Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.A- City Manager 2.A DOC ID: 3706 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO — REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Information/Report From: Allen Parker M/CC Meeting Date: 02/09/2015 Prepared by: Georgeann "Gigi" Hanna, Dept: City Manager Ward(s): Subject: Waterman Gardens Specific Plan Presentation -- National Core (#3706) Current Business Registration Certificate: Financial Impact: Supporting Documents: WG SP_Executive Summary (PDF) FOUNDATION WG SP_2-5-2015 (PDF) Updated: 2/5/2015 by Georgeann "Gigi" Hanna Packet Pg. 5 " 2.A.a Executive Summary To advance the vision of the greater Waterman Gardens community as a healthy, sustainable, equitable, and thriving place to work, live and play, National Community Renaissance (CORE) is proposing to prepare a Specific Plan to guide the transformation of the neighborhood into a mixed- income, service-enriched, sustainable environment. A Specific Plan is a regulatory tool used by L local governments to implement their general plan, promote economic development, and guide v redevelopment/revitalization in a localized area. While the general plan is the primary guide for 0- growth and development in a City, a Specific Plan is able to focus on the unique characteristics of a o ° special area/neighborhood by customizing a comprehensive, action-oriented set of rules and land z use regulations for a specific geographic area. The proposed Specific Plan work program will build upon the Waterman Gardens Master Plan (adopted February 2014) and define what the c surrounding neighborhood desires for its future by regulating land use and defining other aspects of 2 possible future public and private investment in human and physical development. Specifically, _ seven priority issues will be acted on at the neighborhood level using a consensus building y framework. Priority areas include: 1) Economic Development, 2) Education & Workforce a Development, 3) Housing, 4) Transportation & Infrastructure, 5) Environment, 6) Health & Human = Services, and 7) Arts & Culture. a At a minimum,the Specific Plan will .2 The Specific Plan area, as proposed, includes approximately include the following elements: 1.09 square miles or 700 acres and is generally bound by An overview profile of the planning a Highland Avenue to the north, 3rd Street to the south, Sierra area including demographic and N Way to the west and the Flood channel/Tippecanoe Avenue to socio-economic characteristics; • A significant public outreach and a the east. The Specific Plan boundary was drawn to include a g p L number of key assets including: the 38-acre Waterman community involvement process; M Gardens public housing site, E. Neal Roberts Elementary ' A market demand analysis for p 9 housing at all levels of c=a School, St. Bernardine Medical Center, Secombe Lake Park affordability,jobs and retail in the i and the major transportation and commercial corridors of planning area; Baseline Avenue, 3`d Street, and Waterman Avenue. The • Development of several land use planning process is intended to address long-standing alternatives; • A housing strategy that promotes c concerns with the neighborhood - blight, walkability, parks & affordable housing, including new M recreational programs, vacancies, underutilized parcels, crime, and rehabilitated units, and etc. The Plan will simultaneously seek to maintain and minimizes the displacement of enhance what is valued most about the area. This will ensure residents; that future land use decisions include information about • A multi-modal access and E impacts (both positive and negative) allowing informed choices connectivity strategy; in to be made about the area as a whole, not as individual • Pedestrian friendly design m standards for buildings,streets .��—,, projects are proposed. Long term, this effort will ensure that and open space; public investments successfully leverage private investment . A parking analysis to create a resulting in improved prosperity for the community overall. policy for parking demand and wl supply; a In addition to establishing a guiding framework, CORE • An infrastructure development N believes an adopted Specific Plan will give Waterman Gardens analysis and budget; preference/priority in accessing grant funds including our A human capital plan framework r ability o obtain a $20 million or larger Choice Neighborhood of policies, practices, and actions y g g that guide workforce development, grant, among others, and a Promise Zone designation which youth development and early c will further aid in revitalization of the community, access and childhood education, safety& create jobs, increase economic activity, improve educational security, and health &wellness; Q opportunities, improve health and reduce crime. An adopted • An implementation plan and Specific Plan will make evident that the City and established financing strategy to ensure the plan will be adopted and t consortium is invested in redeveloping the area and enhancing employed and that policies and the lives of individuals and families who reside there and programs will be updated as provide the regulatory tools necessary for this to occur thereby necessary. providing certainty to developers and investors. Packet Pg. 6 2.A.a The Specific Plan proposes a fiscally responsible approach which allows the upfront cost of preparing the Specific Plan and associated environmental documentation (CEQA) to be split amongst major land holders in the Specific Plan area (i.e., CORE, SBCUSD, HACSB, the Willis', etc.) and recovered over time as redevelopment occurs through a fee recapture program. Once the approximate 18-month planning process is complete, the Specific Plan will be adopted by City Council ordinance and thereby establish the zoning regulations for the development of the Specific Plan area. To further ensure partnered implementation, it is envisioned that the Specific Plan would i be approved by the San Bernardino City Unified School District and Housing Authority of the County v of San Bernardino. _ FIGURE 1: PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY Z ' I = E HighIon Ave it LEGEND < �3Decific an Boundary w _ N P L CL CL ■� - N d t6 T = 1 E t0 w• w C Line St B Line 51 E B In t �� M E GEC G3 Cn z > 0. 1� x w e > cn r< � r as h E V (Q W 5th > '►. 0 W JrC st'ti Sevre Eet Crg Re1CI;E E..usL.r,& p.a r; Packet Pg. 7 Prepared for THE CITY OF I ''- SAN BERNARDINO Proposal to Prepare a Specific Plan j and Environmental Impact Report for Greater Waterman Gardens Vqw l • k Y ^ a k w ' s - : r A a • C O M M U N I T Y November 19, 2014 National Community Renaissance of California IR RENAISSANCE 2.A.b a� L O U is _ O z _ a _ d N d L CL a m CL w c O L V O M N r O N N I CL cn z 0 a 0 z 0 U- d E s r r a I Packet Pg. 9 r 2.A.b November 19, 2014 Mr. Mark H. Persico, AICP NATIONAL Community Development Director COMMUN City of San Bernardino L 300 North "D" Street �j San Bernardino, CA 92418 0 w Subject: Proposal to Prepare the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan and EIR Z Dear Mr. Persico: _ 0 R r National Community Renaissance (CORE) is pleased to present our proposal for the preparation y of a Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the greater Waterman Gardens L neighborhood. This Specific Plan program will rethink traditional approaches to sustainability °- and community renewal and have transferable benefits that can be implemented throughout 2 greater San Bernardino, and can become a model for the region and state. A road map is needed to guide community initiatives to address redevelopment, revitalization and investment that will Cr support current and future residents and stakeholders in order for the greater Waterman a Gardens community to succeed as a healthy, sustainable, equitable and thriving place to work, N live and play. The positive transformation of this neighborhood and its residents is dependent upon a strong vision for the area linked to a comprehensive and coordinated p g p public-private L ca strategy to expand economic and human service opportunities through social and physical 0 investment and redevelopment. L We have assembled an outstanding team of professionals with diverse experience and talents M that will be dedicated to the success of the project through experience, innovation, and quality. CORE will serve as the lead consultant, overall project manager and author of the Specific Plan. c CORE staff has extensive experience preparing and managing large-scale Specific Plan and EIR M projects. Our team has managed over a dozen Specific Plan projects located in southern and �n northern California, ranging in size from 25 to 2,000 acres. CORE has completed Specific Plans for N the cities of Artesia, Downey, Monrovia, Chino Hills, Perris, and Highland. The project team also includes PlaceWorks and Fehr & Peers, both with offices in the Inland Empire as well as The `I'� Natelson Dale Group based out of Orange County. Each firm has significant experience working Cn on projects in the City of San Bernardino including the Waterman Gardens Master Plan and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Consequently, the project team is well acquainted with the Z opportunities and constraints that surround the City of San Bernardino and the Waterman O Gardens community. Q Z The CORE team can assist the City of San Bernardino in developing a Specific Plan that has been p examined on a technical, creative and practical level and prepare an Implementation Plan to LL achieve it as well as providing you with: • A strong leadership team including a project manager with a successful record of leading award-winning Specific Plans. CORE's project manager, Alexa Washburn, led the preparation of the Artesia Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan (2012 SCAG Compass Q Blueprint Award for Achievement in Livability), the Downtown Downey Specific Plan 9421 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga.CA 917 909.483.2444 Fax: 909.483.2448 nationalcore.o Packet Pg. 10 2.A.b€. (2011 SCAG Compass Blueprint Award for Achievement in Livability and 2011 Orange County APA Award), the Station Square Transit Village Specific Plan (2010 SCAG Compass Blueprint Excellence Award for Visionary Planning in Mobility and 2009 Los Angeles APA Best Planning Practice Award) and the Highway 395 Corridor Study (2013 SCAG Compass N A T I O N A L Blueprint Recognition Award). . M ., U N I T Y Project experience and expertise that covers the full range of issues that may be encountered. CORE has partnered with Fehr & Peers to complete the transportation and U parking analysis, The Natelson Dale Group to analyze market conditions and provide �a financing options, and PlaceWorks for the environmental analysis. In addition, CORE's o C land use team has significant experience in both the public and private sector providing z extensive knowledge of government codes, policies and regulations and the ability to help communities achieve efficient, effective planning programs and implementation c plans. CORE also offers full-service capabilities in public relations. a • A collaborative approach that fosters public/private partnerships. We know that c=, realistic implementation options must come from public/private partnerships. L Consequently, our project team has collaborated with the development community to a c bring experts to the table in varying specialties of development, including urban infill, ca affordable housing, transit oriented, office, and mixed use. We have also partnered L educators, health experts, and social providers to provide a human capital plan framework of policies, practices, and actions that will guide workforce development, Q. youth development and early childhood education, safety & security, and health & N wellness. E Our team is aware of some of the key issues facing the Waterman Gardens area, including the need to revitalize the neighborhood and commercial corridors, identify new, compatible uses and = �a opportunities for catalytic parcels, develop quality design standards to ensure that the area is E L redeveloped with a unique character that is consistent with existing and proposed uses, and to �a P4 build a strategy to implement the established standards. Our proposal is centered on a comprehensive and collaborative approach that will allow us to present alternatives supported by thorough technical, design, and land use planning analyses so that the stakeholders and ° decision makers can make informed decisions about the direction for the plan area. LO 0 We value the process of working with community stakeholders, elected officials, other N LO professionals and specialists, and associated governmental agencies to build a consensus of ideas c4 and encourage collaborative solutions. We are confident we can work with the City, and the 0- Cn Waterman Gardens community to develop an impactful Specific Plan. C7 We look forward to the opportunity to continue our participation in transforming the Waterman Z O • Gardens neighborhood and assisting with this needed project. If you need additional information a or have any questions, please contact me at (909) 969-3562 or spontell @nationalcore.org or ❑ Alexa Washburn, Vice President of Planning, at (949) 394-7996 or awashburn @nationaIcore.org. O LL Respectfully, Steve PonTell Alexa Washburn Q President and CEO Vice President of Planning 9421 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga.CA 917 909.483.2444 Fax: 909.483.2446 nationalcore.o Packet Pg. 11 r 2.A.b Proposal to Prepare a Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report o for a Greater Waterman Gardens 0 w Z Prepared for: _ 0 City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street y San Bernardino, CA 92418 a c c. Prepared by: a Cn National Community Renaissance 9421 Haven Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 N A T I O N A L E rr f0 �D O ti . LO Cnr' O N to NI a FEHR � PEERS PLACEWORKS Z 0 i= a 0 Z 0 U- E M a November 2014 Packet Pg. 12 2.A.b THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. O U c O to z O c0 C N d L a C a U u a) CL y C O L rr�nn V 0) 2� 7 O M Lo r O N N I a cn c� z 0 a 0 z n 0 U- 4i ;_ r a Packet Pg. 13 2.A.b Table of Contents L 0 U c 0 M z PROJECTAPPROACH................................................................................................. 1 0 PROJECTTEAM ......................................................................................................... 7 a� L WORKPROGRAM ................................................................................................... 1 1 = f ask 1 - Project initiation and Area Profile..........................................................................................11 a. Task2 - Engaging the Community......................................................................................................12 .2 Task3 - Research and Analysis .........................................................................................................15 a Task 4 - Development of Land Use Alternatives.................................................................................18 U) N Task 5 - Specific Plan Preparation......................................................................................................19 d Task6 - Confirmation Workshops.......................................................................................................24 M Task7 - CEQA Documentation...........................................................................................................24 Task 8 - Public Hearings and Adoption...............................................................................................28 E E L Task9 - Project Management.............................................................................................................29 w M COSTPROPOSAL .................................................................................................... 31 c� 0 M_ PROJECTSCHEDULE................................................................................................. 41 0 0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................... 45 N I a KEYPERSONNEL...................................................................................................... 47 N O QUALIFICATIONS AND REFERENCES............................................................................ 51 z O i= APPENDIXA - RESUMES...........................................................................................A1 0 z APPENIDX B —TECHNICAL SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................... B1 O u c m E t R r Q PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN ...................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 14 2.A.b THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. U �a c O 'a+ ca z _ _ m m L a c CL w m a cn m c� C7 E a� r ca 0 ti M O r O N O N� a C7 z 0 i` a 0 z 0 U- c d E r a " NOVEMBER 2014 .......................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 15 2.A.b Project Approach L O U �a c O r0 Z O This Specific Plan assumes that the greater Waterman Gardens community can succeed as a healthy, 2 sustainable, equitable and thriving place to work, live and play. The positive transformation of this N neighborhood and its residents is dependent upon a strong vision for the area, linked to a P comprehensive and coordinated public-private strategy to expand economic and human service °- opportunities through social and physical investment and redevelopment. In order to succeed the City _M of San Bernardino, San Bernardino City Unified School District, Housing Authority of the County of San a. Bernardino, National Community Renaissance, Hope Through Housing, The Clancy Company, residents, businesses, property owners, community-based organizations, and other stakeholders must e. lead in developing and implementing the vision of a greater Waterman Gardens as a neighborhood v) where that can occur. Through this Specific Plan effort, seven priority issues will be acted on at the = neighborhood level using a consensus building framework. Priority areas include: 1) Economic a Development, 2) Education & Workforce Development, 3) Housing, 4) Transportation & Infrastructure, 5) Environment, 6) Health & Human Services, and 7) Arts & Culture. _ E The Waterman Gardens Specific Plan will provide for revitalization of the physical conditions and establish a framework for a broader transformation of the community, providing enhanced educational, health and recreational opportunities. This comprehensive neighborhood revitalization effort will build upon the work accomplished through the Waterman Gardens Master Plan process and define what the c surrounding neighborhood desires for its future by regulating land use, development and design and M defining other aspects of possible future public and private investment in human and physical Ln development. The Specific Plan will focus on the unique characteristics of the neighborhood by c customizing a comprehensive, action-oriented set of rules and land use regulations thus providing the regulatory tool that is necessary to guide redevelopment and revitalization. Adoption of the Specific N Plan by City Council Ordinance will make evident that the City and established consortium is committed a. to and invested in redeveloping the area and enhancing the lives of individuals and families who reside there; furthermore it provides the regulatory tools necessary for this to occur thereby providing certainty to developers and investors. Z 0 The City has an incredible opportunity to create a unique neighborhood focused on providing a range of o housing, expanded educational and economic opportunities, recreational amenities, increased health Z and commercial services and leveraged private investment, while capitalizing on the redevelopment of 0 Waterman Gardens, the success of St. Bernardine Medical Center, Secombe Lake Park, sbX Bus U_ Rapid Transit corridor, and the San Bernardino Multi-Modal Regional Transit Center (shown in Figure 2, Assets and Opportunities). However, further study is needed on the land uses, zoning, circulation, and E infrastructure in the proposed Specific Plan area to identify additional opportunities, assess constraints and develop a comprehensive and coordinated public-private strategy. r a PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 1 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pp. 16 2.A.b PROJECT APPROACH Whereas the Specific Plan and analysis will focus on the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan area, the analysis will also lend itself to providing general findings relevant to the City of San Bernardino as a whole. In particular, the market analysis will provide City-wide forecasts of demand for the evaluated land uses. Moreover, the strategic recommendations for the Specific Plan area will likely be applicable to other areas of the City targeted for revitalization and thus support and contribute to a city-wide i economic development strategy/framework. v The proposed Specific Plan area consists of approximately 1.09 square miles or 700 acres and is o generally bound by Highland Avenue to the north, 3d Street to the south, Sierra Way to the west and ' the Flood channel/Tippecanoe Avenue to the east, as shown in Figure 1 below. Z Figure 1: Proposed Specific Plan Area o Z �v E Mlgh1- Ava _ LEGEND < _., specific Plan Boundary L CL CL _ 2 C. N _ d _ E ' T w sh In z E in et i B fn Sl b a � o � a• � �< N N �; r• r � °_; dI # ; Z o o Z D 0 _ E w n � w ra sf M31 [ 2 .............................................................................................................................................................NOVEMBER 2014 ....................... Packet Po_ 17 2.A.b PROJE1, APPROACH Figure 2: Assets and Opportunities as L V ' CAL•OTATE RNIA S UNNERSITY � fC ♦! 0 r !• M 66 ••• Z Vi/ •! '.. • N • L • 210 d _,• • C i a ! HgAiar.e a:anc .� ,J • � C ! e . CITYOF 210 = CITYOF .