The Traffic Impact Study evaluated three conditions for year 1993 traffic impacts which are at less than full buildout (Phase I) and the reader is referenced to Appendix 3 to this document for this information. The maximum traffic impact is identified in Table 7 for Condition 5, Condition 6, Condition 7 and Condition 8. Condition 5 is the year 1998 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually) average weekday, with Phase I expansion. Condition 6 is the year 1998 traffic (year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), peak-month weekday, with Phase 1 expansion Condition 7 is the year 1998 traffic (year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), average weekday, with both Phase I and Phase II expansion. Condition 8 is the year 1998 traffic (year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), peak- 23 37. The project shall contribute, at each phase, an amount equal to 10% of the cost to mitigate/improve the intersection of Orange Show Road and "E", as identified in the traffic study. This equates to a fair-share cash contribution of 530,000, each phase The project is estimated to generate an additional 9,400 ADT on opening of Phase I; this translates to approximately$125,000 (1991 dollars) in Traffic Systems fees. The traffic system fees may be credited from the off site mitigations. Proposed structures shall be kept away from anticipated widening of 1-215 (at worse-case scenario) 38. The project shall develop a landscaped median along Inland Center Drive. Phase II Project Mitigation 39. Contribute the second $30,000 towards the mitigations identified measure 4137 (Orange Show Road and E Street. 40. The second pahse is estimated to generate an additional 5.550 ADT from Phase II; this translates to about $73,000 (1991 dollars) in Traffic Systems fees. The review of the project based on the above improvements was determined by the City Traffic Engineer to reduce the potential project specific traffic impacts below a significant level. No additional mitigation is required. 10. Public Services: 10.a. Fire protection: The City provides fire prevention, fire protection and emergency medical services. Fire Station 10 is closest to the project site, located 1/2 mile away at the intersection of Mill Street and Arrowhead Ave. The Fire Department uses the Uniform Fire Code, the National Fire codes, and the California Administrative Code as the basis for it's enforcement programs, in addition the City has adopted more stringent fire regulations in areas of building construction which requires automatic fire sprinklers in all new commercial buildings over 5,000 square feet in area. To mitigate potential impacts upon the fire protection impacts and the Fire Department's ability to provide adequate levels Of service, the City shall implement the following measures: 41. Require that the project construction meet the standards referenced above related to type of construction,materials and installation of sprinklers during the review of planning, building, and construction drawings. 42. The developer shall ensure that adequate infrastructure and water supply are available onsite and per City standards to meet peak fire flow requirements and that they will he in place and operational prior to occupancy of the new facilities. 43. The Developer shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and enforcement of 25 0 standards and schedules for acquisition and development of new park or rehabilitation of existing parks and recreation and special facilities, i.e. tot lots, or water facilities such as fountains. Policy 9.1.14 of the General Plan requires that new commercial development provide open space facilities on-site for passive and active recreation or contribute fees for the public development of such facilities. The proposed project description does not contain sufficient level of detail to address this issue. To ensure that park and recreation opportunities are provided as recommended by the policy, the following mitigation measure is judged to be sufficient to reduce potential recreation impacts to less than significant. 46. The project shall coordinate with the City Parks and Recreation Department to provide recreational facilities on site and by providing active and/or passive recreation opportunities or special facilities. Alternatively, the developer can arrange to contribute fees for public development of such facilities. 10.e. Medical Aid: Emergency Medical Services are provided by City Fire Department trained personnel through the EMT program (see fire above). The closest hospital to the site is located in Loma Linda, with other hospitals located near Highland Ave and Medical Center Drive. The need for increased medical services at the project site can be correlated to increased population in the region, but not increased use of the project site. Some unquantifjable, but small, increase in demand for emergency medical service may occur due to development of the proposed project. However, the impacts from a minor increase in demand is not identified as causing a significant effect on medical aid levels of service. No potential for significant impact is forecast to affect this service. 10.f. Solid Waste: Solid waste collected in the planning area is presently disposed at landfills in the east valley, either Colton. Mid-Valley or San Timoteo Landfills that are operated by the County. The General Plan EIR evaluated the solid waste generation and evaluated potential impacts as not resulting in significant adverse environmental effects. San Bernardino County utilizes a per capita annual waste generation rate that does not apply to commercial or industrial projects. Riverside County has defined waste generation based upon developed square footage, and although the County of San Bernardino does not calculate waste generation in this manner, the use of this methodology seems best suited for this project. Given the proximity of the site to Riverside County and similar types of population, it was judged that use of Riverside County data would be appropriate for making a forecast. Based upon a generation factor of 1 pound per day for each 100 square feet of building area, the current facility generates 1,613 tons of solid waste per year. Proposed expansion would result _ in another 1,208 tons per year, for a buildout waste stream of 2,821 tons per year. 27 0 0 County of Riverside. 1989, Riverside Counry 5olid Wwf mona2cnjent Plan County of San Bernardino. 1989. Son Bemordino County olid Waste management Ploy, 1989-1990 adore Preliminary Draft. 11. Utilities: a-1/2. Natural Gas/Electricity: Development of the project will increase consumption of natural gas and electricity at the project site. Natural gas is supplied by Southern California Gas Company and the consumption factor for this land use is roughly 31 cubic feet/day for every 100 square feet of floor area. Current site usage is estimated to be an average of 274,000 cubic feet per day. Electricity is supplied by Southern California Edison Company and commercial uses of this type consume roughly 18 kilowatt hours per day for every 100 square feet of building area, with current consumptive use estimated at 160,000 kilowatt hours per day. Proposed expansion of building area will increase the consumption of these utilities. Natural gas consumption will increase by 205,342 cubic feet per day for a total project consumption of natural gas of 480,000 cubic feet per day. Electrical consumption will increase 120,000 kilowatt hours per day for a total electrical demand of 280,000 kilowatt hours per day. The City General Plan and policies address reducing consumption of these resources through policy statements contained in chapter 11. The project site is situated over a geothermal resource which provides a unique opportunity to the developers of the project site. The vast majority of the natural gas consumption at the site is used to provide space beating, and the potential exists to offset the consumption of natural gas resources, which are considered to be nonsignificant, through use of the geothermal usage. 49. The developer shall confer with the City Municipal Water Department regarding the ability to utilize local geothermal resources for space heating and cooling. If judged feasible by the City and developer, the geothermal resource shall be developed and used at the site as an energy source. The California Energy Commission (CEC 1990) has reviewed energy resource availability for California and determined that adequate electricity and natural gas resources are available over the next ten years when the project will be developed. Based on adequacy of commercially available energy resources, the proposed project will not cause a significant adverse impact on the environment. a3/4. Water/Sewer: Water and sewer service to this project is provided by the City of San Bernardino Water Department. It is the responsibility of the City to provide water and sewer service to developments within it's service area if adequate water supplies and sewage treatment capacity are available. 