HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinances_2600 AGENDA ITEM NO.
COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 19, 2005
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 6391 - A resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redlands adopting General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2 to the Redlands
General Plan. Request submitted by ESRI
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005-2-B - PUBLIC HEARING on a
General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to remove and vacate
approximately 230 feet of New York Street north of the intersection with State
Street, and a General Plan Land Use Designation Amendment from Light
Industrial, Commercial, and Linear Park Overlay to Office. Request submitted
by ESRI.
ORDINANCE NO. 2600 (ZONE CHANGE NO. 401) - PUBLIC HEARING on
a Zone Change from M-1, M-2, M-P, and C-4 to A-P on 27.94 acres located
on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of
Tennessee Street. Request submitted by ESRI.
STREET VACATION NO. 127 - Request City Clerk to set hearing date and
provide for publication and posting of notice for proposed vacation of New
York Street north of State Street for a distance of approximately 270 feet.
Request submitted by ESRI.
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
1. Mayor declares the meeting open as a public hearing.
2. Mayor calls upon Department Head for report.
3. Mayor calls for questions/comments from members of the City
Council.
4. Mayor calls upon applicant, or their representative, for
comments/testimony.
5. Mayor calls for comments/questions/testimony from members of the
public (3 minutes per speaker).
6. Mayor calls upon City Clerk to note any written comments received.
7. Mayor calls upon the applicant, or representative, for rebuttal
comments (5 minutes).
8. Mayor closes the public hearing.
9. City Council considers the motion and vote.
c
City Council Meeting of April 19, 2005
General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2-B
Resolution No. 2600 (Zone Change No. 401)
Street Vacation No. 127
Page 2
MOTIONS:
If the City Council determines that the Planning Commission recommendation is
appropriate, staff recommends the following motions:
1. "I move that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2-13, Zone Change No. 401 and Street
Vacation No. 127 and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination"
in accordance with City guidelines. It has been determined thatthis projectwill
not individually or cumulatively affect wildlife resources as defined in Section
711.2 of the Fish and Game Code."
2. "1 move that the City Council approve Resolution Number 6391 for General
Plan Amendment of 2005-2-8, amending the Circulation Element of the
General Plan to remove the Collector designation of New York Street through
the project site from Park Avenue to State Street and changing the
designation of the subject properties from Light Industrial and Commercial to
Office as shown on the attached map."
3. Mayor to direct City Clerk to read the title of Ordinance No. 2600
4. "1 move to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 2600 in full and to introduce
the Ordinance."
5. "1 move to request the City Clerk administratively set the hearing date for the
proposed vacation of New York Street for May 17, 2005 at 7:00 pm and
provide for published and posted notice of the hearing in accordance with
law."
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission reviewed the project on January 25, 2005 and recommended
that the City Council approve the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, and
Zone Change. A proposed Development Agreement, which is a part of this project, was
continued by the Planning Commission to April 26, 2005 to allow the applicant to meet with
staff and the City Attorney to discuss and clarify issues raised by staff.
DISCUSSION
General Plan
The proposed General Plan Amendment has two components:
{
City Council Meeting of April 19, 2005
General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2-B
Resolution No. 2600 (Zone Change No. 401)
Street Vacation No. 127
Page 3
1. An amendment to the Circulation Element proposes to remove the Collector
designation of New York Street through the project site from Park Avenue to
State Street. This would facilitate the removal of a section of New York Street
by a future proposed Street Vacation.
2. An amendment to the Land Use Element proposes to change the "Light
Industrial"and "Commercial"designations to "Office" in order to eliminate the
multiple land use designations that have caused confusion in the past
regarding allowable uses and development standards. The applicant requests
that the entire ESRI Campus be placed under a consistent designation.
The change to the Circulation Element would delete the Collector designation of New York
Street through the ESRI campus, and with the proposed Street Vacation (discussed below)
removing a portion of the street, the remaining segment of New York Street from Park
Avenue to the cul-de-sac would revert to a Local Street. This change would be consistent
with the existing grid pattern and Circulation Element designations in the West Redlands
area for north-south streets. The removal of the Collector designation of New York Street
would be a step toward establishing a consistent Circulation Element hierarchy of roads in
this area of the City. f=urthermore, although not a part of this project, the traffic study and
the Public Works Department recommend future consideration of changes to New York
Street north of Redlands Blvd. to eliminate the railroad crossings and Redlands Blvd.
intersections of New York Street and Stuart Avenue.
The change to the Land Use Element would replace the current Light Industrial and
Commercial designations of the site with an Office designation that is consistent with it's
current and proposed future use. The initial application had also requested modification of
the Linear Park designation, however staff did not support this component of the request
and the applicant agreed to leave the linear park in its current configuration. A consistent
designation for the entire SSRI campus is seen as a positive step which staff supports.
The proposed project does not include any new buildings or construction otherthan removal
of a section of street, therefore, it was determined not to be subject to the requirements of
Measure "U" (Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study).
Environmental Review
The Environmental Review Committee and the Planning Commission recommended that
Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration with five (5) mitigation measures that deal
with air quality, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation and traffic. These
mitigation measures reduce the impact of this project to a level that is less than significant,
and include the two mitigation measures requiring traffic signals at Tennessee Street/Park
Avenue and Tennessee Street/State Street. The Initial Study is attached and provides more
detailed information.
City Council Meeting of April 19, 2005
General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2-B
Resolution No. 2600 (Zone Change No. 401)
Street Vacation No. 127
Page 4
The requirement for traffic signal installation at the intersections of Tennessee Street/Park
Avenue and Tennessee Street/State Street were issues at the Environmental Review
Committee and Planning Commission hearings. The mitigation measures are included in
the attached Conditions of Approval. A traffic signal is to be installed at the Tennessee
Street/State Street intersection.A requirement fortraffic signal installation at the intersection
of Tennessee Street/Park Avenue was amended at the Planning Commission hearing, as
staff recommended removing the responsibility from the applicant, SSRI,to provide a traffic
signal at this intersection. The signal is currently warranted, however staff and the Planning
Commission determined that this should not be the responsibility of the applicant, but rather
that of the City of Redlands. The City of Redlands has a "temporary"fire station at the City
yard. When staff had originally presented the concept of a fire station at this location the
City had identified the need for a signal at this intersection. Since this is now planned as
a permanent facility it is staff's recommendation that responsibility for the signal at
Tennessee Street and Park Avenue be the City of Redlands.
Zone Change
The proposed Zone Change is from a mix of M-1 (Light Industrial), M-2 (General Industrial),
M-P (Planned Industrial), and C-4 (Highway Commercial) Districts to A-P (Administrative
and Professional Office) District. The justification for the Zone Change is the same as
stated above for the General Plan Amendment, i.e. to eliminate the multiple land use
designations that has caused confusion in the past regarding allowable uses and
development standards. The principal uses permitted in this zoning district include business
and professional offices, which is consistent with the current use and proposed future use
of the site. The proposed Zone Change will be consistent with the General Plan designation
of Office. In staffs opinion the proposed zone for the project site is appropriate and
compatible with the surrounding area.
Street Vacation
The proposed Street Vacation is to vacate a portion (approximately 230 linear feet)of New
York Street located north of the intersection of State Street and New York Street. As
proposed, New York Street would end in a cul-de-sac approximately in the middle of the
ESRI campus as indicated on the project Site Plan. Staffs initial concern that the closure
of New York Street may be opposed as it could affect the post office adjacent to the north
of the campus, and that residents to the south of State Street wishing to travel north may
be inconvenienced has resulted only in minimal opposition to date. Four people spoke at
the Planning Commission hearing, and two of them indicated their main concern was
regarding pedestrian access to the post office from the residential area to the south. The
applicant stated ESRI's intent to provide pedestrian access through the campus from State
Street to the post office. The Planning Commission added a Condition of Approval requiring
a public access sidewalk from State Street to the New York Street cul-de-sac prior to
adoption of a City Council Resolution to vacate New York Street.
