Mayor and City Council
October 21, 2026

RECORDING REQUESTED BY:

County of San Bernardino
Department of Public Works
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

County of San Bernardino
Department of Public Works
825 E. Third Street, Room 117
San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE

COVENANT AND AGREEMENT REGARDING WATER QUALITY

MANAGEMENT PLAN AND STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT

PRACTICES TRANSFER, ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE

THIS PAGE ADDED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR RECORDING INFORMATION Packet Page. 1249

Covenant and Agreement Regarding Water Quality Management Plan and Stormwater Best Management Practices
Transfer, Access and Maintenance
OWNER NAME: Little League, LLC
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Tract No. 20150, SanBernardino,
CA
APN: 0348-111-05,24,25 & 26 and 0348-121-18,20,21 & 25
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in
,California, this day of
, by and between
, hereinafter
referred to as Owner, and the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a political subdivision of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as “the County”; WHEREAS, the Owner owns real property (“Property”) in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, more specifically described in Exhibit “A” and depicted in Exhibit “B”, each of which exhibits is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, at the time of initial approval of development project known as within the Property described herein,
the County required the project to employ Best Management Practices, hereinafter referred to as “BMPs,” to minimize pollutants in urban runoff; and
WHEREAS, the Owner has chosen to install and/or implement BMPs as described in the Water Quality Management Plan, dated ______________________, on file with the County and incorporated herein by this reference, hereinafter referred to as “WQMP”, to minimize pollutants in urban runoff and to minimize other adverse impacts of urban runoff; and WHEREAS, said WQMP has been certified by the Owner and reviewed and approved by the County; and
WHEREAS, the Owner is aware that periodic and continuous maintenance, including, but not necessarily limited to, filter material replacement and sediment removal, is required to assure peak performance of all BMPs in the WQMP and that, furthermore, such maintenance activity will require compliance with all Local, State, or Federal laws and regulations, including those pertaining to confined space and waste disposal methods, in effect at the time such maintenance occurs.

Packet Page. 1250

NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually stipulated and agreed as follows:

1. Owner shall comply with the WQMP

2. All maintenance or replacement of BMPs proposed as part of the WQMP are the sole responsibility of the Owner in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.

3. Owner hereby provides the County’s designee complete access, of any duration, to the BMPs and their immediate vicinity at any time, upon reasonable notice, or in the event of emergency, as determined by the County Director of Public Works, no advance notice, for the purpose of inspection, sampling, testing of the BMPs, and in case of emergency, to undertake all necessary repairs or other preventative measures at owner’s expense as provided in paragraph 5 below. The County shall make every effort at all times to minimize or avoid interference with Owner’s use of the Property. Denial of access to any premises or facility that contains WQMP features is a breach of this Agreement and may also be a violation of the County’s Pollutant Discharge Elimination System regulations, which on the effective date of this Agreement are found in County Code Sections 35.0101 et seq. If there is reasonable cause to believe that an illicit discharge or breach of this Agreement is occurring on the premises then the authorized enforcement agency may seek issuance of a search warrant from any court of competent jurisdiction in addition to other enforcement actions. Owner recognizes that the County may perform routine and regular inspections, as well as emergency inspections, of the BMPs. Owner or Owner’s successors or assigns shall pay County for all costs incurred by County in the inspection, sampling, testing of the BMPs within thirty (30) calendar days of County invoice.

4. Owner shall use its best efforts diligently to maintain all BMPs in a manner assuring peak performance at all times. All reasonable precautions shall be exercised by Owner and Owner’s representative or contractor in the removal and extraction of any material(s) from the BMPs and the ultimate disposal of the material(s) in a manner consistent with all relevant laws and regulations in effect at the time. As may be requested from time to time by the County, the Owner shall provide the County with documentation identifying the material(s) removed, the quantity, and disposal destination), testing construction or reconstruction.

5. In the event Owner, or its successors or assigns, fails to accomplish the necessary maintenance contemplated by this Agreement, within five (5) business days of being given written notice by the County , the County is hereby authorized to cause any maintenance necessary to be done and charge the entire cost and expense against the Property and/or to the Owner or Owner’s successors or assigns, including administrative costs, attorneys fees and interest thereon at the maximum rate authorized by the County Code from the date of the notice of expense until paid in full. Owner or Owner’s successors or assigns shall pay County within thirty (30) calendar days of County invoice.

6. The County may require the owner to post security in form and for a time period satisfactory to the County to guarantee the performance of the obligations stated herein.

Should the Owner fail to perform the obligations under the Agreement, the County may, in the case of a cash bond, act for the Owner using the proceeds from it, or in the case of a surety bond, require the surety(ies) to perform the obligations of this Agreement.

Packet Page. 1251

7. The County agrees, from time to time, within ten (10) business days after request of Owner, to execute and deliver to Owner, or Owner's designee, an estoppel certificate requested by Owner, stating that this Agreement is in full force and effect, and that Owner is not in default hereunder with regard to any maintenance or payment obligations (or specifying in detail the nature of Owner's default). Owner shall pay all costs and expenses incurred by the County in its investigation of whether to issue an estoppel certificate within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of a County invoice and prior to the County’s issuance of such certificate. Where the County cannot issue an estoppel certificate, Owner shall pay the County within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of a County invoice.

8. Owner shall not change any BMPs identified in the WQMP without an amendment to this Agreement approved by authorized representatives of both the County and the Owner.

9. County and Owner shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, court orders and government agency orders now or hereinafter in effect in carrying out the terms of this Agreement. If a provision of this Agreement is terminated or held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall remain in full effect.

10. In addition to any remedy available to County under this Agreement, if Owner violates any term of this Agreement and does not cure the violation within the time already provided in this Agreement, or, if not provided, within thirty (30) calendar days, or within such time authorized by the County if said cure reasonably requires more than the subject time, the County may bring an action at law or in equity in a court of competent jurisdiction to enforce compliance by the Owner with the terms of this Agreement. In such action, the County may recover any damages to which the County may be entitled for the violation, enjoin the violation by temporary or permanent injunction without the necessity of proving actual damages or the inadequacy of otherwise available legal remedies, or obtain other equitable relief, including, but not limited to, the restoration of the Property and/or the BMPs identified in the WQMP to the condition in which it/they existed prior to any such violation or injury.

11. This Agreement shall be recorded in the Office of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, at the expense of the Owner and shall constitute notice to all successors and assigns of the title to said Property of the obligation herein set forth, and also a lien in such amount as will fully reimburse the County, including interest as herein above set forth, subject to foreclosure in event of default in payment.

12. In event of legal action occasioned by any default or action of the Owner, or its successors or assigns, then the Owner and its successors or assigns agree(s) to hold the County harmless and pay all costs incurred by the County in enforcing the terms of this Agreement, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and that the same shall become a part of the lien against said Property.

13. It is the intent of the parties hereto that burdens and benefits herein undertaken shall constitute covenants that run with said Property and constitute a lien there against.

14. The obligations herein undertaken shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assigns of the parties hereto. The term “Owner” shall include not only the present Owner, but also its heirs, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns.

Owner shall notify any successor to title of all or part of the Property about the existence of Packet Page. 1252

this Agreement. Owner shall provide such notice prior to such successor obtaining an interest in all or part of the Property. Owner shall provide a copy of such notice to the County at the same time such notice is provided to the successor.

15. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.

16. Any notice to a party required or called for in this Agreement shall be served in person, or by deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid, to the address set forth below.

Notice(s) shall be deemed effective upon receipt, or seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, whichever is earlier. A party may change a notice address only by providing written notice thereof to the other party.

17. Owner agrees to indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably approved by the County) and hold harmless the County and its authorized officers, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all claims, actions, losses, damages, and/or liability arising out of this Agreement from any cause whatsoever, including the acts, errors or omissions of any person and for any costs or expenses incurred by the County on account of any claim except where such indemnification is prohibited by law. This indemnification provision shall apply regardless of the existence or degree of fault of indemnitees. The Owner’s indemnification obligation applies to the County’s “active” as well as “passive” negligence but does not apply to the County’s “sole negligence” or “willful misconduct” within the meaning of Civil Code Section 2782, or to any claims, actions, losses, damages, and/or liabilities, to the extent caused by the acts or omissions of any third party contractors undertaking any work (other than field inspections) or other maintenance on the Property on behalf of the County under this Agreement..
[REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Packet Page. 1253

IF TO COUNTY : IF TO OWNER:

Director of Public Works
825 E. Third Street, Room 117
San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have affixed their signatures as of the date first written above.

OWNER:

Signature: ________________________
Name: ___________________________
Title: ___________________________
Date: __________________________
OWNER:

Signature: ________________________
Name: ___________________________
Title: ___________________________
Date: ___________________________
FOR: Maintenance Agreement, dated
_________________________, for the
project known as
__________________________________
__________________________________
(APN)_____________________________,
As described in the WQMP dated
_________________________________.

NOTARIES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
A notary acknowledgement is required for recordation.

ACCEPTED BY:

KEVIN BLAKESLEE, P.E., Director of Public Works
Date: ___________________________________
Attachment: Notary Acknowledgement
Packet Page. 1254

ATTACHMENT 1
Notary Acknowledgement)
Packet Page. 1255

EXHIBIT A
(Legal Description)
SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT Packet Page. 1256
Order No. 140-1908121-32

Exhibit “A”
Parcel A:

A portion of Government Lot 3, Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to Official Plat of said Land, approved by the Surveyor General on June 24, 1898, and being particularly described as follows:

Beginning at the East 1/4 corner of said Section 35; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Government Lot 3, Section 35, to a point which is the mid-point of the North line of said Lot 3; thence Southerly in a straight line to the mid-point of the Southerly line of said Government Lot 3; thence Easterly along the South line of said Government Lot 3 to the Southeast corner thereof; thence North along the Easterly line of said Government Lot 3 to the Point of Beginning.

Parcel B:

A portion of Government Lot 4, Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to Official Plat of said land, approved by the Surveyor General on June 24, 1898, and being more particularly described as follows:

Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Government Lot 4; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Government Lot 4 of said Section 35 to a point which is the mid-point of the North line of said Lot 4; thence Southerly in a straight line to the mid-point of the Southerly line of said Government Lot 4 to the Southeast corner thereof; thence North along the Easterly line of said Government Lot 4 to the Point of Beginning.

Parcel C:

All of Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the Official Plat of said land approved by the Surveyor General on June 24, 1898.

Parcel D:

The North 14 acres of that portion of the Southwest ¼ of Section 36, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the Official P1st thereof, described as follows:

Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Southwesterly 1/4, said corner being also the Southeast corner of Lot 1 of said Section; thence West along the South line of said Lot 1, 835 feet to an intersection of said South line with that certain line commonly known as the Perrin Line, as shown on Government Plat thereof approved June 24, 1898; thence North 64° West along said Perrin Line 1685 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said Perrin Line, North 64° West 400 feet, more or less, to the Southeast corner of the land conveyed by Rance M. Mecham, to Lena Lerner by Deed recorded December 20, 1920 in Book 704, of Deeds;

the Southwest ¼ of said Section 36, or its Westerly extension: thence East along the said Northerly line of the Southwest ¼ of said Section 36, and its extension, 660.5 feet; thence South 1282 feet; thence North 64° West 160 feet; thence South 23° 30’ West 490 feet; thence South 10° East 220 feet to the True Point of Beginning. The South line of said North 14 acres being parallel with the North line thereof.

