Those persons wishing to speak on any item in cluded on the agenda, or on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, are invited fill out and submit to the City Clerk a “Request to Speak” form (name and address optional) which is available at the entrance to the City Counci l Chambers .
Additionally, members of the public may submit electronic inquiries or comments by submitting emails to [email protected]
If you require a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting per your rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act or for any ot her reason, please contact the City Clerk’s Office (909) 334 -3306, at least 48 hours prior to the advertised starting time of the meeting.
Any documents produced by the City and distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agen da will be made available in the City Clerk’s Office during normal business hours at City Hall located at 13220 Central Avenue, Chino. In addition, such documents will be posted on the City’s website at www.cityofchino.org.
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SPECIAL MEETING – CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
13220 CENTRAL AVENUE
CHINO, CA 91710
WEDNESDAY JULY 5, 2023
CLOSED SESSION – 5:30 PM
OPEN SESSION – 6:00 PM
AGENDA
ROLL CALL
Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa, Mayor Pro Tem Karen C. Comstock, Council Member Curtis Burton, Council Member Christopher Flores, Council Member Marc Lucio.
CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Ci ty Council about the closed session items. Ordinance No. 97 -08 (Chino Municipal Code Section 2.04.090) limits speakers to no more than five (5) minutes in which to address the Council, except as provided under Government Code 54954.3(b)(2).
CLOSED SESSION
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR(S).
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:
Agency Negotiator: Geriann Kingslan, Director of Human Resources/Risk Management.
Employee Organizations: Chino C ity Hall Confidential Employee Association, Chino Polic e Professional Employees Association, San Bernardino Public Employees Association (SBPEA)/Teamsters Local Union No. 1932 -Professioinal, Technical and Clerical, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME District Council 36 -Local 3183), Chino Police Officers Association, Chino Police Management Association, Unrepresented Management, Unrepresented Sworn Management, Executive Management, Elected Officials.
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JULY 5, 2023 2
FLAG SALUTE
CEREMONIALS
Proclamations
Park and Recreation Month - July 2023.
Presentations
Mayor's Home Beautification Award July 2023
Business of the Month July 2023 - Flo's Airport Cafe
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
AGENDA ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
This is the time and place for the Mayor to inform the public of all upcoming events and past occurrences of communitywide interest and concern.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council about subjects that do not appear elsewhere on the agenda. Due to Council policy and Brown Act requirements, action will not be taken on any issues not on the Agenda. Ordinance No. 97 - 08 (Chino Municipal Code Section 2.04.090) limits speakers to no more than five (5) minutes in which to address Council, except as provided under Government Code 54954.3(b)(2).
CONSENT CALENDAR
At this time, members of the public may present testimony as to why an item should be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. Unless a member of the public or City Council requests that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar, all items will be acted upon as a whole and by one vote. Items placed on the Consent Calendar represent routine expenditures and/or actions that support ongoing City operations.
1. Warrants. Approve expenses as audited and within budget for warr ant 765903 to 766067, and Electronic Fund Transfers 517484E to 517528E, totaling $3,713,386.13.
2. Minutes. a. June 6, 2023 Regular Meeting (All Members Present) b. April 18, 2023 Special Meeting of City Council, Planning Commission, and Community Services Commission.
3. Elected City Officials’ Report Regarding Travel, Training, and Meetings . Receive and file the Elected City Officials' Report reflecting City Council business related expenses incurred by the City and forecast of future events and trainings.
4. Award of Co ntract to InfoSend, Inc. for Utility Billing . Award of contract to InfoSend, Inc. for utility billing and online payment services for an estimated amount of $175,000 annually (approximation $55,000 for vendor services and $120,000 for postage).
5. Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program . Authorize the City Manager to submit an application, accept, and execute all necessary documents on behalf of the City for the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program.
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JULY 5, 2023 3
6. State Asset Forfeiture Expenditure for Drug and Gang Education. Appropriate $770.13 from the State Asset Forfeiture - Drug and Gang Prevention Fund to support the San Bernardino Countywide Gangs and Drug Task Force Scholarship Fund
7. Federal Asset Forfeiture - Police K9. Appropriate $22,150 from the Federal Asset Forfeiture / Department of Justice Fund for the purchase of a replacement police service dog.
8. Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - Site Approval PL18-0103 (TDC Remington Partners, LLC). Accept the public improvements for TDC Remington Partners, LLC, PL18 -0103, located at 9301 Remington Avenue as complete and authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty bond.
9. Cal Fire Prado Helitack Base Modificati ons. Adopt Resolution No. 2023 -042, allowing Cal Fire to Submit an Application to the Department of Aeronautics for Modifications to the Existing Cal Fire Prado Helitack Base to Increase Wildfire Safety.
M _____ S _____ RC _____
PUBLIC HEARING
Prior to the vote of the City Council, any member of the audience will have the opportunity to address Council on any items listed under Public Hearings. Council requests, but it is not required, that you state your name and address prior to making any remarks.
10. PL23-0041 (General Plan Amendment), PL 23-0014 (Prezone/Annexation), PL23 -0015 (Zoning Ordinance Amendment) - Ramona Francis Annexation. A request to annex approximately 145 acres of land (Ramona Francis Annexation) from unincorporated San Bernardino County zoning designation of RS-1 (Single Residential minimum lot size 1 acre), RS 20M (Single Residential - 20,000 square feet minimum), RS (Single Residential) to the City of Chino’s zoning designation of RD2 (Residential/Agricultural), RD4.5 (Residential , 4.5 dwelling units/acre) and P (Public) consistent with the City’s General Plan and a proposed amendment to Title 20 (Zoning) of the Chino Municipal Code to update Chapter 20.16 (Right to Farm) to add animal keeping approved by the County of San Bernardi no as a permitted use for properties annexed into the City. A proposed amendment to the General Plan Map to change the existing General Plan land use designation of 13.35 acres of land from RD 2 (2 dwelling units/acre) to RD 4.5 (Residential, 4.5 dwelling units/acre) within the annexation area, located at the NWC of Francis and Yorba Avenues (APN’s: 1013-211-21 and 22)
Staff Report by: Mike Hitz, Principal Planner.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -041 approving an addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) for the prezoning and general plan amendment for the Ramona Francis Annexation project area; 3) approve the introduction of Ordinance No. 2023 -015, approving PL23-0014 (Prezone/Annexation), in conjunct ion with the proposed annexation of the Ramona Francis Annexation area, to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; 4) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -040 approving PL23 -0041 (Genera l Plan Amendment), 5) approve the introduct ion of Ordinance No. 2023 -005, PL23 -0015 (Zoning Ordinance Amendment), to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; and 6) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -039, requesting that the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) initiate annexation proceedings for PL23-0014(Prezone/Annexation).
ORDINANCE NO. 2023 -015 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA, PREZONING APPROXIMATELY 145 ACRES OF LAND TO RD2 (RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL), RD 4.5 (RESIDENTIAL) AND P (PUBLIC) FOR PARCELS LOCATED
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JULY 5, 2023 4
EAST OF NORTON AVENUE, NORTH AND SOUTH OF FRANCIS AVENUE, NORTH AND SOUTH OF
PHILADELPHIA STREET AND WEST OF YORBA AVENUE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHINO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE (APN’s: 1013-211-04-08, 10, 11, & 18-22, 1013-221-01-06, 09, & 11-18, 1013-341-03-07, & 09- 13, 1013-351-16, 17, 20-23, 26-31, & 40, 1013-361-01-11, 14-21, & 25, 1013-371-03-22, 1013-411-11, & 14- 18, 1013-421-01, 04-13, 16, 18, & 19, 1013-431-01, 02, 06, & 09-11, and 1016-121-04-07)., WITHIN THE
CITY OF CHINO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND IN CONNECTION WITH (PREZONE/ANNEXATION PL23-0014) AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2010-06.
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-005 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SELECTED PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING CODE (CHAPTER 20.16 - RIGHT TO FARM AND CHAPTER 20.20 - NONCONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES AND PARCELS) OF THE CITY OF CHINO. PL23-0015 (ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT).
M _____ S _____ RC _____
11. Yorba Villas Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement. Introduction of Ordinance No. 2023- 014 approving the Yorba Villas Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement.
Staff Report by: Fred Galante, City Attorney.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) approve introduction of Ordina nce No. 2023-014, approving the Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement by and between the City of Chino and Yorba Villas, LLC, to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; 3) adopt the CEQA findings included as part of the Ordinance; 4) adopt the Addendum to th e Project EIR confirming no further CEQA review is required; and 5) authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
ORDINANCE NO. 2023 -014 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHINO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PRE -ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHINO AND YORBA VILLAS, LLC RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 13.25 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF CHINO’S SPHERE OF INFL UENCE (APNs 1013-211-21 & -22); AUTHORIZING SUCH DEVELOPMENT PER CHAPTER 20.13; AND APPROVING SANITARY SEWER
SERVICE FOR THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION.
M _____ S _____ RC _____
NEW BUSINESS
12. Introduction of Ordinance 2023-016 - Community Services Department and Commission Name Change. Revisions to Chino Municipal Code To Change the Name of the Department of Community Services to the Department of Community Services, Parks, and Recreation.
Staff Report by: Fred Galante, City Attorney.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Approve the introduction of Ordinance No. 2023 -016, amending the Chino Municipal Code to change the name of the Department of Community Services to the Department of Community Services, Parks, and Recreation, to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 2023 -016 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHINO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF CHINO MUNICIPAL CODE TO
CHANGE THE NAME OF THE COMMUN ITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THE
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JULY 5, 2023 5
M _____ S _____ RC _____
13. Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - Parcel Map No. 19889 (Liberty Property Limited Partnership). Accept the public improvements for Liberty Property, L.P ., PM 19889, located on the southwest corner of Eucalyptus and Yorba Avenues, as complete and authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty bond.
Staff Report by: Jesus Plasencia, Assistant City Engineer.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Accept public improvements as complete for PM 19889; 2) authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty bond; and 3) authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
M _____ S _____ RC _____
14. Award of C onstruction Contract: Kimball Avenue Preser ve Improvements Project (ST232) .
Award a construction contract to C.P. Construction Co., Inc., Upland, CA , in the amount of $2,959,540 for Project No. ST232 - Kimball Avenue Preserve Improvements Staff Report by: Michele Hindersinn, Principal Engineer.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Appropriate $2,234,516 from the Transportation Fund (320) with a backfill from the unappropriated reserves of the Bridges, Signals, and Thoroughfare Preserve Development Impact Fee Fund (260); 2 ) appropriate $1,216,812 from the unappropr iated reserves of the Citywide Storm Drain Fund 540, with a corresponding reimbursement increase to the same project budget ST232; 3) increase the project budget for the Kimball Avenue Preserve Improvements Projec t ST232 by $3,500,000 for a new revised pro ject budget of $4,556,240.94;4) ratify amendment to the Cooperative Agreement Pass Through, with the County of San Bernardino for the Kimball Avenue Drainage Improvements 4) award a construction contract in the amount of $2,959,540 to C.P. Construction Co., Inc., Upland, CA for Chino Preserve Street and Storm Drain Improvements at Kimball Avenue Project (ST232); 5) authorize expenditures of up to $295,954 for construction management, $147,977 for inspection costs, and $395,259 for construction contingency; and 6) authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
M _____ S _____ RC _____
15. Approve the Pre -Qualified List and Vendor Cap for Capital Improvement Project Manageme nt and Related Services . Approve the pre -qualified list of firms to perform Capital Improvement Project Management and Related Services on an as-needed basis.
Staff Report by: Michele Hindersinn, Principal Engineer.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Approve the pre-qualified list of firms to perform Capital Impr ovement Project Management and Related Services on an as -needed basis; 2) approve a Professional Services Agreement with EXP U.S. Services, Inc. for On -Call Civil Engineering Services for Public Works Capital Impr ovement Project Management and Related Serv ices for a total contract amount not -to-exceed $250,000; 3) approve a Professional Services Agreement with Transtech Engineers, Inc., for On -Call Civil Engineering Services for Public Works Capital Improvement Pro ject Management and Related Services for a total contract amount not -to- exceed $650,000; 4) approve a Professional Services Agreement with Z&K Consulting, Inc., for On-Call Civil Engineering Services for Public Works Capital Improvement Project Management and Related Services for a total contract a mount not-to-exceed $900,000; and 5) authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
M _____ S _____ RC _____
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JULY 5, 2023 6
MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
This is the time and place for the Mayor and Council Members to report on pres cheduled Council Committee Assignment Meetings that were held since the last Regular Council Meeting, and any other items of interest. Upon request by an individual Council Member, the City Council may choose to take action on any of the subject matters listed below.
Mayor Ulloa
16. Appointment of Community Services Commissioners . Approve the appointments of Robert Martinez, Julissa Montenegro-Olivas, Patricia Pereda Arlt, and Jamie Aviles to the Community Services Commission.
Staff Report by: Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the appointment of Robert Martinez, Julissa Montenegro-Olivas and Patricia Pereda Arlt to the Community Services Commission for a four -year term ending June 30, 2027, and Jamie Aviles for a term ending June 30, 2024.
M _____ S _____ RC _____
17.Commissions Discussion. Discussion regarding Community Services and Planning Commissioners.
Report by: Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock
Council Member Burton
18. Community Support Contribution . Approve Community Support Contributions to the American Cancer Society ($250), Chino Neighborhood House ($1,000), and Rancho Del Chino Rotary Club ($250).
Staff Report by: Curtis Burton, Council Member.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve community support fund contributions: to the American Cancer Society ($250), Chino N eighborhood House ($1,000), and Rancho Del Chino Rotary Club ($250).
M _____ S _____ RC _____
Council Member Flores
Council Member Lucio
City Manager's Report
City Attorney's Report
Police Chief's Report
Fire Chief's Report
ADJOURN
The next Regular Me eting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. (Closed Session no sooner than 4:00 p.m. if necessary) in these Council Chambers.
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JULY 5, 2023 7
I, Natalie Gon zaga, City Clerk of the City of Chino, hereby declare that on Wednesday, June 28, 2023, this agenda was posted on the south window of Chino City Hall and this agenda together with all of the agenda reports and related documents were posted on the City’s we bsite at www.cityofchino.org by myself or under my direction.
_______________________________________
Natalie Gonzaga, City Clerk.
5.a
July is Park and Recreation Month Proclamation
Packet Pg. 8
Revenue: Expenditure:
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROB BURNS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
SUBJECT: WARRANTS.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve expenses as audited and within budget for warrants 765903 to 766067, and Electronic Fund Transfers 517484E to 517528E, totaling $3,713,386.13.
FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funds have been included in the Fiscal Year 22-23 Operating Budget.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES:
The recommendation detailed above further s the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
• Financial Stability
10.1 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 9
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: WARRANTS
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
As prescribed by Government Code Sections 37202 and 37208, the following demand registers are herewith submitted for Council ratification:
NO. WARRANTS DATE FY AMOUNT
1. 765903 – 766067 6/8/23 22-23 $3,034,490.56
2. 517484E – 517528E 6/9/23 22-23 $678,895.57
E: Electronic Fund Transfers
TOTAL $3,713,386.13
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
See attached exhibit for detailed information on warrants exceeding $50,000.
RB:hm
Attachment: Exhibit 1
10.1 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 10
Council Meeting 7/5/23
CITY OF CHINO
A/P Warrant Register Over $50,000
Check
Number
Check Date Vendor Name Description Amount
765906 06/08/2023 ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT ASPHALT SERVICES $68,441.98 765962 DYETT & BHATIA, URBAN & REGIONAL
PLANNERS
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE $61,210.82
765966 EXP US SERVICES, INC. DESIGN SERVICES $61,192.99 765998 MAMCO, INC. WATER MAIN LINE REPLACEMENT $142,446.33 766023 RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. WATER BLDG-LEAD & ASBESTOS
ABATEMENT
$56,857.50
766031 SEQUEL CONTRACTORS, INC. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES $1,148,791.37 766037 SO CAL EDISON CO SERVICE PERIOD 04/28-05/29 $215,523.29 766040 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE INC. RE-SODDING OF SPORTS FIELD-AYALA PARK
$527,050.67
766060 WASTE MANAGEMENT COLLECTION SERVICES $127,471.39 517490 06/09/2023 BONADIMAN WATER, INC. STORM DRAIN REHAB. $252,899.50 517496 ENGINEERING RESOURCES OF SOUTHERN
CA, INC.
ENGINEERING PLAN SERVICES $73,686.83
517507 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITIES AGENCY RECYCLED WATER $87,671.63
12 TOTAL $2,823,244.30
10.1.a
Warrants
Packet Pg. 11
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING – CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
13220 CENTRAL AVENUE
CHINO, CA 91710
TUESDAY JUNE 6, 2023
CLOSED SESSION – 5:00 PM
OPEN SESSION – 6:00 PM
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
The June 6, 2023, Regular Meeting of the Chino City Council / Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 5:03 p.m. by Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa in the Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Mayor Eun ice M Ulloa, Mayor Pro T em Karen C. Comstock, Council Member Curtis Burton, Council Member Christopher Flores.
ABSENT: Council Member Marc Lucio (Excused – Left meeting at 6:42 p.m.)
CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak.
CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Fred Galante read into the record the items listed on the Closed Session agenda.
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR(S).
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:
Agency Negotiator: Geriann Kingslan, Director of Human Resources/Risk Man agement.
Employee Organizations: Chino City Hall Confidential Employee Association, Chino Police Professional Employees Association, San Bernardino Public Employees Association (SBPEA)/Teamsters Local Union No. 1932 -Professioinal, Technical and Clerical, A merican Federation of Sta te, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME District Council 36 -Local 3183), Chino Police Officers Association, Chino Police Management Association , Unrepres ented Management, Unrepresented Sworn Management, Executive Management, Elected Officials.
The City Council recessed to Closed Session at 5:05 p.m.
The City Council concluded Closed Session at 6:08 p.m. and reconvened the regular meet ing at 6:11 p.m.
FLAG SALUTE
Council Member Burton led the assembly in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 12
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 2
CEREMONIALS
Presentations
Mayor Ulloa called up Chino Youth Boxing Foundation President Mike Garcia , Vice President Ray Morales, and board members who presented each City Council Member with an award in recognition of their continued support of the Chino Youth Boxing Foundation.
Mayor Ulloa recognized Pro Towing as Ju ne 2023 B usiness of the Month . Sarkis and Kevin Karaoghlanian from Pro Towing were present to accept the award.
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Fred Galante reported Closed Session will reconvene after the regular meeting and a report out will be provided at the conclusion of Closed Session.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
City Manager Linda Reich reported there were no agenda additions or revisions.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Ulloa issued a reminder about the following scheduled community events:
• The Household Hazardous Waste Collecti on event is Saturday, June 10 from 8 :00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Public Works Services Yard located at 5050 Schaefer Avenue. For questions, call the Public Works Services Center at (909) 334-3266. • Chino Summer Nights will occur every Friday night at 6:30 p.m. (with the exception of June 30 for the Fireworks Spectacular Carnival) from June 16 to July 28 at City Hall Lawn. For questions, call the Carolyn Owens Community Center at 909-334-3258.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Pastor Bryan Gentry, Calvary Chapel Chino Hills, provided the invocation.
Benjamin Montgomery, City Manager of Chino Hills, thanked the City of Chino for hosting and coordinating the annual Corporate Challenge . He presented the Corporate Challe nge Winner Chino vs Chino Hills award for City of Chino to City Manager Linda Reich.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Warrants. Approve expenses as audited and within budget for warrants 765473 to 765690, and Electronic Fund Transfers 517312E to 517400E, totaling $6,428,904.71.
2. Minutes. February 21, 2023, Regular Meeting (All Members Present)
3. Elected City Officials’ Report Regarding Travel, Training, and Meetings . Rece ive and file the Elected City Officials' Report reflecting City Council business related expenses incurred by the City and forecast of future events and trainings.
4. City Council Meeting Date Changes and Cancellations for month of July and August 2023 . 1) Authorize staff to cancel the J uly 4th, August 1st, and Augu st 15th Regular City Council meetings and 2) schedule a City Council special called City Council meeting on Wednesday, July 5th at 6 p.m. to ensure the continuation of City business. (Item pull ed from the Consent Calendar for separate action)
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 13
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 3
5. Ordinance No. 2023 -012 - Community Services Commission Terms (Second Reading) .
Adopt Ordi nance No. 2023 -012, an Ordin ance of the City of Chino, California to amend Chapter 2.38 (Community Services Commission (Second Reading).
ORDINANCE 2023-012
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2.3 8 (CHINO COM MUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION) OF THE
CHINO MUNICIPAL CODE
6. Amendment to the City's Classification and Salary Sch edule. Adopt Res olution No. 2023 - 034 amending the City's Classification and Salary Schedule to increase the salary range for the Ho meless Outre ach Coordinator, Assistant H omeless Outreach Coordinator, and Special Projects Administrator.
7. Notice of Comp letion - Central Plant Cooling Towe r Replacement Project (IB238) . Accept the Central Plant Cooling Tower Replacement project (IB238 ) completed by C.E.
Mechanical, Inc., Chino, CA as complete.
8. Award of Contract - Auditing Services. Award a contract to Badawi & Associates, Berkeley, CA for auditing services in the amount of $57,480, with two additional one-year options, and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents on behalf of the City.
Moved by Council Member Lucio, seconded by Council Member Burt on, and carried on a 5-0-0 vote to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-3 and 5-8.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES, LUCIO.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: NONE.
ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT
4. City Council Meeting Date Changes and Cancellations for month of July and August 2023. 1) Authorize staff to can cel the July 4th, August 1st, and August 15th Regular City Council meetings and 2) schedule a City Council special called City Council meeting on Wednesday, July 5th at 6 p.m. to ensure the continuation of City business.
Mayor Ulloa provided a report on the item.
Moved by Council Member Lucio, seconded by Council Member Burton, and carried on a 5 -0-0 vote to authorize staff to cancel the July 4th, August 1st, and August 15th Regular City Council meetings and schedule a City Council special called City Council meeting on Wednesday, July 5th at 6 p.m. to ensure the continuation of City business.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES, LUCIO.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: NONE.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 14
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 4
PUBLIC HEARING
9. Solid Waste, Recycling, and Inland Empir e Ut ilities Agency (IEUA) Sew er Rate Str ucture.
Conduct a public hearing, tabulate written protest s, to set the rates for solid waste, recycling and Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) sewer services.
Mayor Ulloa opened the public hearing.
Joslyn Blakely, Project Coordinator provided a presentation on the item outlining the proposed Inland Empire Ut ilities Agency (IEUA) Sewage Treatment, Solid Waste, and Recycling rates for both resid ential and commercial properties , including the imple mentation of the new organics waste c ollection services program to all residents and b usinesses as re quired by SB1383.
Mayor Ulloa asked if the Council had any questions from staff.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock inquired about the methodology used to establish the rate amount and asked if other citi es are collecting overages. M s. Blakely explained that the first year $3.10 fee is based on production fees, but until staff can determine the tonnage amount produced, the fee rate will be reassessed and adjusted accordingly, and noted that she does not know other cities who are collecting overage fees.
Council Member Burton requ ested staff to explain the meaning of pass-through with regards to the rates for IEUA and Waste Management , explain the low volume rate and how this is determined, and confirm if the containers will be airtight . Ms. Blakely explained pass-through is the cost of delivering the service, in essence the city is collecting the fees for the IEUA and Waste Management. Ms. Blakely explained the low volume rate option f or ratepayers who produce les s waste can request a smaller 64 -gallon con tainer in place of the 96 -gallon container. Ms. Blakely confirmed that the organics waste collection containers will not be airtight.
Mayor Ulloa noted that both old and new containers will not be airtight, which will cause odors and attract flie s and rodents, a nd instruct ed staff to report any negative i mpacts that may result from adopting the organics recycling program to fulfill the SB1383 requirements.
Council Member Flores asked if staff have sought out intere st from local bu sinesses to encourage them to work with local non-profit organizations to donate excess fo od to help reduce waste. Ms. Blakely explained that there is a business outreach component as part of the program.
Council Member Burton asked if all residents would receive new waste containers. Ms.
Blakely explained that residents with waste contain ers that have normal wea r and tear conditions could qualify to get a new container and noted that an education al pro gram will help address any concerns residents may have. Council Member Burton stated he supports recycling but does not support Senate Bill 1383.
Leanna Escanuth, resident of Chino, spoke in opposition to the proposed rate increase and expressed displeasure with the customer service she has rec eived from the waste management company.
Jerry Fellows, resident of Chino, requested clarification on the percentage of increased fees for infrastructure improvements, administrative costs, and salary. Mayor Ulloa exp lained that staff will provide this information to him.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 15
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 5
Glenda Chavez, Waste Management Representative, reported that the mand atory organics recycling program is required by the State and explained Waste Management will implement an intense educational campaign to help residents be informed and mitigate any concerns .
Ms. Chavez explained that other municipal agencies have already established the same organics recycling program.
Mayor Ulloa asked Ms. Chavez to explain where the green and organics waste will be stored.
Ms. Chavez explained that the green and organics waste will be taken to a facility in the City of Tulare which is a fully licensed facility to be processed.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock asked Ms. Chavez to identify the cities who have implemented the organics recycling program and explain if the C ity of Chino ’s rate is in line with these other cities. Ms. Chavez identified the followi ng cities have implemented the organics recycling program: City of Chino Hills, City of Eastva le, City of Norco, City of Ontari o, and the City of Pomona. She explained that she is unfamiliar whether the City of Chino ’s rate is in line with these other cities.
Wilson Hernandez, resident of Chino, spoke in opposition to the proposed rate increase.
Council Member Flores commented that IEUA rates will eventually continue to increase and asked if the City at some point would consider establishing its own infrastructure to treat and service its own wastewater, with the goal of achiev ing control over rate increases. City Attorney Fred Galante explained the components of the existing IEUA contract and noted that there are steps the City is taking to establish its own infrastructure. He explained that currently the IEUA establishes the rates for the City of Chino and other contract agencies.
Mayor Pro Tem Co mstock requested staff to provide an annual account ing of the rates collected to determine if rates can be adjusted down.
Mayor Ulloa closed the public hearing.
Mayor Ulloa directed the City Clerk to tabulate the number of protest letters.
City Clerk Natalie Gonzaga reported that at the close of the p ublic hearing the City received 12 written protest letters . This amount is less than the majority needed to overturn the proposed rate structure; therefore, the proposition carried.
Mayor Ulloa announced that Council Member Lucio left due to a family emergency.
City Attorney Fred Galante noted that the motion would also include the Council discussion on an annual report to address the $3.10 rate per month expenditure, which correlates with the annual budget.
Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Comstock, seconded by Council Member Flores, and carried on a 3-1-1 vote to 1) conduct a public hearing; tabulate the written protests; 2) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -027, 3) declaring the resu lts of a noticed protest pro ceeding and approving certain actions for rates, fees, and charge s f or solid waste, recyc ling and IEUA sewer services; an d 4) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -028 setting the rates for solid waste, recycling and IEUA sewer services , including an annual report pro vided to the City Council addressing the $3.10 rate per month expenditure.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, FLORES.
NOES: BURTON.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 16
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 6
10. Conduct Tax Equity and Fiscal Res ponsibility Act (TEFR A) Hearing. Conduct a Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) Hear ing, adopt resol utions a pproving the form of associate membership agreement and the issuance of revenue obligations for the benefit of Heights Christian Schools.
Mayor Ulloa opened the public hearing.
Nadyne Lowry, Deputy Director of Finance, provided a report on the item.
Jessica Shaham, Attorney representing Heights Christian Schools and the California Enterprise Development Authority (CEDA), a conduit financing organization, Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) is requesting the City of Chino become associate members so that Heights Christian Schools can finance through CEDA.
Mayor Ulloa requested Ms. Shaham explain how the City of Chino is under no obligation to pay any bonds and that this administrative act is primarily to help the funding process. Ms.
Shaham explained that because they are issu ing ta x ex empt bonds on behalf of Heights Christian Schools , one of the requirements pursuant of the I RS is to hold a local public hearing and confirmed that the City is not obligated to pay the bonds and noted that it is the complete obligation of the school. She indicated that the associate membership with CEDA, does not pose any financial responsibility with the City and reaffirmed that any financial cost associated with this proposal is the responsibility of Heights Christian Schools.
Claude Lamar, President, and CEO of Heights Christian Schools explained that they own and operate two campuses in Chino Hills. He explained that they are in the process of purchasing a property in the City of Chino located at 14670 Ramona Avenue, to establish a school. Mr.
Lamar explained th ey are asking CEDA to issue these bonds for the purchase and construction of a new school.
Council Member Flores thanked the Height s Christian Schools for t heir efforts to provide services to the community.
There be ing no reque sts to address the City Counc il on this item, the public hearing was closed.
Moved by Mayor P ro Tem Comstock, seconded by Council Member Burton , and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 1) Conduct a public hearing as required by Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to receive comments relating to the issuance by the California Enterpr ise Devel opment Authority (the “A uthority”) of not to exceed $36,100,000 of the Authority’s Re venue Obligations (the “Obligations”) for the benefit of Heights Christian Schools, a California nonprofit religious co rporation (the “Borrower”); 2) Adopt Resolu tion No. 2023-032 approving an As sociate M embership Agreement between the City of Chino and the Authority; 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 033 approving the issua nce of the Obligations by the Authority to finance and refinance the Facilities for the benefit of the Borrower.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 17
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 7
11. Formation of Community Facilities Di strict 2023-1. Conduct a Public Hearing regarding the formation of Community Facilities District No. 2023-1 in The Preserve.
Mayor Ulloa opened the public hearing.
Nadyne Lowry, Deputy Director of Finance, provided a report on this item.
There being no requ ests to addres s the City Coun cil on this item, the public hearing was closed.
Moved by Council Member Flores, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comstock, and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 1) Conduct a Public Hea ring regarding the forma tion of Community Facilities District No. 2023-1; 2) accept tax consultant’s report; 3) adopt Resolution No. 2023-029, establishing CFD No. 2 023-1, author izing th e levy of special taxes, and calling an election; 4) adopt Resolution No. 2023-030, determinin g t he necessity to incur bonded indebtedness; 5) conduct a special election with the property owners.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
City Clerk Natalie Gonzaga reported that all the ballots have been cast in connection with the election to form CF D No. 2023-01. The results of th e election were unanimous, 12 vo tes in favor of the proposition.
City Attorney Fred Galante read the title of the Ordinance into the record.
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-013
ORDINANCE OF T HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, ACTING I N ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLAT IVE BODY OF COM MUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2023-1 (SAGE CEDAR) OF THE CITY OF CHINO AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL
TAXES WITHIN THE DISTRICT
Moved by Council Member Burton, seconded by Council Member Flores , and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 6) adopt Res olution No. 2023-031, declaring results of the s pecial election and directing recording of the special tax lien; 7) appro ve the introduction of Ordinance No. 2023-013, levying a special tax, to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; and 8) auth orize the City Manage r to exec ute all necessary documents on behalf of the City.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
12. Introduction of Ordin ance No. 2023 -011 - Amended and Restated Preserve Deve lopment Agreement. Introduction of Ordinance No. 2023-011, approving the Amended and Restated Preserve Development Agreement by and between the City of Chino and the Chino Preserve Development Corporation, etc. and approving th e Ce rtificate of Development Agreement Compliance.
Mayor Ulloa opened the public hearing.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 18
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 8
Fred Galante, City Attorney, provided a report on this item and explained the amended and restated Pre serve Development Agreement with th e three companies consis ting of Chino Holding Company , the Chino Development Co rporation, and t he Ch ino Prese rve Development Corporation also known as the Lewis Company to addres s ou tstanding improvements, ensure responsible long-range planning and fiscal stability by addressing and further clarify ing Lewis’ fee reimbursement, develo pment and payment , an d infrastructure and park o bligations. Mr. Galante noted that the proposal also ex tends the development agreement by ten years, until July 1, 20 34. In exchange for that extension, the C ity will receive several benefits as outlined in the staff report.
Mayor Ulloa asked staff to clarify the senior affordable housing segment of the development agreement. City A ttorney Fred Galante explained that 2.2 million dollars will be received to supplement this development at other locations.
Mayor Ulloa requested staff to provide a report to ex plain how to track affordable housing development units.
Mayor Pro T em Comstock asked staff to ex plain the estate residential and t he construction stage timeline. Mr. Galante explained that the estate housing development is proposed to be a range of 12 t housand square feet to a third of an acre. Dr. Reich explained that the lower density proper ties are earmarked to be construct ed first . Mayor Pro T em Comstock requested the annu al Development Agreement repo rt be presented to the City Council to ensure compliance. Mayor Pro Tem Comstock thanked City staff and the Lewis company for their dedication to this project.
Council Member Burton thanked City Staff and the Lewis company for the work done on this project.
Mayor Ulloa explained that she is in support of balanced growth and a balanced community.
She expressed that to retain that balance and wants to ensure they are built.
Council Member Burton concurred with Mayor Ulloa’s comments.
Pat L oy, Lewis Corporation, th anked city st aff for their support during the development process and provided details regarding the development.
Leanna Escanuth, resident of Chino, spoke in favor of increasing staff and equipment to the Chino Valley F ire Depar tment and the Chino Police Department to ensure the entire city receives adequate services.
Erren O’Leary, Lewis Homes Company, thanked City staff for their efforts for the project.
Mayor Ulloa closed the public hearing.
City Attorney Fred Galante read the title of the Ordinance into the record.
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-011
ORDINANCE OF T HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING THE AMENDED AND RESTATED P RESERVE DEV ELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN HE CITY OF CHI NO AND TH E CHIN O PR ESERVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ETC. RE LATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 1,157 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY IN THE PRESERVE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHINO (CONTRACT NO. 2004-073)
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 19
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 9
Moved by Council Member Burton , seconded by Mayor Pro Te m Com stock, and carried o n a 4-0-1 vote to 1) conduct a public h earing; 2) approve introductio n of Ordinance No. 2023-011, approving the Amended and Restated Preserve Development Agreement by a nd between the City o f Chino and the Chino Preserve De velopment Corporation, etc., to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; and 3) approve the Certificate of Deve lopment Agreement Complian ce, including authorization for the City Manager to sign all documents.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
NEW BUSINESS
13. Final Acceptance of Public Improvements, Payment Reconciliation & Release Agreement, & Development Impact Fee Reimbursement – Site Approval PL16-0719 (Scannell Properties #404, LLC). Accept the public improvements for Site Approval PL16-0719 as com plete and approve a Payment Re conciliation and Release Agreement with Scann ell Properties #404, LLC for Equipment Tax for Equipment Tax in the amount of $1,000,000 and Cou nty Dedications eligible for D evelopment Impa ct F ee Reimbursements, as well as all ot her eligible DIF reimbursements pursuant to Construction Credit and Reimbursement Agreement No. 2020-223.
Fred Galante, City Attorney, provided a report on this item.
Moved by Council Member Flores, seconded by Council Member Burton, and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 1) Appropriate from the unappropriated reserves of the following:
Storm Drain Enterprise Fund in the amount of $3,200,000; Water Enterprise Fund in the amount of $4 85,406, a nd the Transportatio n Fund in the amount of $462, 300; 2) schedule corr esponding year-end transfers fro m the f ollowing Development Impact Fee Funds: The Preserve Storm Drainage Collection System Facilities in the amount of $3,200,000 The Preserve W ater Sour ce, Storage and Dist ribution i n the amount of $485,406, an d Citywide C irculation (St reets, Sig nals and Bridges) Syst em in the amount of $462,300; 3) accept the public improvements for Site Approval PL16-0719 as complete; 4) authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty bond; 5) approve a Payment Reconciliation and Release Agreement with Scannell Properties #404, LLC ("Scannell"), a Delaware limited liabi lity company for Scannell's E quipment Tax Com mitment in the amount of $1,0 00,000 an d County Dedications eligible for Development Imp act Fee R eimbursements, as wel l as all other eligible DIF reimbursements pursuant to Construction Credit and Reimbursement A greement No. 2020-223 ("Agree ment"); 6) appro ve an immediate reimbursement in the a mount of $4,147,706 to Scannel l per the terms of the Agreement, thus, fulfilling the City’s obligation to Sca nnell; and 7) authorize the City Manager to execute all necessar y documents on behalf of the City.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 20
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 10
14. Adopt Resolution No. 202 3-026: Am end Parking Res trictions for Street Sweeping . Adopt Resolution No. 2023-026, modifying parking restrictions for street sweeping purposes.
Dennis Ralls, City T raffic Engineer , pr ovided a report on t his item , exp laining that Waste Management adju sted trash pick up days , which prompts the change in street sweeping days.
Leanna Escanuth, r esident of Chino, commented that she was uncertain what street sweeping sched ule she had for her neighborhood and noted that the stree t s weeping schedule was confusing. Mr. Ralls identified the resid ent’s street sweeping schedul e. Mr.
Ralls assured the resident that the re will be signs posted in every co mmunity advising residents when enforcement will occur.
Council Member Burton asked staff to identify any addition al information r esidents will receive regarding street sweeping. Ben Orosco, Public Works Serv ices Manager, confirmed that notices were mailed to customers by Waste Management to advise residents of the new trash pick up days and noted that the City’s website will also contain the new street sweeping schedule. Police Chief Simmons confir med that th e Police Department notified residents of the street sweeping enforcement in The Preserve and College Park and issued warning citations to help remind residents.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock expres sed concern over the s treet sweeping schedu le and how parking concerns would arise if restricted parking were scheduled on both sides of the street on the same day . Mr. Ralls confirmed that staff can revisit Mayor Pro T em Co mstock’s concern and report back with options to address the parking restrictions.
Mayor Ulloa recommended sta ff to report back wit h the new street sweeping sc hedule proposal based on each individual neighborhood.
City Manager Linda Reich confirmed that the proposed reso lution only reassigns the days when the street sweeping will occur throughout the city. Staff will bring a recommendation to the City Council before the incorporation of no parking on street s weeping days when it i s finalized.
Moved by Council Member Flores, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Comstock, and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to adopt Resolution No. 2023 -026, modifying parking restrictions for street sweeping purposes.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
15. Award of Construction Contract: CDBG Alley Project (G6220). Award a construction contract to Wh eeler Paving, Inc., Riverside, CA, in the amoun t of $396,135 for Project No. G6220 CDBG Alley Project East-West North of Chino Avenue between 9th Street and 13th Street.
Michele Hindersinn, Principal Engineer, provided a report on this item.
Mayor Ullo a asked staff to explain why ins pections and manag ement are co ntracted to outside companies. Ms. Hindersinn explained that contractual services are sought depending on the scope of the project. City Manager Reich explained that Director of Public Works Amer Jakher changed the way Public Works projects are processed and chose this methodology to manage and complete multiple projects simultaneously.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 21
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 11
Council Member Flor es would like to see work completed internally opposed to by a consultant.
Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Comstock, seconded by Council Member Flores, and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 1) Appropriate $205, 000 f rom the unappropriated rese rves o f the Sanitation Fund (550) w ith a corresponding increas e t o Pr oject No. G6220, for a revised project budget of $579,824.54; 2) award a construction contract in the amount of $396,135 to Wheeler Paving, Inc., Riverside , CA, for CDBG Alley Project Eas t-West North of Chino Avenue betwee n 9 th Street and 13th Stree t P roject (G6220); 3) authorize ex penditures o f up to $39,614 for co nstruction mana gement, $19,807 for inspection costs, and $59,421 for construction contingency; and 4) authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
16. Notice of Completion - SD200 Benson Avenue Storm Drain Project . Accept the SD200 - Benson Ave Storm Drain Project as complete an d authorize the Director o f Public Works to file the Notice of Completion.
Michele Hindersinn, Principal Engineer, presented a report on this item.
Moved by Council Member Burton, seconded by Council Member Flores , and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 1) Accept the B enson Avenue Storm Dra in Project (SD200), C.P.
Construction Inc., Santa Fe Springs, CA contract No. 2022-063 as complete; 2) release the retention funds following the 35-day lien period; and 3) authorize the Dir ector of Public Works to file the Notice of Completion.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
17. Appropriation of Funds: ST203 - Pine Avenue Impr ovements. Approve an a ppropriation of $650,000 from the Transportation Fund (320) with a backfill from the unappropriated reserves of the Bridges, Signals, and Thoroughfare Pre serve Development Impact Fee Fund (260) and increase the project budget for the Pine Avenue Improvements Project ST203.
Michele Hindersinn, Principal Engineer, provided a report on this item.
Mayor Ulloa requested staff clarify why there is a need to backfill account 260 and will t he City be short of funds when there is a need to construct bridges and similar projects. Director of Finance Rob Burns assured Mayor Ulloa that using this money for this project would not take awa y f unds from other projec ts and explained that the re are ot her mon ies being collected for those projects in the Development Impact Fees (DIF) program.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 22
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 12
Moved by Council Member Burton , seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Co mstock, and carried on a 4-0-1 vote to 1) Appropriate $650,000 from the Transportation Fund (320) with a backfill f rom the u nappropriated reserves of the Bridges, Signals, and Thoroughfare Preserve Development Impact Fee Fund (260); 2) i ncrease the project budget for the Pine Avenue Improvements Proj ect ST203 by $650,000 for a new revised project budget of $4,568,113; and 3) authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
AYES: ULLOA, COMSTOCK, BURTON, FLORES.
NOES: NONE.
ABSENT: LUCIO.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Ulloa.
18. Review o f Tr acked Legislation and Updat es. Receive and Fi le a Legislati ve Update and Consider New Legislative Position Letters
Staff Report by: Jack Morgan, Assistant to the City Manager.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive a repo rt on tracked legisl ation and discuss off icial C ity positions as recommended by the Legislative Policy Committee on new pieces of legislation consequential to the City of Chino.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock thanked staff for tracking the legislative bills.
Mayor Ulloa instructed staff to reexamine the legislative policy process and make the necessary amendments to ensure legislative actions are submitted in a timely manner.
Mayor Ulloa.
Mayor Ulloa reported on meeting and events attended sinc e the la st meeting that included the City Manager meeting with City of Chi no Hill s Council Memb er regarding Pine and Euclid Avenues common development transportation issues; Water Facilities Authority Board of Directors meeting; City Counties Conference; Pioneer Picnic; Community Services Commission interview; New Water Facilities Authority General Manager interviews; Raul Garnica’s Funeral; American Legion Memorial Day event.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock.
Mayor Pro Tem Comstock reported on meeting and events attended since the last meeting that included meeting wi th the City o f Chino H ills regarding Pine and Eu clid Avenues common development transportation issues; City Manager Meeti ng; Community Services Commiss ion interviews; Community Services Commission meeting; Public Wor ks Ap preciation luncheon, Legislative P olicy Committ ee Meeting; Buena Vis ta High School Commencement Se rvices; American Legion Memorial Day event; Quarterly Chino Valley Fire Board Meeting; City Manager Meeting; Congratulated the Chino Boxing Club and the Business of the Month Award recipients Pro Towing.
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 23
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 13
Council Member Burton.
Council Memb er Burton reported on meeting and events attended since the last meeting that included the Planning Commission meeting; City County Conference; International Council of Shopping Centers Conference; Public Works appreciation luncheon; American Legion Memorial Day eve nt; Energy Summit meeting; Tiny Tots pres chool gradua tion and was p roud to have presented his grandson with his certificate of gradu ation; Toured the development at The Preserve; Investment Committee meeting; City Manager meet ing; City Council meeting; closed session.
Council Member Flores.
Council Member Flo res reported on meeting and events attended since the la st meeting that included the Argonza Cellars Wine ry Gr and Opening, D on Lugo’s Sports Booster Club house meeting; Kiwanis Club American Flag posting; American Legion Memorial Day event; Chino Hills State of the C ity event; Investment Committee meeting; Chino Valley of Commerce Collaborate Group meeting; Congratulated all city staff for gr aduation; and congratulated the Chino Boxing Club for their efforts.
Council Member Lucio.
Council Member Lucio was absent (excused).
City Manager's Report.
City Manager Linda Reich had no report.
City Attorney's Report.
City Attorney Fred Galante had no report.
Police Chief's Report.
Police Chief Wes Simmons reported the Chino Police Department began staffing the temporary Southeast Substation located at the Chino Valley Fire Station 63 on Kimball Avenue. He thanked the Fire Department for their support. The hours of operation are Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. with a Police Service Officer and will take minor criminal reports and provide general information to the public.
Fire Chief's Report.
Fire Chief D ave Williams, Chino Valley Fire District, reported that San Bernardino County has decided to begin negotiations with both American Medical Response, Inc. (AMR) and CONFIRE.
He encouraged the City Council to demonstrate their support for CONFIRE being awarded the contract.
CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed back into Closed Session at 9:32 p.m.
The City Council concluded Closed Session at 10:05 p.m.
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Fred Galante reported out of closed session as follows:
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR(S).
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 24
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 6, 2023 MINUTES 14
Agency Negotiator: Geriann Kingslan, Director of Human Resources/Risk Management.
Employee Organiz ations: Chin o Cit y Hall Confidential Employee Association , Chino Police Professional Employee s Association , San Bernardino Public E mployees Association ( SBPEA)/Teamsters Local Union N o. 193 2-Professioinal, Te chnical and Clerical, A merican Federation of Sta te, County a nd Mu nicipal Employees (AFSCME District Counc il 36 -Local 3183), Chino Police Offi cers Associat ion, Chino Poli ce Management As sociation, Unrep resented Managem ent, Unrepresented S worn Management, Executive Management, Elected Officials.
The City Council received an update, provided direction, and no reportable action was taken.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 10:07 p.m. The next meeting of the City council w ill be a workshop held on Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 4:00 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. (Closed Session no so oner than 4:00 p.m. if necessary) in these Council Chambers.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th DAY OF JULY, 2023.
EUNICE M. ULLOA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
**************************************************
(These minutes are not official until signed.)
10.2 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 25
CHINO CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CHINO PLANNING COMMISSION
CHINO COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
CLOSED SESSION – CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
13220 CENTRAL AVENUE
CHINO, CA 91710
TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023
CLOSED SESSION - 5:45 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
The April 18 , 2023, Special Joint Meeting of the Chino City Council / Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Planning Commission, and Community Services Commission was called to order at 5:50 p.m. by Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa in the Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL – CITY COUNCIL
Present: Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa, Mayor Pro Tem Karen C. Comstock, Council Member s Curtis Burton, Christopher Flores, and Marc Lucio.
Absent: None.
ROLL CALL – PLANNING COMMISSION
Present: Chairperson Kevin Cisner oz, Vice-Chairperson Jimmy Alex andris, Commission Members Brandon Blanchard, Joanna Chavez , Li ssa Fraga, Steve Lewis, Lawrence Vieira.
Absent: None.
ROLL CALL – COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
Present: Chairperson Robert Martinez, Vice Cha irperson Linda Ta keuchi, Commission Members Jamie Harwood, Neal Jerry, and Brenda Strong.
Absent: Commissioner Gregory Marquez and Julissa Montenegro-Olivas.
CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak.
CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Ulloa read into the record the item listed on the Closed Session agenda.
THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OR FACILITIES
(Gov. Code section 54957(a).)
Consultation with: Chief Wes Simmons, Chino Police Department
CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 26
CHINO CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2023 MINUTES 2
The City Council, Planning Commission, and Community Se rvices Commission recessed to closed session at 5:51 p.m.
The City Council, Planning Commission, and Community Servic es Commission concluded closed session at 6:24 p.m.
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Ulloa announced there was no reportable action.
ADJOURN
The Special J oint Meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Community Servic es Commission adjourned at 6:24 p.m.
The next Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. in these Council Chamber s. The next Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. in these Council Chambers. The next Regular Meeting of the Community Services Commission will be held on Monday, April 24, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. in these Council Chambers.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE CHINO CITY COUNCIL THIS 5th DAY OF JULY 2023.
EUNICE M. ULLOA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
**************************************************
(These minutes are not official until signed.)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 27
Revenue: Expenditure: 1002000-43320
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS’ REPORT REGARDING TRAVEL, TRAINING, AND MEETINGS.
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the Elected City Officials’ Report reflecting City Council business related expenses incurred by the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funding is available in the adopted Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating Budget.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES The recommendation detailed above furthers the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
• Public Service Excellence through Internal and External Partnerships
10.3 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 28
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS’ REPORT REGARDING TRAVEL, TRAINING, AND
MEETINGS
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
In accordance with Government Code Sections 53232.2 and 53232.3, implementing Assembly Bill 1234 (AB 1234), on January 1, 2006, the City adopted Resolution No. 2005-093 establishing a Business-Related Expense Policy. On December 6, 2016, the City approved Resolution No. 2016-075 adopting the latest revisions to this policy. In addition to requiring local agencies to adopt a business-related expense policy, AB 1234 requires that Elected Officials provide a brief report on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the legislative body.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
In response to AB 1234, a report regarding Elected City Officials’ Travel, Training, and Meetings (Exhibit A) was created and is placed on the City Council Agend a Consent Calendar, as needed. The documents that pertain to the items listed on Exhibit A are available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s office located in City Hall at 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA.
Attachment: Exhibit A
10.3 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 29
JULY 5, 2023 EXHIBIT A
Event Date Meeting Purpose and
Subject Matter
Location
City Official Attendees
None.
10.3.a
Elected Officials' Report Regarding Travel, Training, and Packet Pg. 30
Revenue: Expenditure: 5203100-43650, 5303110-43650, 5403120-43650, 5503130-43650
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROB BURNS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO INFOSEND, INC. FOR UTILITY BILLING.
RECOMMENDATION
Award a professional services contract with InfoSend, Inc., Anaheim, CA for utility billing and on-line payment services for an estimated amount of $175,000 annually (approximately $55,000 for vendor services and $120,000 for postage), with two additional one -year options and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Operating Budget.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES:
The recommendation detailed above further the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
• Superior Customer Service
• Financial Stability
10.4 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 31
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO INFOSEND, INC. FOR UTILITY BILLING PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
The City utilizes Infosend, Inc. for utility billing and on-line payment services. These services are for weekly production of the City’s utility bills which includes file transmission, data process ing, bill printing, mail preparation (folding, inserting bill and return envelope), utility bill production, and delivery to the United State Postal Service.
The City incurs the cost of postage for mailing all bills and notices. InfoSend pays this expense upfront and then passes this cost on to the City with no mark -up. Therefore, InfoSend only retains a portion of the total amount paid by the City through this contract, with the remainder going to the United States Postal Service. The City is responsible for this postage regardless of the vendor providing the printing and support services.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Finance Department recommends Council approve a new contract with InfoSend for utility billing and on-line payment services. The recommendation is for a one-year contract beginning July 5, 2023 with two (2), one (1) year renewal options.
On an annual basis, InfoSend produces and mails approximately 189,000 bills and/or notices on behalf of the City. Without their expert assistance, the City would no t be able to produce assemble and mail the current and growing volume of utility bills and notices in -house, potentially jeopardizing the flow of revenue.
On June 18, 2022 the City of Vallejo conducted a competitive RFP and selected InfoSend as their provider for these same services. Both the City of Vallejo and InfoSend are agreeable to InfoSend extending the same pricing and terms to the City of Chino as a piggyback agreement.
Moreover, following is a comparison of the City’s current pricing versus the p roposed, highlighting the two items with price increases proposed:
Description Current Proposed Difference
Bill Print & Service Fee $0.0730 $0.0766 $0.0036
Paper $0.0155 $0.0155 $0.0000
#10 Envelope $0.0242 $0.0242 $0.0000
#9 Envelope $0.0228 $0.0228 $0.0000
Outgoing Flat Envelope $0.1800 $0.1800 $0.0000
Excess Pages Handwork $0.3000 $0.3500 $0.0500
Address Change Service $0.3000 $0.3000 $0.0000
Insert Fee $0.0100 $0.0100 $0.0000
Postcard Stock $0.0155 $0.0155 $0.0000
Monthly Support Fee $155.00 $155.00 $0.0000
e-Bill Loading & Support $0.0200 $0.0200 $0.0000
Enrolled User $0.0400 $0.0400 $0.0000
Initiated Payments $0.0400 $0.0400 $0.0000
Staff completed an analysis of the City of Vallejo /InfoSend agreement and find it to be fair and reasonable. The City has been utilizing InfoSend’s services for 8 years and has continually experienced excellent work product and customer service. Consequently, to maintain uninterrupted business processes, and based on the foregoing staff recommend s an award to InfoSend for continuous utility billing services as it is in the best interest of the City.
10.4 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 32
Revenue: Expenditure:
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
POLICE DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: WES SIMMONS, CHIEF OF POLICE
SUBJECT: ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolutio n No. 2023 -047, authorizing the City Manager to submit a grant application, acceptance, and execution of all necessary documents for the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Program.
FISCAL IMPACT
No immediate fiscal impact. No match is required for the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC:
The recommendation detailed above furthers the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
• Financial Stability
• Public Service Excellence through Internal and External Partnerships
10.5 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 33
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
The State Budget Act of 2022 (Senate Bill 154, Chapter 43) established the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program . A Total funding of $242,250,000 is available to California police departments to support local law enforcement agencies in preventing and responding to organized retail theft, motor vehicle or motor vehicle accessory theft, or cargo theft. Permissible uses of grant funds include, but are not limited to, the purchase of technology or other equipment to help develop strategies for preventing or responding to crime and staffing costs associated with the prevention or investigation of organized retail theft , motor vehicle or motor vehicle accessory theft, or cargo theft. The grant period runs from October 1, 2023 through December 31, 2026.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) requires an adopted official resolution to apply f or the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program. Staff has preemptively prepared an application that must be submitted, with the approval resolution attached, no later than Friday, July 7, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. This resolution will authorize staff to seek grant funding to support the Chino Police Department for the following:
1. Conduct 18 operations staffed by eight members of the Chino Police Department over the three -year grant period. Each operation will be focused on working with retail establishments to identify, arrest, and recover stolen property associated with organized retail theft. The related cost of these operations is approximately $97,632.
2. Purchase of equipment to aid the prevention or investigation of organized retail theft, motor vehicle theft, or cargo theft. The proposed purchase will include leased security cameras, retail trackers, a discreet surveillance camera, and a mobility surveillance camera trailer. The total cost for equipment and related expenses is approximately $368,550.
If successful, the Board of State and Community Corrections will reimburse the City of Chino for these expenses, which do not require matching funds. Annual evaluations and reports required by the grant would be handled by staff at the police department. At the end of the grant period there are no required ongoing costs. Staff has met with various commercial and retail businesses within the city who have expressed an interest in covering future costs once the grant is completed.
Attachment: Resolution No. 2023-047
10.5 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 34
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-047
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR THE
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Chino desires to participate in the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program funded through the State Budget Act and administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections (hereafter referred to as the BSCC).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council of City of Chino authorizes the City Manager or designee, as agent to submit the grant proposal for this funding and sign the Grant Agreement with the BSCC, including any amendments thereof.
2. Grant funds received hereunder shall not be used to supplant expenditures controlled by this body.
3. The City of Chino agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement as set forth by the BSCC.
4. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is hereby authorized to affix her signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Chino and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed assistant, is directed to attest thereto.
That the Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THIS 5TH DAY OF JULY 2023.
Eunice M. Ulloa
Mayor
ATTEST:
Natalie Gonzaga
City Clerk
10.5.a
Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program
Packet Pg. 35
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-047
State of California )
County of San Bernardino )§
City of Chino )
I, Natalie Gonzaga, City Clerk of the City of Chino, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a special meeting held on the 5th day of July 2023, by the following votes:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
______________________________
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
10.5.a
Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program
Packet Pg. 36
Revenue: Expenditure: 12340002-43300
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
POLICE DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: WES SIMMONS, CHIEF OF POLICE
SUBJECT: STATE ASSET FORFEITURE EXPENDITURE FOR DRUG AND GANG EDUCATION.
RECOMMENDATION
Appropriate $770.13 from the State Asset Forfeiture - Drug and Gang Prevention Fund to support the San Bernardino Countywide Gangs and Drug Task Force Scholarship Fund, and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
Requires an appropriation of $770.13 from the unappropriated reserves of the State Asset Forfeiture - Drug and Gang Prevention Fund. There is sufficient fund balance for this appropriation.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES:
The recommendation detailed above further the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
· Public Service Excellence through Internal and External Partnerships
10.6 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 37
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: STATE ASSET FORFEITURE EXPENDITURE FOR DRUG AND GANG
EDUCATION
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
Over the last several years, the Chino Police Department has directly participated in investigations or prosecutions that have resulted in a state forfeiture and, therefore, an equitable share of the net proceeds of the forfeiture are returned to the City. Forfeiture funds can only be designated for law enforcement use and must be used to increase or supplement the resources of the receiving law enforcement agency. Forfeiture funds cannot be used to replace or supplant the resources of the Department.
Health and Safety Code Section 11489 requires all law enforcement agencies receiving State asset forfeitures under this provision to deposit 15% of all proceeds to a special fund for Drug & Gang Prevention. This fund shall be used for the sole purpose of funding programs designed to combat drug abuse and divert gang activity ("programs and prevention" as opposed to "enforcement"). The County of San Bernardino has an established Asset Forfeiture Panel to ensure funds are being expended in accordance with the provisions of the law.
Annually, San Bernardino County agencies submit requests to the Asset Forfeiture Panel for consideration and approval. The Chino Police Department submitted a request use these funds to support the San Bernardino Countywide Gangs and Drugs Task Force Scholarship Fund. On June 7, 2023 , the Chino Police Department received notice that the request was approved by the San Bernardino Asset Forfeiture Panel, pursuant to AB 114.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Chino Police Department has a history of being dedicated to gang and narcotic prevention and education.
Attached: Letter of Approval
10.6 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 38
10.6.a
State Asset Forfeiture Expenditure for Drug and Gang
Packet Pg. 39
10.6.a
State Asset Forfeiture Expenditure for Drug and Gang
Packet Pg. 40
10.6.a
State Asset Forfeiture Expenditure for Drug and Gang
Packet Pg. 41
Revenue: 12040002-51539-G4241 Expenditure: 12040002-48090-G4241
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
POLICE DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: WES SIMMONS, CHIEF OF POLICE
SUBJECT: FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE - POLICE K9.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Appropriate $22,150 from the Asset Forfeiture / Department of Justice Fund for the purchase of a police service dog; 2) increase the Asset Forfeiture revenue by $22,150; and 3) authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
These purchases will require an appropriation of $22,150 from the unappropriated reserves of the Federal Asset Forfeiture / Department of Justice Fund 120 and increase the revenue of the fund by the corresponding amount.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES:
The recommendation detailed above furthers the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
• Public Service Excellence through Internal and External Partnerships • Superior Customer Service
10.7 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 42
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE - POLICE K9
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
For several years, the Chino Police Department has directly participated in criminal investigations and/or prosecutions that have resulted in the federal forfeiture of assets. As a result of the Police Department’s participation in these cases, the City of Chino receives an equitable share of the net proceeds from the forfeiture. Forfeiture funds can only be designated for law enforcement use and must be used to increase or supplement the appropriated resources of the receiving law enforcement agency. Forfeiture funds cannot be used to replace the resources of the Department (e.g., decreasing the department budget and replacing those funds with federal asset forfeiture funding).
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Department currently staffs three police service dogs assigned to supplement patrol. After six years of service, K9 Kobra will be retired and a new dog is needed.
Police canines are critical to the safety of our officers, the community and even to suspects.
Police dogs can locate and alert their human partners to the location of hidden suspects. The officers are then able to formulate a plan to take the suspect in custody and reduce the chances of an armed surprise encounter with a suspect. Police dogs are also a valuable de -escalation tool that often reduces the need for any force. Prior to using police dogs to find hidden suspects, announcement are made affording the suspect an opport unity to surrender. These announcements almost always lead to the peaceful surrender of the suspect. Without the use of police dogs, dangerous physical searches would have to be conducted with increased danger to all involved as well as increasing the time to resolution.
During her tenure, K9 Kobra has been responsible for the following:
• Over 500 Deployments
• 40 Suspects Surrenders
• 2 Suspect Apprehensions
• Drug Seizures:
o 186 lbs of methamphetamine
o 15 lbs of cocaine
o 12 lbs of heroin
o 780,000 fentanyl pills
• 8 Guns
As these statistics clearly demonstrate, Police Service Dogs provide our community with a valuable resource to disrupt crime and increase officers’ safety.
10.7 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 43
Revenue: Expenditure:
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: WARREN MORELION, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
SUBJECT: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPRO VEMENT - SITE APPROVAL PL18- 0103 (TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC).
RECOMMENDATION
1) Accept public improvements as complete for Site Approval PL18 -0103; 2) authorize release of the performance bond and initiate the warranty bond; and 3) authorize the City M anager to execute the necessary documents on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are sufficient funds included in the City’s Operating Budget to support the maintenance activities related to the improvements.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES <https://ca- chino.civicplus.com/415/Strategic-Plan>:
The recommendation detailed above further the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
· Positive City Image
10.8 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 44
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT - SITE APPROVAL PL18- 0103 (TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC)
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
On May 20, 2019, the Chino Planning Commission approved a revision to the General Plan and The Preserve Specific Plan land use designations for the 3.1 -acre project site from Agriculture to Light Industrial land use fo r the construction of a 50,618 square foot industrial warehouse building. This project is located at 9301 Remington Avenue (Exhibit A). Subsequently, on July 20, 2020, the Planning Commission approved a developer modification to change the size and design of the previously approved industrial building to 61,023 square feet.
As part of the Conditions of Approval, TDC Remington Partners, LLC (developer) was required to design and construct public improvements including curb and gutter, sidewalk, a streetlight , domestic and recycled water improvements in/on Remington Avenue and sewer improvements in Moon Place. Between August 2020 and October 2021, the project underwent various rounds of plan check review for the onsite and offsite improvements, including a lot merger, deed of right-of-way, and an emergency access easement. The developer received plan approvals on all plans, except their sewer plans in October 2021. The required public improvements necessitated the execution of a Public Improvement Agreement and the posting of securities that was approved by City Council on October 19, 2021.
The time required to finalize the project’s plans were delayed due to the unavailability of City of Chino sewer in the area. The developer had submitted plans to the City of Ontario during the entitlement phase and received a verbal authorization to connect to the City of Ontario’s sewer.
However, during final engineering, Ontario denied the connection request due to capacity in their newly constructed master planned line in M oon Place. In December 2020, the City of Chino requested a new point of connection directly into the IEUA sewer bypass trunk line that exists within an easement on the southside of the property. IEUA requested the City of Chino to enter into an Interagency Service Agreement with the City of Ontario requesting a new point of connection into the City of Ontario’s sewer line which connects to the IEUA line. This occurred in March 2021. On August 19, 2022, IEUA approved a modification to the City of Ontario's sewer system tributary area, which addressed capacity concerns and allowed this development to connect to the City of Ontario’s line.
While working out the details for the sewer connection, the developer proceeded at risk and pulled encroachment permits fro m Engineering in May 2021 and Building permits in December 2021. Once the public improvements were completed, City staff initiated the punch list, final inspection, and project close out. This process began in January 2023 and was completed in April 2023.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The public improvements are complete and have been constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The public improvements being accepted by the City include curb and gutter, sidewalk, a streetlight, domestic and recycled water improvements in/on Remington Avenue. All pedestrian improvements being accepted have been satisfactorily constructed to meet all applicable accessibility requirements.
All required development related fees have been paid and security for a one -year warranty period has been submitted. Under the warranty bond obligation, the developer will correct any defects found within one-year of City Council’s acceptance of the project.
With approval by City Council, the following maintenance obligations will commence:
10.8 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 45
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT - SITE APPROVAL PL18- 0103 (TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC)
PAGE 3
Public Street Sweeping: By the City
Public Sidewalks: By the property
owner
Public
Domestic/Recycled
Water:
By the City
Street light: By the property
owner
Landscaping: By the property
owner
Attachment: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Fully Executed Public Improvement Agreement & Bonds
10.8 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 46
10.8.a
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 47
Contract No: 2022- 175
Approval: 10- 19- 2021 # 8
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
by and between
CITY OF CHINO
and
TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3 Updated 10- 2020
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 48
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHINO
AND
TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC
Agreement Date: October 19, 2021
Developer' s Name: TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC
Project Description: On May 20, 2019, the Chino Planning Commission approved a revision to the General Plan and The Preserve Specific Plan land use designations for the 3. 1 acre project site from Agriculture to Light Industrial land use for the construction of a 50, 618 square foot industrial warehouse building. This project is located at 9301 Remington Avenue. Subsequently, on July 20, 2020, the Planning Commission approved a developer modification to change the size and design of the previously approved industrial building to 61, 023 square feet.
Project No.: SA PL18- 0103
Estimated Total Cost of Improvements: $ 295, 800. 00
Security:
Bond No.: 107503089
Surety: Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 49
Designees for the Service of Written Notice:
CITY: DEVELOPER:
Chris Manee
TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLCCity Engingineerr
13220 Central Avenue Scott Heaviside
Chino, CA 91710 Development Manager- Logistics Group
909) 334- 3417 949) 351- 8147
cmagdosku( c cityofchino. orq scott. heavisideCa) transwestern. corn
CITY PROJECT INSPECTOR SURETY
Isaac Ortega TravelersCasualtyandSuretyCompanyofAmerica Permit& Inspection Supervisor
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
909) 334- 3501
iortega(a cityofchino.org
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 50
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Construction Obligations
1. 1 Works of Improvement
1. 2 Other Obligations Referenced in Conditions of Approval
1. 3 Intent of Plans
1. 4 Survey Monuments
1. 5 Performance of Work
1. 6 Changes in the Work
1. 7 Defective Work
1. 8 No Warranty by City
1. 9 Authority of the City Engineer
1. 10 Documents Available at the Site
1. 11 Inspection
1. 12 Compliance With Law; Applicable Standards for Improvements
1. 13 Suspension of Work
1. 14 Erosion and Dust Control and Environmental Mitigation
1. 15 Final Acceptance of Works of Improvement
1. 16 Vesting of Ownership
1. 17 Developer's Obligationto Warn PublicDuringConstruction
1. 18 Injuryto Public Improvements, PublicPropertyor Public Utility
2. Time for Performance
2. 1 Commencement and Completion Dates
2. 2 Phasing Requirements
2. 3 Force Majeure
2. 4 Continuous Work
3. Labor
3. 1 Labor Standards
3. 2 Nondiscrimination
3. 3 Licensed Contractors
3. 4 Workers' Compensation
4. Security
4. 1 Required Security
4. 2 Form of Security Instruments
4. 3 Developer' s Liability
4. 4 Letters of Credit
4. 5 Release of Security Instruments
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 51
5. Cost of Construction and Provision of Inspection Service
5. 1 Developer Responsible for All Related Costs of Construction
5. 2 PaymenttoCityforCostofRelatedInspectionandEngineeringServices
5. 3 Payment of Development Impact Fees
6. Acceptance of Offers of Dedication
7. Warranty of Work
8. Default
8. 1 Default by Developer
8. 2 Remedies
8. 3 Remedies Not Exclusive
8. 4 Attorney' s Fees and Costs
8. 5 Waiver
9. Indemnity/ Hold Harmless
10. Developer' s Indemnity of Project Approval
11. Insurance Requirements
12. Environmental Warranty
13. General Provisions
13. 1 Successors and Assigns
13. 2 No Third Party Beneficiaries
13. 3 No Vesting Rights
13. 4 Developer is Not Agent of City
13. 5 Time of the Essence
13. 6 Notices
13. 7 No Apportionment
13. 8 Severability
13. 9 Captions
13. 10 Incorporation of Recitals
13. 11 Interpretation
13. 12 Entire Agreement; Waivers and Amendments
13. 13 Counterparts
14. Authority
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 52
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ( this " Agreement") is entered into this19thdayofOctober, 2021, byandbetweentheCITYOFCHINO, amunicipalcorporation, organizedandexistingintheCountyofSanBernardino, underandbyvirtueofthelawsof the State of California, (" CITY"), and TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC DEVELOPER").
RECITALS
A. Developeris the ownerof certainrealpropertylocatedin the Cityof Chino, County of San Bernardino, State of California ( the " Property"), as described on Exhibit " A", which Developerproposesto develop and constructcertainworks of improvementthereon, as hereafter set forth.
B. Developerhasappliedfor andreceivedconditionalapprovalfromthe City to construct a 50,618 square foot industrial warehousebuilding. This project is located at 9301 Remington Avenue ( the " Project").
C. The City desires to assure that said improvementsproposed for the Project will be constructed in a good workmanlike manner and in accordance with all applicable laws, statues, ordinances, resolutions and regulationsnow in force and effect in the City of Chino and the State of California, all of which are incorporated herein.
D. TheDeveloperacknowledgesfamiliaritywiththe variousrequirementsfor public improvementscontainedin the Chino MunicipalCodeand agrees to comply therewith.
COVENANTS
Based upon the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein by reference and in consideration of City's site plan or other entitlements for the Property and permitting development of the Property to proceed, Developer agrees to timely perform all of its obligations as set forth herein.
1. Construction Obligations.
1. 1. Works of Improvement. Developer agrees, at its sole cost and expense, to construct or install, or cause to be constructed or installed the street, domestic water, recycled water and other improvements more fully described as Exhibit " B" attached hereto ( the "Works of Improvement"), as the same may be supplemented and revised from time to time as set forth in this Agreement ( said plans and specifications, together with all related documents, the Plans"). The estimated construction cost for the Works of Improvement is $ 295, 800. 00.
1. 2. Other Obligations Referenced in Conditions of Tentative Map Approval. In additionto the foregoing, Developer shall satisfy all of the other Conditionsassociatedwith the Project and the Property. The Conditions associated with the Map are included in Exhibit " B" attached hereto.
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
1 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 53
1. 3. Intent of Plans. Theintentof thePlansreferencedin Section1.1 isto prescribea completeworkofimprovementwhichDevelopershallperformorcauseto beperformedin a manner acceptable to the City Engineer, ( or designee), and in full compliance with all codes and the terms of this Agreement. Developer shall complete a functional or operable improvementorfacility, eventhoughthePlansmaynotspecificallycalloutall itemsof work requiredfor Developer's contractorto completeits tasks, incidentalappurtenances, materials, and the like. If anyomissionsare madeor informationnecessaryto carryout the full intent and meaning of the Plans, Developeror its contractorshall immediatelynotify its design engineer who will seek approval of the City Engineer for furnishing of detailed instructions. In the eventof any doubtor questionarisingregardingthe true meaningof any of the Plans, referenceshall be madeto the City Engineerwhosedecisionthereon shall be final.
Developer recognizes that the Plans consist of general drawings. All authorized alterationsaffectingthe requirementsand informationgivenon the Plansshall be in writing and approved by the City Engineer. The Plansshall be supplementedby such working or shop drawings as are necessary to adequately control the work. Without the City Engineer' s prior writtenapproval, no changeshall be madeby Developeror its contractorto any plan, specification, or working or shop drawing after it has been stamped as approved.
1. 4. Survey Monuments. Before final approval of street improvements, Developer shallplacesurveymonumentsin accordancewiththeprovisionsof the StateSubdivisionMap Act, the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Chino, and any other applicable law. Developer shallprovidesecurityfor suchobligationas providedin Section4.1(a)(iii) and, aftersettingthe monuments,
Developershall furnishthe City Engineerwrittennoticeof the settingof said monumentsandwrittenproofof havingpaidthe engineeror surveyorfor the settingof said monuments.
1. 5. Performance of Work. Developer shall furnish or cause to be furnished all materials, labor, tools, equipment, utilities, transportation, and incidentals required to perform Developer' s obligations under this Agreement.
1. 6. Changes in the Work. The City Engineer, without invalidating this Agreement and without notification to any of the sureties or financial institutions referenced in Paragraph 4, may order extrawork or may make changesby alteringor deleting any portion of the Works of Improvementas specified herein or as deemed necessaryor desirable by the City Engineer as determined necessaryto accomplish the purposes of this Agreement and to protect the public health, safety, or welfare. The City Engineershall notify Developer or its contractor in writing ( by Correction Notice) at the time a determination has been made to require changes in the work. No field changes performed or proposed by Developer or its contractor shall be binding on City unlessapproved in writing by the City Engineer. The City and Developer may mutually agree upon changes to the Works of Improvement, subject to the security requirements in Section 4.
1. 7. Defective Work. Developer shall cause its contractor to repair, reconstruct, replace, or otherwise make acceptable any work found by the City Engineer to be defective. 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
2 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 54
1. 8. No Warranty by City. The Plans for the Works of Improvement have been preparedby or on behalfof Developeror its consultantsor contractors, and Citymakes no representationorwarranty, expressor implied, to Developeror to anyotherpersonregarding the adequacy of the Plans or related documents.
1. 9. Authority of the City Engineer. In additionto the authoritygrantedto the City Engineerelsewherein thisAgreement, the CityEngineershallhavethe authorityto decideall questions which may arise as to the quality and acceptabilityof materials furnished and work performed, and all questions as to the satisfactoryand acceptable fulfillment of the terms of this Agreement by Developer and its contractor.
1. 10. Documents Available at the Site. Developershall cause its contractorto keep a copy of all approvedPlansat the job site and shall give access thereto to the City's inspectors and engineers at all times.
1. 11. Inspection. Developer shall have an authorizedrepresentativeon the job site at all times during which work is being done who has full authority to act for Developer, or its design engineer, and Developer' s contractor( s) regarding the Works of Improvement.
Developershall cause its contractorto furnishthe City with every reasonablefacility for ascertaining whether or not the Works of Improvement as performed are in accordance with the requirements and intent of this Agreement, including the Plans. If the City inspector requests it, the Developer' s contractor, at any time before acceptance of the Works of Improvement, shall remove or uncover such portionsof the finished work as may be directed which have not previously been inspected. After examination, the Developer' s contractor shall restore said portions of the work to the standards required hereunder. Inspection or supervision by the City Engineer ( or designee) shall not be considered as direct control of the individual workmen on the job site. City's inspectorsshall have the authority to stop any and all work not in accordance with the requirements contained or referenced in this Agreement.
The inspection of the work by City shall not relieve Developer or its contractor of any obligations to fulfill this Agreement as herein provided, and unsuitable materials or work may be rejected notwithstandingthat such materialsor work may have been previouslyoverlooked or accepted.
1. 12. Compliance With Law; Applicable Standards for Improvements. In addition to the express provisions of this Agreement and the Plans, Developer shall cause construction of the Works of Improvement to be completed in accordance with all other applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. In addition, without limiting the foregoing, the Developer shall, at its expense, obtain and comply with the conditions of all necessary permits and licenses for the construction of the Works of Improvement. The Developer shall also give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes as required by law.
Developer shall construct the improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of the adoption of this Agreement. City reserves the right to protect the public safety or welfare or comply with applicable Federal or State law or City zoning ordinances.
1. 13. Suspension of Work. The City Engineer shall have authority to order suspension of the work for failure of the Developer' s contractor to comply with law pursuant to Section 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
3 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 55
1. 12. Incase of suspensionof workfor anycausewhatsoever, Developerand its contractor shall be responsible for all materials and shall store them properly if necessary, and shall providesuitableinterimdrainageand/ordustcontrolmeasures, anderecttemporarystructures where necessary.
1. 14. Erosion and Dust Control and Environmental Mitigation. All grading, landscaping, and constructionactivitiesshall be performedin a mannerto controlerosionand prevent flooding problems. The City Engineer shall have the authority to require erosion plans to prescribe reasonablecontrols on the method, manner, and time of grading, landscaping, and construction activities to prevent nuisances to surrounding properties. Plans shall include without limitation temporary drainage and erosion control requirements, dust control procedures, restrictions on truck and other construction traffic routes, noise abatement procedures, storage of materials and equipment, removal of garbage, trash, and refuse, securing the job site to prevent injury, and similar matters.
1. 15. Final Acceptance of Works of Improvement. After Developer' s contractor has completed all of the Works of Improvement, Developer shall then request a final inspection of the work. If items are found by the City's inspectors to be incomplete or not in compliance with this Agreementor any of the requirementscontainedor referencedherein, City will inform the Developer or its contractor of such items. After the Developer' s contractor has completed these items, the procedure shall then be the same as specified above for the Developer' s contractor' s initial request for final inspection. If items are found by City's inspectors to be incomplete or not in compliance after two ( 2) " final" inspections, the City may require the Developeror its contractor, as a conditionto performingfurther field inspections, to submit in writing a detailed statement of the work performed subsequent to the date of the previous inspection which was found to be incomplete or not in compliance at that time. Developer shall be responsiblefor paymentto City Engineerof re-inspectionfees in the amount necessary to cover the City's costsfor additionalfinal inspections, as determinedby the City Engineer.
No inspection or acceptance pertaining to specific parts of the Works of Improvement shall be construed as final acceptance of any part until the overall final acceptance by the City Engineer is made. The City Engineer shall make a certification of completion and acceptance on the Works of Improvement by recordation of a Notice of Acceptance on behalf of the City.
Final acceptance shall not constitute a waiver by the City Engineer of defective work subsequently discovered.
The date on which the Works of Improvement will be considered as complete shall be the date of the Notice of Acceptance.
1.16. Vesting of Ownership. Upon recordation of the Notice of Acceptance, ownership of the Works of Improvement shall vest in the City.