City Council Meeting of April 19, 2005
General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2-B
Resolution No. 2600 (Zone Change No. 4011)
Street Vacation No. 127
Page 5
As the project will not include any new buildings or facilities, the Conditions of Approval are
minimal. The only construction generated by the project will be that associated with the
removal of the vacated section of New York Street and the provision of a cul-de-sac at it's
new terminus. The requirements for intersection improvements and traffic signals at the
intersections of Tennessee Street/State Street and Tennessee Street/Park Avenue,and the
pedestrian access sidewalk are discussed in the Environmental Review section above and
in the attached Initial Study. These requirements are included as Conditions of Approval
attached to the Street Vacation that must be met prior to vacation of New York Street.
The Municipal Utilities Department has indicated there are existing water and'! sewer mains
in the portion of New York Street proposed to be vacated, and request a thirty-five (35)foot
easement to accommodate these two mains, In addition, it is likely that there will be water
meters, backflow devices, and appurtenances to be relocated. These concerns are also
addressed in the Planning Division Conditions of Approval attached to the Street Vacation,
ALTERNATIVES
1. The City Council can deny the proposal.
FISCAL IMPACT
The applicant has paid $24,175 in fees.
Prepared by: Concurrence:
J
her H�afto
%nior PlanP
yy Develotmmunitpment Director
Reviewed by: Recommended by:
Dan cH h J,WnD rvidlson
Cityto
City Atto�rn y Hager
Attachments:
A. City Council Resolution No. 5391 (General Plan Amendment),
City Council Meeting of April 19, 2005
General Plan Amendment No. 2005-2-B
Resolution No. 2600 (Zone Change No. 401)
Street Vacation No. 127
Page6_
B. Ordinance No. 2600 (Zone Change)
C. Conditions of Approval
D. Planning Commission Staff Report of January 25, 2005
E. Initial Study Environmental Review
F. General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Street Vacation Exhibits
RESOLUTION NO. 6391
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS
ADOPTING PROPOSED AMENDMENT NOS. 2005-2-B TO THE REDLANDS
GENERAL PLAN AS THE CITY'S SECOND CYCLE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2005
WHEREAS,in accordance with Government Code section 65353,the Planning Commission
of the City of Redlands has reviewed the proposed amendment number 2005-2-B to the Redlands
General Plan and made a written recommendation for adoption of such amendment to the City
Council after holding noticed public hearings; and
WHEREAS, notice of this City Council's public hearing for the amendment was duly
published in the Redlands Daily Facts by the Redlands City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, following a public hearing on the proposed amendment, at which this City
Council provided opportunity for public testimony,the City Council determined that adoption of the
proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public health, safety and general welfare;
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redlands that
the following second cycle amendment for the calendar year 2005 to the Redlands' General Plan be
adopted:
Section 1. Amendment No. 2005-2-B: The Circulation Element of the General Plan is
hereby amended to remove the"Collector"designation for New York Street,north of the intersection
with State Street to the intersection of Redlands Boulevard,and the Land Use Element of the General
Plan is amended to change the designation from Light Industrial, Commercial and Linear Park
Overlay to Office for the property described in Exhibit"A."
ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 19th day of April, 2005.
Mayor of the City of Redlands
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DIMIRESOk6391 esri gpa 1
I,Lorrie Poyzer,City Clerk of the City of Redlands,hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was
duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of April, 2005,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
City Clerk
DJM\RES016341 esri pa 2
44M 3w
It W
LL
Lug Q
Lw
O LY
LU I
L L J 11 1-1"1A111111-J4-'-,MZMz
C4 wQ6
4O t(2) 0
A 0 % Ov
1 0.
ry
Q
LL
.... .........
..... ..... .....
r
CN
LO
.................
C*4
O
LU
LL
LL
............
CL
77,
7-777,777 7
..77,77
sea
c
ORDINANCE NO. 2600
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE REDLANDS
MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING A REVISED LAND USE ZONING MAP
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The zoning designation for 27.94 acres of vacant property located on both sides
of New York Street, north of State Street and east of Tennessee Street and further identified as
Assessor's Parcel Nos. 171-011-55, 171-021-09, 171-021-12, 171-021-13, 171-161-06, 171-161-14,
171-161-15, 171-171-08, 171-171-13, 171-171-18, 171-171-19, 171-171-22,171-171-23, 171-171-
24, 171-171-26, 171-171-27, 171-171-28 is hereby changed from "M-1" (Light Industrial), "M-2"
(General Industrial), "M-P"(Planned Industrial)and"C-4"(Highway Commercial) Districts to"A-
P" (Administrative and Professional) District on the City's Land Use Zoning Map. This action is
contingent upon, and takes effect only upon adoption of the related General Plan Amendment,
Resolution No. 6363.
Section 2. The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall certify to the
adoption of this ordinance and shall cause it, or a summary of it, to be published once in the
Redlands Daily Facts, a newspaper of general circulation within the City, and thereafter, this
ordinance shall take effect in accordance with law.
Mayor of the City of Redlands
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I,Lorrie Poyzer,City Clerk of the City of Redlands,hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was
duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of April, 2005.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
City Clerk
ord12600 zC 401.wpd
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION FOR
STREET VACATION NO. 127
Date of Preparation: December 16, 2004 (Revised March 31, 2005)
Location: New York Street, north of State Street
Applicant: ESRI - �
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section IIIb-d) of the'Environmental
Checklist, during the period of construction the applicant shall perform on-site daily
watering of the site during all construction activities in order to mitigate the potential
impacts to air quality from the generation of dust.
2. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section VIII(a) of the Environmental
Checklist, the applicant shall comply with all requirements of the NPDES permit,
both temporary and permanent, issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board.
3. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section XI(a) of the Environmental
Checklist, the time of construction activities shall be limited to the hours from 7:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m during the week with no construction activities permitted during
weekends and Federal Holidays.
4. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section XV(a) of the Environmental
Checklist, prior to adoption of the City Council Resolution to vacate New York Street
the applicant shall install traffic signal system at the intersection of Tennessee
Street and State Street. (Revised by staff March 31, 2005)
5. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section XV(a) of the Environmental
Checklist, prior to adoption of the City Council Resolution to vacate New York Street
a traffic signal system shall be installed at the intersection of Tennessee Street and
Park Avenue. (Revised by staff January 24, 2005).
Conditions of Approval
Street Vacation No. 127
March 31, 2005
Page 2
6. Added by Planning Commission Januar/ 25, 2005: Prior to adoption of the City
Council Resolution to vacate New York Street, a public access sidewalk shall be
provided from State Street to the New York Street cul-de-sac.
7. Added by staff March 25, 2005: The Municipal Utilities Department has indicated
there are existing water and sewer mains in the portion of New York Street
proposed to be vacated. It is estimated that a thirty-five (35) foot easement is
required to accommodate these two mains. In addition, it is likely that there will be
water meters, backflow devices, and appurtenances to be relocated. Prior to
adoption of the City Council Resolution to vacate New York Street, the applicant
shall meet any requirements of the Municipal Utilities Department.
avzez� ) '�-- -
,leffr . Sh , AI
Co unity Development Director
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
ENGINEERING ADMINMTRATION DIVISION REQUIREMENTS
Revised January 24, 2005
Applicant: SSRI
Location: North of the Intersection of State Street and New York Street
Development No.: Street Vacation No. 127
Date: January 11, 2005 ,
The applicant shall comply with the following Engineering requirements as necessary prerequisite
for checking and approving the legal description for the street vacation:
A. The following items shall be submitted.
1. All reference materials pertinent to the vacation such as recorded maps,records of
survey and deeds.
2. Identify the original lot line and the area to be vacated.
3. Legal description of the area to be vacated.
B. The following items are required prior to the issuance of the ENCROACHMENT
PERAM.