� a 4• �_, i °. HIGHLAND d RWLLO 8 « _ _r. 8 j• � i L k 66 '66WNT'0W4 six E iVon L tD O M Through this work program, the greater Waterman Gardens Specific Plan will implement the following U) objectives: N Highest and Best Uses - Explore new potential uses that will be permitted and encouraged in NI the Specific Plan area and that are compatible with existing uses that will remain or are N appropriate to the neighborhood; 0 Repurpose Underutilized Parcels - Identify opportunities for and/or constraints to � redevelopment for each underutilized parcel in the Specific Plan area; O Design Guidelines - Develop design guidelines to ensure that the area is redeveloped with a o unique, high quality character that is consistent with existing/remaining and proposed uses; Z Integrated Development-Since there are a number of parcels under separate ownership, 0 the Specific Plan will be used as a guide for integrated development; Adequate Infrastructure - Provide adequate utilities and public services to serve the Specific E Plan area; Mobility and Connectivity - Ensure safe access, connectivity, circulation, parking, and traffic a control throughout the Specific Plan area; PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 3 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 18 2.A.b PROJECT APPROACH Sense of Place- Incorporate elements necessary to instill a sense of place within the community. This will include design, signage, public art, landscape, and lighting standards. Retain and Expand Tax Dollars-Allow for a variety of retail and service uses that captures sales tax leakage, while recognizing existing retail patterns in the City and surrounding d communities; o 0 Recapture Costs- Establish a program to recapture the full fair-share cost of impacts to the City from development while also identifying innovative methods to incentivize and attract o retailers by reducing the overall cost of development. Z Streamline CEQA-The associated Program EIR will allow the City to effectively implement the Specific Plan and enable streamlining project-level CEQA review when consistent with c the Specific Plan. r m N m L a _ a as CL N _ L V _ E L d 2� 7 O M to r O N N I a U) 0 Z 0 i= a 0 Z 0 U_ _ E r a 4 NOVEMBER 201 Packet Pg. 19 2.A.b PROD APPROACH Approach The National CORE team proposes a phased work program to allow for the Specific Plan to adapt as issues and opportunities arise in the earlier part of the project. Often, issues arise in the issue L identification phase that can require modifications to the Specific Plan process. Most importantly, the v phased approach will allow for incremental accomplishments that local decision makers, outreach ; participants, and City staff can identify and celebrate. The phased approach encourages continued o public interest and investment into an 18-month planning process. As such, the phases are constructed to have clear beginnings and ends with products or events to be recognized and celebrated as Z accomplishments. Our work program proposes four phases. _ 0 • N1 I ME-.]its URINE]91111111111]1 IT101 RIM r _ a� During the first phase, we will focus on educating the public about the Specific Plan program and L learning from them about community priorities for the next 10-20 years. These priorities will be used to a. craft a vision and guiding principles for long-range decision making. Toward this end, the CORE team r_ will conduct consensus-building and education exercises with community leaders, service providers, a residents, and affinity groups. Through the Phase I exercises we look to understand key issues of iL_ community concern and the opportunities that can be achieved. The public engagement effort must be a innovative and creative, providing opportunities for people of diverse interests, income levels, and v) ethnic backgrounds to participate. For this program, we have included planners who are fluent in = Spanish and able to easily communicate planning issues and concepts to people who feel more T comfortable expressing their ideas in their native tongue. The team will perform a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis which will E serve as the roadmap for the Specific Plan. We will consolidate recent planning efforts, including the Waterman Gardens Master Plan, and studies, and integrate relevant information and recommendations into the Specific Plan. Collecting and reviewing this data will allow the team to assimilate completed work, ideas, and efforts into the Specific Plan without duplicating past work, while enhancing the c consultant team's understanding of the project area. National CORE will assume a lead role in summarizing the (SWOT) and will prepare a project vision and objectives. 0 ' • . • • ' • Government Code Section 65451 establishes the requirements for a Specific Plan and at a minimum al the Specific Plan will include the following elements: Cn C9 Introduction, including vision, project summary, specific plan objectives. Z O An overview profile of the planning area including demographic and socio-economic Q characteristics; o Z A market demand analysis for housing at all levels of affordability, jobs and retail in the O planning area; U_ Land use and zoning including land use plan, permitted uses, and development standards; Multi-modal circulation: including vehicular and non-vehicular access and connectivity; Parking analysis to create a policy for parking demand and supply; Q Open space and recreational facilities; PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 5 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet PQ_20 2.A.b PROJECT APPROACH Public services, infrastructure, and utilities; Design standards and guidelines for buildings, streets and open space; Implementation plan including a discussion of the future required actions to implement the project, financing, maintenance, and specific plan administration; L 0 General Plan consistency analysis: including identification of specific plan components that v are consistent with the City's General Plan. If necessary, we will also identify where the Specific Plan may vary and develop the necessary amendments to the General Plan; and c A human capital plan framework of policies, practices, and actions that guide workforce z development, youth development and early childhood education, safety and security, and health and wellness. ca c as MWITYMN61 M 0 1 a M&MM• • L In Phase III, Place Works will prepare a comprehensive program-level Environmental Impact Report = (EIR) for the Specific Plan. Place Works will coordinate with the City and consultant team throughout a the environmental review process to ensure that the Specific Plan is prepared in the most efficient and environmentally responsible manner, while fully supporting the planning goals of the City. PlaceWorks anticipates that communication will be particularly critical during the preparation of the Strengths, Q. Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) Analysis; formulation of performance standards n and/or specifications in the Specific Plan; and during impact analysis and development of mitigation measures. PlaceWorks will incorporate background information that CORE gathers in the course of the SWOT Analysis and preparation of the Specific Plan into the existing setting section of the EIR. This will result in a streamlining of effort to prepare the EIR and consistency between the Specific Plan and EIR. After completing the SWOT Analysis and the Draft Specific Plan review, EIR scoping process, and Notice of Preparation response period, Place Works will identify and communicate to the City potentially significant impacts that would result from implementation of the Specific Plan. PlaceWorks will assess the environmental impacts of all planning and administrative aspects of the Specific Plan and advise the n City and CORE on the most effective ways to reduce environmental impacts. Ideally, this reduction or elimination of impacts would be done through project design and inclusion of implementation measures LO that would be incorporated into the Specific Plan. PlaceWorks will also work with the City and CORE to N refine the level of detail needed for specific project components to avoid the need for future environmental analysis. This can be accomplished by clearly defining the project boundaries, maximum ` I scenario for land use buildout, specifying specific standards for project components where feasible Cn (such as lighting standards or parking supply), and ensuring that the analysis considers all potential a project components. z 0 'Phase IV - Adoption and ImplementationA' 0 Once the draft Specific Plan has been "seen and heard" by the community, it will be adopted by City z Council through a series of public hearings. 0 :r c m E R r Q bNOVEMBER 2014 Packet Pg.21 2.A.b Project Team L O U is c O cv Z National Community Renaissance has assembled an outstanding team of professionals rooted in the c Inland Empire to collaborate with the City of San Bernardino in the preparation of the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan. In addition to the seasoned, creative designers and planners of National CORE, the team also includes PlaceWorks to complete the necessary environmental analysis; Fehr & Peers to complete a thorough transportation and parking analysis; and The Natelson Dale Group to a complete the market study/ economic analysis for the project area. Both PlaceWorks and Fehr& Peers are familiar with the City of San Bernardino through their work on the Waterman Gardens Master Plan a and Val-9 Residential Project that National CORE in partnership with The Clancy Company is 2 developing; the team's prior and current work in the area will be leveraged to the greatest extent possible. �- U) L V National Community Renaissance (National CORE) is a (501)(c)(3) nonprofit public benefit corporation. M Our mission is to plan, develop and manage high quality affordable housing and transform the d communities in which they reside. We have in-house community planning, development, general contracting, social services and property management services expertise and are able to enhance neighborhood stability through long-term management and maintenance, as well as industry-leading c services such as senior wellness, preschool and afterschool programs, and family financial training M through our Family Opportunity Centers. Our portfolio includes planning, development and management of mixed-income, mixed-use, deeply affordable, market rate, new construction and c rehabilitation of both family and senior developments. N u� We believe that a home is more than sticks and bricks, and CORE understands the broader context and al importance of housing in a community. Planning from a housing perspective includes integrating the Cn diverse pieces that make up a neighborhood and community—including parks and recreation, mobility, U social services, care for the environment, design and aesthetics, health and wellness, and the Z economy. CORE's in-house community planning services offers our partner clients experience and o knowledge to craft creative and workable solutions for the communities we serve. We manage, prepare Q and implement a variety of urban planning and design projects including general, community, master, Z revitalization, downtown, and specific plans; corridor studies, housing elements, and sustainability strategies. Because we want to design plans that are not only practical and implementable but also U_ embraced by the public and decision makers, we employ a variety of engagement tools. We seek input c and involvement online, by phone, in person, and through focus groups from diverse voices in the 0 community. By opening this dialogue and building support, we can help move projects—from the simple to the most challenging—through review and final approval. Q PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN Packet Pg. 22 2.A.b PROJECT TEAM The Specific Plan effort will be headed out of the Corporate office located at: 9421 Haven Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 i Phone: (909) 483-2444 0 U Fax: (909) 291-1401 Contacts: Steve PonTell, President and CEO = 0 spontell nationalcore.org Alexa Washburn, Vice President of Planning Z awashburn(cDnationalcore.org = www.nationalcore.org o_ co c _ m L 0- Mr. Clancy worked actively with HUD between 1993 and 1995 on the legal and financial structure and c design for the "mixed finance" way of doing public housing revitalization in partnerships between a. housing authorities and private development companies. This approach was first made available and encouraged by HUD in the 1995 Hope VI NOFA. The Community Builders (TCB), under his leadership, prepared the top scoring Hope VI applications in 1995 and 1996 and consistently competed effectively a for HOPE VI funding, carrying out fifteen large public housing revitalization efforts with housing N authorities from Boston to Chicago, New Brunswick to Norfolk. Its Park DuValle development in Louisville was one of the most dramatic early successes of the program, while Oakwood Shores, its 3,000 unit planned mixed income community with over 700 units now completed in Chicago, is widely 0 regarded as the most successful of the many Chicago public housing transformation efforts. Today, R TCB is the only non-housing authority winner for Choice Neighborhoods funding. E d Through this work, Mr. Clancy's role is one of active involvement in creating (and adjusting where necessary) the vision and strategy for each site, the neighborhood, the market-and particularly the families being served. He will be intimately involved in the financial innovation critical to this work effort and to its implementation. With a mission to build and sustain strong communities where people of all incomes can achieve their full potential, The Clancy Company takes a creative approach to: Lo Plan, finance, develop, and operate high-quality affordable housing. N Coordinate access to support services and asset building activities. Ni CL Collaborate with neighborhood groups, residents, public and private agencies, and philanthropic interests to shape community and economic initiatives. 0 10 Focus on meeting the needs of low-income people not effectively served by market forces. Z 0 • Transform large-scale distressed housing projects into anchors for revitalization efforts. Q 0 • Serve as a long-term stakeholder in the neighborhoods we help transform. Z • Create effective local implementation teams that combine neighborhood understanding, 0 technical skills, and managerial ability. as E r Q 8 NOVEMBER 2014 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg. 23 PROJECT PlaceWorks PLACEWORKS PlaceWorks (formerly The Planning CenterlDC&E) is one of the West's most eminent planning design firms, with approximately 110 employees in six offices throughout California. Originally known as The L Center for Planning & Research, PlaceWorks was established in 1975 and modeled on the principles of v Germany's famous Bauhaus School of Design, which aimed to integrate individual design disciplines �a and work efforts into a greater whole. Today PlaceWorks serves both public- and private-sector clients o in the fields of comprehensive planning, environmental analysis and science, urban design, landscape z architecture, economics, school planning and GIS. PlaceWorks' CEQA practitioners and environmental scientists have handled projects of every size and type. Good environmental analysis doesn't just tally o up impacts, but finds opportunities to address and solve serious environmental concerns. Creating policies and designs that self-mitigate effects on the environment streamlines the process. They continually monitor legal precedent and legislative proposals, and we periodically we survey personnel n from industry and government so you can stay on top of the latest technology and trends. Their a environmental scientists combine site assessment and environmental engineering to span all kinds of c risk assessment. They know the regulations about hazards backwards and forwards—in fact, they wrote a some of them. Their staff are are not only intimately familiar with routine site assessment techniques, they are conversant with more innovative techniques. And if there is no technique to handle a certain problem at a certain site, they have the experience, know-how, and imagination to create one. o. W N PlaceWorks is a California S-Corporation. Our corporate office is in Santa Ana, California. This project will be managed by the San Diego office, with environmental planning work being done in collaboration with our Orange County and Inland Empire offices. FEH R ' PEERS Fehr & Peers has specialized in providing transportation planning and engineering services to public and private sector clients since 1985. They develop creative, cost-effective, and results-oriented solutions to planning and design problems associated with all modes of transportation. They offer their clients the right combination of leading-edge technical skills and extensive knowledge of the communities in which they work to deliver comprehensive solutions and superior client service. They c are nationally-recognized experts who routinely publish original research, serve on national committees, N and teach courses to others in the industry. They do this while maintaining their commitment to N translating those techniques into practical solutions. At Fehr & Peers, they take a creative, data-driven approach to each of our practice areas: U) 0 Travel behavior and forecasting z Multimodal operations and simulation O Q Transit planning Z • Bicycle and pedestrian planning p U_ • Sustainable transportation • Freight systems and airports E Integrated land use and transportation plans a Conceptual street and trail design Q • Transportation engineering and ITS design PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 9 ...................I..........................................................I............................................................................................................. Packet Pg.24 2.A.b PROJECT TEAM Clients hire Fehr & Peers because of their commitment to being the best at what they do. They live out this commitment in three distinct ways. First, they invest heavily in their culture to ensure that they are attracting and retaining the best and brightest staff in the industry. Second, they have a robust, internally-funded research and development program that enables them to develop new analytical methods and advance the state of the practice. And third, they survey every client at the completion of a every project to assess their satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement. They are very proud of v the impact this commitment has had on the communities they have been fortunate to serve. This project will be managed by Fehr& Peer's Inland Empire office. c The ca Natelson Dale Group z - o The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. (TNDG) is a real estate economic and financial consulting firm established in 1974 which provides services to both public and private clients in the following basic areas: a • Real estate market forecasts and development feasibility studies C • Financial feasibility and income projection analyses a. U • Economic development strategic plans d General plan economic development elements cn N • Downtown and corridor revitalization strategies E • TOD/mixed-use/infill development strategies • Fiscal impact assessments C Market impact studies and cost/benefit analyses r Deal structuring and negotiation of public/private development agreements M TNDG is dedicated to the direct involvement of its principals in all phases of the firm's work and c maintains a highly qualified staff of senior professionals to assist the principals in the conduct of each M assignment. The company also regularly participates on multi-disciplinary consulting teams, both as a prime and a subcontractor. c N TNDG is a "boutique" firm not only in terms of size (total staff of five professionals) but also in terms of N philosophy and approach. In this regard, the firm's principal personally manages every contract and a� maintains primary contact with the client. As their references will attest, exceptional responsiveness to N the unique needs of each client is a hallmark of TNDG's approach. Z Sophisticated analytical techniques are balanced with seasoned judgment as TNDG strives to produce 0 analyses of the highest technical quality without advocating its own or anyone else's opinions. Q Imaginative problem identification and study plan formulation are applied to each assignment. The final Z products are structured to assist the client make realistic decisions and achieve practical results in the shortest possible time. Results are communicated through a variety of media tailored specifically to U_ their intended audiences. The firm is headquartered in southern California and has satellite offices in Phoenix, Arizona. This project will be served by the Yorba Linda (Orange County) office. E t U f6 r r+ Q i 10 NOVEMBER 2014 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg.25 2.A.b Work Program L O U �a _ O r to z Scope of Work 0 Task 1 - Project Initiation and Area Profile N L 1.1- Project Kick-Off Meeting = To begin the Specific Plan work program, National CORE will lead an initial project kickoff a meeting with City staff, implementing partners (SBCUSD, HASBC and The Clancy Company) and consultants. This meeting will allow for all parties to understand the expectations regarding CL the work program, and level of involvement and coordination. We will work collectively to refine the scope of work and schedule, identify key player roles, establish communication protocol and product review procedures, and identify data needs. L 1.2- Existing Conditions - Initial Area Survey Following the program kick-off meeting, the project team will tour the study area to conduct a E site survey and document the built environment. While exploring the area, photographs and a survey checklist will be completed for parcels/blocks within and around the Specific Plan area. ?: The team will note street design, building form, building placement, architectural character and natural features. The team will document existing land use patterns, existing uses, street connections, building types and building heights. The tour allows the consultant team to enhance their understanding of the study area and prepare an initial GIS base map showing Specific Plan area boundaries, existing roads, parcels, and other data available for use by the N project team. This task assumes that basic GIS data can be obtained from the City and/or San Bernardino County. NI a Cn 1.3 - Document and Data Review c� Resource documents will be studied to gain an understanding of policies, regulations, and z procedures relevant to the project area. Base data for land use and demographics will also be 0 collected and reviewed. In addition, the project setting, including political, geographic, and o obvious environmental issues will be explored. Resource documents to be reviewed include: z O City of San Bernardino General Plan and Program EIR U_ • City of San Bernardino Zoning Code and Zoning Map • Recent Development Plans and Proposals E Capital Improvement Projects and Master Plans w Q Collecting and reviewing this data will allow the team to assimilate completed work, ideas, and efforts into the Specific Plan without duplicating past work, while enhancing the consultant PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM team's understanding of the project area. All applicable data will be added to the GIS base maps. 1.4- Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Constraints The CORE team will assess potential strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints or c threats (also known as a SWOT analysis) facing the Specific Plan area. This analysis will help v distinguish the unique conditions and characteristics of the Specific Plan area and identify = potential opportunities for infill development, redevelopment, and preservation. °- •a Z 1.5- Goals and Objectives _ Findings of the site survey and the SWOT analysis will inform include a preliminary set of goals •° and objectives for the Specific Plan area. The goals and objectives will be developed as a = cooperative effort between City Staff and the consultant team. The ideas presented will later be N introduced to the community and key decision makers to collect input and establish a clear a direction for the area. CL Task 1 Meetings d One (1) project kickoff meeting with staff from the City and project team Q- Cn ,Task 1 as Deliverables -a c� # GIS base map Memorandum identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints of the E Specific Plan area (SWOT analysis) M Preliminary goals and objectives for the Specific Plan area 0 ti M Task 2 - Engaging the Community 0 Our approach to community engagement in planning programs is rooted in collaborative planning. This LO approach is based on the premise that those who live and work in the community are the true experts. Ni Our role is to engage and inspire the community, to work with them to develop future scenarios, and to a help the community make informed choices and understand the outcomes of those choices. We Cn strongly support engaging members of the community who may not have ever been involved in planning activities, or any city activity for that matter. Z We believe that collaboration and education go hand-in-hand and together create the foundation for a o successful planning effort. However, it is also important that we work closely with City staff to identify a z program that is best suited for the effort. For this reason, we have provided a selection of outreach 0 options that can be expanded or refined as needed. w c m 2.1 - Leadership Committee Meetings E The Leadership Committee will be involved in setting priorities and being the "keeper of the r goals" in the final Specific Plan. The Leadership Committee will consist of a cross fertilization of Q stakeholders, including, but not limited to: 12 NOVEMBER 201 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 27 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM City of San Bernardino- Mayor Davis and City Manager Parker s San Bernardino City Unified School District-Superintendent Marsden • County of San Bernardino- Supervisor Gonzales/ Ramos and CEO Devereux • Housing Authority of San Bernardino County- Dan Nackerman o • The Waterman Gardens Partnership (CORE, HTH and The Clancy Company) - Steve v PonTell and Pat Clancy o • Inland Valley Development Agency- Michael Burrows z Loma Linda University- Dr. Hart California State University, San Bernardino- President Tomas Morales • A City appointed faith based organization • A City appointed business representative a The Committee will meet on a monthly basis to define long term equitable objectives; to review a and guide the development of the Specific Plan (including identifying next steps to continue implementation efforts beyond the preparation of this Specific Plan); and to share information on a initiatives that are supporting implementation of the Plan. Responsibilities of the Leadership cn Committee will be: consensus building; decision making about the Plan and implementation c strategy; active proponent of the Plan's development/implementation process; knowledge a sharing of the neighborhood and environs including strengths/weaknesses; attend and actively participate in meetings throughout the process; review work products; offer feedback; and = commit to the successful/timely implementation of the Plan. Throughout the course of the work program, the project team will consult with the Leadership Committee to keep the process on track and to verify key issues. 