Except therefrom that portion lying within the Parcel described as Parcel No. 1 in the Deed to the City of San Bernardino by Deed recorded April 3, 1974 in Book 8401, Page 1043, Official Records.

Parcel E:

That portion of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 36, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the Official Plat thereof, described as follows:

Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Southwest one-quarter, said corner being also the Southeast corner of Lot 1 of said Section; Thence West along the South line of said Lot 1,835 feet to an intersection of said South line with that certain line commonly known as the Perrin Line, as shown on Government Plat thereof approved June 24, 1898; Thence North 64° West along said Perrin Line 1685 feet to the True Point of Beginning; Packet Page. 1257
Order No. 140-1908121-32

Thence continuing along said Perrin Line, North 64° West 400 feet, more or less to the Southeast corner of the land conveyed by Rance M. Mecham, to Lena Lerner by Deed recorded December 20, 1920 in Book 704 of Deeds, Page 57; Thence North along the East line of the land so conveyed, 1702.8 feet, more or less, to an intersection with the North line of the Southwest one-quarter of said Section 36, or its Westerly extension, thence East along the said Northerly line of the Southwest onequarter of said Section 36 and its extension, 660.5 feet; Thence South 1282 feet;
Thence North 64° West 160 feet;
Thence South 23° 30’ West 490 feet;
Thence South 10° East 220 feet to the True Point of Beginning.

Except therefrom the North 14 acres, the South line of said North 14 acres being parallel with the North line thereof.

Also except therefrom that portion lying within the Parcel described as Parcel No. 1 in the Deed to the City of San Bernardino by Deed recorded April 3, 1974 in Book 8401 Page 1043 Official Records.

Parcel F:

Being a portion of that Parcel of Land as described in the Grant Deed to First American Title Insurance Company, a California Corporation by Official Record No. 87-179437, as recorded May 28, 1987, in the Office of the San Bernardino County Recorder; more particularly described as follows:

Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Parcel;
Thence North 64° West along the North line of Rancho Muscupiabe, according to the United States Government Map thereof, approved June 24, 1898, said line also commonly referred to as the “Perrin Line”, a distance of 800 feet, more or less, to the Southeast corner of that property Deeded to Dwight L. Bryant and Lillil Fay Bryant per Book 260, Page 172 of Official Records of said County on August 1, 1927;
Thence continuing the following three courses along the Easterly line of the above mentioned Bryant Property;

1. North 10° West, a distance of 220 feet;

2. North 23° 30’ East, a distance of 490 feet.

3. South 64° East, a distance of 160 feet.

Thence continuing South 64° East an additional 330.8 feet, more or less to a point which is 79.2 feet West and 825.0 feet North of the Point of Beginning;
Thence East a distance of 79.2 feet to the Easterly line of said First American Title Insurance Company Parcel; Thence South along the Easterly line of said Parcel, a distance of 825.0 feet to the Point of Beginning.

Parcel G:

That portion of the Southwest one-quarter of Section 36, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to the U. S. Government Township Plat thereof, described as follows:

Commencing at the intersection of the West line of said Section 36 with the North line of the Rancho Muscupiabe as per Plat thereof recorded in Book 7 of Maps, Page 23, records of the County Recorder of said County; thence North 01° 24’ 24” West along said West line of Section 36, a distance of 1,063.47 feet; thence South 61° 35’ 04” East, a distance of 220.40 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing South 61° 35’ 04’ East, a distance of 222.00 feet; thence North 28° 24’ 56” East, a distance of 264.00 feet; thence North 61° 35’ 04” West, a distance of 222.00 feet; thence South 28° 24’ 56” West, a distance of 264.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning.

Parcel H:

All of Government Lots 3 and 4, Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to the Official Plat thereof.

Packet Page. 1258
Order No. 140-1908121-32

Excepting therefrom a portion of Government Lot 3, Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to the Official Plat of the United States Survey and being particularly described as follows:

Beginning at the East one-quarter corner of said Government Lot 3; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Government Lot 3 of said Section 35 to a point which is the mid-point of the Northerly line of said Lot 3; thence Southerly in a straight line to the midpoint of the Southerly line of said Lot 3; thence Easterly along the South line of said Government Lot 3 to the Southeast corner thereof; thence North along the Easterly line of said Government Lot 3 to the point of beginning.

Also excepting therefrom a portion of Government Lot 4 of Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to the Official Plat of United States Survey being particularly described as follows:

Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Government Lot 4; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Government Lot 4 of said Section 35, to a point which is the mid-point of the North line of said Lot 4; thence Southerly in a straight line to a mid-point of the Southerly line of said Government Lot 4; thence Easterly along the South line of said Government Lot 4 to the Southeast corner thereof; thence North along the Easterly line of said Government Lot 4 to the point of beginning.

Packet Page. 1259
Packet Page. 1260
Packet Page. 1261

EXHIBIT B
(Map/illustration)
Packet Page. 1262

VICINITY MAP
SITE

ON-SITE DETENTION / INFILTRATION BASIN- SECTION A-A'
20150
Packet Page. 1263
Infiltration Test Report

NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME
Packet Page. 1264
Educational Material
Packet Page. 1265
Packet Page. 1266
Packet Page. 1267
Packet Page. 1268
Packet Page. 1269
Packet Page. 1270
Packet Page. 1271
Packet Page. 1272
BMP Fact Sheets
Packet Page. 1273
Packet Page. 1274
Packet Page. 1275
24"
(600 mm) MIN*

7.0'
(2.1 m)
MAX
100" (2540 mm) 12" (300 mm) TYP
12" (300 mm) MIN
12" (300 mm) MIN
9"
(230 mm) MIN
60"
(1525 mm)

DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED
BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MIN
*MINIMUM COVER TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVED INSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR, INCREASE COVER TO 30" (750 mm).

SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING

THE REQUIRED BEARING CAPACITY OF SOILS

PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNED

BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)
MC-4500

END CAP

PERIMETER STONE

EXCAVATION WALL
(CAN BE SLOPED

OR VERTICAL)
CHAMBERS SHALL BE BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". ADS GEOSYTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN

GEOTEXTILE ALL AROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED,

ANGULAR EMBEDMENT STONE
CHAMBERS SHALL MEET ASTM F2418 "STANDARD

SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPELENE (PP) CORRUGATED
WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".

EMBEDMENT STONE SHALL BE A CLEAN, CRUSHED AND ANGULAR
STONE WITH AN AASHTO M43 DESIGNATION BETWEEN #3 AND #4
GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35%
FINES, COMPACT IN 12" (300 mm) MAX LIFTS TO 95% PROCTOR DENSITY. SEE THE TABLE OF ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS.

MC-4500 CHAMBER
Designed to meet the most stringent industry performance standards for superior structural integrity while providing designers with a cost-effective method to save valuable land and protect water resources. The StormTech system is designed primarily to be used under parking lots, thus maximizing land usage for private (commercial) and public applications. StormTech chambers can also be used in conjunction with Green Infrastructure, thus enhancing the performance and extending the service life of these practices.

STORMTECH MC-4500 CHAMBER
(not to scale)
Nominal Chamber Specifications
Size (L x W x H)
52” x 100” x 60”
1,321 mm x 2,540 mm x 1,524 mm
Chamber Storage
106.5 ft3 (3.01 m3)
Min. Installed Storage*
162.6 ft3 (4.60 m3)
Weight
120 lbs (54.4 kg)
Shipping
7 chambers/pallet
11 pallets/truck
*Assumes a minimum of 12” (300 mm) of
stone above, 9” (230 mm) of stone below
chambers, 9” (230 mm) of stone between
chambers/end caps and 40% stone porosity.

STORMTECH MC-4500 END CAP
(not to scale)
Nominal End Cap Specifications
Size (L x W x H)

35.1” x 90.2” x 59.4”
891 mm x 2,291 mm x 1,509 mm
End Cap Storage

35.7 ft3 (1.01 m3)
Min. Installed Storage*
108.7 ft3 (3.08 m3)
Weight
120 lbs (54.4 kg)
Shipping
7 end caps/pallet
11 pallets/truck
*Assumes a minimum of 12” (300 mm) of stone
above, 9” (230 mm) of stone below, 6” (150 mm)
of stone perimeter, 9” (230 mm) of stone between
chambers/end caps and 40% stone porosity.

Packet Page. 1276

THE MOST ADVANCED NAME IN WATER MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS TM Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.
4640 Trueman Blvd., Hilliard, OH 43026
1-800-821-6710 www.ads-pipe.com
ADS “Terms and Conditions of Sale” are available on the ADS website, www.ads-pipe.com The ADS logo and the Green Stripe are registered trademarks of Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.

StormTech® is a registered trademark of StormTech, Inc. © 2017 Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. #S26B1110 09/17 CS For more information on the StormTech MC-4500 Chamber and other ADS products, please contact our Customer Service Representatives at 1-800-821-6710 TOOL
DESIGN
MC-4500 CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS
STORAGE VOLUME PER CHAMBER FT3 (M3)
Note: Assumes 9” (230 mm) of separation between chamber rows, 12” (300 mm) of perimeter in front of the end caps, and 24” (600 mm) of cover. The volume of excavation will varyas depth of cover increases.

Note: Assumes 9” (230 mm) row spacing, 40% stone porosity, 12” (300 mm) stone above and includes the bare chamber/end cap volume. End cap volume assumes 12” (300 mm) stone perimeter.

Working on a project?
Visit us at www.stormtech.com
and utilize the StormTech Design Tool
ENGLISH TONS (yds3) Stone Foundation Depth
9” 12” 15” 18”
MC-4500 Chamber 7.4 (5.2) 7.8 (5.5) 8.3 (5.9) 8.8 (6.2) MC-4500 End Cap 9.6 (6.8) 10.0 (7.1) 10.4 (7.4) 10.9 (7.7) METRIC KILOGRAMS (m3) 230 mm 300 mm 375 mm 450 mm
MC-4500 Chamber 6,681 (4.0) 7,117 (4.2) 7,552 (4.5) 7,987 (4.7) MC-4500 End Cap 8,691 (5.2) 9,075 (5.4) 9,460 (5.6) 9,845 (5.9) Note: Assumes 12” (300 mm) of stone above and 9” (230 mm) row spacing and 12” (300 mm) of perimeter stone in front of end caps.