29 © a distance the Mall features blend into the overall foreground view north towards the San Bernardino Mountains. Uses with southern views of Blue Mountain occur north of Inland Center Drive with 500.600 feet separation between buildings. As viewed from Inland Center Drive the Mall is slightly depressed with current buildings not extending above foreground views. The project proposes "infilling" the reaches between the three major anchors with a second story, and adding up to three additional major anchors upon completion of all phases. Overall building heights would not exceed the current heights of the existing anchor stores, estimated at 70-80 feet. Proposed construction will result in increasing the overall building footprints and massing of structures on the project site while retaining a perimeter surface parking area. None of the proposed buildings will be constructed any closer than current building locations and will not result in obstruction of their views, which are long range scenic vistas. Thus, the project will have no significant impacts to existing scenic vistas in the valley. 12.b. The analysis of project aesthetic impacts upon the surrounding area needs to be compared to the setting in which it is located. CEQA allows a Lead Agency to use its own judgement in how it evaluate projects as well as providing guidance in the determination of significance. Appendix G lists the following effects as normally having a significant effect on the environment if it will,; (a) Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community, (b) have a demonstrable substantial negative aesthetic effect, (u) disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The current developed setting in the portion of the City which surrounds the ICM and adjacent commercial development provides a weak image, with poorly defined districts and linkages to adjacent areas. Architectural treatments are generally reflective of past and older styles which by most standards are less visually appealing than new mall developments. The current development in and surrounding the 1CM can be best characterized as a remnant of past planning practices. The City has initiated Redevelopment activities to enhance the visual setting of its regional malls. Redevelopment activities have resulted in the Carousel Mall improvements, major streetscape installations in the downtown area. Other renovation projects include complete new edge treatment and revamping of the Orange Show Fairgrounds, particularly the street and intersection enhancements along "E" Street South of Mill. The ICM has yet to undergo these types of renovation and the proposed project provides an opportunity to achieve comparable improvements in the visual setting at the project site. To assist the City in achieving aesthetic enhancement of the project area, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 50. Prior to initiating the first phase or development, the developer shall submit a more detailed 31 APPENDIX 3 i -' TRAFFIC E IPACT STUDY -INTLAND CENTER EXPANSION SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA t PREPARED FOR r_fI�:r�Fini. .:.R+.iPr.Vli lira*1'sP.. •�l:i��:L�;�: i ';:: Q "m Cl >;J��flID niSiiiEfl flSSflClfl1[S )Tall IC AND iltlRSlpa tAllDN [NGN([RS"D I[ANN[RS 44431 HAMLIN STREET • SUITE 1 _ VAN NUTS. CALIFORNIA • 91401 218 /755•:572 2431973.1579 OOOflLO �flISCfl�fl C flSSOCIflifS 1 4 4 3 1 H A M L I N S T R E E T VAN NUYS, CALIFORNIA 9 140 1 818/785- 1578 213/873- . 1578 September 6, 1991 General Growth Centers Companies, Inc. Suite 525 15821 Ventura Boulevard Encino, California 91436 Attention: Mr. Richard C. Donavin, Vice President Subject: Traffic Impact Study Inland Center Expansion Gentlemen: We are pleased to submit the attached report, T�-afric Impact Study Inland Center Expansion, dated September 6, 1991. In the report, we have presented the results of a comprehensive study of the potential traffic impac-s that would be generated by two major phases of expansion of Inland Center. We have submitted in a separate volume a Technical Appendix containing detailed calculations and other references mentioned in the report to those individuals who would have need for the information. Inland Center would be expanded from its current 883,829 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA) to 1279,130 square feet GLA in Phase I. In Phase H, another 250,000 square feet GLA would be added to the center raising its size to a total of 1,529,130 square feet GLA. Two major depart- ment stores and mall shops would be added in Phase I, and one major department store would be added in Phase Il. TRAFFIC A Nn To a General Growth Centers Companies, Inc. September 6, 1991 Page 3 With the implementation of major improvement projects being proposed by others such as the improvements on Interstate Route 215 and the extension of Central Avenue, there would be major changes in traffic patterns in the vicinity of Inland Center. Although the effects of those changes can not be considered at this time, it is likely that the results would be positive. The interconnection and coordination of traffic signals was found to be feasible for the intersections that were studied on Inland Center Drive and on E Street. When Phase I is completed, the installation of a traffic signal would be warranted at the Inland Center driveway that is located midway between the two existing signalized driveways at G Street and at Adell Street. We wish to acknowledge the excellent cooperation we have received from Mr. Anwar Wagdy, City Traffic Engineer, and his staff during the study. We will continue to be available to respond to comments and questions regarding the study. Very truly yours, DONALD FR SC M & ASSOCIATES Donald Frischer, P. E. Registered Professional Engineer Traffic No. 44 ♦ Civil No. 9141 O QpOFESSIpN4 Qf. �,0 FR/3, l QpOFESS/Q q 2P OZ�"c Qf0 VO PR/S,ql uO Am y�OP CZfyc+ Na « EXP. 3-31-0 P * ¢ Na 9141 a ��i TRAFF\C �P s EXP. IE-JI-BP �E�°GL1fOR� B�� CIY�I �r to tfvFrmgcNOP" C BSSO[18IFS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION P.g. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 DATA SOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 PUBLIC TRANSIT 9 CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 FUTURE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 ESTIMATED FUTURE TRAFFIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND ANALYSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 TABLES Na 1. INLAND CENTER EXPANSION-PHASE I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3. ESTIMATED INLAND CENTER TRAFFIC AVERAGE WEEKDAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 FIGURES 1. VICINITY MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. SITE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. CURRENT TRAFFIC YEAR 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4. FUTURE TRAFFIC WITHOUT INLAND CENTER EXPANSION YEAR 1993 . . . . . . . 21 5. FUTURE TRAFFIC WITH INLAND CENTER PHASE I EXPANSION AVERAGE WEEKDAY-YEAR 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 6. FUTURE TRAFFIC WITH INLAND CENTER PHASE I EXPANSION AVERAGE WEEKDAY-YEAR 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 24 7. FUTURE TRAFFIC WITH INLAND CENTER PHASE I AND PHASE II EXPANSION AVERAGE WEEKDAY-YEAR 1998 27 nnflo O IG Rfutp f G[tnrl2Tfr � o TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY INLAND CENTER EXPANSION SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION Inland Center is an existing regional shopping center that is located in the City of San Bernardino, California. The center is located within the area bounded by Inland Center Drive on the northwest, Interstate Route 215 Freeway on the southwest, and Lytle Creek Flood Control Channel on the east. There are two bridges across Lytle Creek that link the parking lot of Inland Center and E Street. (See Figure 1, Vicinity Map, and Figure 2, Site Plan.) General Growth Center Companies, Inc. bas proposed the expansion of the Inland Center. Based on architectural plans prepared by Altoon & Porter, the expansion would be developed in two phases. In Phase I, Inland Center would be expanded from its current 883,829 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA)to 1,279,130 square feet GLA. In Phase II, another 250,000 square feet GLA would be added to the center raising its size to a total of 1,529,130 square feet GLA. Portions of the existing center would be demolished and new buildings would be added. Two major