1. Cash cleanup deposit shall be submitted($1,000.0. Deposit will be reimbursed
after the work is completed an accepted by the City upon written request
2. Truck route permit is required($55.00) for all construction vehicles five(5)tons
and over gross vehicular weight (e.g. concrete trucks) using streets other than
established trick routes. -
3. All off-site improvements shall be designed by owner's Civil Engineer in accordance
with City Standard Specifications and Detail Drawings and Standard Specifications
for Public Works Construction (Green Book) latest revision thereof. All existing
utilities shall be pot holed to determine the actual depth if no signed plan is available.
Field notes will be submitted at time of submitting the plan for review and plan
checking.
4. Applicant must have all plans approved and delivered to the Public Works
Department prior to final approval.
Public Works Department-Engineering Administration Division Requirements
Street Vacation No. 127
January 11, 2005
5. Although this project will have an on-going inspection throughout construction, a
final inspection for all off-site improvements must be scheduled by developer to
certify that these improvements comply with City specifications and any corrective
work must be completed prior to final release of bonds. All as-built plans shall be
delivered to Public Works as well as in a CD-ROM.dwg file format.
6. Requirements for New York Street
a. Dedicate to provide for a 52 foot radius cul-de-sac.
b. Construct standard cul-de-sac at street terminus, including sidewalk.
c. Remove existing pedestrian traffic signal and deliver all traffic signal
components to the City Yard.
7. Requirements for State Street
a. Construct standard curb and gutter 20 feet on the north side of the street
centerline and match existing curb and gutter across the vacated New York
Street.
b. Constrict standard sidewalk across the vacated New York Street.
8. Requirements for Tennessee Street
a. Construct standard traffic signal at the intersection of Tennessee Street and State
Street.
9. Provide for adequate drainage facilities.
10. Dedication documents shall be prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer(registered prior to January 1982)and must be submitted for review
and approval before recordation.
11. Payment of plan check and final map check fees are required.
12. The approximate locations of existing underground utilities shall be shown on the
improvement/site/grading plans. The utilities shall be plotted from record and field
data. The City of Redlands and the Engineer assume no liability as to the exact
location of said lines whose locations are not shown.
13. Section 4216/4217 of the Government Code requires a Dig Alert Identification
Number be issued before a "Permit to Excavate" will be valid. For your Dig Alert
Identification Number, call Underground Service Alert toll five, 1-800-227-2600,
two worldng days before you dig.
fir..
Public Works Department-Engineering Administration Division Requirements
Street Vacation No. 127
January 11, 2005
14. Encroachment Permit application, three (3) sets of signed plans and foes must be
submitted for any off-site improvements prior to construction.
15. A California OSHA Permit Number for all work that is five feet deep or deeper shall
be provided Call (909)383-4321.
16. A copy of preliminary soils report is required with recommendation for the final
structural section to be submitted prior to placing of the street pavement, The report
shall include test results and boring/sampling locations.
17. Survey points shall be reset that were destroyed during construction and a second
Corner Records filed for those points prior to completion of theproject to San
Beaardino County Surveyor.
18. A traffic control plan shall be prepared in accordance with the latest revision of
Chapter 5 of the State of California Traffic Manual,submitted and approved by the
City Engineer prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. The plan shall show all
required construction signage,warning devices,road closures,detours,delineation,
phasing schedules and anticipated durations of closures and detours for any work
within the public right-of-way. The plans shall provide names and 24-hour phone
numbers of individuals who can be contacted regarding traffic control measures.
Prepared By: Approved By:
WECK RONALD C,MUTTE
sociate Engineer Public Works Director
EW:ew
M:sTRW VACATION No.IV
Page 3
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
III. D GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98 - Planning Commission to consider a
recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a
PUBLIC HEARING on a General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to
remove and vacate approximately 230 feet of New York Street north of the
intersection with State Street, and a General Plan Land Use Designation
Amendment from Light Industrial, Commercial, and Linear Park Overlay to Office.
Request submitted by ESRI.
III. E ZONE CHANGE NO. 401-Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to
the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for
a Zone Change from M-1, M-2, M-P, and C-4 to A-P on 27.94 acres located on both
sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of Tennessee Street.
Request submitted by ESRI.
III. F STREET VACATION NO. 127 - Planning Commission to consider a
recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a
PUBLIC HEARING to vacate a portion of New York Street located north of the
intersection of State Street and New York Street in the M-1, M-2, and M-P Districts.
Request submitted by ESRI.
III. G DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19 - Planning Commission to consider a
recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a
PUBLIC HEARING for a Development Agreement to lock-in the existing use of the
site and future expansion under the land use policies and regulations of General
Plan Amendment No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, and Street Vacation No. 127 on
27.94 acres located on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and
east of Tennessee Street. Request submitted by ESRI.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 25, 2005
Planner: Asher Hartel, AICP, Senior Planner
SYNOPSIS
1. General Plan Designation: The General Plan designation of the property is
"Light Industrial","Commercial',and"Linear Park
Overlay", and is being proposed for a change to
"Office".
2. Existing Zoning: The zoning designation of the property is M-1
(Light Industrial), M-2 (General Industrial), M-P
(Planned Industrial), and C-4 (Highway
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 2
Commercial) Districts, and is being proposed for
a change to A-P (Administrative and
Professional Office) District.
3. Surrounding Zoning: The property is surrounded by the following
zoning designations:to the north is M-2(General
Industrial), O (Open Land), and A-P
(Administrative and Professional Office); to the
east is C-3 (General Commercial), C4 (Highway
Commercial), and R-2 (Multiple Residential); to
the south is E (Educational) and R-2;to the west
is M-P (Planned Industrial), M-2, and I-P
(Industrial).
4. Existing Land Use: The project site contains the existing office
complex of the ESRI company.
5. Surrounding Land Use: The surrounding land uses are: to the north of
the project site is the Redlands post office,
Jennie Davis Park,the Mission Zanja Creek,and
mixed commercial and industrial uses along
Redlands Blvd. and Park Avenue; to the east is
residential and commercial development on
State Street and Texas Street; to the south are
existing residential uses and a school (Redlands
Adventist Academy) along State Street; to the
west are commercial and industrial uses along
Tennessee Street.
6. Area/Topography: The site is 27.94 acres in size and exhibits a
relatively flat terrain.
7. Environmental Assessment: The proposed project was reviewed by the
Environmental Review Committee on December
6, 2004. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is
recommended.
8. Socio-Economic Cost /Benefit Study: The proposed project does not include
any new buildings or construction other
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 3
than removal of a section of street,
therefore, it was determined not to be
subject to the-requirements of Measure
"U"(Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study).
9. Planning Commission Submittal Dates:
(A) Date Submitted: December 9, 2003
(B) Date Accepted As Complete: October 18, 2004
(C) Planning Commission Meeting: January25, 2005
(D) City Council Meeting: March 1, 2005
(E) CEQA Action Deadline: April 18, 2005
10. Attachments: Resolutions for GPA 98, ZC 401, and DA 19
Letter of Intent from applicant's representative, Pat Meyer
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Checklist/ Mitigated Negative Declaration
Proposed Development Agreement
Letter from Dennis Bell, 406 S. San Mateo
General Plan Amendment & Zone Change Map packet
Site Plan
New York Street Vacation Plan
BACKGROUND
The project site is owned by SSRI and/or it's affiliated companies. As indicated in the
attached Letter of Intent from the applicant's representative, the request is to replace the
multiple General Plan and Zoning designations with one consistent designation that reflects
the existing use as the SSRI campus. The proposed Development Agreement is to lock-in
the existing use and future expansion under the policies and regulations of the General
Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Street Vacation. The Street Vacation is for the City
to vacate a portion of New York Street located north of the intersection of State Street and
New York Street. This section of New York Street passes through the ESRI campus. The
applicant seeks to integrate the campus without a City public street bisecting it into two
halves, since pedestrian traffic is increasing as employees and customers traverse the
campus. A street vacation application normally goes directly to City Council for approval.