AMOUNT OF STONE PER CHAMBER
Stone Foundation Depth
9” (230 mm) 12” (300 mm) 15” (375mm) 18” (450 mm)
MC-4500 Chamber 10.5 (8.0) 10.8 (8.3) 11.2 (8.5) 11.5 (8.8) MC-4500 End Cap 9.3 (7.1) 9.6 (7.3) 9.9 (7.6) 10.2 (7.8) VOLUME EXCAVATION PER CHAMBER YD3 (M3)
Bare
Chamber
Storage
ft3 (m3)
Chamber and Stone
Foundation Depth in. (mm)
9” (230
mm) 12” (300 mm) 15” (375 mm) 18” (450 mm)
MC-4500 Chamber 106.5 (3.02) 162.6 (4.60) 166.3 (4.71) 169.6 (4.81) 173.6 (4.91) MC-4500 End Cap 35.7 (1.0) 108.7 (3.08) 111.9 (3.17) 115.2 (3.26) 118.4 (3.35) Packet Page. 1277
Packet Page. 1278
Packet Page. 1279
Packet Page. 1280
Packet Page. 1281
Packet Page. 1282
Packet Page. 1283
Packet Page. 1284
Packet Page. 1285
Packet Page. 1286
Packet Page. 1287
Packet Page. 1288
Packet Page. 1289
Packet Page. 1290
Packet Page. 1291
Packet Page. 1292
Packet Page. 1293
Packet Page. 1294
Packet Page. 1295
Packet Page. 1296
Packet Page. 1297
Site Plan
(WQMP Exhibit)
Packet Page. 1298

VICINITY MAP
SITE

ON-SITE DETENTION / INFILTRATION BASIN- SECTION A-A'
20150 Packet Page. 1299
Packet Page. 1300
Packet Page. 1301
Meyers Creek Drainage Study
Preliminary Design Report
Q3 Consulting
Appendix M: As-Builts
Packet Page. 1302
Packet Page. 1303
Packet Page. 1304
Packet Page. 1305
Packet Page. 1306
18'-4" 9'-1 1/2" 5'-2 1/2" 18'-5" 33'-7 1/2"
76'-3" 14'-0" 5'-7 3/4"
32'-5 3/4" 9'-9 3/4"

67.4° 156.62° 3'-0"
9'-0"
Packet Page. 1307
Packet Page. 1308
Packet Page. 1309
Packet Page. 1310
Packet Page. 1311

Packet Page. 1315
Packet Page. 1316
Packet Page. 1317
Packet Page. 1318
Packet Page. 1319
Packet Page. 1320
Packet Page. 1321
Packet Page. 1322
Meyers Creek Drainage Study
Preliminary Design Report
11-66 Q3 Consulting
Appendix N: Environmental Constraints Analysis
Packet Page. 1323
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com Remi Candaele
Project Manager
Q3 Consulting
27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110
Foothill Ranch, CA 92610
Via e-mail to: [email protected]
Subject: Environmental Constraints Analysis for the Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan Project, San Bernardino, California
Dear Mr. Candaele:

ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP) is pleased to submit this Environmental Constraints Analysis for the Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan Project (Proposed Project). The Proposed Project is located within the City of San Bernardino (City, Lead Agency), approximately 2.6-miles east-southeast of the Interstate 15 (I-15) and I-215 interchange (Figure 1). Meyers Creek stretches from Cable Creek to the headwaters at the top of Meyers Canyon. Upstream of the crossing at Meyers Road, the channel is largely unimproved. Between Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue, Meyers Creek is a graded trapezoidal earthen channel that is undersized. The neighborhood surrounding the stretch of Meyers Creek from Meyers Road to Cable Creek is subject to flooding during large storm events. This Environmental Constraints Analysis has been prepared to compare, identify, and assess anticipated environmental constraints of the Proposed Project for two site alternatives (Figure 2). Figures are included in Attachment A. For the purposes of this analysis the following naming conventions are used: Project Alternative I (Meyers Creek Channelization) and Project Alternative II (Storm Drain System).

Project Alternative I: Meyers Creek Channelization
The proposed earthen channel improvements start approximately 414-feet downstream of Belmont Avenue following the existing path of Meyers Creek. Upstream of the existing culvert at Meyers Road, the channel design expands gradually to maximize capture of flows from smaller tributaries in Meyers Canyon. The upstream end of the project stops approximately 500-feet from the existing culvert at Meyers Road. The minimum slope is 0.5-percent south of Belmont Avenue, and the maximum channel slope is

7.31-percent north of Meyers Road. The channel section between Belmont and Meyers is sloped at 4.11- percent. The width of the proposed channel varies significantly from 12-feet to 150-feet with a constant side slope of 2H:1V. The channel depth ranges from 4.5-feet to 12.6-feet, and the banks are 15-feet or 18- feet wide depending on the width of the channel. The existing crossings at Belmont Avenue and Meyers Road would be replaced with arch culverts with spans of 32-feet and rises of approximately 12-feet. Both the left and right banks of the proposed channel would extend past the proposed channel improvements to meet with the existing ground.

Packet Page. 1324
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
(Channel would pass through the following privately owned Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs), and rights-of-ways (ROWs): 0261-061-01, Culvert Underneath W Meyers Rd ROW, 0261-061-09, 0261-061-07, 0348-111-19, 0261-061-28, Culvert Underneath Belmont Ave ROW, 0261-131-02, and 0261-131-03) Project Alternative II: Storm Drain System
Project Alternative II would be constructed under the ROW of Meyers Road, N. Little League Drive, Belmont Avenue, and a portion of City owned APN: 0261-132-01 to Cable Creek. Meyers Creek stretches from Cable Creek to the headwaters at the top of Meyers Canyon. Upstream of the crossing at Meyers Road, the channel is largely unimproved. Between Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue, Meyers Creek is a graded trapezoidal earthen channel that is undersized. The neighborhood surrounding the stretch of Meyers Creek from Meyers Road to Cable Creek is subject to flooding during large storm events. The proposed storm drain captures overflows from the culverts at Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue in rectangular channels adjacent to the north side of Meyers Road between the Meyers Creek crossing and Little League Drive. Channels would be rectangular with drop inlets connected to the main storm drain.

Additional channels would be included adjacent to the north side of Belmont Avenue between the Meyers Creek crossing and Little League Drive. Curb inlet catch basins with filter inserts would be included throughout Project Alternative II at main intersections and locations where existing catch basins are undersized. Additionally existing catch basins currently connected to the storm drain at the intersection of Meyers Road and Little League Drive would be altered to connect to the proposed storm drain. Similar alterations would be made to the catch basin on the south side of Meyers Road, just east of the crossing.

The channels and catch basins contribute to a storm drain running from the Meyers Road crossing, within the roadway, to Little League Drive where it turns south. The storm drain picks up flow from the catch basins along Belmont Avenue before letting out to Cable Creek east of the Little League Drive crossing.

The length of storm drain along Little League Drive also remains within the roadway until it turns towards its eventual outlet to Cable Creek.

This Environmental Constraints Analysis for the Proposed Project was conducted by reviewing subject sections of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study (IS) checklist to identify potential environmental constraints during the planning process and is not intended to be used as a full CEQA analysis. It is understood that a future CEQA document will be prepared by the Lead Agency once a site plan has been determined and project details are available.

Environmental Limitations and Constraints
The Environmental Constraints Analysis has identified a need for further study of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology, Greenhouse Gas, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources for the Proposed Project. It is recommended that subsequent CEQA documentation further analyze these areas for potential impacts. A summary of the recommendations in this letter report is provided below.

Packet Page. 1325
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Review of Environmental Resources
For the purposes of this analysis, environmental issues to be addressed in any subsequent CEQA documentation for development of the Proposed Project are summarized below, followed by the listing of any potential environmental limitations or constraints to development for the subject site alternatives.

Resource
Alternative I
Recommendation
Alternative I
Timing
Alternative II
Recommendation
Alternative II
Timing
General CEQA
Recommendation
Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration
Before Project
approval by City
Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration
Before Project
approval by City
Air Quality
Streamlined Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment
During CEQA
process
Streamlined Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment
During CEQA
process
Biological
Resources
Biological Resource
Assessment
During CEQA
process
Biological Resource
Assessment
During CEQA
process
Special-status plant species
habitat assessment
During the
appropriate
season, prior to
construction.

San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat
(SBKR) Assessment
During the
appropriate
season, prior to
construction.

Pre-construction Nesting Bird
Survey
During the
appropriate
season, prior to
construction.

Formal consultation between
USACE and USFWS under
Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act.

During CEQA
process
Presence/Absence survey for
bat species within Project
Alternative I Site
During the
appropriate
season, prior to
construction.

Section 404 permit, and
certification or waiver in
compliance with Section 401 of
the Clean Water Act.

During CEQA
process
Packet Page. 1326
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Resource
Alternative I
Recommendation
Alternative I
Timing
Alternative II
Recommendation
Alternative II
Timing
SBKR Assessment
During the
appropriate
Season, prior to
construction.

CDFW Section 1600 Lake and
Streambed Alteration
Agreement.

During CEQA
process
Appropriate habitat
assessments and focus surveys
for sensitive species:

Habitat assessment and
focused mammal trapping for
SBKR, if needed (March –
August)
Habitat Assessment and
focused surveys for Crotch
bumble bee
Focused avian survey for
coastal California gnatcatcher
(March – June)
Focused survey for arroyo toad
(March – July)
Focused bat survey
Focused plant survey for
species such as Nevin’s
barberry, slender-horned
spineflower, and Santa Ana
River woollystar (May –
August).

Burrowing owl habitat
assessment, and focused
surveys, if needed (MarchAugust).

During the
appropriate
season, prior to
construction.

Packet Page. 1327
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Resource
Alternative I
Recommendation
Alternative I
Timing
Alternative II
Recommendation
Alternative II
Timing
Issuance of Waste Discharge
Requirement by State or
Regional Water Quality Control
Board
During CEQA
process
CDFW Section 1600 Lake and
Streambed Alteration
Agreement
During CEQA
process
Cultural
Resources
Formal Cultural Resources
Report
During CEQA
process
Formal Cultural Resources
Report
During CEQA
process
“stop work” clause in
construction specifications, on
call archaeologist, worker
education training
During
construction
“stop work” clause in
construction specifications, on
call archaeologist, worker
education training
During
construction
Energy
Streamlined Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment (Energy Modeling)
During CEQA
process
Streamlined Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment
(Energy Modeling)
During CEQA
process
Geology
Site-Specific Geotechnical
Evaluation
During CEQA
process
Site-Specific Geotechnical
Evaluation
During CEQA
process
Paleontological Records Search During CEQA
process
Paleontological Records Search During CEQA
process
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Streamlined Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment
During CEQA
process
Streamlined Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment
During CEQA
process
Packet Page. 1328
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Resource
Alternative I
Recommendation
Alternative I
Timing
Alternative II
Recommendation
Alternative II
Timing
Land Use and
Planning
Change of land use/zoning and
General Plan Amendment for
the City’s partial acquisition of
private property.

During CEQA
process
No land use constraints for
Project Alternative II
During CEQA
process
Noise
Focused noise
analysis/modeling
During CEQA
process
Focused noise
analysis/modeling
During CEQA
process
Transportation Prepare Traffic Control Plan Prior to any lane closures
Prepare Traffic Control Plan Prior to any lane
closures
Tribal Cultural
Resources
AB 52 Native American
Notification
During CEQA
process
AB 52 Native American
Notification
During CEQA
process
Aesthetics. Both Project Alternative I and Project Alternative II are located more than 30-miles west of the closest Officially Designates State Scenic Highway (State Route 38). Visual resources within the City that benefit from sensitive treatment of land include Kendall Hills, San Bernardino Mountains, the hillsides adjacent to Arrowhead Springs, Lytel Creek Wash, East Twin Creeks Wash, the Santa Ana River, Badger Canyon, Bailey Canyon, and Waterman Canyon (City 2005). Both Project Alternatives I and II would not disturb these significant ridgelines and visual resources that define the City’s distinctive vistas.