department stores and mall shops would be added in Phase I, and one major department store would be added in Phase 11. (See Table 1, Inland Center Expansion-Phase I.) + l : A + >,Y � J J J f J JI all AN Cl IZ r 1 V L 1 t u 3 0 In Phase I, a three-level parking structure with approximately 2,100 spaces would be constructed on the eastern part of the site and another parking structure with 600 spaces would be constructed on the southern part of the site to accommodate the additional parking demands that would be generated by the expansion. In Phase II, two parking structures with a total of approximately 1,550 spaces would be constructed on the western part of the site to accommodate the additional parking demands that would be generated in Phase H. DATA SOURCES Site plans for the proposed development were prepared by Altoon & Porter Architects. On June 4, 5, 6, 11, and 12, 1991, during the midday and afternoon peak periods, vehicle turning movements at the eight selected inter- sections were counted manually. On June 6, 7, and 8, 1991, daily traffic volumes were counted automatically at the seven driveways of the center. The traffic was counted by Newport Traffic Studies under contract to Donald Frischer & Associates. Intercity and local bus line schedules and route information were obtained from Omnitrans. Donald Frischer &Associates personnel investigated traffic operations on the streets and freeway serving Inland Center and the surrounding community. Pertinent physical features of the existing street and freeway system were recorded Orange Shorn Road runs approximately east-west between a point easterly of Arrowhead Avenue and the Orange Show Road Interchange on Interstate Route 215 in the City of San Bernardino. Between the interchange and Fairway Drive, the street runs approximately north- south and is named Auto Center Drive. Easterly of Interstate Route 215, Orange Show Road has two lanes in each direction separated by a two-way left-turn lane. The curb-to-curb street width varies between 72 feet and 75 feet. There are left-turn lanes on both approaches to the intersection at E Street. Parking is prohibited on both sides of the street. E Street, a north-south major street, runs within the City of San Bernardino between Kendall Drive (State Route 206) and Hunts Lane. There are two lanes in each direction, separated by a two-way left-turn lane. The curb-to-curb width varies from 73 feet to 87 feet. There are left- turn lanes on both approaches of the intersections on E Street at Central Avenue-Inland Center driveway,Benedict Street-Inland Center driveway, Mill Street/Inland Center Drive, and Orange Show Road. The street is posted for a 40-mile-per-hour speed limit. Parking is permitted on both sides of the street, H Street is a local north-south street that runs from Mill Street to Inland Center Drive. The street is 40 feet wide from curb to curb and has one lane in each direction. There are railroad crossing gates on the approach of the intersection at Inland Center Drive. Parking is permitted on both aides of the street. 7 PUBLIC TRANSIT Omnitrans provides transit service to the City of San Bernardino and neighboring cities. Route 2 runs between the northern part of the City of San Bernardino and the City of Colton. On weekdays, service is provided at 45-minute intervals from 5:25 am to 8:00 p.m. On Saturdays, service is provided hourly from 8:00 a.m. to 5:50 p.m. There are bus stops on both sides of Inland Center Drive north of Adell Street-Inland Center driveway and southwest of Mill Street. Route 17 runs between the City of San Bernardino and the City of Redlands. On weekdays, service is provided every 45 minutes from 5:45 a.m to 10:00 p.m. On Saturdays, service is provided at 45-minute intervals from 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. There are bus stops within the Inland Center, on both sides of E Street north of Central Avenue, on the east side of E Street north of Mill Street, and on the west side of E Street south of Mill Street. Route 110 runs between the City of Riverside and the City of Los Angeles by way of the cities of San Bernardino and Ontario. On weekdays, service is provided hourly from 4:00 a.m to 10:00 p.m. On Saturdays, service is provided hourly from 6:00 a.m. to 9:20 p.m. There are bus stops on both sides of Inland Center Drive north of Inland Center driveway-Adell Street and southwest of Mill Street. 9 0 3. Inland Center driveway-Adell Street/Inland Center Drive Three-phase traffic signal with northbound and southbound protected left.-turn phases 4. Inland Center drivewav-G Streetflnland Center Drive Three-phase traffic signal with northbound and southbound protected left-turn phases 5. E Street/Mill StreetJlnland Center Drive (five-lee intersection) Six-phase traffic signal with northbound and southbound protected left-turn phases, northeastbound, eastbound, and westbound separate phases 6. E Street/Oranae Show Road Foi-r-phase traffic signal with northbound and southbound protected left-turn phases,and eastbound and westbound separate phases 7. Inland Center Drive/H Street-northbound Interstate Route 215 ramps Three-phase traffic signal with northbound and southbound protected left-turn phases 8. Inland Center Drivelsouthbound Interstate Route 215 ramps Three-phase traffic signal with southbound protected left-turn phase 11 ---- - J� IL �r� P Sam ••> J 1 L r>o-To Rt�r e_m-I =cM IM 4 1' ff• �q SITE 4 tf,•r, • J �`, ` J I L r s_T �e,•nw mm Jy _ �R r e� o-' R 3�J tJ 7¢H Lra_ � Q JlLr;a-Z NOT TO NUMBER OF OF VEHICLES Midday Aftenwo. �F Peak Hour Peak Hour 000 — 000 • FvNm, tea. fire v,,cla, DDDfllO RUG C BSSD MHE FIGURE 3 T•••f$C•ND T•ANSM"A roR . ("IM(•t•.G ft"Ar(RS CURRENT TRAFFIC YEAR i9a1 {fff{{fitj� �pps�� "] ss rrt;rr'; �' s1l �� t�� � l�I lit i e fit Itltii� 1� � i r , . . .• ._ IitlS ......... tit i -------- fits ----•°- iitt� Ei e ....._ fit ........ I tt- ___... c.ai :. s t ._..... !ill -- --•• fitt •----- Tilt 0�l CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ITEM # LOCATION CASEAS,RFFMFNT NO 4 HEARING DATE 1 ?Z4<1 F5+!S.W ZA $MOW LTE Lij ` �-I4/(p/MSS �•/ s y?v7 :. .. - • I Q s ; IMLL .(.0 IR ST fl V _ S MY Al j � y j • _ `�l , 4 4 FUTURE,TRAFFIC DlIPROVEMENTS Interstate Route 215 Widening and Reconstruction The California Department of Transportation is planning to improve Interstate Route 215 between State Route 30 on the north and the San Bernardino County line on the south. Preliminary alternative designs which were prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. (PBQ & D) were being considered at the time this report was prepared. Additional alternatives will probably be suggested for study, and no final determinations regarding the project will be made until sometime in the year 1992. Central Avenue Extension There have been studies of a concept to extend Central Avenue from the east along the creek through the National Orange Show to an inter- section at E Street, and then westerly along the south side of Inland Center to Interstate Route 215. The studies are underway, and no conclusions will be reached in the immediate future. ESTIMATED FUTURE TRAFFIC Growth 7raffic A growth factor of five percent compounded annually was applied to the current traffic volumes(other than the Inland Center traffic)to account for traffic growth prior to the expected completion of Phase I and Phase II of the Inland Center expansion. As recommended by the City staff, that traffic growth would include any future traffic generated by other developments within the study area. 15 ---- - 0 o In Table 3 are estimates of the 24-hour, midday, and afternoon peak- hour traffic volumes that would be generated by the Inland Center expansion on an average weekday. The estimated peak-hour traffic volumes that would be associated with the expansion of Inland Center were assigned to the street and freeway system based on current observable travel patterns and minimum travel times and distances. The average weekday midday and afternoon peak-hour project traffic volumes at the selected intersections are listed in the tables, Estimated Intersection T�affc Volumes, in the Technical Appendix. Project Traffic, Peak-Month Weekday Based on unpublished studies by Donald Frischer & Associates at twelve shopping centers in California, it was determined that shopping center traffic on a peak month weekday is approximately 55 percent higher than on an average weekday. Based on data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers', Friday traffic for a shopping center of more than 300,000 square feet is 15.4-percent higher than average weekday traffic. Because the average weekday traffic for the project were based on the driveways traffic counts recorded on Friday, the average peak-month weekday traffic volumes were obtained by increasing the average weekday estimates by 40 percent. The weekday midday and afternoon peak-hour traffic volumes for the peak-month at the subject intersections are listed in the tables, Estimated Intersection T-affic Volumes, in the Technical Appendix. 