In this instance the Planning Commission can consider the vacation as it relates to the
GPA, ZC, and Development Agreement, but no recommendation is required on the street
vacation.
€ e:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 4
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element proposes to remove the Collector
designation of New York Street through the project site from Park Avenue to State Street.
The project site's current General Plan land use designation is "Light Industrial",
"Commercial", and "Linear Park Overlay". The "Light Industrial" and "Commercial"
designations are being proposed for a change to "Office". The Amendment is proposed
in order to eliminate the multiple land use designations that has caused confusion in the
past regarding allowable uses and development standards. The applicant requests that
the entire ESRI Campus be placed under a consistent designation. In view of the manner
in which the site has developed as the headquarters for SSRI, the proposed Amendment
has merit.
The change to the Circulation Element would delete the Collector designation of New York
Street through the SSRI campus,and with the proposed Street Vacation(discussed below)
removing a portion of the street, the remaining segment of New York Street from Park
Avenue to the cul-de-sac would revert to a Local Street. This change would be consistent
with the existing grid pattern and Circulation Element designations in the West Redlands
area for north-south streets. Starting at the westerly edge of the City with California Street,
every second street is designated as either an arterial or collector (California, Nevada,
Alabama,Tennessee, and Center/Texas Streets). The north-south streets between these
streets are New Jersey, Iowa, Kansas, and New York Streets, and all are non-designated
local streets in the Circulation Element with the exception of the New York Street
designation as a Collector. The removal of the Collector designation of New York Street
would be a step toward establishing a consistent Circulation Element hierarchy of roads
in this area of the City. Furthermore, although not a part of this project, the traffic study
and the Public Works Department recommend future consideration of changes to New
York Street north of Redlands Blvd. and south of State Street.
The surrounding area is extremely mixed as regards General Plan Land Use designations
and actual land uses. To the north are designations of Light Industrial, Parks,
Public/Institutional, and Commercial; the actual land uses reflect these designations with
the Redlands post office, Jennie Davis Park, the Mission Zanja Creek, and mixed
commercial and industrial uses along Redlands Blvd. and Park Avenue. To the east are
designations of Commercial/Industrial, Commercial, and High-Density Residential; actual
uses are residential and commercial development on State Street and Texas Street. To
the south are designations of High-Density Residential and Public/institutional; actual
uses are multiple residential uses and a school (Redlands Adventist Academy) along the
south side of State Street. To the west is designated Light Industrial; actual uses are
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 5
commercial and industrial uses along Tennessee Street. The proposed Amendmentwould
replace the current Light Industrial and Commercial designations of the site with an Office
designation that is consistent with it's current and proposed future use.
ZONE CHANGE
The application proposes to rezone the property from a mix of M-1 (Light Industrial), M-2
(General Industrial), M-P (Planned Industrial), and C-4 (Highway Commercial) Districts to
A-P(Administrative and Professional Office)District. The justification for the Zone Change
is the same as stated above for the General Plan Amendment, i.e.to eliminate the multiple
land use designations that has caused confusion in the past regarding allowable uses and
development standards. The principal uses permitted in this zoning district include
business and professional offices, which is consistent with the current use of the site.
Under Chapter 18.200 of the Municipal Code(Change of Zone),the Planning Commission
must be satisfied that the following conditions prevail before recommending to the City
Council that the rezoning be granted. The following are those conditions and staffs
comments:
1. That the proposed change of zone is in conformity with the General Plan.
Staffs Comments:
The purpose of the project is to apply the appropriate General Plan and zoning
designations on property. The Zone Change will be in conformity with the amended
General Plan "Office" designation. Approval of the project would be consistent with the
policies of the General Plan and would not adversely impact the surrounding residential
neighborhood.
2. That there is a need in the community for more of the types of uses
permitted by the zone requested.
Staffs Comments:
The purpose of the project is to provide recognize existing and future office space on a site
that is clearly not going to develop to current industrial and commercial designations. The
current user, ESRI, is beneficial to the City as a major employer.
& That the proposed change of zone would not adversely affect the
surrounding area or the community in general.
Staffs Comments:
The proposed change of zone to allow office use will not adversely affect surrounding
F
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 6
residences or commercial and industrial uses, and will recognize the existing use of the
site. The uses permitted in an A-P zone will provide an adequate transition between these
adjacent uses. The project would not result in an adverse impact nor affect the character
of the surrounding neighborhood.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the project on December 6, 2004, after
a continuance at a previous ERC hearing on November 1, 2004, in order to further
evaluate two mitigation measures recommended by the Public Works Department relating
to traffic signal improvements at two nearby intersections: 1)Tennessee Street & State
Street; 2)Tennessee Street & Park Avenue. The applicant and their traffic consultant met
with the Public Works Department following the November 1st Environmental Review
Committee meeting, and at the December 6th Environmental Review Committee the two
mitigation measures were again discussed. The applicant stated that ESRI should not be
required to install traffic signals at both intersections, but would be willing to participate and
pay it's fair share toward these improvements. The Public Works Director acknowledged
that ESRI had paid development impact fees for road and intersection improvements for
development projects on the project site since at least the early 1990's, and discussed
credits and reimbursement that may apply to the mitigation improvements. It was
recommended that the two mitigation measures fortraffic signal improvements remain and
the project move forward. Since the project cleared Environmental Review Committee on
December 6,2004,the Public Works Department conditions of approval issued on January
11,2005 also include a requirement for traffic signal installation at these two intersections.
The ERC on December 6, 2004, recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be
adopted with five (5) mitigation measures that deal with air quality, hydrology and water
quality,noise,and transportation and traffic. These mitigation measures reduce the impact
of this project to a level that is less than significant, and include the two mitigation
measures discussed above for traffic signals. The Initial Study is attached and provides
more detailed information.
STREET VACATION
The proposed Street Vacation is to vacate a portion (approximately 230 linear feet)of New
York Street located north of the intersection of State Street and New York Street. As
proposed, New York Street would end in a cul-de-sac approximately in the middle of the
SSRI campus as indicated on the project Site Plan. Staffs initial concern that the closure
of New York Street may be opposed as it could affect the post office adjacent to the north
of the campus, and that residents to the south of State Street wishing to travel north may
1.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 7
be inconvenienced has resulted only in minor opposition up to this point. All parties have
received notices of the project, and to date staff has received two phone calls opposed to
the closure and only one letter has been received that raises concerns (attached).
As the project will not include any new buildings or facilities,the Conditions of Approval are
minimal. The only construction generated by the project will be that associated with the
removal of the vacated section of New York Street and the provision of a cul-de-sac at it's
new terminus. The requirements for intersection improvements and traffic signals at
Tennessee Street & State Street and Tennessee Street & Park Avenue are discussed in
the Environmental Review section above and in the attached Initial Study. These
requirements are included as Conditions of Approval attached to the Street Vacation that
must be met prior to adoption of the City Council Resolution to vacate New York Street.
The process for a Street Vacation provides for City Council review and approval. No action
or recommendation is required from the Planning Commission, however the above
discussion has been provided as the New York Street vacation is an integral part of the
project.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The Development Agreement is proposed to lock-in the existing use of the site and future
expansion under the land use policies and regulations of General Plan Amendment No.
98, Zone Change No. 401, and Street Vacation No. 127 on 27.94 acres located on both
sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of Tennessee Street. The
proposed term of the Development Agreement is thirty (30) years. As stated in the
applicant's letter of intent(attached), ESRI seeks some degree of certainty with respect to
the City's land use regulations which would permit the continued growth of the company
under certain regulations. It is the applicant's intent to include his/her intent to develop the
property as part of the Agreement to cover existing and future development, expansion,
improvement, construction and use of the property to further the mission of ESRI in the
software business to include additional office, research and development,distribution,and
other facilities. The proposed Development Agreement includes the land use designations
proposed by the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, and the closure of New
York Street to through traffic.