2.2 - Create the Buzz: Listening, Learning, and Establishing the Vision o During the first phase, we will focus on educating the public about the Specific Plan program and learning from them about community priorities for the next 10 to 15 years. These priorities LO will be used to craft a vision and objectives/guiding principles for the Specific Plan area. Toward N this end, the CORE team will conduct community-building and education exercises with L9 community leaders, service providers, residents, and affinity groups. Through the Phase I al exercises, we look to understand key issues of community concern, and we can begin to test vn interest in topics that decision-makers may wish to pursue in the Plan. For example: O What constitutes a complete and sustainable neighborhood in the mind of residents and O business leaders? Describe the services and amenities (i.e. infrastructure improvements, parks and recreation,) Z that residents would like to see enhanced or provided where they are not today. :3 O What efforts should we take to achieve a unique and resonating identity that represents the values of residents? What are those values? c What barriers exist to using alternative transportation modes? E r PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 13 . ......................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 28 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM 2.3 - Stakeholder and Technical Expert Interviews To better understand the individual goals of the various stakeholders within and surrounding the Specific Plan area, the consultant team will hold stakeholder interviews with key property and business owners to identify their individual ideas and concerns. CORE will work with City staff to identify stakeholders to participate in interviews. Stakeholders may include not only property o owners and business owners, but also citizens, technical experts, and city leaders. The v interviews will reinforce the need for public involvement, educate about the upcoming process, _ and allow the consultant team to gain a better understanding of the desires, ideas, and 2 motivations for the Specific Plan. Stakeholders may include: Z City Council Resident groups o San Bernardino City School District Business and property owners a� Housing Authority of San Local Advisory Committees and Bernardino County Commissions within the City 0- _ �v It is important that the team obtain a clear understanding from the appropriate technical experts a. of the opportunities and constraints facing the project area. The team will schedule meetings with technical experts to obtain information regarding: Q. k Transportation conditions and issues • Economic conditions and issues ca • Development proposals and projects • Existing infrastructure • Public health a� • Education • Other key issues 0 n M Outreach efforts will include personal invitations to identified stakeholder groups, including groups representing special needs (low-income, disabled, elderly, and families), social services c providers, and non-profit organizations, as well as other groups the City indicates are appropriate. The Core team will consult with City staff, but ultimately will be responsible for 4? preparing the necessary staff report, public notices, invitations and comment forms for the a� meetings. Meeting notices will be provided in both Spanish and English. As part of the work `n scope refinement process, we can discuss with staff the most effective approach for these meetings, including opportunities to ensure the involvement of key stakeholder groups, non- z profits, and the community 0 Q LTask 2 Meetings °z 0 Facilitation of Leadership Committee meetings (up to 8) `' r Two (2) community building/visioning workshops Up to fourteen (14) stakeholder interviews over two consecutive days w Q 14 NOVEMBER 2014 3 Packet Pg. 29 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM • Leadership Committee meeting materials including agendas and presentations • Leadership Committee meeting summaries c U • Community workshop materials including presentations, graphic display boards, handouts, comment cards, etc. _ 0 v Summary of feedback received at community workshops Z Interview materials, exhibits, and presentations 0 • Executive summary of interview findings d Task 3 - Research and Analysis a In this task the puzzle pieces come together painting a picture of what the project area is today and M what the area will aspire to be tomorrow. From these visions, the CORE team will begin to outline the a steps to get from the past to the present. In outlining the steps, the project team will illustrate the opportunities and constraints at a technical level. CL This series of tasks will focus on collecting detailed background data on the project area including all y specialized studies. All technical reports identified on the data request list prepared in Task 1.1 will be =°'a reviewed and utilized to inform the Specific Plan and the Environmental Impact Report. R C� 3.1- Market Study M The Natelson Dale Group (TNDG) will complete a market study to serve two major purposes a; within the overall specific planning process: 1) to identify the project area's real estate development opportunities, with this information serving as a basis for defining land use alternatives for the plan, and 2) to provide a strategic framework - in terms of a specific o marketing strategy - for attracting desired development (and specific tenant types) to the plan M area. The market study would address the following land use categories: Lo 0 N Retail/Restaurant • Office al • Business park (potentially including light industrial uses) W 0 • Residential � Mixed-use Z 0 a TNDG will also conduct interviews with commercial and residential developers familiar with the Z San Bernardino market to provide a "reality check" on TNDG's statistical findings and to identify and prioritize the strategic actions the City can take to maximize development potentials within o the Specific Plan area. Please refer to Appendix B, Technical Scopes of Work, for the tasks necessary to complete the market study. ca a PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN Packet Pg. 30 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM 3.2 - Land Use, Design and Architectural Surveys To establish a clear understanding of the existing conditions of the Specific Plan area and the surrounding areas, 7 o the consultant team will supplement v the data collected in the initial site c .40 ,Sr ,33 11 -b .51 33 .10 �1 O survey (Task 1.2) and further W document the built and natural "' Z 10 -13 D7 20 a environmental. The team will illustrate the opportunities and constraints at a ; :rya c .KS.+a.s xsra jr technical level, for example, parcel size and depth, existing utilization, fn1�� a� existing infrastructure, and land uses. a 3.2.1 Land Use Data Collection a. To summarize and illustrate the existing land uses within and surrounding the Specific 2 Plan area, the CORE team will prepare GIS maps documenting, at the parcel level, the existing uses. To identify any land use inconsistencies, the team will cross reference the a existing uses with those permitted via the Land Use Element and Zoning Code. ) c as 3.2.2 Site and Building Conditions 0 Based on the detailed parcel surveys and data collected on the tour, the CORE team, will 4 ` ArnrP s.rr 1' S s t4 develop a map and database to indicate the physical condition of buildings within o the Specific Plan area. I M Established criteria and ° LO ranking or classification CD system will be used to identify „1 the extent to which structures 1 Ni are considered to be in good 1 a condition, in need of --- c7 rehabilitation or may qualify for Legend 3:Q Vacant-Primary Opportunity Site demolition as well as vacant Q UnderutiliLed Sile -Secondary Opportunity Site Z and underutilized parcels and Valiant Space to be Leased Icrtiary Opportunity Site O P 0 Corridor Study Area-Non-Opportunity Site f—• those with leasable space. a 0 Z 3.2.3 Image Analysis o The project team will inventory the physical improvements and unique characteristics of the Specific Plan area through photographs, sketches, and measurements of buildings, E streets, natural features and public spaces. Additional focus will be placed on edges, gateways, nodes, pedestrian paths, centers and landmarks. The team will document w street and pedestrian connections, signage, building types, building placement, and Q architectural character for each project parcel. Improvements and characteristics to be evaluated include: 16 NOVEMBER 2014 Packet Pg. 31 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM Existing streetscapes and public improvements Public and private signage Entry and boundary demarcation and identification Nodes and open spaces Pedestrian circulation 0 Significant places and community landmarks U 0 3.3 - Transportation Conditions Z Fehr & Peers will conduct a comprehensive inventory of the transportation conditions within the ; Specific Plan area. Specific items that would be noted through this inventory include: o �o Roadway configurations including the number of lanes and posted speed limits • Traffic control devices including traffic signals and stop signs L • The locations of crosswalks and sidewalks a _ • Bus routes and stops a. • Bicycle lanes and routes .2 a� Fehr & Peers will also identify up to 15 intersection locations where updated traffic counts data cn would be required. These study locations would be identified through consultation with the City = of San Bernardino and other members of the project team. AM and PM peak hour traffic counts would be collected at these locations. To the extent feasible, Fehr & Peers will use data from the previous traffic studies prepared for the Waterman Gardens and Phase I Val-9 sites to minimize = the need for additional data collection. E 3.4 - Utilities and Infrastructure Analysis The CORE team will collect relevant utility and public service data and assess whether the current services are adequate to serve the Specific Plan area and future development. Base ° data may include sewer and water master plans as well as contact with local service providers (i.e. police, fire and schools) to ensure that future needs can be met. 0 N N I Market study summary report documenting the data, assumptions and methodology used to cai� arrive at the findings. Spreadsheet tables and databases will be attached as appendices. O Existing conditions report and database including land use information, site and building Z conditions, utilities and infrastructure data, and transportation conditions. GIS maps indicating zoning, existing land uses, building footprints, building conditions, street o classifications, existing infrastructure, and street and pedestrian connections. O Specific Plan vision, goals and objectives. UL r c a� E r Q Q PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 17 ........................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 32 D.AE WORK PROGRAM Task 4 - Development of Land Use Alternatives 4.1 - Pro Forma Analysis TNDG will prepare financial pro formas for four (4) prototypical development projects to determine the development densities that would be needed to allow for feasible v infill/redevelopment projects in the Plan area. The prototypes will be defined in conjunction with the National CORE team and will be oriented towards identified opportunity sites within the g Specific Plan area. The prototypical projects will encompass a range of land use alternatives z and be intended to demonstrate the feasibility of different mixes and densities of development. ; They would be prepared in a format suitable for inclusion in developer marketing materials. c 4.2 - Land Use Alternatives The CORE Team will prepare two (2) land use alternatives with guidance from City Staff. Land d use maps and illustrations will be prepared demonstrating the proposed land use scenarios a including the identification of new development sites, existing development/buildings to i preserve, sites prime for redevelopment and, parking and streetscape improvements. The maps a. and illustrations will provide a clear visualization of the improvements and key elements being t proposed in each scenario. Once the land use scenarios have been developed and evaluated, a the CORE team will meet with City Staff to select a final or preferred land use scenario. a� Task 4 Meetings One (1) Meeting with City Staff to discuss land use alternatives d r w Pro formas for prototypical development projects (4) c Land use concepts (2) LO 0 N Hosaw• � fn O f/ BnAw. - j pr'J Z -J �,,, w w..w O Mr.wt. \ 215 F.ec,.ay Pwle �� 3 18 NOVEMBER 2014 Packet Pg.33 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM Task 5 - Specific Plan Preparation Based on the information gathered in the •, I k preceding tasks, the CORE team will prepare LJ the draft Specific Plan for review by City Staff. t1 1� 7'T TA ♦ Where appropriate, illustrations in the form of c sketches, diagrams, and photographs will be v _ used to clearly explain and highlight development standards and design guidelines. •�� ;" w. n a T The CORE team shall prepare three (3) -r , z .�• ' versions of the draft Specific Plan as follows: CIOY An administrative draft for City staff ; ^ o review; A public review draft for posting and •-•" -•z• n. ��.,�a�A.�, N circulation; and ' N ''•�� � a. L .n; I tip - � •� � a 1 : _ A public hearing draft to be considered by the Planning ' a Commission and City Council for .2 adoption. - ►` z a a. The draft Specific Plan is anticipated to include n the following information and sections. 5.1 - Final Land Use Plan 0 _ The CORE team will prepare a plan showing the preferred land uses within the Specific Plan E area and incorporating project site development concepts. The illustrative plan will be produced a; at a scale suitable for public presentation and will also be capable of reduction for inclusion final Specific Plan. 0 5.2 - Final Land Use Plan Narrative and General Plan Consistency Analysis M The CORE team will write a narrative summarizing the major principles of the Land Use Plan developed in Task 4.1. CORE will perform a General Plan consistency analysis which will N identify specific plan components that are consistent with the City's General Plan. If necessary, N we will also identify where the Specific Plan may vary and develop the necessary amendments al to the General Plan. cn 0 5.3 - Infrastructure Plans Z z O The project team will prepare an Infrastructure Plan that focuses on the adequacy of the Q infrastructure within the Specific Plan area and presents development policies pertaining to 0 transportation including alternative modes of travel, utilities and public services. z O 5.3.1 - Non-Motorized Network Based on data collected in Task 3.3 and input from the project team, Fehr & Peers will identify E potential upgrades to the bicycle and pedestrian network, necessary to support anticipated development within the Specific Plan area. These recommendations will leverage data from other studies including the proposed Master Plan for the Waterman Gardens site, which a identified potential improvements to the non-motorized transportation network along Baseline PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 19 ..................11........................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg. 34 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM m Street and North Waterman Avenue. Specific recommendations might include but not be limited to the following: Pedestrian only signals Enhanced crosswalks Improved sidewalks o New bicycle lanes or routes v Improved wayfinding measures 0 5.3.2 - Transit Connections z Fehr & Peers would also identify recommendations to improve transit connectivity within the ; Specific Plan area. These recommendations would include but not be limited to the following c items: New or expanded bus stops Additional or expanded connections to the E Street BRT line Private or semi-private shuttle connections to the BRT or the San Bernardino aL Intermodal Transit Center c a 2 5.3.3 - Roadway Improvements In coordination with the project team and City staff, Fehr & Peers will identify any roadway Q. improvements that might be needed to support the Specific Plan. Potential improvements would N include any mitigation measures identified by the traffic study for the Waterman Gardens site. fi L 5.3.4 - Parking Analysis �! ►� E One key transportation issue within the proposed study area is the issue of parking supply and ( `� demand in selected residential areas. Fehr & Peers will therefore conduct parking occupancy I c counts in the area generally bordered by the M_ following streets: East Baseline Street o North Sierra Way CIA East 9th Street Ni North Waterman Avenue a. The survey will be collected during one evening. All vehicles parked along the street in legal Cn parking spaces will be counted. Any vehicles illegally parked will be noted as well. Fehr & Peers will also estimate the number of legal on-street parking spaces to identify parking z occupancy. Q 0 5.3.5 - Public Services and Utilities The Public Services and Utilities section will include general information regarding the planned 0 distribution, location, extent and intensity of public services and utilities in the Specific Plan area. The utilities will be mapped and written discussion of the sewer, water, and storm drain systems E required for the Specific Plan area including future infrastructure improvements will be indentified and incorporated in the draft Specific Plan. Public services and utilities to be addressed include water, sewer, storm drainage, energy, solid waste disposal, street lights, Q police, fire, schools, parks and libraries. 20 NOVEMBER 2014 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM 5.4 - Design Guidelines The CORE team will prepare design guidelines and standards for the Specific Plan area. Our services will include, but is not limited to, preparation of building _ _�-, o design, signage, open space, lighting, - v parking, and public art standards and guidelines. .0 - a Z Architectural Design - This component includes design standards for new development and for rehabilitation of existing development including building mass and volume, corner and c entry features, materials and colors. If appropriate architectural fagade and design illustrations will be included. _ m U) Signage - High-quality signs a contribute to the overall identity of an area, help people find their way along a streets and sidewalks, and clearly mark an area as a destination. General and conceptual guidelines a for signs located on public and b Cn private property will be developed to supplement the existing city sign - code requirements. The guidelines will focus on prototypical designs and — — requirements for directional and E informational signs on public right-of-way and conformance standards for signs on private a property. Lighting - An overall framework for lighting will be developed indicating intensity and typical c design standards. M Parking Lots - To enhance areas devoted to parking, standards and guidelines regarding edge treatments, screening, landscaping and adjacent building revitalization will be created. N Open Space - An illustrated guide that facilitates implementation of quality and defensible N open spaces will be developed. al Public Art- If desired, standards and guidelines for public art can be created. Z 5.5 - Landscape and Streetscape Concept Plan g r` This section will establish written and graphic design guidelines and standards for landscape o and streetscape improvements within the Specific Plan area. The standards and guidelines will Z focus on the appropriate use of landscaping to enhance neighborhoods and specific sites, buffer O uses, and improve the pedestrian environment. The Specific Plan team will prepare an illustrative Landscape and Streetscape Concept Plan with correlating guidelines to ensure the plans are implemented. The final element will be an illustrated guide that facilitates E implementation of quality and defensible gathering spaces, and vital and sheltering sidewalks and pathways. Elements in the landscape plan to be addressed include: a Street scene and parkways PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 21 ...............................................................................................................................I............................................................ 