1. 17. Developer' s Obligation to Warn Public During Construction. Until recordation of the Notice of Acceptance, Developer shall give good and adequate warning to the public of any dangerous condition of the Works of Improvements, and shall take reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. Until recordation of the Notice of Acceptance, Developer shall provide forty- eight ( 48) hours' advance written notice to all 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
4 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 56
neighboring property owners and tenants affected by Developer' s operations or construction of the hours, dates and durationof any plannedconstructionactivities.
1. 18. Injuryto PublicImprovements, PublicPropertyor PublicUtility. Untilrecordation of theNoticeofAcceptanceoftheWorksof Improvement, Developerassumesresponsibility for the care and maintenanceof, and any damage to, the Works of Improvements. Developer shall replace or repair all Works of Improvements, public property, public utility facilities, and surveying or subdivision monuments and benchmarks which are destroyed or damaged for any reason, regardless whether resulting from the acts of the Developer, prior to the recordation of the Notice of Acceptance. Developer shall bear the entire cost of such replacement or repairs regardlessof what entity owns the underlying property. Any repair or replacementshallbe to the satisfaction, and subjectto the approval, of the City Engineer.
Neither the City, nor any officer or employee thereof, shall be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, occurring to the work or Works of Improvements prior to recordation of the Notice of Acceptance of the work or improvements.
2. Time for Performance.
2. 1. Commencement and Completion Dates. Subject to Sections 2. 2 and 2. 3 below, Developer shall ( i) commence with construction and installation of the Works of Improvement thirty ( 30) days following City' s approval of the Plans (" Commencement Date"); and ( ii) complete or cause to be completed all of the Works of Improvement within two ( 2) years after the Commencement Date. In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, the time for commencement of construction or completion of the Works of Improvement hereunder may be extended by up to three ( 3) additional one year periods. Extensions shall be executed in writing by the City Engineer. The City Engineer in his or her sole discretion determines whether or not the Developer has established good cause for an extension. As a condition of such extension, the City Engineer may require Developer to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement, as extended, in an increased amount to compensate for any increase in construction costs as determined by the City Engineer. If Developer requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, City may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension.
2. 2. Phasing Requirements. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2. 1, the City reserves the right to control and regulate the phasing of completion of specific Works of Improvement as required to comply with applicable City ordinances, regulations, and rules relating to the timely provision of public services and facilities. In addition to whatever other remedies the City may have for Developer' s failure to satisfy such phasing requirements, as the same now exist or may be amended from time to time, Developer acknowledges City' s right to withhold the issuance of further building permits on the Property until such phasing requirements are satisfied. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall provide satisfactory evidence that all applicable requirements that are a condition to issuance of building permits have been satisfied. Such requirements may include the payment of fees, construction of improvements, or both. Final inspections or issuance of Certificates of Occupancy may be withheld from the Developer by the City, if, upon a determination by the City Engineer, completion of specific Works of Improvements or other requirements associated 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
5 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 57
with the developmentof the Propertyhavenot beencompletedto the City Engineer's satisfaction.
2. 3. Force Majeure. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2. 1, Developer' s time for commencementand completionof the Worksof Improvementshall be extendedfor the period of any enforceddelay caused due to circumstancesbeyondthe control and without the fault of Developer, including to the extent applicable adverse weather conditions, flood, earthquakes, strikes, lockouts, pandemics, actsorfailurestoactofa publicagency (including City), requiredchangesto the scopeof work requiredby City, and similarcauses; provided, however, that theperiodof any enforceddelayhereundershallnot includeany periodlonger than five ( 5) days prior to City's receipt of a written notice from Developer or its contractor detailingthe groundsfor Developer's claim to a right to extend its time for performance hereunder. The City Engineer shall evaluate all claims to Force Majeure and make a reasonable determination regarding the length of any extension of time for commencement and/or completionof the Works of Improvementand the City Engineer's decisionshall be final.
2. 4. Continuous Work. After commencement of construction of the Works of Improvement ( or separate portion thereof), Developershall cause such work to be diligently pursued to completion, and shall not abandon the work for a consecutive period or more than thirty ( 30) days, events of Force Majeure excepted.
3. Labor.
3. 1. Labor Standards. This Agreementis subjectto, and Developeragrees to comply with, all of the applicableprovisions of the Labor Code including, but not limited to, the wage and hour, prevailing wage, worker compensation, and various other labor requirements in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, including section 1720 to 1740, 1770 to 1780, 1810 to 1815, 1860 to 1861, which provisions are specifically incorporated herein by reference as set forth herein in their entirety. Developershall expresslyrequirecompliancewith the provisions of this Section in all agreements with contractors and subcontractors for the performance of the Works of Improvement.
3. 2. Nondiscrimination. In accordance with the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (" FEHA"), California Government Code Section 12940 et seq., Developer agrees that Developer, its agents, employees, contractors, and subcontractor performing any of the Works of Improvementshall not discriminate, in any way, against any person on the basis of race, ethnicity, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. Developer shall expressly require compliance with the provisions of this Section in all agreements with contractors and subcontractors for the performance of this Agreement.
3. 3. Licensed Contractors. Developer shall cause all of the Works of Improvement to be constructed by contractors and subcontractors with valid California Contractors' licenses for the type of work being performed. All of Developer' s contractors and subcontractors shall obtain a valid City of Chino business license prior to performing any work pursuant to this Agreement. Developer shall provide the City Engineer with a list of all of its contractors and 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
6 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 58
subcontractors prior to initiating any work, and all valid Contractor's licenses and business licensesissued theretoas a conditionof constructingthe Works of Improvements.
3. 4. Worker' s Compensation. Developer shall cause every contractor and subcontractor performingany of the Works of Improvementto carry Workers' Compensation Insuranceas requiredby the Labor Code of the State of Californiaand shall cause each such contractorand subcontractorto submit to City a Certificateof Insuranceverifying such coverageprior to suchcontractor or subcontractorenteringonto the job site.
4. Security.
4. 1. Required Security.
a) At the time Developer executes this Agreement, Developer shall furnish to City the following bonds, letters of credit, instruments of credit ( assignment of deposit account) or other security acceptable to City in its sole and absolute discretion and satisfying the requirementsof the applicable provisions of this Section4 below (hereinafter "SecurityInstruments"):
i) A Security Instrumentsecuring Developer's faithful performance of all of the Works of Improvement (" Faithful Performance Security Instrument"), in the amount of $ 295, 800. 00 equal to 100% of the estimated construction cost referenced in Section 1. 1. ii) A Security Instrument guaranteeing the payment to contractors, subcontractors, and other persons furnishing labor, materials, and/ or equipment (" Labor and Materials Security Instrument") with respect to the Works of Improvement in an amount equal to 147, 900. 00 equal to 50% of the estimated construction cost referenced in Section 1. 1.
This Agreement shall not be effective for any purpose until such Security Instruments are supplied to and approved by City in accordance herewith. b) Required Security Instrument for Maintenance and Warranty. Prior to the City Council' s acceptance of the Works of Improvement and recordation of a Notice of Completion, Developer shall deliver a Security Instrument warranting the work accepted for a period of one ( 1) year following said acceptance Maintenance and Warranty Security Instrument"), in the amount of $ 29, 600. 00 equal to 10% of the estimated construction cost set forth in Section 1. 1 or a suitable amount determined by the City Engineer.
4. 2. Form of Security Instruments. All Security Instruments shall be in the amounts required under Section 4. 1 ( a) or 4. 1( b), as applicable, shall meet the following minimum requirements and otherwise shall be in a form provided by City or otherwise approved by the City Attorney:
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
7 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 59
a) Bonds. For Security Instrumentsprovided in the form of bonds, any such bondmust be issued and executedby an insurancecompanyor bank authorized to transactsuretybusinessin the Stateof California. Any insurancecompany acting as surety shall have a minimum rating of A-IX, as rated by the current editionof Best's Key Rating Guide publishedby A.M. Best's Company, Oldwick, NewJersey, 08858. Any bankactingas suretyshallhavea minimumrating of AA, as rated by Moody' s or Standard & Poor' s.
b) Letters of Credit. For Security Instrumentswhich are letters of credit, any letter of credit shall be an original separate unconditional, irrevocable, negotiable and transferable commercial letter of credit issued by a financial institution with offices in the State of California acceptable to City. Any such letter of credit shall specifically permit City to draw on same by unilateral certification of the City Engineer of the City that Developer is in default under its payment or performance obligations hereunder or in the event Developer fails to deliver a replacement letter of credit not less than thirty ( 30) days prior to the date of expirationof any such letter of creditand shall further be subjectto the provisions of Section 4. 4.
c) Instrument of Credit. For Security Instruments which are Instruments of Credit, any Instrument of Credit shall be an assignment of deposit account assigning as security to City all of Developer' s interest in funds on deposit in one or more bank accounts with financial institutions acceptable to City. d) General Requirements for all Security Instruments. i) Payments under any Security Instruments shall be required to be made ( and, with respect to bonds, litigation shall be required to be instituted and maintained) in the City of Chino, State of California and the Security Instrument shall so provide).
ii) Each Security Instrument shall have a minimum term of one ( 1) year after the deadline for Developer' s completing the Works of Improvement, in accordance with Section 2. 1 ( other than Instruments of Credit, which shall have no defined term or expiration date).
iii) Each Security Instrument shall provide that changes may be made in the Works of Improvement pursuant to the terms of this Agreement without notice to any issuer or surety and without affecting the obligations under such Security Instrument. iv) If the Developer seeks to replace any security with another security, the replacement shall: ( 1) comply with all the requirements for security in this Agreement; ( 2) be provided by the Developer to the City Engineer; and ( 3) upon its written acceptance by the City Engineer, be deemed a part of this Agreement. Upon the City 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
8 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 60
Engineer' s acceptance of a replacement security, the former securityshall be releasedby the City.
4. 3. Developer' s Liability. While no action of Developer shall be required in order for City to realize on its security under any Security Instrument, Developer agrees to cooperate with City to facilitate City's realizationunder any Security Instrument, and to take no action to preventCityfromsuchrealizationofanySecurityInstrument. Notwithstandingthegivingof any SecurityInstrumentor the subsequentexpirationof any SecurityInstrumentor any failure by any surety or financial institution to perform its obligations with respect thereto, Developer shall be personally liablefor performanceunder this Agreement and for payment of the cost of the labor and materials for the improvementsrequired to be constructed or installed hereby and shall, withinten (10) daysafterwrittendemandtherefor, deliverto Citysuchsubstitutesecurity as City shall require satisfying the requirements in this Section 4.
4. 4. Letters of Credit.
a) In the event a letter of credit is given pursuant to Section 4. 2( b), City shall be entitled to draw on any such letter of credit if a replacement letter of credit expiring in not less than one ( 1) year, unless City agrees to a lesser term in City's sole and absolutediscretion) is not delivered not less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the original letter of credit, such substitute letter of credit beingin the same amountand havingthe terms and conditionsas the initial letter of credit delivered hereunder, issued by a financial institution acceptable to City as of the date of delivery of the replacement letter of credit. b) In the event of draw by the City on a letter of credit, the City may elect, in its sole and absolute discretion, to apply any such funds drawn to the obligations secured by such letter of credit or to hold such funds in an account under the control of the City, with no interest accruing thereon for the benefit of the Developer. If the City elects to hold the funds in an account pursuant to the foregoing, City may thereafter at any time elect instead to apply such funds as provided in the foregoing. Developer agrees and hereby grants City a security interest in such account to the extent required for City to realize on its interests therein, and agrees to execute and deliver to City any other documents requested by City in order to evidence the creation and perfection of City' s security interest in such account.
4. 5. Release of Security Instruments. The City shall release all Security Instruments consistent with Government Code Sections 66499. 7 and 66499. 8, Section 19. 09. 010 of the Chino Municipal Code, and as follows:
a) City shall release the Faithful Performance Security Instrument and Labor and Materials Security Instrument when all of the following have occurred:
I) Developer has made written request for release and provided evidence of satisfaction of all other requirements in this Section 4. 5; ii) the Works of Improvement have been accepted;
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
9 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 61
iii) Developerhas deliveredthe Maintenanceand Warranty Security Instrument; and
iv) after passage of the time within which lien claims are required to be made pursuant to Title 3 (commencing with Section 9000) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code of the State of California. If lien claims have been timely filed, City shall hold the Labor and Materials Security Instrument until such claims have been resolved, Developer has provided a statutory bond, or otherwise as required by applicable law.
b) City shall release the Maintenance and Warranty Security Instrument upon Developer' s written request upon the expiration of the warranty period, and settlement of any claims filed during the warranty period. c) The City may retain from any security released, an amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney' s fees.
5. Cost of Construction and Provision of Inspection Service.
5. 1. Developer Responsible for All Costs of Construction. Developer shall be responsible for payment of all costs incurred for construction and installation of the Works of Improvement. In the event Developer is entitled to reimbursement from City for any of the Works of Improvement, such reimbursement shall be subject to a separate Reimbursement Agreement to be entered into between Developer and City prior to construction of the Works of Improvement.
5. 2. Payment to City for Cost of Related Inspection and Engineering Services.
Developer shall compensate City for all of City's costs reasonably incurred in having its authorized representative make the usual and customary inspections of the Works of Improvement. In addition, Developer shall compensate City for all design, plan check, evaluating any proposed or agreed-upon changes in the work. The procedures for deposit and payment of such fees shall be as established by the City. In no event shall Developer be entitled to additional inspections or a final inspection and acceptance of any of the Works of Improvement until all City fees and charges have been fully paid, including without limitation, charges for applicable penalties and additional required inspections.
5. 3. Payment of Development Impact Fees. Developer shall pay Development Impact Fees pursuant to and in accordance with Chino Municipal Code Chapter 3.40 and Chapter
3. 45, as applicable.
6. Acceptance of Offers of Dedication. The City Council shall pass as appropriate resolution or resolutions accepting all offers of dedication shown on the approvals for the Project, with acceptance to become effective upon completion and acceptance by City of the Works of Improvement.
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 62
7. Warranty of Work. Developer shall guarantee all Works of Improvement against defective materials and workmanship for a period of one ( 1) year from the date of final acceptance. If any of the Works of Improvementshouldfail or provedefective within said one 1) yearperiod dueto any reason other than impropermaintenance, or if any settlement of fill or backfill occurs,
or should any portionof the Works of Improvementfail to fulfill any requirements of the Plans, Developer, within fifteen ( 15) days after written notice of such defects, or withinsuchshortertimeas mayreasonablybedeterminedby the Cityin the event of emergency, shallcommenceto repairor replacethesametogetherwithanyotherwork which may be damaged or displaced in so doing. Should Developerfail to remedy defective material and/ or workmanship or ake replacements or repairs within the period of time set forth above, City may makesuch repairs and replacementsand the actual cost of the required labor and materialsshall be chargeableto and payableby Developer. The warranty provided herein shall not be in lieu of, but shall be in addition to, any warranties or other obligations otherwise imposed by law.
8. Default.
8. 1. Default by Developer. Default by Developer shall include, but not be limited to:
a) Developer' s failure to timely commence construction of Works of Improvement under this Agreement;
b) Developer' s failure to timely complete construction of the Works of Improvement;
c) Developer' s failure to perform substantial construction work for a period for 20 consecutive calendar days after commencement of the work; d) Developer' s insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy, either voluntary or involuntary, which Developer fails to discharge within 30 days;
e) The commencement of a foreclosure action against the Property or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or f) Developer' s failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement.
8. 2. Remedies. The City reserves all remedies available to it at law or in equity for a default or breach of Developer's obligations under this Agreement. The City shall have the right, subject to this Section, to draw upon or use the appropriate security to mitigate the City' s damages in the eventof default by Developer. The City's right to draw upon or use the security is in addition to any other remedy available to City. The parties acknowledge that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction of the improvements and, therefore, City's damages for Developer' s default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The City may use the sums provided by the securities for the completion of the Works of Improvement in accordance with the plans. In the event the Developer fails to cure any default under this Agreement within 20 days after the City mails a notice of such default to the Developer and the Developer' s surety, Developer authorizes the 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
11 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 63
City to performthe obligationfor whichDeveloperis in defaultand agreesto pay the entire cost of such performanceby the City. The City may take over the work and complete the Works of Improvement, by contract or by any other method City deems appropriate, at the expense of the Developer. In such event, City, without liability for doing so, may complete the Works of Improvement using any of Developer' s materials, appliances, plans and other property that are at the work site and that are necessary to complete the Works of Improvement.
8. 3. Remedies Not Exclusive. In any case where this Agreement provides a specific remedy to City for a default by Developer hereunder, the Developer agrees that the choice of remedyor remediesfor Developer's breachshallbe in the discretionof the City. Additionally, any remedy specifically provided in this Agreement shall be in addition to, and not exclusive of, City's rightto pursueany otheradministrative, legal, or equitableremedyto whichit may by entitled.
8. 4. Attorney' s Fees and Costs. In the event that Developer fails to perform any obligation under this Agreement, Developeragrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by City in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney' s fees. In the event of any dispute arising out of Developer's performance of its obligations under this Agreement or under any of the Security Instruments referenced herein, the prevailing party in such action, in addition to any other relief which may be granted, shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney' s fees and costs. Such attorney' s fees and cost shall include fees and costs on any appeal, and in addition a party entitled to attorney's fees and costsshall be entitled to all other reasonablecosts incurred in investigating such action, taking depositions and discovery, retaining expert witnesses, and all other necessary and related costs with respect to the litigation. All such fees and costs shall be deemed to have accrued on commencement of the action and shall be enforceable whether or not the action is prosecuted to judgment.
8. 5. Waiver. No waiver by the City of any breach or default by the Developer shall be considered valid unless in writing, and no such waiver by the City shall be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default by the Developer.
9. Indemnity/ Hold Harmless. City or any officer, employee or agent thereof shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of Developer, its agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors in the performance of this Agreement. Developer further agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its officials, boards and commissions, and members thereof, agents, and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions of Developer, its agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors in the performance of this Agreement, except for such claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss arising out of the sole active negligence of the City, its officials, boards, commissions, the members thereof, agents and employees, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss because of or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the improvements. This indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of said Project, and the public improvements as provided herein, and in addition, 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
12 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 64
to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design and construction of public drainage systems, streets and other improvements. Recordationof the Notice of Acceptance by the City of the Works of Improvements shall not constitute an assumption by the City of any responsibilityfor any damageor taking covered by this Section.
City shall not be responsiblefor the design or constructionof the property to be dedicated or the improvementspursuantto the approvedimprovementplans or map, regardlessof any negligent action or inaction taken by the City in approving the plans or map, unless the particularimprovementdesignwas specificallyrequiredby City over written objection by Developer submitted to the City Engineer before approval of the particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design.
After recordation of the Notice of Acceptance, the Developer shall remain obligated to eliminate any latent defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect for a period of one ( 1) year; however, Developer shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. It is the intent of this section that Developer shall be responsible for all liabilityfor designand constructionof the improvementsinstalled or work done pursuant to this Agreementand that City shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving or reviewing any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this Paragraph.
Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs and expenses, including but not limited to fees and charges of architects, engineers, attorneys, and other professionals, and court costs, incurred by City in enforcing this Section.
10. Developer' s Indemnity of Project Approval. Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning the Project. The City shall promptly notify the Developer of any claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding. In the event City fails to promptly notify the Developer of any claim, action, or proceeding, or if the City fails to cooperate in the defense, the Developer shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. Nothing in this Section prohibits the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if City bears its own attorney' s fees and costs and defends the action in good faith. Developer shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the settlement is approved by the Developer.
11. Insurance Requirements. Developer, at Developer' s sole cost and expense and for the full term of this Agreement and any extensions thereto, shall obtain and maintain all of the following minimum insurance requirements in a form approved by the City's authorized designee for Risk Management prior to commencing any work:
a) Commercial General Liability policy with a minimum $ 1 million combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage providing all of the following minimum coverage without deductibles:
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
13 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 65
i) Premisesoperations; includingX, C, and U coverage; ii) Owners' and contractors' protection;
iii) Blanket contractual;
iv) Completed operations; and
v) Products.
b) Commercial Business Auto policy with a minimum $ 1 million combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage, providing all of the following minimum coverage without deductibles:
i) Coverage shall apply to any and all leased, owned, hired, or non- owned vehicles used in pursuit of any of the activities associated with this Agreement; and
ii) Any and all mobile equipment including cranes which are not covered under the above Commercial Business Auto policy shall have said coverage provided under the Commercial General Liability policy.
c) Workers Compensation and Employers' Liability policy in accordance with the laws of the State of California and providing coverage for any and all employees of the Developer:
i) This policy shall provide coverage for Workers' Compensation Coverage A); and
i) This policy shall provide coverage for $ 1, 000, 000 Employers' Liability ( Coverage B).
ii) Pursuant to Labor Code section 1861, Developer by executing this Agreement certifies: " I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract."
iii) Prior to commencement of work, the Developer shall file with the City's Risk Manager a Certificate of Insurance or certification of permission to self-insure workers' compensation conforming to the requirements of the Labor Code.
d) Endorsements. All of the following endorsements are required to be made a part of each of the above- required policies as stipulated below:
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
14 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 66
i) " The Cityof Chino, its officers, employeesand agentsare hereby added as additional insureds."
ii) " This policy shall be considered primary insurance with respect to any other valid and collectible insurance the City may possess, includingany self- insuredretentionthe City may have and any other insurance the City does possess shall be considered excess insurance only."
iii) " This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy has been written for each. This, however, will not act to increase the limit of the insuring company." iv) " Thirty (30) days priorwritten notice of cancellationshall be given to the City of Chino in the event of cancellation and/ or reduction in coverage, except that ten (10) days prior written notice shall apply in the event of cancellation for non- payment of premium." Such notice shall be sent to the Risk Manager at the address indicated in Subsection f below.
v) Subsection d( iv) hereinabove " Cancellation Notice" is the only endorsement required of the Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability policy.
e) Admitted Insurers. All insurance companies providing insurance to the Developer under this Agreement shall be admitted to transact the business of insurance by the California Insurance Commissioner.
f) Proof of Coverage. Copies of all required endorsements shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance which shall be provided by the Developer' s insurance company as evidence of the coverage required herein and shall be mailed to:
City of Chino
Risk Management
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
12. Environmental Warranty.
12. 1. Prior to the acceptance of any dedications or Works of Improvement by City, Developer shall provide City with a written warranty in a form substantially similar to Exhibit " C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, that:
a) Neither the property to be dedicated nor Developer are in violation of any environmental law, and neither the property to be dedicated nor the Developer are subject to any existing, pending or threatened investigation by any federal, 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
15 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 67
state or local governmental authority under or in connection with the environmentallaws relatingto the propertyto be dedicated. b) Neither Developernor any other person with Developer's permission to be uponthe propertyto be dedicated shall use, generate, manufacture, produce, or release, on, under, or about the property to be dedicated, any Hazardous Substanceexcept in compliancewith all applicable environmentallaws. For the purposesof thisAgreement, the term "HazardousSubstances" shallmean any substanceor materialwhichis capableof posinga riskof injuryto health, safety or property, including all those materials and substances designated as hazardous or toxic by any federal, state or local law, ordinance, rule, regulation or policy, including but not limited to, all of those materials and substances defined as "Toxic Materials" in Sections 66680 through 66685 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, Division 4, Chapter 30, as the same shall be amendedfrom time to time, or any other materials requiring remediation under federal, state or local laws, ordinances, rules, regulationsor policies. c) Developer has not caused or permitted the release of, and has no knowledge of the release or presence of, any Hazardous Substance on the property to be dedicated or the migration of any hazardous substance from or to any other property adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, the property to be dedicated. d) Developer' s prior and present use of the property to be dedicated has not resulted in the release of any hazardous substance on the property to be dedicated.
12. 2. Developer shall give prompt written notice to City of:
a) Any proceeding or investigation by any federal, state or local governmental b) authority with respect to the presence of any hazardous substance on the property to be dedicated or the migration thereof from or to any other property adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, the property to be dedicated. c) Any claims made or threatened by any third party against City or the property to be dedicated relating to any loss or injury resulting from any hazardous substance; and
d) Developer' s discovery of any occurrence or condition on any property adjoining or in the vicinity of the property to be dedicated that could cause the property to be dedicated or any part thereof to be subject to any restrictions on its ownership, occupancy, use for the purpose for which it is intended, transferability or suit under any environmental law.
13. General Provisions.
13. 1. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon all successors and assigns to Developer' s right, title, and interest in and to the Property and any portion 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
16 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 68
thereof. Developerherebyconsentsto City recordingthis Agreementas official records of San BernardinoCounty, affecting fee title interest to the Propertyto provide constructivenotice of the rights and obligations incurred by Developer in the City's approval of this Agreement. In the eventthe Propertyis subsequentlyconveyedby Developerto a third party prior to completion of the Works of Improvement, whereby the third party is intended to assume Developer' s responsibilities with regard to this Agreement, ( the " Replacement Developer"), the rights and obligations of this Agreement shall transfer to the Replacement Developer; however, the SecurityInstrumentsrequiredpursuantto Section4 of this Agreement, andfurnishedby Developer as a condition of the City's approval of this Agreement, shall remain Developer' s responsibility to maintain until such time as Developer and its Replacement Developer enter into a Transfer and Assignment of Public Improvement Agreement, ( the " Transfer Agreement"), to acknowledgethe transfer of fee title to the Propertyfrom the Developer to its Replacement Developer, and to acknowledge the rights and obligations associated with this Agreement upon the Replacement Developer, including Replacement Developer' s responsibilityto furnishreplacementSecurityInstrumentsmeetingthe City's approval pursuant to Section 4 of this Agreement. Until such time as a Transfer Agreement, meeting the City's approval, is executed by Developerand its ReplacementDeveloper, and replacementSecurity Instruments meeting City's approval are furnished by the Replacement Developer, Developer retains sole responsibility for maintaining all Security Instruments required pursuant to Section 4 of this Agreement.
13. 2. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is intended to benefit only the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Neither City nor Developer intend to create any third party beneficiary rights in this Agreement in any contractor, subcontractor, member of the general public, or other person or entity.
13. 3. No Vesting Rights. Performance by the Developer of this Agreement shall not be construedto vest Developer's rights with respectto any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance.
13. 4. Developer is Not Agent of City. Neither Developer nor Developer' s agents, contractors, or subcontractors are agents or contractors of the City in connection with the performance of Developer' s obligations under this Agreement.
13. 5. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of Developer' s performance of all of its obligations under this Agreement.
13. 6. Notices. Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, all notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail.
Notice shall be provided to the persons listed on Pages 1 and 2 of this Agreement by the parties for this purpose.
Either party may provide a new designated representative and/ or address by written notice as provided in this Section.
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
17 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 69
13. 7. NoApportionment. Nothingcontainedin thisAgreementshallprecludeCity from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrentlyor previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreements with other Developers for the apportionment of costs of waterand sewermains, or otherimprovementspursuantto the provisionsof the City ordinances providingtherefore. Nor shall anything in the Agreement commit City to any such apportionment.
13. 8. Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual written consent of the parties.
13. 9. Captions. Thecaptionsof thisAgreementarefor convenienceandreferenceonly and shallnot be usedin the interpretationof any provisionof this Agreement.
13.10. Incorporationof Recitals. The recitalsto this Agreement are hereby incorporated into the terms of this Agreement.
13. 11. Interpretation. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
13. 12. Entire Agreement; Waivers and Amendments. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein, or incidental hereto, and supersedes all negotiations and previous agreements between the parties with respect to all or part of the subject matter hereof, except as may be expressly provided herein. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by an authorized representative of the party to be charged, and all amendments hereto must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representatives of both parties.
13.13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which taken together shall be deemed one original.
14. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties warrant the I) party is duly organized and existing, ( ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said party, ( iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and ( iv) the entering into of this Agreement does not violate any provisions of any other agreement to which said party is bound.
SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
18 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 70
INWITNESSWHEREOF, the City and the Developerhave causedthis Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROV D AS TO CONTENT:
SIGNED IN COUNTERPART
Ltr, tft, r,
Fred Galante, City Attorney Nicholas S. Ligi, AICP
Development Services Director
TDC REMINGTON/PARTNERS, LLC
By:, ve..____261
i / v: z
Sig ture nd Date)
Name: 1.
r
K7indoL!Jes
Please type or print name)
Title: 4t 1i ti Z- Ect- S' i Vtv,,
kajPlease type or print title)
CITY OF CHINO
r
Matthew C. B IIa tyn City Manager
Dated: IO . ZI.
ATTEST:
By
Angel Robles, City Clerk
Dated: to ' 2t ' ?. o tt
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
19 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 71
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C9C4BA9- F88D- 4CC7- 9BBA- D10AA7465794 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Developerhave caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
DocuSigned by:
Fred Galante;` i jitA` orney Nicholas S. Igu ri, AICP Development ervices Director
TDC REMINGTO / PARTNERS, LLC
By: l00/../o2 f
Sig nd Date)
pp
Name: Z o e k.5
Please type or print name)
Title: O/»
CLS'j
Please type or print tithe)
CITY OF CHINO
Matthew C. Ballantyne, City Manager
Dated:
ATTEST:
By
Angela Robles, City Clerk
Dated:
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
19 10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 72
CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE§ 1189 i( A- t. Fl c ` Y cr t l , v rk- r- kr r c- r, cr rycC F r r c trc r Fv w Anotarypublicorotherofficercompletingthiscertificateverifiesonlytheidentityoftheindividualwhosignedthe documentto whichthiscertificateisattached,andnotthetruthfulness,accuracy,orvalidityofthatdocument.
State of Gelifer ie- 1 > 4S
Countyof -- tom-( f^ I S
On (
or /S L c- I before me, La U V. V n M CIill 2w f
Date Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared 0- f 1- A i e c lies h?e r i ed_ SI na_- Name( s) of Signer( s)
of
6- E —1—D C- Revn i
ins- a r4- 0- ers-- L, C„ C .
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidenceto be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledgedto me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorizedcapacity(ies),andthat by his/her/theirsignature(s)onthe instrumentthe person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 1certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws
of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature i'•., 6v1- (1/
J "" '
Signature of Notary Public
a""''
LAUREN M MATHEWS
c Notary Public, State of Texas
v' . Comm. Exp, res 04- 23- 2025
Notary ID 133060612
PlaceNotarySealAbove
OPTIONAL
Though this section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: ' Pt-bl+`c- L- v' nmit / Document Date: ( C" / /` 3"/(:),) a Number of Pages: J'/ f Signer( s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies)ClaimedbySi ner/ys)
Signer' s Name: : - P Kri '- z 1IeS Signer' s Name:
Corporate Officer — Title( s): Corporate Officer — Title( s):
Partner — 0 Limited General Partner — Limited General Individual Attorney in Fact Individual Attorney in Fact Trust Guardian or Conservator 0 Trustee Guardian or Conservator er: ! - Wi& rr 2- e L - S/ tic::-.
Ai
Other:
Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing:
77)G Wemltlyieb1- 4Pa.'4rte("Se• LL. L. C
02014 National NotaryAssociation , www. NationalNotary.org , 1- 800- US NOTARY( 1- 800- 876- 6827) Item# 5907 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 73
xhibit
A-1
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 74
EXHIBIT " B"
WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT
A. Removal of undesirable, dangerous and dead plant materials and roots.
B. All onsite and offsite grading as specified on the approved grading plan.
C. Relocation of all public utility structures as necessary to properly construct the required improvements.
D. Water mains, valves, hydrants, services, meters and appurtenances to serve each lot as shown on the approved construction plans and in accordance with City Standards.
E. Underground installation of all electrical, telephone, cable television and any other energy or communication lines that abut or are within the project site.
F. A street lighting system ( City-owned) in accordance with City Standards.
G. Disposal of all rocks and debris located within any public right-of-way within said development or on the boundary streets thereof.
H. Installation of concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalks, cross gutters, driveways and intersections as shown on approved construction plans and in accordance with City Standards.
I. Installation of asphalt concrete or Portland Cement Concrete street pavement on base material as shown on approved construction plans and in accordance with City Standards.