The applicant has not submitted any specific plans concerning future development or
expansion. The term "Development Plan" used in the proposed Agreement is meant as
the plan and intent of ESRI to continue their operation and for future unspecified
development. Staff has a numberof concernswith the proposed Development Agreement,
most of which are issues of clarification of various items in the language as follows:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 8
1. Section 1.1.5. Commission Review and Approval(CRA)applications are not
mentioned for future development proposals. CRA applications have been
the primary processing tool used by the City to evaluate past ESRI projects,
and it is anticipated that this will also be the case for future development
projects.
2. Section 1.1.7. The term "Development Plan" is for unspecified future
development, and appears to be "all-encompassing" and does not give the
City latitude in Zoning evaluation.
3. Section 3.4. Development approvals are to remain effective for the term of
the Development Agreement(30 years). Perthe City Code, a CRA approval
is effective for two (2)years;the applicant has the ability to receive three one
(1) year extensions.
4. Section 3.5. This requires the City to approve a project within 105 days if
said project is consistent with the Development Plan. Aside from the above
comments on the term "Development Plan", the 105 days is more restrictive
than state law regarding review time for development applications. While
most processing is well within this time frame staff would not recommend
these changes.
5. Section 3.8. Development Exactions are not allowed. It is unclear what this
may include. This may affect the City's ability to obtain necessary
improvements, such as the traffic signals needed for nearby intersections,
drainage improvements, etc.
6. Section 3.10. Clarification is needed to this section as regards the City's
responsibility to provide Assessment District or other financing for ESRI
projects. We are unclear as to what these projects are.
7. Section 7.2. Requires the City to provide staff reports at least ten (10) days
prior to a Planning Commission or City Council meeting. This conflicts with
standard City practice of making staff reports available 4 to 5 days in
advance.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission closely examine the proposed
Development Agreement, seek clarification, and discuss these issues. It is staffs opinion
that more time is required to explore the ramifications of the above items.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 9
PUBLIC COMMENT
One letter (attached) was received from Dennis Bell, which states a concern with the re-
routing of traffic due to the closure of New York Street. The traffic study submitted by the
applicant indicated that in an analysis of study area intersections with current traffic both
with and without the New York Street vacation, there was no difference in intersections
operating at Level of Service (LOS) C or better. In both cases the following intersections
operate or are projected to operate at LOS D to F during peak hours:
• Tennessee Street at Park Avenue
• Tennessee Street at State Street
• New York Street at Redlands Boulevard
• Center Street at State Street
The traffic study indicates that traffic signals appear to be warranted at these intersections
for existing traffic conditions with or without the New York Street vacation. The Public
Works Department has indicated that traffic signals at Tennessee Street/ParkAvenue and
Tennessee Street/State Street are a priority, and these improvements are required in their
Conditions of Approval and are identified as mitigation measures in the environmental
review. The New York Street/Redlands Blvd. intersection was not identified by Public
Works as needing a traffic signal due to the curving alignment of Redlands Blvd. and
uncertainty as regards the gradient of New York Street and the railroad on the north side
of Redlands Blvd. The Center Street/State Street was also not identified by Public Works
as needing a traffic signal safety due the close proximity of the Redlands Blvd./Texas
Street intersection, which is signalized; the two sets of signals would be too close to
function effectively.
For year 2030 traffic conditions,the analysis of study area intersections yielded almost the
same results, with the difference being one additional intersection being added to those
listed above projected to operate at LOS D to F during peak hours as follows:
• Tennessee Street at Redlands Boulevard
All of the above intersections are projected to operate at LOS C or better in year 2030 with
traffic signal improvements and General Plan improvements.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the above analysis,staff recommends thatthe Planning Commission continue
t �
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401
STREET VACATION NO. 127
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2005
PAGE 10
the project to allow for discussion and clarification from the applicant on the issues
identified by staff as regards the Development Agreement.
If the Planning Commission is satisfied with the project, including the Development
Agreement, and wishes to move forward with a recommendation to the City Council, staff
recommends that the Commission:
• Recommend approval to the City Council of the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
• Adopt Resolution No. 1052, recommending to the City Council approval of General
Plan Amendment No. 98;
• Adopt Resolution No. 1053, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone
Change No. 401;
• Adopt Resolution No. 1054, recommending to the City Council approval of
Development Agreement No. 19.
MOTIONS
The following motions are recommended if the Planning Commission wishes to move
forward with a positive recommendation to the City Council:
Negative Declaration Motion
"I move that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council
approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment
No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, Street Vacation No. 127, and Development
Agreement No. 19 and direct staff to file and post a"Notice of Determination"
in accordance with City guidelines. It has been determined this project will
not individually or cumulatively affect wildlife resources as defined in Section
711.2 of the California Fish and Game Code."
General Plan Amendment Motion
"I move that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution
No. 1052 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment
No. 98, a General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to remove and
vacate approximately 230 feet of New York Street north of the intersection with
State Street, and a General Plan Land Use Designation Amendment changing the
designation of the property from Light Industrial and Commercial to Office".
Zone Change Motion
"I move that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution
No. 1053 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 401,
changing the designation of the property from M-1 (Light Industrial), M-2 (General
Industrial), M-P(Planned Industrial),and C-4(Highway Commercial)DistrictstoA-P
(Administrative and Professional Office) District."
Development Agreement Motion
"I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City
Council of Development Agreement No. 19."
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
General Plan Amendment No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, Street Vacation No. 127,
Development Agreement No. 19
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Redlands
Community Development Department
35 Cajon Street, Suite 20
Redlands, CA 92373
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Asher Hartel, AICP, Senior Planner
(909) 798-7555
4. Project Location:
The project site is located on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street and east
of Tennessee Street.
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
ESRI
380 New York Street
Redlands, CA 92373
6. General Plan Designation:
The General Plan designation of the project site is Light Industrial, Commercial, and
Linear Park Overlay.
7. Zoning:
The zoning designation of the project site is M-1 (Light Industrial), M-2 (General Industrial),
and M-P (Planned Industrial) Districts.
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for
its implementation. Attach additional sheet(s), if necessary.)
The project consists of the following requests by the applicant:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98 - General Plan Amendment to the Circulation
Element to remove a segment of New York Street as a Collector Street north of the
intersection with State Street and south of the intersection with Redlands Boulevard, and
a General Plan Land Use Designation Amendment from Light Industrial, Commercial, and
Linear Park Overlay to Office on 27.94 acres at the ESRI campus.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 1 of 26
i,.
ZONE CHANGE NO. 401- Zone Change from M-1, M-2, M-P, and C-4 to A-P on 27.94
acres located on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of
Tennessee Street.
STREET VACATION NO. 127 -Vacate approximately 230 linear feet of New York Street
located north of the intersection of State Street and New York Street in the M-1, M-2, and
M-P Districts.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19 - Development Agreement to lock-in the existing
use ofthe site and future expansion underthe land use policies and regulations of General
Plan Amendment No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, and Street Vacation No. 127 on 27.94
acres located on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of
Tennessee Street.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
The project site contains the existing office complex of the ESRI company. The site
exhibits a relatively flat terrain and has been previously paved and graded. No native
vegetation exists on-site. The surrounding land uses are: to the north of the project site
is the Redlands post office, Jennie Davis Park, the Mission Zanja Creek, and mixed
commercial and industrial uses along Redlands Blvd. and Park Avenue; to the east is
residential and commercial development on State Street and Texas Street; to the south is
existing residential uses along State Street;to the west are commercial and industrial uses
along Tennessee Street. All utilities are on-site and all public infrastructure is existing
along the site's street frontages.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval,
or participation agreement): None.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
_ Aesthetics Agriculture Resources X Air Quality
Biological Resources _ Cultural Resources — Geology 1 Soils
Hazards& Hazardous Materials X Hydrology 1 water Quality _ Land Use 1 Planning
Mineral Resources X Noise _ Population 1 Housing
Public Services _ Recreation X Transportation 1 Traffic
Utilities 1 Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 2 of 26
✓ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made byor agreed to bythe project proponent.A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described
on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
Asher Hartel, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Redlands
October 28, 2004
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A"No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project fails outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g.