'Institute of Transportation Engineers,5th Edition Trip Gene hm,Wuhington,D.C., 1991. 17 ...... ........ . .... 0 TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND ANALYSES Traffic impacts were evaluated for the following conditions for both the midday and afternoon peak hours: Condition 1 Year 1991 traffic Condition 2 Year 1993 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually) without Phase I expansion Condition 3 Year 1993 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), average weekday, with Phase I expansion Condition 4 Year 1993 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), peak-month weekday, with Phase I expansion Condition 5 Year 1998 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), average weekday, with Phase I expansion Condition 6 Year 1998 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), peak-month weekday, with Phase I expansion Condition 7 Year 1998 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), average weekday, with both Phase I and Phase II expansion Condition 8 Year 1998 traffic (Year 1991 traffic plus growth of five percent compounded annually), peak-month weekday, with both Phase I and Phase II expansion 19 0001t0 lAIS[R[R t ASSO[IRI[S x'41, r�r•\o -0 °e •^'.� X1=1 / J 'P N' t y 1 w, •,p' SITE •�� JILrb- �py�� ��y rtwmm mim yy 1i-]tea �JF YeE ru-1P N JILrr*- MWCf rCw b.0 Aw_ mJ l NOT TO SCALE -1,M-�; NUMBER OF VEHICLE p:= Middo Atm,mm PMk Harr Prk H••r BBB — ODD • FRwv tMn fin vhion FIGURE 4 OOOflID I flISCflE� ROME WITHOUT TRAFFIC C fl WITHOUT INLAND CENTER EXPANSION 10&f"C AMO }RAMSRWr1A110M . CMWM MRS AMO RLAMMCRS YEAR laoZ 0 0 Impacts With Phase I Expansion, Year 1998, Conditions 5 and 6 The volumes for Condition 5 are shown in Figure 6. With Condition 5, six of the eight selected intersections would operate at level of service E or better during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The exceptions would be: The E Street/Mill Street/Inland Center Drive intersection would operate at level of service F during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The E Street/Orange Show Road intersection would operate at level of service E during the midday peak hour and level of service F during the afternoon peak hour. With Condition 6, five of the eight selected intersections would operate at level of service E or better during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The exceptions would be: The E Street/Mill Street/Inland Center Drive intersection would operate at level of service F during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The E Street/Orange Show Road and Inland Center Drive/H Street- northbound Interstate Route 215 ramps intersections would operate at level of service E during the midday peak hour and level of service F during the afternoon peak hour. AAAGIA [01[fn[e r nrtnn errc Impacts With Phase I and Phase H Expansion, Year 1998, Conditions 7 and 8 The volumes for Condition 7 are shown in Figure 7. With Condition 7, six of the eight selected intersections would operate at level of service E or better during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The exceptions would be: The E Street/Mill Streetgnland Center Drive intersection would operate at level of service F during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The E Street/Orange Show Road intersection would operate at level of service E during the midday peak hour and at level of service F during the afternoon peak hour. With Condition 8, four of the eight selected intersections would operate at level of service E or better during the midday and afternoon peak hours. The exceptions would be: The Inland Center driveway-Adell Street/Inland Center Drive and the E Street/Orange Show Road intersections would operate at level of service E during the midday peak hour and level of service F during the afternoon peak hour. The E Stree0dill Street/inland Center Drive and Inland Center Drive/H Street-northbound Interstate Route 215 ramps intersections would operate at level of service F during the midday and afternoon peak hours. 25 . . .......... J/ IL r,w_y� r, t m m_,mJ 1llr u_:9-7 b s�ry i�a -Mi I �'.. °br •.Q,� J I L r m-7S ar A.Av - Via• , /( ^`r kei ,P`e / A' •R SITE Sri J I L r m_m v°miv mn -1lr i t� R 4 JiL -11r w-a,J I r NOT TO SCALE .��._a,— NUMBER OF VEHICLES iei Midd" Afwn Puk Hour PNk Maur 000 - 000 FNVer Mon lim welds . FIGURE 7 FUTURE TRAFFIC OOOflLD fl�ISCNER C flSSOCIfl1ES PHASEYIIAND PHASE ce Exaeuclnel T*AI/I[on to°uw°u . E Street/MU Street/Inland Center Drive Based on the projections, the intersection would begin to operate at level of service E during peak hours in the peak month of the year in the year 1993 without the expansion of Inland Center. By the year 1998, the intersection would operate at worse than level of service E during peak hours on average days without the expansion of Inland Center. Mitigation measures that require street widening would not feasible within the existing right-of-way widths, and it would be necessary to acquire right-of-way to widen any of the approaches to the intersection. However, improvements in traffic conditions at the intersection could be expected if and when other parallel streets are built E Street/Orange Show Road The intersection is expected to operate at worse than level of service E in the year 1998 after the Phase I expansion(Condition 5). It appears feasible to widen the west leg of the intersection—Orange Show Road between the freeway and E Street--to reduce delays and improve levels of service. The widening of approximately eight feet on the north side and th-ee feet on the south side would result in dual left-turn-only lanes, two straight-movement lanes, and one right-turn-only lane. Along with the widening, the traffic signal phasing could be Winged to reduce the delay for motorists. As a result of the proposed mitigation, the operation of the intersection would be improved to level of service E. Inland Center Drive/H Street-northbound Interstate Route 215 ramps The improvement of the intersection would require significant reconstruction and right-of-way acquisition, neither of which appear to be feasible at this time. Furthermore, Caltrans is planning to improve freeway access, and it is likely that the interchange will be reconstructed before the year 2000. No mitigation is recommended at this time. 29 .....- APPENDIX 4 d Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 75 North Fair Oaks Avenue Phone:(818)449-3917 Pasadena, California 91109-1090 Fax: (818) 440-8940 USA February 5, 1992 Mr. Richard Donavin Vice President, New Business General Growth of California, Inc. 15821 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 525 Encino, California 91436 RE: INLAND CENTER MALL—VEHICLE DES OF TRAVEL Dear Dick: Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., is pleased to submit this letter report summarizing our findings regarding the above-mentioned study. The purpose of this study was to determine the reduction in vehicle miles (VM'I) travelled due to the proposed expansion of the Inland Center Mall and the capture of leakage trips from the vicinity of the Inland Center Mall to shopping malls in other areas. The market research study for the Inland Center Mall shows a 12 percent leakage of trips un9er existing conditions. The leakage trips are distributed as follows: 6 percent to Montclair Plaza, 4 percent to Tri-City Center, 1 percent to Riverside Plaza and 1 percent to Tyler Mall. The proposed expansion will add 645,301 square feet (total area = 1,529,130 square feet) to the existing Inland Center Mall by the year 1998. The expansion of the mall will reduce the vehicle miles of travel in two ways: (1) reduction in trip rates and, (2) capture of leakage trips. The reduction in trip rates is due to the fact that the expanded mall will have additional facilities which will reduce the shoppers' need to go to other locations (i.e., increase in multi-purpose trips). Also, due to the increase in facilities at a near-by mall, shoppers will no longer have to travel to distant malls for these facilities, thus reducing the leakage nips. The market research group of the Inland Center Mall estimates that 50 percent of the existing leakage trips would be captured by the proposed expansion. The summary of findings for the proposed expansion is presented below. The VMT calculation worksheets are included in the Appendix to this report. O Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. Mr. Richard Donavin February 5, 1992 Page 3 In conclusion, our