Furthermore, neither Project Alternatives would include new on-site lighting, and would not include materials that would generate a new source of glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Project Alternative I
Project Alternative I would channelize the largely unimproved Meyers Creek from approximately 414-feet downstream of Belmont Avenue following the existing path of Meyers Creek to 500-feet upstream of the existing culvert at Meyers Road. The width of the proposed channel varies significantly from 12-feet to 150-feet, with a depth that ranges from 4.5-feet to 12.6-feet, and banks with a width of either 15-feet or 18-feet depending on the width of the channel. The existing crossings at Belmont Avenue and Meyers Road would be replaced with arch culverts with spans of 32-feet and rises of approximately 12-feet. Both the left and right banks of the proposed channel would extend past the proposed channel improvements to meet with the existing ground. The channelization of Meyers Creek would alter the existing visual character of the largely unimproved course of Meyers Creek.

Packet Page. 1329
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Project Alternative II
Project Alternative II proposes the construction of a storm drainage system that would underlie existing ROW to direct stormwater flows to Cable Creek, just south of the Little League Baseball facility. Alternative II would not substantially alter the visual character of the site and its surroundings, as it would be constructed within existing ROWs.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources. Neither of the Project Alternatives include land zoned for forest land or agriculture (City 2005, Figure LU-2; DOC 2024a). The neighborhood which surrounds both Project Alternatives is predominantly developed with single family housing and the Western States-Reginal District 43 Little League Baseball Complex. Project Alternative I would be constructed on land with a zoning designation of Residential Estate (RE) and General Plan land use designation of Single Family Residential (SFR). Project Alternative I would also construct two culverts within the West Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue right-of-ways (ROWs). Project Alternative II would be constructed mostly within the existing Little League Drive, Meyers Road, and Belmont Avenue ROWs, as well as a small portion of APN 0261-132-01, which is zoned as Public Commercial Recreation.

Both Project Alternative sites and surrounding properties are not currently used for agriculture or timberland production (City 2005; DOC 2024a). Neither site alternative location would be considered environmentally superior with respect to agricultural and forestry resources as both site alternatives would not conflict with agricultural land uses or result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

Air Quality. Both Project Alternatives I and II are located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, SCAQMD is required to reduce criteria pollutant emissions for which the air basin is in nonattainment of standards. The Proposed Project conforms with the SCAQMD air quality planning efforts as it would not conflict with the growth forecasts contained in SCAQMD’s air quality attainment.

Specifically, neither Project Alternative would generate new housing units, or result in unplanned population growth. Additionally, the flood control measures included in both Project Alternatives I and II would not generate operational emissions once completed. Typically, a project of this scale would not generate sufficient emissions to result in a significant impact to air quality. However, while the emissions generated during Project operations are expected to be less than significant for either proposed alternative, a streamlined Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Assessment is recommended in order to provide an adequate and defensible analysis.

Biological Resources. A desktop review using the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW’s) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW 2024) and the California Native Plant Society’s Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) (CNPSEI; CNPS 2024) was conducted to determine the special-status plant and wildlife species that have been documented near the Project Site. ECORP searched CNDDB and CNPSEI records within the Project Site boundaries as depicted on USGS 7.5-minute San Bernardino North topographic quadrangle. Additionally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) online service for Packet Page. 1330
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
information regarding Threatened and Endangered Species Final Critical Habitat designation within California was reviewed to determine if the proposed Project Alternatives I and II are located within any species’ designated Critical Habitat (USFWS 2024).

Habitat surrounding both Project Alternatives are predominantly urban/developed with single family housing, the Western States-Regional District 43 Little League Baseball Complex, open/vacant land, and native vegetation communities such as California buckwheat scrub and scale broom scrub.

The San Bernardino County Biotic Resources Overlay was established by the Land Use Plan and Land Use Zoning Districts (§§ 82.01.020) and the Overlays (§§ 82.01.0230) of the County of San Bernardino. The purpose of the Biotic Resources Overlay is to implement General Plan policies regarding the “protection and conservation of beneficial rare and endangered plants and animal resources and their habitats” (County 2023). Projects within the County of San Bernardino are required to address the biological resources that appear within the Biotic Resources Overlay and overlap with their project site. Further, project proponents must identify mitigation measures that will reduce or eliminate impacts to the identified resources.

Project Alternative I (Meyers Creek Channelization) is an earthen channel that occurs along Meyers Creek with disturbed/developed land cover and moderate to dense patches of disturbed vegetation including California buckwheat scrub and scale broom scrub, that could provide moderate-quality habitat for special status species. Project Alternative I does not appear to be subject to major anthropogenic disturbances.

Project Alternative II (Storm Drain System) will be constructed under the ROW of Meyers Road, North Little League Drive, Belmont Avenue, and a portion of City owned APNs: 0261-132-01 and 0261-061-01 to Cable Creek. Areas along the road are developed. Other areas within the Project Alternative II site include ruderal/disturbed nonnative forbs and grasses and ornamental vegetation. Project Alternative II is continuously subjected to disturbances associated with human activities, development, and landscape maintenance activities, except for the southern portion that occurs in or adjacent to Cable Creek.

A biological reconnaissance survey was not conducted as part of this due diligence constraints analysis.

Instead, the analysis presented below is based on a review of Google aerial imagery, street view, available literature, and desktop resources. The due diligence constraints analysis is limited to the information gathered from public sources based on the date that photographs were taken, or species information was recorded. The literature-based constraints analysis cannot account for habitat occupation by wildlife or plants that are not visible in the photographs or documents in the observations. Therefore, it is recommended that a site visit be conducted to evaluate both Project Alternatives for the presence or potential presence of biological resources on the Project Site and surrounding habitat. A biological survey will identify areas of suitable habitat for sensitive plant and wildlife species, which may require focused surveys.

Packet Page. 1331
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Biological resources may be either directly or indirectly affected by Project Alternatives. Furthermore, direct and indirect impacts may be either permanent or temporary in nature. These impact categories are defined below.

Direct impacts include any loss, alteration, disturbance, or destruction of biological resources that would result from Project-related activities. Examples include vegetation clearing, encroachment into drainages, diversion of natural surface water flows, and the loss of individual species and/or their habitats. Direct impacts are long-term.

Indirect impacts may occur to special-status wildlife species during Project construction in the form of increased human activity, noise, ground vibrations, dust, erosion created by the removal of vegetation, and the introduction of invasive plants and/or unnatural predators. These indirect impacts may be both short-term and long-term in their extent.

General recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to sensitive biological resources for each Project Alternative are provided below.

Project Alternative I
Project Alternative I consists of improvements to the existing earthen channel along Meyers Creek. This alternative would construct two culverts within the West Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue ROWs.

The vegetation and land cover types within and surrounding Project Alternative I appear to include patches of native California buckwheat and scale broom scrub vegetation with some level of disturbance due to the presence of nonnative vegetation, trash, and pedestrians. Ornamental vegetation and disturbed/developed land cover also occur within the Project Alternative I footprint. Meyers Creek is a drainage feature that is considered an aquatic resource and therefore, a formal aquatic resources delineation was conducted to identify the limits of potentially jurisdictional waters.

Based on the literature review and Google Earth imagery, the soils, vegetation, and land cover present in or adjacent to Alternative I may provide habitat for special-status wildlife species including burrowing owl, coastal California gnatcatcher, Crotch bumble bee, southern rubber boa, San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR), Los Angeles pocket mouse, arroyo toads, and/or special-status bats. Special-status plant species such as Nevin’s barberry, slender-horned spine flower, and Santa Ana River woollystar may be present in or adjacent to Project Alternative I.

The mature trees, shrubs, and ornamental vegetation within or adjacent to Alternative I can provide habitat for nesting birds and raptors protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code. In addition, the culverts and mature trees present within Project Alternative I can provide habitat for roosting bats roosting. Maternity bat roosts are considered protected as native wildlife nursery sites under CEQA and California Fish and Game Code Section 4150.

Packet Page. 1332
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Based on the current Project Alternative I footprint, direct and indirect impacts to special-status plant and/or wildlife species could occur as a result of the Proposed Alternative. The limitations of the desktopbased literature review indicate that a biological habitat assessment should be conducted to determine if suitable habitat for sensitive plant and/or wildlife species occurs within the Project Alternative footprint and surrounding areas. USFWS designated critical habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) is located within the southern portion of the Project Alternative footprint which requires additional consideration to verify the presence of this protected species.

The desktop literature review provided valuable information to assess the potential wildlife and plant related issues within the Project footprint. However, a desktop literature review contains inherent limitations in terms of documenting wildlife and plant species presence in the Project footprint and the potential impacts that may occur within and in the vicinity of the Project Site.

The following recommendations are provided as suggestions for next steps in the Project:
• A biological resources assessment is recommended to identify any biological resources that could be affected by the proposed Project, pursuant to the terms of CEQA, and for the purpose of identifying any biological constraints that would affect the Project alternative. The Project will be subject to county, state, and federal regulations regarding compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), California Endangered Species Act (CESA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; USFWS 1918), Clean Water Act (CWA) regulations, and California Fish and Game Code. • A qualified botanist familiar with the special-status plant species in the region should conduct a special-status plant species habitat assessment, during the appropriate blooming periods for target species, to determine whether special-status plant species are present within the footprint of Project Alternative I. If special-status plant species are present and impacts to the species are unavoidable and significant under CEQA, then additional protection measures and mitigation measures may need to be implemented, such as transplanting and additional biological monitoring requirements. The qualified botanist should also identify if there are any plant species protected by the San Bernardino County Development Code within the Project Alternative footprint. • Due to the potential for birds and raptors nesting, Project construction could result in impacts to nesting birds. To avoid/minimize direct and indirect impacts to nesting birds, a pre-construction nesting bird survey and other measures such as, biological monitoring, visual shielding, noise barriers, etc., on an as-needed basis, should be incorporated into the Project assuming that work will be performed during the breeding season, generally identified as February 15 – September 15. • There is a moderate potential for bat species to occur within Project Alternative I. A qualified bat biologist should confirm the presence/absence of bat species within the Project Alternative I. A focused bat survey should be conducted to assess potential bat roosting habitats and/or active bat roosts on the project site that may be affected by project activities. Based on the survey findings, the bat biologist will develop and recommend appropriate mitigation measures. • A SBKR assessment should be conducted to evaluate habitat conditions and areas potentially suitable for SBKR, and to determine if trapping for proposed Project Alternative I is warranted. If suitable Packet Page. 1333
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
habitat or SBKR sign is identified during the habitat assessment, then trapping would need to be conducted.
• If Project Alternative I provides suitable habitat for sensitive plant and/or wildlife species and/or sensitive vegetation communities, appropriate habitat assessments and focus surveys for sensitive species shall be conducted during the appropriate season. Some of the surveys may include but are not limited to:
o Habitat assessment and focused mammal trapping for SBKR, if needed (March – August) o Habitat Assessment and focused surveys for Crotch bumble bee o Focused avian survey for coastal California gnatcatcher (March – June) o Focused survey for arroyo toad (March – July)
o Focused bat survey
o Focused plant survey for species such as Nevin’s barberry, slender-horned spineflower, and Santa Ana River woollystar (May – August).
o Burrowing owl habitat assessment, and focused surveys, if needed (March-August). • Impacts to the Meyers Creek, if determined to be jurisdictional to state or federal regulatory agencies, would require the Project to obtain necessary permits prior to Project activities.