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-
site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well
as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur,then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. if there are one or
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 3 of 26
more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated"applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from"Potentially Significant
Impact"to a"Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated,"describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated
or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference
to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used
or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are
relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 4 of 26
Fess Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
duality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Aesthetics
La) The City's General Plan MEAIEIR (MEA Section 11.0) does not identify the project site and
surrounding area as part of a scenic vista or view corridor. None of the above mentioned
streets are an adopted scenic vista or highway by local, state, or the federal government. The
surrounding streets do not have any features which would be disturbed or disrupted by the
proposed project and hence, no mitigation is required.
Lb) The site of the proposed project will not damage scenic resources, including trees, rock
outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway since the site does not
contain any of the above. No Mitigation Measures are needed.
I.c) The project as proposed will not erode the aesthetics of the site or the area and will not
degrade the existing visual character or affect the quality of the site and its surroundings. No
mitigation measures are needed.
l.d) The project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area. No new buildings or parking lots are proposed with
this project, other than a conceptual indication of a future new office building on the proposed
vacated portion of New York Street. Project specific evaluation will be considered at the time
of a proposed project for a new building. No mitigation is required.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 5 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated impact Impact
It. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (9997) prepared by the California
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland, Would
the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? _ ✓
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract. _ _ ✓
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? _ _ _- ✓
Agricultural Resources
ILa) Adoption of the proposed project will not convert lands designated as either Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use
or operations as per Figure 5.2 of the Master Environmental Assessment for the General
Plan (MEAIEIR), which classifies the property as "D" Urban. Figure 5.2 is based on the
data provided by the State of California, Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program. Since there is no interaction with agriculture, no mitigation
measures are necessary.
11.b) According to the City's Agricultural Preserve Map the property is not located in a City
Agricultural Preserve or under Williamson Act Contract from the State of California,
Department of Conservation, therefore there is no impact on land zoned for agricultural
use or land under a Williamson Act contract. No Mitigation Measures are needed.
Il.c) The proposed project will not result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use.
No Mitigation Measures needed.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 409, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM uX
Page 6 of 26
rr'
F'.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
111. AIR QUALITY. Where available,the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality management or
air pollution control district may be relied upon to make
the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Air Quality
Il.a The proposed project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Regional Air
Quality Management Plan as written by the South Coast Air Quality Management District,
since it does not exceed any of their established thresholds. Since these strategies will
be evaluated and implemented through the review of subsequent proposals and
development on the site, no mitigation is required at this time.
Ill.b-d} In order to prevent the project from violating any air quality standard, generating significant
amounts of dust that would have a negative impact on sensitive receptors, or cumulatively
increasing the amount of any pollutant during removal and restoration of the vacated
portion of New York Street, Mitigation Measure No. 1 shall require that during the period
of construction the applicant shall perform on-site daily watering of the site during all
construction activities in order to mitigate the potential impacts to air quality from the
generation of dust.
I lLe) Adoption of the proposed project will not result in the creation of objectionable odors that
would affect a substantial number of people.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 7 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications,on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service? _ — ✓
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies,regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service? _ — ✓
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal,etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological
interruption, or other means? _ _ ✓
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? _ __ — ✓
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy
or ordinance? — — ✓
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan,or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Biological Resources
IV.a-f) The project site is not identified on the Biotic Resources Map, Figure 7.1 of the MEA, as
an area containing any sensitive biological resources. The project site is developed and
within an urban area, and does not have any potential to impact sensitive biological
resources or their habitat. The site is adjacent to the Mission Zanja Channel on the north,
which is off-site and runs along the northerly property line. The channel is identified on
the Biotic Resources Map, Figure 7.1 of the MEA, for potential riparian restoration. The
project will not conflict with this designation. Any work that is done as a result of this
project will not affect the channel, as the removal of the vacated portion of New York
Street is at least 500 to the south. No mitigation is required.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 8 of 26
�^T �
Less Than
Significant
Issues: Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? /
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to§ 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Cultural Resources
V.a-d) The project is located within an urban area. Development of the site will not disturb
paleontological, archaeological, or historic resources. The project site is not identified on
the Archaeological Resource Sensitivity Map, Figure 10.1 of the MENEIR, as being within
an area of concern. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? _ _ ,/
iv) Landslides?
b) Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? _ ✓
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 9 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? __. �_ _ ✓
d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-
6 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
Geology and Soils
VI.a) The proposed project falls outside any Earthquake Fault Zone, as depicted in Figure 4.6
of the MEAIEIR, and will not expose people to potential impacts involving fault rupture,
seismic ground shaking,or ground failure. The subject site is not identified as being within
an area that is susceptible to liquefaction, as depicted in Figure 4.9 of the MEA/EIR. No
mitigation is required.
VI.b) Adoption of the proposed project will not result in the exposure of people to erosion or the
loss of topsoil from excavation, grading or fill. The subject site is not on a slope and will
not require an extensive or significant amount of soil movement and will maintain the same
general gradient after development. The site for the proposed vacation of New York
Street will be graded and restored to its natural condition. No mitigation is required.
VI.c) No significant adverse impacts related to ground instability will occur as a result of on-or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse due to project or
existing site conditions. No mitigation is required.
VIA) The project site is not within an area that is underlain by soils that have an expansion
potential, as depicted in Figure 4.5 of the MEA/EIR. Any potential soil impacts are
anticipated to be non-significant and will not result in the exposure of people to expansive
soils. No mitigation is required.
VI.e) The project does not include any buildings or facilities requiring waste disposal systems,
therefore these types of waste water disposal systems will not be used. No mitigation is
required.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 10 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Vll. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would
the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Vll.a,b) Hazardous materials associated with the proposed project would be limited to the
removal and disposal of New York Street paving materials on the vacated portion of
the road. The disposal of these materials will be handled through the standard
requirements of the City Public Works Department. No mitigation is required.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "dn
Page 11 of 26
Vll.c) The project site is within a 114 mile of an existing school site on the south side of State
Street. The proposed project would not involve the handling or emission of hazardous
materials. No mitigation is required.
VITA) The project site is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
sites and will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No
mitigation is required.
Vll.e) The closest public airport facilities include the San Bernardino International Airport,
approximately 5 miles northwest of the project site, and the Redlands Municipal Airport,
which is located approximately 5 miles northeast of the project site. The project site is not
within the direct approach or departure paths of either airport. Accordingly, no air traffic
safety hazards would affect this project. No mitigation is required
Vll.f) The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip and will not result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No mitigation is required.
VI I.g) Adoption of the proposed project will not result in impairing implementation of or physically
interfering with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The
City of Redlands' Emergency Disaster Plan identifies a number of hazardous situations
that City personnel would respond to and outlines procedures to follow during such events.
Emergency response procedures are crafted upon the basic Standardized Emergency
Management System (SEMS), developed by the Governor's Office of Emergency
Services. The proposed project would have no affect on the City's ability to implement the
Emergency Disaster Plan. Adequate access to the project site would be maintained with
the addition of an access driveway on State Street near the existing intersection with New
York Street. No mitigation is required.
Vll.h) The project site is an infill development located in an urban area. As shown on Figure
15.1 in the MEA, the project site is a considerable distance from any wildland fire hazard
areas. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would
the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements? — ✓ ___
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 12 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such thatthere
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river,orsubstantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map? _ _ ✓
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as
a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Hydrology and Water Quality
VI II.a) The proposed project includes the vacation and removal of approximately 230 fleet of New
York Street and it will not specifically violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements. However, the removal of this portion of New York Street will
disturb approximately 14,000 square feet of ground, and the project would be required to
adhere to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements for a permit
under the Federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Thus, in
order to ensure that the project would not cause any groundwater quality impacts during
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 13 of 26
grading and construction activities, Mitigation Measure No. 2 shall require the applicant
to comply with all requirements of the NPDES permit, both temporary and permanent,
issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Adherence to this
mitigation measure will avoid or reduce all associated water quality impacts below a level
of significance.