J. Street signs at intersections per the City Standards.
K. Installation of approved landscaping ( plants and materials).
L. Setting monuments as required by the State Code.
The Developer shall also perform all work and furnish all materials necessary, in the opinion of the Director of Development Services or his designee and on his order, to complete the improvements in accordance with the plans and specifications on file as hereinbeforespecified, or any changes required or ordered by said Engineer which, in his opinion, are necessary or required to complete this work. 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3 B- 1
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 75
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF' CHINO
ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
t!!=
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2-Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
STREETS
LS Traffic Control( 5% of construction cost) 5% $ 4, 765. 38 LS Clear& Grub Site( 5% of construction cost) 5% $ 4, 765. 38 EA Tree Removal 800. 00 $
CY Concrete Removal 300. 00 $
19 CY AC Pavement Removal 100. 00 $ 1, 929. 63
LS Excavation( Clean Material)( 5% of Construction Cost)_ 5% $ 4, 765. 38 CY Imported Common Fill( Incl. Compaction) 34. 00_$
SF Preparation of Subgrade 1. 00 $
347 LF PCC 8" Curb& 24" Gutter 23. 00 $ 7, 988. 36 LF PCC Curb Only 20. 00 $
LF 8" A. C. Berm 20. 00 $
SF 8" PCC Cross Gutter 11. 00 $
2186 SF 4" PCC Sidewalk 5. 80 $ 12, 678. 80
SF 6" PCC Thick Drive Approach 7. 40 $
1856 SF 8" PCC Thick Drive Approach 9. 00 $ 16, 704. 00 LF 2" x 6" Redwood Header 5. 00 $
EA Street Sign 475. 00 $
EA Traffic Sign and Post 400. 00 $
EA Reflector Sign and Post 175. 00 $
EA Painted Legend 6. 50 $
SF Prime or Tack Coat 0. 05 $
37 TON AC Variable-< 300T 90. 00 $ 3, 366. 36
TON AC Variable-> 300T 80. 00 $
EngCostEstimate Page 1 of 13 Effective Date. January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 76
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
7-- e,. CITY OF CHINO
ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2-Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item —
STREETS
48 TON CAB Variable-< 300T 75. 00 $ 3, 611. 49
TON CAB Variable-> 300T 65. 00 $
EA Adjust Sewer Manhole to Grade 665. 00 $
LS Mobilization 5% $ 4, 765. 38
EA Adjust Sewer Cleanout to Grade 350. 00 $
EA Adjust Water Valve to Grade 265. 00 $
1 EA Street Light( City Owner) 6, 700. 00 $ 6, 700. 00 EA Lot Monument Setting Fee 550. 00 $
518 LF Sawcut A. C. 3. 00 $ 1, 554. 00
LF Sawcut Concrete 3. 00 $
SF Cold Plan A. 0( 5 foot wide) 0. 28 $
LF Signing& Striping for
Arterial 19. 00 $
Collector 13. 00 $
Local 7. 00 $
EA Traffic Signal( 8- Phase Controller) 250, 000. 00 $ EA Modify existing Traffic Signal per Quadrant 50, 000. 00 $ LF Chain Link Fence
4 foot Residential Grade( Add$ 7. 00/ LF for Removal of Existing Fence) 25. 00 $
6 foot School fence( Add$ 9. 00/ LF for Removal of
Existing Fence) 35. 00 $
EA Utility Poles
Transmission 11, 500. 00 $
Distribution 8, 000. 00 $
Service 3, 000. 00 $
EngCostEstimate Page 2 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 77
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF CHINOFak.----
e '
l.„
ww7f* ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
cnn, ce i PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
STREETS
Landscape( Including shrubs, Hardscape, Irrigation, Ground Cover, Lighting, Installation Labor and Connection to
3600 SF Existing Systems) 10. 00 $ 36, 000. 00
14 foot Median with Landscape, Irrigation, Lighting,
LF Hardscape, Curb, Gutter& Pavement 300. 00 $
Rail Road Crossing
Safety Equipment( Complete Including Crossing Gates,
LS Signs, and Lights) 400, 000. 00 $
SF Track Crossing( Concrete) 150. 00 $
SF Approach 2. 25 $
EA S. W. Ramps( A. D. A. Compliant) 4, 000. 00 $
EA Traffic Signal Loops 400. 00 $
395 LF 2" Rigid conduit 3-# 8 10. 00 $ 3, 950. 00
3 EA Relocate existing traffic sign and post 225. 00 $ 675. 00 3 EA Remove existing delineators 50. 00 150
STREET SUBTOTAL 114, 369. 16
PROJECT ADDITIVES Project Contingencies 10% $ 11, 436. 92 Construction Staking 3% $ 3, 431. 07
Soils Testing 1% $ 1, 143. 69
Material Testing 1% $ 1, 143. 69
Construction Inspection 2% $ 2, 287. 38
Contract Administration 1% '$ 1, 143. 69
GRAND TOTAL STREETS ONLY 134, 955. 61
EngCostEstimate Page 3 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 78
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
ijil ',,, CITY OF CHINO
ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
16._ PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
WATER
LS Traffic Control( 5% of Construction Cost) 5% $ 3, 867. 25 LF Trench Support/ Shoring( 6 foot depth) 15. 00 $ CY Pipe Bedding( Imported) 45. 00 $
6" Pipe& Fittings Installed, including excavation, bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 60. 00 $
8" Pipe& Fittings Installed, including excavation, bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration. 75. 00 $
10" Pipe& Fittings Installed, including excavation, bedding, 15 LF backfill and pavement restoration 80. 00 $ 1, 200. 00 12" Pipe& Fittings Installed, including excavation, bedding, 451 LF backfill and pavement restoration 90. 00 $ 40, 590. 00 16" Pipe& Fittings Installed, including excavation, bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 105. 00 $
EA 6" Gate Valve 1, 500. 00 $
EA 8" Gate Valve 2, 000. 00 $
1 EA 10" Gate Valve 2, 400. 00 $ 2, 400. 00
2 EA 12" Gate Valve 2, 800. 00 $ 5, 600. 00
EA 16" Gate Valve 3, 500. 00 $
1 EA Fire Hydrant Assembly per City Std. 7, 500. 00 $ 7, 500. 00 1 EA Blow- off Assembly 4" per City Std. 4, 500. 00 $ 4, 500. 00 1 EA 2" Air Relief Assembly with Blow Off 4, 500. 00 $ 4, 500. 00 EA 1" Water Service/ Meter 3, 500. 00 $
1 EA 2" Water Service/ Meter 4, 500. 00 $ 4, 500. 00 1 EA 2" Air Relief Assembly 4, 500. 00 $ 4, 500. 00 3 EA Concrete Thrust Block 585. 00 $ 1, 755. 00
1 EA 12" X 12" X 10" Tee 300. 00 $ 300. 00
EngCostEstimate Page 4 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 79
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF CHINO
ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
WATER
WATER SUBTOTAL 81, 212. 25
PROJECT ADDITIVES Project Contingencies 10% $ 11,121. 23 Construction Staking 3% $ 2, 436. 37
Soils Testing 1% $ 812.12
Material Testing 1% $ 812: 12
Construction inspection 2% $ 1, 624. 25
Contract Administration 1% $ 812. 12
GRAND TOTAL WATER ONLY 95, 830. 46
EngCostEstimate Page 5 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 80
RESOLUTIONNO 2015-078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF CHINO
k'-
s
s ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
oq. rE,:
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
RECYCLED WATER
LS Traffic Control( 5% of Construction Cost) 5% $ 2, 125. 50 LF Trench SupporUShoring( 6 foot depth) 15. 00 $ CY Pipe Bedding( Imported) 45. 00 $
6" Pipe& FittingsInstalled,includingexcavation,bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 60. 00 $
8" Pipe& FittingsInstalled,includingexcavation,bedding, 439 LF backfill and pavement restoration. 75. 00 $ 32, 925. 00 10" Pipe& FittingsInstalled,includingexcavation,bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 80. 00 $
12" Pipe& FittingsInstalled,includingexcavation,bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 90. 00 $
16" Pipe& Fittings Installed, including excavation, bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 105. 00 $
EA 6" Gate Valve 1, 500. 00 $
EA 8" Gate Valve 2, 000. 00 $
EA 10" Gate Valve 2, 400. 00 $
EA 12" Gate Valve 2, 800. 00 $
EA 16" Gate Valve 3, 800. 00 $
EA 6" wharf Fire Hydrant Assembly per City Std. 5, 000. 00 $ EA Blow- off Assembly 6" per City Std. 4, 500. 00 $
1 EA 2" Air Relief Assembly with blow off 4, 500. 00 $ 4, 500. 00 EA 1" Water Service/ Meter 3, 500. 00 $
1 EA 2" Water Service/ Meter 4, 500. 00 $ 4, 500. 00 1 EA Concrete Thrust Block 585. 00 $ 585. 00
EngCostEstimate Page 6 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 81
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY' OF CI- LINO
4~ 1a, j ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
9`' i PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
RECYCLED WATER
RECYCLED WATER SUBTOTAL 44, 635. 50
PI QJECT ADDITIVES Project Contingencies 10% $ 4, 463. 55 Construction Staking 3% $ 1, 339. 67
Soils Testing 1% $ 446. 36
Material Testing 1% $ 446. 36
Construction Inspection 2% $ 892. 71
Contract Administration 1% $ 446. 36
GRAND TOTAL RECYCLED WATER ONLY 52, 669. 89
EngCostEstimate Page 7 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 82
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF CHINO
wi - ; ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
4. PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2-Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per item
SEWER
LS Traffic Control( 5% of Construction cost) 5% $ 193. 75 LF Trench Support/ Shoring 15. 00 $
8" V.C.P Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 92. 00 $
10" V.C.P. Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 98. 00 $
12" V.C.P. Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 104. 00 $
15" V.C.P. Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 110. 00 $
18" V.C.P. Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 140. 00 $
21" V.C.P. Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 150. 00 $
24" V.C.P. Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 170. 00 $
1 EA Sewer Saddle 450. 00 $ 450. 00
EA Wyes 6" x 8" Typical 225. 00 $
1 EA SewerCleanout@ P/ L 1, 800. 00 $ 1, 800. 00
6" V.C.P Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill 25 LF and pavement restoration per City of Chino 65. 00 $ 1, 625. 00 EngCostEstimate Page 8 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 83
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY' OF CHINO
ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2-Sep-21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
SEWER
SEWER SUBTOTAL 4, 068. 75
PROJECT ADDITIVES Project Contingencies 10% $ 406: 88 Construction Staking 3% $ 122.06
Soils Testing 1% $ 40. 69
MaterialTesting 1% $ 40:69
Construction Inspection 2% $ 81.38
Contract Administration 1% $ 40. 69
GRAND TOTAL SEWER ONLY 4, 801. 13
EngCostEstimate Page 9 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 84
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
V
CITY OF CHINO
K
te ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATEa ,
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2-Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
STORM DRAIN
LS Traffic Control( 5% of Construction Cost) 5% $ 305. 00 LF 24" X 36" C. M. P. A.( 10 Gauge) 230. 00 $
LF 27" x 43" C. M. P. A( 10 Gauge) 250. 00 $
EA Storm Drain Manhole# 1 5, 000. 00 $
EA Junction Structure# 2 ( 24" or larger) 4, 400. 00 $ EA Junction Structure# 4 ( 24" or smaller) 2, 500. 00 $ EA Outlet Structure 5, 000. 00 $
EA Catch Basin 5' Width 5, 500. 00 $
1 EA Catch Basin 5' Width/ L. D. 6, 100. 00 $ 6, 100. 00 EA Catch Basin 10' Width/ L. D. 7, 000. 00 $
EA Catch Basin 14' Width/ L. D. 8, 000. 00 $
EA Catch Basin 21' Width/ L. D. 10, 000. 00 $
18 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 130. 00 $
24 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 150. 00 $
27 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 160. 00 $
30 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 175. 00 $
33 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 190. 00 $
36 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 240. 00 $
39 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 260. 00 $
42 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 275. 00 $
EngCostEstimate Page 10 of 13 Effective Date January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 85
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF CHINO
wir7, j - ' ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
v:; PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
STORM DRAIN
45 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 280. 00 $
48 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 300. 00 $
51 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 325. 00 $
54 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 350. 00 $
60 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 360. 00 $
63 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 370. 00 $
66 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 400. 00 $
72 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 460. 00 $
78 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 470. 00 $
81 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 490. 00 $
84 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 510. 00 $
90 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 540. 00 $
96 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 570. 00 $
102 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 610. 00 $
108 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
LF backfill and pavement restoration 640. 00 $
7' x 6' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 700. 00 $
7' x 8. 5' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 820. 00 $
7' x 9. 5' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, LF backfill and pavement restoration 870. 00 $
8' x 11' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 1, 000. 00 $
8' x 13' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 1, 100. 00 $
9' x 9' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 1, 000. 00 $
9' x 12' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 1, 100. 00 $
4' x 6' RCB Installed, including excavation, bedding, backfill LF and pavement restoration 680. 00 $
EngCostEstimate Page 11 of 13 Effective Date. January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 86
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
P ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN SUBTOTAL 6, 405. 00
PROJECT ADDITIVES Project Contingencies 10% $ 640. 50 Construction Staking 3% $ t9215
Soils Testing 1% $ 64. 05
Material Testing 1%,.$ 64.05
Construction Inspection 2% $ 128. 10
Contract Administration 1% $ 64. 05
GRAND TOTAL STORM DRAIN ONLY 7, 557. 90
EngCostEstimate Page 12 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 87
RESOLUTION NO 2015- 078
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF CHINO
ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE
s
PROJECT NO: 3781
LOCATION: 9261 REMINGTON AVENUE
By: THIENES ENGINEERING, INC
DATE: 2- Sep- 21
Quantity Unit Item Unit Total Cost
Price Per Item
ENGINEER' S ESTIMATE GRAND TOTAL 295, 814. 98
BY ENGINEER
Prepared By: REINHARD STENZEL
R. C. E. Number: 56155
Expiration: 12/ 31/ 2022
OFESS/04,ql
r-
R.C.E NO. 56155r
Ex . 22
cir
F CALF
Place R.C.E. Stamp Here
BY CITY
Faithful Performance Bond( 100% of Construction Cost) 295, 800. 00 Labor& material Bond( 50% of Construction Cost) 147, 900. 00 Warranty Bond( 10% of Construction Cost) 29, 600. 00
REVIEWED
CITY OF CHINO ENGINEERING
BY DATE 9/ 2/ 21
EngCostEstimate Page 13 of 13 Effective Date: January 1, 2016
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 88
NL CM DSH
FM X IA MK
NA AC
E- Mail Sent: AG
To: 6- 29- 20
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SITE APPROVAL NO. PL20- 0010 & PL18- 0103/ DM01
DATE: June 16, 2020 PC MEETING DATE: July 20, 2020 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Distribution Center
PROJECT LOCATION: 9301 Remington Avenue, Remington Avenue East of Carpenter Avenue APPLICANT: Transwestern Development Company PROJECT ENGINEER: Felicia Marshall
PRIOR TO THE TWO MAJOR DEVELOPMENT EVENTS, THE APPLICANT SHALL SATISFY AND FULFILL ALL CONDITIONS OUTLINED BELOW. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ANY CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL SHALL BE DEEMED JUST CAUSE FOR REVOCATION OF PROJECT APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. HOWEVER, THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SHALL HAVE
THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE MINOR DEVIATIONS IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND ALL PLANS INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS.
1. 0 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
1. 1 All required plans and studies shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and submitted to the Project Engineer for review and approval. All project plans must be approved by the City Engineer' s office before a Building Permit will be issued. All maps, studies, calculation sheets, reports, etc. must be on and/ or folded in an 11- inch by 8%- inch standard format.
1. 2 Make the following dedications:
Street Name Distance Direction From C/ L
Remington Avenue 37 feet South
1. 3 Dedicate to the City the additional right of way for sidewalks behind driveway aprons, if needed.
4.. 4 Prepare and submit a drainage study, including supporting hydraulic and hydrological data to the project engineer for approval. The study shall confirm or recommend changes to the City's adopted Master Drainage Plan by identifying off-site and on-site storm water runoff impact resulting from build- out of permitted General Plan land uses. In addition, the study shall identify the project' s contribution and shall provide locations and sizes of catchments and system connection points and all downstream drainage mitigation measures.
1. 5 Prepare and record necessary drainage easements to implement the project in accordance with drainage law.
1. 6 Prepare and submit a final grading plan showing building footprints, pad elevations, finished grades, drainage routes, retaining walls, erosion control, slope easements and other pertinent information in accordance with Appendix J of the California Building Code, latest edition.
1. 7 Provide a certificate, from a Registered Civil Engineer, certifying that the finished grading has been completed in accordance with the City approved grading plan.
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 89
PL 20- 0010 2 June 20, 2020
1. 8 Submitasoils/geologyreportinaccordancewithAppendixJ oftheCaliforniaBuildingCode, latest edition to the project engineer for review and approval.
1. 9 DesignperCityStandardsand constructfull publicimprovementsfor all impactedand interior streets/ facilities in accordance with City Code, Standards and Specifications. Such public improvements shall include, but not be limited to, the following: ( Pleasecoordinate and verify all requirements with the project engineer.)
Street Names
Remington Carpenter
Ave Ave
S N W E
Curb& Gutter( Offset from Centerline) 22' N/ A 22' N/ A Sidewalk( Width) 5' N/ A 5' N/ A
Asphalt Concrete Pavement on Aggregate Base
Width from Centerline) 20' 15' 20' 15' Asphalt Concrete Overlay
Street Lights X N/ A X N/ A
Median Island and Landscaping
Parkway Landscaping X N/ A X N/ A
Striping and Traffic Controls X X
Traffic Signal Interconnect
Conduit System for CATV
Sewer
Storm Drain
Domestic Water X(
1)
X0"
Recycled Water X(
2)
X( 2
Fire Hydrants as required by CVIFD X X
1) Construct a 12" domestic water line from the existing end of the main from the development to the west.
2) Construct an 8" recycled water line from the existing end of the main from the development to the west.
1. 10 Design and install a monitoring manhole ( per City Standard No. 530) on each private sewer lateral that is tributary to the IEUA' s main sewer near the southerly property line. If connecting to the City of Ontario' s sewer main, approval from the City of Ontario is required.
1. 11 Execute a Public Improvement Agreement and submit security in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer to guarantee construction of the public improvements listed in 1. 9. All security must be accessible to the City at any time and in a form acceptable to the Assistant City Manager, pursuant to Government Code, Section 66499.
1. 12 There are currently two parcels, APN 0218- 292- 15 and APN 0218- 292- 16. Process a lot merger for the two parcels.
1. 13 Obtain design and plan approval from appropriate utility companies for undergrounding all utility lines adjoining and interior to the project, including power lines of 34.5kV or less in accordance with City Code, Chapter 13.32.
1. 14 Comply with all applicable requirements of the City Code.
1. 15 Pay all applicable fees pursuant to City Code including, but not limited to, the Development Impact Fees ( DIF) and Sewage Facilities Development Fee ( SFDF). The actual amount of fees due to the
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 90
PL 20- 0010 3 June 20, 2020
Citywill bebasedonthefeeschedulein placeonthe datethatthefeesaredue, or the date that they are paid, whichever occurs last. The fee amount stated in this notice is subject to change basedon (1) annualadjustmentsfor inflation, pursuantto ChinoMunicipalCodeSection3.40.100 or3.45.100, (2)revisionstotheChinoMunicipalCode, and (3)updatestothefeestudiesandnexus reports adopted by the City.
Developer is solely responsible for remaining informed about changes in the fee amounts. City shall have no obligation to inform Developerof changes in the fee amounts unless Developer requests notice of such changes, pursuant to Government Code Section 66019(b) and Chino Municipal Code Section 3. 40. 080( B) or 3.45. 080( B).
1. 16 Allprojectsdevelopingone (1) acreor moreoftotallandarea, orwhicharepartof a largerphased developmentthat will disturb one acre of land, are requiredto obtain coverage under the State Water ResourcesControl Board's (SWRCB)GeneralPermitfor stormwater dischargesassociated with construction activity. Proof of filing a Notice of Intent ( NOI) with the SWRCB for coverage under this permit is required. A copy of the Waste Discharger' s Identification Number ( WDID), issuedbytheSWRCB, mustbesubmittedto theProjectEngineerpriorto issuanceof grading permits. More detailed informationregardingthis General Permit, applicablefee information and the necessaryforms to completethe NOI areavailableby calling (916) 341-5537 or on the SWRCB web site at:
http://www. swrcb.ca.gov/water issues/ programs/ stormwater/ constpermits. shtml.
1. 17 Pursuantto SantaAna RegionalWaterQualityControlBoardOrder NumberR8-2010-0036, NPDES Permit No. CAS618036, prepare a project-specificWater Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and submit to the project engineer for review and approval. To address NPDES Permit requirements to the maximum extent practicable, the project shall be designed to specify preferential use of Low Impact Development Best Management Practices that reduce pollutants and runoff volume through structural measures (e.g. infiltration, harvesting, and bio-treatment) and non-structural measures (e.g. preserving natural areas, clustering development, and reducing impervious areas). The WQMP shall conformto the requirementsof the San BernardinoCounty Stormwater Program, 2013 WQMP Technical Guidance Document.
1.18 Any future maintenance and repair of fire service and sewer laterals to the project site shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant/ property owner in accordance with City Code, Chapter 13.04. 175 and 13. 12. 150.
1. 19 Convey ownershipof all existing onsite water wells to the City and convert to monitoring wells as directed by the City' s Water Utilities Supervisor. Prepare and record any necessary easements to provide the City with access to the monitoring wells. Any existing water wells that cannot be feasibly converted to monitoring wells shall be destroyed per City Standard No. 465.
1. 20 Citystaff shalldeterminethe type of water( potableor recycled)to be used for grading operations, dust control activities, and common area/ public landscape irrigation at the time of permit issuance.
1. 21 All public street corners shall have a minimum curb radii per City Code, Chapter 19.06 and City Standards and Specifications.
1. 22 Provide adequate sight distance per City Standard No.865 for each project driveway and at all intersections. Landscaping type and height shall be maintained to ensure sight distance requirements are perpetuated.
1. 23 Private sewer and water improvements shall be reviewed and inspected by the Building Division.
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 91
PL 20- 0010 4 June 20, 2020
1. 24 The easterly 1/2widthdrivewayapproachandsidewalkfrontingMoonPlacemustbe constructed.
Join existingimprovementsconstructedby the developerto the west, so there is continued accessibilityaccess. Thiswillprovidecontinuedaccessto theCityof ChinoandtheCityof Ontario overthe adjoiningpropertyownedby the City of Chino.
1. 25 The developeris responsiblefor the continuedoperationand maintenanceof perimeterstreet lights, common area landscaping, and parkway areas ( landscaping, sidewalk). The project is required to establish an association for the continued operation and maintenance of above improvements or the alternative is to annex the properties into the Preserve Master Maintenance Corporation ( PMMC) or other association acceptable to the Director.
1. 26 An easementshall be requiredfor EmergencyVehicleAccess.
1. 27 Thedeveloperis responsiblefor the continuedoperationand maintenanceof water quality devices.
1. 28 SubmittotheCityelectronicfiles, inAdobeAcrobatPDFformat, ofall submittals, includingreports, studies, improvement plans and City redlines of previous submittals.
2. 0 PRIOR TO REQUEST FOR AND RELEASE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS/ ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS:
2. 1 Construct and secure Development Services Department approval of all public facilities enumerated under Section 1.0 above ( per Resolution No. 88-23).
2. 2 Undergroundall utility lines adjoining and interiorto the project, includingpower linesof 34.5kV or less in accordance with City Code, Chapter 13.32.
2. 3 Distribute for signature of all buyers, the information form and disclosure notice announcing that the development will be annexed to the PMMC or other acceptable association before transfer of property title and completion and acceptance of all public improvements.
2. 4 The applicant' s Civil Engineer shall field verify that all BMPs are designed, constructed, and functional inaccordancewith the approvedWQMP. BMPsshall also be inspectedby Public Works Environmental staff. Coordinate inspection with staff and submit a completed City of Chino BMP field verification form for review and approval.
2. 5 Pay all remaining applicable fees pursuant to City Code.
2. 6 Slurry seal along all streets impacted by the development as directed by City staff. Install signing and striping per approved plans.
2. 7 Submit to the City, electronic files of Tract/ Parcel Map and " as- built" improvement plans in AUTOCAD format and Adobe Acrobat PDF format. AUTOCAD files shall be submitted as an archived zip file of the CAD drawings with all base files attached.
FM
Attachment
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 92
CITY OF CHINO
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
ITEMS REQUIRED FOR FIRST PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL
SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. PL 20- 0010
PROJECT ENGINEER: Felicia Marshall
DATE: 7- 20- 20
A COPY OF THIS CHECK LIST MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THE FIRST PLAN CHECK 1 Copy of DevelopmentEngineeringDivisionConditionsof Approval 2 Sets of Maps ( Subdivision Only)
2 Copies of preliminary Title Report( no older than six months) 2 Copies of Closure Calculations
1 Set of Referenced Maps
2 Copiesof PreliminarySoils Report (noolder than sixty days) 2 Copies of lot line adjustment certificate
2 Copies of lot merger
Z 2 Copies of right-of-way dedication
4 Sets of Rough Grading Plans
5 Sets of Precise Grading Plans
4 Sets of Storm Drain Plans
2 Copies of Hydrology and Hydraulic Calculations with Backup Data Signed and Sealed by a Registered Civil Engineer)
2 Copies of Engineering Cost Estimate ( On City Forms) with Engineer' s Wet Signature and Stamp 3 Sets of Street Improvements Plans
3 Copies of Cross- Sections ( if street plans are required) at 50' intervals and extended a minimum of 100' beyond limits of improvements
2 Sets of Sewer Plans
3 Sets of Domestic Water Plans
2 Sets of Recycled Water Plans
Z 2 Sets of Street Light Plans
2 Copies of Voltage Drop Calculations ( Signed and Sealed by a Registered Engineer) 2 Sets of Signing and Striping Plans
1 Sets of Traffic Signal Interconnect Plans
2 Sets of Traffic Signal Plans
2 Water Quality Management Plan
Rev. 11/ 19/ 18 MB
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 93
EXHIBIT " C"
SITE APPROVAL PL18- 0103
TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC
ENVIRONMENTAL WARRANTY
As a condition precedent to acceptance of the dedications and public improvementsto be conveyed by the above-named Developer to the City of Chino for the above-referencedSubdivision, Developerherebywarrants to the City of Chinothat:
1. Neither the property to be dedicated nor Developer are in violation of any environmental law, and neither the property to be dedicated nor the Developer are subject to any existing, pending or threatened investigation by any federal, state or local governmental authority under or in connection with the environmental laws relating to the property to be dedicated.
2. Neither Developer nor any other person with Developer' s permission to be upon the property to be dedicated has used, generated, manufactured, produced, or released, on, under, or about the property to be dedicated, any Hazardous Substance except in compliance with all applicable environmental laws. For the purposes of this warranty, the term " Hazardous Substances" shall mean any substance or material which is capable of posing a risk of injury to health, safety or property, including all those materials and substances designated as hazardous or toxic by any federal, state or local law, ordinance, rule, regulation or policy, including but not limited to, all of those materials and substances defined as " Toxic Materials" in Sections 66680 through 66685 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, Division 4, Chapter 30, as the same shall be amended from time to time, or any other materials requiring remediation under federal, state or local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations or policies.
3. Developer has not caused or permitted the release of, and has no knowledge of the release or presence of, any Hazardous Substance on the property to be dedicated or the migration of any hazardous substance from or to any other property adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, the property to be dedicated.
4. Developer' s prior and present use of the property to be dedicated has not resulted in the release of any Hazardous Substance on the property to be dedicated.
5. All persons executing this warranty hereby represent and warrant to the City of Chino, and Developer hereby represents and warrants, that the signators hereto have the legal power, right and authority to execute this warranty on behalf of the Developer and that the signators hereto have sufficient knowledge or expertise, either personally, through reasonable inspection and investigation of the property, or through reasonable reliance upon the investigation and professional opinion of Developer' s environmental experts, to make the representations herein, and that no consent of any other party is 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3 C- 1
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 94
required to execute this warranty and make the representations herein on behalf of the Developer to the City of Chino.
Each of the undersigned persons declares under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: &"/ 4-94'(
v-
TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC
By:
er(-6 476/ Ams, da,/xoci. Fee Q,5/4a4y
Proof of authorization for Developer' s signatures is required to be submitted concurrently with this environmental warranty.
01225. 0006/ 367559. 3 0- 2
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 95
Bond No.: 107503089
Contract No.:
Approved:
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND
SA PL18- 0103
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chino, State of California, hereinafter designated as" CITY" and TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC hereinafter designated as
PRINCIPAL," have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which said agreement, dated OCTOBER 19, 2021 and identified as Project No. SA PL18- 0103 is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, said Principal is required under the terms of said agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal and
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
as
surety, areheldandfirmlybounduntotheCityofChinointhepenalsumof TWOHUNDREDNINETY-FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED Dollars($ 295, 800. 00 lawful money of the United States,for the paymentof which sumwell and truly to be made,we bindourselves,our heirs,successors,executors, and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
The condition of this obligation is such that if the above- bound Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in said agreementand any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on hisor its part, to be keptandperformedat thetimeand in the mannerthereinspecified, and in all respects accordingto theirtrueintentand meaning, andshallindemnifyandsaveharmlessCity, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligationshall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.
Aspartoftheobligationsecuredherebyandinadditiontothefaceamountspecifiedtherefor, thereshall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by City in successfullyenforcingsuchobligation, alltobetaxedascostsandincludedinanyjudgmentrendered.
Thesuretyherebystipulatesandagreesthatno change, extensionof time, alteration, or additionto the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performedthereunderor the specifications accompanying the same shallinanywayaffectitsobligationsonthisbond, andit doesherebywaivenoticeof anysuchchange, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications.
INWITNESSWHEREOF, this instrumenthasbeendulyexecutedby PrincipalandSuretyabovenamed, on October 13, 2021
TDC Remington Partners, LLC Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
PRIN IPAL SURETY
By: BY: jdatA, 13-07L
4 ,
Salena Wood, Attorney- In- Fact
144,12-e-d- Si1
SIGNATURES M T BE NOTARIZED
Rev. 04/ 2019)
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 96
CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE§ 1189 r, Crerer , ererCi':'— rercrererCr e 00<% erer„ cc e ,, 7 —', C4 rceeC: Cf;, e c ererc A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
CAS
State of Geii# ernia-
County of \-- km yl
n-[
On c,"o t5, itIV before me, N? 'f ' ` IX II
rif4j Wyi4 kov 1(,,
Date Here Insert Name abd Title of the Officer
personally appeared l l WOWLev
Name( s) of Signer( s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person( s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/ they executed the same in his/her/their authorizedcapacity(ies),and that by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrumentthe person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTYOF PERJURYunder the laws
of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph t
PY
PUe STEPHANIE TURLEY
is true and correct.
Jl, Notary ID# 129880538
WITNESSmy hand and official seal.S f My CommissionExpires t'' July 9, 2022
Signatur
Signature of Notary blic
PlaceNotary SealAbove
OPTIONAL
Thoughthis section is optional, completing this informationcan deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: Document Date:
Number of Pages: Signer( s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer' s Name: Signer' s Name:
Corporate Officer — Title( s): Corporate Officer — Title( s):
Partner — Limited General Partner — Limited General Individual Attorney in Fact Individual Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Other:
Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing:
2014 National Notary Association • www. NationalNotary. org • 1- 800- US NOTARY( 1- 800- 876- 6827) Item# 5907 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 97
CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE§ 1189 rcr., e, r., cr., cc,: r., crcr;, cr., crycr-, ter-. ec, t; esEr, crerec, s.rergcc, c, crcret; crcc>, ec" ccc r., ec,<, ercr, cr, Ercr., crcc, A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the documentto whichthis certificateis attached,andnot thetruthfulness,accuracy,or validityof that document.
Missouri
State of California
County of St.Louis
On October 13, 2021 before me, Barbara Pannier, Notary Public Date Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared Salena Wood
Name( s) of Signer( s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorizedcapacity(ies),andthat by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrumentthe person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws
of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
BARBAHA PANNIER
WITNESS my hand and offi ' al seal.
Notary Public- Notary Seal
STATEOFMISSOURIR
Jefleroon County Signature
My Commission Expires: Sept 07, 2022 Barbara P Hier ignature of Notary Public Commission#14430636
Place Notary SealAbove
OPTIONAL
Thoughthis section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: Faithful Performance Bond Document Date: 10/ 13/2021 Number of Pages: 1 Signer( s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer' s Name: Salena Wood Signer' s Name:
Corporate Officer — Title( s): Corporate Officer — Title( s):
Partner — Limited General Partner — Limited General Individual R Attorney in Fact Individual Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Other:
Signer Is Representing: Travelers casualty and Surety Signer Is Representing:
Company of America
2014 National Notary Association • www. NationalNotary. org • 1- 800- US NOTARY( 1- 800- 876- 6827) Item# 5907 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 98
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company
TRAVELERS J St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut ( herein collectively called the" Companies"), and that the Companies do hereby make, constitute and appoint Selena Wood of ST LOUIS Missouri their true and lawful Attomey( s)- in- Fact to sign, execute, seal and acknowledge any and all bonds, recognizances, conditional undertakings and other writings obligatory in the nature thereof on behalf of the Companies in their business of guaranteeing the fidelity of persons, guaranteeing the performance of contracts and executing or guaranteeing bonds and undertakings required or permitted in any actions or proceedings allowed by law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Companies have caused this instrument to be signed, and their corporate seals to be hereto affixed, this 21st day of April, 2021.
e
0 amok AN,
11.14,1,
0,
00 rot
State of Connecticut
By:
City of Hartford ss. Robert L. Rane , enior Vice President On this the 21st day of April, 2021, before me personally appeared Robert L. Raney, who acknowledged himself to be the Senior Vice President of each of the Companies, and that he, as such, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposestherein contained by signing on behalf of said Companies by himselfas a duly authorized officer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal. i GGd
ot m
4My Commission expires the 30th day of June, 2026
p16`
Anna P. Nowik, Notary Public
This Power of Attorney is granted under and by the authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of each of the Companies, which resolutions are now in full force and effect, reading as follows:
RESOLVED, that the Chairman, the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President,anySecondVice President, the Treasurer, any AssistantTreasurer, the CorporateSecretaryor any AssistantSecretarymay appoint Attorneys-in-Fact and Agents to act for and on behalf of the Company and may give such appointee such authority as his or her certificate of authority mayprescribeto signwiththe Company's nameandsealwiththe Company's seal bonds, recognizances, contractsof indemnity, and otherwritings obligatoryin thenatureof a bond, recognizance, or conditionalundertaking, and any of said officersor the Boardof Directorsat any time may remove any such appointeeand revoke the power given him or her; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chairman, the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President or anyVicePresidentmay delegateall or any part of the foregoingauthorityto one or more officersor employeesof this Company, provided that each such delegation is in writing and a copy thereof is filed in the office of the Secretary;and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that any bond, recognizance, contract of indemnity, or writing obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance, orconditionalundertakingshall be valid and bindingupon the Companywhen (a) signedby the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive VicePresident, any Senior Vice Presidentor any Vice President, any SecondVice President, the Treasurer, any AssistantTreasurer, the CorporateSecretaryor anyAssistantSecretaryand duly attestedand sealedwith the Company's seal by a Secretaryor AssistantSecretary; or ( b) dulyexecuted (under seal, if required) by one or moreAttorneys-in-Fact and Agents pursuantto the powerprescribedin his or her certificate or their certificates of authority or by one or more Company officerspursuantto a written delegation of authority; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the signature of each of the following officers: President, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, anyVicePresident, anyAssistantVicePresident,anySecretary,anyAssistantSecretary,andthesealofthe Companymaybeaffixedbyfacsimileto anyPowerof Attorneyor to any certificaterelatingtheretoappointingResidentVice Presidents, ResidentAssistantSecretariesor Attorneys-in- Factforpurposesonlyofexecutingandattestingbondsandundertakingsandotherwritingsobligatoryinthenaturethereof, andanysuchPowerof AttorneyorcertificatebearingsuchfacsimilesignatureorfacsimilesealshallbevalidandbindingupontheCompanyandanysuchpowersoexecuted andcertifiedbysuchfacsimilesignatureandfacsimilesealshallbevalidandbindingontheCompanyin thefuturewithrespectto anybondor understanding to which it is attached.
I, Kevin E. Hughes, the undersigned, Assistant Secretary of each of the Companies, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a trueandcorrectcopyof the PowerofAttorneyexecutedbysaidCompanies,whichremainsinfullforceandeffect.
Dated this 13th day of October , 2021 .
cosefienopo:\ if rw
4 o
LE. Hughes, Asscretary
Toverifytheauthenticityof thisPowerofAttorney,pleasecallusat 1-800-421-3880.
Please refer to the above- named Attomey(' s} in- Fact and the details of the bond to which this Power of Attorney is attached.
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 99
Bond No.: 107503089
Contract No.:
Approved:
LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND
SA PL18- 0103
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chino, State of California, hereinafter designated as" CITY" and TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC hereinafter designated as
PRINCIPAL," have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which said agreement, dated OCTOBER 19, 2021 and identified as Project No. SA PL18- 0103 is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, Principal is required, before entering upon the performance of thework, to file a good and sufficientpayment bondwith the City of Chinoto secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15( commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
NOW, THEREFORE, said Principal and the undersigned, as corporate surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Chino, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material, men, and other persons employed in the performanceof the aforesaid agreement and referredto in the aforesaid Code of Civil Procedure in the sum of ONE HUNDRED FORTY- SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED Dollars ($ 147, 900. 00 ) for materialsfurnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment InsuranceAct with respectto suchwork or labor,that said suretywill paythe samein an amountnotexceedingthe amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonableexpensesandfees, includingreasonableattorneys'fees, incurredby City insuccessfullyenforcingsuch obligation,to be awardedand fixed by the court, and to be taxedas costsand to be included in the judgment therein rendered.
It is hereby expressly stipulatedand agreedthat this bond shall inureto the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 ( commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond.
Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.
The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does herebywaive notice of any such change, extensionof time, alteration, or addition.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrumenthas been duly executed by Principal and Surety above named, on October 13, 2021
TDC Remington Partners, LLC Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America_
PRINCIPAL SURETY
BY: By: >f i,„7-„Lam.
Salem Wood, Attorney- In-Fact
SIGNATURE( S) MUST BE NOTARIZED
Rev. 04/ 2019)
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 100
CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE§ 1189 rercrcc. crcrc rercrerccrercrerct crerrrerercrcrerF rerctrer rc re r rcrerercrc A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of 6atiifef •
County of\
n
MY. 1
kO\O(COn X \ 5, before me, C T€ '1`Q'
Date Here Insert Name an Title of the Oer
personally appeared Vim-" f
tt AJ L
Name( s) of Signer( s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person( s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/ she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorizedcapacity(ies),and that by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrumentthe person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTYOF PERJURYunder the laws
of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
t: , e STEPHANIE TURLEY WITNESSmy hand and official seal.J1` Notary ID# 129880538 My Commission Expires
Fov July 9, 2022
Signature
Signature of Notaty P lic
Place Notary SealAbove
OPTIONAL
Thoughthis section is optional, completing this informationcan deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: Document Date:
Number of Pages: Signer( s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer' s Name: Signer' s Name:
Corporate Officer — Title( s): Corporate Officer — Title( s):
Partner — Limited General Partner — Limited General Individual Attorney in Fact Individual Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Other:
Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing:
2014 National Notary Association • www. NationalNotary. org • 1- 800- US NOTARY( 1- 800- 876- 6827) Item# 5907 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 101
CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE§ 1189 r• eC c cY> crcY ec Y crer e ercrcK Y cep re c c c crcY rcC cC cC Y crct c) cY > cocecrcc",, ce,, cracr., ec`, Ercrc!> erc A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
Missouri
State of California
County of St.Louis
On October 13, 2021 before me, Barbara Pannier, Notary Public Date Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared Salena Wood
Name( s) of Signer( s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person( s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/ they executed the same in his/ her/their authorized capacity( ies), and that by his/ her/their signature( s) on the instrument the person( s), or the entity upon behalfof which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws
of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and offic. eal.
BARBARA PANNIER
Notary Public- Notary Seal Signature
STATE OF MISSOURI Barbara Pa ni Signature Notary Public Jefferson County
MyCommissionExpires:Sept.07,2022
Commission# 14430636
Place Notary SealAbove
OPTIONAL
Thoughthis section is optional, completing this informationcan deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: Labor and Material Bond Document Date: 10/ 13/2021 Number of Pages: 1 Signer( s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer' s Name: Salena Wood Signer' s Name:
Corporate Officer — Title( s): Corporate Officer — Title( s):
Partner — Limited General Partner — Limited General Individual Attorney in Fact Individual Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Other:
Signer Is Representing: Travelers Casualty and Surety Signer Is Representing:
Company of America
ti •- w- c r c x- ct- e- c;+ c. wc— c x— t- cN- t u c- c = cw- cc- cc- c '- c-w- c c: t- cw- r. w- ce cr vw- ct- v 4 c f- v c 2014 National Notary Association • www. NationalNotary. org • 1- 800- US NOTARY( 1- 800- 876- 6827) Item# 5907 01225. 0006/ 367559. 3
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 102
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
A Travelers Casualty and Surety Company
TRAVELERS J St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut ( herein collectively called the" Companies"), and that the Companies do hereby make, constitute and appoint Salena Wood of ST LOUIS Missouri their true and lawful Attomey( s)- in- Fact to sign, execute, seal and acknowledge any and all bonds, recognizances, conditional undertakings and other writings obligatory in the nature thereof on behalf of the Companies in their business of guaranteeing the fidelity of persons, guaranteeing the performance of contracts and executing or guaranteeing bonds and undertakings required or permitted in any actions or proceedings allowed by law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Companies have caused this instrument to be signed, and their corporate seals to be hereto affixed, this 21st day of April, 2021.
kkKeire;91
4. 4°•,-,..
eveN
culm• jr
COML
yTfgD,
E
W W
o
State of Connecticut
By: 04,
City of Hartford ss. Robert L. Rane , enior Vice President On this the 21st day of April, 2021, before me personally appeared Robert L. Raney, who acknowledged himself to be the Senior Vice President of each of the Companies, and that he, as such, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposestherein contained by signing on behalf of said Companies by himself as a duly authorized officer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal. drool (/
I eG
wortS
My Commission expires the 30th day of June, 2026 N •' O°`
rer
Anna P. Nowik, Notary Public
This Power of Attorney is granted under and by the authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of each of the Companies, which resolutions are now in full force and effect, reading as follows:
RESOLVED, that the Chairman, the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President,anySecondVice President, the Treasurer, any AssistantTreasurer, the CorporateSecretaryor any AssistantSecretarymay appoint Attorneys- in- Fact and Agents to act for and on behalf of the Company and may give such appointee such authority as his or her certificate of authority mayprescribeto signwiththe Company's nameandsealwiththe Company's seal bonds, recognizances, contractsof indemnity, and otherwritings obligatoryin thenatureof a bond, recognizance, or conditionalundertaking, and any of said officersor the Boardof Directorsat any time may remove any such appointee and revoke the power given him or her; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chairman, the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President or anyVicePresidentmay delegateall or any part of the foregoingauthorityto one or more officersor employeesof this Company, provided that each suchdelegation is in writing and a copy thereof is filed in the office of the Secretary;and it is FURTHERRESOLVED, that any bond, recognizance, contract of indemnity, or writing obligatoryin the nature of a bond, recognizance, orconditionalundertakingshall be valid and bindingupon the Companywhen (a) signedby the President, any Vice Chairman, any Executive VicePresident, any Senior Vice Presidentor any Vice President, any SecondVice President, the Treasurer, any AssistantTreasurer, the CorporateSecretaryor anyAssistantSecretaryand duly attestedand sealedwith the Company's seal by a Secretaryor AssistantSecretary; or ( b) dulyexecuted (under seal, if required) by one or more Attorneys-in-Fact and Agents pursuantto the power prescribedin his or her certificate or their certificates of authority or by one or more Companyofficers pursuantto a written delegation of authority; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the signature of each of the following officers: President, any Executive Vice President, any Senior Vice President, anyVicePresident, anyAssistantVicePresident,anySecretary,anyAssistantSecretary,andthesealof theCompanymaybe affixedby facsimileto anyPowerof Attorneyor to anycertificaterelatingtheretoappointingResidentVicePresidents, ResidentAssistantSecretariesor Attorneys-in- Factforpurposesonlyofexecutingandattestingbondsandundertakingsandotherwritingsobligatoryinthenaturethereof, andanysuchPowerof AttorneyorcertificatebearingsuchfacsimilesignatureorfacsimilesealshallbevalidandbindingupontheCompanyandanysuchpowersoexecuted andcertifiedbysuchfacsimilesignatureandfacsimilesealshallbevalidandbindingontheCompanyinthefuturewithrespectto anybondor understanding to which it is attached.
I, Kevin E. Hughes, the undersigned, Assistant Secretaryof each of the Companies, do hereby certify that the above and foregoingis a trueandcorrectcopyof the PowerofAttorneyexecutedbysaidCompanies,whichremainsinfullforceandeffect.