study shows that the proposed expansion of the Inland Center Mall will result in a reduction of 47,100 VMT daily. The reduction in VMT rates and capture of leakage trips. results from both reduction in trip We appreciate the opportunity to work on this project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. We look forward to working with you in future. Sincerely, BARTON-ASCBMAN AASSXO/CIA�TES, INC. �1''i I ,ITZ,'�- Y' /P$trick A. Gibson �Senior Vice President Paramsothy Thananjeyan Associate PT:PAG:bjs vEi�ra.nu-nu INLAND MALL - VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL Existing Mall (st) = 883,829 Proposed Expansion (sf = 645,301 Existing leakage (°k) = 12 % 883,829 Existing Leakage Trips = X 100 - 883,829 100 - 12 120,522 SF ADT & VMT CALCULATIONS A WITHOUT EXPANSION A.1 AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS DESCRIPTION AREA TRIP RATE TOTAL TRIPS (SF) (PER 1000 SF) (ADT) Inland Mall 883,829 33.13 29,280 Other Malls-Local Malls 645,301 33.13 21,380 Distant Malls 120,522 33.13 3,990 Total 1,649,652 54,650 A.2 VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL DESCRIPTION ADT TRIP LENGTH TOTAL VMT Inland Mall NEH) (MILES) CuM� 29,280 3.3 96,625 Other Malls Sub Total 29,280 96,625 Local Malls 21,380 3.3 70,555 Sub Total 21,380 70,555 Distant Malls Montclair Plaza 1,995 25 49,675 Tricity City Center 1,315 5 6,575 Riverside Plaza 340 10 3,400 Tyler Mall 340 16 5,440 Sub Total 3,990 65,290 TOE 54,650 232,470 TOTAL VMT(per day) = 232,470 ` \I DDDflLD FflISCfif� C flSSDCIfliES � 1 4 4 3 1 N A M L I N S T R E E T \� VAN NUYS, CALIFORNIA 91401 919.795.1579 2131873.1579 April 14, 1992 �z •City of San Berardino Public Works/=ngmecmg •`•� r=__ ' City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street �! San Bernardino, C lrfi ri;a 92418 r �_ V Attention: Mr. Ogbonna L Abarawti, Associate Traffic Engineer Subject Inland Cents CO Traffic Impact Study ' File No.2252-0A-00 Gentlemen: The City of San Bernardino staff has requested, that we evaluate traffic operations at the intersections of E Street/MM Street/Inland Cents Drive and E Street/Orange Show Road for the year 1998 traffic (year 1991 traffic plus growth of five pecan compounded annually), average weekday, without Phases I and 11 of the project, and without mitigation. 711ey also requested that the average weekday level of service results be separated from the peak-month weekday results. This is an addendum to our report, Traffic Impact Study Inland Center Expansion, dated October Zl, 1991, in response to the abovementioned requests. In the attached Tables A through D are republished the results of the level of service analysis that were published in 'Tables 4 and 5 of our KP°rt referenced above The average weekday results of the level of service analysis for the years 1993 and 1998 are listed in Tables A and C, respectively. Similarly, the peak-month weekday results are listed in Tables B and D. Traffic Operations E Strnet/Mill Streeti'hilend Cantos Drive In the year 1998 an an average weekday, traffic operations would be at level of service F during the midday peak hour and level of service E during "he afternoon Peak hour assuming that Phases I and Il of the Inland Center Expansion would not be built and the edsting street system: would not be improved. The Calculatioru are included in the attached Technical Appendbc DA 91 -Di ATTAGN M69T 6 City of San Bernardino April 14, 1992 Page 2 During the midday peak hour and with the aforementioned traffic condition, the weighted average delay of 79 seconds per vehicle would be worse than the weighted average delay of 51 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phase I of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 5 of our report), and worse than the weighted average delay of 53 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phases I and II of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 7 of our report). During the afternoon peak hour and with the aforementioned traffic condition, the weighted average delay of 59 seconds per vehicle would be worse than the weighted average delay of 46 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phase I of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 5 of our report), and worse than the weighted average delay of 53 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phases I and II of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 7 of our report) E Street/Orange Show Road In ;he year 1998 and on an average weekday, traffic operations would be at level of service E during the midday peak hour and level of service F during the afternoon peak hour assuming that Phases I and II of the Inland Center Expansion would not be built and the existing street system would not be improved. The calculations are included in the attached Technical Appendix. During the midday peak hour and with the abovementioned traffic condition, the weighted average delay of 49 seconds per vehicle would be worse than the weighted average delay of 42 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phase I of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 5 of our report), and worse than the weighted average delay of 43 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phases I and II of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 7 of our report). Omit fRI mp t ounrionr City of San Bernardino April 14, 1992 Page 3 During the afternoon peak hour and with the aforementioned traffic condition, the weighted average delay of 63 seconds per vehicle would be worse than the weighted average delay of 41 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phase I of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 5 of our report), and worse than the weighted average delay of 42 seconds per vehicle that would have existed with Phases I and II of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report (Condition 7 of our report.) Conclusion On a weekday of an average month in the year 1998, assuming that Phases and II of the Inland Center Expansion would not be built and the existing street system would not be improved, both subject inter- sections would operate at level of service F during one of the peak hours. Traffic operations would be worse than those that would have existed with Phase I or with Phases I and II of the project and with the street improvements recommended in our report Very truly yours, DONALD FRLcCHM & ASSOCIATES Bernard Brauner, P. E., Senior Project Engineer BB-MMO/njc Attach. cc + attach.: Richard C. Donavin Kenneth C. Topping, AICP John Jaquess Carl F. Meyer, ALA Mark A. Ostoich John C. Olivier, P.E. Tom Dodson 000810 fiiuuto r arrnrmtf 0 � m -Y O= 0 b m m m m p p p m 00 z= a W YQ _O O m = m m m m m W p U m U > j J tl1 'o a O O_Y �W 6 m N � OI Ot ty 0 ^ e N fV -Y m W zc we m m m m in p („) m Y -0 > < °z=a PI: W Y LLI y W W A ^ N N Q < m U. O Q f7 t7 N m W Q Wi u n 10 IA N O p O p O « � O ¢ m`L� N f ID W W J J < 2 m y E w a> E I I n m Jm W W U ? J v m m m m w p U m ._mp > 8a' ui vi o < "'J > Q0 a W N f ~ Z < O =LL _0 2Q a O L u J m > > W ^ O ^ ^ R N 6 J JN < m U 0 W LL U) m ' a W W = >. E c N � _ N p� d N 0 L = is EL p d �• ; _ m m W c d c = .� C Y •� SL q C 1p Q Q N j m = d > o Y O 9 8 3 m ° d uJ U n 0 S C G V m < Q C m b L m - d N R N & ml T f % f g !963i -- m 2 c v v v b > d d d d f O U U U U U d d U d IO f0 d (7 fn d l0 ~ O S c Z U U RNRP,R IRIS[NfR t RSSR[IPIES (9§ !} = : o � � : � ! ! Is z )( » § ` CZ .) } | uj E !{ ( \ eeR , ƒ k@ ! \ / to LL 0 � } ! \ § ! _k L) {\ ;\ 2 - ± ! c � zIL § ! ) ƒ j / 7 / M � § k } k ! — � ! f ! ra t2 75 } ! ■ � § X772 ; ! - . . ± ! k � r5 k } { } ( \ ( ; ) � } } / } \ / k } k { / k } ma ma § § k } ƒ/ } 0 DORRID fRISINI; E isso:l.ils 0= 15 oom f £ �! § E / § �k � oo � � � � .co ! ) >. : !} _ m _ _ w c, — § § } ° © k� ` . f 0 LL q — — — — / � _ uj $ - | ! � �=2 ; ; ; � o > . T77 � . § E k § *km � � � � � � � ! k ) | < > ' £ 2 } _ \ { ) ! LU — \ — / !} � @ & ' — — —, | E ; - a < 0o0 z L $ r . | 7 „ — — � ƒ — � a � L> ) cn Z6 � LU Af, t } { } � ) car 'E 7E IE \ 'E is \/ 0001to MUM E ;ssoclRus = !} — 2 00 .5 q ! = ■ m = g ; § � � § �ke � z � � � �0 § < ES 00 a (n LLJ LL + {§ _ ° ) / § , | I [ LU > R § —I ! | tu< —J < � 'o "a { | 0 — ^ ` LD B !