Project Alternative II
Project Alternative II would be constructed mostly within the existing Little League Drive, Meyers Road, and Belmont Avenue ROWs, as well as a small portion of APNs 0261-132-01 and 0261-061-01, which is zoned as Public Commercial Recreation.

The vegetation surrounding Project Alternative II is predominantly ruderal/nonnative and ornamental and includes some scattered native vegetation. Areas within the ROW and Project Alterative II are mostly disturbed/developed. Additionally, Meyers Creek and Cable Creek occur to the north and south (respectively) of the Project Alternative II footprint. These are aquatic resources; therefore, a formal aquatic resources delineation was conducted to identify the limits to potentially jurisdictional waters.

Areas surrounding Project Alternative II provide habitat for nesting birds and raptors, in the mature trees, native shrubs, and ornamental vegetation and potential habitat for SBKR. Based on the disturbed/developed conditions within Project Alternative II site, no direct impacts to special-status wildlife or plant species are expected as a result of the Proposed Project. However, indirect impacts may occur to nesting birds and raptors, roosting bats in the area, special-status plant species, and specialstatus wildlife species during Project construction in the form of increased human activity, noise, ground vibrations, and dust. Additionally, USFWS designated critical habitat for SBKR occurs along the western portion of the ROW of the Project Alternative II footprint adjacent to Little league Drive and south of Belmont Avenue West.

The following recommendations are provided as suggestions for next steps in the Project:

Packet Page. 1334
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
• A biological resources assessment is recommended to identify any biological resources that could be affected by the proposed Project, pursuant to the terms of CEQA and for the purpose of identifying any biological constraints that would affect the Project alternative. The Project will be subject to county, state, and federal regulations regarding compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), CESA, Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; USFWS 1918)-nesting birds, Clean Water Act (CWA) regulations, California Fish and Game Code, and protection for sensitive bat species. • A SBKR assessment should be conducted to evaluate habitat conditions and areas potentially suitable for SBKR, primarily on the western portion of the Project Alternative II footprint and Cable Creek, to determine if trapping for the proposed Project Alternative II is warranted. If suitable habitat or SBKR sign is identified during the habitat assessment, then trapping would need to be conducted. Impacts to USFWS designated SBKR Critical Habitat are potentially significant under CEQA. • Impacts to USFWS designated SBKR Critical Habitat within jurisdictional waters may be require formal consultation between U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and USFWS under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and with CDFW under the CESA to determine whether an Incidental Take Permit (ITP), Section 2081(b) is required for this Project. Consequently, the USACE will consult with the USFWS regarding impacts and mitigation measures for SBKR and its habitat. However, if impacts to SBKR individuals and Critical Habitat can be avoided to below the level of significance with the appropriate mitigation, then an ITP would not be necessary. • Impacts to the Cable Creek, if determined to be jurisdictional to state or federal regulatory agencies, would require the project to obtain necessary permits prior to project activities.

Aquatic Resource Delineation
Both Site alternatives were analyzed for potential jurisdictional aquatic resources within the Aquatic Resources Delineation (ARD) (ECORP 2024). The results of the ARD are summarized below in this section.

ECORP recorded two named riverine features within Project Alternatives I and II. Meyers Creek runs the length of Project Alternative I, and Cable Creek crosses the southernmost tip of Project Alternative II. The following sections provide details on both features. ECORP mapped a total of 0.237 acre of ephemeral drainage within Project Alternative I and a total of 0.077 acre of intermittent drainage within Project Alternative II. In addition, approximately 0.835 acre of streambed and approximately 0.624 acre of associated riparian habitat occurs within Project Alterative I. Approximately 0.121 acre of streambed occurs within Project Alternative II. No wetlands were observed within either Project Site Alternative. None of the aquatic features present within Alternative I or II support wetland characteristics.

Site Alternative I.

Meyers Creek is a non-navigable and non-relatively permanent water. In general, flows from Meyers Creek appear to originate in Meyers Canyon and the hillsides located to the north of Project Alternative I. The flows travel south through Project Alternative I and then appear to join Cable Creek to the west of Project Alternative II. Although Meyers Creek flows to a Traditional Navigable Water (TNW; Pacific Ocean), Meyers Creek is a non-navigable tributary, is not relatively permanent, and does not appear to support any surface-water-related interstate commerce. Therefore, Meyers Creek does not appear to meet the current Packet Page. 1335
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
definition of Waters of the U.S. and is not likely to be considered jurisdictional under Section 404 of the CWA. However, Meyers Creek would likely be considered Waters of the State. In addition, the area mapped as streambed at Meyers Creek and its associated riparian habitat would likely be regulated under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code.

The placement of dredge or fill material into Waters of the State that are not Waters of the U.S. would require issuance of a Waste Discharge Requirement by the State or Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Impacts to CDFW-regulated resources would require a Section 1600 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement by the CDFW.

Site Alternative II.

Cable Creek is a relatively permanent water that is a tributary to a TNW (Pacific Ocean). Flows from Cable Creek appear to originate in Cable Canyon, Ames Canyon, and Hopper Canyon, all of which are located to the northwest of Project Alternative II. These flows travel south and then appear to join Cable Creek. The flows in Cable Creek appear to travel approximately 38-miles downstream to Prado Dam via Cajon Wash, Lytle Creek, Warm Creek, and the Santa Ana River. Prado Dam regulates flows in the Santa Ana River and releases flows downstream, as needed, with flows eventually reaching the Pacific Ocean. It is reasonable to assume that Cable Creek would be considered Waters of the U.S. because it is a relatively permanent tributary to a TNW. In addition, the area mapped as streambed at Cable Creek would likely be regulated under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code.

The placement of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S. would require a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA and certification or waiver in compliance with Section 401 of the CWA. The placement of dredge or fill material into Waters of the State that are not Waters of the U.S. would require issuance of a Waste Discharge Requirement by the State or Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Impacts to CDFW-regulated resources would require a Section 1600 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement by the CDFW.

Cultural Resources. A cultural resources records search and literature review was conducted for the Project Area. A cultural resources records search was conducted on August 20, 2024, at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), located at California State University, Fullerton. The purpose of the records search was to determine the extent of previous cultural resources investigations and the presence of previously-recorded archeological sites or historic-period (i.e., over 50 years in age) resources within a one-mile (1,600-meter) radius of the Project Area. In addition to the official records and maps for archaeological sites and surveys in San Bernardino County, the following historic references were also reviewed: Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) for San Bernardino County (OHP 2024a); the National Register Information System (National Park Service [NPS] 2024); Office of Historic Preservation, California Historical Landmarks (OHP 2024b) and California Historical Resources (OHP 2024c). The review used reasonably accessible records search and database information. However, this due diligence review Packet Page. 1336
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
did not include field surveys for cultural resources, agency or tribal consultation, or evaluations of significance for any previously recorded resources.

The results of the records search indicate that 45 previous cultural resource investigations have been conducted within 1-mile of the Project Alternatives between 1978 and 2013, covering 85- percent of the total records search radius (Table 1). Of the 45 studies, two were conducted within both Project Alternative Areas I and II, and one was conducted only within Project Alternative II.

The remaining 43 were outside of the boundaries of both Project Alternative Areas but within the 1-mile radius. One study (SB-05546) is shown as possibly encompassing the Project Areas; however, this report is not on file at the SCCIC, nor is it in their system.

These studies revealed the presence of pre-contact sites, including lithic scatters and habitation sites, and historic-period sites, including rock walls and sites associated with historic ranching activities. Details of all 45 investigations are presented below in Table 1.

Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
0713
Chavez, David Final: Cultural Resources Evaluation for the Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 (Elk Hills) to Rialto
Crude Oil Pipeline
1978
No
1285
Lerch, Michael K. Cultural Resources Assessment of the Cajon Creek Project (Wilson Property and Surrounding
Properties), San Bernardino County, California
1982
No
1734
Shackley, M. Steven,
Rebecca Mccorkle
Apple, Jan Wooley,
And Robert E.

Reynolds
Cultural and Paleontological Resources Survey:

US Sprint Fiber Optic Cable Project, Rialto,
California to Las Vegas, Nevada
1987
No
Packet Page. 1337
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
1821
Peak & Associates, Inc. Cultural Resource Survey and Clearance for an AT&T Fiberoptic Communication Cable Re-Route
from San Bernardino Northwest to San
Bernardino National Forest Boundary
1988
Yes, Both
Project
Alternatives
1885
De Munck, Victor C. Environmental Impact Evaluation: A Cultural Resource Assessment of a 9.7 Acre Parcel of Land
Designated as Tentative Tract No. 14261 Located
in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino
County, California
1989
No
1958
Lerch, Michael K. Cultural Resources Assessment of Five Public Works Infrastructure Improvements, Verdemont
Area Assessment District #987, City of San
Bernardino, California
1989
No
2031
De Munck, Victor C. Environmental Impact Evaluation: A Cultural Resource Assessment of a 11 Acre Parcel of Land
Designated as Tentative Tract No. 13630 Located
in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino
County, California
1989
No
2040
De Munck, Victor C. Environmental Impact Evaluation: A Cultural Resource Assessment of a 16 Acre Tract
Designated as Tentative Tract No. 14604 Located
in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino
County, California
1989
No
Packet Page. 1338
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
2056
Macko, Michael E.,
Roger D. Mason, And
Richard H. Osborne
Cultural Resources Survey Report for the 10 Acre
Verdemont Site in San Bernardino County,
California
1989
No
2073
De Munck, Victor C. Environmental Impact Evaluation: A Cultural Resource Assessment of a 12 Acre Tract
Designated as Tentative Tract No. 14655 Located
in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino
County, California
1990
No
2092
De Munck, Victor C. Environmental Impact Evaluation: A Cultural Resource Assessment of a 8.1 Acre Tract
Designated as Tentative Tract No. 14444 Located
in the City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino
County, California
1990
No
2102
Lerch, Michael K. Addendum to: Cultural Resources Assessment of Five Public Works Infrastructure Improvements,
Verdemont Area Assessment District #987, City
of San Bernardino, California
1990
No
2452
Lerch, Michael K. Cultural Resource Assessment of Tentative Tract No. 14881, Verdemont Area, City of San
Bernardino, California
1990
No
2526
Laska, Robin E. And
Mark T. Swanson
A Cultural Resource Survey of a 25.8 Acre Tract
of Land Designated as Tentative Tract No. 14473
in Cajon Pass, San Bernardino County, Ca
1991
No
Packet Page. 1339
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
2712 Ritz, Frank and Sue A.