VI II.b) The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level. No mitigation measures are needed.
VII I.c,d) The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, nor alter the course of a stream or river in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on or off-site. No mitigation is needed.
Vlll.e) Adoption of the proposed project will result in a less than significant change in the
absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff. The
proposed project will actually result in a decrease in impervious surface with the removal
of a section of New York Street. Thus, surface runoff is anticipated to be a less than
significant increase in volume. The project will not alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or cause any adverse impacts. The site slopes to the north toward the Mission
Zanja Creek which is adjacent to the subject property. The Zanja is controlled by the San
Bernardino County Flood Control District and will require a permit to convey runoff into the
Zanja. This process would addresses any drainage issues into the Zanja and is not
deemed an adverse impact. No mitigation is required.
VIIU) No potential water quality impacts other than those already described in this section are
forecast. No mitigation is required.
VII I.g) The proposed project does not involve any housing and would therefore not generate any
associated flood hazard impacts. No mitigation is required.
VI ll.h) According to Figure 6.4 of the MEAIEIR and the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Map,the site is within the 100-year flood hazard area (Zone AO)to a depth of two
feet from overflow of the Mission Zanja Creek System that is located to the north. The
project will not result in the exposure of people or property to water related hazards. As
part of the standard requirements for development within this type of area in the City, the
project will be required to adhere to all FEMA and Redlands Municipal Code (Flood
Damage Prevention) requirements. No mitigation is required.
VIIIJ) This project site does not lie within the potential inundation area of any dam and is not
adjacent to or downstream of any levee. Proposed utility facilities would be placed
underground, and are generally not subject to flood-related impacts. No mitigation is
required.
VIILj) Adoption of the proposed project will not expose people to seiche hazards because the
City is not within an area that is affected by this type of hazard, as stated in Section 4.2.3
of the MEA/EIR. No mitigation is required.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 14 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan? _ _ V
Land Use and Planning
IX.a) The project site is located within an urban area,which contains a mix of residential, office,
commercial and industrial uses. The project will not physically disrupt or divide any
established portions of the Redlands Community. No mitigation is required.
1X.b) The proposed project seeks to amend the City General Plan and Zoning ordinance,which
designate the site for uses that are not necessarily consistent with the existing use as
offices for ESRI. Existing designations and zoning are for industrial and commercial uses
and a linear park along the Mission Zanja Creek, and do not reflect the actual use of the
site as the corporate offices of ESRI. The proposed General Plan Land Use Designation
Amendment and Zone Change to Office and Administrative-Professional Districts would
better reflect the current use of the site, and would resolve the current conflict with the
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The General Plan Amendment to the Circulation
Element proposes to remove a segment of New York Street as a Collector Street and
downgrade the road to a Local Street between State Street and Redlands Blvd. The
proposed street vacation would vacate and remove approximately 230 feet of New York
Street that bisects the ESRI campus complex north of the intersection with State Street,
and is proposed to remove through traffic and create a more pedestrian oriented facility.
The project does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, regulation orzoning
ordinance adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No
mitigation is required.
IX.c) As described in the earlier responses to the questions in Section IV concerning biological
resources, the project site contains no sensitive or protected plants or animals or any
important habitat. There are no conservation plans governing the use of this site. No
mitigation is required.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM °J°
Page 15 of 26
z
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state? _ _ __ ✓
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? _
Mineral Resources
X.a,b) According to the General Plan MEA(Section 8.0 Mineral Resources),there are no known
or potential mineral resources of value locally, or to the region or state, found on or near
the project site. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XI. NOISE. Would the project:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies? _ ✓ '�
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? �_ _ ✓
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? ✓
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? — ✓
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels? _ _ ✓
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels? __ _ _ ✓
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 16 of 26
f_
Noise
XI.a) The site is located within an urbanized area which has a park and residential units with an
ambient noise level of around 60 CNEL, as illustrated in Figure 14.2 of the MEAIEIR. This
is consistent with 65 CNEL level that is considered to be the maximum clearly compatible
noise exposure for institutional uses,as defined in Table 9.1 in the Redlands General Plan
Noise Element. The proposed project would generate short-term noise in association with
the vacation and removal of New York Street with construction-related vehicle/equipment
operation. Noise levels that would be generated on and off-site would depend on the type
and number of equipment in use, the time of day, and the amount of time that machinery
and equipment are operated. The sensitive noise receptors within the vicinity would be
primarily the residents of the apartments south of the site. In order to mitigate potential
short-term impacts to ambient noise during the construction period, Mitigation Measure
No. 3 shall limit the time of construction activities to the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m
during the week with no construction activities permitted during weekends and Federal
Holidays. This will reduce this potential impact to a level of non-significance.
XI.b) The proposed project will not expose people to or cause a generation of excessive ground
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels since there will be no equipment used that
would cause such vibrations. No mitigation is required.
XI.c-d) The proposed project would not have the potential to result in a permanent increase in
periodic or ambient noise levels in the project vicinity that would have a negative impact
on the adjacent properties. No mitigation is required.
XI.e) As discussed earlier in the responses to item Vll(e), the project site is not located within
the area under the jurisdiction of Redlands Airport Land Use Plan, is not within two miles
of any public airport or public use airport including Redlands Airport, and will not expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from aircraft. No
mitigation is required.
XI.f) As discussed earlier in the responses to item VII(f),the project site is not in close proximity
to a private airstrip, no associated impacts are anticipated. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated impact Impact
Xll. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of road or other infrastructure)?
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 17 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? — ✓
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ✓
Population and Housing
Xll.a-c) The project is located within an urban area of the City, and would not be considered
growth inducing from either a direct or indirect basis as no residential housing or
expansion of the offices currently on the site is part of this project. The project may
facilitate future development on the site that would be consistent with the existing office
complex, but not to a significant degree as the properly is almost fully developed at this
time. Official regional or focal population projections and employment projections will
not be exceeded, and the project will not displace existing housing. No mitigation is
required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? _._.
ii) Police protection? �. _ ✓
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks? —
v) Other public facilities? —
Public Services
Xlll.a) As no new construction of buildings or facilities are proposed, adoption of the proposed
project is not expected to significantly impact or result in a need for new or altered public
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "T
Page 18 of 26
services provided by the City of Redlands, the Redlands Unified School District, or other
governmental agencies. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Recreation
XIV.a,b) Based upon the absence of a residential component of the project, implementation will
neither adversely affect existing or planned recreational facilities nor create a
significant new demand for additional recreational facilities. Any potential direct or
indirect impacts would be offset through the payment of development impact fees
assessed at the time of permit issuance. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XV. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads,or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in airtraffic patterns,including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 19 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporates! Impact Impact
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? _ ✓
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? _ ✓
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? _ __ — ✓
Transportation/Traffic
XV.a) Adoption of the proposed project will not result in an increase in vehicle trips, as no
buildings are proposed on the project site. The project will, with the closure and vacation
of New York Street, result in the re-routing of traffic on existing roads around the project
site as opposed to going through the site on New York Street. A traffic impact analysis
was prepared by Kunzman and Associates for the project. Traffic impacts were analyzed
for existing traffic conditions and for year 2030 traffic conditions both with and without the
project, and mitigation measures are proposed in the traffic study area for year 2030 traffic
conditions. The traffic study included existing roads in the area consisting of Tennessee
Street, New York Street, Center Street, Redlands Boulevard, Park Avenue, State Street,
and Pine Avenue. In an analysis of study area intersections with current traffic both with
and without the New York Street vacation, there was no difference in intersections
operating at Level of Service (LOS) C or better. In both cases the following intersections
operate or are projected to operate at LOS D to F during peak hours:
• Tennessee Street at Park Avenue
• Tennessee Street at State Street
• New York Street at Redlands Boulevard
• Center Street at State Street
The traffic study indicates that traffic signals appear to be warranted at these intersections
for existing traffic conditions with or without the New York Street vacation.