— ' , § ; } } \ E \/ § � ƒE / — i � / ! } ! « � )) {� f ) ! k � � 2l - t LLJ f2 } ff ) i ! f ! LLJ � \ — ■ $ pv . . } ) k \ \ j } } ƒ/ \ 0 :,;.iE r;isrRig E is;::,.iFs p a TECHNICAL APPENDIX ADDENDUM, APRIL 14, 1992 CONTENTS INTERSECTIONS I. E Street/Mill Street/Inland Center Drive II. E Street/Orange Show Road TABLES 1 Comprehensive Analysis Program for a Single Signalized Intersection, Average Weekday, Midday Peak Hour Year 1998 Traffic, Without Phase I and Phase II Expansion 2 Comprehensive Analysis Program for a Single Signalized Intersection,Average Weekday, Afternoon Peak Hour, Year 1998 Traffic, Without Phase I and Phase II Expansion Donato fAISMA ( UsIr aliS 0 TABLE 1 .1 C A P S S I - 8 5 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS PER 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL City of San Bernardino Year 1998 Traffic, Average Weekday, Without Phase I & Phase II Expansion SOLUTION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME LANE GROUPS E St./Mill St./Inland Ctr CM 1 CM 2 CM 3 CM 4 CM 5 ------------------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Peak 15 Min Flow (vph) 910 620 730 720 225 Saturation Flow (vph) 3600 $100 3600 3600 1700 Lost Times (seconds) 3.0 4 .0 3.0 4.0 2.0 Relative Saturation - 'X' 1.01 0.96 1.02 1.00 1.04 Green Times (effective) 42 21 33 33 20 Movement Times 45 25 36 37 22 Minimum Times 10 10 27 23 10 Progression Adj. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Average Delays (sec/veh) 72 74 81 77 117 Level of Service F F F F F Av Queue @ start of green 32 25 28 27 10 Vehicles stopping ($) 100 99 100 100 100 Do Vehicles Clear NO YES NO NO NO Critical Movements - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 79 Level of Service = F Whole Intersection - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 79 Level of Service = F Required Cycle Length is 167 seconds Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 1.01/F © U TABLE 1. 1 CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS E Street/Mill Street/Inland Center Drive Year 1996 Traffic, Averace Weekday, Without Phase I & Phase II Exeansion Midday Peak Hour LEG I MOVEMENTI PEAK I LANE ISATURATIONI VOLUME/ I CRITICAL I I 1 15 MIN. I GROUP I FLOW I CAPACITY 1 VOLUME/ I 1 I FLOW RATEI FLOW RATE] I I CAPACITY I Mill St. IL I 250 1 250 1 1. 700 1 0. 15 1 Ebtl. IS I 495 I 910 1 3. 600 1 0.25 1 0.25 1 IRI I 95 1 I I 0.00 1 IRE I 320 I Inland I1-1 I 20 1 620 i 5. 100 I 0.12 I Center IL2 I cc^70 I 0. 12 1 I 1 0.00 I Dr. IRS I I 2901 01 01 0.001 I NEbd. IR4 1 40 I 1 1 0.00 1 Mill St. IL3 I 190 I 190 I 1.7 00 I 0. 11 I I Wbd. IL4 I 105 1 105 1 1. 700 1 0.06 1 IS I 620 1 1 730 1 3.600 1 0.20 1 0.20 1 IR I lie I I 90 I 90 1 1. 700 I 0.05 1 Sbd. IS I 720 1 720 1 3,600 1 0.20 1 ,0.E0 I IRS I 65 1 1 1 0.00 1 IRS 1 140 I 225 1 1, 600 1 0. 13 1 E St. IL5 I 65 1 1----" I 225 I 1.700 I 0. 13 I 0. 13 I Nbd. IL6 I 160 I I I IS - I 695 1 @•@0 695 I 3.600 I 0.25 I I IR 1 310 1 310 1 1. 600 1 0. 17 1 ----------I TOTAL VOL. /CAP. = 0. 90 MOVEMENT: FROM: TO. Ll Inland Center Drive Mill Street L2 Inland Center Drive E Street L3 Mill Street E Street L4 Mil] Street Inland Center Drive L5 E Street Inland Center Drive L6 E Street Mill Street R1 Mill Street E Street RE Mill Street Rs Inland Center Drive Inland Center Drive R4 Mill Street Inland Center Drive E Street RS E Street AS Inland Center Drive E Street Mill Street 0 TABLE 1 .2 INTERSECTION CAPACITYBANALYSIS PER 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL City of San Bernardino Year 1998 Traffic, Average Weekday, Without Phase I & Phase 1I Expansion SOLUTION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME LANE GROUPS E St./Mill St./Inland Ctr CM 1 CM 2 CM 3 CM 4 CM 5 ----------------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Peak 15 Min Flow (vph) 700 490 895 335 190 Saturation Flow (vph) 3600 5100 3600 1800 1700 Lost Times (seconds) 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 Relative Saturation - 'X' 0.94 0.88 0.95 1.00 0.94 Green Times (effective) 28 15 35 25 15 Movement Times 31 19 38 29 17 Minimum Times 10 10 27 23 10 Progression Adj. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Average Delays (sec/veh) 55 56 50 81 79 Level of Service E- E-' E F F Av Queue @ start of green 21 16 25 11 7 Vehicles stopping (%) 99 99 98 100 100 Do Vehicles Clear YES YES YES NO NO Critical Movements - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 59 Level of Service = F- Whole Intersection - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 59 Level of Service = E- Required Cycle Length is 135 seconds Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 0.95/E TABLE I.2 CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS E Street/Mill Street/Inland Center Drive Year 1998 Traffic, Average Weekday, Without Phase I d Phase II Expansion Afternoon F'eak Hour LEG I MOVEMENTI PEAK I LANE ISATURATIONI VOLUME/ I CRITICAL I I 1 15 MIN. I GROUP I FLOW I CAPACITY I VOLUME/ I I I FLOW RATEI FLOW RATEI I I CAPACITY I Mill St. IL 1 150 1 150 1 1. 700 1 0.09 1 1 Ebd. IS 1 535 1 700 1 3. 600 1 0. 19 1 0. 19 1 IRI 1 140 1 1 1 0.00 1 1 IRE 1 25 1 0 1 0 1 0.00 I I I----I—_—___I__________I—--------I__________I —__I Inland I1-1 1 10 1 490 1 5, 100 1 0. 10 1 0. 10 1 Center ILE 1 240 1 1 1 0.00 1 1 Dr. IR3 1 235 1 @ 1 0 1 0.00 1 1 NEbd. IR4 1 5 1 1 1 0.00 1 1 Mill St. IL3 1 175 1 175 1 1. 700 1 0. 10 I I Wbd. IL4 1 360 1 380 1 1, 700 1 0.22 1 1 IS I B00 1 895 1 3.600 1 0.25 1 0.225 1 IR 1 95 1 1 1 0.00 1 1 E St. IL 1 55 1 55 1 1. 700 1 0.03 1 1 Sbd. IS 1 650 1 650 1 3.600 I 0. 18 1 1 IRS 1 220 1 1 1 0.00 1 1 1 R6 1 115 1 335 1 1. 800 1 0. 19 1 0. 19 1 - I —I---I----I-----I----I---- I E St. IL5 I 25 1 190 1 1, 700 1 0. 11 1 0. 11 1 Nbd. I1-6 1 165 1 1 1 0.00 1 1 IS 1 645 1 845 1 3. 600 1 0.23 1 I IR 1 130 1 130 1 1, 800 1 0.07 1 1 TOTAL VOL. /CRP. = 0. 64 MOVEMENT: FROM: TO: L1 Inland Center Drive Mill Street L2 Inland Center Drive E Street L3 Mill Street E Street L4 Mill Street Inland Center Drive L5 E Street Inland Center Drive L6 E Street Mill Street R1 Mill Street E Street R2 Mill Street Inland Center Drive R3 Inland Center Drive Mill Street R4 Inland Center Drive E Street R5 E Street Inland Center Drive R6 E Street Mill Street TABLE 11 .1 C A P S S I 04-08-92 COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR A SINGLE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION s City of San Bernardino Year 1998 Traffic, Average Weekday, Without Phase 16 Phase II Expansion SOLUTION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME FLN:2252MF E St./Orange Show Rd, Midday Peak Hour Scenario 10 Movement EBT EEL EBR SET SBL SSR WET WBL WBR NET NBL N8R Phase 1 - 29 secs X X X X Phase 2 - 25 secs X X X Phase 3 - 20 secs X _ _ X Phase 4 - 33 secs X X X X Phase 5 - 0 secs _ Phase 6 - 0 secs _ Critical Mvmt-*a' sss: sass ssss ss== Peak 15 Vol -Von 575 620 570 925 240 580 590 245 155 700 465 215 Saturation -vph 2550 2750 1800 3600 1700 1800 3600 1700 1800 3600 3200 Shrd Lost time -sec 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 - Relative Sat 'X' 0.89 0.89 1.25 0.89 0.84 0.59 0.76 0.67 0.40 0.88 0.86 - Effective Gr-sec 27 27 27 31 18 58 23 23 23 31 18 Move Time -sec 29 29 29 33 20 60 25 25 25 33 20 Min/Ped Time-sec 24 5 24 23 5 23 25 5 25 24 5 Frog Factor PAF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 - AvDelay/veh -sec 40 39 193 34 46 13 33 33 28 34 42 - Level of Service D- D- F D E B- D D D4 D E4 Av. 'Q'/ lane veh 6 14 19 10 6 8 7 6 4 10 6 Veh Stopping % 97 97 100 96 97 68 94 92 86 95 97 Do Veh Clear ? YES YES NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES - Whole Intersection - Weighted AV Delay (sec) = 49 Level of Service = F Critical Movements - Weighted AV Delay (sec) = 37 Level of Service = D- - Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 0.86 Required Cycle Length is 107 seconds (All Minimum times are satisfied) s CAPSSI (Release 10) - Based on Delay Methodology Per 1985 Highway Capacity Manual 4 TABLE 11 .2 C A P S S I 04-08-92 COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR A SINGLE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION t City of San Bernardino Year 1998 Traffic, Average Weekday, Without Phase 13 Phase II Expansion SOLUTION USING REQUIRED CYCLE TIME FLN:2252PF E St./Orange Show Rd. P.M Peak Hour Scenario 10 Movement EST EBL EBR SET SBL SBR WET WBL WBR NET NSL NSR Phase 1 - 33 secs X x X X Phase 2 - 32 secs X X x _ Phase 3 - 34 secs X X Phase 4 - 37 secs X X X X Phase 5 - 0 secs Phase 6 - 0 secs Critical Mvmt-**' •ss: :sst ' stse s;�� Peak 15 Vol -vph 700 605 365- 720 170 645 805 255 95 740 790 195 Saturation -Vph 2850 2450 1800 3600 1700 1800 3600 1700 1800 3600 3200 Shrd Lost time -sec 7.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Relative Sat 'X' 1.08 1.08 0.89 0.78 0.43 0.74 1.01 0.68 0.24 1.Ol 1.05 - Effective Gr-sec 31 31 31 35 32 66 30 30 30 35 32 Move Time -sec 33 33 33 37 34 68 32 32 32 37 34 Min/Ped Time-sec 24 5 24 23 5 23 25 5 25 24 5 Frog Factor PAF 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AvDelay/veh -sec 93 97 53 39 34 24 68 40 33 63 79 Level of Service F F E D- D C- F E+ D F F Av. 