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM Pedestrian amenities such as street furnishing, decorative pavings, seating y " area, and bike racks Public parking lot landscape treatments a ` `o 5.6 - Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Plan This section will identify existing and future _ open space areas within the Waterman ' a;: 2 Gardens Specific Plan area, including z parks, open space areas, pedestrian , pathways and other recreational amenities. o This section is intended to help define ratios , � + for the provision of recreational amenities, including, but not limited to: baseball fields, basketball courts, tennis courts, soccer a. fields, etc. The proposed ratios are intended to ensure that future development provides its fair share of open space, parks or recreational a. amenities to serve existing and future residents living within the Specific Plan area. .2 d 5.7 - Development Standards cn N Detailed land use and development standards for all land uses allowed in the Specific Plan area will be developed using a mix of text and graphics. Elements to be addressed include, but are -a not limited to, minimum lot sizes, lot coverage, building height, floor area ratios, building C7 setbacks, parking requirements, and open space and landscape requirements. The section, like R a zoning ordinance, will guide development in the Specific Plan area. E Q 5.8 - Phasing Plan A Phasing Plan including all elements of the Specific Plan will be prepared including any special c program recommendations. The phasing plan will address improvements to the public right away, program inauguration recommendations and other implementation actions. Ln 0 5.9 - Human Capital Plan A Human Capital Plan framework of policies, practices, and actions will be prepared to guide ai workforce development, youth development and early childhood education, and health and cn wellness. Z 5.10 - Implementation Plan o The CORE team will prepare an Implementation Plan as required by Section 65451(a)(4) which o will include discussion of the future actions required to implement the project, financing z mechanisms, maintenance, and Specific Plan administration. p The team will outline a list of feasible policy steps and implementation actions necessary to carry out the vision for the Specific Plan area. The Implementation Plan may include actions E such as: Streamlining the process and procedures for approval Q Redevelopment targeting strategy (see task 4.9.1) 22 NOVEMBER 2014 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg.37 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM Marketing strategy Key capital improvement projects Other actions necessary to implement the vision for the Specific Plan area a� L G 5.10.1 - Financing Program/Implementation Strategy—� This task will provide a "tool box" of potential implementation strategies and financing Y mechanisms available to encourage/incentivize private investment in the Plan area and achieve z other short and long-term goals of the Specific Plan. The overall implementation plan will I include the following components: c �a Identification and prioritization of key opportunity sites; Recommendations regarding allowable development densities with the Plan area (and relevant sub-areas); a _ Recommended timing of public improvements; a Recommendations for streamlining of development processing within the Plan area; m Identification of municipal incentives necessary to attract desired development/land uses; a Cn Designation of lead agencies for implementation of Specific Plan actions; Recommended marketing approaches to attract desired development and/or to expand L consumer awareness of the Plan area; _ Analysis of potential funding sources and financing mechanisms (including grants, fees, assessments, developer impact fees, etc.); a, Financial pro forma of sources and uses of funds for recommended public improvements. 3: co 0 5.10.2- Specific Plan Recovery Fee Government Code Section 65456 allows a legislative body to develop and impose a fee upon applicants seeking approvals within the project area that are consistent with the adopted N Specific Plan. The fees may include or cover the cost of preparation, adoption, and N administration of the Specific Plan and associated CEQA documentation. The CORE team will al develop a fee structure that allows the City to be reimbursed for the costs of the Specific Plan cn planning effort. z Task 5 Deliverables, o Q • Five (5) hard copies; One (1) reproducible original copy; one (1) electronic copy (Microsoft ° Word and Adobe formats) of the administrative draft Specific Plan for City review and o comment. U_ Five (5) hard copies; One (1) reproducible original copy; one (1) electronic copy (Microsoft Word and Adobe formats) of the draft Specific Plan for public review and posting. E s Fifteen (15) hard copies; One (1) reproducible original copy; one (1) electronic copy (Microsoft Word and Adobe formats) of the public hearing Draft Specific Plan for a consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption. PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 2h3 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM Specific Plan recovery fee program Task 6 - Confirmation Workshops L O U 6.1 - Community Forum Once the administrative draft Specific Plan has been completed and reviewed by staff, we will prepare the public review draft Specific Plan and conduct a Confirmation Community Forum to ask residents the z question: "Does this draft Plan represent the ideas you have expressed and your vision for the community?" o 6.2 - Planning Commission and City Council Study Sessions N We plan for two study sessions: One (1) with the Planning Commission and one (1) City Council at key a check-in points in the work program: 1) to confirm issues/ideas and Vision Statement, 2) to review and get concurrence on the preferred land use and circulation alternatives, and 3) to review the entire Draft n. Specific Plan and EIR prior to formal public hearings. 2 w Q Task 6 Meetings C One (1) community forum L One (1) Planning Commission study session • One (1) City Council study session a� �o Forum materials including presentation, graphic display boards, handouts, comment cards, etc. Ln Summary of feedback received at community forum c N +� Handout materials and visual presentations for PC/CC study sessions W) N I a. Task 7 - CEQA Documentation Z The PlaceWorks team will coordinate closely with National CORE and the City of San Bernardino to o_ determine the level of analysis anticipated for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Waterman Q Gardens Specific Plan EIR is proposed as a programmatic EIR, characterized by a long-term and Z phased buildout. The proposed project will be analyzed at the maximum level of detail possible based o on the project description. Appropriately structured, the EIR will include specific performance standards U_ and requirements for more detailed design or engineering level studies as future details become available. The EIR will also provide information related to SB 226 so that the City may utilize the streamlining provisions in CEQA Guideline Section 15183.3 and avoid or limit a subsequent CEQA document (EIR or MND). a 24 NOVEMBER 2014 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg. 39 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM The Waterman Gardens Master Plan and Val--9 Residential project areas are included as a part of the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan project area. Mitigation identified in both projects will be included in the project design and analysis for the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan EIR. To the extent feasible, PlaceWorks will use data, analysis, and other information from the previous environmental studies prepared for the Waterman Gardens Master Plan and Valencia Gardens sites to 0 minimize the need for additional data collection and analysis. v �a The Waterman Gardens Specific Plan EIR will meet all the requirements in the California Environmental c Quality Act (Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 150000 et seq). Z 7.1 - Notice of Preparation We will prepare the draft notice of preparation (NOP) and submit it for review and approval by the City. It is anticipated that this EIR will address every topic except Agriculture/Forestry Resources. As a result, no Initial Study will be prepared. The NOP will note the topics to be addressed, and support for a exclusion of Agriculture/Forestry Resources will be discussed in the "Impacts Found Not To Be r_ Significant" section of the EIR. a U Upon review and approval of the NOP, PlaceWorks will copy and distribute the NOP to state and local agencies, surrounding property owners, and other special interest groups or individuals per the a distribution list provided by the City. The NOP will clearly identify the time period, contact person, and N address established for submitting responses. _ C)!Task7*1 Deliverables d �a * One (1) electronic copy of the Draft NOP r • Up to forty-five (45 )hard copies and one (1) electronic copy of the NOP for distribution • Certified mailing to agencies and general public o • Certified mailing to State Clearinghouse for circulation to state agencies M LO 0 7.2 - Public Scoping Meeting The National CORE team in collaboration with the City will organize and conducting one scoping meeting with agencies and interested parties to solicit comments regarding the scope and content of a. the environmental issues to be addressed in the EIR. At the meeting, we will be prepared to discuss the 0 environmental review process and answer specific questions, as desired by the City. It is recommended 3: that the scoping meeting be held as soon as possible after the release of the NOP so public concerns z0 about environmental issues can be identified. Q 0 Z 'Task 7.2 Deliverables o U_ Preparation and participation at scoping meeting c a� PowerPoint slides and public handouts (up to 50 copies) E V Scoping meeting record of comments y a C PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 26 Packet Pg. 40 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM 7.3 -Administrative Draft EIR I and II A programmatic-level EIR will be prepared and include the following sections in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines: • Executive Summary Cumulative Impacts L 0 • Introduction Effects Not Found to Be v • Project Description Significant c • Environmental Setting Organizations and Persons z Consulted Discussion of Existing Conditions, Other CEQA-Mandated = Environmental Impacts, and Mitigation 0 Measures Sections Each topical section of the document will: (a) describe existing environmental conditions and pertinent 0) regulatory policies and programs that apply to this project, (b) define the criteria by which impacts will a be determined to be significant, (c) determine the environmental changes that would result from the project, (d) evaluate the significance of those changes with respect to the impact significance criteria a (thresholds), (e) define mitigation measures to reduce or avoid all potentially significant adverse .2 impacts, and (f) provide a conclusion as to whether significant impacts would remain, even after successful implementation of recommended mitigation measures. Two types of mitigation measures cn CL that are practical and feasible will be recommended: measures addressing impacts related to the primary (direct) impacts and measures addressing impacts related to the secondary (indirect) impacts of the proposed project. A conservative scenario approach will be followed for all analyses in the EIR. . c� Please refer to Appendix B, Technical Scopes of Work, for the topical analysis and subtasks necessary to complete the programmatic draft EIR. E L d M Task 7.3 Deliverables Ten (10) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy (in MS Word and PDF) with technical appendices on CDs of ADEIR I Ten (10) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy (in MS Word and PDF) with technical o appendices on CDs of ADEIR II ,r, N' a. 7.4 - Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) c� PlaceWorks will incorporate City comments on the two rounds of review of the ADEIR. Upon approval of the third set of revisions, we will forward the Preprint Draft EIR for final review before publication. Upon Z O approval we will prepare the notice of completion (NOC) for National CORE and City approval. We will also prepare the notice of availability (NOA) for City approval and distribution by the City and publish o and print and distribute the DEIR per the mailing list to be provided by the City. Z O U. Task 7.4 Deliverables m E • One (1) hard copy with technical appendices on CDs of the Preprint Draft EIR • Up to ten (10) bound hard copies with technical appendices on CD of the Draft EIR; 10 CDs a in pdf form • Fifteen (15) hard copies of the Executive Summary with EIR CDs attached \rr� 26 NOVEMBER 201, .................................................................................................................................................................................... .. Packet Pg.41 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM Twenty-seven (27) copies of the EIR on CD Five (5) hard copies of EIR Appendices in a 3-ring binder and 1 CD in original format Preparation of the NOA and NOC Certified mailing of up to forty (40) copies of the Draft EIR to recipients on the approved o distribution list and State Clearinghouse U �a 0 7.5 - Final EIR - Response to Comments z Response to Comments received on the Draft EIR will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15089. Following receipt of all comments on the Draft EIR, written responses will be c prepared for each comment. A Response to Comments section will be created for the Final EIR and will contain an introduction describing the public review process for the Draft EIR, copies of all comment letters and minutes from public meetings where oral comments were taken, and written responses to all d comments. Responses will focus on comments that address the adequacy of the Draft EIR. Comments a that do not address EIR adequacy will be noted as such and no further response will be provided unless deemed necessary by the City. Responses will be prepared by PlaceWorks with input from our a. technical specialists, as needed. .2 An estimate of up to 50 hours of professional time to respond to comments has been included. The a estimated budget assumes that no additional basic research will be required to respond to comments and that the comments will be directed at the substance and technical adequacy of the EIR. Modification to the scope of work, budget, and time frame may be necessary if comments received from agencies or the general public requires substantially increasing the scope of impacts and issues M addressed in the EIR. c �a The Final EIR will also include any revisions, updates, or corrections needed to respond to comments E or address minor errors in the Draft EIR. M PlaceWorks will revise the Responses to Comments based on revisions provided by the City. Responses to Comments from responsible agencies will be distributed a minimum of 10 days prior to 0 consideration of the Final EIR by the City Council. M LO 0 task 7.5 Deliverables N NI • Ten (10) bound copies of the Administrative Final EIR (Appendices in a CD) a Cn • Fifteen (15) bound hard copies of the Final EIR - Response to Comments with Appendices/MMP included on CD; 25 CDs in pdf format and 1 CD in MS Word z • Distribution of the Response to Comments to Commenting Agencies o • One (1) copy of FOR including Appendices and MMP in a web-friendly format o z 7.6 - Mitigation Monitoring Program An MMP will be prepared, pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. It will be presented in standard City format and will identify the significant impacts that would result from the s project, proposed mitigation measures for each impact, the times at which the measures will need to be conducted, the entity responsible for implementing the mitigation measure, and the City department or Q other agency responsible for monitoring the mitigation effort and ensuring its success. PlaceWorks will revise the MMP based on revisions provided by National CORE and the City. PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 27 .................................................................................................................................................................................. Packet Pg.42 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM • Mitigation Monitoring Program a� 7.7 - Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Notice of Determination 0 The Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) will be prepared consistent c with the requirements of CEQA. The draft Findings of Fact and SOC will be distributed to the City for o review and comment. z Notice of Determination: A draft notice of determination (NOD) will be prepared for review the City. After the City takes action certifying the Final EIR and approving the project, the NOD will be filed with the o Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the San Bernardino County Clerk. Exemptions and No Effect Determination: A request for A No Effect Determination (NED) will be submitted to the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to Fish and Game Code a` Section 711.4(c)(1) to receive a waiver for the filing fee. A NED may be granted if the project will have c no effect on fish and wildlife. However, although no impacts to biological resources are anticipated, the a NED approval is under the discretion of the CDFW and may not be granted. m - • cn N _ • Two (2) bound copies and one (1) electronic copy of the Draft Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Notice of Determination and CDFW filing E L d Task 8 - Public Hearings and Adoption 8.1 - Public Hearings M The CORE team will attend one (1) Planning Commission and one (1) City Council public u� hearing to present the Draft Specific Plan and EIR. The CORE team will be responsible for the N preparation of any necessary materials and exhibits for these hearings. N I 8.2 - Final Specific Plan and EIR Cn After review and approval/certification by the Planning Commission and City Council, CORE will U incorporate any necessary revisions including project conditions of approval recommended by z the Planning Commission and adopted/certified by the City Council. 0 a Task 8 Meetings zz 0 One (1) Planning Commission Hearing One (1) City Council Hearing E r I a Public hearing meeting materials and exhibits 28 NOVEMBER 2014 ........................................................................................................................................................................................I.- Packet Pg. 43 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM One (1) electronic PDF copy (and Word document for amending) of the final adopted Specific Plan and EIR on CD Task 9 - Project Management L 0 U 9.1 - Project Coordination Meetings 0 M Strategic planning will be necessary between the CORE team and City Staff to ensure the z ongoing understanding of strategies and direction, coordination of teamwork efforts, and adherence to project deadlines. We have provided an allowance to attend, in person and/or by o_ teleconference, bi-weekly coordination meetings with City staff and the consultant team. d 9.2 - Collaborative Website Development and Maintenance CL CORE will set up a collaborative project website (Basecamp) accessible to the project team and key City staff to ensure better communication and the sharing of files and other project-related a materials and information. w m 9.3 - Overall Project Management C The purpose of this task is to allow for the coordination of the project team, accounting, scope, schedule, and other administrative tasks related to management of the team. As the overall -a project manager, CORE will also review all work products. CORE will develop and implement a M quality control procedure to the satisfaction of the City. This quality control procedure will include a strategy for review and coordination of data and tasks among consultants and City E staff. a+ ea 3 0 Bi-weekly project coordination meetings (allowance) Basecamp file sharing site c N Monthly progress reports and invoices L? N CL I N O z O z O LL E t ti: v Z PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 29 .............I................................................................................................................. ...................................................... . Packet Pg. 44 2.A.b WORK PROGRAM 0 d THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. p U is _ O m z C c�v _ d N d L a CL w m Q. c a� E L 'm V _ m a) r 2m 7 to O M r O N N I a C7 z 0 F- a 0 z 0 LL _ E U R r+ Q 0 30 NOVEMBER 201 Packet Pg.45 2.A.b Q Cost Proposal O U is _ O cv z O r d N Overall Pro=cl Budget d Company Budget National CORE $ 192,705.00 °; PlaceWorks $ 299,493.80 N _ Fehr & Peers $ 59,995.00 Natelson Dale Group $ 58,240.00 L TOTAL $ 610,433.80 0 n M W) r O N NI CL 0) c7 z 0 a 0 z 0 LL w _ E r a C PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN Packet Pg.46 COST PROPOSAL THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. U CL Cn CL| .. � � � 32 N{wsmaER Packet Pg. 47 -----------------------'—'~------------'--------------------'---- 2.A.b COST PROPOSAL S.Walker E.Johnson Washburn Senior Deputy Project Project Designer Project Graphics Word Director Manager /Planner Manager /GIS Planner Processing Labor Subtotal $205 $160 $140 $125 $120 $110 $75 L •+ O ask 1 - Program Inititiation and Kickoff V 1.1-Project KickOff Meeting 4 4 4 6 $ 2,770.00 1.2-Existing Conditions- Initial Area Survey 4 8 4 8 $ 3,220.00 = O 1.3-Document and Data Review 4 4 $ 940.00 , 1.4-Strengthes,Weaknesses,Opportunities,and Constraints 2 8 4 $ 1,800.00 Z 1.5-Goals and Objectives 1 2 $ 410.00 C Task 2- Engaging the Community O 2.1-Leadership Committee Meetings(8) 16 24 8 32 $ 11,640.00 2.2-Community Visioning Workshops(2) 8 8 8 16 $ 5,000.00 2.3-Stakeholder Interviews(14) 18 18 $ 4,860.00 d 0 8 66 0 $ 21,500.00 Task 3-Research and Analysis a 3.1-Market Study 1 2 1 $ 525.00 C 3.2-Land Use,Design and Architectural Surveys 8 8 24 16 40 $ 11,720.00 3.3-Transportation Conditions 2 $ 320.00 d 3.4-Utilities and Infrastructure Analysis 2 8 24 $ 3,960.00 V SUBTOTAL 1 8 32 16 64 0 $ 16,525.00 V Task 4-Development of Land Use Alternatives Q, 4.1-Pro Forma Analysis 1 2 $ 525.00 4.2-Land Use Alternatives 1 8 40 8 8 $ 9,045.00 N $ 9,570.00 y Task 5-Specific Plan Preparation 5.1 -Final Land Use Plan 1 16 12 $ 3,840.00 5.2-Land Use Plan Narrative and General Plan Consistency 8 24 12 4 $ 5,900.00 C 5.3-Infrastructure Plans 4 4 8 12 $ 3,420.00 M 5.4-Design Guidelines 24 80 20 24 $ 20,420.00 E 5.5-Landscape and Streetscape Concept Plan 4 40 4 20 $ 9,140.00 4) 5.6-Open Space,Parks,and Recreation Plan 4 8 20 $ 4,260.00 R 5.7-Development Standards 24 8 40 16 16 $ 13,640.00 5.8-Phasing Plan 8 2 4 1 $ 2,010.00 5.9-Human Capital Plan 4 1 8 40 $ 6,500.00 0 5.10-Implementation Plan 4 24 24 $ 6,840.00 �y IIprn T ! a i ?5,970.00 Task 6-Confirmation Workshops 6.1-Community Forum(2) 12 8 10 12 $ 5,440.00 C 6.2-Planning Commission and City Council Study Sessions(2) 8 8 4 4 $ 3,860.00 N C4 9,300.00 N Task 7-GEQA Documentation al 7.1-Notice of Preparation 1 $ 160.00 7.2-Public Scoping Meeting 2 $ 320.00 7.3-Administrative Draft EIR I and II 10 $ 1,600.00 3 7.4-Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR) 6 $ 960.00 Z 7.5-Final EIR-Response to Comments 8 $ 1,280.00 O 7.6-Mitigation Monitoring Program 4 $ 640.00 7.7-Statement of Overriding Considerations 1 $ 160.00 C SUBTOTAL 0 3? Z Task 8-Public Hearings and Adoption D 8.1-Public Hearings(2) 8 16 4 8 $ 5.580.00 O 8.2-Final Specific Plan and EIR 8 16 8 4 $ 4,460.00 U. 24 0 20 0 16 C Task 9-Project Management 9.1-Project Coordination Meetings 12 28 18 $ 9,190.00 t 9.2-Collaborative Website Development and Maintenance 4 8 $ 1,460.00 V 9.3-Overall Project Management 72 1 8 18 1 $ 14,890.00 r SUBTOTAL 12 100 1 8 1 40 1 8 0 0 $ 25,540.00 Q Relimursables Other direct expenses(including document production,meeting $ 10,000.00 materials,mailings,administration costs,etc.) TOTAL 59 I 220 290 146 246 192,705.00 PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 33 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 48 2.A.b COST PROPOSAL C THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. d L O U iu _ O Ri z r to r _ d N d L a. (L m CL _ m L ,m V _ 0) 2m 7 O M r O N N I a. z O H Q z D O U- c m E t r Q C 34 NOVEMBER ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2014 Packet Pg.49 2.A.b o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O o O 000000000 0 0 0 o w p ' O O I n O LO 0 0 am O O LO r N <0 r O W r M N W M O co M r O V M N O O an r N N c n a0 M O) c q c0 J U') r In In O O n n (D w (O V q cn Q > Lf r M N r N Lo rV J I L C j a0 O O O O N O a O V > O O a O U u n ao 0 0 0 o a v ao ^� N R{ c7 O U Z O J O O O O N M 7 C 000 O O a aa � G t O U a c T O 7 O O O O V V C N N O O O a)fA C w d � L ro c n o 0 0 o O d M'A _ a � a N yOj c W O iJ O O M O V y a fA N Q c CL 00 L S O vI N C o O O O O O O O O T ul L c N 00 O c u'O N (^ m M Z of v U Y N O O O C 2 O o YUVOU��i V O O O O O O N N Q c Q M � M a N n�^ 0 C n a) r IN N N IL () M c w a' T N O : wN N O c - (O ([; O O O O O N r a M N Cl)' N (O N O Y. a a` M C a � � 'd c N O O O O O O O (D (D M V N N m N ON N to to `-' : Z = a`d' `O co J J J J J J i c H f- h 'm O O O U O o O .M 0 M m m m c cn E Z m c D W Z) c a (n s O m : LL p ) 3 c w c c m c W c r c n v E E Y u) r D W o a o a d a 0 E N W 0 3 0 E am C m W c w m o m o v c c v c o y u O m N y E W5 J a .W. m c c m U rn U A [[ m e E N i > o p ¢ m o c - o y Q o o W E a) D m c Co �?m- �+ U O d 3 O o)tt a 1. E a c w c co (M ? w o. Q.' Q N N D C W a U a) CT'O C ._ M U O m C C C O 4) u) c O c v u m Y « W m _W O V .c m c c W c -° n m c w .4 0 a0 au o r E a m o m 0 m ° > o IY v m fl m c O n a ) 2 Y m a c � c C 0 o m o u C W Y u SL d°a c c a U o a` v a E E w w a V U U :c m cr w (n d u 76 o w ° �O 5 E°m 0 UN {9 /w Y Y O j u= Q O C(Qn B M r N M V UA W W W W W W r N M m U V (O I� q r N W r N M O o a H� � F- F- F k- F- F � � � r r r r F as ao F M of ai O a N Packet Pg.50 2.A.b T � c N E . O Z d L O U c O Z c O C N O L CL FL Y •t> Z G1 Q fn CD N I- C W d W 'a uiJ J = 0 Z � H Z W O O C� n c S O �- N W) N I CL cn Z o p a 0 Z o U- w c as J E Q � � V Q U Packet Pg. 51 2.A.b J Q J O 00000 0 0 0 0 0 00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 00000 00 op a �p M 0 N rl 0 ( N W ' oD OD p M Q7 oo M N r T r N o0 O ° N 0 U J Ef3 to fA fA fA<f` FA fA to to e. EA Vi EA fA fA Vi V!to fA to EA to A A �3 to tH M FA to fA U3 EA fA fA fA o .f+ y m C Z o o W N N N n W_ O Qlo H to to Ito Z L_ � L (L 0 _ a M °Lr) - w UI O^ o O a R O O N N oo M O N 4h v Q V II^�^ v! C T � V C r O �V N N V N O W OOi O O d M_ F d d N L j l c0 N w w? W :J 't 1V O 0 — �C U N Cu (Z � U 4= � N O U � N N T C VJ (� N C Co Co a a V (D N V O V V YY Co U o aw a m � Z a a O Co : F- N o Q o o m m m m Q m 0 m N N C N Z c ? m (n o ; _ - O o E LL Ir,'bi o m c W o d • a w c c a C fr�,1' U Z m a ❑ g o `° Y.�.i Y No `` w • c c v M r c m n m ^ a m o a j $ aci m o a E �° E FL Clm m °' oa o d m a �o U U .c o a E " m a L c 3 O E >. t C t0 'C C Y .H. N C O cp 9 C C [� ° m m 6 E m U ado • a m x `o m m !� m U °i U m o d y m O �•[ a,'_c a>i d ° ? J m > `m E U ° c w¢ n° a °i w m d ❑ L Q m e ¢ y U a ' o d a y o y '3 3 • c c w E y E o •' N VI C > c C a ` c C N a Z O> y N O C C c E O N N C 10 c0 'y Q. d C N C C N C U _ a .� lr 'C C N �[ 4 C O (p m m c N N O. T N C W W O ° i0 N C O d 10 O O N 0 ❑ t0 U m U Q.d Z N C d cn a d O N N L N O O c ._ N E — N c tp C a ° O OI❑ O N > c N T c 3 a c T m c - ° N _m ° U m v m c c o E U m c ° 0 0 S b r.' x o m N 0 4 • ❑ D a m u w r o _ m y m mm Q w a o `o a o o > .o O W � U c d c p ai `r° c > m a y o E m � o (a E a c c C7 coy E .> c c a • ° m _ a Y m m $ m C H o �0 o a c w c a c m O o a °�U d ° W o y c o o E _ y LF m w O N } c o o E w w o E • z H a a v m c m o .26 (n o m U d m c m = c m y c > m E g H E m `0 � ao w ° > O 'R o o N M o m V N c o H N m N L 7 t° n o o na c Y w W ❑ c/1 Y Y m J H 7 Y Y ll J F Q m U ❑ ❑ J ❑ d S Y Y Z w ¢ ❑ IL (/I Y Y w U 0 CL q r N C') O N e •`- N M V ® !r N f`•)M m.M fh fh< N t0 n W 0 Y r N C) O N t0 h 4 q N C) nQ ; F r r F F M M lh M F F I11 1f1 N N N N N N N N N N lO l0 F F 1� r n n n n I� F F m T m LL Packet Pg. 52 j 2.A.b i oN I � Z _ L v R _ 0 z I 0 a _ m m L CL c �a a U Y V Z d J (n m N LL d LLJ J J J = H � Z � H Z •• W p 0 1- d v co LO 2 O f— N N I CL co c� z 0 a 0 Z o U- w _ J � Q O Q O Go U m 00 0 0 0 C? 0 0 0 CD CD co 0 LQ LO LQ rV n 0 V) 0 C CD 0 0 C O uj O V) cc to 0. .2 LO ai G CN (N 0 C CL O 0 Cn U 0 C) 00 m Cli E RR C', O a LO Co 'o 0- Co Z 0 Co Co Z o C o Cl) .2 00 LL Y Ln Cl. =3 0 Co o 0 CL 'a C CM o 2 t z, m m C Co = C- r 0 2 m E Z (n w �2 c E 0 -?� CL he Co V) a C E a > = .= E 0 (D 0 - .0 u Co m Co E -Fon -FOn)C) co E c�3 0 0 o - t 0 :r —Tm E E m�: < U W Cl m ;z —V a C', CY Cm C 7i 2 al E 'a M rA 6) d @ > E C m 0 0 (D 0 m 0 uj M 0 0 CL EL w E -0 CC Z Z) io 0 Z) U L) CL CL E LL 0 Co 2 m Lo co r, co cn Ad .19 Je w Ad 17 1"IV!I �w C! �(o N (a m w m m CL N 04 CJ —A C) m C) m - T F- 0 n Packet Pg. 54 2.A.b o : N E O Z d L O U is _ O z Z _ O C N d L a R a w Y v Z d Q C. CD N LL (D W 'G J � J J C= C Q i Z LU H Z W 0 � n Cn W) r F- N �f! N I a c� Z o a 0 Z o LL J G Q � V V n Q O Packet Pg. 55 2.A.b A CD L rn LL c c 3 o m n LO U ca � o c O O N a E C Z E C M O O tf +' d � d N Q� L o . a. 3 0 � a c m a o � E -� 00 o c O Q. co m N � a = (D E d Q 0 L V Co O U Co fd E c tD m O L O L Co LD Q O N d - r Q U O Y 1 U S N CD L O C O U) a cn D � c : (D °' Co C3 Z W O O o Co E i= (D Cl) `° Z o ^' O C: : O LL U) E V �� c0 U r U f0 : Q V/ O �� • Q- 0 7C37C3 N O N CO n� � N li @ O o m r O d . Packet Pg. 56 2.A.b T N i O Z d L O U is _ O to Z I _ O y _ N d L a ca a Y V Z d Q fn CL m N LL d W 'a J � Q R H � Z ui E- Z W O O = O {- N Ln N I a U) z 0 a 0 Z o U- _ W E n V W U a cn O N Q� V n Packet Pg. 57 m � � 00 q ƒ 2 ! o 2 � � n ) _ : ( k m o - ; 2 ) $ ! a ( & 0 ) $ ( CL ( 2 ^ ! 2 ; c ® } � ! R § ( » ! © 2 ) k CL 3 ! 0 § ; $ 2 \ } 2 U) o ; k 'a o ! 2 2 § d ■ § ( m U) 0 � \ ( U . . j � 2 k r- 0 U) o a 2 CM CL k C2 2 2 » 0EE:2 ` - � ( R ■ - 2A� / � § ° 2 � at it/ a ` § / : � % )4 Io- # c @ - § . cZ) . $« © - �2R 9_ ` c a CM ■ ER� c . � © @ : % ' - c ■ . `e , . ' ca - m � C o w- �e c @ Cm S ! ° Co - § m S E a) k . E2' c « . . sec © mac ©- ©*ac= - ' 2 « Ez� �ma E� E � - �� 2 0jg ' I / } / P moo= t Eo $ . 3e . _ c g c ' �$ - % ee U) _ten U) G � e � ec�=gym - � § . u Mn ert - e ec )3 2E . c E (n c 9 2 t ' R - )�- 2 0- =- eem2c � �.� c= » : . mac . o . = a s 0M a 8 o � o o . ak . 2 @ § . © (D Rd ° E�J ` e � 8 �§ ' 22 - � - ƒ \( \ .&°■ � mko � . E - . S OL - , � %mf ��2e . I . � .� ' 2aEe ° _ %= o= -1 E m ! . Ee . m mm Ea a��wu � E g 25 cn ,0_ 'oE LL f� `-= � § E- . Ea � Eg�. � 22 �= 2 E : u e wjq c cJ - c e � (n ± a © . ee - 2Q e ID , e 0 = \ '57, �m ��w= a � =�=c�c& =a 3E za■o=gym a tea/ . @ 4§, . -1C kC; § . /§1k$k, -1 . -§ $�� . 4 -§C \ ( wow �nnn 4- a�ui ui ui ui ui ui ui C6 C6 R��rz��� o � a�a 7 k; 2 : n Packet Pg. 58 2.A.b T • Q N c O Z d L O U �a _ O m Z _ O w _ d N d L a IL a� CL J = Q z O a 0 z c LU z z Q � n c = o f- M in r O N in N I a c) o Z 0 a 0 Z o LL w _ W d E o u W m U a O r Packet Pg. 59 2.A.b Project Management 6 L 0 0 U c City of San Bernardino z o Community Project Management N ' Groups (National Community Renaissance) a Residents i City Council ��' Erik Johnson Alexa Washburn Planning Commission Project Director Project Manager San Bernardino City i c. Unified School District C/) Housing Authority of San Bernardino Stakeholders i ,..••''``r�`�*�•■'' •••■••+••f•••'••.f■ //^v^ +---------------', .■■••'•M` ■ ••••ff■, V Specific Plan Transportation Economic (National Community Renalssance) Analysis Analysis (Fehr&Peers) (Natelson Dale Group) o Alexa Washburn Project Manager Chris Grey Roger Dale = Task Leader Task Leader Sarah Walker N Deputy Project Manager N I a ''•• ULM- z 0 Environmental a Analysis z z (Placeworks) 0 w Brooke Peterson Task Leader E w a PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 45 ..............I............................................................... ............................................................................................................. Packet Pg. 60 2.A.b PROJECT MANAGEMENT THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. c U �a _ 0 :r ca z �a _ d U) p L CL _ CL 2 as CL U) c as E L /m V 2m 7 Q M Lo T- CD N NI a C7 z 0 a 0 z 0 LL _ E a C 46 NOVEMBER ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 61 2.A.b Key Personnel 7 L O U c O r M Z National CORE has assembled an outstanding team of professionals to collaborate with the City of San = Bernardino in the preparation of the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan. In addition to the seasoned, 2 creative designers and planners of National CORE, the team also includes PlaceWorks to complete the necessary environmental analysis; Fehr & Peers to complete a thorough transportation and parking y analysis; and The Natelson Dale Group to complete an economic study of the project area. Both a PlaceWorks and Fehr & Peers are familiar with the City of San Bernardino through their work on the = Waterman Gardens Master Plan and Val-9 Residential Project that National Community Renaissance in a partnership with The Clancy Company is developing. w All team members are able to commence work immediately and remain dedicated to the project's a completion. 0=1 E0761 a� C� Steve PonTell-Strategic Advisor M L Mr. PonTell will serve as Strategic Advisor for the Specific Plan. His 25-plus years of experience in the M community development field will provide the project team and City with a valuable resource for overall program direction and recommendations. Mr. PonTell oversees both National CORE and Hope through c Housing - two large nonprofits that, together, serve over 16,000 low-income residents in over 8,000 apartment units under ownership and management throughout Arkansas, California, Florida and Texas. LO Mr. PonTell has extensive experience managing large scale community based projects. He is a c nationally recognized authority on community development and creating forward-thinking organizations to maximize evolving market environments. He worked on major research projects ranging from studying critical community indicators in San Bernardino County to bringing together four counties: Los al Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange County with the four Corners Coalition. Mr. PonTell W will be available to peer review the work products to ensure that opportunities are being maximized, and to offer his expertise on the team's approach to issue and constraints identification. Z O Erik Johnson - Project Director a 0 Z Mr. Johnson will serve as the Project Director for the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan and 0 Programmatic Environmental Impact Report providing quality assurance and quality control, and offering strategic guidance during the planning process. Erik has more than 10 years of project d management experience overseeing and coordinating housing and community development activities in E addition to 7 years working in the real estate and financial industries. Prior to joining CORE, Mr. Johnson served as the Executive Director of the Livable City Initiative in New Haven, Connecticut. Q While leading the Livable City Initiative, he was responsible for managing the investment pipeline for the City, comprised of approximately 1,000 new units and $500M in potential development activities. He PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 47 I........................................................................................I.................................................................................................. 2.A.b KEY PERSONNEL also worked diligently to foster relationships with developers, investors, and builders to facilitate interest and support of development activities, while simultaneously managing investments in affordable and workforce housing developments; including negotiation of land disposition agreements, loan terms, and tax abatements. Erik is a reputable leader and strategic developer with a successful background orchestrating public and private programs and initiatives in new and emerging markets. 0 U Alexa Washburn - Project Manager M _ 0 Ms. Washburn will serve as the overall Project Manager for the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan and z Programmatic Environmental Impact Report. She will have a far-reaching role on all project activities. ; She has over 15 years of experience in land use and environmental planning and community c development and specializes in sustainable redevelopment/infill/revitalization plans and Housing Elements/affordable housing strategies. Her projects have been recognized with nine awards from the c American Planning Association and Southern California Association of Governments including award a winning Specific Plans in the cities of Artesia, Downey, Monrovia and Chino Hills as well Specific Plans a in Highland, Mendocino County and Perris among others. She possesses strong interpersonal skills that have been developed through direct involvement with elected and appointed public officials and is a well versed in the management of multi-disciplinary teams ensuring success thorough communication amongst her team members and with her clients and the timely delivery of products and services. CL Cn Sarah Walker- Deputy Project Manager d Ms. Walker will serve as Deputy Project Manager in support of this project. Ms. Walker has eight years of public and private sector planning experience including general plan updates, housing element = updates, specific plan preparation, and zoning ordinance preparation. She has strong research and E writing skills which have contributed to several award winning plans and programs including Specific L. Plans in the cities of Artesia, Downey, Monrovia, Madera County, and Mendocino County. She is also 3 involved in Housing Element updates for more than a dozen cities throughout California and assists in the coordination of community outreach programs. Her GIS skills have played a role in the preparation o of land use and zoning maps as well training programs for several public sector clients. M LO Zoe Kranemann - Project Planner c N N Ms. Kranemann has eight years of working with public agencies helping them implement economic ; development and redevelopment projects. She has provided economic feasibility analyses of economic Cn development projects, including commercial, mixed-use, and residential development projects. She has a collaborated in numerous revitalization plans, field surveys, and land use analyses. Additionally, she has developed, managed, and implemented affordable housing strategies and programs including first- p time homebuyer, and single-family housing rehabilitation programs using HOME, CDBG, and Redevelopment funds. She managed the reporting requirements of clients including drafting the Five o Year Implementation Plans, Housing Compliance Plans, HCD reports, and Housing Elements. Z O U_ c m E s R w Q 48 NOVEMBER ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 63 2.A.b KEY PERSONNEL 0J.,he Clancy Company Pat Clancy-Strategic Advisor, a� L O Mr. Clancy will serve as Strategic Advisor for the Specific Plan. As President and CEO of The U Community Builders (TCB), Inc., a mission driven 501(c)3 focused on building and sustaining strong c communities, Mr. Clancy led the organization for 40 years to become one of the largest premier and most accomplished non-profit development corporations in the United States. Mr. Clancy's wealth of Z experience includes serving as a member of the National Association of Home Builders Multifamily Housing Round Table, as a member and chairman of the Massachusetts, Housing Finance Agency o Multifamily Advisory Committee, as a member of the Advisory Committee for the Center for Real Estate a at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and of the Affordable Housing Advisory Council of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston and as a director of the Metropolitan Boston Housing Partnership, d Inc. and of the Philadelphia Development Partnership. He is currently a director of the Federal Home a. Loan Bank of Boston. Mr. Clancy has spoken on low-income housing development, federal tax aspects of housing and the role of the nonprofit development sector at various colleges, universities, a. conferences and seminars. He is also the author of Tax Incentives and Federal Housing Programs: .2 Proposed Principles for the 1990s. His leadership and experience will be of value to this effort, particularly the financing program and implementation strategy. N N C Place PlaceWorks PLACEWORKS William Halligan, ESQ- Environmental Principal-in-Charge E d Mr. Halligan will serve as Principal-In Charge for the EIR. In over 20 years of both public and private 3: sector planning experience, Bill has prepared environmental documents for a diverse range of projects, including small-scale residential and large planned communities, high-rise commercial office, industrial, ° and mixed use. Specific key projects include The Ontario Plan EIR, Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change EIR for the Northern Sphere Area in Irvine, and the LA County General Plan Update EIR. In addition, Bill had been involved in extensive N discussions and negotiations with the State Attorney General's office regarding the analysis of N Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) in project EIRs. al co AICP- Environmental Task Leader Brooke Peterson, � Z Ms. Peterson will serve as Project Manager/Task Leader for the EIR. Brooke has extensive comprehensive and environmental planning and community engagement experience within San o Bernardino and the Waterman Gardens project area specifically, as well as many other Southern z California communities. Her career includes a wide range of long-range policy planning, development p project planning, and environmental planning experience that provides her with a broad depth of skill U` and expertise. She has focused on new development, community redevelopment, public health and urban greening, and public engagement. Brooke is passionate about creating not just healthy and E livable communities but communities with true character and vibrancy. Q r PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B49 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg. 64 2.A.b KEY PERSONNEL Peers FEHR PEERS Christopher Gray, AICP -Transportation & Parking Task Leader L O Mr. Gray will serve as Project Manager/Task Leader for traffic and transportation. He is a Principal with v nearly 20 years of experience in transportation planning, Sustainable Transportation, Complete Streets, c climate change studies, travel demand forecasting, parking studies, transit studies, and Smart Growth. 2 Chris has been with Fehr & Peers for 13 years working extensively in California, other areas of the z United States, and internationally. Mr. Gray works effectively with planning commissions, elected officials, advocacy groups, and multiple city departments to gain consensus on complex transportation o planning issues. o The a� Natelson Dale • , L a Roger Dale Economics Task Leader ii Mr. Dale would serve as Project Manager/Task Leader for TNDG's portions of the assignment. In this capacity he would be responsible for primary interface with the client and the consultant team, and for preparation of all draft and final market study and economic analysis work products. Mr. Dale has 21 = years' experience with TNDG, encompassing all aspects of real estate market analysis and economic ,4) development strategic planning. His project experience includes real estate market forecasting, infrastructure financing plans, fiscal impact analysis, cost/benefit assessment, and structuring of public/private joint development agreements. He frequently works on multidisciplinary consultant teams v and has served as the project economist for high-profile planning processes throughout southern and central California. Mr. Dale has a Bachelor's degree in economics from Claremont McKenna College a and a Master's degree in economics from U.C. Riverside. co 0 M LO Ir- O N N' a. Cn z 0 a 0 z 0 LL _ E r r r a G V5 0 NOVEMBER 2014 Packet Pg. 65 2.A.b C Qualifications and References L O V O J.