Wade
Cultural Resource Survey of Martin Ranch, San
Bernardino County
1990
No
3117
Cook, John R. Cultural Resource Survey of the Cajon Creek Specific Plan Project, San Bernardino County,
California
1990
No
3308
Love, Bruce Archaeological Record Search Results, San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project.
23pp
1996
No
3308 Schmidt, James Supplemental Cultural Resources Investigation:

The Martin Ranch (TT15576). 21pp
1998
No
3647 White, Robert and
Laurie White
An Archaeological Assessment of TT 13630, an

11.42 Acre Parcel Located Adjacent to Belmont
Ave in the Verdemont Area of the City of San
Bernardino. 17pp
1999 No
3711
Shepard, Richard Cultural Resource Record Search & Survey Report for Level 3 Fiber Optic Project: WSO 4
Devore Alternatives, San Bernardino County, CA.
10pp
2000
No
4081
Strickland, Jan Proposed AT&T Wireless Telecommunication Equipment Installation, 3205 Kendall Dr, San
Bernardino, CA. 20
2002
No
Packet Page. 1340
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
4321
Encarnacion, Deirdre
and Josh Smallwood
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey
Report: Tentative Tract Map #16533 Near the
City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County,
CA. 19pp
2004
No
4551
Tang, Bai and Michael
Hogan
Cultural Resources Evaluation Report: BNSF
Railway Bridge Over Cajon Blvd, BNSF Mile Post

72.31 Devore-Verdemont Area, San Bernardino
County, CA. 13pp
2005
No
4720
Fulton, Terri and
Deborah McLean
Cultural Resources Assessment for the
Verdemont Heights Towne Center Project, San
Bernardino County, California.
2006
Yes, Project
Alternative II
4721
Dice, Michael, Peter
Messick, and Jay
Keasling
Phase I Cultural Resource Survey of the Ranch
Country View Estates Project near Cable Creek
and Interstate 215, County of San Bernardino,
California.
2005
No
4722
Lerch, Michael K.,
William E. Hayden,
Kurt R. Heidelberg,
and Anne Q. Stoll
A Class I Cultural Resources Assessment for the
FEMA/City of San Bernardino Vegetation
Management Project (HMGP #1005-20), San
Bernardino County, California.
2001
No
5272 Lambert, Meranda CA-8533-A/Bailey Canyon. 2004 No
5273
Hogan, Michael Archaeological Survey: Palm Connector,
Verdemont Phase I Project, City of San
Bernardino, San Bernardino County, California.
2006
No
Packet Page. 1341
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
5545
Sander, Jay K. Cultural and Paleontological Resources Inventory of 6 Acres: APN 260-032-04, San Bernardino, San
Bernardino County, California.
2006
No
5546
Austerman, Virginia Cultural Resources Assessment Tentative Tract 16794 City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino
County, California
2006
Unknown
5897 Jurich, Denise M. Archaeological Survey Report for the Palm Avenue Distribution Center.
2007
No
6057
Encarnacion, Deirdre Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties: Palm No. 3 Reservoir Project, City of
San Bernardino, San Bernardino County,
California.
2008
No
6648
Wlodarski, Robert J. Cultural Resources Record Search and Archaeological Survey Results for the Proposed
Royal Street Communications, California, LLC,
Site LA3588A (Bailey Canyon TowerCo CA2794)
Located at 6707 Little League Drive, San
Bernardino, San Bernardino County, California
92407.
2009
No
6650 -- -- No
6770 -- -- No
Packet Page. 1342
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
6971
Goodwin, Riordan Historic Property Survey Report for the I-15/I-215 Interchange Improvements Project, Community
of Devore, San Bernardino County, California.
2011
No
6987 No
7623
Becker, Wendy L.

Tinsley and Laura
Hoffman
Cultural Resources CRHR/NRHP Review of the
105 Mile Portion of the Arrowhead-CalectricDevil Canyon-Shandin 115kV Sub-Transmission Line Project, Cajon Creek, San Bernardino
County, California.
2014
No
7624
White, Robert S. and
Laura S. White
A Cultural Resource Assessment of a 5.07 Acre
Parcel Located North of the Intersection of
Belmont and Mirna Avenues, City of San
Bernardino, San Bernardino County.
2006
No
7625
Mason, Roger Cultural Resources Survey Report for Muscoy Groin #2 Storm Drain Project, San Bernardino
County, California.
2012
No
7636
Hamilton, M. Colleen Finding of Effect for the Palm Avenue/Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Grade Separation
Project.
2011
No
7637
Hamilton, M. Colleen Historic Property Survey Report- Palm Avenue/BNSF Railroad Grade Separation Project,
San Bernardino County, California.
2011
No
Packet Page. 1343
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 1. Previous Cultural Studies in and within one mile of Project Alternatives I and II Report
Number
SBAuthor(s) Report Title Year
Includes
Portion of the
Project Areas?
7690
Hogan, Michael Historical/Archaeological Resources Field Inspection of a Well Site near Arrastre Creek near
the Long Beach Area YMCA’s Camp Oakes
Facility near the City of Big Bear Lake, San
Bernardino County, California.
2013
No
07959
Hatheway, Roger G. Determination of Eligibility for 50 Buildings in the City of San Bernadino
1998 Yes, Both
Project
Alternatives
8223
Hamilton, M. Colleen
and Joan George
Archaeological Survey Report Palm Avenue
Grade Separation Project San Bernardino County,
California TCIFL-6053(087) Caltrans District 8
2011
No
The results of the records search indicate that both Project Alternative Areas have been previously surveyed for cultural resources. The records search also determined that 19 previously recorded resources are located within one mile of the Project Areas (Table 2). Of these 19 resources, 18 are historic-period resources and one is of an undetermined age. One resource, the historic-period Cable Creek Levy, is within Project Alternative II. No previously recorded resources are within Project Alternative I.

Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources in or within one mile of Project Areas I and II Site
Number
CA-SBRPrimary
Number
P-36-
Recorder and Year Age/
Period Site Description
Which
Project
Area or
buffer?
2910H
2910
L. Burr Belden, 1963
Historic National Old Trails Highway,
Route 66
No
Packet Page. 1344
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources in or within one mile of Project Areas I and II Site
Number
CA-SBRPrimary
Number
P-36-
Recorder and Year Age/
Period Site Description
Which
Project
Area or
buffer?
6793H 6793 M. K. Lerch 1990 Historic Cajon Rail Alignment ATSF RR No 7031H
7031
Frank Ritz 1990
Historic House Foundations and rock
wall
No
7054H 7054 Schmidt et al. 1990 Historic Partially covered concrete canal No 10221H
10221
Richard Shepard 2000
Historic Building foundations and rock
wall
No
1031H
10315 N. Neunshwander
1988
Historic Boulder Dam to San Bernardino
Transmission Line
No
N/A 14177 V. Demunck 1989 Historic Irrigation Reservoir No N/A 14463 Michael Dice 2008 Historic Foundations and rock walls No N/A
14464
Michael Dice 2008 Unknown Rectangular rock alignment
near historic debris
No
13136H 14897 Sherri Andrews 2009 Historic Can and bottle dump site No 13137H
14898
Sherri Andrews 2009 Historic Cable Creek Levy
Yes,
Project
Alternative
II
13168H 14968 Harper 2009 Historic WWII Target Range No
N/A 21515 2010 Cogstone Historic Meyer Family Cemetery No Packet Page. 1345
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources in or within one mile of Project Areas I and II Site
Number
CA-SBRPrimary
Number
P-36-
Recorder and Year Age/
Period Site Description
Which
Project
Area or
buffer?
N/A
27100 Barbara Loren-Webb
2012
Historic Isolate: glass fragments No
31937H
31937
Shannon Smith 2018 Historic
Foundation with associated
farm debris
No
N/A 31938 Shannon Smith 2018 Historic Isolate: glass fragment No N/A 31939 Shannon Smith 2018 Historic Isolate: glass insulator fragment No N/A 31940 Shannon Smith 2018 Historic Isolate: railroad spike No N/A 60940 Richard Shepard, 2000 Historic Isolate: glass fragment No The OHP’s BERD for San Bernardino County (dated September 23, 2022) included more than seven resources within one mile of the Project Alternative I and II; these resources include structures and water basins. All of the resources are considered ineligible for the National Register by consensus through Section 106 process but have not been evaluated for the California Register or local listing.

The National Register Information System (NPS 2024) failed to reveal any eligible or listed properties within the Project Area. The nearest National Register property is a United States Postal Office, located eight miles southeast, of the Project Alternative I and II in downtown San Bernardino.

ECORP reviewed resources listed as California Historical Landmarks (OHP 1996) by the OHP (2024b, 2024c) on April 29, 2025. The nearest listed landmark is #573, the Sycamore Grove site, located 1.5 miles northwest of the Project Area, within Glen Helen Regional Park.

Should the Proposed Project move forward, CEQA requires the lead agency to address any unanticipated cultural resources discoveries during Proposed Project construction and ECORP recommends a formal cultural resources report with mitigation measures for unanticipated finds for adoption and implementation by the Lead Agency that would reduce potential adverse impacts to a less than significant level.

Packet Page. 1346
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Energy. Temporary energy use in connection with Project construction for either site would include consumption of diesel fuel and gasoline by construction equipment and transport of earth moving equipment, construction materials, supplies, and construction personnel to and from either site alternative. Project operation at either site alternative would consume energy at a similar rate, as both alternatives would only require occasional maintenance. While energy use during Project operations is expected to be less than significant, a streamlined Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Assessment is recommended in order to provide an adequate and defensible analysis.

Geology and Soils. Neither site alternative would be located within the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. The nearest Alquist-Priolo fault traces and hazard zones are located approximately 0.50-mile north of both site alternatives (DOC 2024b). Neither of the two alternative Project Sites have been evaluated by the California Geologic Survey (CGS) for liquefaction or landslide susceptibility hazards. As both alternatives would control stormwater flows during large storm events, and neither would include the construction or occupation of habitable structures, the risk to people or structures from strong seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, seismic-related ground failure, landslide, and expansive soils would be similar at both site alternatives.

Both site alternatives would include cut, fill, and grading activities on previously disturbed sites and undisturbed soils. Grading activities occurring on undisturbed soils have the potential to uncover previously undiscovered paleontological resources. A paleontological records search is recommended to disclose the presence of potential paleontological resources.

No unusual constraints related to geologic or seismic impacts are associated with either site alternative.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The construction phase of the Proposed Project, for either site location, would result in the generation of GHG emissions from the use of heavy construction equipment and construction related vehicle trips. Because of the nature of the Proposed Project, operational sources of GHG emissions are anticipated to be predominately associated with vehicular traffic for occasional project maintenance. While the emissions generated during Project operations are expected to be less than significant for either proposed alternative, a streamlined Air Quality and GHG Emissions Assessment is recommended in order to provide an adequate and defensible analysis.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials. According to the Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database, and State Water Resource Control Board Geotracker database, there are no hazardous waste facilities and sites with known contamination or sites where there may be reasons to investigate further located in either site alternative or their vicinity (DTSC 2024; SWRCB 2024). However, some hazardous materials, such as diesel fuel, would be used by heavy equipment during construction and the occasional maintenance once the Project is operational. As such, no unusual constraints related to emergency response or evacuation plans are anticipated for either site alternative and both project alternatives are not anticipated to cause significant hazards as a result of Project construction or from the release of hazardous material to the public, or the environment.

Packet Page. 1347
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
Hydrology and Water Quality. Both site alternatives would require more than one acre of ground disturbing activities. Therefore, both Project alternatives would be subject to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (Order NO. R8-2010-0036) including a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) listing BMPs to prevent construction pollutants and products from violating any water quality standard or waste discharge requirements. Additionally, it is not anticipated that groundwater supplies would be substantially depleted as a result of the either Project Alternative.