'Q'/ lane veh it 20 11 10 5 13 12 8 3 S4 12 Veh Stopping % ]00 100 97 93 85 80 100 92 82 100 100 Do Veh Clear ? -NO NO YES YES YES YES NO YES YES NO NO - ">> Intersection Oversaturated <<c� Whole Jntersection - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 63 Level of Service = F Critical Movements - Weighted Av Delay (sec) = 75 Level of Service = F - Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) = 1.04 Required Cycle Length is 136 seconds (All Minimum times are satisfied) + CAPSSI (Release 10) - Based on Delay Methodology Per 1985 Highway Capacity Manual E j TOM DODSON & ASSOCIATES i 444 N. ARROWHEAD AVE- SUITE 203 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401 • (714) 884-9700 June 2, 1992 Mr. Paul G. Scroggs City of San Bernardino r1 y J 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 OEtitri 6_pIXG +ESv:GG$ Dear Paul: In accordance with our discussions, I have finalized the responses to comment letters on the Inland Center Mall Development Agreement. The responses contain information and technical data that clarify traffic and air quality impacts, as requested by the SCAQMD and the Caltrans. I have attached IS copies of the responses to comments, which when combined with the Initial Study complete the review process for issuing a Negative Declaration. If you concur with this conclusion, it would be appropriate to distribute them to the ERIC and %ie should be able to finalize this issue on June 11, 1992. I look forward to your decision in this matter and please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, 7a Tom Dodson Attachments cc: Richard Donavin John Jaquess Carl Meyer Mark A. Ostoich 9 CI < O s m p^ J O P R C O u D O L r O o Q U _< D 2 .ter ZD c o U Q� `07 o�L.T arn. o° v Y YwyD P C • DY a'a Zgg Y ��2L r C66 q q i U 6VUL P O Vq FN • Y q �tl Y B C y P pY O p L•f L Y^ D D ol y Y U O M P Y • L O 6 it • p.rYO U P • V i'V' Y L UZy 9 YMC • a e C C i $ 2° • e` °Ua • Y Gw,� ^ Y Y =` L • Y C2 �• L� yL � Y q Y` O •O�I��Npp °w • y CpgDO • N a P•.�iMU �yNb � V� Y^• qY '?J� ov SLAY <Z Y ' • U P � U •ONO �w> P jU L^a,•OC C CU ^ ^ N•OOw 0O U L Y Y YG, O • \ yN Y O • •� Y Mjp y iy � LLyM • Y'pq a 6 ^¢■ • DSO• <6L0 L pL Cya• • 1\ P^ • ^ . 6 P, Z � • ',y L • C \ • c CC pF�O_t SU6nN t Cl ,ry • p. D • U� � ^ N CS6 U Y VNCi 5 J �q E� C W E c ^ � eeo 9 L^ C �p0 9Yax L LU °pL< WOO mZo 0GC i- 7 L ono GG2 U:5 pp c—. 0 �4 �pQ 0 'Z O z <F YO ONF< d � L 6' L kEG �p p: V � V O - a N I ^ Jj O • VOYOY � ; i� ^ Fr>i L✓ >YOY PGUwV UV � � 02 9yyccy M1ZCY • w0 G V • Y ± • VVG • •U✓ Map .ar ,y Cam• VOP2V L I CIOI7 1 L YQ y9..aiL Y ° y . P C ° �i ;y y Cp�' p• � .V ,1 C WZ N;yGUn OOYyY y A t r �• _ 6 Cy .Y..•iu .Gi � �Ta p 6J ^ P 4 • Url U✓n P CO i• • Y O rl f. P V N tS Sp9V QP ✓ >w [6 uV �J .°i u �1MO YVYC VM Vyy C G ° yy qL yN P N yCn Vilt •r G On ° Vw U .i3Ow Cyn � ..Vi..°i Ei •0 su • •i j ^ S EwE L SO .• 9n CUV OVM C':c ET `' .> P ✓ O O' • Y • ✓ GL • ✓ a V V n V >•p Y YVGiVLyp! 2 Y U wCY>>4��• • ✓en✓JNU OY .w A �Y S j n CYE H U y UCVCVpV VV E�Y✓w >..�... pV ^S. C x Y. .� YO YYYY UO • reiEV c WY .( a 6 u%OC F V • S >O ..ni CO YnnS 00 • 'v. pV V S U O • N y •Yn • yy OY L \ yZ✓ y P S U6nN t 6 G ILpiO.2Uf. M1 c'6o c9: Et . ySE �t 9 5 e c E °G wea C �2 �s 'L uCO O�L �D sro la u�p 9 u YrV' C 6 O - r: €a EM e� 2 YY vL i 1110 - c �q T O V 9�S—N - E � o` EY c- c 3 E.9 o cTt _`o< :eLJ �u Ego Eau� uu Eeyxg 8L ' E.P Y E c T G n i 5 3 M ry i O I CY Y� Y ] O CYEY v ° — o uen Y') M • U C G` u W ° V [L OtiL V~ p OM Ce U O Cw yU . M9 CYOp .� Y `��1PI I�/Nv h O • P V p, ti Nw Gi rO o .qyp_ V u: ae U :Y� yw .n • yl G O V L > • 0 4 Y�� i ✓ P a p C..I . 0 Y O • w 9 n N� E 6 _O O > Gh Ow 9ONU YL9 o�Ya '.� V ry U.� • M p ° Y D _� __ � XN L Ya G'. d0 )• 9Y ) p wh w ti I�Vy['M 4Oy C_ � E.rTP n nYr9j y4p uY J C w y4 S~• ~� P• nC . > YO ODJI Yw O COjL Pug �L n yR. ] UO Lan wT�Y • °�9 ° �C.y V p n u.1V O • M ti0 Y�.L 9 M~ • w] Y � w NS TC4 C 9 • O _ 0 } U as Z~ w n C awvy9 w E• O`CP° Oww n M n `V •VYA• O E V JW u . nY „ np • ', uT• YC.'~ • OY O .y YU }O � n .i Vi• .O C •u 4 9� ) n eu > P 4Y V Si P E'a O > : PwC O•Ty: • P J ^I ONy 6 ow P 6Y wL . u. )w4 V5OypI pr Y /_ w _ O Y wC n2N UOwV Su : • y0: >Y . .. ] U V y PO V 6.1 u U L r >• P6.G L !w LQ ^_ • MYY O P „ VUn • pT " �~n 9aaL IViC a0Y O • ti D C .g OOY M Y2I Y .ui YCU SV ,I M. SUY T-� r u Un.tY V nnn V N C Y •w E Y V .y U V MOO: u Y. . MCY •V • Y Y 'J. 2Y i O UnN S R. O OO Mnu 1OOe ]I � In I „tiq M 2M U V PO V Y. O Mn IM O O = ° ;i E 9EE E,'c °NSLwiE nioc = 'o�s aE , a._� °u• Z = °o `c°` ° ^ r _° EUyE ys° ton r e 8 9 2 v=_ y L ?S G u ' 'C o Jm 9 L,t�w>;G'D ° "•Y,-.9- `.LL m° o cE9.-^_ 9iesgso Cpc�c Ein-UE � 3� m °' Uc° q'cu 2z E E ^ > ; m E u O_= Y OE20 � �-' ou c_E 60 E N m o c J u E 'E O:_ ° ^m _ $ 2 9 '° >,c O � u 'oU uU � c_ � _ r '`o ` �-._ !��- 'E Tio LY Zn G y' — °< C p y m p 9 E n °L L 'r A C -L �w V 6<'Em90OoU yEL,L .nC �'=_ :' cc : u9�? r99 y �U y°> ie9wC.t n TL gCic _ „C� �9 Ly60i — ° o In E �, e x ^ ° -gi n 9” n 'J- �` E =.R u.=� c c E pE u_D E " EE-sl� i eln-c: c� °p2D n ro n u2 E E °m -2L ' = 2� ?=`o _° 'n °.. 'o wrEE L= 5 .2+ E.`•,9 ° UOE`DU° ^=.c y� V buy L9 E= P_ CIE EZ w. ` _? G�snE 3v � c: - n P � � e L C.� Y ✓ Y cm, O cjF e e 11. ¢ yir G " C ww Y a✓ Yn " �6 V.nn • L O JO �� ° w UrO O Y lo Y.n /Yp -J _ e Y✓ Y Y U Y ° e Y L �Y N Y D Y Ibn 6 un 'JL ✓N rC YYY yN � > u n wn W O ° ^Y Ury Y ]. =✓ OO 9yYY^y ° yd CYtl .Ni aP • 90 : > ! Y u wIOY DYrYryw aU L Y' •+ 96 YL r0 C eY6tlYnW pb O : Yp O �9Yw LY : 6 � r � Y ■ C•+ YY VYLj YL OYYO Y° Y C Y2 p.0 a Y > �F YC Y 'J YwaYe C Y w U 0 nPV )r T 0 y � > YY 09 LJO eO Yw erL�[Lr C : • Pti I • P YO YU a : 4Y OO� Oe Va���j " S Yy .°� pY9 I ° OYYOY OYlne 9 � Z ° w Y vo COQ a6°i0 .Crn " fie II DC ^ C yY O 3 L 1 � � P P ■ 9Y G ° C OLti O >�C.IU YwLWL~u C ( ° tl0 eY YO rY✓ Y^ 6wY � Y✓ CO •w 0c P Q yy 0•Y OY YYY j.° e .Y YY 9'^ YIY PYeIUD p 90 OP pU0 pOeP° Y y °Y YnwCY•. 6 N i.Y�M N L ( W I N Le CpP F FO i�..0 • • 4.;u o�Yf•n IO ^L pYCYY L " C Y O O � W< Qy °ui w °f S iG �� Y�nnG: • Lw ! SU6nN p 0a n n n 1 i 'R `oB Eis :2t �Ei7°u_cs cL_ � g Coo= E E0 ]� C�Li u•OOY2 E'3 E Jus ° oE E i a cvoo ; osot � _o cZe� cgac c L sS5 ' E r o O >�� OiO � E° y9 CS 06q � y c >p w 7a ]9°•c €9[E8 h_°EL `. o ] CL � Y� C-.Y l-LY1y c�a ��e�g - nov : o qO LC�Jwi ° 9Y.Y E°p�9 =[C P _9 air=e� o� T FFp= � j 9 2 9 L ; 9 F Op y O L g yyC cIIT9 2 O V� 4Y°'� C : aZU qi n s O r L O y = p—• NYC > EES =` E >n- o=sE � L.;z _ eEE�.oU accm E=� r ri L • • i On .. C Y9 Y[R G V b V • 4 U n b ] r N Y^Y .� �Yw • > • Y yC EYP ! •L�a c, ✓'° LVYF 0 • V_ L 9VVLYU . „^ � •� L 7V Yy Y = • VOtlV OY • Y 60� y C Y • V p U Y u�= > V 0 MY %1 On YV Un y V �Yq '_ C Y. b0 V 9V O uO .+ CYY O� O • UY A OU Y V� Ci QQ O • TOYC YL64Y •VI N r e • P U ] • L ° • > tl Y V ] U y > pL 6 Y Y L S P Y • • .. Y F a n 4 Y•� U�r ] Cc L ! Y • p• C ✓v P✓ • 1 L 90✓ >yY0 y Y GO YV • � eV 0�� 09 Ye✓q=; • p O � � '�' aY Y9 • p • Y • 94 4Y'[ Y O i � O O � L � p n O 9 ° • .p • O 4 C � O P • p Y Q OCy Y P Y.� O ••F • ✓ 6 ✓ 9TG S.°i ' F L i 9 • C C7 Y C •� UC✓tlL 6 4Q •Y YO • �� p^y y :, � Y^YS y • • ° 4L O^4 pVy waPO✓OY •U .. • • UY UO • Y • Y.+ 0Y9 ae^^ • p pPM ]L P >L Ow O • _•YY SS� •Y Yr O✓ y • Y OOOMC O O L✓ 09 aC ° O ✓ ^Ob_P6 Y ^ Y e^ •L LY LY ° GI.LV 6✓ L Y Y e L p o 0 � V .i I ^YP✓ L y L7P FY FO F^Y • • Fe.1^aF^ aycYY y C 4G^ IW �yJY 1 pyczo : : Y0 � f :i -w.•.oa • c•"• � s • xupnn a U- A _=.9 : cy; Eli TC O 9 E 6 C V s o Y E° — L E m— euEe o u c n e3a�: =5 b U L C 9 Y C Y n O y ✓ • • ) � Y C �C C Y Y Y • Y UCCL u c • c � Y ° ,• ] 4 ¢CUyvY .°Y •O °icon 4 p ^yC OTe T OYy • a V Y • ti y� � \��j� Y C • O • �U ]^.� Y y FL.Yy 4 a LYOY PuY C O O U L ti O L Y ) PO • L T ...• • 00 F U •N • ] '=ti M Y 1Y 9• C.Oi •.�i C C y✓ • O• U •� PY LY p, • Fw O�FLNp t0 • C w P YP6 OC O • .O. y YO0 Y •^ LtY I > 'JO O pPI kk q!!ƒ! � + �-1 , • i | !}{! !! A, §) &f!- w! /ƒ !!g h;2I § a ° |!:!!! r Z | }2 E E \ ZZ ({E _ 5& q \HA } !R pFU 4E q% -£ !!! j & - 2/ � ) .e U! /I 7 � oo } � ® . S R. © ° k -k2 £&!b!. Ll/ q ) f ! | R «\9 lG, ! / | ur � ! i E!! q! A§#D;{p a / � d !u 3 ) \Iw! £ _! / $ is.} a\� ■ QW—L !k! &� E - !Q: , !&,ate, /� j� _ - w —.11Z t; /2d!\ y 1 C aCmV V-`p° J S.6L O $_ a.i as ud of Eo `c OF E � sg=_ a. L . a._ oo•so °- Y •6� _ i- '" ° L` 3 lz _ 3 c ^ e YTEF`o� o' t zS y M Y . 2 °< 2 u c E t' o C t _o Y QF Ey + d E- WW ta oEo y qL �° OeOiOfiOU O �� Li C°O Va L`y•h- CA Y Ec °ue v` p20°u$�' :s EA $ 5 n° `No�or o°c'C - SC^on° 6E „n.N'in L .'Ti iY �Y9 SAN I. n C IU 11j v�Q 2E PRE 9, 8"O= S E U O O O p� 'E i i - dd UF-2wa N1= _ VEAL 73 $uW U Q 00�' v Z w a 1 N n Ey ? Y y _ °_'.� LsUo ain + owcv�$w DvwE ^^ tee° 0 ov °9r y°tea'-� o vyco 5 _ .iUV Sc6v c`oa z-Q °n^cEo ��yo Ewa = E Y -�'2 + 2 v,s�`� C2:2.„i 0 Eg Of E2° V_22 CI of Fv�O. acuo+�c°v< $i soZ•e a9gc» .E E °`Y'Q? E -vz i[O9y 7cw.S - ao,Ec aV cos °S»,o°,< < `-- '3E ° $9 WWR uau� ^,_€E- o�= .°�oi Ti! _b6 5_cu cE o4_'Onc - CO a a'r �s�•d dE^d -°w°_ n =o°°�°-°�a: S+ oE°o$y u< ° 3°e ocr` 0 L� ra_ ^69 Ea M r= vo.y`=EoE 2 �yoq e E -L- OL�wy Yw 9 S .Z` oyLO >pi �f $E LIE Fi`oc oOo`oo°psi O. _B°= i2ccw•V° y C mo 3_ = - c.°. 