Dated this 13th day of October , 2021 .
4141 LE. HuetantSecretary
f
1441ram a *
Toverifytheauthenticityof thisPowerofAttorney,pleasecallusat 1-800-421-3880.
Please refer to the above- named Attomey( s)- in- Fact and the details of the bond to which this Power of Attorney is attached.
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 103
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF CHINO
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 19, 2021
TO: MATTHEW C. BALLANTYNE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: NICHOLAS S. LIGUORI, AICP, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT SITE APPROVAL PL18- 0103. DM01 TDC REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC).
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Public Improvement Agreement and securities for Site Approval PL18- 0103. DM01 with TDC Remington Partners, LLC; and authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents of behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact.
Revenue: Expenditure:
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 104
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 19, 2021
SUBJECT: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT SITE APPROVAL PL18- 0103. DM01 ( TDC
REMINGTON PARTNERS, LLC)
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
On May 20, 2019, the Chino Planning Commission approved a revision to the General Plan and The Preserve Specific Plan land use designations for the 3. 1 acre project site from Agriculture to Light Industrial land use for the construction of a 50, 618 square foot industrial warehouse building. This project is located at 9301 Remington Avenue ( Exhibit A). Subsequently, on July 20, 2020, the Planning Commission approved a developer modification to change the size and design of the previously approved industrial building to 61, 023 square feet.
As part of the Conditions of Approval, the developer is required to design and construct public improvements including curb, gutter sidewalk, a streetlight, domestic and recycled water improvements in/ on Remington and Carpenter Avenues.
The required public improvements necessitate the execution of a Public Improvement Agreement and the posting of securities to ensure the timely delivery of said public improvements.
ISSUES/ ANALYSIS
The requirements made at the time of the site approval have been met by the execution of the Public Improvement Agreement and by posting the necessary securities to guarantee the construction of said improvements. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Public Improvement Agreement and respective securities.
Therefore, it is staffs recommendation to the City Council to approve the Public Improvement Agreement and correlating securities.
Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Public Improvement Agreement
10.8.b
Final Acceptance of Public Improvement - PL18-0103
Packet Pg. 105
Revenue: Expenditure:
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: WARREN MORELION, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
SUBJECT: CAL FIRE PRADO HELITACK BASE MODIFICATIONS.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2023-042 pursuant to Section 21661.5 of the California Public Utilities Code (PUC) allowing Cal Fire to submit an application to the Department of Aeronautics for modifications to the existing Cal Fire Prado Helitack Base to increase wildfire safety.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City of Chino's budget related to the modifications to Cal Fire's Prado Helitack Base.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES:
The recommendation detailed above further the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
· Responsible Long-Range Planning
· Public Service Excellence through Internal and External Partnerships
10.9 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 106
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: CAL FIRE PRADO HELITACK BASE MODIFICATIONS
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) would like to modify the air operations facility at the Prado Helitack Base located within the boundaries of the California Institute for Men (CIM) at 14467 Central Avenue. The facility has been owned and operated by Cal Fire at this location since 2007. Due to the increased frequency and size of wildland fires throughout the State, Cal Fire is upgrading its fleet of helicopters to a larger Sikorsky UH-60 ‘Fire Hawk’ model, which has far superior firefighting capabilities, such as night firefighting capabilities, as compared to the smaller Huey aircraft currently in use. The larger helicopters will require the expansion of two existing touch down and liftoff areas (TLOF’s) on the site from 50’x50’ to 54’x54’ and will require other related improvements on the site including the new construction of a 26 -bed 7,465 square foot barracks, a 7,421 square foot hangar, a 4,800 square foot warehouse, a 2,990 square foot garage and a new 54 -foot training tower.
Construction drawings and plans have not been included with this report because the City Council is not being asked to approve any technical construction documents.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The City Counci l is not being asked to approve the project. Instead, the City Council is simply being asked to allow Cal Fire to submit an application to the Department of Aeronautics (“DOA”). The DOA is ultimately responsible for approving or denying the project.
The sole reason this item is coming before the City Council is because state law requires Cal Fire to get approval from the City in which the heliport is located (Chino) before it can submit an application to the DOA. (Public Utilities Code § 21661.5.) The pro ject does not require any permits or other approvals from the City because it is located on State-owned land.
The proposed modifications to the existing heliport are outside of the Chino Airport Influence Areas and the existing flight paths and traffic pat terns at Chino Airport. The area around the Prado Helitack Base is primarily industrial with several CIM correctional buildings in the vicinity.
Ayala Park is also to the north of the project site. Since the project is outside the boundaries established by the City’s Airport Land Use Plan, the proposed modifications will not have a significant impact on the Chino Airport nor on the immediate surroundings. Furthermore, the project will allow Cal Fire to use more effective fire -fighting helicopters, which wi ll increase the safety of Chino and the surrounding region. The flight path for the new helicopters for the Cal Fire facility are essentially the same as the helicopters previously in use.
Modifications to the Helitack Base further long -range planning goal s and providing public services and excellence through internal and external partnerships, by helping to improve the operations of the Cal Fire Helitack Base to allow for improved fire fighting capabilities in the future.
Consequently, staff recommends app roving Resolution No. 2023 -042 which will allow Cal Fire to move forward with submitting an application for the modification to the DOA.
Attachment - Resolution 2023-042
10.9 CONSENT CALENDAR
Packet Pg. 107
01225.0005/896465.1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-042
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA,
ALLOWING CAL FIRE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF AERONAUTICS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING CAL FIRE PRADO
HELITACK BASE TO INCREASE WILDFIRE SAFETY PURSUANT TO PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 21661.5.
WHEREAS, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) is in the process of making modifications and improvements to the air operations facility at the Prado Helitack Base located within the boundaries of the California Institute for Men (CIM) at 14467 Central Avenue in Chino; and
WHEREAS, the facility has been owned and operated by CAL FIRE at this location since 2007; and
WHEREAS, due to the increased frequency and size of wildland fires throughout the State, CAL FIRE is in the process of upgrading its fleet of helicopters to a larger Sikorsky UH-60 ‘Fire Hawk’ model, which has far superior firefighting capabilities as compared to the smaller aircraft currently in use. The increased size in aircraft has triggered the need for a larger physical landing area and other related improvements at the Chino location; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications of the Helitack Base include an increase in the size of the helicopter touchdown and lift areas (TLOF) by approximately 416 square feet for each TLOF for a total increase of 832 square feet, and other related improvements (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5 requires CAL FIRE to obtain approval of the plan of construction of the Project from the Chino City Council prior to submitting an application for the construction of the Project to the Caltrans Department of Aeronautics; and
WHEREAS, San Bernardino County has selected the “Designated Agency” method for airport land use planning under Public Utility Code Section 21670.1(c), which does not require the formation of an airport land use commission; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chino has not created an airport land use commission, but has instead incorporated the policies and requirements of the airport land use plan into the City’s general plan and specific plans; and
WHEREAS, the Project is on state-owned property and does not require any permits from the City, and therefore the Project is not required to be consistent with the City’s general plan or any specific plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA , HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and are incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby approves the plan of construction for the Project pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5.
10.9.a
Cal Fire Prado Helitack Base Modifications
Packet Pg. 108
RESOLUTION NO. PC2023-042
01225.0005/896465.1
SECTION 3. Approval of this resolution is not a final approval for purposes of CEQA as it is simply a preliminary step required for the applicant to submit an application for approval of the construction to the state. Consequently, no environmental review is required at this time.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this resolution , and shall transmit a certified copy of this resolution to both the applicant and the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, Division Chief.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF JULY 2023.
EUNICE M. ULLOA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
State of California )
County of San Bernardino ) ss.
City of Chino )
I, NATALIE GONZAGA, City Clerk of the City of Chino, do hereby certify that the forgoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of July 2023, by the following votes:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
10.9.a
Cal Fire Prado Helitack Base Modifications
Packet Pg. 109
Revenue: Expenditure: .
Transfer In: Transfer Out:
M E M O R A N D U M
CITY OF CHINO
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
TO: LINDA REICH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: WARREN MORELION, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMEN T), PL23 -0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA FRANCIS ANNEXATION.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -041 approving an addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Imp act Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) for the prezoning and general plan amendment for the Ramona Francis Annexation project area; 3) approve the introduction of Ordinance No. 2023 -015, approving PL23 -0014 (Prezone/Annexation), in conjunction with the prop osed annexation of the Ramona Francis Annexation area, to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; 4) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -040 approving PL23 -0041 (General Plan Amendment), 5) approve the introduction of Ordinance No. 2023 -005, PL23 -0015 (Zoning Ordinance Amendment), to be read by number and title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance; and 6) adopt Resolution No. 2023 -039, requesting that the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) initiate annexation proceedings for PL23-0014(Prezone/Annexation).
FISCAL IMPACT
The annexation would result in an average annual net deficit to the City's budget of approximately $190,000 per year as outlined in the Ramona Francis Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis.
CITY OF CHINO MISSION / VISION / VALUES / STRATEGIC ISSUES:
The recommendation detailed above further the City’s values and strategic issues that serve as key pillars on which identified priorities, goals, and action plans are built, by fostering:
Responsible Long-Range Planning
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 110
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND
In October 2017, the City Council directed staff to gather the necessary information to better understand the fiscal implications before acting on any future annexation applications for properties located within the unincorporated San Bernardino County (County) area of the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI). To acquire the information, staff obtained the services of Stanley R.
Hoffman Associates, Inc. (SRHA), to prepare an economic analysis that would include the fiscal effects of four different annexation scenarios of the north and south SOI areas, which encompasses approximately 1,500 acres of the County. The four fiscal alternatives studied included: 1) a status -quo (“do nothing”) alternative which allows a nnexations on a piecemeal basis as they presently occur; 2) annexation of all “County island” areas (as determined by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)), with future annexation of other territory; 3) a phased or partial annexation alternative; and 4) a complete SOI annexation alternative. Included in the analysis was a review of current infrastructure in the SOI and an analysis of future infrastructure improvements (both on a full-service and minimum service level).
Following the completion of the economic analysis, a joint workshop was held with the Planning Commission and City Council in January 2021 to discuss the findings of the economic analysis.
Based on this information, the preferred approach identified in the analysis was to work on annexing the “County islands” over the next few years first. A County island, as described by California Government Code and LAFCO, must meet certain requirements to be considered an island annexation. These include not exceeding 150 acres in size, being subst antially surrounded (60%) by the City that the area is being incorporated into, not containing any prime agricultural land, and other provisions. There are currently seven islands identified by LAFCO in the SOI. Five of the islands are located within the n orthern SOI and two are located within the southern SOI. As a result of the economic analysis and information presented at the workshop, the City Council directed staff to start the County annexation process by annexing one island first. The proposed island annexation is approximately 145 acres and located within the northern SOI.
As outlined below, the project annexation area includes the 13.35 acre Yorba Villas project that was approved by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors in October 2022 to allow for the development of 45 single -family homes at a density of 3.37 dwelling units per acre. This approval also included land use changes that amended the San Bernardino Countywide Plan from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) to Low Density Residenti al (LDR) and the San Bernardino County Zoning District from Single Residential -1 acre minimum lot size (RS -1) to Single Residential (RS). The current City of Chino General Plan land use designation for the site is RD2 (Residential, 2 units/acre).
The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February 22 and June 7, 2023.
Prior to the February public hearing, staff received a letter (Exhibit C) from the applicant for the Yorba Villas project, Borstein Enterprises, concerned that the prezoning of their property as outlined in the proposed project is inconsistent with the recently amended San Bernardino County Land Uses. Furthermore, the letter stated that this inconsistency “will cause significant harm to our project. Specifically building and selling a project that is arguably inconsistent with applicable zoning would inhibit our ability to obtain construction financing or a buyer’s ability to obtain home loan”. Additionally, in the letter, Borstein Enterprises requested that the City adopt a General Plan Amendment and prezone the property from RD2 (Residential, 2 units/acre) to RD4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) to be consistent with the County’s adopted land uses for the
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 111
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 3
project.
At the February 22, 2023 hearing three residents spoke in favo r of the annexation, primarily stating that the City could control development in the annexation area and be able to utilize Code Enforcement to clean up the area. The president of the Baitul Hameed Mosque spoke in favor of the annexation, wanting to work with the City to conduct modifications to the Mosque in the future. Another resident asked question regarding the ability to continue their home business. In addition, two residents had concerns about the need to maintain larger lot sizes in the area. Ult imately, the Planning Commission continued the project to a future meeting to allow staff time to analyze the land use issue identified in the Borstein Enterprises letter. After analyzing the issue, it was determined that it was appropriate to make the re quested land use change as part of the annexation project. The project was re -noticed for the June 7, 2023 Planning Commission meeting.
On June 7, 2023 the item was brought back to the Planning Commission for review and action.
At the hearing, one residen t had concerns about being able to retain the size and quantity of marijuana plants on his property. Additionally, the Planning Commission asked questions of staff if the Yorba Villas could be required to be modified or the number of units reduced. Staff informed the Commission that the City would be required to accept the entitlements granted by the County of San Bernardino for that project. The Commission also had questions about the amount of annual estimated budget deficit the City would be accepting by annexing this area.
Following the public hear ing, the Planning Commission voted in favor of the project by a 5 -2 vote.
The proposed project furthers the City’s values and strategic issues goals, and action plans by fostering Responsible Long -Range Planning through the implementation of the General Plan Land Use Element goal of providing a clear transition for properties within the SOI.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment
As mentioned, the City is proposing a General Plan Amendment to change the City’s existing General Plan land use for the 13.35 -acre Yorba Villas project site from RD2 (Residential, 2 units/acre) to RD4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) to be consistent with the County’s adopted land uses for the project. The initial intent to solve this issue prior to the request from Borstein Enterprises was to process the General Plan and Zoning Map amendments for those parcels at a later date, along with the comprehensive General Plan Update. However, State law states that no land use changes are permitted to take place within two years following the certification of an annexation. The mapping and development of these parcels are likely to take place prior to the annexation certification and the comprehensive General Plan Update is proposed to be finalized in the summer of 2024.
Additionally, State law and City policy requires that when a property is annexed into the City from the County, any entitled development projects, approved uses, and/or building construction that are legally permitted in the Coun ty are required to be accepted by the City. Furthermore, when LAFCO is considering an annexation, they take into consideration consistencies between City and County land uses to avoid incompatibilities and legal non-conforming developments.
Also, on the Ci ty Council agenda tonight is a Pre -Annexation and Development Agreement
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 112
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 4
between the City and Borstein Enterprises to allow sewer service for the Yorba Villas project.
With this agreement, and to be consistent with State Law and the policies of the City of Chino and LAFCO, staff has determined that in the interest of best planning practices, the City should make the General Plan amendments to the Yorba Villas parcels at this time to be consistent with what has been previously approved by the County of San Be rnardino and not wait for the City's comprehensive General Plan Update. Furthermore, this would allow for the proposed prezoning of the annexation area to be consistent with the amended General Plan Map, allowing for the developer to move forward with its project and avoid the financial issues outlined in the Borstein Enterprises letter. It would also avoid a development that is inconsistent with the underlying City land use designations and zoning regulations. The Pre -Annexation and Development Agreement for the Yorba Villas project also provides that the City is not to submit the Resolution for annexation to LAFCO until the Yorba Villas receives its final map approval and secures its first building permit from the County or by December 19, 2023, whichever occurs first.
Prezone/Annexation
The first County island that is proposed to be annexed into the City is the largest SOI Island and is known as the “Ramona Francis” annexation area. This annexation area is approximately 145 gross acres in size and is gener ally located east of Norton Avenue, north and south of Francis Avenue, north and south of Philadelphia Street, and east and west of Yorba Avenue. The annexation area is surrounded by the City on 73 percent of its perimeter and includes a small amount of wh at is defined as prime agricultural land due to the quality of the soil and existing agricultural operations.
The Ramona Francis annexation area currently includes mostly single -family residential zoned parcels, some of which are vacant, and others are uti lized for animal keeping and various agricultural purposes. There is also the Baitul Hameed Mosque and a small M & M Market, both located on residentially zoned properties within the annexation area. The current County zoning designation for the annexation area is RS-1 (Single Residential-1 acre minimum lots), RS -20M (Single Residential-20,000 square foot minimum lots), and RS (Single Residential -7,200 square foot minimum lots) (Exhibit A). As mentioned, the annexation area includes an approved single family residential development on 13.35 acres at the northwest corner of Francis and Yorba Avenues that was approved by the County Board of Supervisors in October 2022 to allow for the development of 45 single -family homes known as Yorba Villas. The homes have not yet been constructed.
The majority of the properties to the south, east and west of the annexation area that are within the City are developed with single-family homes with a small commercial center at the southeast corner of Ramona Avenue and Philadel phia Street. The properties to the north within the County are mostly semi -rural residential development, that includes animal keeping and agricultural uses.
Land Use
The proposed prezone and annexation is intended to transfer the Ramona Francis annexation area from the County to the City of Chino and establish RD2 (Residential/Agricultural), RD4.5 (Residential, 4.5 dwelling units/acre), and P (Public) zoning for these properties (Exhibit B). The RD2 zoning allows for a density of 1 to 2 dwelling units per acre, the RD4.5 zoning allows for 3 to 4.5 dwelling units per acre, and the P zoning is intended for the development of publicly owned facilities, such as parks, recreational facilities, libraries, and public schools. The chart
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 113
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 5
below outlines the acreages as it relates to the County vs. City zoning.
Current and proposed approximate acreages based on City and County zoning:
County Zoning Acres City Zoning Acres
RS-1 71.5 RD-2 77
RS-20M 44 RD 4.5 63.5
RS 29.5 P 4.5
The proposed prezoning of the Ramona Francis Annexation area will only apply if the City Council approves the prezone application and when LAFCO records the certificate of completion in the future for the annexation.
Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis
A plan for service and fiscal i mpact analysis (PFS/FIA) which is attached to Resolution No. 2023-039, as required by LAFCO, has been prepared for the proposed Ramona Francis Annexation. The PFS/FIA was completed by the same consultant, SRHA, that conducted the SOI economic analysis in 2 018. The PFS/FIA looks at the costs associated with the City taking over servicing this area in relation to the anticipated revenue from property taxes, development impact fees, vehicle license fees, sales tax and other revenue sources. The analysis took i nto account the additional 45 single -family homes to be developed with the Yorba Villas within the next three years. The analysis determined an additional 75 single-family homes could also have the potential to be developed on other RD4.5 zoned properties after annexation. Based on the presumed revenues and City expenditures, the annexation would result in an average annual net deficit to the City’s budget of approximately $190,000 a year, with the largest expense related to police protection. Resolution No . 2023-039 initiates the annexation proceedings with LAFCO. Once the proposed project is annexed into the City from the County, property taxes collected by the County will be transferred to the City. As outlined in the PFS/FIA, the City will receive its fu ll property tax share. The PFS/FIA includes an estimate of Development Impact Fees, Park Fees and Administration Fees that may be collected for the potential 120 units noted above through buildout year 2040. It is important to note that based on the Pre -Annexation and Development Agreement between the City and Borstein Enterprises that is on the Council Agenda tonight, the City would only receive Development Impact Fees and Administration Fees related to sewage collection facilities for the 45 units within their development. The County would receive the remainder of development impact fees. This change in development fees does not impact the estimated annual deficit to the City budget outlined above. (See memo attached as Exhibit D.)
Public Engagement
As part of the prezone and annexation process, City staff conducted a public engagement campaign to provide specific information to residents and property owners both within and directly adjacent to the proposed Ramona Francis annexation area. The goal of the campaign was to inform the public on what likely would and would not change as a result of the proposed annexation. The campaign included the establishment of a dedicated annexation webpage (hosted within the City of Chino’s primary website), pamphlet/pos tcard mailers, a community workshop held on December 1, 2022, a community open house held on January 25, 2023, as well as various one-on-one conversations between interested residents and staff.
At both the community workshop and community open house, staf f provided detailed
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 114
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 6
information on a number of topics, those primarily being animal keeping, sewer/septic, land use/zoning, code enforcement processes, property taxes, permitted uses, and general information on what an annexation is, including outlining the role of LAFCO.
Approximately 30 people attended both the community workshop and open house, as well as the Mayor, Council members and representatives from the County and LAFCO staff. The overall public engagement process was well -received, with many res idents indicating to staff that they appreciated the opportunity to discuss their concerns and get answers to their questions.
Below is an overview of some of the concerns discussed by residents and staff’s general response to them:
Animal Keeping . Some re sidents in the annexation area were concerned about maintaining the same number of animals they currently have in the County, primarily horses and livestock. For the majority of the annexation area, this is a non -issue because the current properties (zoned RS-1 and a portion zoned RS-20M) in the County will be zoned RD2 in the City. The allowance for animal keeping between the County and the City in those areas is very similar and would have little impact. The majority of the land that is zoned RS -20M in the County, that will be zoned RD4.5 in the City, does not allow for horses. To rectify this, staff has prepared an amendment to Chapter 20.16 (Right to Farm) and Chapter 20.20 (Nonconforming Uses, Structures and Parcels) to allow for properties to continue to keep animals as they were legally permitted to in the County prior to annexation.
Sewer/Septic Systems. The City is responsible for providing a backbone sewer system for both the City and the City’s SOI areas, if approved by LAFCO. Since the City is the provider of sewer to the area that will be annexed, there are concerns by property owners that they would be compelled to connect to City sewer if annexed. At this time, there is very little backbone sewer infrastructure in the annexation area. The majori ty of the properties in the area are on septic systems. Currently, the only sewer mains that run through the annexation area are located on Ramona and Yorba Avenues, with the main on Yorba being the only sewer line directly adjacent to approximately 10 residences. State law requires that any property that has a sewer main within 200 feet would be required to connect to the sewer main, if necessary to serve their property due to the capacity of the existing septic system being unable to process the sewer generated onsite. The requirement for a sewer connection usually occurs when 1) additional square footage is added to a building; 2) when buildings are added to a property; or 3) the existing septic system fails on the property. This requirement would apply whether the property is located in the County or the City.
Primarily for water quality purposes, it is the long -term goal of various agencies to move away from septic systems and transition to a sewer system that can allow for proper wastewater treatment. N either the City nor the County have detailed plans in place at this time to construct a backbone sewer system in the areas that are, for the most part, currently on septic. It is unknown when this infrastructure upgrade will take place, and therefore, only a small amount of property owners would be required to go on sewer.
Once again, that would only take place if their septic system fails or they have exceeded capacity due to intentional expansions on their property. Residents were informed if those variables align, they would be financially responsible to connect to the City sewer.
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 115
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 7
Code Enforcement. Concerns were communicated that City Code Enforcement would begin proactive and aggressive enforcement of properties once the area is annexed.
Residents were i nformed that like it is currently in the County, Code Enforcement primarily responds to complaints from the public. Code Enforcement’s general perspective in the City is not punishment, it is compliance with the City’s code. The City takes a collaborative approach to working through issues with residents.
Property Tax. Residents were reminded that they pay their property tax to the County and there is no additional property tax assessed as a result of the annexation.
Permitted Improvements/Uses and Permitting. Residents were informed that any uses or improvements that were legally permitted in the County could continue and would be accepted by the City. They were also informed that once annexed into the City, they would obtain all necessary future permits fr om the City rather than going to County offices.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
As part of the annexation, the City is also proposing a Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) to Chapter 20.16 (Right to Farm) and Chapter 20.20 (Nonconforming Uses, Structures And Parcels) of the City Municipal Code. The City’s current right to farm regulations allow for agricultural operations that are existing at the time of annexation to continue to operate in the City regardless of the underlining land use, as long as the agricultural use was legally permitted in the County. In this context, agricultural operations would be more related to livestock farming, dairies, the raising of crops and other uses associated with farming. The keeping of animals not associated with farming is not clearly addressed in Chapter 20.16.
The proposed ZOA would expand the City’s right to farm provisions to include the keeping of animals on properties where such uses are permitted by the County at the time of annexation.
As previously noted, the majority (7 7 acres) of the land being proposed to be annexed into the City will go from a County zoning of RS -1 and RS-20M to a City zoning of RD2. These zoning designations in both the County and the City have similar zoning regulations as it relates to animal keepi ng. However, approximately 50 acres of land within the annexation area will go from RS -20M zoning to RD4.5 zoning. The RD4.5 zoning in the City does not allow for the keeping of horses and goats and has certain limits on the keeping of chickens. This ZOA w ould allow for those residents that will be in the RD4.5 zone once annexed into the City to continue to keep their horses, goats, chickens, and other animals as was permitted in the County prior to annexation. The keeping of animals on properties, as previ ously approved in the County, would continue to stay in effect as long as the properties are not subdivided and developed.
The revisions to Chapter 20.20 (Nonconforming Uses, Structures And Parcels) clarify that existing, legally established animal keeping uses on properties annexed into the City that do not conform to the City’s animal keeping regulations will be allowed to continue. Furthermore, the use can be reestablished even if it is discontinued for any period of time, and the use may continue even if the ownership of the property changes. However, the use may not be expanded beyond what existed at the time of annexation unless an expansion of the use is permitted under the City’s animal keeping ordinance (CMC Section 20.21.030). Finally, the animal keeping use must be brought into compliance with City animal keeping regulations when the property is developed in accordance with the underlying zoning district.
Public Noticing
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 116
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 5, 2023
SUBJECT: PL23-0041 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT), PL23-0014 (PREZONE/ANNEXATION), PL23-0015 (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) - RAMONA
FRANCIS ANNEXATION
PAGE 8
A 10-day notice was mailed to all property owners within an approximately 500-foot radius of the project site, which exceeds the noticing requirement. In addition, a one -eighth page notice was published in the Chino Champion on June 24, 2023 and the City sent information out on the City’s social media platforms. In response to the public notice, no comments have been received. The notice exceeds legal noticing requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Addendum to City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) for the Annexation/Prezoning and General P lan Amendment for the Ramona Francis Annexation, dated May 2023 has been prepared for this project by T&B Planning. As outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum is the appropriate environmental document if the proposed project does not constit ute significant new information or change the assumptions, analysis, conclusions, or mitigation measures of the EIR to a significant degree. The analysis concluded that the proposed project would not create any new significant impacts or impacts that are s ignificantly different than those identified in the original EIR. In addition, the project would not substantially increase the severity of any previously identified significant impacts. Therefore, the proposed project is within the scope of the previous General Plan EIR.
The proposed Zone Ordinance Amendment related to Animal Keeping is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), Common Sense Exemption, in that it can be seen with certain ty that there is no possibility for this action to have a significant effect on the environment, since the animal keeping is an existing and allowed use.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - San Bernardino County Zoning Map
Exhibit B - Prezone Map
Exhibit C - Borstein Enterprises Letter
Exhibit D - Memo regarding Development Impact Fees (PFS/FIA)
11.10 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 117
EB 60
WB 60
FRANCIS AVE
PHILADELPHIA ST
YORBA AVE
RAM
ONA AVE
PIPELINE AVE
ROSW
ELL AVE NORTON AVE
M
ONTE VISTA AVE
TELEPHONE AVE
CARLISLE AVE
LIBERTY ST
WB 60 OFF
SERRA AVE
MAPLE ST
WB 60 ON
SILICON AVE
TAFT ST
ADAMS ST
EB 60 OFF
EB 60 ON
HANCOCK ST
VISTA AVE
ORGREN ST
MUSTANG RD
CRYSTAL AVE
JASM
INE DR
WAKEFIELD AVE
OLIVE ST
CRAW
AVE
FARNDON AVE
ROUNDTREE LN
DUNLAP AVE
COMPTON ST
BUTTERFIELD AVE
LOMBARDY AVE
DUNLAP PL
ALTURAS LN
LAMPLIGHTER LN
LESTER CT
LOCUST ST
ARBOR CIR
ABACHERLI AVE
ORCHARD DR
LEXINGTON AVE
DEL M
AR AVE
UNION ST
OLIVE PL BRYANT ST
PILGRIM CT
REVERE ST
WALDEN ST
VISTA CT
BRYANT LN
BUTTERFIELD PL
JUNIPER CT
LESTER AVE
WINTRESS DR
STARLIGHT LN
CONCORD CT
GREENWAY LN
CAMELIA CT
LESTER PL
VALERIE LN
GREEN WAY LN
LA MASITA CT
LOMBARDY ST
FRANCES W
AY
LA CAUSEY CT
SUNVIEW LN
LEXINGTON ST
TWAIN ST
KADOTA AVE
REVERE CT
JACKSON CT
CONSTITUTION STGOLDENROD CT
LAKE ST
ABACHERLI PL
CHESAPEAKE CT
COMPTON CT
ROSWELL CT
BELMONT PL
INDEPENDENCE ST
OAKDALE DR
LOMBARDY CT
BIRDVALE DR
SKYHAVEN LN
ORGREN AVE
LEXINGTON CT
COLLEGE AVE
FARNDON AVE
BIRDVALE DR
INDEPENDENCE ST
FARNDON AVE
BIRDVALE DR
LESTER AVE
DUNLAP PL
CRYSTAL AVE
CARLISLE AVE
REVERE ST
SERRA AVE
REVERE ST
BUTTERFIELD PL
LESTER PL
EB 60 OFF
INDEPENDENCE ST
MUSTANG RD
LOCUST ST
KADOTA AVE
WB 60 ON
JACKSON CT
LOMBARDY CT
¯
LEGEND
ANNEXATION AREA:
144 ACRES / 73% SURROUNDED BY CITY - TOTAL PARCEL COUNT IS 121
CITY BOUNDARY
SB COUNTY ZONING:
CN - (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL)
RS-1 - (SINGLE RESIDENTIAL - 1 ACRE MIN.)
RM - (MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL)
RS - (SINGLE RESIDENTIAL)
RS-20M - (SINGLE RESIDENTIAL - 20,000 S/F MIN.)
PARCELS
CITY OF CHINO - ANNEXATION AREA - PREZONE - SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY ZONING Date: 6/7/2023
RS
RS
RS-1
RS-20M
RS-20M
RS
RS
RS-1RS-1
RS
RS
RM
CN
RS
11.10.a
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 118
WB 60
EB 60
YORBA AVE
FRANCIS AVE
RAMONA AVE
PIPELINE AVE
NORTON AVE
PHILADELPHIA ST
MONTE VISTA AVE
PHILLIPS BLVD
CARLISLE AVE
WB 60 OFF
SERRA AVE
MAPLE ST
LIBERTY ST
WB 60 ON
SILICON AVE
VISTA AVE
ORGREN ST
MUSTANG RD
CRYSTAL AVE
JASMINE DR
ELM ST
ROUNDTREE LN
BUTTERFIELD AVE
TAFT ST
ALTURAS LN
LAMPLIGHTER LN
BOYER ST
ORCHARD DR
LEXINGTON AVE
LOCUST ST
OLIVE ST
DEL MAR AVE
HANCOCK ST
ADAMS ST
SAN FELIPE AVE
OLIVE PL
BRYANT ST
PILGRIM CT
REVERE ST
WALDEN ST
VISTA CT
BRYANT LN
LOMBARDY AVE
WAKEFIELD AVE
BUTTERFIELD PL
ESSEX AVE
WINTRESS DR
STARLIGHT LN
CONCORD CT
GREENWAY LN
CAMELIA CT
VALERIE LN
GREEN WAY LN
LA MASITA CT
LOMBARDY ST
LA CAUSEY CT
SUNVIEW LN
REVERE CT
JACKSON CT
ORANGE BLOSSOM LN
GOLDENROD CT
ORANGE BLOSSOM RD
COMPTON CT
BELMONT PL
INDEPENDENCE ST
OAKDALE DR
LOMBARDY CT
BIRDVALE DRSKYHAVEN LN
ORGREN AVE
COLLEGE AVE
CARLISLE AVE
ELM ST
REVERE ST
SERRA AVE
CRYSTAL AVE
¯
LEGEND
ANNEXATION AREA 1:
145 ACRES / 73% SURROUNDED BY CITY
CITY BOUNDARY
PARCELS
Prezone - Land Use
RD 2
RD 4.5
RD 8
RD 12
NC
P
CITY OF CHINO - ANNEXATION AREA - PREZONE
Date: 5/17/2023
RD 4.5
RD 2
RD 4.5
RD 4.5
RD 2
RD 8
RD 12
RD 2
NC
NC
RD 4.5
RD 4.5
P
RD 2
RD 4.5
EXHIBIT B
11.10.b
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 119
Ij
B c R sr E I N 11766 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 820, Los Angeles, California 90025 T 310 582 1991 F 310 582 1999 borstein enterprises. com
ENTERPRISES
February 21, 2023
Mr. Nick Liguori,
Community Development Director
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
Regarding: Ramona Francis Annexation, including City File No's: PL23-0014 and PL23-0015 Mr. Liguori,
This letter is in response to the City of Chino's proposed annexation referenced above which includes our 13.35-acre property located at 4570 and 4664 Francis Avenue. We are writing to express our concern that the City of Chino's failure to pre-zone our property consistent with the County of San Bernardino's approval of VTTM 20394 will cause significant harm to our project.
Specifically building and selling a project that is arguably inconsistent with applicable zoning would inhibit our ability to obtain construction financing or a buyer's ability to obtain home loan.
Should the City of Chino wish to include our property in the proposed annexation, we respectfully request that the city pre-zone our property to RD-4.5, and adopt a conforming General Plan amendment, to ensure vertical consistency between County VTTM 20394 and the City's General Plan and zoning ordinance so as to avoid financial harm to our project and future homeowners.
Sincerely yours,
Erik Pfahler,
Senior Vice President
11.10.c
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 120
11661 San Vicente Boulevard Suite 306 Los Angeles, California 90049-5111 P: 310.820.2680, F: 310.820.8341 www.stanleyrhoffman.com To: Michael Hitz, Principal Planner, City of Chino From: Bravish Mallavarapu, Director, Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Date: July 21, 2023 Subject: Revised Development Impact Fees for the Ramona/Francis Annexation Area The Ramona Francis annexation area is a county island within the City of Chino’s sphere of influence (SOI). The City is proposing to annex this island area within its municipal boundary. This requires a Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis study to be submitted to the San Bernardino County Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) that examines potential service delivery and fiscal impacts on the annexing entity (City of Chino). Accordingly, we prepared the ‘Ramona Francis Annexation Area’ Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Study, dated January 5, 2023. The fiscal impact analysis, based on a set of growth and fiscal assumptions, projects the ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) revenue and cost impacts on the City’s General Fund and estimates potential one-time development impact fees (DIFs) accruing to the City from new growth in the island area. DIFs are one-time fees, charged typically at the issuance of permits, and can be used to only fund capital improvements. Projected new growth in the island area includes the proposed 45-unit ‘Yorba Villas’ development anticipated within the first 5-years upon annexation and an additional 75 units on other opportunity sites over the long-term by buildout year 2040. This results in total new growth of 120 units within the island area at buildout. In the January 2023 study it was assumed that all DIFs from new growth would accrue to the City of Chino, including those from the 45-unit Yorba Villas development. However, since the completion of the report, it has been indicated that the County will approve and collect all one-time fees from the project, except for the Sewage Collection System fees, which the City can still collect. At the same time, it is assumed that upon annexation the City will collect all fees from the balance 75 new units projected by buildout in the island area. This memorandum updates the one-time DIFs to be collected by the City of Chino under this latest fee collection scenario. The new fee collection scenario does not change the ongoing O&M revenue and cost impacts projected on the City’s General Fund and only impacts the one-time DIFs. • As summarized in Table 1, within Year 5 upon annexation, the City of Chino will collect $29,383 under the new fee collection scenario compared to $2.08 million shown previously in the January 2023 study (Table 4-1 in the report). • At Buildout 2040, the City of Chino will collect $2.63 million under the new fee collection scenario compared to $4.16 million shown in the January 2023 study.
11.10.d
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 121
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates July 21, 2023 Michael Hitz, City of Chino Revised Development Impact Fees for the Ramona/Francis Annexation Area Page 2 of 4 Table 1 Summary of Cumulative Development Impact Fees Ramona Francis Annexation Area Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis, City of Chino (In Constant 2022 Dollars) Panel A: New Fee Collection Scenario Panel B: January 2023 Report
• As further detailed in Table 2, by Year 5 upon annexation, under the new fee scenario, the City of Chino will only collect $26,235 for the Sewage Collection System fees and $3,148 in 12% fee administration charges for a total of $29,383. No other DIF categories are collected from the 45-unit Yorba Villas development. • Table 2 should be compared with Table 4-2 in the January 2023 report. • At Buildout 2040, as shown in Table 3, the City of Chino will collect: o $69,960 in Sewage Collection System fees from all 120 units comprising new growth in the island area, including Yorba Villas. o $2.43 million for all other City DIF categories from the balance new growth of 75 units on other opportunity sites within the island area, excluding Yorba Villas. o $2.63 million in total DIFs (including a 12% fee administration charge) for the Sewage Collection System fees and all other DIF categories, as described above. • Table 3 should be compared with Table 4-3 in the January 2023 report.
Year 5 Buildout
Fee Category Impact Fees 2040
City of Chino Development Impact Fees $29,383$2,632,369 Chino Valley Unified School District Developer Impact Fees$711,315$1,896,840 Total Fees $740,698$4,529,209
Year 5 Buildout
Fee Category Impact Fees 2040
City of Chino Development Impact Fees $2,080,192$4,164,778 Chino Valley Unified School District Developer Impact Fees$711,315$1,896,840 Total Fees $2,791,507$6,061,618
Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.
City of Chino Development Services Department, Fee Schedule, July 5, 2022.
Chino Valley Unified School District, Developer Fee Schedule, Board Effective, June 20, 2022
11.10.d
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 122
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates July 21, 2023 Michael Hitz, City of Chino Revised Development Impact Fees for the Ramona/Francis Annexation Area Page 3 of 4 Table 2 New Fee Collection Scenario Cumulative Development Impact Fees, Year 5 Ramona Francis Annexation Area Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis, City of Chino (In Constant 2022 Dollars)
Units Fee per UnitTotal Fees
Panel A. City Development Impact Fees
Capital Impact Administration Charge 1 12% of City Development Impact Fees Subtotal
1.Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment0 $637 $02.Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment0 $1,310 $03.Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System 0 $4,586 $04.Storm Drainage Collection System Facilities 0 $2,396 $0
5.Water Source, Storage and Distribution 2 n/a n/a n/a
6.Sewage Collection System 45 $583 $26,2357.General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment 0 $156 $08.Public Use (Community Center) Facilities 0 $4,736 $0Subtotal 1-8 $26,23512% Capital Impact Administration Charge $3,148City Development Impact Fees Subtotal $29,383 Additional City Related Development Impact Fees (with no 12 percent Capital Impact Administration Charge)Residential Parks and Recreation Fee 0 $22,494 $0Sewage Facilities Development Fee 0 $7,600 $0Additional City Related Development Impact Fees Subtotal $0 Total City Development Impact Fees $29,383
Panel B. School Development Impact Fees
Estimated Total Square Feet of
Units 3
Fee per Residential Building Square Foot
Chino Valley Unified School District 148,500 $4.79 $711,315 Total Development Impact Fees $740,698
1. The City of Chino administers a Capital Impact Administration Charge that is 12% of the development impact fees related to categories 1-8 in Panel A. School Fees and Additional City Related Development Impact Fees are excluded from the Capital Impact Administration Charge.2. The Yorba Villas project will receive domestic water and water quality services from the Monte Vista Water District. Therefore, City water source, storage and distribution fees are not included for this project.3. The estimated total square feet of units is based on an average size of 3,300 square feet per single family residence from prior studies single family residence. Therefore, a total of 148,500 square feet is estimated for 45 units.
Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Chino Development Services Department, Fee Schedule, July 5, 2022. Chino Valley Unified School District, Developer Fee Schedule, Board Effective, June 20, 2022 Fee Category
11.10.d
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 123
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates July 21, 2023 Michael Hitz, City of Chino Revised Development Impact Fees for the Ramona/Francis Annexation Area Page 4 of 4 Table 3 New Fee Collection Scenario Cumulative Development Impact Fees, Buildout 2040 Ramona Francis Annexation Area Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis, City of Chino (In Constant 2022 Dollars)
Units Fee per UnitTotal Fees
Panel A. City Development Impact Fees
Capital Impact Administration Charge 1 12% of City Development Impact Fees Subtotal
1.Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment75 $637 $47,7752.Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment75 $1,310 $98,2503.Circulation (Streets, Signals and Bridges) System75 $4,586 $343,9504.Storm Drainage Collection System Facilities 75 $2,396 $179,700
5.Water Source, Storage and Distribution 2 n/a n/a n/a
6.Sewage Collection System 120 $583 $69,9607.General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment 75 $156 $11,7008.Public Use (Community Center) Facilities 75 $4,736 $355,200Subtotal 1-8 $1,106,53512% Capital Impact Administration Charge $132,784City Development Impact Fees Subtotal $1,239,319 Additional City Related Development Impact Fees (with no 12 percent Capital Impact Administration Charge)Residential Parks and Recreation Fee 75 $11,619 $871,425Sewage Facilities Development Fee 75 $6,955 $521,625Additional City Related Development Impact Fees Subtotal $1,393,050 Total City Development Impact Fees $2,632,369
Panel B. School Development Impact Fees
Estimated Total Square Feet of
Units 4
Fee per Residential Building Square Foot
Chino Valley Unified School District 396,000 $4.79 $1,896,840 Total Development Impact Fees $4,529,209
1. The City of Chino administers a Capital Impact Administration Charge that is 12% of the development impact fees related to categories 1-8 in Panel A. School Fees and Additional City Related Development Impact Fees are excluded from the Capital Impact Administration Charge.2. The Yorba Villas project will receive domestic water and water quality services from the Monte Vista Water District. Therefore, City water source, storage and distribution fees are not included for this project.3. The estimated total square feet of units is based on an average size of 3,300 square feet per single family residence from prior studies single family residence. Therefore, a total of 148,500 square feet is estimated for 120 units. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Chino Development Services Department, Fee Schedule, July 5, 2022. Chino Valley Unified School District, Developer Fee Schedule, Board Effective, June 20, 2022 Fee Category
11.10.d
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 124
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-041
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE CI TY OF CHINO
GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(SCH NO. 2008091064) (EIR) FOR THE ANNEXATION/PREZONING (PL23-0014) AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PL23 -0041) FOR THE RAMONA FRANCIS ANNEXATION.
WHEREAS, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA), T&B Planning has prepared an Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) for the Annexation/Prezoning and Ge neral Plan Amendment for the Ramona Franci s Annexation, dated May 2023. As outlined in C EQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum is the appropriate environmental document if the proposed projec t does not cons titute significant new inform ation or change the as sumptions, analysis, conclusions, o r mitigation measures of the EIR to a significant degree. The analysis concluded that the proposed project would not create any new significant impacts or impacts that ar e significantly different tha n those identified in the original EIR. In addition, the project would not subs tantially increase the seve rity of any previously identified significant impacts.
Therefore, the proposed project is within the scope of the previou s General Plan EIR. The Addendum satisfies the req uirements of the California Environ mental Quality Act ( CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.; 14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et seq.); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission was asked to consider a proposed amendment to the City’s General Plan (PL23-0041) to amend the City’s General Plan Land Use Plan to change the land use designation of 13.35 acres of land from RD 2 (Residential, 2 units/acre) to RD 4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) and a request to prezone approximately 145 acres of land (Ramona Francis A nnexation) from the San Bernardino Coun ty zoning designation of RS -1 (Single Residential minimum lot size 1 acre), RS-20M (Single Residential-20,000 square feet minimum), and RS (Single Residential) to the City of Chino’s zoning desig nation of RD2 (Residential/Agricultural), RD4.5 (Residential, 4.5 dwelling units/acre), and P (Public) in conjunction with the proposed annexation of the Ramona Francis Annexation site (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the certified City of Chino General Plan Envir onmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) serves as th e foundation docu ment for t he Add endum; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chino has made the proposed Addendum available for public review; and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2023 and June 7, 2023 , the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing for the proposed General Plan Amendment (PL2 3-0041), and Annexation/Prezoning (PL23-014), and the related Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) and at of v ote of 5 -2, adopted Resolution Nos. PC2023-019, PC2023-004 recommending the City Council to approve General Plan Amendment (PL2 3-0041), and Annexation /Prezone (PL23-0014) and R esolution No. PC2023-003, recommending the City Council adopt the Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR); and
11.10.e
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 125
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-041
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2023, the City Council held a d uly noticed public hearing for th e proposed Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) in compliance with law, entertained the written and oral report of staff, and took public testimony on the Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chino, California, does hereby FIND, DETERMINE, and RESOLVE as follows:
A. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.
B. Based on substantial evidence, both written and oral, from the public hearing, the City Council makes th e following findings and takes the following actions with respec t to the General Plan EIR:
1. The Draft Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA, and is adequate for this proposed project.
2. The Draft Addendum was presented to the City Counci l, and the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the documents.
3. There is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
4. Based on the above, the City Council hereby further fin ds and determin es that the Project will have no significant impact on the environment as outlined in the Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) , attached hereto as Exhibit A.
5. The documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which adoption of this resolution is based are in the custody of the City of Chino, Development Services De partment, Planning Division, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA 91710.
6. Based upon t he independent judgment of the City Council, the City Council adopts th e Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR), dated May 2023, prepared by T&B Planning, for General Plan Amendment (PL23-0041), and Annexation/Prezoning (PL23-0014).
7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to certify as to the adoption of this Resolution as of the date set forth below and forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to the Applicant at the address of record set forth in the Application.
11.10.e
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 126
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-041
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF JULY 2023.
EUNICE M. ULLOA, MAYOR
ATTEST:
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
State of California )
County of San Bernardino ) §
City of Chino )
I, Natalie Gonzaga, City Clerk of the City of Chino, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Chino City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of July, by the following votes:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NATALIE GONZAGA, CITY CLERK
Attachment: Exhibit A – Addendum to the City of Chino General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008091064) (EIR) for the Ramona Francis Annexation
11.10.e
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 127
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 128
RAMONA FRANCIS ANNEXATION
CITY OF CHINO, CALIFORNIA
ADDENDUM TO CITY OF CHINO GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
LEAD AGENCY:
City of Chino
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
Contact: Mike Hitz, Principal Planner
CEQA CONSULTANT :
T&B Planning, Inc.
3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
May 2023
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 129
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Name and Number Page
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page i Lead Agency: City of Chino
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Document Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.3 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ..................................................................................... 1-1
1.3.1 CEQA Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3.2 Prior CEQA Review ................................................................................................................. 1-2
1.3.3 CEQA Rules and Requirements for an Addendum .................................................................. 1-3
1.3.4 Initial Study Findings .............................................................................................................. 1-5
1.3.5 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum ........................................................................... 1-6
1.3.6 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum ................................................................ 1-6
2.0 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2 Planning Context ................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2.1 General Plan Land Use Designations ..................................................................................... 2-1
2.2.2 Existing Zoning Classifications ............................................................................................... 2-6
2.3 Existing Site Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 2-6
2.3.1 Existing Land Uses .................................................................................................................. 2-6
2.3.2 Aesthetics and Topography ................................................................................................... 2-6
2.3.3 Air Quality and Climate .......................................................................................................... 2-6
2.3.4 Geology ................................................................................................................................ 2-10
2.3.5 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................. 2-10
2.3.6 Public Services ...................................................................................................................... 2-11
2.3.7 Utilities ................................................................................................................................. 2-12
3.0 Project Description ............................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Project Description ............................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2.1 Project Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.2 LAFCO Process ........................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.2.3 Proposed Land Use Designations and Zoning Classifications ................................................ 3-3
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 130
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Name and Number Page
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page ii Lead Agency: City of Chino
3.2.4 Future Land Use and Development ........................................................................................ 3-3
3.2.5 Analysis Under CEQA.............................................................................................................. 3-4
4.0 Initial Study Checklist ......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................ 4-4
4.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources ....................................................................................................... 4-7
4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................................... 4-11
4.4 Biological Resources ......................................................................................................................... 4-15
4.5 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................ 4-20
4.6 Energy ............................................................................................................................................... 4-23
4.7 Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................................. 4-25
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................................... 4-31
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................................... 4-33
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................................... 4-39
4.11 Land Use and Planning ...................................................................................................................... 4-48
4.12 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................................ 4-50
4.13 Noise ................................................................................................................................................. 4-52
4.14 Population and Housing .................................................................................................................... 4-56
4.15 Public Services ................................................................................................................................... 4-58
4.16 Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 4-63
4.17 Transportation .................................................................................................................................. 4-65
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 4-68
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................................ 4-70
4.20 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................................. 4-76
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................................. 4-78
4.22 Earlier Analyses ................................................................................................................................. 4-79
5.0 References ......................................................................................................................................... 5-1
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 131
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Name and Number Page
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page iii Lead Agency: City of Chino
LIST OF TABLES
Table Name and Number Page
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 132
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
LIST OF TECHNICAL APPENDICES
Appendix Document
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page iv Lead Agency: City of Chino A. Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis
B. Cultural Resources Study
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 133
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND UNITS OF MEASURE
Acronym Definition
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page v Lead Agency: City of Chino AB Assembly Bill
ac acre
AFY Acre-Feet per Year
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
amsl above mean sea level
APN(s) Assessor’s Parcel Number(s)
BFFP Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
BMPs Best Management Practices
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CAO Cleanup and Abatement Order
CAP Climate Action Plan
CBC California Building Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDC California Department of Conservation
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDO Cease and Desist Order
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CIWMP Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan
CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan
CRS Cultural Resources Study (GPU EIR Addendum Technical Appendix B) CVFD Chino Valley Fire District
CVUSD Chino Valley Unified School District
CWA Clean Water Act
DIF Development Impact Fee
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
du dwelling unit
DWR Department of Water Resources
EHS Environmental Health Services
EIR Environmental Impact Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
GHG Greenhouse Gas
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 134
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND UNITS OF MEASURE
Acronym Definition
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page vi Lead Agency: City of Chino gpd gallons per day
GPU General Plan Update
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
IEUA Inland Empire Utilities Agency
LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission
LOS Level of Service
mgd million gallons per day
MRZ Mineral Resources Zone
MSHCP (Western Riverside County) Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan MVWD Monte Vista Water District
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
No. Number
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NSA Northern Service Area
O3 Ozone
OBMP (Chino Basin) Optimum Basin Management Program
ONT Ontario International Airport Land Use
PM2.5 Particulate Matter (smaller than 2.5 microns)
PM10 Particulate Matter (smaller than 10 microns)
PFS Plan for Service (GPU EIR Addendum Technical Appendix A) ppd pounds per day
pph persons per household
PRC Public Resources Code
RMP Resource Management Plan
RS Residential Suburban (San Bernardino County Zoning Classification) RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAWPA Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority
SB Senate Bill
SBCFD San Bernardino County Flood Control District
SBCSD San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 135
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND UNITS OF MEASURE
Acronym Definition
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page vii Lead Agency: City of Chino SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCAQMP South Coast Air Quality Management Plan
SCE Southern California Edison
SCH State Clearinghouse
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
s.f. square foot or square feet
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SOC Statement of Overriding Considerations
SOI Sphere of Influence
SRA State Responsibility Area
SSA Southern Service Area
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WDR Waste Discharge Requirements
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 136
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-1 Lead Agency: City of Chino
1.0 Introduction
1.1 DOCUMENT PURPOSE
This Introduction provides general information regarding: 1) a summary of the Project; 2) the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certified in compliance with CEQA by the Chino City Co uncil for the 2010 General Plan Update; 3) standards of adequacy for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ; 4) a summary of the Initial Study findings supporting the Lead Agency’s (City of Chino ) decision to prepare an EIR Addendum for the proposed Project; 5) a description of the format and content of this EIR Addendum ; and 6 ) the governmental processing requirements to consider the Project for approval.
1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project consists of a proposal to annex into the boundaries of the City of Chino approximately 144.8 acres of land (herein, “Annexation Area” or “Project Site”) that is currently under the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County.
As depicted on Figure 1-1, Annexation Area, the Annexation Area is located at the northern border of the City and is generally centered on Ramona Ave and Mustang Road. The Annexation Area is located entirely within the City’s Sphere of Influence ( SOI) and is surrounded by the City on 73 percent of its perimeter. T he proposed Project would consolidate service areas and promote consistency with the City of Chino 's SOI by redrawing City Limits in a more logical and consistent manner by incorporating the Annexation Area into the City’s boundaries . The Annexation Area currently includes low -density single family residential units, agricultural uses, one public/religious structure, and vacant/undeveloped parcels in an area that is designated by the City’s General Plan for “RD 2 Residential (1 -2 dwelling u nits per acre [du/ac]) ,” “RD 4.5 Residential (3 -4.5 du/ac),” and “P (Public)” land uses. The City’s General Plan land use designations for the Annexation Area are consistent with the San Bernardino County General Plan land use d esignations and zoning classifications that currently apply to this portion of the City’s SOI . As such, the proposed Project would not allow for any intensification of existing or planned land uses beyond what already would b e allowed under existing conditions pursuant to the San Bernardino County General Plan and zoning ordinance. Additionally, the proposed Project would not authorize or permit any new development within the Annexation Area, as all future development within the Annexation Area either would be required to comply with the City’s zoning ordinance (which implements the City’s General Plan Land Use designations), or would be subject to applications for discretionary permits that w ould separately require their own review and analysis for compliance with CEQA. Refer to Section 3.0, Project Description, for a comprehensive description of the proposed Project.
1.3 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
1.3.1 CEQA Objectives
CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) applies to most public agency discretionary decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potential to adversely affect the environment. CEQA requires that public agencies inform their decision -makers of the environmental consequences of th eir discretionary actions and to consider alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce the discretionary actions’ significant, adverse environmental effects. CEQA also gives other public agencies and the general public an
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 137
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-2 Lead Agency: City of Chino Figure 1-1 Annexation Area
opportunity to participate in the environmental review process. The principal objectives of CEQA are to: 1) inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities; 2) identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; 3) prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental a gency finds the changes to be feasible; and 4) disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved.
1.3.2 Prior CEQA Review
In 2010, the City of Chino undertook a comprehensive update to its General Plan and Focused Growth Plan (hereinafter, “GPU”). The GPU was a complete revision to the previously -adopted General Plan, and comprises the principal policy document for guiding future conservation and development in the City of Chino. The GPU identifies concepts for long-term planning through 2025, and provides overall direction for day -to-day actions of the City, its elected officials, and staff. The GPU includes regulations in the form of goals, objectives, policies, and actions that are designed to implement the community’s vision for the future of Chino. The policies and actions are intended to be used by the City to guide everyday decision -making and to ensure progress toward the attainment of the goals outlined in the plan. The City of Chino adopted the GPU on July 6, 2010.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 138
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-3 Lead Agency: City of Chino In conjunction with its approval of the GPU on July 6, 2010, the City of Chino also certified the Final EIR ( State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2008091064; hereinafter, “GPU EIR” ) that was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental effects associated with implementation of the GPU . The GPU EIR was prepared as a Program EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. As defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, a Program EIR “ …is an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: (1) Geographically; 2) A logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions ( sic); 3) In connection with issuance of rules, regul ations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program; or (4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.”
In certifying the GPU EIR, the City of Chino City Council found that the GPU EIR adequately addressed the potential environmental impacts associated with buildout of the GPU. The GPU EIR identified three (3) significant and unavoidable environmental impacts under two (2) individual environmental topics that would result from implementation of the GPU:
• Agricultural Resources (Impact AG -1): The GPU EIR disclosed that the GPU would result in the conversion of two parcels under Williamson Act contract and located outside of The Preserve Specific Plan Area. Although the City’s Right-to-Farm ordinance would remain in effect, this impact cannot be mitigated and would be significant and unavoidable.
• Air Quality (Impact AQ-1) : The GPU EIR disclosed that because the land uses proposed in the GPU were inconsistent with the then-existing General Plan upon which the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (SCAQMP) was based, the GPU would not conform to the planning assumptions included in the 2007 SCAQMP. The GPU EIR found that the GPU would increase the region’s Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and air emissions beyond what was assumed in the 2007 SCAQMP.
Consequently, the GPU EIR found that the GPU would conflict with the adopted air plan, a nd would result in cumulative air quality impacts in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB).
• Air Quality (Impact AQ-2) : The GPU EIR found that while the GPU contains objectives, policies, and actions that would reduce emissions, implementation of the GPU would result in emissions that are greater than 85 percent of then -existing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The GPU EIR concluded that impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
In conjunction with certifying the GPU EIR, the City Council adopted findi ngs of fact as required by CEQA, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC), which demonstrated that the benefits of the GPU outweighed the significant and unavoidable environmental impacts summarized above.
1.3.3 CEQA Rules and Requirements for an Addendum
The CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously -certified EIR for projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new or more severe significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 139
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-4 Lead Agency: City of Chino The following describes the requirements of an Addendum, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164:
a. The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an Addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred.
b. An Addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
c. An Addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR.
d. The decision-making body shall consider the Addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the project.
e. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a Subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an Addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record.
The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
The GPU EIR was prepared to serve as a “program EIR” for the ultimate buildout for the GPU (Chino, 2010b, p. 1- 2). CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) sets forth requirements that implementing develop ments must meet in order to tier from a program EIR as provided in Section 15152 of the CEQA Guidelines. As documented in the Initial Study provided herein in Section 4.0, the proposed Project’s environmental effects were fully evaluated in the GPU EIR, as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(1). CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(2) allows for tiering from a program EIR if the lead agency finds that no subs equent EIR would be required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. As discussed below under the discussion of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the lead agency (City of Chino) has determined that there is substantial evidence demonstrating that the proposed Project is within the scope of analysis of the GPU EIR, is consistent with the project evaluated in the GPU EIR, is within the geographic area analyzed by the GPU EIR, and is consistent with the overall planned building intensity for the site as evaluated by the GPU EIR . As such, the Project meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) that allows for tiering from a program EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15152.
As noted above, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a) and (b) allow for the preparation of an Addendum and Section 15168(c)(2) allows for tiering from a program EIR if none of the conditions described in Section 15162 are met. CEQA Guideline Section 15162 describes the conditions under which a Subsequent EIR must be prepared, as follows:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of environmental effects or a substan tial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 140
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-5 Lead Agency: City of Chino c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
1. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
2. Significant effects previously examined will be substantia lly more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
3. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent s decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternatives; or
4. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, b ut the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
If none of these circumstances are present, and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to update the previously certified EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. As described in subsection 1.3.4, below, and in the Initial Study provided in Section 4.0, none of the above circumstances that warrant the preparation of a Subsequent EIR are present.
1.3.4 Initial Study Findings
The City of Chino , serving as the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed Project ( See CEQA Guidelines Sections 15050–15051), determined in its independent judgment that the Project evaluated herein does not meet any of the circumstances from CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and that an Addendum to the previously-certified GPU EIR is the appropriate CEQA compliance document for the Project. The City’s finding is based on the following facts:
a. As demonstrated in detail in Section 4.0 of this document, the Project would not require major revisions to the previously-certified GPU EIR because the Project would neither result in significant impacts to the physical environment that were not already disclosed in the GPU EIR nor result in substantial increases in the severity of the environmental impacts previously disclosed in the GPU EIR. b. Subsequent to the certification of the GPU EIR, no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken have occurred that would require major revisions to the GPU EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
c. There is no evidence in the public record that new information of substanti al importance has become available that is applicable to the Project and/or Project Site , was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the GPU EIR was certified, and would alter the conclusions of the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 141
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-6 Lead Agency: City of Chino
1.3.5 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum
This EIR Addendum includes the following sections:
• Section 1.0, Introduction, provides a summary of the proposed Project, provides an overview of CEQA objectives and requirements, and summarizes the results of the Project’s Initial Study.
• Section 2.0, Environmental Setting, provides a summary of t he existing environmental setting for the Project Site and its surroundings as they existing at the time environmental analysis commenced for the Project (November 2021).
• Section 3.0, Project Description , provides an overview of the proposed Project and the Project’s discretionary approvals, and describes the Project’s construction and operational characteristics.
• Section 4.0, Initial Study Checklist, provides the Initial Study Checklist, provides the determination of the Initial Study, includes the analysis associated with the Initial Study Checklist, and documents the reasons to support the findings and conclusions of the Initial Study.
• Section 5.0, References, includes a list of reference material used to prepare this Addendum. All reference materials cited in Section 5.0 are herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for public review at the internet addresses provided in Section 5.0 and/or at the City of Chino Planning Department, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA. 91710
In addition, the analysis herein relies on two technical studies that were prepared in association with the proposed Project, which are attached as Technical Appendices to this Addendum. The appendices listed below are available for review at the City of Chino Planning Department located at 13220 Central Avenue, Chino , CA 91710, and are hereby incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150.
Technical Appendix A: Ramona Francis Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis Technical Appendix B: Cultural Resources Study for the City of Chino Annexation Project
1.3.6 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum
The City of Chino Development Services Department, Planning Division, directed and supervised the preparation of this EIR Addendum. Although prepared with assistance of the consulting firm T&B Planning, Inc., the content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this EIR Addendum reflect the sole independent judgment of the City.
This EIR Addendum will be forwarded, along with the previously certified GPU EIR and a draft R esolution of Application to the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), to the City of Chino City Council for consideration. A public hearing then will be held before the City Council, which will consider the information contained in the Project’s EIR Addendum and the Project’s Administrative Record in its decision- making processes, and will adopt or decline to adopt this EIR Addendum, and will approve, approve with changes, or deny the draft Resolution of Application to LAFCO requesting annexation of the Annexation Area. Following approval of the Resolution of Application, LAFCO would commence review of the City’s annexation application.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 142
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 1-7 Lead Agency: City of Chino Once LAFCO has determined that the City’s application for annexation is complete, the LAFCO executive officer would issue a c ertificate of filing and set the proposal for LAFCO commission consideration within 90 days. As part of their review of the application for annexation, the LAFCO would rely on the information and findings contained within this Addendum to the GPU EIR. Fo llowing their review, the LAFCO commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed annexation request.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 143
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 2-1 Lead Agency: City of Chino
2.0 Environmental Setting
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Figure 2-1, Regional Map, and Figure 2-2, Vicinity Map, depict the location of the Annexation Area. As shown, the 144.8-acre Project Site is located at the northern border of the City of Chino and is currently under the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County. The Project Site generally is located east of Norton Avenue, north and south of Francis Avenue, north and south of Philadelphia Street, and east and west of Yorba Avenue. The Project Site includes Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 1013 -211-(04-08, 10, 11, 18-22), 1013 -221-(01-06, 09, 11-18), 1013-341-(03- 07, 09-13), 1013-351-(16, 17, 20-23, 26-31, 40), 1013-361-(01-11, 14-21, 25), 1013-371-(03-22), 1013-411-(11, 14- 18), 1013-421-(01, 04-13, 16, 18, 19), 1013 -431-(01, 02, 06, 09-11), and 1016 -121-(04-07) and the public right of way (to centerline) of public streets abutting the above listed parcels . The Project Site is located in Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 8 West , and Section 3, Township 2 South, Range 8 West , San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian.
2.2 PLANNING CONTEXT
2.2.1 General Plan Land Use Designations
As shown on Figure 2-3, San Bernardino County General Plan Land Use Designations , under existing conditions, the San Bernardino County General Plan (Countywide Plan) designates a majority of the Annexation Area for “VLDR: Very Low Density Residential (0 -2 [dwelling units per acre ( du/ac)] max)” land uses, while the property located at th e northwest corner of the Yorba Avenue and Francis Avenue intersection and the portions of the Annexation Area located south of Philadelphia Street and east of Yorba Avenue are designated for “LDR Low Density Residential (2-5 du/ac max).” The VLDR land use designation allows for very low-density residential uses when developed as single -family neighborhoods that can share common infrastructure, public facilities, and services. The LDR land use designation is intended to promote conventional suburban residential neighborhoods that support and are served by common infrastructure, public facilities, and services. (SB County, 2020a, Table LU-1)
As shown on Figure 2-4, City of Chino General Plan Land Use Designations, the City of Chino General Plan identifies the Annexation Area as part of the City’s SOI, and designates the northern portions of the Annexation Area (generally, existing residential uses along Mustang Road and areas to the north) for “RD 2 (1 -2 du/ac)” land uses, and designates a majority of the southern portions of the Annexation Area for “RD 4.5 (3-4.5 du/ac)” land uses.
Four parcels (APNs 1014 -421-09, 1013-421-11, 1013-421-12, and 1013 -421-10) located north of Philadelphia Street between Ramona Avenue and Yorba Avenue are designated by the Chino Ge neral Plan for “Public” land uses. The RD2 land use designation is intended to allow for large -lot residential uses that are compatible with semi-rural development at a maximum density of 1 to 2 du/ac, and allows for up to 2.5 du/ac with provision of affordable housing. The RD 4.5 land use designation is intended to allow for single-family suburban uses, consisting primarily of detached dwelling units, at a maximum density of 3 to 4.5 du/ac. The Public land use designation is intended to allow for major public uses or institutions, including the Civic Center, hospital, post offices, fire stations, and the airport. (Chino, 2010a, pp. LU-9 and LU-10, Figure LU-1)
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 144
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 145
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 146
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 147
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 148
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 2-6 Lead Agency: City of Chino
2.2.2 Existing Zoning Classifications
As shown on Figure 2-5, San Bernardino County Zoning Classifications, San Bernardino County zones the property located at the northwest corner of the Yorba Avenue and Francis Avenue intersection and the portion of the Annexation Area located south of Philadelphia Street and east of Yorba Avenue for “Single Residential (RS),” while the existing residential parcels along Mustang Road and areas to the north within the Annexation Area are zoned for “Single Residential, 1-acre Minimum Lot Size (RS-1).” The remaining portions of the Annexation Area are zoned for “ Single Residential, 20,000 s.f. Minimum Lot Sizes (RS -20M).” The RS zone is intended to promote the development of single-family detached units in a suburban setting with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet, and a maximum density of 4.0 units per net acre, except where larger lot sizes otherwise are indicated by the zoning classification. The City of Chino does not apply zoning classifications to the Annexation Area under existing conditions.
2.3 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
2.3.1 Existing Land Uses
As shown on Figure 2 -6, Aerial Photograph, the Annexation Area primarily consists of low -density single-family residential units interspersed with vacant land. The Annexation Area contains 117 dwelling units under existing conditions with an estimated population of 394 persons (SRHA, 2023, p. 4) . One religious facility (The Chino Mosque) occurs within the Project Site along the east side of Ramona Avenue, to the sou th of which are several existing greenhouses. Agricultural uses also occur to the north of Francis Avenue. Lands surrounding the Project Site include a mobile home park and low -density single-family residential units interspersed with vacant land to the west; low-density single-family residential units and agricultural uses to the north; low -density single-family residential units and medium density residential units to the east; and medium-density residential and multi - family residential uses to the south.
2.3.2 Aesthetics and Topography
As depicted on Figure 2 -7, USGS Topographic Map, topography within the Annexation Area generally consists of flat land that slopes slowly downward from north to south. Elevations range from 846 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the northeast portion of the Annexation Area to 789 feet amsl in the southern portion of the Annexation Area. Overall topographic relief is approximately 57 feet. As previously depicted on Figure 2 -6, aesthetic conditions within the Annexation Area are typical of a predominantly low -density residential community with relatively low levels of ambient lighting. Vegetation within the Annexation Area is largely limited to ornamental trees, groundcovers, and shrubs. There are no prominent scenic vistas or visual resources within the Project area.
2.3.3 Air Quality and Climate
The Annexation Area is located in the 6,745-square-mile South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County. The SCAB is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and the San Diego County Line to the south. The SCAB is within the jurisdiction of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD); SCAQMD is charged with bringing air quality in the SCAB into conformity with federal and state air quality standards. The climate of the SCAB is characterized as semi-arid and more than 90% of the SCAB’s rainfall occurs from November through April. During the dry season, which also coincides with the months of maximum photochemical smog concentrations, the wind flow is bimodal, characterized by a daytime onshore sea breeze and a nighttime offshore drainage wind.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 149
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 150
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 151
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 152
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 2-10 Lead Agency: City of Chino
2.3.4 Geology
The City of Chino occurs in the Valley Region of San Bernardino County, which sits at the base of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains and is an area of low relief, consisting predominantly of alluvial fans and plains that range from 500 to 3,500 feet amsl. Most of the Valley Region is in the Upper Santa Ana River Valley.
There are several small ranges of hills in the region, including the Crafton Hills near the City of Yucaipa and the Shandin Hills in the City of San Bernardino. The southwest edge of the County is in the Chino Hills and the southern edge of the County is in the Jurupa Hills in the City of Fontana and the Loma Linda Hills in the Cities of Grand Terrace, Colton, Loma Linda, and Redlands. Most of the Valley Region has a southerly slope; elevations are also somewhat higher in the east end of the region. (SB County, 2020b, p. 5.6-5)
Beneath the surface, the Valley Region consists of deep alluvial-filled basins that receive sediment from the adjacent San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains. Groundwater depths in the Valley Region can range from very shallow to relatively deep. The Valley Region is the major population center of the C ounty and is, therefore, most susceptible to loss of life and structural damage during an earthquake. The San Andreas, San Jacinto, Chino- Central Avenue, Cucamonga, Puente Hills, and other local prominent faults cross or are close to the Valley Region and can cause earthquakes of significant magnitude. (SB County, 2020b, p. 5.6-5)
Notable geological features in the Valley Region include the San Andreas Fault at the southwest foot of the San Bernardino Mountains, the San Jacinto Fault at the southwest edge of the San Bernardino Basin, and the Cucamonga Fault at the southern foot of the San Gabriel Mountains. (SB County, 2020b, p. 5.6-5)
2.3.5 Hydrology
As noted above, the City of Chino occurs the Valley Region of San Bernardino County. The Valley Region is situated at the base of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino mountains to the north, the Los Angeles County line to the west, Yucaipa and the mountain portions of the County to the east, and Riverside County to the south. Drainage is mainly via creeks, streams, and washes descending from mountains and foothills. Many of these features drain into the Santa Ana River, and the Valley Region is in the Santa Ana River Watershed. The river channel transects the watershed from the San Bernardino National Forest to the ocean at Huntington Beach. (SB County, 2020b, p.
5.9-4)
More specifically, the Annexation Area occurs within the Chino Hydrologic Subarea of the Middle Santa Ana River Hydrologic Area Split of the Santa Ana River Hydrologic Unit. The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires all states to conduct water quality assessments of their water resources to identify water bodies that do not meet water quality standards. Water bodies that do not meet water quality standards are placed on a list of impaired waters pursuant to the requirements of Section 303(d) of the CWA. Receiving waters f or the Annexation Area include San Antonio Creek, Chino Creek Reach 2, Chino Creek Reach 1B, Chino Creek Reach 1A, and Santa Ana River Reach
2. San Antonio Creek is listed as being impaired with pH; Chino Creek Reach 2 is impaired with indicator bacteria and pH; Chino Reach 1B is impaired due to chemical oxygen demand, indicator bacteria, and nutrients; Chino Reach 1A is impaired due to indicator bacteria and nutrients; and the Santa Ana River Reach 2 is not listed as being impaired. (SWRCB, 2022)
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 153
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 2-11 Lead Agency: City of Chino
2.3.6 Public Services
Fire and Paramedic
The Chino Valley Fire District (CVFD) provides fire and paramedic services to the Cities of Chino and Chino Hills, as well as surrounding unincorporated areas , including the Annexation Area. The firefighters, paramedics, and specialized teams respond to s tructure fires, vegetation fires, medical aids, traffic collisions, confined space rescues, water rescues, and hazardous materials incidents. The specialized teams include Urban Search and Rescue, and Hazardous Materials and Swift Water Rescue. The CVFD in cludes seven fire stations which employ over 100 professional firefighters. The two fire stations closest to the Annexation Area include Station 5 located at 12220 Ramona Avenue ( approximately 0.2-mile southwest of the annexation area) and Station 7 locate d at 5980 Riverside Drive (approximately 2 miles southeast of the annexation area) (Google Earth, 2021).
Sheriff (Police) and Public Safety
The San Bernardino County Sheriff ’s Department (SBCSD) currently provides public safet y services to the Annexation Area. The SBCSD serves over 2.1 million residents, with 8 county and 14 contract patrol stations and approximately 3,600 employees. The department is augmented by several divisions to include aviation, training, patrol, dispat ch, court services, detentions, gangs and narcotics, crimes against children, and the coroner’s division. (SBCSD, n.d.)
Schools
Public school services within the Annexation Area are provided by the Chino Valley Unified School District (CVUSD).
Schools in the CVUSD that provide service to the Annexation Area include E. J. Marshall Elementary School, located approximately 0.4-mile east of the Annexation Area; Ramona Junior High School, located approximately 0.4 -mile south of the Annexation Area; and Don Antonio Lugo High School, located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Annexation Area. Collectively, these schools provide education for students from kindergarten through 12 th grade.
Library Services
The Chino Branch Library is a branch of the San Bernardino County Library system that currently serves the Annexation Area. The library is located at 13180 Central Avenue in the City of Chino, approximately 1.5 miles to the southeast of the Annexation Area.
Parks and Recreation
There are no local or regional San Bernardino County park faciliti es in the Annexation Area under existing conditions. Existing park facilities located in the vicinity of the Annexation Area are operated and maintained by either the City of Chino or San Bernardino County. Some of the amenities in the City parks are baseball fields, basketball courts, lighted tennis courts, volleyball/sport courts, open areas for football and soccer, playground areas (tot lot areas), picnic tables, barbecue pits, electricity upon request, drinking fountains, restrooms, trails, and a dog park for small and large dogs.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 154
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 2-12 Lead Agency: City of Chino
2.3.7 Utilities
Water Service
The City of Chino and The Monte Vista Water District (MVWD) currently provide retail potable water service to different portions of the Annexation Area. The service area for the MVWD is shown in Figure 2 -8, Monte Vista Water District Service Area, which shows the district boundary cut midway between Ramona Ave and Yorba Ave.
The Annexation Area currently receives recycled water services from the IEUA.
Wastewater/Sewer
Wastewater/sewer services are not currently provided to the Annexation Area. Nearby lands within the City of Chino are served by the City of Chino’s sewer system, which ultimately relies on IEUA for the operation and maintenance of regional sewer collection facilities.
The local system consists of a City -owned and maintained gravity flow collection and conveyance sanitary sewer system. The wastewater conveyance capacity of the City system is 71.7 million gallons per day (mgd), with anticipated use of ab out 10.7 mgd at buildout of the City’s General Plan. The City of Chino itself does not have wastewater treatment facilities and therefore depends on the IEUA treatment plants. The City of Chino pays the IEUA for the treatment and disposal of wastewater.
The IEUA owns and operates a 66 -mile regional interceptor system that collects and conveys wastewater from local sewers owned and operated by its member agencies, including the City of Chino. The IEUA has organized its service area into two portions: the N orthern Service Area (NSA), generally north of State Route 60, and the Southern Service Area (SSA), generally south of State Route 60. The Annexation Area is within the IEUA’s NSA.
Flood Control and Drainage
The City of Chino, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFD), and the Army Corp of Engineers manage flood control in the Project area. The Project area includes several flood control channels and creeks. The SBCFD is responsible for intercepting and conveying flood flows through and away from the City of Chino.
Solid Waste
The current service provider for collection of solid waste in the annexation area is USA Waste of California. In 2016 about 97 percent of the solid waste landfilled from the unincorporated County was disposed of at the eight landfills summarized in Table 2-1, Landfill Capacity of Landfills Serving Unincorporated San Bernardino County (SB County, 2020b, p. 5.18-53).
Other Utility Services
Electricity within the Project area is provided by Southern California Edison (SCE). Natural gas is provided by the Southern California Gas Company. Cable, internet, and telephone services within the Annexation Area are provided by Time Warner and Verizon.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 155
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 156
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 2-14 Lead Agency: City of Chino Table 2-1 Landfill Capacity of Landfills Serving Unincorporated San Bernardino County
(SB County, 2020b, Table 5.18-9)
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 157
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 3-1 Lead Agency: City of Chino
3.0 Project Description
3.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Figure 2 -1, Figure 2 -2, and Figure 2 -7 (previously presented) depict the location of the Annexation Area (also referred to herein as the “ Project Site”). As shown, the 144.8-acre Annexation Area is located at the northern border of the City of Chino and is currently under the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County. The Project Site generally is located east of Norton Avenue, north and south of Francis Avenue, north and south of Philadelphia Street, and east and west of Yorba Avenue. The Project Site encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 1013- 211-(04-08, 10, 11, 18-22), 1013-221-(01-06, 09, 11-18), 1013-341-(03-07, 09-13), 1013-351-(16, 17, 20-23, 26-31, 40), 1013-361-(01-11, 14-21, 25), 1013-371-(03-22), 1013-411-(11, 14-18), 1013-421-(01, 04-13, 16, 18, 19), 1013- 431-(01, 02, 06, 09-11), and 1016-121-(04-07). The Project Site is located in Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 8 West, and Section 3, Township 2 South, Range 8 West, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian.
3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.2.1 Project Purpose
The proposed Project evaluated herein would consist of the annexation of approximately 144.8 acres, which are currently under the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County, into the City of Chino boundaries. The proposed annexation would consolidate service areas and promote consistency with the City of Chino's Sphere of Influence (SOI) by redrawing City Limits in a more logical and consistent manner to include the Annexation Area. The new boundaries, as shown on Figure 3-1, Existing and Proposed City of Chino Boundaries, would accomplish these goals without any environmental impacts, and would eliminate the pockets of intermixed City and County serviced residences and uses under the current configuration.