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) #06071C7930J, the majority of Project Alternative I is located within “Zone A: No Base Flood Elevations determined.” Project Alternative I is located within a 100-year flood hazard area (FEMA 2016). The Majority of Project Alternative II is located within “Zone X: Area of Minimal Flood Hazard”, with the southern portion near cable creek within “Zone AE: Areas that must be kept free of encroachment so that the 1-percent annual change flood can be carried without substantial increases in flood heights,” and “Zone X: Area with reduced flood rick due to levee.” Project Alternative II is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area (FEMA 2016). As both Project Alternatives would improve the conveyance of stormwater flows, and would reduce flood hazard risk, it is not anticipated that Flood Hazard Areas as depicted on FEMA FIRM #06071C7930J would constitute an environmental constraint. A positive impact would occur with implementation of either Project Alternative.

Therefore, no significant impacts to hydrology or water quality are anticipated for either site alternative.

Land Use and Planning. Neither Project Alternative would divide an established community. Both Project Alternatives would construct stormwater control infrastructure within an area characterized by residential development and would not divide an established community, displace residents, nor conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan. Project Alternative I would require a partial take of private property and a General Plan amendment to change all residential parcels land use to Publicly Owned Flood Control (PFC).

Project Alternative I
Alternative I would require change of land use/zoning and General Plan Amendment for the City’s partial acquisition of portions of the following privately owned parcels: APN 0261-061-01, 0261-061-09, 0261- 061-07, 0348-111-19, 0261-061-28, 0261-131-02, and 0261-131-03. These parcels are zones as Residential Estates (RE), with a General Plan Land Use Designation of Single-Family Residence (SFR) (City 2005; City 2024a). Project Alternative I would also construct culverts within the West Meyers Avenue and Belmont Avenue ROWs.

Project Alternative II
No unusual land use and planning constraints have been identified for Project Alternative II. Alternative II would be constructed within City owned ROW and would not require the acquisition of private property.

All Project components would be constructed within the ROW of N. Little League Drive, Belmont Avenue, Packet Page. 1348
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
and W. Meyers Road except for a small segment of storm drain that would feed into Cable Creek from underneath the southwestern corner of the City owned Little League Baseball Complex (City 2005; City 2024a).

Mineral Resources. The Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in an adverse effect to known mineral resources for either alternative site location due to the existing residential land uses which surround both Project Alternatives. Nearly all of Project Alternative II would be constructed within existing ROWs, with a small portion underlying the southwest corner of the Little League Baseball Complex, where the storm drain would divert all flows into Cable Creek. The majority of Project Alternative I would be constructed on privately owned land designated as MRZ-2 areas of identified mineral resources of significance, and MRZ-4 areas of undetermined mineral resource significance. The MRZ-2 area contains construction aggregate that meets certain State criteria for value and marketability based solely on geologic factors. However, the area surrounding both project alternatives has been developed previously with uses and intensities that are incompatible with mineral production and large-scale mining operations.

Noise. Noise would be generated during the construction phase of the Proposed Project. Chapter

8.54.060 of the City’s Municipal Code states that construction, repair, and excavation work performed pursuant to a valid written agreement with the City, or any of its political subdivisions, which provide for noise mitigation measures are exempt from the provisions of the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 8.54.

Chapter 8.54.070 of the City’s Municipal Code states that temporary construction, repair, or demolition noise is only permitted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Construction activities limited to these permitted hours, with adherence to any recommendation provided in a project-specific noise analysis would result in less than significant noise impacts. Once operational, neither of the proposed stormwater infrastructure alternatives would introduce a new or increased source of noise to the area. A focused noise analysis is recommended to disclose and mitigate the minimal Project effect on the existing noise environment of the surrounding residential communities.

Population and Housing. Both Project Alternatives would improve the area’s stormwater infrastructure.

Neither Project Alternative would include the extension of existing roadways; as such, neither alternative would directly or indirectly induce population growth in the region. Neither alternative would include additional housing or create permanent jobs in the project vicinity that would induce population growth.

Therefore, no unusual constraints associated with population and housing have been identified for either Project Alternative.

Public Services. During project operation, neither alternative is anticipated to create a significant fire or public safety hazard. Additionally, the construction of Project Alternatives I and II would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities or affect response time or other performance objectives once operational. However, as both alternatives would require temporary road closures during the construction phase, it is recommended that the City or its contractor prepare a Traffic Control Plan Packet Page. 1349
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
prior to any lane closures to ensure proper access to residences and businesses by emergency vehicles during construction and to maintain traffic flow.

Recreation. Both Project Alternatives would construct stormwater infrastructure within an area characterized by residential land uses and therefore would not induce substantial unplanned population growth because neither Project Alternative would include the construction of new housing, creation of new jobs, or the extension of roadways that may result in unplanned population growth. Furthermore, neither alternative would include modification of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. As such, no unusual constraints associated with recreation have been identified for either Project Alternative.

Transportation and Traffic. Both alternatives would generate short-term construction related vehicle trips and temporary road closures to allow for construction. Alternative I would require closures on W.

Meyers Road and Belmont Avenue to allow for the construction of new replacement culverts. Alternative II would require intermittent road closures on N. Little League Drive (approximately 0.4-mile segment), W.

Meyers Road (approximately 0.15-mile segment), and Belmont Avenue (approximately 0.10-mile segment) to allow for the construction of a stormwater drainage system within each ROW. For either alternative, it is recommended that the City or its contractor prepare a Traffic Control Plan prior to any lane closures to ensure proper access to residences and businesses by emergency vehicles during construction and to maintain traffic flow.

Due to the nature of both alternatives, operational traffic and emergency access are anticipated to be similar to present conditions. As both Project Alternatives would construct stormwater infrastructure, vehicle trips associated with the operational project are limited to infrequent maintenance trips. These infrequent maintenance trips would not substantially increase the number of vehicle trips in the region.

Additionally, neither project alternative would alter the alignment of an existing roadway in an incompatible or potentially hazardous manner, and neither alternative would conflict with an adopted policy, plan, or program regarding public transit, bicycle facilities, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.

The nearest airport is the San Bernardino International Airport, located approximately ten miles to the southeast of both Project Alternatives. Therefore, no unusual constraints associated with transportation and traffic have been identified for either Project Alternative.

Tribal Cultural Resources. Please refer to the Cultural Resources section above. Regardless of the site selected for development, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 Native American notification is required during the CEQA process.

Utilities and Service Systems. Neither Project Alternative I nor II are of a scope that would result in the construction of new utility services infrastructure. The Proposed Project could use a negligible amount of water during the construction phase to reduce dust. Both Project Alternatives would construct stormwater Packet Page. 1350
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
control infrastructure within an area characterized by residential development and would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, solid waste or telecommunications facilities. Although Project Alternative I is anticipated to generate more construction and demolition waste when compared with Project Alternative II, both Project Alternatives would require compliance with AB 939, which requires every California City and County to divert 50-percent of its waste from landfills. Further, it is not anticipated that either Project Alternative would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Therefore, no significant site-specific constraints related to utilities and service systems are anticipated for either site location.

Wildfire. Both site alternatives are designated as located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). Additionally, both sites would be located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and are designated by the City’s General Plan as within the Moderate Fire Hazard Area (FRAP 2024; City 2005, Figure S-9).

Based on this Environmental Constraints Analysis, the recommended CEQA document is an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration with supporting technical studies and described in this report. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at (909) 307-0046 or email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Attachments
Attachment A: Figures
References
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2018. California Officially Designated State Scenic Highways Map. Available online at:

Jesus “Freddie” Olmos
Southern California Regional CEQA/NEPA Group
Manager, Principal Environmental Planner
Christopher Uminski
Assistant Environmental Planner
Packet Page. 1351
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e805711 6f1aacaa. Accessed November 21, 2024.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2024. RareFind California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). California. Sacramento, CA, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch. Accessed August 2024.

City of San Bernardino (City). 2005. City of San Bernardino General Plan. Available online at:
https://cdnsm5-
hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_17442462/File/Government/Department/Communit y%20&%20Economic%20Development/Planning/Complete%20General%20Plan%20Compressed. pdf. Accessed November 21, 2024.
_____. 2024a Online General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map. https://sbcity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=dcca6aa4816b4021bd9364888 ba669fd. Accessed November 21, 2024.
_____. 2024b Chapter 8.54 of City’s Municipal Code, Noise Control. Available online at:
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/sanbernardinoca/latest/sanbernardino_ca/0-0-0-7579.

Accessed November 21, 2024.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024. Rare Plant Program, Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5). Available online at: https://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed August 2024.

San Bernardino County (County). 2023. San Bernardino County Biotic Resources Map. Available online at:
cnty_all_biotic_resources_map_final.pdf. Accessed August 2024.

Department of Conservation (DOC). 2024. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application (EQZapp).

Available online at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/.

Accessed November 21, 2024.

Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2024. DTSC EnviroStor Database. Available online at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=San+Bernardnio. Accessed November 21, 2024.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP). 2024. Aquatic Resource Delineation for the Meyers Creek Drainage System Project. Prepared November 2024.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2016. Flood Insurance Rate Map, (FIRM #06071C7930J).

Available online at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/downloadProduct?productTypeID=FINAL_PRODUCT&productSubTy peID=FIRM_PANEL&productID=06071C7930J Accessed November 21, 2024.

Packet Page. 1352
Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan
Environmental Constraints Analysis
May 9, 2025

City of San Bernardino: Meyers Creek Conceptual Improvement Plan 2024-164
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) 2024. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer (FHSZ). Available online at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.

Accessed November 21, 2024.

Google Earth. 2024. Google Earth© website. Available online at: https://earth.google.com. Accessed November 21, 2024.

National Park Service (NPS). 2024. National Register of Historic Places, Digital Archive on NPGallery 2025. https://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp. Accessed April 29, 2025.

Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). 2024a. Office of Historic Preservation’s Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), dated September 23, 2022 for San Bernardino County. _____. 2024b. Office of Historic Preservation California Historical Landmarks Website. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21427. Accessed April 29, 2025. _____. 2024c. Directory of Properties in the Historical Resources Inventory. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=30. Accessed April 29, 2025.

State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB). 2024. SWRCB GeoTracker Database. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=City+of+San+Bernard ino. Accessed November 21, 2024.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024. Critical Habitat. https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe09893cf75b 8dbfb77. Accessed August 2024.
_____. 1918. Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Available online at: https://www.fws.gov/law/migratory-bird-treatyact-1918. Accessed August 2024.

Packet Page. 1353
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com Attachment A: Figures
Packet Page. 1354
Project Location
Los Angeles
San Francisco
California
Nevada Utah
Arizona
Oregon Idaho
Map Date: 8/13/2024
Sources: ESRI
Location: N:\2024\2024-164 Meyers Creek Constraints Analysis\MAPS\Location_Vicinity\Location and Vicinity.aprx - MCCA_Vicinity_20240813 (trotellini - 8/13/2024) I
0 5 10
Mile s
2024-164 Meyers Creek Constraints Analysis
Figure 1. Project Vicinity
Packet Page. 1355
Map Date: 8/13/2024
Sources: ESRI, San Bernardino County (2023)
Location: N:\2024\2024-164 Meyers Creek Constraints Analysis\MAPS\Location_Vicinity\Location and Vicinity.aprx - MCCA_Location_20240813 (trotellini - 8/13/2024) I
0 350
US Feet
2024-164 Meyers Creek Constraints Analysis
Figure 2. Project Location
Map Contents
Project Alternative I
Project Alternative II
Packet Page. 1356
Meyers Creek Drainage Study
Preliminary Design Report
11-67 Q3 Consulting
Appendix O: Sedimentation and Scour
Packet Page. 1357
Packet Page. 1358




 



 

 


!"#
$%&'()!*
)'+,'--,) .
/,* 

! '01234567 89 8 8:9 8: 89 +37;<5 (35;7=3> ?@

A

B: 

 ?C
 


 




 ?C
 


 







 ?C
 


 


D


 ?C
 


 


'6=>E ?@

A

B ?