'vu � " - c _ c9Ey $° a. ul`i U - °a °nE •°' oc 2•?.v Bc o`E °.: q°o Yc .E, n oy9w no � y7o > Pi o°^o ? E + � o=- aEG. c . Z EE h= g:c°-Q _ .< Scy� .S�`°e +awa Ew .Y E r.� E i�'7 r>e�w.mu u 'c5_2 61 E°`o�w .mom c c YEw oL� nu d p c>>-� voy oy G u»oa c`olj9 o° 6°r--- ` -- ya - pZ IV — OC a.°�° � CU> C CCOC Y°LL E r+OYy VLL S 1`oo Gn o uU�•°� '� 02 0� Ev °oc » Y° Eaa7 2 - E92 °O $OOH aY OS�T7wic ES .2�o S22c o' Z�Sm^ ^ono `o��c eat °c Ep-ec6y Yi aV7 •O y ° ° V OVOa ° YCy r`Q 4° °o 4 b a a EYS, S'$�^oS� 2 I�.?o 2s w'o '°.':wo�Z ��. �° ° FarE2pSE °' _TYO Oi � p u C O 9 aid` w i 2 i A= O L C.J 9 Y p w C 9 L L'y C=i: D 1L0. nO ���L T� w�99L OL. o. w . 0 w EZ p p V C a FO nrCL Yi �°' _- O Lwi<Z„•Q s U c°•o^2 o.°' u'= o - wna a ♦ wE- o 00oe°.Luj° Y d Y � °: Eve '7A - = 5'•.= eo a' S �` Ku.� 20 e ^P:9 6�9'_'''E L G9 rE �pV �L � G9 n- rPL Pw Vyp9 Tm 9 Eo QE ^°c v-u wE -ym, EQ O r L L O C E l EEO E.i v E c Z C '� a°•` i m� uc nU = - _^ c S -„ o• c '� '-' -o u o oa • y=_ ewLn QE ° SIIev 6d 'Y' ° • �9 °i � er ec� °„ u = y�q^ u Ki Cw ` C�C n� .5 a °i u LDV ` nG�tV 6u y 99 Cr C .�9 �i3eK �� a � � „�� moo �_y= .w`a� ^ wo°E ° „ 8"' E E u��� e'er YF Y '� y5 zu pEE �e � c5�-vU u a °w uaE -wQ93EE�7 C� = � oe i•c-`duce BE'��j9z 2 ° 'm� E �^"opT cu = o.c ` °eIEi e :Y � � b 'n,' r V9pu 2a y n.2�°icpie Ya Z`o .B Er �c°<a; 9v � .7 X30±'2 O9u .Y7 �. € my 'L.- nV 0° -gyp. Yep rcvo Yp�Ey � ; off Y - L_w 8 T�C ZY2'L S G o °EuEC=°u�L EO�L V�K+ -_8w? e A v o �umc Y w Cf GO-2 PEo `o ° $u " 2Lr ::B; 5° v, E 2 & no c°-•o_f ooc�guE.aY'Y c�`:o Y�eei Y2L2o Y 8 v 2 K e 9v°,uY 5 e ° =<Q°�sZoeY -rowY o o� �c _3 L'`:9 B• Td °° e Ya E ?-o_o�c n O 2 En�3 E LS eo Eo o BE ° °3,cg:9 cS o E moo. Eo e� c ot.L � C'EC .0 0 -r� `�E r oe !f-°�o0 �e EEE_ > ='y `° sSE ° w�F`9L cc ° o L cU wu�- '�o` E �u E s_ 2•Q c _ Ee •- E 28 c' - �' �� r<'ia O-�. Z'E c•" ` o ° v' e oE- 'v- L•E- D - E8 v o0 V . C'ou auew< S,SL. L- y3� p[c-'y4� sG.�u q •wee-u„2 cEs• 9 Ayy '�' •LY4� Z�y i$ ei O e L n -1. " c � WL Lo'c wo _ euuD 3no°uoo �w�y� QL� uoi29 ° ae °E2oQ g �nro ' ET-Q 2A��°a S� ; c S: Y - z 289o.w Z 5r `S E e� LEF° a eS EPA O =fie °o .�° -T. �P Ess- i'Y. c°E EI `-8 -� •G 3 E u ^xu ^ E EEL = S: O a O � 8 UD�: aEs ^ \. aD t Un y C iOYL 9 L L S. Y _E g. iC- VjLG �LSa � m a^S ate° >•9 T r ES 9 2 C09 '= SmS Y u? pi UY y "au ? � ? pp a O 2 i C c`s �V. u°e°YS`o uyr m>�G U OD UD_= p •A EL_ YL_LD>_ °y ` En �> CL „U D ,E, 33 -` `p °E ' 2°529 QE.EZX v2v Y .can'= D3Z So••+°om D w'o E in GSC .w .0 5c GOU9 O9 ` � VDiuO _Ss ` ° .• uE E cc Z,Z, ep-E _`o .°, °`^ E' PnYY •"`K' c ` O a- `^' W .Y o `oy _2 L; y.- 0. .2 L Et� 1 22^ 2y cY.? + . :,u�•� LEy � 2•cY •"o u:- -• C °12.ew E O E2 :"' E O Z E COV L__D y0_ ci oo��p O2� - z_ � EY° .2,°! Ac -0 . oo a `_. u 299 �c Ew9E E. u.cE E :E-°o`D VE V =i E_ oEc 'o u_w< ` YY Y :e , gccc `B- Ec JEL' Sa :�"� ° 'D 'eZ Y_ - >3`0 `o . YES .� g - ^� Fy- ca . Da� °`op rE c5 �_ o ° '- w-� 'X L5' vcl2c r:E2oY E - ��'0 E- -X-8 E-p os'yG rE',5 w: E2 ��"-w O_-• 2.x`°®22 ° O °S2w `� L6i i� t• Y-'0° y� E2° ?� S9L . .0 ^ ` 2°.�QeY E� )a o.Ev : O�°.°• c >�c° Y.. 05 O.. c - mo E. M��20`0° E °g a°E�.2 a C =�` '° o° ?•'^j »°°50<° .^.at2E > E g 4v' d 7 3'^ aS', cc " YU ` E- ao -4„ ii2= �0° ° °°c �E7 Yo `S�Nj s. c3? 2 2 2 2 - v `o 'v°a 5f5 E-� E `os29 c po2oE WL- ct_ `e ;;as`o ..n oYOO 52 peg ^^„a v g' coR'c'Ea 'S3 c a_pyc 5 YE ° ll 6 �m -A Oo-?. 2_ ZL.^°2 i � `.i L'•�u2ar o E 2 22°<. ;.11 uo o' YY..u-'-2 EESE2 � ^ `o E. l�`F°885ee c € E 00 66 r yP S u E C 6°E'EI ��z•5°' .�, •�� P-L Z� raL9 coV Vs`o y '• a0 ' O a V' _ .E.s End iU �Z'Q ° .Ee - �?= Y � • c Eozz. c+ E ?� uo ° �E° �� �� is n� • �fti E D L9 73 O DOE P 0:9 V qo� � aE °•:--° EV�: r � �v= tea 2� � E° E c E E eo Q _d< s -� e U• o` E'^ E y C yD w : O n r�i O ° O° Y C Y C u C C D c i c-v- Y E 9 +°u U ; '�s - u -0- c9 E a m E Q 'u c a Y aYxEE E °8� _ : S°u $np a ? '3E rLe is 1°° c?Om'EL u Em � oqK c c ou°a L 62 °2F-?_ 'a �s •- oc ^ oD _ 9 ^ E E t o ° a n E r E � 'v °EEc `3o E . Eo'-° Ogoo �a--' mv� o'8er ` E Y � YY Y�cr L .••.v °co Eo oE° e�e ° oEEiuvc_V= Eu : E° v 'G= +L E j °JCL �9p EYU'� e� ay yO�O 2C °c R= o -YE '7°Y�2.°. QC$`=N� oa 0`°'c° n5 L9 ^E Y`.o^ 3 tee : V_ i `u °oo s °�Y _ _e ap e `cz S.y9cw uy °Lr E _FIN +aEu $ a °°<ct=y n •O==- u'CUUU O' 9= ° _ E -: - LYE_=YL- rne- • °5vZ v °Ey ° -[Y_°o E c vE� S -go oeo.°� °'= � V6 oe.E9 E:�c2 j.! >t.e' 'f °E° op QpL_a_ E'u rzE� WS;; i 'acE 2 nm=°..5,±» % OE wgi?EV EZ^- ` ° �LOLw OC.b� icOV "� OUPnCi a° °..a-6 7aB •9.o7_ r 'C Y L +p °Z L_ Y° y L L 9 r Z P L r O of L �c-'aE Z .°, O°�rOE Yu C 5•-yrY °10 T�^ C E2 z°� =EB ue+ Za o - rE '7 ° �a - ED 7 = Ei E �7 Y9 L•E`9 u e_ $r� out r Y =�° = °.._ a •+^S 'a'E a LXg L `o'� PE2Ea ° SL&LP aW 0'f-u .SYC°+ Oe+ p m �E C 6 IJ O eEt 9 ,I x > O Ve0 �_V / 2 ƒ I !! : =!E !§|!' ; ` 9| !'94 b � � ( ldGq % , } § „e „ a„ , R ! | ! ■ 2i = ! & ! _/ . � { } , / { ( / / ® � 2- ..�! -- / m �R£� -a k ! : ! a; § » - A ! /// OZ t )/$ k § R � !v,; e . /#�w c a.�&D»8 ! / ;:&Qua.: , 9 , ( Agdk k � ��"W%\ : IM / �� � 0 GRESHAM. VARNER, SAVAGE, NOLAN & TILDEN "W OEPICES iLBN B.O%EHHAN CBd10 O.DOHIEH gp0 ppg�y.E A%gOII.EteD ATENUE SUITE 'JOO HUCE D.V VAM. DAHYL H.CdBLipN WILLGg 041...1E MIND IR�7) )UNN.SwVAOE.II[ EATBIC D D.NdeG y`dpj BEHNABD]IjO. CALIFOBNIA BE401 DONALB N.JOBDAN(EM>-IBBH) )UN 0.NOLW PAYBAR G.. I EL LL W[L TOXEN HICEABL O.NOW ('/141 884-2141 (]141 826-09LL JOHN H'LONEBOAN(RETIRED SIM .HHS E.000D JAY 1.DOENES AS A.OSTOICB PEEEL)PE dLEEAHDEB TELECOPIEH (]M) 888.21220 IONAS N.JACOMON Td RBll1Y IIIRTZ 3731 MAIN STREET.SDISE BOO '" TN ORIME,I JAN49 H.8201[228 RNEHSIDE.C OANIA RPAUI MINT E RIME,C Je. NIC'RAEL p.RAILSET December 3, 1992 THLEPHpNE o]a g1<-1777 HIN J.B. IT [OCBHdN HHENDdN N.SeANDT :... .ROMEHY RONALD D.OETCHSY EB B.ROME SAHL JAPES WCTOH7ILLE O"TCE EN R.B.Rl"BY DAVID P.SIM 1"OO PAHH dVENpE.SIM MO 'NEST E.BIPPSNHD%DH VICTOBVILLg,ULIPpgNL - E DdO 083.8 Ai T N W. N 88R12IZ 22E TBIyPHONB IeI9)PL)•88Bp HAND DELIVERED Ms. Rachel Clark City Clerk City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, California 92418 Re: Inland Center Mall Development Agreement Dear Ms. Clark: On behalf of Mann Management, Incorporated, I hereby request that the Mayor and Common Council's consideration of Development Agreement No. 91-01 (Inland Center Expansion Development Agreement) be continued until the December 21, 1992 meeting of the Mayor and Common Council. Please contact my office to confirm that the continuance has been arranged. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. If I can be of any assistance to you, please let me know. Very truly yours, Mark A. Ostoich of GRESHAM, VARNER, SAVAGE, NOLAN & TILDEN cc: Valerie Ross mao/pb f`Ai�P.f /J t3 0 GRESHAM, VARNER. SAVAGE, NOLAN & TILDEN LAW OFFICES AMEN M OMESPAN CRAIG O.WRIER BOO NORTH AB ONHEAD AVENUE. SUITE • MILLIAM Gun R,E ARAB 10,11 BRACE D�VARNER DARTL UCAE-NON DONAIJ]M.JORDAN 0WI-ENMN PHILIP M.SAVAGE.H1 RI C HAND 0 MARCA SAN HEFN RDINO, Cd FORMA 02401 JOHN P.LOMEROAN(RETIRED I0N) JOHN CNo.LL PATRICK 0MITCH ELL ]14) B '21T1 (114)824-961L M,MiUUM TDEN NIC RAEL 0 MOU, ( $4 RIVERSIDE OPNICE JAM EE E.GOOD JAT C.EOENES TEI.ECOPIER 17141 888.2120 OTaI MAIN STREET,SUITE BOO NARK A�OSTOICE PENEIUPE A1EAAMDER RIVERSIDE,CALIFORNIA WWI THOMAS M.JACOBSON TARA NEU1Y WHITE STEPRAN O.sALESON JAMES R.BAIRER April 16, 1993 TaLEeRONE(714) eT<'1T1T ROBERI W.RITTER.JR. MICHAEL O.BANSHEE ROBIN BRAMLEIT COCHRAN BRENDAM M.BNANDT VICTORVT E OFFICE FRANK J.DELAMT RONALD D OETCHET I4G11 PANK AVENUE.sum 3W DUKE D ROUSE SAUL JAKE JOHN B,MCCABLET DAVID P.RUTH VICTONVIIIE,CALIFORNIA 0e90R ERNESf T.RIPPENSURGR TELEPHONE(SIR)PA9-2800 MICHAEL DUANE DAVIS BART M.BRIZEEE HAND DELIVERED Ms. Rachel Clark City Clerk 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, California 92418 Re: Inland Center Mall Development Agreement Dear Rachel: On behalf of Mano Management Company, Inc., I hereby request that the Mayor and Common Council's consideration of Development Agreement No. 91-01 (Inland Center Expansion Development Agreement) be continued until the May 10, 1993 meeting of the Mayor and Common Council. I have enclosed our check in the amount of $75.00. Please contact my office to confirm that the continuance has been arranged. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. If I can be of any assistance to you, please let me know. Very truly yours, Mark A. Ostoich of GRESHAM, VARNER, SAVAGE, NOLAN & TILDEN cc: Lorraine Velarde Valerie Ross mao/pb a � IVCITY OF SAN BERNARDINO �j O MISCELLANEOUS CASH RECEIPT N° 658987 Date 1-1,�7- —____19 ACCOUNT NO. AMOUNT Received From elo j Letf Dollars Cents N Fbr' 4 S O /ti9sl /tea,/?-�� e. 4 I i oN D;)aAmedt ey � $ Ay- �— TOTAL DISTRIBUTION: white—Customer;Canary—Caahler;pink—Departmenti ackienroe—DeVt.Numvk Comm JO I H ti �P�� j � i yyX�II--� OtJ OO M 1y.1 .N} I r I I I M I it pb ^ I 1 ♦ �y pN ; pN '� pN i pN � �8 I � 8 X O 1 N O 11 O I O $ N