3.2.2 LAFCO Process
Annexation requests from local cities require approval by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), which for the proposed Project is the San Bernardino County LAFCO. The process commences with the filing of applications by petition of affected landowners or registere d voters, or by resolution from the involved city.
Unless determined to be statutorily or categorically exempt from CEQA, LAFCO’s action is considered a “project” that is subject to CEQA review. Following CEQA review by the affected city, LAFCO will revi ew the annexation application and determine that it is complete for processing. As part of the application process, the affected city is required to provide a plan for providing services, which must at a minimum address the type, level, range, timing, and financing of services to be extended, including requirements for infrastructure or other public facilities. Once the application has been accepted as complete, the LAFCO executive officer will issue a certificate of filing and set the proposal for LAFCO commission consideration within 90 days. During the application process, LAFCO will work with the City and affected agencies to analyze the proposed annexation in light of the commission’s State mandated evaluation criteria (as set forth in Government Code Section 56668) and responsibilities, and its own locally adopted policies and procedures. LAFCO may approve, conditionally approve, or deny proposed annexations. LAFCO cannot disapprove an annexation if it meets certain requirements (as set forth in Government Code Section 56375(a)(4)), including “island annexations” that are 150 acres or fewer in size (per Government Code Section 56375.3). Following approval of an annexation request, the local city is
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 158
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 159
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 3-3 Lead Agency: City of Chino prohibited from amending the adopted general plan land use designations or zoning classifications for a period of two years after the annexation’s effective date.
In conformance with the requirements of the San Bernardino County LAFCO, the City of Chino is currently considering adoption of a Resolution of Application to LAFCO formally requesting the annexation of the Annexation Area into the City’s boundaries. Additionally, and as required by State law for local agency initiation of annexation requests, the City of Chino also prepared a document titled, “ Ramona Francis Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis, City of Chino” (hereinafter, “Plan for Service” or “PFS”), dated January 5, 2023, and appended to this EIR Addendum as Technical Appendix A . This EIR Addendum has been prepared in conformance with CEQA to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed annexation Project.
Following approval of the Resolution of Application by the City of Chino City Council , LAFCO would commence review of the City’s annexation application in accordance with the process outlined previously in Subsection 3.2.2, LAFCO Process. Following their review, the LAFCO commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed annexation request.
3.2.3 Proposed Land Use Designations and Zoning Classifications Table 3 -1, Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations and Zoning Classifications , provides a summary of the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area and the City’s proposed General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications for the Annexation Area. The City is processing a General Plan Amendment in conjunction with the proposed annexation to establish the proposed General Plan land use designations presented in Table 3-1.
3.2.4 Future Land Use and Development
No plans for development of any property within the Annexation Area are proposed by the City as part of the Project. Pursuant to the City’s proposed pre-zoning for the Annexation Area and in consideration of the Yorba Villas project 1 which is unrelated to the City’s proposed annexation action but whose approval by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors would be honored by the City should the annexation be approved, future development within the Annexation Area could include a net total of 114 additional residential dwelling units. As reported by the Project’s PFS, the Project area is estimated to have 3.37 persons per household (pph), indicating that future growth within the Annexation Area is reasonably expected to result in a population increase of approximately 370 persons. The 114 additional residential dwelling units that could be built within the Annexation Area in the future also could be constructed under the existing San Bernardino County General Plan l and use designations and zoning classifications, although it should be noted that several parcels within the Annexation
1 The Yorba Villas project was approved by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors on October 4, 2022. The project provides for the development of 45 residential units, located on approximately 13.5 acres at the northwest corner of Yorba Avenue and Francis Avenue. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared by San Bernardino County to evaluate the potential environmental effects directly and indirectly related to the development of the Yorba Villas project (State Clearinghouse No. 2020120545). The EIR for the Yorba Villas project concluded that implementation of the project would not result in significant impacts to the environment after application of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR. The EIR for the Yorba Villas project is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 160
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 3-4 Lead Agency: City of Chino Table 3-1 Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations and Zoning Classifications Assessor’s Parcel
Numbers
Existing County General
Plan Land Use
Designation
Existing County Zoning
Classification
City of Chino General
Plan Land Use
Designation
Proposed City of Chino
Zoning Classification
1013-211-(04-08, 10,
11, 18-20), 1013-221-
(01-06, 09, 11-18),
1013-341-(03-07, 09-
13), 1013-351-(16, 17,
20-23, 26-31, 40), 1013-
361-(01-11, 14-21, 25),
& 1013-371-(10-22)
VLDR: Very Low Density
Residential (0-2 du/ac
max)
Residential Single, 1-
acre Minimum Lot Size
(RS-1)
RD 2 (1-2 du/ac) RD 2 – Residential/
Agricultural
1013-211-21, 1013-211-
22 LDR Low Density
Residential (2-5 du/ac
max)
Residential Single (RS) RD 4.5 (3-4.5 du/ac) RD 4.5 - Residential 1013-37-(03-09) VLDR: Very Low Density
Residential (0-2 du/ac
max)
Residential Single,
20,000 s.f. Minimum Lot
Sizes (RS-20M)
RD 2 (1-2 du/ac) RD 2 – Residential/
Agricultural
1013-411-(11, 14-18) LDR Low Density
Residential (2-5 du/ac
max)
Residential Single (RS) RD 4.5 (3-4.5 du/ac) RD 4.5 - Residential 1013-421-(01, 04-08,
13, 16, 18, 19) &
1013-431-(01, 02, 06,
09-11)
VLDR: Very Low Density
Residential (0-2 du/ac
max)
Residential Single,
20,000 s.f. Minimum Lot
Sizes (RS-20M)
RD 4.5 (3-4.5 du/ac) RD 4.5 - Residential
1013-421-(09-12) VLDR: Very Low Density
Residential (0-2 du/ac
max)
Residential Single,
20,000 s.f. Minimum Lot
Sizes (RS-20M)
Public P - Public
1016-121-(04-07) LDR Low Density
Residential (2-5 du/ac
max)
Residential Single (RS) RD 4.5 (3-4.5 du/ac) RD 4.5 - Residential
Area would be assigned residential density that slightly differs – either lower or higher – from existing San Bernardino County regulations (refer to Table 3 -1). There are no components of the Project that would result in an increase of the total planned number of residential units within the Annexation Area, in aggregate, beyond the maximum total that is already allowed by existing San Bernardino County land use regulations. With consideration of the 117 existing dwelling units within the Annexation Area, future buildout of the Area under the City’s proposed General Plan land use and zoning designations is expected to total 231 dwelling units with a population of 749 persons. (SRHA, 2023, p. 6)
3.2.5 Analysis Under CEQA
While the annexation and prezoning of the Project Site lays the foundation for future development, no development plans are proposed as part of the Project. In addition, the proposed Project would not allow for an increase in the total number of residenti al dwelling units within the Annexation Area that exceeds the total number of dwelling units allowed by the County’s existing Countywide Plan land use designations and zoning classifications. Furthermore, the General Plan land use designations that would apply to the Annexation Area with approval of the Project are generally comparable to the land use designations assumed for the Annexation
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 161
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 3-5 Lead Agency: City of Chino Area by the GPU EIR. Accordingly, the analysis herein focuses on the physical changes to the environment, if any, that would result from the annexation of the Annexation Area into the City’s boundaries.
Should discretionary development applications be filed with the City in the future for any parcel(s) within the Annexation Area , such site -specific applications would be subject to further CEQA compliance and would be evaluated based on the level of intensity and areas subject to impact as identified in the application(s). At that time, technical studies that evaluate the site -specific discretionary application(s) would be required by the City, including, but not necessarily limited to, the following: air quality impact analysis, general biological assessment, cultural resources (historical/ archaeological/paleontological), geotec hnical report, greenhouse gas analysis, hydrology and water quality technical reports, noise impact analysis, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) assessment , etc. Any impacts and mitigation related to the site -specific applications’ environmental impacts would b e identified and mitigated as required per CEQA. The City would invite review and comments by the Regulatory Agencies and the public for all future development proposals, including landowners within and around the annexation boundary, as appropriate.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 162
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-1 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.0 Initial Study Checklist
1. Project Title: Ramona Francis Annexation
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Chino Development Services Department, Planning Division, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA 91710.
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Mike Hitz, Principal Planner, (909) 334-3448.
4. Project Location: Generally east of Norton Avenue, north and south of Francis Avenue, north and south of Philadelphia Street, and east and west of Yorba Avenue.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of Chino Development Services Department, Planning Division, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA 91710.
6. General Plan Designation: San Bernardino County: “VLDR: Very Low Density Residential (0 -2 [dwelling units per acre (du/ac)] max)” and “LDR Low Density Residential (2-5 du/ac max)”; City of Chino: “RD 2 (1-2 du/ac),” “RD 4.5 (3-4.5 du/ac),” and “Public.”
7. Zoning: San Bernardino County: “Single Residential (RS),” “Single Residential, 1-acre Minimum Lot Size (RS- 1),” and “Single Residential, 20,000 s.f. Minimum Lot Sizes (RS-20M)”; City of Chino: Not Applicable.
8. Description of the Project: The Project consists of a proposal to annex into the boundaries of the City of Chino approximately 144.8 acres of land (herein, “Annexation Area” or “ Project Site”) that is currently under the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County. Refer to Section 3.0 for a complete description of the proposed Project.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Mobile home park and low -density single-family resident ial units interspersed with vacant land to the west; low-density single-family residential units and agricultural uses to the north; low -density single-family residential units and medium density residential units to the east; and medium-density residential and multi-family residential uses to the south. Refer to Section 2.0 for a detailed description of the land uses and setting surrounding the Project Site.
10. Other p ublic agencies whose approval is required: San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 163
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-2 Lead Agency: City of Chino Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below (☒) would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation ☐ Agriculture & Forest Resources ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Transportation ☐ Air Quality ☐ Land Use / Planning ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☐ Energy ☐ Paleontological Resources ☐ Mandatory Findings of ☐
☐
Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
☐
☐
Population/Housing
Public Services
Significance
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
A PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS NOT PREPARED:
☐ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) is required.
A PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED:
☐ I fin d that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, NO NEW ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED because (a) all potentially significant effects of the proposed project have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, (b) all potentially significant effects of the proposed project have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, (c) the proposed project will not result in any new significant environmental effects not identified in the earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, (d) the proposed project will not substantially increase the severity of the environmental effects identified in the earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, (e) no considerably different mitigation measures have been identified and (f) no mitigation measures found infeasible have become feasible. ☒ I find that although all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15162 exist. An ADDENDUM to a previously-certified EIR or Negative Declaration has been prepared and will be considered by the approving body or bodies.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 164
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 165
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-4 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.1 AESTHETICS
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. In non -urbanized areas, s ubstantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site an d its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized
area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? GPU EIR Finding: The EIR prepared for the General Plan Update and Focused Growth Plan (collectively referred to hereinafter as “General Plan Update” or “GPU”) found that impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant assuming compliance with the goals and policies contained within the GPU Community Character Element, including, but not limited to, Policies P1 and P3 under Goal CC -2, Objective CC-2.1 (requiring the enforcement of property maintenance codes, abatement of graffiti, quality of in -fill development, rehabilitation of existing housing, replacement of deteriorated infrastructure, and the preservation, restoration, and enhancement of buildings with character), Policies P7 and P8 under Goal CC -3, Objective CC -3.2 (requiring quality architectural design and construction quality, and r equiring that new infill development, secondary residential units, and multifamily housing must be consistent in scale and character with existing neighborhoods), and Goal CC -6 and Objective 6.1 (requiring new site development to support views of geographi c and environmental features that make Chino unique). With these goals and policies, the GPU EIR concluded there would be a less-than-significant impact on scenic vistas.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : As previously indicated on Figure 2 -6, the Annexation Area comprises developed and disturbed lands, and does not contain any prominent scenic vistas under existing conditions. As indicated in Section 3.0, no development or construction plans are being processed as part of the proposed Project. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (refer to Technical Appendix A), vacant
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 166
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-5 Lead Agency: City of Chino parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with additional residential dwelling units.
However, it is important to note that these vacant parcels were anticipated to be developed with additional dwelling units by the GPU as well as by the existing San Bernardino County General Plan (and evaluated by the respective EIRs for these planning documents). As with the project evaluated by the GPU EIR, future development proposals that may result from the proposed Project would be required to comply with the goals and policies contained within the GPU Community Character Element, including, but not limited to, Policies P1 and P3 under Goal CC-2, Objective CC-2.1; Policies P7 and P8 under Goal CC -3, Objective CC-3.2; and Goal CC-6 and Objective
6.1. Consistent with the conclusion reached by the GPU EIR, mandatory compliance with applicable goals and policies of the GPU would ensure that future development within the Annexation Area does not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project s ubstantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that there are no scenic highways in the City of Chino. Therefore, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts would be less than-significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, there are no scenic highways in the City of Chino. Additionally, the Annexation Area comprises developed and disturbed lands, and does not contain any prominent scenic resources, aside from common ornamental t rees associated with existing residential developments. The existing ornamental trees do not comprise a scenic resource due to the abundance of such ornamental trees in the area, and the potential removal of individual trees, if proposed by landowners in the future, would not be visible from any State scenic highways. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public view s are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the Project is in an urbanized area, would the Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the introduction of new or redeveloped uses in existing community areas, and new development on currently vacant lands, might alter the visual character of Chino. However, the GPU EIR found that the proposed updates to the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinanc es would ensure that new development complements the existing aesthetic environment of the City and adjacent areas. In addition, the GPU EIR found that the goals and policies of the GPU encourage high quality design, including, but not limited to, Policies P1 and P3 under Goal CC-1 (requiring compliance with the design principles of the Community Character Element, and the provision of green spaces, such as community squares, parks, rooftop gardens, and plazas), Objective CC -2.1 (requiring the preservation and enhancement of the character of existing residential neighborhoods), and Policies P7 and P8 under Objective CC -3.2 (requiring quality architectural design and construction and requiring that new infill, secondary residential units, and multifamily housing must be consistent in scale and character with existing neighborhoods). The GPU EIR found that these various goals and policies would
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 167
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-6 Lead Agency: City of Chino reduce the potentially adverse city -wide impacts of new development allowed under the GPU to a less -than- significant level.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: No changes to the City’s Zoning Code are proposed as part of the Project. As previou sly indicated on Figure 2 -6, the Annexation Area comprises an “urban” environment due to the developed nature of on-site uses as well as uses in the immediately surro unding area; furthermore, the area encompassed by the Annexation Area was planned for residential development by the GPU. No development or construction plans are proposed as part of the Project. Any future proposals for development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with all applicable requirements of the underlying zoning classifications, and may also require appropriate review for compliance with CEQA. There are no components of the proposed annexation that would result in a conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. As such, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
GPU EIR Finding : The GPU EIR determined that new development under the GPU has the potential to create additional light or glare. The GPU EIR noted that Policy P5 under Goal CC-1.1 in the Community Character Element calls for lighting on private and public property that mini mizes light spillage to adjacent properties and the night sky. As a result, the GPU EIR found that there would be a less -than-significant impact due to light and glare with buildout of the GPU.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : No development or construction plans are proposed as part of the Project. Any future proposals for development within the Annexation Area would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code, including Section 20.10.090 (Outdoor Lighting). Section 20.10.090 requ ires, among other items, that “No lighting on private property shall produce an illumination level greater than one foot candle on any property within a residential zoning district .” Additionally, all portions of the Annexation Area are and would continue to be designated for non-commercial and non-industrial land uses, which are not associated with the generation of substantial amounts of light or glare. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area , and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 168
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-7 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Departmen t of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural
use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non -agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project c onvert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU would result in the conversion of agricultural areas into urban uses. However, the GPU EIR concluded that such impacts would be less than significant because the GPU: 1) did not convert lands that weren’t already planned for such conversion; 2) proposed to convert lands that were unlikely to be used for agricultural uses; 3) would continue to allow for continued agricultural operations on certain properties; 4) relied on the less-than-significant conclusions and associated mitigation provided in the
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 169
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-8 Lead Agency: City of Chino East Chino Specific Plan EIR; and/or 5) included policies that would protect agricultural operations in certain areas of the City, including: Policies P1, P2, and P4 under the Open Space and Conservation Element Goal OSC -2, Objective OSC-2.1 (requiring the City to encourage the retention of small-scale agricultural operation and promote collaboration with farmers markets and school programs; requiring the C ity to work with the County to support agricultural uses in the City’s sphere of influence; and encouraging the City to recognize the potential role small farms play in education and agricultural tourism and provide for the inclusion of such activities thr ough land use regulations); Policies P1, P2, and P3 (and associated Action A1) under Objective OSC 2.1 under Goal OSC -2 (requiring the City to: work with landowners to maintain existing Williamson Act contracts; to work with non - profit organizations to preserve agricultural land within the City; and to support private conservation organizations that utilize voluntary conservation easements as tools for agricultural conservation), Objective OSC -2.2 (promoting the preservation and protection of agricultural land within the City); and Policies P1 and P2 under Goal OSC-2, Objective OSC-2.3 (requiring new development adjacent to agricultural uses to provide buffer zones, and to require that agricultural uses shall be the primary uses within the Agriculture land use designation).
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : According to mapping information available from the California Department of Conservation (CDC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), a majority of the Annexation Area is identifie d as “Urban and Built -Up Land,” while the existing greenhouses in the southern portions of the Project area (east of Ramona Avenue and north of Philadelphia Street) , as well as an existing property at the northwest corner of Francis Avenue and Ramona Avenue, are classified as containing “Unique Farmland” (CDC, n.d.). No development or construction plans are proposed as part of the Project, and any future development within the Annexation Area would be similar in nature to development that already is planned by the GPU (and allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the area ). The proposed annexation would not convert lands to non -agricultural use that aren’t already planned for such conversion by the GPU and the Countywide Plan. Furthermore lands within the Annexation Area that aren’t already being used for agricultural purposes are unlikely to be used for agricultural uses in the future. Moreover, the proposed annexation would continue to allow for agricultural operations on properties where such uses already are occurring, and any future development within the Annexation Area would be required to comply with applicable GPU policies related to the protection of existing agricultural operations. These findings are consistent with the findings and conclusions reached by the GPU EIR. As such, impacts due to the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that the GPU would allow for the conversion of Williamson Act contract lands to urban uses. As noted in the GPU EIR, the majority of such conversions were previously evaluated as part of The Preserve Specific Plan EIR, which identified a significant and unavoidable impact. Additionally, the GPU EIR found that compliance with GPU policies, such as Policy P1 under GPU Objective OSC -2.3 (requiring new development adjacent to properties designated for agricultural uses to incorporate buffer zones), would reduce potential impacts to Williamson Act contract lands. However, the GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU would allow for the conversion of two parcels located within an active Williamson Act contract that were not addressed as part of The Preserve Specific Plan EIR, and such potential conversion was identified as a new significant and
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 170
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-9 Lead Agency: City of Chino unavoidable impact of the GPU for which no mitigation was available, and a statement of over riding considerations was adopted. No impacts were identified in the GPU EIR associated with conflicts with existing zoning.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : Under existing conditions, the Annexation Area is zoned by San Bernardino County for “Single Residential (RS),” “Single Residential, 1-acre Minimum Lot Size (RS-1),” and “Single Residential, 20,000 s.f. Minimum Lot Sizes (RS-20M)” uses. Lands within unincorporated San Bernardino County and that abut the Annexation Ar ea also are classified as RS. The County’s RS zoning classification comprises a residential zone and is not an agricultural zoning classification. Lands within the City of Chino and that abut the Annexation Area are zoned by the City for “RD2 - Residential / Agricultural” and “RD4.5 – Residential.” The City’s RD2 zoning classification is intended to “… provide large lot residential development in a nonurbanized environment,” and allows agricultural uses only as an ancillary use (e.g., keeping of horses). The RD4.5 zoning classification is intended to “…encourage a predominately single-family suburban residential development similar to that found in many of the city's existing residential tracts.” Thus, neither the RD2 or RD4.5 zoning classifications comprise primarily agricultural zoning classifications. Furthermore, future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with all applicable GPU goals and policies, including Policy P1 under GPU Objective OSC-2.3. In addition, the pro posed Project would not a llow any new development that isn’t already planned to occur by the GPU or allowed to occur based on the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area under existing conditions. As such, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, and impacts would be less than significant.
According to a listing of APNs that are subj ect to Williamson Act Contracts obtained from the San Bernardino County Assessor, none of the parcels within the Annexation Area are subject to a Williamson Act Contract. As such, the Project would not conflict with a Williamson Act Contract, and no impac t would occur. (SB County Assessor, 2021)
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberlan d (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? GPU EIR Finding: Although the GPU EIR did not address this subject, the GPU EIR contained enough information about the City’s existing land uses , vegetation types, and zoning that with the exercise of reasonable diligence, information about the absence of forest land and forest land zoning on the property was readily available to the public. The GPU EIR did not e valuate impacts to forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: Parcels within and adjacent to the Annexation Area are currently zoned for residential uses by San Bernardino County and the City of Chino. There are no parcels within the Project vicinity that are zoned for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land, and no impact would oc cur. Therefore, the Project would not result
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 171
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-10 Lead Agency: City of Chino in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? GPU EIR Finding: Although the GPU EIR did not address this subject, the GPU EIR contained enough information about the property’s existing land use, vegetation types, and zoning that with the exercise of reasonable diligence, information about the absence of forest land on the property was readily available to the public. The GPU EIR did not evaluate impacts to forest land or due to the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The Project Site occurs in a generally urbanized portion of San Bernardino County, with land uses consisting of large-lot residential and agricultural uses within the County and smaller lot residential and multi-family residential uses to the south within the City of Chino. There are no portions of the Project vicinity that comprise forest land. As such, the Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
e) Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non -agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any additional impacts involving changes to the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use, other than the significant unavoidable impact described above under Threshold 4.2.b) to Williamson A ct contract lands, that does not apply to the Project Site. The GPU EIR did not evaluate impacts due to the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The Project as evaluated herein consists of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be allowed with approval of the Project, and the land uses proposed for the Annexation Area are already allowed to occur based on the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications for the Area . While some lands within and surrounding portions of the Project Site are classified as containing Farmland, these areas already are designated by San Bernardino County for development with residential uses. Additionally, there are no forest lands within the Project vicinity. Consistent with the finding of the GPU EIR, the proposed annexation would not involve changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 172
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-11 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.3 AIR QUALITY
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the land uses proposed as part of the GPU were inconsistent with the previous General Plan upon which the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (SCAQMP) was based, and would therefore fail to conform to the planning assumptions included in the 2007 SCAQMP. The GPU’s conflict with the 2007 SCAQMP was disclosed as a significant and unavoidable impact for which no mitigation was available and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: Since adoption of the GPU in 2010, the SCAQMD has undertaken two updates to the SCAQMP, with the most recent version having been adopted in 2017 ( the “2016 SCAQMP”).
The 2016 SCAQMP relies on the demographic growth forecasts for various socioeconomic categories developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as part of the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SC S) (SCAQMD, 2016, p. 3-17). The demographic growth forecasts included in the 2016 RTP/SCS are based on the land uses of the various general plans adopted by local cities and counties within the SCAG region (SCAG, 2016, p. 75). The proposed Project would involve the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. The proposed City of Chino General Plan land use designations for the Annexation Area are similar to the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations that currently apply within the Annexation Area (refer to Table 3-1, previously presented). Thus, the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in future population beyond what is already assumed for the Annexation Area by the RTP/SCS , and there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in an increase in development beyond what is already allowed under existing conditions. Moreover, the future construction of up to 114 additional dwelling units within the Annexation Area is unlikely to exceed the air quality thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD. As such, the proposed Project would not result in an increase in the
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 173
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-12 Lead Agency: City of Chino frequency or severity of existing air quality violations ; cause or contribute to new violations ; or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the 2016 SCAQMP.
Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2016 SCAQMP, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that future development allowed under the GPU have the potential to violate the 2007 SCAQMD air quality standards. Specifically, the GPU EIR found that emissions of PM10, PM2.5, and ozone precursors associated with future construction activities in the City would be less than significant due to mandatory compliance with SCAQMD requirements and GPU Objective AQ -1.3 (requiring the reduction of air pollution during construction and operations of a project). The GPU EIR also found that although future development projects within the City would be subject to the policies contained in the GPU to reduce air quality emissions, and also would be required to comply with applicable SCAQMD r ules, regulations, and permitting processes, implementation of the GPU would result in increased operational-related vehicle miles travelled (VMT), which would result in increased emissions of criteria pollutants for which the region is non -attainment; operational emissions were disclosed as a significant and unavoidable impact of the GPU and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project occurs within the SCAB, which is designated as non-attainment under State standards for ozone (O
3; 1-hour and 8-hour standards), particulate matter smaller than 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and is designated non-attainment under federal standards for O 3 (8-hour only) and PM 2.5 (SCAQMD, n.d.) . As previously discussed in subsection
3.2.4, it is estimated that up to 114 additional new dwelling units could be constructed on existing vacant parcels within the Annexation Area. However, these 114 additional new dwelling units already could be developed within the Annexation Area under the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Area and, also, do not represent a substantial change in comparison to the land use vision planned by the GPU. Thus, there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in an increase in development intensity beyond what already is allowed on site under existing conditions. In addition, a nd consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, potential future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with applicable SCAQMD requirements and GPU Objective AQ-1.3. Notwithstanding, and consistent with the conclusion reached by the GPU EIR, potential future development within the Annexation Area would result in an increase in the emissions of criteria pollutants, including pollutants for which the region is non -attainment (i.e., O3, PM10, and PM2.5). As such, potential future development within the Annexation Area would contribute to the significant and unavoidable operational impacts to air quality as identified by the GPU EIR; however, because the Project would not allow for a substantial increase in develo pment intensity within the Annexation Area, the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in impacts due to a conflict with the SCAQMP beyond what was already evaluated and disclosed by the GPU EIR. Therefore, the Project would not resul t in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or substantially increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 174
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-13 Lead Agency: City of Chino c) Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU would not result in the creation of any carbon monoxide “hot spots” and found that compliance with Policy P5 under Objective AQ-1.1 in the Air Quality Element (requiring the separation of sensitive land uses from significant sources of air pollutants, toxic air contaminants, or odor emissions) would reduce impacts associated with diesel particulate matter (DPM) to less than significant levels. Thus, the GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU would result in less than significant impacts associated with the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
No Substantial Change from Previous Anal ysis: The proposed Project evaluated herein would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No future development would be allowed with approval of the Project that isn’t already planned by the GPU or allowed to occur based on the Annexation Area’s existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications. As previously summarized in Table 3 -1, with approval of the Project all of the parcels within the Annexation Area would be designated for RD2, RD4.5, or Public Facilities land uses. The residential uses allowed under the City’s RD2 and RD4.5 land use designations and the existing public facilities land uses (i.e., the existing mosque) are not associated with the generation of substantial pollutant concentrations, and are not associated with the generation of large truck traffic that could result in DPM emissions. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pol lutant concentrations , and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU did not propose any specific new sources of odor and that policies contained within the GPU would ensure that sensitive uses would be separated from odor generating land uses; thus, the GPU concluded that impacts due to objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project evaluated herein would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be allowed with approval of the Project . Additionally, all land uses allowed by the proposed Project are already planned by the GPU or allowed to occur based on the Annexation Area’s existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications. Potential future development within the Annexation Area would have the potential to result in air emissions leading to odors.
Potential odor sources associated with future development within the Annexation Area may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities, and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed Project’s long - term operational uses.
Potential future construction activities within the Annexation Area would be s ubject to standard construction requirements, including the use of low-VOC architectural coatings as required by SCAQMD Rule 113 (Architectural Coatings); compliance with low sulfur fuel requirements pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 431.2 ( Low Sulfur Fuel); and compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), which requires that a person shall not discharge air contaminants
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 175
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-14 Lead Agency: City of Chino or other materials that would cause health or safety hazards to any considerable number of persons or the public.
Compliance with these standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short -term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of construction and are thus considered less than significant.
Potential future development within the Annexation Area would consist of residential uses, which are not typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. It is expected that refuse generated by future development within the Annexation Area would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations. Potential future construction in the Annexation Area also would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances.
Based on the foregoing analysis , and consistent with the findings of th e GPU EIR, construction and operation al odors associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 176
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-15 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project h ave a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
GPU EIR Finding : The GPU EIR found that the GPU would have a less -than-significant impact to candidate, sensitive, and special status species because implementing projects within the City would be required to adhere
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 177
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-16 Lead Agency: City of Chino to federal and State regulations protecting such species in addition to General Plan goals, objectives, policies, and actions requiring avoidance, preservation, and/or mitigation for impacts where they would occur. Other impacts to such species already were addressed as part of certified EIRs or Resources Management Plans (RMP) associated with previously-approved developments (e.g., The Preserve Master Plan and Edgewater Communities project).
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries that is planned for residential development by both the GPU and the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan. No development or construction is proposed as part of the Project. Thus, the Project would not directly result i n any impacts to sensitive or special- status plant or animal species.
Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, any future development within the Annexation Area would be required to adhere to federal and S tate regulations protecting such species in add ition to General Plan goals, objectives, policies, and actions requiring avoidance, preservation, and/or mitigation for impacts where they would occur. Mandatory compliance with federal, State, and local requirements and regulations would ensure that future development within the Annexation Area does not result in a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any spe cies identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations . Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project h ave a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU would limit development that may be located on or near riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities, which mostly occur within The Preserve and Rancho Miramonte (formerly known as Edgewater ) communities. The GPU EIR found that development in The Preserve would be controlled by The Preserve Resource Management Plan, which includes re gulations and mitigation measures to lessen the effect of development on riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities, while development within the Rancho Miramonte area would be subject to the mitigation measures contained in the Edgewater Communities EIR that address impacts to riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities . With adherence to General Plan Policies, the Resource Management Plan for The Preserve , and the mitigation measures contained in the Edgewater Communities EIR, the GPU EIR found that the GPU would have a less-than-significant impact on riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : Under existing conditions, the Annexation Area comprises a mixture of residentially-developed parcels, parcels subject to agricultural uses, vacant/disturbed parcels, and an existing mosque. Vegetation within the Annexation Area includes ornamental trees and landscaping, agricultural crops, and plant communities typically associated with disturbed sites. These plant communities do not comprise riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities. Furthermore, t he proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the Ci ty of Chino boundaries that is planned for residential land uses by the GPU and the Countywide Plan. No development or construction would occur as part of the Project. Thus, the Project would not directly result in any impac ts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area would be required to adhere to federal and S tate regulations protecting such species in addition to G eneral Plan goals, objectives, policies, and
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 178
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-17 Lead Agency: City of Chino actions requiring avoidance, preservation, and/or mitigation for impacts where they would occur. Mandatory compliance with federal, State, and local requirements and regulations would ensure that future develop ment within the Annexation Area does not result in a substantial adverse effect to riparian habitat or sensitive natural community. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that existing wetlands are concentrated in the southern portions of the City, especially within The Preserve Specific Plan area. Howev er, the GPU EIR also noted that moderate-sized to very small wetlands can be present or develop nearly anywhere there is sufficient water at or just below the ground surface. The GPU EIR found that i mplementation of the Proposed GPU’s goals, objectives, po licies, and actions; conditions associated with Section 404 permits and Section 401 water quality certifications; and additional mitigation protection of wetlands during construction activities would reduce potential impacts on federally-protected wetlands to a less -than-significant level. Additionally, with adherence to the Resource Management Plan covering The Preserve Specific Plan , the GPU EIR concluded that the GPU would have a less - than-significant impact on protected wetlands.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: No wetlands are known to exist within the Annexation Area, as the majority of wetlands occur within the southern portion of the City, while the Annexation Area is located along the City’s northern boundary. No development or construction is proposed as part of the Project . Thus, the Project would not directly result in any impacts to State- or federally-protected wetlands. Although development may occur within the Annexation Area in the future, such development would be similar to what is planned by the GPU and allowed by the Area’s existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino zoning district classifications. Any future development within the Annexation Area that has the potential to impact jurisdict ional waters or wetlands would be required to obtain appropriate permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (Wildlife Agencies) . As pa rt of the required permits, impacts to jurisdictional waters or wetlands, if any, would be required to be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Wildlife Agencies. Accordingly, impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands associated with the proposed Project would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project i nterfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that wildlife movement in Chino is generally constrained by traffic on major roadways such as Highway 71, Highway 60, Euclid Avenue, and Central Avenue. However, the GPU EIR noted that wildlife species travel between the Prado Basin, the open spaces in Chino Hills, the Santa Ana River watershed and the interior regions of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Wildlife species use the open spaces in the southernmost portion of The Preserve to move between these areas. The GPU EIR found that the GPU would not
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 179
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-18 Lead Agency: City of Chino allow expanded development in this most southern portion of the City, allowing existing wildlife connections to remain. In addition, the GPU EIR found that the Resource Management Plan for The Preserve would require development to maintain an urban buffer or transition area in the southernmost portions of the development in The Preserve area , which would protect the open spaces to the south for use as wildlife habitat and for the movement of wildlife species. Lastly, the GPU EIR concluded that mandatory compliance with federal and State law would preclude substantial effects to nesting and migratory bird species. With adherence to the Resource Management Plan and applicable regulations , the GPU EIR concluded that the GPU would have a less-than - significant impact to the movement of wildlife species.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: As previously shown on Figure 2-6 , the Annexation Area occurs within a portion of San Bernardino County that is largely developed with medium-density residential, large -lot residential, public/community facilities (e.g., an existing mosque), and agricultural land uses, and areas within and surrounding the Annexation Area have been improved with roadways. As such, the Annexation Area does not contain any wildlife movement corridors under existing conditions. Additionally, the Annexation Area does not contain any streambeds or waterbodies that would support migratory fish species, and there are no native wildlife nursery sites within the Annexation Area. Moreover, and as noted by the GPU EIR, wildlife movement corridors are lar gely confined to the southern portions of the City, while the Annexation Area occurs along the City’s northern boundary. Accordingly, the Project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites, and impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, any future development within the Annexation Area would be required to c omply with applicable federal and State regulations protecting nesting and migratory birds , which would ensure that substantial adverse effects to avian species do not occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
e) Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
GPU EIR Finding : The GPU EIR determined that local policies and ordinances would be maintained with the implementation of the GPU, and that f uture development allowed by the GPU would be subject to these regulations. The GPU EIR also noted that the GPU is consistent with the Resource Management Plan for The Preserve. The GPU EIR cited the findings of the Edgewater Communities EIR, which identified a significant impact associated with conflicts with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources , but determined that the provision of conservation easements and the management and maintenance of biological resources protected by these easements would reduce this impact t o a less -than-significant level. Consequently, the GPU EIR concluded that the GPU would not result in any impacts due to a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and impacts would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres that is planned for residential land uses by both the GPU and the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. All future development within the Annexation Area would be required to comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Chino Municipal Code, incl uding all ordinances adopted for the purpose of protecting biological resources. Additionally, the City of Chino would review future development applications within the
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 180
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-19 Lead Agency: City of Chino Annexation Area for compliance with all applicable GPU policies, including those that were adopted to protect biological resources. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
f) Would the Project c onflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that there are three plans related to biological resources in the Chino region. They are the Western Riverside Count y Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), the San Bernardino County Riparian Plan Conservation Ordinance, and The Preserve RMP. The GPU EIR noted that the City of Chino lies outside of the MSHCP plan area and thus the GPU would not conflict with the plan. As described by the GPU EIR, the San Bernardino County Riparian Plant Conservation Ordinance protects riparian habitat on private land within the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County, including the Chino SOI. This ordinance prohibits the removal of any vegetation within two hundred feet of the bank of a stream or in an area indicated as a protected riparian area. The GPU EIR found that f uture development in Chino’s SOI must comply with these regulations. The GPU EIR found that the RMP for The Preserve describes areas to be left as open space serving as buffers to other adjacent areas described for conservation. The GPU EIR also noted that the Edgewater Communities EIR found a potentially significant impact associated with conflicts with the RMP. However, the GPU EIR found that the GPU would not result in impacts beyond those analyzed in the Edgewater Communities EIR.
The GPU EIR found that a ll other development under the GPU would be subject to and consistent with the regulations in thes e three documents. Therefore, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts associated with conflicts with regional conservation plans would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The Annexation Area occurs along the northern boundar y of the City, and is not located within the purview of the Western Riverside County MSHCP, The Preserve RMP, or any other Habitat Conservation Plan s, Natural Community Conservation Plan s, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. The proposed Project evaluated herein would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. Any future development in the Annexation Area would be consistent with what is already to occur based on the Site’s existing land use designations in the GPU and the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan.
Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR , any future development within the Annexation Area would be required to comply with the San Bernardino County Riparian Plant Conservation Ordinance, if applicable. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in a conflict with the p rovisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan . Accordingly, no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 181
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-20 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project c ause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU would not, in and of itself, result in physical construction that could impact historical resources, and that future projects that would implement the GPU would be subject to site -specific studies and would be conditioned to protect historic resources. Additionally, the GPU EIR concluded that policies of the GPU also would protect historic resources, including Objective OSC-7.1 in the Open Space and Conservation Element and the Action measures associated with this objective (generally requiring the preservation and enhancement of historical, paleontological, and archaeological resources). As a result, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts to historical resources would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new d evelopment or construction would occur in conjunction with the Project. Future development of residential land uses within the Annexation Area already is allowed to occur based on the Area’s existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications, as well as the land use designations from the GPU . As documented in the Project’s Cultural Resources Study (“CRS”; Technical Appendix B ), th e potential for historic resources such as structures, foundations, trash deposits, and other associated resources is high throughout the Annexation Area (BFSA, 2021, pp. 32, 36). Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area has the potential to result in the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of potential historical resources that are 50 years old or older. Ground-disturbing activities such as grading, leveling and sub - grade excavation also have the potential to damage cultural resources such as standing structures. Given that there may be resources that are 50 years old or older, it is possible there are resources within the Annexation Area that are historically significant and eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources or the National Register of Historic Places. As future projects are proposed within the Annexation Area, they would be subject to applicable policies in the GPU related to the preservation of historic resources and, potentially, could be required to conduct site-specific evaluations to determine the level of significance of any potential impacts to historical
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 182
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-21 Lead Agency: City of Chino resources and implement mitigation measures as appropriate and necessary to reduce impacts to less-than - significant levels. Because there are no components of the proposed Project that would directly result in impacts to historical resources, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that implementation of Objective OSC-7.1, Policy P3 of the GPU’s Open Space and Conservation Element (requir ing evaluation and appropriate treatment of any unknown archaeological or paleontological resources discovered during construction) and Objective OSC-7.1, Policy P4 (calling for the City to consult with the Native American community if Native American artifacts are discovered to ensure the respectful treatment of sacred places) would ensure that future developments within the City adequately protect known and previously undiscovered archaeological resources, thereby ensuring that impacts to archaeological resources would be less-than-significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project evaluated herein would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur as part of the Project but development could occur in the future as the Annexation Area already is planned for residential land uses by the GPU and the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan. As documented in the Project’s CRS (Technical Appendix B ), the potential exists that prehistoric and historic resources exist within the Annexation Area. M any of the parcels within the Annexation Area appear to have only been subjected to minor surficial grading, which would limit the impacts to prehistoric resou rces, if any, within the subject property. Therefore, given the known distribution of prehistoric sites in the region, there is a potential for archaeological sites to be present within the former agricultural fields and below the current built environment within the Annexation Area. (BFSA, 2021, p. 32) Consistent with the finding of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area may result in disturbances to unknown archeological resources that may be buried beneath the soil surface.