+ L Z a 1 e I I _ O 1 Y Artesia Boulevard The Artesia Boulevard Corridor Plan was initiated by the City to guide growth and development along Artesia Boulevard, encourage economic revitalization, and a Corridor Specific Plan create a lively center of activity for the City. Artesia Boulevard is a highly traveled, c auto-oriented corridor with an eclectic mix of existing uses dominated by auto 2 a AWARDS sales, repair and related uses. The plan aimed to achieve a sustainable standard 2012 Southern California of living by creating a walkable environment, adapting underutilized properties into focused mixed use development, and promoting the preservation of the Association of Governments surrounding neighborhoods while creating new economic opportunities. The plan cn CIL (SCAG)Compass Blueprint also provides the foundation for a comprehensive and cohesive strategy to guide Award future development and establish the corridor as a vibrant thoroughfare with dining, employment, housing, shopping, entertainment, and cultural opportunities all within a short walking distance of one another. Client Contact r--, is Okina Dor, Planning Director, _ y 18747 Clarkdale Avenue _i (a [3dp p b: M Artesia,California 90701 �« v �.. P:562.865.6262 x227 """ j''. ; co E:odor @cityofartesia.us Lead Agency City of Artesia CO bV3 a dc,t�lrh in ar'_!E,. Project Team y • Alexa Washburn,CORE Planning & Outreach Process - The planning effort involved a strong partnership a with the business community and extensive coordination by the City of Artesia 3: • Sarah Walker,CORE Planning Department, City Manager's Office, Redevelopment Agency, Chamber of Z Commerce, and numerous stakeholder groups. Ideas and comments from residents, business operators, and property owners were collected and Q incorporated into the Specific Plan through a multi-layered community outreach Z program which included stakeholder interviews, workshops, chamber mixers, luncheons and other events, along with distribution of detailed surveys and 0 comment cards. Based on community input, and existing uses, building conditions, parcelization patterns, constraints and opportunities, the plan area was divided into four quadrants or districts. The project team developed distinct land use scenarios, E with corresponding development standards and design guidelines for each quadrant in order to capture and expand upon the characteristics that define each Q of the four areas ensuring compatibility with sensitive surrounding uses, while guiding future development. The plan preserves and enhances the features and PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN 51 .................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 66 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS uses that provide each quadrant with its unique character, while simultaneously improving the aesthetics and environment of the entire corridor. Implementation - Moving forward, the City is focused on parcels that are ripe for redevelopment to establish new uses that are complementary to the existing successful businesses operating in the corridor. The project team has identified key sites as potential catalysts to spark redevelopment. Lot consolidation and open o public spaces are encouraged through various incentive programs. The plan also V considers the creation of the Artesia Boulevard Corridor Business Development = Committee to guide a business retention and recruitment strategy, promote public safety and security, and ensure specific plan enforcement. In addition to a change z in land use patterns, the Specific Plan has resulted in a new commitment to ; alternative transportation, including bike lanes and additional transit amenities to c reduce vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions. A specific plan implementation fee was also established by the project team to allow the City to fund future development. N m Downtown Downey The Downtown Downey Specific Plan and EIR were initiated by the City to guide a Specific Plan and EIR growth and facilitate development in the Downtown core, encourage economic c p revitalization, and create a dynamic center of activity in the City. The 131-acre `L FL Specific Plan area is envisioned to be the hub of the City in the form of a traditional v AWARDS downtown, including a civic center, transit center and central gathering space 2011 Southern California supported by commercial and residential development. The Specific Plan a Association of Governments establishes the Downtown as a vibrant urban center with dining, employment, v� (SCAG)Compass Blueprint housing, shopping, entertainment, and cultural opportunities all within a short Award walking distance of one another. .a A crucial aspect of the Specific Plan is the incorporation of a Park-Once strategy designed to get residents out of their cars, and walking to reach multiple 0 2011 Orange County American destinations within one trip, thereby reducing the dependence on automobiles. A Planning Association(APA) recommendation included in the Specific Plan to reinforce this strategy is the relocation of the Downey Depot transit center from the edge of the project area to a Award Y P 9 P l � more prominent, central location in the Downtown. The relocation will increase visibility and facilitate a more direct connection with the Lakewood Metro Green Client Contact Line station located just south of the Specific Plan area. o � David Blumenthal,Senior Planning & Outreach Process - The planning effort for the Specific Plan involved extensive coordination the City of Downey Planning Department, Redevelopment Planner Agency, and numerous stakeholder groups. Ideas and comments from residents, c°., 11111 Brookshire Avenue business and property owners, and various community groups were collected and u? Downey,CA 90241 incorporated into the Specific Plan through a multi-layered community outreach P:562.904.7155 program. Based on community input, and existing building patterns, businesses, a E:dblumenthal @downe ca.or and opportunities,pportunities, five unique land use districts were established: Downtown Core, � 9 Downtown Residential, Firestone Boulevard Gateway, Paramount Boulevard Professional and Civic Center. The Downtown Specific Plan preserves and Z Lead Agency enhances the features that provide each district with its unique character, while City of Downey p Z Project Team 0 L • Alexa Washburn,CORE • Sarah Walker,CORE a� z r 52 NOVEMBER .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 67 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS simultaneously improving the aesthetics and environment of the overall Downtown area. To revitalize each district, the Specific Plan team constructed a unique combination of traditional development standards and form based design guidelines to transform each area into distinct neighborhoods that are compatible with each other and the surrounding community. m 1 Implementation - In the six months following Specific Plan adoption, the Downtown v has already experienced new development and economic growth with the opening of Porto's Bakery and a Fresh N' Easy market, the approval of a 50-unit affordable o apartment complex, and the rehabilitation of an existing, gateway commercial center. The City is exploring funding opportunities for the proposed central z gathering space, the relocation of the transit center, and is in the process of I reviewing the routes served by the Downey Link, the City's local shuttle, to provide c clear connections to the project area and the Metro Green Line. This project is a strong indication that the City of Downey, with assistance from the consultant team, c is planning for its future and welcoming change in a well-established community. ai d L Highway 395 The Highway 395 Corridor Study developed a strategy for a i implementation of multi-modal transportation and mixed use Corridor Study for development opportunities for the shared 16-mile, auto-centric a i = arterial that parallels Interstate 15 and runs through the four Southwest Riverside �s w contiguous cities of Wildomar, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, and 5 County 395 Temecula. The Study was funded through a Caltrans a Community-based Transportation Planning Grant. N AWARDS i A joint planning process brought consistency to the individual 2013 Southern California city planning efforts, stimulated greater dialogue, and identified Association of Governments land use and transportation opportunities that will create a (SCAG)Compass Blueprint mixed use, multi-modal corridor that can serve as a model for other areas in Recognition Award southern California. Through a community-based planning process, the Study E evaluated existing conditions and anticipated growth patterns, current best practices, and identified mobility and land use opportunities, including: Client Contact Multimodal transportation opportunities including rapid transit, transit co centers, future high speed rail, bicycle paths, pedestrian facilities, and ° Western Riverside Council of disabled accessibility; Governments(WRCOG) Mixed use development including activity centers and nodes near transit; c Rick Bishop, Executive Director Housing and affordability issues; `� 4080 Lemon Street u9 3rd Floor, MS 1032 Safety for all transportation modes; NI Riverside,CA 92501-3609 Sustainability including reduced vehicle trips, reduced congestion, reduced U) P:951.955.8303 air emissions, preserved historic and cultural setting, energy conservation, (9 E:bishop @wrcog.cog.ca.us open space; and � Economic development including employment nodes, business and trade p Lead Agency growth. Q City of Temecula Planning & Outreach Process - The Highway 395 Corridor Study employed an O integrated process of technical planning and analysis with outreach to Project Team policymakers, business and property owners, residents, and staff and technical 0 U. experts from the participating cities and regional planning agencies. The Caltrans • Alexa Washburn,CORE Title VI compliant outreach process involved a multi-pronged approach to engage m • Chris Gray, Fehr& Peer, stakeholders including: E Charrette with staff and technical experts from partner cities and regional agencies a Community workshops in each of the participating cities Presentations to community, neighborhood, business and civic PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B53 ......................................................................................................................................................I.............................. Packet Pg. 68 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS organizations Workshops and presentations with city councils and planning commissions Regular updates to a dedicated project website Graphic brochure L Project video 0 U Imple(nentation Extensive funding mechanisms were identified that could be used to implement changes in the Corridor. Key funding sources included State and o federal grants, E13-5 Program, new market tax credits, improvement districts, a exactions/fees, tax revenue sharing, financing districts as well as non-traditional Z funding such as private foundations. _ 0 M m - . - PLACEWORKS _ a Greenspot Village & Marketplace Program EIR & Market Analysis, Highland, CA a� CL Highland's General Plan—prepared by PlaceWorks—identified the potential of an area called the Golden N Triangle. In the past, the CA 30/210 freeway running through the city would carry residents to a Walmart-anchored shopping center just north of the city boundary or to a major new regional shopping a center in the unincorporated county area to the south. The general plan envisioned the Golden Triangle 0 as a mixed-use center that could help the city recapture some of its fair share of residents' retail r_ spending. As part of the environmental review for Greenspot Village and Marketplace development, E PlaceWorks analyzed the current and near-term market demand. Our analysis found that there was sufficient consumer spending to support the proposed retail center and the existing regional retail 3: centers. We concluded that the project would not cause long-term vacancies leading to urban decay. Environmental issues included agriculture resources, air quality, noise, and traffic M_ Client Contact: Lawrence A. Mainez, Community Development Director N City of Highland 27215 Base Line Highland, CA 92346 a. (909) 864-8681 0 Platinum Triangle EIR, Anaheim, CA o a The Platinum Triangle is home to such landmarks as Angel Stadium, Honda Center, and the Grove of Z Anaheim. The Platinum Triangle Master Plan is part of an effort to attract residents and businesses, D O making Anaheim a desirable urban community as well as a popular vacation spot. The Subsequent U. Environmental Impact Report No. 2 analyzes proposed amendments to the Anaheim General Plan and c to the Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay Zone and Master Land Use Plan that will increase E allowable residential, office, and commercial space. The master plan envisions the development of the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center, which would complement local urban communities such as A-Town and The Gene Autry Experience by providing alternative transportation a 54 NOVEMBER ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2014 Packet Pg. 69 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS and making Anaheim a hub of Southern California. The increased intensity has the potential to impact public services, traffic, and utilities, which are thoroughly analyzed in the EIR. Client Contact: Sherri Vander Dussen Planning Director d City of Anaheim 0 200 S. Anaheim Blvd, Room 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 = 0 (714) 765-5790 �o Z National City General Plan, Zoning Code, EIR, & Climate Action Plan, National City , CA c PlaceWorks, as a subconsultant to Project Design Consultants, lead the preparation of a Program/Project EIR and assisted with the completion of a comprehensive update to the City's General Plan and land use code. Key issues addressed by the project included a severe need for a` redevelopment, economic development, and investment; adaptive reuse of aging industrial sites; environmental justice; and adequate recreational opportunities. PlaceWorks provided a detailed peer a. review of the draft General Plan and draft Land Use Code, developed a form-based code for new .2 mixed-use zones, and prepared a comprehensive Program/Project EIR to evaluate potential .3 environmental impacts of the adoption of the General Plan and Land Use Code update and a number of proposed individual projects. PlaceWorks also prepared a Climate Action Plan (CAP), which provides a w comprehensive strategy to both reduce greenhouse gases and make National City a more sustainable community in general. The CAP includes strategies for both government operations and community- wide emissions related to energy use, transportation, land use, solid waste management, air quality, 1 public health, water conservation, economic development, agriculture, and open space protection. 1 Client Contact: Brad Raulston a Executive Director of Redevelopment City of National City 1243 National City Boulevard ° National City, CA 91950-4301 Lo (619) 336-4250 0 FEH R � PEERS N I a. Cn City of Upland Downtown Specific Plan, Upland, CA � Z 0 Fehr & Peers worked on the City of Upland Downtown Specific Plan and the city-wide General Plan. Q As part of our efforts on the Downtown Specific Plan, we have provided a detailed parking assessment o for the downtown area. Using parking inventory and occupancy data and the proposed Specific Plan land uses, we forecasted future parking and identified parking needs for downtown with Specific Plan 0 buildout. We also assessed the feasibility of a parking structure for Metrolink and downtown users and w recommended locations and implementation phasing for new parking facilities in downtown Upland. d Finally, we reviewed parking codes and parking standards for the city and provided recommendations E specific to downtown Upland so that the City could better achieve their overall vision for the downtown. The Downtown Specific Plan has been completed and the associated Environmental Document is a currently being subject to public review. PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B55 ....................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 70 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS I Client Contact: Karen Peterson, formerly with the City of Upland Planning Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 d (909) 477-4303 v Waterman Gardens Master Plan and EIR, San Bernardino, CA o z Fehr & Peers provided transportation planning and engineering services related to the Waterman Gardens Master Plan and subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Our initial work supported c the development of the Master Plan by identifying opportunities to enhance opportunities for walking , and biking around the Waterman Gardens site. Fehr & Peers also identified strategies to connect with the E Street Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and other major transportation facilities. Fehr & Peers attended numerous workshops with residents, Housing Authority Staff, and other stakeholders to shape the a. Master Plan. Fehr & Peers also supported the development of the Environmental Impact Report by preparing a transportation impact study. This study fulfilled all of the requirements of the City of San a Bernardino and was used to develop the Circulation Chapter of the EIR. .2 Client Contact: Gus Joslin CL Assistant Deputy Executive Director N Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino a 715 E. Brier Drive San Bernardino, CA 92408 C� I (909) 890-0644 E L r Dale Market Analysis and Financial Pro Forma for Downtown Specific Plan, Huntington Beach M Ln As part of a Specific Plan process, TNDG completed a comprehensive market absorption study for Downtown Huntington Beach. Consistent with the City's development vision for the area, the study focused on the potentials to attract the following land uses: high-density/mixed-use residential, retail, N; higher-end restaurants, entertainment, hotel/B&B development, and office. In addition to evaluating N market absorption potentials, TNDG completed pro forma financial evaluations to determine the development densities necessary to allow for feasible redevelopment of key opportunity sites. z Client Contact: Ms. Kellee Friztal Deputy Director o Economic Development Department z City of Huntington Beach o U. (714) 374-1519 w KFritzal @surfcity-hb.org E w C 5 6 NOVEMBER ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 j Packet Pg. 71 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, Escondido TNDG completed a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) for the City of Escondido in San Diego County. TNDG's work included an in-depth demographic analysis, an assessment of o economic and housing market conditions, and a target industry analysis. The CEDS includes a focus on 0 revitalization of older neighborhoods, including areas targeted for affordable housing and mixed-use development. The CEDS also addresses housing issues via interface with other recently updated City o plans, including the General Plan, the Housing Element, and the Downtown Specific Plan. z Client Contact: Ms. Michelle Geller = 0 Management Analyst City of Escondido c (760) 839-4587 Mgeller @ci.escondido.ca.us a Economic Analyses for Proposed Mixed-use Projects, Santa Monica a. w On behalf of the City of Santa Monica, TNDG has completed financial feasibility and fiscal impact Q. analyses for nine proposed mixed-use projects (mostly infill projects in the Downtown area). Studies 0 completed by TNDG for these projects include market assessments, pro forma financial analyses, fiscal impact analyses and economic benefits forecasts. T R C7 Client Contact: Ms. Jing Yeo, AICP = Special Projects Manager City of Santa Monica d (310) 458-8203 53 jing.yeo @smgov.net 0 M N r O N Additional Specific Plans prepared by National CORE team members, Alexa Washburn and Sarah NI Walker, while with their previous firm, are illustrated on the following pages: a. Z 0 F- a 0 z 0 U_ E s M a PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B57 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pa. 72 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS Greenspot Village . • Marketplace ADVANCE PLANNING SPECIFIC FLAN O U C 1 Z O 1 r J L Project Summary Hogle-Ireland, Inc. is currently preparing the development of up to 820.000 square v a Specific Plan to accommodate feet of commercial, retail, office, and v Greenspot Village and Marketplace, a hotel uses and 800 residential units. The Client:Vestar Oevelopment Company and Q. mixed-use development proposed in the Specific Plan is designed to provide a Mission Development Cl) City of Highland.The Specific Plan area is broad range of commercial opportunities c Location:Highland.CA d currently undeveloped and encompasses and a variety of housing types. styles. approximately 104 acres with frontage on and sizes that attract a diversity of buyers Pro' Scope:pa:104-acre mixed-use Specific Ur Greenspot Road just east of the 1-2101 into a well-balanced, master-planned Plan with a broad range of housing and = SR 30 Freeway. The Greenspoi Village community. commercial opportunities E and Marketplace Specific Plan allows for Project Initiated:March 2007 ; R 7 ti%IIrrn Project Completed:Ongoing • vnl n ! O M y .r O N. . IL r f c yr WESIfrtD .. Fw�l _wK r. Ur MARRlThACI rid VMACI >••••• ?� Crtr IT • . jt_ AML .• x� •. a •_ • WS 2 Y 1M1f �F —__ Z LL GREEN5P T VILLAGE &MARKETPLACE Ia12:1:FPiZ!/].IillJ'i<i-ftf,T7�F I'tl]� � E t V r Q ■ NOVEMBER ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 73 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS The Shoppes at Chino Hills 4j ADVANCE PLANNING I SPECIFIC PLAN O s .0 Z _ _ O L Project Summary .. Hogle-Ireland. Inc, collaborated with The land use plan allows for development a 2 developer Opus West to prepare The of 550.000 square feet of commercial. Shoppes at Chino Hills Specific Plan. retail, office, and restaurant uses: 300- Client:Opus west d tz The Specific Plan represents an effort hotel rooms: a new 133,060-square- Location:Chow HMIs.CA to address the City of Chino Hill's foot civic center: 360 residential units: c long-term objectives to create a central a 43-acre community park: and a Project scope:too-acre mixed-use Specific '0 Plan with commercial.residential,civic.and gathering place, establish a permanent 19.000-square-foot community center. recreational uses government center, enhance park and The Specific Plan creates a diverse r_ recreation facilities, and expand the environment catering to the needs of Project Initiated:January 2005 E City's economic base. The Specific Plan residents of many lifestyles. The project Project Completed:October 2005 *; area includes two planning areas totaling was adopted by City Council in October M approximately 100 acres. 2005 and opened in May 2008. Awards:2009 Inland Empire APA Planning a pp y p y Project Award 2009 Orange County APA Award of Merit tD O w. 2010 SCAG Compass Blueprint Honorable L Mention It a Yr M I e�' r'�, r '» { pm µ•' r Q N JO F �.►ttyswtr= ..' ; •��e+wt�tr� � � - r ,�>� c:, I a p a' _ ■ PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B59 . ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS Station C ' • . • ' ADVANCE PLANNING 0 SPECFIC PLAN d L 0 U its c O w Z _ _ y . L Project Summary Hogle-Ireland, Inc. served as the lead multifamily housing. The overall concept U consultant for the Station Square is focused on the inclusion of a large Transit Village (Phase 1) Specific Plan, central open space area, a linear park, Cllent:City of Monrovia a. coordinating the public engagement paseos, and pocket parks to provide rn effort and preparing the Specific connectivity for residents and visitors Location:Monrovia,CA Plan document. The Specific Plan between on-site uses and the future proposes an innovative transit-oriented Gold Line station. This innovative project Project Scope:25-acre transit-oriented Specific development integrating the future was seen by the City of Monrovia as an Plan with residential,office,and retail uses surrounding a Metro Cold Line station � extension of the Metro Gold Line with a opportunity to revitalize an underutilized M mix of uses ranging from retail shops and area and connect the City into a regional d Project Initiation:May 2007 restaurants, to office space and upscale light rail network. Project Completed:Deo-ember2008 O O Avwrds:2009 Los Angeles APA Award-Best M Planning Practice M� 2010 SCAO Compass Blueprint Award- to sra T�f Fa �. Visionary Planning for Mobility � N N s J�' I 1A J 1 Q 'a 0 Ste.