 F



C G

H

C I
H

C ?

G

@
 

J?

G

@
 ?
J?

G

@
 DC
B?

 G

@
 ?

H
C


?


 KC

 ?
J
?


 KC




?


 KC

 HH


 LHH


 ?
JHH


 HH


 /M3<<;> (67NM6>6OP ?@

A

BQ 


R KSB

 L?J

 


R ?
J?J

 


R ?J

 


R RK



 TQU
@R K


 :QU
@R K


 V:U
@R K


 R 


 F



C R G

H

C R 
H

C R W


 G


W

 ?
JW


 
W


 I


 I

 LI

 F
I


 X=>>E>6N; (67NM6>6OP ?@

A

BY Z
A
 

C ?
J?
 L?
 
CJ
?

KC

L?
KC

F
?
KC



 B


 K


 B


 ?
JK


 B


 LK


 B


 [[

\
?J
@
[?@

@

JY?@

A

B8
Packet Page. 1359
July 1952
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1360
November 1967
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1361
May 1970
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1362
August 1975
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1363
December 1980
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1364
October 1986
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1365
April 1994
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1366
March 2008
Courtesy of USGS Packet Page. 1367

DISCUSSION
City of San Bernardino
Request for Council Action
Date: October 21, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Lynn Merrill, Director of Public Works
Azzam Jabsheh, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer Department: Public Works
Subject: University Parkway Landscaping Improvements –
Conceptual Landscape Plan Review and Direction
Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review the proposed conceptual landscape plan for the University Parkway Landscaping Improvements Project and provide direction to staff prior to proceeding with final design.

City Manager's Comments
This item is the landscape construction project previously at the Council meeting and the bids were all rejected. Based on City Council discussion, Public Works has put together an alternative conceptual landscape plan for City Council review.

Executive Summary
The University Parkway Landscaping Improvements Project proposes droughttolerant, lower-maintenance landscape enhancements along University Parkway between Baseline Street and 16th Street. The revised concept uses drought-tolerant plant materials, decorative hardscape treatments, and gateway monuments to improve the appearance and identity of the corridor while reducing long-term irrigation and maintenance requirements. The landscaping improvements follow the original University Parkway Extension Phase 1 roadway construction, which included roadway improvements and a raised hardscape median; however, the additional landscaping was not completed as part of that original construction and was subsequently advanced as a separate project.

Packet Page. 1368
The separate Median and Streetscape Improvements Project was later advertised for construction, but the apparent low bidder withdrew its bid after the proposed award was continued by the Mayor and City Council. On June 3, 2026, the City Council rejected the construction bids and considered alternatives for moving the project forward. Staff subsequently developed a revised conceptual design and presented two alternatives to the Northwest PAC on September 14, 2026. The Northwest PAC supported the alternative incorporating gateway monuments. Staff is now presenting the preferred conceptual design to the Mayor and City Council for review and direction prior to proceeding with final design.

Background
University Parkway is identified as a major arterial roadway in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element. The roadway previously terminated at 16th Street and was extended south to Baseline Street as part of the first phase of a larger four-phase improvement project. On December 5, 2018, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-310 approving an agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California (ERSC) to provide environmental clearance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and prepare Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the University Parkway extension between Baseline Street and 16th Street. The agreement was subsequently amended to provide additional design and construction support services.

On August 17, 2022, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-185 awarding the University Parkway Extension Phase 1 construction contract to Riverside Construction Company in the amount of $7,436,165 and authorizing related construction contingencies and engineering and inspection costs. The original roadway construction was completed in December 2023 and included construction of a raised median with stamped concrete between 16th Street and Baseline Street.

The original construction did not include the additional landscaping along the corridor, which was subsequently advanced as a separate Median and Streetscape Improvements Project.

The separate Median and Streetscape Improvements Project contemplated landscaping and automatic irrigation within the median and along both sides of University Parkway, including approximately 110 24-inch box trees, shrubs and other landscape improvements, and replacement of existing electric streetlights with solar streetlights. The project was advertised for public bidding on August 5, 2025, and nine sealed bids were received and opened on September 23, 2025. H L Hitchcock Construction, Inc. was identified as the lowest responsive bidder with a base bid of $1,011,835. The proposed construction award, together with contingency, resulted in a total estimated project cost of $1,129,835.

Packet Page. 1369
On January 21, 2026, the proposed construction award was presented to the Mayor and City Council. Council continued the matter to allow additional time to evaluate the bids, project costs, and market conditions. Prior to the item returning for award, H L Hitchcock Construction, Inc. formally withdrew its bid, citing current market conditions and material price escalation. Proceeding with the remaining bids was not considered feasible within the available project funding.

On June 3, 2026, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026-066 rejecting the construction bids. The Council item identified several potential paths forward, including rebidding the existing design or proceeding with a new design process for the University Parkway landscaping project. In response to Council direction, staff began developing a revised drought-tolerant landscape concept intended to reduce irrigation needs, long-term maintenance requirements, and overall project costs while maintaining an attractive and cohesive appearance for the University Parkway corridor.

Discussion
The revised conceptual landscape plan was developed to provide an attractive streetscape along University Parkway while emphasizing drought tolerance, reduced long-term maintenance, water conservation, and compatibility with existing site conditions. Compared with the previous design, the concept reduces the amount and intensity of plant material and incorporates a drought-tolerant landscape palette consisting of Palo Verde trees, Blue Agave, Aloe ‘Blue Elf,’ Brittlebush, Golden Barrel Cactus, stabilized decomposed granite (DG), mixed aggregate, gray aggregate, cobbles, and natural boulders.

The design increases the use of decorative rock and aggregate treatments to provide visual interest while reducing areas requiring routine landscape maintenance.

Appropriate stabilizers and/or binders are proposed for decomposed granite and applicable decorative aggregate materials to help keep the materials in place and minimize displacement onto sidewalks and the roadway. The revised concept is also intended to eliminate the extensive permanent irrigation system included in the previous design. Establishment watering requirements and other necessary landscape establishment provisions will be evaluated and incorporated into the final construction documents.

Gateway monuments are incorporated near the entrance to the University Parkway corridor to enhance the visual identity of the roadway and provide a recognizable community gateway. On September 14, 2026, staff presented two conceptual alternatives to the Northwest PAC for review and input. Both alternatives incorporated substantially the same landscape palette and overall design approach; however, one alternative included gateway monuments and the other did not. The Northwest PAC expressed a preference for the alternative incorporating the gateway monuments.

Packet Page. 1370
Based on this input, staff is presenting a single conceptual design to the Mayor and City Council that includes the gateway monuments. If necessary, the monument features could be removed during final design as a potential cost-saving measure without substantially changing the remainder of the proposed landscape concept.

The project area is also subject to existing utility constraints. Previous design work required coordination with the Department of Water Resources due to an existing 96- inch water line located beneath the University Parkway right-of-way. Accordingly, the revised final design will require necessary verification and agency coordination before construction documents are completed. This coordination and review process is anticipated to take approximately 9 to 12 months.

Based on the current conceptual design, staff anticipates a preliminary construction cost in the range of approximately $500,000 to $700,000. A detailed Engineer’s Estimate will be prepared and refined as part of the final Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E).

The conceptual plan is being presented at this stage so that the Mayor and City Council may provide feedback and direction before the project proceeds into final design. Following Council direction, staff will coordinate with Engineering Resources of Southern California (ERSC) to define the additional professional design services necessary to revise and complete the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) based on the approved conceptual direction. Staff will return to the Mayor and City Council with a future staff report requesting approval of an amendment to ERSC’s Professional Services Agreement, as necessary, to authorize the additional design services and associated compensation. Following authorization, ERSC will complete the revised PS&E, required agency coordination, and other construction documents necessary to prepare the project for a future construction bidding process.

Strategic Targets and Goals
The University Parkway Landscaping Improvements Project supports Key Target No. 3d under Improved Quality of Life – Improve the City’s appearance, cleanliness and attractiveness. The proposed improvements will enhance the appearance of the University Parkway corridor through drought-tolerant, lower-maintenance landscaping, decorative hardscape treatments, and gateway features.

Fiscal Impact
No additional appropriation is requested as part of this action. Funding for the University Parkway project was previously appropriated through the Regional Circulation Fund. The current available project balance is approximately $1.14 million.

Packet Page. 1371
The existing project balance is anticipated to be sufficient to fund the remaining project activities, including the additional professional design services necessary to complete the revised Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E), as well as the subsequent construction of the revised project. Accordingly, no additional project funding or appropriation is anticipated for either design or construction at this time.

Following Council direction, staff will coordinate with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. (ERSC) to finalize the scope and fee for the additional design services. Final construction costs will be confirmed through the revised PS&E prior to advertising the project for construction.

Conclusion
It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review the proposed conceptual landscape plan for the University Parkway Landscaping Improvements Project and provide direction to staff prior to proceeding with final design.

Attachments
Attachment 1 - University Parkway Landscaping Improvements Conceptual Landscape Design
Attachment 2 - Project Location Map
Ward:

Ward 6
Synopsis of Previous Council Actions:

June 3, 2026 – Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026-066 rejecting construction bids for the University Parkway Extension – Median & Streetscape Improvements Project.

January 21, 2026 – Mayor and City Council considered the proposed construction contract award to H L Hitchcock Construction, Inc. and continued the matter to allow additional time for staff to evaluate the bids, project costs, and market conditions.

August 6, 2025 – Mayor and City Council authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 5 to the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Engineering Resources of Southern California (ERSC), adding design and construction support services, including surveying.

August 17, 2022 – Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-185 authorizing construction, construction contingencies, and inspection costs for the University Parkway Extension Project (Phase 1).

December 5, 2018 – Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-310 approving an agreement with ERSC to provide environmental clearance under the Packet Page. 1372
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and preparation of Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the University Parkway extension between Baseline Street and 16th Street.

Packet Page. 1373

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN RENDERINGS

UNIVERSITY PARKWAY

LANDSCAPING DESIGN
BASELINE STREET TO 16TH STREET
SEPTEMBER 2026
Packet Page. 1374

EXISTING CONDITIONS
UNIVERSITY PARKWAY - BASELINE STREET TO 16TH STREET
02 / 11 Packet Page. 1375
03 Packet Page. 1376
RENDERING 1 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
04 Packet Page. 1377
RENDERING 2 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
05 Packet Page. 1378
RENDERING 3 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
06 Packet Page. 1379
RENDERING 4 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
07 Packet Page. 1380
RENDERING 5 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
08 Packet Page. 1381
RENDERING 6 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
09 Packet Page. 1382
RENDERING 7 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
10 Packet Page. 1383
RENDERING 8 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY LANDSCAPING DESIGN
11 Packet Page. 1384
Packet Page. 1385