For year 2030 traffic conditions, the analysis of study area intersections yielded almost
the same results, with the difference being one additional intersection being added to
those listed above projected to operate at LOS D to F during peak hours as follows::
• Tennessee Street at Redlands Boulevard
All of the above intersections are projected to operate at LOS C or better in year 2030 with
traffic signal improvements and General Plan improvements.
Mitigation measures are proposed in the traffic study as follows:
1. Reclassify New York Street between Redlands Boulevard and Pine Avenue from a
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 20 of 26
Collector to a local Street.
2. New York Street north of Redlands Boulevard and the railroad tracks should be
deleted and elbowed into a realigned Stuart Avenue, and the Stuart Avenue
connection with Redlands Boulevard should be deleted because of the grade
differentials on Redlands Boulevard and the railroad tracks and the low traffic volumes
on these streets.
3. Traffic studies shall be required for development projects throughout the study area,
and City service level standards should be maintained by requiring the necessary
improvements prior to occupancy of projects.
4. An area wide fee program should be established to implement General Plan road
improvements.
The Public Works Department review of the traffic study is contained in their memo dated
May 25, 2005. Their recommendations include items that cannot be tied to the project,
but need to be considered in the planning and development of off-site properties in the
area of the project site as follows:
1. New York Street north of Redlands Boulevard and the railroad track should be rerouted
easterly to connect to Stuart Avenue. Stuart Avenue north of the track should be
rerouted westerly to connect with New York Street. The two existing at-grade railroad
crossings at New York Street and Stuart Avenue need to be eliminated.
2. Upon the vacation of New York Street and the re--routing of New York Street north of
the railroad track, New York Street will be allowed to have only "right turn in and out"
traffic movements at the Redlands Boulevard intersection.
3. Require that the Circulation Element of the General Plan be amended to indicate New
York Street as a Local Street rather than it's current designation as a Collector Street
from Colton Avenue to it's terminus at Pine Avenue.
The mitigation measures that follow below reflect the recommendations from the Public
works Department where a nexus can be established with the proposed project.
Mitigation Measure No. 4 shall require that the applicant install traffic signal system at
the intersection of Tennessee Street and State Street. The applicant will receive fee credit
for a portion of the installation cost out of the Traffic Signal Development Impact Fee
funds.
Mitigation Measure No. 5 shall require that the applicant install traffic signal system at
the intersection of Tennessee Street and Park Avenue.
Implementation of the above mitigation measures will be required priorto the vacation and
removal of New York Street that is part of the project.
Initial Study for GPA Na 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 927, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 21 of 26
P
[e E
XV.b) Since the number of peak hour trips from this project would be less than 250, this project
is not subject to the traffic analysis criteria set forth in the San Bernardino County
Congestion Management Program (CMP). There are no elements of the CMP network
within the project vicinity that would be adversely impacted if the above mitigation
measures are implemented. This project would not,therefore, result in exceedance of the
level of service standards of any identified roadway segments in the CMP. No mitigation
is required.
XV.c) No air traffic demand would be created or affected by this project. The subject site is not
within any airport land use planning area and is not subject to building height restrictions
due to aircraft flight patterns. No mitigation is required.
XV.d) The design of the project will not create a traffic safety hazard. The separation of
driveways providing access to the project site will be subject to the review and approval
of the Public Works Director.
XV.e) Emergency access to adjoining properties is currently available without crossing through
the project site and project construction and operation would not change this condition.
No mitigation is required.
XV.f) The project site currently includes more parking spaces than are required in accordance
with the City's parking standards. On-site parking capacity and demand will be reviewed
as necessary in conjunction with any future development proposals. No mitigation is
required.
XV.g) Adoption of the proposed project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans,or programs
supporting alternative transportation. No mitigation is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? _ _ _ ✓
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM ",3"
Page 22 of 26
aiynnivani
Potentia, With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources,or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs? ✓
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Utilities and Service Systems
XVI.a) The project does not propose any facilities requiring wastewater treatment. No
mitigation is required.
XVI.b) The project will not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment
facilities and/or the expansion of existing facilities. No mitigation is required.
XVI.c) The project will not require improvements to the City's storm water drainage system.
No mitigation is needed.
XVIA) The project will not require water service. No mitigation is required.
XVI.e) Wastewater treatment is not required for the project. No mitigation is required.
XVI.f-g) The project will be required to comply with applicable regulations related to the
disposal and/or recycling of removed roadway materials on the vacated portion of New
York Avenue. No mitigation measures is required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XVII. (MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 23 of 26
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory? r — ✓
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? _ �. ✓
Mandatory Findings of Sicinificance
XVI I.a) Adoption of the proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment.
XVI l.b) The project will not significantly impact the environment by itself and with the mitigation
measures identified within this document will not be cumulatively significant.
XVII.c) Adoption of the proposed project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly.
REFERENCES
• Redlands General Pian
• Master Environmental Assessment/Final Environmental Impact Reportfor Redlands General
Plan
• California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
• Traffic Analysis prepared by Kunzman and Associates, dated February 6, 2004
• Redlands Public Works Department Memorandum, dated May 25, 2004
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 24 of 26
MITIGATION MEASURES AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
Air Quality:
1. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section 111(b-d) of the Environmental Checklist,
during the period of construction the applicant shall perform on-site daily watering of the site
during all construction activities in order to mitigate the potential impacts to air quality from the
generation of dust.
To be monitored by the Community Development Department, Planning Division and the
Building and Safety Division, during construction of the project.
Hydrology and Water Quality:
2. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section VIII(a) of the Environmental Checklist,
the applicant shall comply with all requirements of the NPDES permit, both temporary and
permanent, issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board.
To be monitored by the Public Works Department and satisfied during construction of the
project.
Noise:
3. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section XI(a) of the Environmental Checklist,
the time of construction activities shall be limited to the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m
during the week with no construction activities permitted during weekends and Federal
Holidays.
To be monitored by the Community Development Department, Building&Safety Division and
Planning Division, and satisfied during construction of the project.
Transportation/Traffic:
4. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section XV(a) of the Environmental Checklist,
the applicant shall install traffic signal system at the intersection of Tennessee Street and
State Street. The applicant will be reimbursed for a portion of the installation cost out of the
Development Impact Fee funds.
To be monitored bythe Public Works Department and the Planning Division of the Community
Development Department and satisfied prior to adoption of the City Council Resolution to
vacate New York Street.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 25 of 26
4
5. To mitigate the potential impacts identified in Section XV(a) of the Environmental Checklist,
the applicant shall install traffic signal system at the intersection of Tennessee Street and
Park Avenue.
To be monitored by the Public Works Department and the Planning Division of the Community
Development Department and satisfied prior to adoption of the City Council Resolution to
vacate New York Street.
Initial Study for GPA No. 98, ZC No. 401, SV No. 127, DA No. 19 FORM "J"
Page 26 of 26
i i 1
Hit
L L AI11111111, .22zzz2z W
� s
G)o
o Ob
O V
®A t O a
r ] L
on s Y
777777,
LL
I
U. f
s'
k
r G
I �
E i 4
RNA M Z
r4 >
k
h �
I 3 N
a
1 :Y ` F
CL
d 99
I 9 G
LU
qj UA
tu
soul
cco
116
wit
E) IS
(DA
MNEEMN=ft
ma
AD
dD
oVM
0 now
41
CM'CU 4W-04d N"
E315 O
LM WD vDjq-j
LS3
1 fill
irriffor fii&y i8 ll
i I bi .11fi
fit its 1,16API
TIARA@
54 'D
Jill, CL
IL ANNO
CO)
>AA
lilt
4 MUM
Now
111 Hit cc