{,� _ - LL E V V NOVEMBER 2014 Packet Pg. 75 QUALIFICATIONS The Commons at • Hills ADVANCE PLANNING 1 SPECIFIC PLAN N L O Z C 1 I i O � tt3 C N d L a Project Summary C Hogle-Ireland, Inc. collaborated with design guidelines capitalize on the site's CL developer Opus West to prepare The visibility and frontage on both the Chino Commons at Chino Hills Specific Plan Valley Freeway (SR-71) and Chino Hills Client:opus west CL which allows for development of up to Parkway. The Specific Plan resulted in a N 600.000 square feet of building area for y Location-,Chino Hills,CA q g positive contribution to the City of Chino major anchor retailers such as Lowes. Hills through expansion of the City's Project Scope:49 acre regional commercial -p Wickes,Ethan Allen,Easy Life,and Office revenue and employment base. and Specific Plan (9 Depot, specialty retail shops.restaurants, establishment of a strong design theme Project Initiated:March 2006 = its offices. a health club, new vehicle sales. that creates a unique project identity and � Project Completed:September 2006 L and a hotel on 49.1 acres. The permitted builds community character. m r uses, development standards. and cis 13 i' •• s .It;'\Ukl]tlPl .y ��' - InaSlNiint.:TAry M'ATit iTATRFITW ��. M i % _ — 1 ~ srx,llrx,e a THECOMMONS; � o c � L�����.. 7�s •A Mnru.lknitv,tu. r- � TENANT �n ti,�•u° Qoaq t T .mc,-nu.�.�.,.K, TENANT NI w o u �nuol ` ., - a TENANT l t_ V) �y�oo� o 0 0 0 of MUM-- TENANT 2C7 :a•o 0 0= .w Mtil „ TENANT O fuuocut s�Ww TENANT t- t� [, �P U G Mmld1't[1KAL W�RW ktANtl 111Y11 Q THLe (_SUMMONS "I Rk..111..fiCrwrtnn Z At �.1 tiN�./HiLtwl �*� �J4Q• - wNtlh-ltfli O y tL ..• Y V ♦J Q PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B61 ............................................................................................................................................. ...................... ...................... Packet Pg. 76 2.A.b QUALIFICATIONS Downtown Downey Specific Plan ADvANcE PtAmr IG (t SPEanc PLAN ' O f` U :r _ Z i C - o - to L Project Summary a The Downtown Downey Specific Plan major recommendation to reinforce this a (Specific Plan) was initiated by the strategy is the relocation of the Downey City to guide growth and facilitate Depot transit center from the edge of the Client: City of Downey W M development in the Downtown core, project area to a more prominent,central W Location: Downey,California y encourage economic revitalization, and location in the Downtown.The relocation c create a dynamic center of activity in the will increase visibility and facilitate a more Project Scope: 131-acre Downtown Specific Plan City. The 131-acre Specific Plan area direct connection with the Lakewood M is envisioned to be the hub of the City Metro Green Line station located just Project Initiated:August 2009 C in the form of a traditional downtown, south of the Specific Plan area. R cc Project Completed:Adopted September 2010 L including a civic center,transit center and y central gathering space supported by Awards: 2011 Orange Section APA award for P4 Outstanding Planning Outside Orange County by commercial and residential development. an Orange County Firm. 2011 SCAG Compass The Specific Plan is intended to establish Blueprint Award for Achievement in Livability c the Downtown as a vibrant urban center n M ti with dining, employment, housing City , f Downe LO shopping, entertainment, and cultural ..,-.�...a o opportunities all within a short walking LO r _ r distance of one another. , 04` P...q al A crucial aspect of the Specific Plan is ®^ ` ""•f t�____:-;_._ Z Cl) the incorporation of a Park-Once strategy designed to get residents out of their cars, Z and walking to reach multiple destinations - ` " --- ° O within one trip, thereby reducing the ME _ ~ dependence on automobiles. One `' c Z O LL , <m o�no'.. lL E rouu'4n amrau Tnr W ,$ 0 ttS ao a Q Beak in buillirq — 0 0.¢nitedadt Detail ©ezcessea entry NOVEMBER ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 77 2.A.b Appendix A - Resumes L O AU _ O z 0 _ R _ W N O L n. _ a w U 0 CL cn N _ L 0 _ r 2� 7 0 M Lo T- O N T c*4 a cn z 0 a 0 z 0 U- E a PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN Al ........................................................................................................................................................................................... Packet Pg. 78 2.A.b APPENDIX A THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. G U is c O R z R c d N d CL a. V ,CL N L /R V ® R d.d R O O n M r O N N I d z O H Q 0 z O U- w c m E s R r Q A2NOVEMBER .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 79 2.A.b Q Appenidx B - Technical Scope of Work L O U c O 'r+ to Z The Natelson Dale Group 3.1 - Market Study The Natelson Dale Group (TNDG) will complete a market study to serve two major purposes within the overall specific planning process: 1) to identify the project area's real estate (L C development opportunities, with this information serving as a basis for defining land use 2 CL alternatives for the plan, and 2) to provide a strategic framework - in terms of a specific marketing strategy - for attracting desired development (and specific tenant types) to the plan area.. The market study would address the following land use categories: Q. W Retail/Restaurant • Office -a C7 • Business park (potentially including light industrial uses) �a • Residential E m • Mixed-use v 5.10.3 Develop Demographic Database and Forecasts. M As background for the demand analyses for the individual land uses, TNDG will develop a comprehensive demographic database for the project area and the o overall surrounding trade area. Key variables will include population, households, income levels, employment, age and ethnicity. The data will be developed at the Ni census tract level. Recognizing that no single source of demographic data is definitive, TNDG will review a range of sources and then prepare customized 0 forecasts for purposes of this assignment. The reviewed data sources will include z the following: 2010 Census (and updated Census data from the American o Community Survey); forecasts adopted by the Southern California Association of a Governments (SCAG); any population forecasts prepared by the City of San Z Bernardino; available data on any pending residential projects in the City; and o forecasts prepared by private demographic firms (e.g., Claritas, ESRI, etc.). U. d A. Retail/Restaurant Demand Analysis. The retail demand analysis will involve the following steps: 0 0 a Review any previous market analyses completed for the City of San Bernardino. PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B1 ...............................................................................................................................................................I............................ Packet Pg. 80 2.A.b APPENDIX B • Based on the above review and on TNDG's existing familiarity with the market area, define the geographic market areas from which retail facilities in the Specific Plan area could be expected to draw market support. • Compile data on existing retail sales (by major category) in San Bernardino and neighboring cities. • Utilize TNDG's proprietary retail demand model to evaluate future growth in retail sales potential in L 0 the market area, broken down by major retail sales category (e.g., apparel, furniture, general U merchandise, home improvements, etc.). The projections will be expressed in terms of both dollars c and square footages supportable. The projections will cover a 15-year forecast period (in annual o and/or 5-year increments), and will be based on the demographic forecasts developed by TNDG at o the outset of the project. Z • Identify major existing and planned retail districts that would complete with the Plan area for future = 0 regional demand. r r • Given the inventory of competitive development, estimate the shares of future retail demand that could potentially be captured in the Plan area. • Express "bottom line"findings in terms of square feet of retail space that could potentially be = absorbed in the project area over the planning horizon (in annualized or 5-year increments), with the 2 total numbers broken-down as appropriate by major retail category and facility type. a. B. Office & Business Park Demand Analysis. The office demand analysis will involve the CL following steps: 0 C m Estimate existing inventories of office and business park space in City(and surrounding communities, E as appropriate). Estimate current vacancy levels based on discussions with local realtors. Project future absorption of office and business park space in the City, based on current utilization a> levels, historic trends and general economic parameters (i.e., anticipated population and employment M growth in the City). Given the inventory of competing facilities and Plan area's unique locational attributes, project the amounts and types of office/business park space that could potentially be captured within the Specific Plan area. Express "bottom line"findings in terms of square feet of new office/business park space that could potentially be absorbed in the project area over the planning horizon (in annualized or 5-year increments). C`'i CL C. Demand Analysis for Residential Units. The residential demand analysis will involve the 0 following steps: Z O Compile historic data on local and regional population growth and the correlated demand for new Q housing units. Z Evaluate recent historic trends regarding the mix of single- and multi-family units. p u_ Review city-level projections of future growth in population and households (as appropriate, TNDG would evaluate multiple sources of demographic data). Project future growth in housing demand (and the breakout between single-and multi-family units) over the planning horizon (in annualized or 5-year increments). M r Project that amounts and types of housing development that could potentially be attracted to the Q project area. B2NOVEMBER .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 81 2.A.b APPENDIX b Express"bottom line"findings in terms of new residential units that could potentially be absorbed in the project area over the planning horizon (in annualized or 5-year increments). Forecast potential housing values in the project area. These pricing forecasts would enable more detailed planning of residential product types appropriate for the project area and would also be inputs to the pro forma financial analysis. i 0 U 5.10.4 Interface with Development Community 0 TNDG will conduct interviews with commercial and residential developers familiar M with the San Bernardino market, with a particular focus on firms experienced in z urban infill development / redevelopment. The purposes of these interviews will = be to provide a "reality check" on TNDG's statistical findings and to identify and prioritize the strategic actions the City can take to maximize development r- potentials within the Specific Plan area. In addition to interviewing developers, TNDG will also interview major landowners within the project area to identify their a potential plans for redevelopment or intensification of their properties. CL 5.10.5 Prepare Summary Report TNDG will compile the findings of the above tasks into a single summary report (n fully documenting the data, assumptions and methodology used to arrive at the C presented findings. Spreadsheet tables and databases will be attached as appendices. The market report will serve two major purposes within the overall c� specific planning process: 1) to identify the project area's real estate development opportunities, with this information serving as a basis for defining land use E alternatives for the plan, and 2) to provide a strategic framework - in terms of a R specific marketing strategy - for attracting desired development (and specific tenant types) to the plan area. o n M_ 5.10.6 Interface with Development Community Ln 0 TNDG will conduct interviews with commercial and residential developers familiar with LO the San Bernardino market, with a particular focus on firms experienced in urban infill C4 development / redevelopment. The purposes of these interviews will be to provide a al "reality check" on TNDG's statistical findings and to identify and prioritize the strategic `n actions the City can take to maximize development potentials within the Specific Plan 0 area. In addition to interviewing developers, TNDG will also interview major landowners z within the project area to identify their potential plans for redevelopment or intensification O of their properties. Please refer to Appendix B, Technical Scopes of Work, for the tasks o necessary to complete the market study. z O U. c a� E r ca a PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN BI .......................................................................................................... .. . .. ............................................................................. Packet Pg. 82 2.A.b APPENDIX B • , PLACEWORKS Task 4.1 - Administrative Draft EIR I and II O A programmatic-level EIR will be prepared and include the following sections in accordance with the v CEQA Guidelines: c O • Executive Summary Cumulative Impacts z • Introduction Effects Not Found to Be Significant • Project Description Organizations and Persons Consulted ° Environmental Setting Other CEQA-Mandated Sections Discussion of Existing Conditions, L Environmental Impacts, and Mitigation a. Measures = R Each topical section of the document will: (a) describe existing environmental conditions and pertinent regulatory policies and programs that apply to this project, (b) define the criteria by which impacts will be determined to be significant, (c) determine the environmental changes that would result from the a project, (d) evaluate the significance of those changes with respect to the impact significance criteria (thresholds), (e) define mitigation measures to reduce or avoid all potentially significant adverse impacts, and (f) provide a conclusion as to whether significant impacts would remain, even after -a successful implementation of recommended mitigation measures. Two types of mitigation measures that are practical and feasible will be recommended: measures addressing impacts related to the tv primary (direct) impacts and measures addressing impacts related to the secondary (indirect) impacts E of the proposed project. A conservative scenario approach will be followed for all analyses in the EIR. F? 7.4.1 - Aesthetics 0 PlaceWorks will perform the following tasks to determine potential aesthetic impacts. Sensitive uses C r- ' within the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan area include medium density, single- and multifamily residential uses, and schools. o • Review the proposed zoning and development standards related to design, including N streetscape/landscape design and signage program. (L U) • Discuss any potential significant aesthetic impacts associated with project implementation. O • Specify mitigation measures that will reduce significant impacts to the maximum extent feasible. z O Deliverable(s): F- Q • Aesthetics section of the EIR z O U- 7.4.2 -Air Quality Analysis a� PlaceWorks will prepare an air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions technical analysis to evaluate potential air quality impacts associated with the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan. Impacts will o be based on the current methodology of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) a for projects within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). Modeling will be conducted using the California B4NOVEMBER ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 83 2.A.b Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). PlaceWorks was a beta tester for the CalEEMod program, was recently involved in beta testing CaIEEMod 2013. The results of the analysis will be summarized in the EIR and modeling included as an appendix to the EIR. Existing Environmental Setting & Emissions Inventory. To establish the existing air quality conditions L in the project area, the EIR will discuss the regional meteorology with emphasis on local wind patterns o that affect air pollutant transport and dispersion. Existing air quality conditions will be described based V on the most current five years of air quality data within SoCAB from a monitoring station operated by c SCAQMD. The existing land uses within the Specific Plan generate criteria air pollutant emissions °— r from transportation sources, energy(natural gas), and area sources (landscape emissions, consumer f° Z products). The existing criteria air pollutant emissions inventory will be developed for the project ; based on the existing land uses onsite and modeled using CaIEEMod. Trip generation and/or vehicle c miles traveled provided by Fehr& Peers for existing land uses will be incorporated into the model. 2 a Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Inventory. The air quality technical analysis will provide an estimate of the increase in long-term criteria air pollutant emissions from operation of the Specific Plan using N L CaIEEMod. The criteria air pollutant emissions analysis will be based on the average daily trip o. generation provided by Fehr& Peers. It is anticipated that the EIR would be analyzed in one c development phase (buildout only). Total criteria air pollutant emissions generated at buildout of the `6 Specific Plan will be compared to the SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds. A qualitative assessment of the air quality impacts of the project alternatives compared to the proposed project will "= be provided for the EIR's Alternatives Chapter. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts will a be identified, as necessary. AQMP Consistency. The SoCAB is designated under the California and National ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for ozone, particulate matter(PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide, and lead (Los -a Angeles County only). Consistency of the project's regional emissions will also be evaluated against C9 the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan. • Localized Impacts and Odors. The SoCAB has been designated as attainment for carbon monoxide E L (CO) under both the California and National AAQS. Consequently, a quantitative assessment of CO hotspots is no longer warranted in the SoCAB. The EIR will include a qualitative assessment of CO hotspots based on this updated designation. A qualitative assessment of potential odor generation will also be included. t° 0 • Air Quality Compatibility. It is anticipated that new land uses within the Specific Plan would be = primarily residential, commercial/retail, and office (or mix)and would not be industrial in nature. However, SCAQMD has given special attention to the siting of new sensitive receptors from exposure to elevated concentrations of toxic air contaminants. The EIR will identify types of land uses within or proximate to the Specific Plan areas that are major sources of TACs. If necessary, the EIR will identify NI mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts from exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial a. concentrations of toxic air contaminants. Cn ® Construction Emissions. The air quality technical analysis will provide a qualitative assessment of the increase in short-term criteria air pollutant emissions generated from construction activities associated 0 with the development areas identified through the Specific Plan. Because the Alameda Specific Plan E_ will be analyzed at a program-level, localized air pollution impacts from construction equipment Q exhaust and fugitive dust will also be analyzed qualitatively for their potential to elevate z concentrations of air pollutants at the adjacent land uses surrounding the development sites. Mitigation measures required for future discretionary approvals within the Specific Plan to reduce U. potential impacts will be identified, as necessary. a� D- . • E s ca w Air Quality Section of the EIR Q • Air Quality Modeling Data, to be included as an appendix to the EIR PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN y ............I............................................................................................................................................................. Packet Pg. 84 2.A.b APPFNnIX B 7.4.3 - Biological Resources Led by Alden Environmental (Alden), the PlaceWorks project team will prepare a biological technical analysis to evaluate potential biological resource impacts associated with the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan. The results of the analysis will be summarized in the EIR and fieldwork data will be included as a technical report appendix to the EIR. Specifically, the biological resources task will c include the following: v �a c Literature Review. Alden will review available information for the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan ° project area as well as research available database information (MSCP, CNDDB, BIOS, USFWS)for `° z biological resources. This review will help identify biological resources that may occur on the site. ; Vegetation Mapping. Upon completion of the literature review, Alden will conduct a site visit to map o existing vegetation within the proposed project study area. Of the approximately 700 acre study area, a only approximately 80 acres are anticipated to be undeveloped with the potential to support sensitive = m biological resources. While the entire study area will be mapped, the bulk of the effort is anticipated to occur within the undeveloped areas. Sensitive plant and animal species observed during the site visit a will be recorded. During the field visit the habitat on site will be evaluated for the potential for = sensitive species to occur. Additional surveys may be recommended if there is habitat for other 2 IL species that may require surveys. A sensitive biological resources map of the site will be prepared v and submitted to National CORE and City staff. m Focused Habitat Assessments. The project area will also be assessed for the potential to support the a federal listed as endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat(Dipodomys merriami parvus) and Delhi N Sands flower-loving fly(Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominali) as these species were identified in the (D CNDDB as potentially occurring. The project area also will also be assessed for the potential to support the burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and nesting bird species (including raptors) that would 0 be protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA). Focused surveys for these, and = other potentially occurring sensitive species may be recommended if suitable habitat is present. t4 E L Rare Plant Survey. The project area has the potential to support several sensitive plant species. Under this task Alden will conduct a spring rare plant survey of the approximately 80 acre undeveloped areas within the study area. The results of the survey will be incorporated into a revised version of the sensitive biological resources map prepared above under the Vegetation Mapping task. o Jurisdictional Delineation. Alden will conduct a jurisdictional delineation of the study area to identify local, state, and federal jurisdictional features (wetlands). The delineation will be conducted in 'n accordance with the Arid West Supplement to the 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(Corps), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and County jurisdictional features will be identified, mapped, and NI quantified. Results of the fieldwork will be included in the Biological Technical Report to be prepared a. under this scope of services. C`) Biological Technical Report. Alden will prepare a biological technical report for submittal to the County 3: in support of the project's environmental review process. The report will present the results of Z O fieldwork conducted, analyze impacts, and recommend mitigation measures that may be necessary. F The impact analysis will be based on a future development plan, to be provided by Client. This task a includes analysis of a single plan, one round of Client revisions, and one round of revisions following z County review. Additional revisions would require a contract augment. Alden will attend up to four(4) 0 0 client/City staff meetings. m E Biological Resources section of EIR r Biological Technical Report, to be included as an appendix to the EIR Q B6NOVEMBER ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2014 2.A.b APPENDIX B 7.4.4 - Cultural Resources Led by McKenna et al., the PlaceWorks project team will complete a Phase I/Class II cultural resources investigation that will provide the necessary CEQA/NEPA compliance but will not include formal evaluations of individual properties. The investigation will include: a� L 0 Archaeological Records Search. A search will be completed through the San Bernardino County V Museum, Archaeological Information Center, Redlands, the local repository for all studies in San c Bernardino County. This research will include a review of the data pertaining to the specific project o area, but will also include a buffer zone of/2 mile around the project area to ensure coverage to a develop the historic setting and context. Given the extent of known sites within the general area, Z including the civic center, this research will be intensive and detailed. 0 Native American Consultation. Consultation will be completed through the Native American Heritage Commission and contact with local Native American representatives. This level of consultation is c standard for a Phase I/Class II study and will incorporate any comments received by local N representatives. L a Background History. This research will be conducted through review of previous studies on file at the = ca Information Center, consultation with the local historical society, research on land ownership and use a through the San Bernardino County Archives and Assessor's offices, and research in the McKenna et 2 al. in-house library and data base(s). McKenna et al. recently completed a study within the Waterman U Gardens Specific Plan project area and will attempt to keep research to a reasonable level and avoid Q. duplications of effort. N Paleontological Overview. McKenna et al. will obtain a paleontological overview from the Natural m History Museum of Los Angeles County and/or the San Bernardino County Museum, whichever is available to provide this overview and review. C7 Field Survey.The project area is relatively large and highly developed. McKenna et al. proposes to complete a windshield survey of the entire project area to complete a preliminary listing of resources E over 45 years of age and an intensive survey of undeveloped properties that have not been surveyed in the past. At this time, McKenna et al. anticipates the need to survey approximately 80 acres of undeveloped lands and a reconnaissance (windshield survey) of the remaining 300 +/-acres. The field surveys will be supplemented by a photographic record and field notes detailed enough to address the needs of the project and, if deemed necessary, to complete supplemental site records. Analysis and Report Production. A detailed technical report will be prepared in support of the Specific c Plan EIR that presents the discussions with recommendations for future studies and provides enough c� data to support the findings and recommendations. The technical report will be completed with all data requirements of the Office of Historic Preservation and the City of San Bernardino and will both be incorporated into the EIR and included as an appendix. a. U) Deliverable(s): Z • Cultural Resources Section of the EIR 0 H Cultural Resources Technical Report, to be included as an appendix to the EIR Q O Z D 7.4.5 - Geology and Soils ILL Mike Watson, PG, Associate Geologist, will prepare the Geology and Soils section of the EIR. This section will define the existing geologic, soils, and groundwater characteristics onsite; identify regional E seismic influences; and note and explain the characteristics of any areas containing constraints to site development. Based on the proposed specific plan and the site constraints, an analysis of project a impacts will be conducted. Mitigation measures known to be successful in addressing the various ( geotechnical constraints affecting proposed development areas will be defined, including reference to PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B7 ........................................................................................................................................................................................_1 Packet Pg. 86 2.A.b APPFNDIX B existing geological and soils tests and plan checking requirements administered by the City of San Bernardino. Research and review readily available geotechnical reports and maps of the project site and adjacent areas. m L Review in detail the available geotechnical report(s) and land use plan. U • Analyze available aerial photographs. 0 • Review readily available fault hazard studies and earthquake records to evaluate site seismicity. Z • Review readily available groundwater data. ; D- .b o ca • Geology and Soils support materials, to be included as an appendix to the EIR m a� L 7.4.6 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis r_ PlaceWorks will prepare a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions technical analysis to evaluate potential a. impacts associated with the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan. Impacts will be based on the current :L_ methodology of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for projects within the 0 South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). Modeling will be conducted using the California Emissions Estimator cn Model (CalEEMod). PlaceWorks was a beta tester for the CaIEEMod program, was recently involved in c beta testing CaIEEMod 2013. The results of the analysis will be summarized in the EIR and modeling included as an appendix to the EIR. Existing Environmental Setting. The environmental setting will the effects of climate change within California and the City of San Bernardino and will also describe the history of California's GHG E emissions regulation. To establish the baseline environmental setting for GHGs, the EIR will discuss m existing GHG regulations in California Passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming `4 Solutions Act, in 2006 has brought climate action planning to the forefront of planning and CEQA. The EIR will include a discussion the GHG reduction targets of AB 32 as identified in the California Air c Resources Board's (CARB) Scoping Plan and regional per capita transportation targets for the M Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for passenger vehicles under Senate Bill 375 (SB 375). 0 Existing GHG Emissions Inventory. The existing land uses within the Specific Plan generate GHG C emissions from transportation sources, energy (natural gas and indirect emissions from purchased N electricity), area sources (landscape emissions, consumer products), indirect emissions from water a use and wastewater generation, and indirect emissions from waste disposal. The existing GHG Cn emissions inventory will be developed for Specific Plan based on the existing land uses onsite O provided by National CORE and modeled using CaIEEMod. Trip generation and/or vehicle miles Z traveled provided by Fehr and Peers for existing land uses will be incorporated into the model. O GHG Emissions Inventory. Long-term GHG emissions impacts generated by the Specific Plan will be a quantified using CaIEEMod at buildout. GHG emissions generated by the project include Z transportation sources, area sources (landscaping fuel, architectural coatings, and consumer D products), energy sources (natural gas consumption, energy use), water and wastewater use, and U. waste generation associated with the project. In addition, total GHG emissions from construction r activities will be amortized into the GHG emissions inventory. GHG emissions reductions from recently adopted programs and regulations, such as improvements in fuel efficiency, state building code energy efficiency, and landscaping water efficiency will be incorporated. GHG emissions will be R compared to SCAQMD's proposed significance thresholds. Mitigation measures will be incorporated, Q as necessary, to reduce potentially significant GHG impacts of the project. A qualitative assessment B8NOVEMBER ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2014 2.A.b APPENDIX 6 of the GHG emissions impacts of the project alternatives compared to the proposed project will also be provided for the EIR's Alternatives Chapter. Project Consistency with Plans Adopted to Reduce GHG Emissions. The CEQA Guidelines require an assessment of whether the project would conflict with plans adopted for the purpose of reduce GHG emissions. Applicable plans include the California Air Resources Board's 2008 Scoping Plan i and the SCAG's 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). o Project consistency with these statewide/regional GHG emissions reduction strategies will be v reviewed. In addition, a consistency analysis with the measures identified in the San Bernardino c Association of Government's (SANBAG) Regional GHG Reduction Plan for the City of San Bernardino will be provided. Applicable measures from the Regional GHG Reduction Plan for the City Z of San Bernardino will be incorporated, as needed. ; D- . • c r • Greenhouse Gas section of EIR m m • GHG Modeling Data, to be included as an appendix to the EIR a _ ca 7.4.7 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials a PlaceWorks will use the technical analysis for the proposed project conducted by a consultant selected a by and contracted with National CORE. PlaceWorks will then complete the hazards and hazardous cn materials section of the DEIR, and include the technical data in the EIR Appendix. Mitigation measures N that reduce hazards and hazardous materials impacts will be identified, as necessary. Pertinent technical details will be included in an appendix. R ble !Delivera (s): E 0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the EIR m` ca 7.4.8 - Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Based on technical analysis completed by Guerra & Associates, or another consultant contracted with M National CORE, PlaceWorks will prepare the hydrology/water quality section of the EIR. This section LO will provide description of existing and proposed drainage improvements and mapped flood hazard o areas, and provide discussion on project-related short-term construction and long-term operational ,`r, impacts to existing hydrology and water quality, NPDES and other applicable regulatory requirements, NI along with any other stormwater pollution prevention measures. a D- . • C� Hydrology/Water Quality Section of the EIR O F= Q 7.4.9 - Land Use and Planning °z Past and present land use conditions will be documented, and the local land use patterns will be U. described. The Waterman Gardens Specific Plan would include a General Plan Consistency Analysis as an appendix. The EIR will review and supplement, as necessary, Waterman Gardens Specific Plan's m consistency with the goals and policies of the City's general plan. Specifically, PlaceWorks will: Inventory all existing and planned land uses in the project area. Q PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B9 ...............................................I..........................................................................................................I............................... Packet Pg. 88 2.A.b APPENDIX B Analyze recent development trends within the general area and assess the consistency of the Proposed project with current development trends as well as relevant local and regional land use planning programs. • Provide a nexus between the project's environmental impacts in aggregate and the environmental compatibility of the proposed project with surrounding uses. L 0 D- - .b - U �a _ Land Use and Planning Section of the EIR c R Z 7.4.10 - Mineral Resources = 0 The EIR will contain a brief section discussing the general plan designation of mineral resource zones within the Specific Plan area. However, it is expected that no significant impacts to mineral resources will occur as a result of the project. L a. 7.4.11 - Noise and Vibration Analysis a PlaceWorks will prepare a noise and vibration technical analysis to evaluate potential acoustical impacts associated with the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan. The technical noise analyses will aim to facilitate the Specific Plan's goal of establishing a framework for near- and long-term development and Cn community preservation within the planning area (which extends from Baseline Street on the north to 0 5th Street on the south, and from Sierra Way on the west to Valencia Avenue/Flood Channel on the east). t� Existing Conditions Assessment. PlaceWorks will describe the existing noise environment in the = planning area. We will identify the dominant sources of environmental noise, including major E transportation-related and stationary noise sources. We will use our experience and knowledge of similar noise environments to characterize the existing conditions for the Plan Area. To document existing ambient noise conditions, to identify the major sources of noise in the area, and to identify potential issues, opportunities, and challenges with respect to noise and land use o compatibility, an evaluation of existing ambient noise conditions will be conducted. PlaceWorks will M conduct field surveys of the Plan Area to acquire ambient noise level data. These ambient noise „n measurement surveys will consist of short-term (15-minute) sampling at up to eight locations and c long-term (24-hour) noise monitoring at up to two locations. These locations will be selected by N PlaceWorks, in coordination with City and Applicant staff, and will take into consideration the existing `" N and future uses in the planning area. These field data will establish the baseline and existing noise environments, will be used to calibrate traffic modeling for the noise impact assessment, and will be Cn included in the EIR documentation. C7 Preparation of a Program-Level EIR. The noise and vibration analysis for the WG Specific Plan EIR Z will identify the impacts on nearby existing and proposed sensitive land uses from the implementation O of the project. The noise analysis will discuss relevant standards and criteria for noise exposure, Q including City and County of San Bernardino ordinances, policies, and standards, as well as interior o sound requirements from the State of California (i.e., State Building Code and Title 24). D O The noise analyses will include an evaluation of short-term noise and vibration levels associated with U_ construction activities during the build-out of the Specific Plan. The level of significance will be based c on the magnitude of noise and vibration generated at adjacent noise-sensitive receptors and the E length of construction activities. The predictive modeling of traffic noise will be conducted using the Federal Highway Administration's Q (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Model and will be based on average daily segment volumes, as BIO NOVEMBER .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2014 Packet Pg. 89 2.A.b APPENDIX b provided by the traffic consultants, Fehr & Peers. Noise levels will be assessed for existing year and build-out year conditions, with and without the project, for the Specific Plan Area. Changes in ambient noise levels at build-out of the project and from cumulative growth in the project vicinity will be analyzed to determine if project-related noise significantly increases the ambient noise environment or significantly contributes to cumulative noise increases. L 0 The noise analysis will also describe changes in the noise environment generated by non- v transportation sources (e.g., HVAC units, loading docks, trash compactors, commercial equipment, etc.) from the proposed development land uses. An evaluation of long-term noise and vibration c impacts from the operation of the proposed uses on adjacent off-site uses will be provided. This z analysis will be based on the proposed land use designations, the project description, and illustrations of the opportunity sites. Noise impacts to adjacent noise-sensitive areas will be evaluated from these c potential new uses, based on the noise limits in the City and County Codes, the land use compatibility criteria, and the state's interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL (for residential uses). We anticipate d that there will be a single, future-year land use scenario to analyze for this study. The analyses of the existing and final build-out year scenarios — including the with-project and without-project conditions— a will provide a comprehensive assessment of the predicted noise environments for the project area. The noise analyses and assessments will consider the overall goals and philosophies of the Specific a Plan regarding the promotion of affordable housing, a multi-modal access and connectivity strategy, .2 and an appropriate infrastructure development. Mitigation measures that reduce construction, operations, and transportation noise impacts will be identified, as necessary. The results of this Cn analysis will be summarized in the noise section of the EIR, and pertinent analysis details will be provided in an Appendix. L De . • 0 C to f Noise Section of the EIR E L • Noise modeling data to be included as an appendix 7.4.12 - Population and Housing o M The Waterman Gardens Specific Plan includes development of new housing, and the anticipated economic growth by the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan would also induce population growth in the c area. The EIR will address the project's impact on local and regional population and housing and N compare to the growth planned for the area as part of regional forecasts. N I D- . • CL 0 ® Population and Housing Section of the EIR z O 7.4.13 - Public Services o PlaceWorks will contact service agencies, such as police, fire, and school districts, and other applicable � service providers that would be affected by the Waterman Gardens Specific Plan to identify existing 0 0 service levels and capacities available to serve the proposed project. The demand will be estimated and the ability of the agencies to accommodate the planned growth will be assessed. And in consultation E with the agencies, the need for additional public facilities or personnel to serve the proposed project and maintain adequate levels of service will be determined. r D - . • PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE GREATER WATERMAN GARDENS SPECIFIC PLAN B11 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ Packet Pg. 90 2.A.b APPENDIX B Public Services Section of the EIR. 7.4.14 - Recreation The Waterman Gardens Specific Plan will create demands for recreational facilities through population growth and also provide additional open space and recreational opportunities. The EIR will analyze the L physical impacts related to existing and planned recreational amenities. 0 Deliverable(s): R 0 Recreation Section of the EIR Z 7.4.15 - Transportation and Traffic PlaceWorks will use the traffic impact analysis for the proposed project conducted by Fehr & Peers. PlaceWorks will then complete the transportation section of the DEIR and include the traffic modeling data in the EIR Appendix. Mitigation measures that reduce transportation impacts will be identified, as a` necessary. Pertinent technical details will be included in an appendix. CL D ' . • CL Traffic Section of the EIR m Traffic Study, to be included as an appendix to the EIR -a ea C7 ( 7.4.16 - Utilities and Service Systems Impacts to dry utilities (natural gas and electricity) as well as solid waste collection services will be discussed. PlaceWorks will coordinate with Guerra & Associates, or another consultant contracted with National CORE, and use the relevant studies to address impacts related to wastewater and water •• utilities systems. We anticipate these studies to include a Water Supply Assessment and Sewer Study. n Deliverable(s): v u� 0 Utilities and Service Systems Section of the EIR N I Alternatives to the proposed project: Alternatives to the proposed project will be defined and analyzed in CO) compliance with Section 15126(d) of the CEQA Guidelines and with consultation with City staff. 0 Alternatives will be selected on the basis of their ability to: (1) avoid or reduce one or more of the Z project's significant impacts; and (2) feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project. O Analyses of up to three alternatives, including the "No Project," will be conducted. Designed to reduce c or eliminate any significant impacts, alternatives may include: 1) No Project; 2) Alternative Land Use Alternative; and 3) Reduced Density Alternative. Alternatives that were considered but eliminated from O further consideration will also be documented. The environmentally superior alternative will be LL identified; if it is either No-Project Alternative, then one of the development alternatives will be identified r_ as environmentally superior to the others. 0 E Our scope of work includes two rounds of review of the ADEIR. a B12 NOVEMBER 2014 ............................................................................................................................................................................................