However, future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to GPU Objective OSC-7.1, Policy P3, which requires that if unknown archaeological resources are discovered during construction, the Planning Division should be notified immediately and construction should stop until an archaeologist evaluates the discovered resources and recommends appropriate action. Consistent with the conclusion reached by the GPU EIR, this policy would ensure that impacts associated with the discovery of archaeological resources associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not resu lt in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR concluded that Policies P5 and P7 under Objective OSC-7.1 of the GPU’s Open Space and Conservation Element (requiring appropriate treatment of human remains discovered during development projects and consultation with tribes pursuant to Senate Bill 18) would ensure that any human remains that may be discovered would be treated with respect and dignity per the regulations of the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, thereby ensuring that impacts to human remains would be less than significant.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 183
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-22 Lead Agency: City of Chino No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would result in the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur as part of the Project but development could occur in the future as the Annexation Area already is planned for residential land uses by the GPU and the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan. Although no human remains are known to occur in the Annexation Area , the remote potential exists that human remains may be unearthed during grading and excavation activities associated with future development or construction within the Annexation Area . If human remains are unearthed during potential future construction activities, the construction contractor would be required by law to comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, “Disturbance of Human Remains.” According to Section 7050.5(b) and (c), if human remains are discovered, the County Coroner must be contacted and if the Coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Coroner is required to contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by telephone within 24 hours. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, whenever the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner, the NAHC is required to immediate ly notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The descendants may, with the permission of the owner of the land, or his or her authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American human remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treatment or disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the human remains and any associated grave goods. The descendants shall complete their inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. According to Public Resources Code Section 5097.94(k), the NAHC is authorized to mediate disputes arising between landowners and known descendants relating to the treatment and disposition of Native American human burials, skeletal remains, and items associated with Native American burials. With mandatory compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 et seq., potential future development within the Annexation Area would result in less-than-significant impacts to human remains. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 184
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-23 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.6 ENERGY
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Result in potentially significant environmental
impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project r esult in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? GPU EIR Finding: Although the GPU EIR did not address this subject, the GPU EIR contained enough information about the projected energy demand associated with the GPU that with the exercise of reasonable diligence, information about the level of energy consumption associated with the GPU was readily available to the public.
Specifically, Subsection 4.3 (Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases) disclosed the amount of electricity and natural gas demand that would result from the GPU. The GPU EIR did not evaluate impacts due to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project; however, the Annexation Area could be developed with residential land uses in the future as planned by the GPU, and as allowed by existing San Bernardino County land use regulations. Potential future construction activities within the Annexation Area would be subject to applicable State regulations designed to minimize air pollutants associated with construction activities, which in turn also serve to reduce energy consumption. For example, C alifornia Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3), Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Additionally, potential future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to the 2019 Title 24 Standards (or applicable Title 24 Standards in effect at the time of building permit issuance), which requires, among other things, contemporary design features such as photovoltaic systems or renewable energy for new homes. Notwithstanding, because the Project would not result in any new development that isn’t already planned or permitted under existing conditions, there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts would be less than significant.
Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 185
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-24 Lead Agency: City of Chino b) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
GPU EIR Finding: Although the GPU EIR did not address this subject, the GPU EIR contained enough i nformation about the projected energy demand associated with the GPU that with the exercise of reasonable diligence, information about the GPU’s potential to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency was readily available to the public. The GPU EIR did not evaluate impacts due to conflicts with or obstructions of a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project; however, residential land uses already are allowed within the Annexation Area by the Area’s existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications and, also, are planned by the GPU. Future development within the Annexation Are a would be subject to all applicable State and local policies, regulations, and plans related to energy or energy efficiency, and there are no components of the proposed Project that have the potential to conflict with such policies, regulations, or plans. No impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase t he severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 186
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-25 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iv) Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on - or off- site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Be located on e xpansive soil, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the California Building Code (2019) ,
creating substantial risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 187
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-26 Lead Agency: City of Chino a) Would the Project d irectly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that while there are two active fault zones within the City of Chino, they are not defined as Alquist -Priolo earthquake fault zones and do not present a significant hazard to development from ground rupture. Thus, GPU EIR concluded that the risk of ground rupture due to the potential development allowed by the GPU would be less than significant.
The GPU EIR found that compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) and GPU objectives and policies related to ground shaking would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. The GPU objectives and policies relied upon in reaching this conclusion include Policy P1 under Safety Element Objective SAF -1.1 (requiring the enforcement of state building codes); Policy P2 under Objective SAF-1.1 (requiring the City to rely on the most up- to-date and comprehensive geologic hazard mapping available); Policy P3 under Objective SAF -1.1 (requiring the preparation of site-specific soil and geology reports for new developments); Safety Element Policy P1 under Objective SAF-6.1 (requiring City departments to conduct periodic trainings with staff on emergency operations based on the Emergency Operations Plan); Policy P2 under Objective SAF-6.1 (requiring the City to work with other agencies and businesses within the City to assist and support their disaster preparedness efforts); Policy P3 under Objective SAF-6.1 (requiring the City to regularly review the adequacy of its infrastructure for emergency preparedness); and Policy P5 under Objective SAF-6.1 (requiring the City to be involved with providing information to residents and businesses on emergency preparedness information, such as preparing emergency kits, developing a communications plan, implementing evacuation procedures, and updating emergency plans).
The GPU EIR determined that although soils in the City may be subject to the risk of liquefaction hazards, the City’s development review procedures and compliance with the CBC and GPU objectives and policies that address liquefaction hazards would ensure that impacts due to liquefaction would be less than significant.
The GPU EIR concluded that the risk of landslides in the City is relatively low, since the City is generally level with very few areas of steep slopes. The areas that do have steeper slopes are not proposed for increased development as part of the GPU. As such, the GPU EIR disclosed that impacts due to landslides would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project. Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area). According to GPU EIR Figure 4.6-1, the Annexation Area occurs approximately 1.4 miles northeast of the Chino-Central Avenue Fault, indicating that there is a low potential for fault rupture hazards within the Annexation Area. In addition, the topography of the Annexation Area and lands surrounding it is generally characterized as relatively flat, with no prominent hill sides that could be subject to
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 188
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-27 Lead Agency: City of Chino landslide hazards. Furthermore, pursuant to GPU EIR Standard Condition of Approval 3.6, future applications for grading and building permits within the Annexation Area would require the preparation of site-specific soils reports, which would address site-specific conditions and identify recommendations to address any potential geological hazards involving strong seismic ground shaking and liquefaction. Mandatory compli ance with the future-required soils reports would ensure that potential impacts to future development due to seismic ground shaking and liquefaction are reduced to less than significant levels. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of an earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides , and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that soils in the City are at a limited risk of erosion, and that implementation of the GPU would not alter conditions in such a way as to increase the likelihood of soil erosion. Although the GPU EIR noted tha t future development has the potential to increase erosion hazards, the City’s standard conditions of approval require that on-site landscaping and irrigation construction drawings be submitted before the issuance of a building or grading permit, assuring that adequate drainage systems would be built to address drainage, water quality and soil erosion issues. Due to mandatory compliance with this condition of approval, the risks of soil erosion were determined to be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area). As part of future development within the Annexation Area, project applicants would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for construction activities. The NPDES permit is required for all projects that include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavations that disturb at least one acre of total land area. Additionally, during future grading and other construction activities involving soil exposure of the transport of earth materials, Section
19.09.030 (Grading, Erosion, and Dust Control) of the City’s Municipal Code would apply, which establishes, in part, requirements for the control of dust and erosion during construction, would apply to future development within the Annexa tion Area . As noted by the GPU EIR, such future development would require approval of landscaping and irri gation drawings to demonstrate that adequate drainage systems would be built to address potential erosion hazards. Requirements for the reduction of particulate matter in the air also would apply, pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 403. Mandatory compliance with the future -required NPDES permit s and these regulatory requirements would ensure that water and wind erosion impacts during potential future construction activities within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
Following construction activities, f uture development within the Annexation Area would result in impervious surfaces and landscaped areas, which would minimize the potent ial for soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. For areas not subject to development or landscaping, future development within the Annexation Area would not result in an increase in erosion hazards as compared to existing conditions.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 189
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-28 Lead Agency: City of Chino Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
GPU EIR Finding: A summary of the GPU EIR’s conclusion related to liquefaction hazards is provided above under Threshold 4.7.a). The GPU EIR disclosed a possibility that soils in some parts of the City may subside in the future, but that the City’s groundwater production activities would reduce the potential for subsidence. Additionally, the GPU EIR noted that all new development would be required to comply with the City’s standard conditions of approval, which require a detailed soils report to investigate the adequacy of building engineering for the local soil conditions, including structural damage from land subsidence, prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. The GPU EIR further identified policies in the General Plan that would help ensure ground stability impacts remain below a level of significance, including Policies P2 and P3 under GPU Safety Element Objective SAF-1.1, which require new development to adequately investigate all geological hazards including current and comprehensive geological hazard mapping. Finally, and as noted in the GPU EIR, mandatory c ompliance with State building codes, in conformance with GPU Safety Element Objective SAF-1.1, Policy P1, would ensure that adequate soil stability protections are included in new developments. As such, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts due to unstable geologic units or soils would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project. Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardi no County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area ). The topography of the Annexation Area and lands surrounding it is generally characterized as relatively flat, with no prominent hill sides that could be subject to landslide hazards. In addition, pursuant to GPU EIR Standard Condition of Approval 3.6 , future applications for grading and building permits within the Annexation Area would require the preparation of site-specific soils reports, which would address site-specific c onditions and identify recommendations to address any potential geological hazards involving lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Mandatory compliance with required soils reports would ensure that impacts due to unstable geologic units would be reduced to less -than- significant levels for future development within the Annexation Area . Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the California Building Code (2019), creating substantial risks to life or property? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR indicated that soils in the City are susceptible to expansion and compaction, but that new development would be required to comply with Standard Condition of Approval 3.6, which requires a detailed soils report to investigate the adequacy of building engineering for the local soil conditions, including structural damage from expansive soils prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. The GPU EIR also
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 190
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-29 Lead Agency: City of Chino noted that Policies P2 and P3 under GPU Safety Element Objective SAF-1 .1 require new development to adequately investigate all geological hazards including current and comprehensive geological hazard mapping. As concluded in the GPU EIR, compliance with building codes adopted by the State, as required by Safety Element Objective SAF-1.1, Policy P1, would require the incorporation of adequate design features to be included in all new development, thereby reducing the risks from expansive soil to less-than-significant levels.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area). According to GPU Figure 4.6-3 (Expansive Soils), all portions of the Annexation Area are mapped as having a “Low” shrink -swell potential, indicating that potential future development within the Annexation Area would not occur on expansive soils. Furthermore, pursuant to GPU EIR Standard Condition of Approval 3.6, future applications for grading and building permits within the Annexation Area would require the preparation of site-specific soils reports, which would address site-specific conditions and identify recommendations to address any potential h azards associated with expansive soils. Accordingly, the Project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the California Building Code (2019), and would not create substantial risks to life or property due to expansive soils. Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
e) Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR indicated that the GPU requires all new development in the City to connect to the public wastewater collection system, as required by Policy P2 under GPU Public Facilities and Services Objective PFS-9.1. Consequently, the GPU EIR concluded that there would be a less-than-significant impact associated with soils that are inadequate to support the use of septic system.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area ). All future development within the Annexation Area would be required to connect to the public wastewater collection system, pursuant to GPU Objective PFS-9.1, Policy P2. As such, there would be no new septic tanks or wastewater disposal systems allowed within the Annexation Area .
Accordingly, no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
f) Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that Objective OSC -7.1, Policies P3 (requiring evaluation and appropriate treatment of any unknown archaeological or paleontological resources discovered during
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 191
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-30 Lead Agency: City of Chino construction) and P4 (calling for the City to consult with the Native American commu nity if Native American artifacts are discovered to ensure the respectful treatment of sacred places) of the GPU’s Open Space and Conservation Element would ensure that impacts to any known or previously undiscovered paleontological resources would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analys is: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area). Notwithstanding, and consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area has the potential result in impacts to previously unknown paleontological resources. However, future development would be subject to compliance with GPU Objective OSC-7.1, Policy P3. Policy P3 states that if unknown paleontological resources are discovered during construction, the Planning Division shall be notified immediately and construction shall stop until an a rchaeologist evaluates the discovered resources and recommends appropriate action. Additionally, future development also would be subject to compliance with Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.5, which prohibits the removal, destruction, injury, and defacement of paleontological resources and features. Consistent with the conclusion reached by the GPU EIR, mandatory compliance with Policy P3, as well as the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 5097.5, would ensure that impacts to paleontological resources associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the sever ity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 192
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-31 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project g enerate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR included a discussion and analysis of potential impacts that may result from implementation of the GPU and concluded that although the GPU includes objectives, policies, and actions that would reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, implementation of the GPU would res ult in emissions that are greater than 85 percent of the existing GHG emissions. In order to mitigate GHGs to the maximum feasible extent, the GPU EIR included the following mitigation measure:
MM AQ-2 Objective OSC-5.1 Action A1 would be included in the Open Space and Conservation Element as follows:
“Adopt a Climate Action Plan within 18 months of adoption of this General Plan that demonstrates how the City will achieve the needed reductions of GHG emissions. The Climate Action Plan shall be developed in coordination with SANBAG and SCAQMD."
Even with implementation of the above-listed Action A1, impacts due to GHG emissions were disclosed in the GPU EIR as a significant and unavoidable impact of the GPU.
Following the City’s approval of the GPU and certification of the GPU EIR, CREED initiated legal action against the City of Chino on the adequacy of the GPU EIR. The City and CREED entered into a Settlement and Release Agreement that stipulated, among other things, that the City prepare and approve, n o later than December 31, 2013, a Long-Term Climate Action Plan (CAP) to address greenhouse emissions. The agreement also required the City to implement “Immediate Climate-Protection Actions" prior to the approval of any development projects and associated development agreements, which are not exempt from CEQA. The City of Chino adopted the 2013 CAP on November 19, 2013, which was superseded by the 2020-2030 CAP that was adopted on November 17, 2020.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), the Annexation
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 193
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-32 Lead Agency: City of Chino Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units, which is the same total number of dwelling units allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area . Any future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with the City’s CAP. The CAP incorporates a number of requirements int ended to reduce the emissions of GHGs, including measures related to energy efficiency, lighting efficiency, solar energy, transportation, solid waste, wastewater, and water consumption, and identifies GHG performance standards for new development. The CAP indicates that with implementation of applicable CAP measures along with applicable Statewide and regional measures, the City would surpass its GHG reduction target of 46 percent below 2008 levels by 2030. Because future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to the City’s CAP, and because the CAP demonstrates that the City would meet (and exceed) its GHG reduction targets by 2030, future development within the Annexation Area would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly o r indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment . Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project c onflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any impacts due to a conflict with an app licable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, although the GPU did acknowledge several provisions of the GPU that were proposed to address GHG emissions.
No Substantial Change from Previous A nalysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area). All future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, including, but not limited to, the City’s CAP and appli cable GPU policies related to GHG emissions and energy efficiency. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 194
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-33 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
g. Expose people or structures , either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 195
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-34 Lead Agency: City of Chino a) Would the Project c reate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that land uses allowed under the GPU could increase the amount of hazardous materials used and wastes generated, as well as the number of people and structures exposed to these and other hazards. However, the GPU included a number of goals and policies that would reduce the potential to expose the public to hazardous materials. These include GPU Safety Element Goal SAF-4 (requiring minimizing City residents’ exposure to the harmful effects of hazardous materials and waste) along with the following policies under Goal SAF-4: Policy P2 (requiring investigation of sites for the presence of hazardous materials); Policy P3 (incorporating measures to ensure safe transport of hazardous materials); Policy P4 (requiring projects proposing to generate hazardous waste to prepa re emergency response plans); Policy P6 (prohibiting the use of Perchlorethylene in new dry cleaning facilities); Policy P7 (requiring the use of clean technology for dry cleaners in mixed use developments); Policy P8 (directing the City to work with the San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division to ensure compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations and guidelines), and Policy P9 (directing the City to work with the San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division to ensure Chino residents have convenient access to the disposal of household hazardous wastes). As concluded in the GPU EIR, with policy implementation, impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area).
Future construction activities within the Annexation Area could, potentially, include heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors), which likely would be fueled and maintained by petroleum -based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which is considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, adhesives, solvents, and other substances typically used in building construction could be stored within the Annexation Area during potential, future construction activities. Improper use, storage, or transportation of hazardous materials can result in accidental releases or spills, potentially posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. This is a standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for improper handling, transportation, or spills associated with potential, future development within the Annexation Area than would occur on any other similar construction site. Construction contractors would be required to comply wit h all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction -related materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA, California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the SCAQMD, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or the San Bernardino Environmental Health Services (EHS). Because compliance with these regulatory requirements by construction contractors is mandatory, potential impacts due to hazardous materials used, transported, and/or stored during future construction activities within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 196
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-35 Lead Agency: City of Chino Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with residential dwelling units. Residential uses are not associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Household and other goods used by residential homes and retail uses that contain toxic substances are usually low in concentration and small in amount; therefore, there is no significant risk to humans or the environment from the use of such household goods. Residents are required to dispose of household hazardous waste, including pesticides, batteries, o ld paint, solvents, used oil, antifreeze, and other chemicals, at a Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility. Also, as of February 2006, fluorescent lamps, batteries, and mercury thermostats can no longer be disposed in the trash. Furthermore, the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials are fully regulated by the EPA, State, and/or San Bernardino County. As such, future development within the Annexation Area would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the env ironment. Impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project e mit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that land uses allowed under the GPU could increase the amount of hazardous materials used and wastes generated, as well as the number of people and structures exposed to these and other h azards. However, the GPU included a number of goals and policies that would serve to reduce the potential to expose the public to hazardous materials. These include GPU Safety Element Goal SAF -4 (requiring minimizing City residents’ exposure to the harmf ul effects of hazardous materials and waste), along with the following policies under Goal SAF-4: Policy P2 (requiring investigation of sites for the presence of hazardous materials); Policy P3 (incorporating measures to ensure safe transport of hazardous materials); Policy P4 (requiring projects proposing to generate hazardous waste to prepare emergency response plans); Policy P6 (prohibiting the use of Perchlorethylene in new dry cleaning facilities); Policy P7 (requiring the use of clean technology for dry cleaners in mixed use developments); Policy P8 (directing the City to work with the San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division to ensure compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations and guidelines), and Policy P9 ( directing the City to work with the San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division to ensure Chino residents have convenient access to the disposal of household hazardous wastes). As concluded in the GPU EIR, with policy implementation , impacts associated with the emission or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: There are no existing or planned school sites within 0.25-mile of the Annexation Area . The nearest schools are the E. J. Marshall Elementary School, located approximately 0.4 - mile east of the Annexation Area, and the Ramona Junior High School, located approximately 0.4-mile to the south of the Annexation Area . Furthermore, and b ased on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with dwelling units. As more fully discussed under the analysis of Thresholds 4.9 .a and 4.9.b, residential uses are not associated with
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 197
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-36 Lead Agency: City of Chino hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste.
Accordingly, no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any impacts associated wit h locating projects on sites included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.7.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : Based on a review of Cortese List Data Resources available from the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), none of the properties within the Annexation Area are included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Lists that were reviewed include the DTSC EnviroStor data base (listing hazardous waste and substances sites); the State Water Board’s GeoTracker database (listing leaking underground storage tank sites); the Water Board’s list of solid waste disposal sites; list of “active” Water Board Cease and Desist Orders (C DO) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAO); and DTSC’s list of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (CalEPA, 2022) Accordingly, the Project would no t be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to existing site contamination. No impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that mandatory compliance with the Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Chino Airport Master Plan would help to preclude safety hazards from airports. Additionally, the GPU EIR found that implementation of the goals and policies of the GPU would preclude significant safety hazards, including GPU Safety Element Goal SAF-5 (directing the City to minimize risks associated with the Chino Airport operations), Policy P1 under Goal SAF- 5 (directing the C ity to ensure construction activities are consistent with the required setbacks and height restrictions for the Chino Airport), and Action A -1 under Goal SAF-5 (requiring updates to the Chino Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan to reflect current regulations and approaches to land use regulation at the airport). The GPU EIR concluded that with policy implementation, the airport hazards impact of the GPU would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The only airport s in the Project vicinity a re the Chino Airport, which is located approximately 5.0 miles southeast of the Annexation Area, and the Ontario International Airport, which is located approximately 4.7 miles northeast of the Annexation Area.
In November 1991, the San Bernardino County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) adopted the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the Chino Airport. The Chino Airport CLUP establishes three Safety Zones (Safety Zones
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 198
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-37 Lead Agency: City of Chino I, II, and III). the Annexation Area is located well to the northwest of the Safety Zones identified by the CLUP, indicating that the Annexation Area is not subject to hazards associated with airport operations. Additionally, according to Figure II-5 of the Chino Airport CLUP, the Annexation Area is located far to the northwest of the 65 dBA CNEL contour associated with the Chino Airport, indicating that the Annexation Area would not be subject to excessive noise associated with airport operations. (SB County, 1991, Figures II-5 and III-7)
The Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT ALUCP) was adopted by Ontario City Council on April 19, 2011. According to ONT ALUCP Map 2 -2 (Compatibility Policy Map: Safety Zones), the Annexation Area site is located well outside of the safety zones associated with the Ontario International Airport. According to ONT ALUCP Map 2-3 (Compatibility Policy Map: Noise Impact Zones), the Annexation Area site is located outside of the 60-65 dB CNEL contour for the Ontario International Airport, indicating that the Annexation Area would not be subject to excessive noise associated with operations at the Ontario Internat ional Airport. (Ontario, 2011, Maps 2-2 and 2-3)
Based on the forgoing analysis , the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
f) Would the Project i mpair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any impacts associated with potential conflicts with adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project. Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area ). Under existing conditions, the Annexation Area does not contain any emergency facilities nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route . All future development within the Annexation Area would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles as required by standard City of Chino requirements. Furthermore, there are no components of the proposed Project that would result in a substantial alteration to the desi gn or capacity of any public road that would impair or interfere with the implementation of evacuation procedures. Because the Project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
g) Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that adherence to GPU Goal SAF-3 (encouraging the protection of life and property from wildland fire hazards) and associated Policy P1 (requiring incorporation of measures to reduce wildland fire hazard threats) would provide protect ion from wildland fires. Additionally, the GPU EIR concluded
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 199
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-38 Lead Agency: City of Chino that the City is generally buffered from wildland fires due its flat topography and the limited amount of open space immediately surrounding the City, as well as the separation between the City and the Chino Hills provided by State Route 71. As such, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts due to wildland fire hazards would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : As indicated on GPU EIR Figure 4.7 -1 (Wildland Urban In terface Threat to Community), the Annexation Area is mapped as having “Little or no threat” due to wildland fire hazards.
The nearest area identified as having a “Moderate threat” for wildland fire hazards occurs approximately 0.1-mile west of the northwe stern boundary of the Annexation Area ; however, the Annexation Area is separated from these lands by existing residential developments and improved roadways. Furthermore, and as documented by the GPU EIR, conditions of approval for new development include a number of actions to reduce fire danger to new structures and the community in general. Furthermore, the City of Chino enforces a Weed Abatement program to reduce fire hazards. Accordingly, the Project would not expose people or structures, either dire ctly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires , and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 200
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-39 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on
or off site?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on or off site?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the capacity of existing
or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would create or contribute runoff
water which would impede or redirect flood flows?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 201
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-40 Lead Agency: City of Chino
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
g. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would
the project risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
h. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project v iolate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that water quality could be impacted by the discharge of soils and other pollutants as a result of urban runoff and construction activities associated with future development allowed under the GPU. However, the GPU EIR notes that such future development would be subject to the City’s standard conditions of approval, including requirements for the preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that incorporates post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs). Additionally, the GPU EIR notes that City Ordinance No. 94 -01 calls for reduction of pollutants in all stormwater discharges. Furthermore, the GPU EIR indicates that future development in the City would be required to comply with applicable GPU policies related to runoff pollution, including Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-10.1 (addressing the control of stormwater runoff to protect against flooding, account for future development, and address environmental concerns), and the following Policies under Objective PFS-10.1: Policy P1 (directing the City to maintain stormwater infrastructure in good conditions); Policy P2 (directing the City to review stormwater infrastructure in conformance with the Master Plans of Drainage); Policy P4 (requiring all dra inage facilities to be consistent with State and federal requirements, including NPDES requirements); Policy P6 (directing the City to implement a local stormwater program in compliance with the City’s NPDES permit); Policy P7 (directing the City to implem ent the City’s Sewer System Management Plan to prevent sanitary sewer overflows from reaching local water bodies); and Action 1 (directing the City to update the Master Plan of Drainage when conditions warrant). Accordingly, the GPU EIR concludes that impa cts due to violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU a nd already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area.
Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area would be required to comply with City Ordinance No. 94 -01, which calls for a reduction of pollutants in all stormwater discharges.
Additionally, any future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with applicable
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 202
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-41 Lead Agency: City of Chino GPU objectives and policies, including Policies P1, P2, P4, P6, and P7 as well as Action 1 under Objective PFS-10.1.
Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with residential dwelling units. In accordance with Ordinance No. 94 -01 and applicable GPU objectives and policies, the City would review future applications for grading and building permits to ensure that appro priate measures have been incorporated to address pollutants in stormwater discharges.
Additionally, and consistent with the finding of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval related to drainage, which include the following:
• Prepare and submit a drainage study, including supporting hydraulic and hydrological data for approval. The study must identify the project’s impact and all downstream drainage- mitigating measures, including, but not limited to, detention facilities. • Prepare and submit a grading plan showing drainage routes and other pertinent information. • Prepare and submit a WQMP to mitigate impacts to stormwater quality and quantity through the implementation of post-construction BMPs.
Accordingly, mandatory compliance with Ordinance No. 94 -01, applicable GPU objectives and policies, and the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval would ensure that the proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards or w aste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality , and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR indicated that the Chino Basin Optimum Basin Management Program (OBMP) would guide Chino Groundwater Basin activities. The OBMP contains several elements designed to provide enhanced management of the local groundwater basin resource, includin g protection of water quality and the safe yield of the basin. Any impacts to the water quality associated with the GPU were determined to be mitigated by a combination of recharge and other groundwater management activities accomplished by the Chino Basin parties, including the City, and coordinated by the Watermaster. Therefore, the GPU EIR concluded that there would be a less-than-significant impact on groundwater quality and recharge.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project w ould result in the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project, and no new groundwater wells are proposed . As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in demand for groundwater resources , nor would the Project directly interfere substantially with groundwater recharge.
Water services are provided within the Annexation Area by the MVWD and the City of Chino. In fiscal year 2019- 2020, MVWD obtained approximately 45% of its water from the Chino groundwater basin, while during the same
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 203
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-42 Lead Agency: City of Chino period the City of Chino obtained approximately 26% of its water from the Chino Groundwater Basin (MVWD, 2021, p. 6-3; Chino, 2021, p. 6-3).
Although potential, future development within the Annexation Area would indirectly be supplied with groundwater via the M VWD or City of Chino , the MVWD’s and City of Chino’s Urban Water Management Plan s (UWMPs) forecasts water demands and supplies under normal, single -dry, and multiple- dry year conditions; assesses supply reliabi lity; and describes methods of reducing demands under potential water shortages. The MVWD and City of Chino UWMPs are based, in part, on the land uses planned as part of the City’s General Plan.
As previously indicated in Table 3-1, the land use designations that would apply to the Annexation Area with approval of the Project would be substantially similar to the existing San Bernardino County General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications. Thus, the Project would not allow for an increase in land use intensity that could exceed the growth assumptions of the MVWD and City of Chino UWMPs. As such, and consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, the proposed Project is fully accounted for by the MVWD or City of Chino UWMPs. Because the UWMP s demonstrate that the M VWD and City of Chino would have sufficient water supplies, including groundwater, to meet water demands within their respective districts through 2040, it can therefore be concluded that the demand for potable water associated with future development within t he Annexation Area would not result in the depletion of groundwater supplies. As such, Project impacts to groundwater supplies would be less than significant.
According to mapping information available from the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA ), the Annexation Area occurs within the Chino North Groundwater Recharge Zone (SAWPA, n.d.). Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with residential dwelling units. Thus, while future development within the Annexation Area would result in the introduction of impervious surfaces that would preclude groundwater recharge, future development would result in large lots that would continue to include pervious surfaces, similar to what occurs on the existing developed parcels within the Annexation Area. Furthermore, the Annexation Area is relatively small (144.8 acres) in relation to the total size of the Chino Groundwater Basin, and the majority of existing water sources is from direct precipitation, providing little opportunity to recharge under existing conditions. Any runoff that does not infiltrate into the groundwater table within the Annexation Area would be conveyed by existing storm drain facilities within the surrounding area to downstream facilities, including facilities downstream that would allow for groundwater infiltration (e.g., within the Prado Ba sin). As such, the Project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin, and impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the preceding analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR indicated that erosion or siltation h azards could occur from the discharge of soils and other pollutants as a result of urban runoff and construction activities associated with future development allowed under the GPU. However, the GPU EIR notes that such future development would be subject to the City’s
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 204
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-43 Lead Agency: City of Chino standard conditions of approval, including requirements for the preparation of a drainage study and the preparation and review of grading plans showing drainage routes and other pertinent information. Furthermore, the GPU EIR indicates that future development in the City would be required to comply with applicable GPU policies related to erosion hazards, including Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-10.1 (requiring the control of stormwater runoff to protect against flooding, account for future development, and address environmental concerns), and the following policies under Objective PFS -10.1: Policy P1 (directing the City to maintain stormwater infrastructure in good conditions); Policy P2 (directing the City to review stor mwater infrastructure in conformance with the Master Plan of Drainage); Policy P4 (requiring all drainage facilities to be consistent with State and federal requirements, including NPDES requirements); Policy P6 (directing the City to implement a local stormwater program in compliance with the City’s NPDES permit); Policy P7 (directing the City to implement the City’s Sewer System Management Plan to prevent sanitary sewer overflows from reaching local water bodies); and Action 1 (directing the City to updat e the Master Plan of Drainage when conditions warrant).
Accordingly, the GPU EIR concludes that impacts due to erosion or siltation hazards would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist o f the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the proposed Project would not directly alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site. Additionally, please also refer to the analysis of Threshold 4.7.b, which demonstrates that future development within the Annexation Area would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on site. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site?
e) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that alteration of the existing drainage patterns and/or increased rates of runoff could result from construction activities associated with future development allowed under the GPU , and that such future developments have the potential to exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems . However, the GPU EIR notes that such future development would be subject to the City’s standard conditions of approval, including requirements for the preparation of a drainage study and the preparation and review of grading plans showing drainage routes and other pertinent information. Additionally, the GPU EIR notes that Ordinance No. 94-01 of the City of Chino calls for reduction of pollutants in all stormwater discharges. Furthermore, the GPU EIR indicates that future development in the City would be required to comply with applicable GPU policies related to erosion hazards, including Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-10.1 (requiring the control of stormwater runoff to protect against flooding, account for future development, and address environmental concerns), and the following policies under Objective PFS-10.1: Policy P1 (dir ecting
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 205
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-44 Lead Agency: City of Chino the City to maintain stormwater infrastructure in good conditions); Policy P2 (directing the City to review stormwater infrastructure in conformance with the Master Plans of Drainage); Policy P4 (requiring all drainage facilities to be consistent with State and federal requirements, including NPDES requirements); Policy P6 (directing the City to implement a local stormwater program in compliance with the City’s NPDES permit); Policy P7 (directing the City to implement the City’s Sewer System Manageme nt Plan to prevent sanitary sewer overflows from reaching local water bodies); and Action 1 (directing the City to update the Master Plan of Drainage when conditions warrant). Accordingly, the GPU EIR indicates that alterations to the existing drainage pa tterns and/or increased rates of runoff associated with implementation of the GPU would not result in any new flood hazards, would not result in impacts due to increased runoff that exceeds the capacity of drainage systems, and would not result in new sour ces of polluted runoff. As such, the GPU EIR conclude d that such impacts would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU ( and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area ). As such, the proposed Project would not directly alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site; result in runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned drainage systems; or result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
According to GPU EIR Figure 4.8 -1 (FEMA Floodplains), the Annexation Area is located in an area that is outside the 500-year flood plain; thus, the Annexation Area is not subject to flood hazards under existing conditions.
Consistent with the finding of the GPU EIR, future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval related to drainage, which could include the following:
• Prepare and submit a drainage study, including supporting hydraulic and hydrological data for approval. The study must identify the project’s impact and all downstream drainage- mitigating measures, including, but not limited to, detention facilities. • Prepare and submit a grading plan showing drainage routes and other pertinent information. • Prepare and submit a WQMP to mitigate impacts to stormwater quality and quantity through the implementation of post-construction BMPs.
Compliance with the above-listed Standard Conditions of Approval would ensure that future development within the Annexation Area does not generate runoff in a manner that would exceed the capacity of existing or future drainage facilities, result in flooding, or result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
Furthermore, and as noted by the GPU EIR, the GPU contains policies and actions to control runoff. Objective PFS-
10.1 states that the City would control stormwater runoff. Policies P1 and P2 under this Objective call for stormwater runoff infrastructure to be maintain ed in good condition, as well as for stormwater runoff infrastructure to attain capacity that conforms with the requirements of the Master Plans of Drainage. To address potential erosion and runoff impacts from new storm drainage facilities, Objective PFS-10.1, Policy P6 calls for the City to implement a local stormwater program that achieves compliance with the provisions of the City's NPDES
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 206
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-45 Lead Agency: City of Chino permit for area -wide urban stormwater runoff (MS4 Permit). Also, Action A1 under this Objective calls for an update to the Master Plans of Drainage to reflect existing and future demand on stormwater runoff collection facilities. Consistent with the conclusion reached by the GPU EIR, implementation of the aforementioned policies and actions, along with the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval, would ensure potential, future development within the Annexation Area would result in a less than significant impacts to drainage, including flooding.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not substantially alter th e existing drainage pattern of the Annexation Area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or a mount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site. Additionally, the Project would not result in runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff . Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
f) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would impede or redirect flood flows?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU did not propose housing or other urban structures within the 100-year flood hazard area. Since there would not be new development within the 100 -year plain, the GPU EIR concluded there would be a less -than-significant i mpact related to structures placed within a 100 -year floodplain. Additionally, the GPU EIR noted that the GPU includes goals and policies to reduce hazards related to flooding, including GPU Safety Element Goal SAF-2 (encouraging the reduction of hazards related to flooding and inundation), Objective SAF -2.1 (directing the City to minimize flood risks associated with development), and associated Policy P2 (preventing the construction of flood barriers within the 100-year flood zone which will divert flood water or increase flooding in other areas). Implementation of the GPU objectives and policies was found to further ensure that impacts associated with flood hazard areas would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would result in the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the Project has no potential to impede or redirect flood flows. Additionally, according to GPU EIR Figure 4.8 -1 (FEMA Floodplains), the Annexation Area is located in an area that is outside the 500 -year flood plain. As such, potential, future development within the Annexation Area also would not impede or redirect flood flows. No impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
g) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the Project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR noted that the potential risk of seiche is low in the City Chino and the area is not at risk of tsunamis. As such, the GPU EIR concluded that there would be a less -than-significant impact related to seiches and tsunamis. Additionally, the GPU EIR noted that the GPU includes goals and policies to reduce hazards
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 207
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-46 Lead Agency: City of Chino related to flooding, including GPU Saf ety Element Goal SAF-2 (encouraging the reduction of hazards related to flooding and inundation), Objective SAF -2.1 (directing the City to minimize flood risks associated with development), and associated Policy P2 (preventing the construction of flood bar riers within the 100 -year flood zone which will divert flood water or increase flooding in other areas). Implementation of the GPU objectives and policies was found to further ensure that impacts associated with flood hazard areas would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The Annexation Area is located more than 30 miles from the Pacific Ocean, and is therefore not subject to inundation due to tsunamis. According to GPU EIR Figure 4.8 -1 (FEMA Floodplains), the Annexation Area is located in an area that is outside the 500 -year flood plain, indicating that the Annexation Area is not subject to inundation due to flood hazards. In addition, according to GPU EIR Figure 4.8-2 (566 Foot Prado Dam Inundation Area), the Annexation Area is located well outside of the inundation Area for the Prado Dam. As there are no other large bodies of water in the Project vicinity capable of producing a seiche that could result in inundation on site, the Annexation Area is not subject to inundation due to seiches.
Accordingly, the Project would not risk release o f pollutants due to project inundation due to flood hazards, tsunamis, or seiches, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
h) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any impac ts due to a conflict with or obstruction of the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . Residential land uses are planned in the Area by the GPU (and already are allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area). As such, the Project would not directly conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
The 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires local public agencies and Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) in “high -” and “medium” -priority basins to develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) or Alternatives to GSPs. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) currently categorizes the Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins, which supply groundwater to the MVWD and the City of Chino, as “very low” priority. Furth er, Section 10720.8(a) of the SGMA exempts adjudicated basins from the SGMA’s requirement to prepare a GSP; the Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins have been adjudicated.
Therefore, preparatio n of Groundwater Sustainability Plans is not required and the Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins are not subject to the requirements of the SGMA. As such, potential future development within the Annexation Area has no potential to conflict with a sustainable groundwater management plan, and no impact would occur.
The California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Section 13000 (“Water Quality”) et seq., of the California Water Code), and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1972 (also referred to as the Clean
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 208
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-47 Lead Agency: City of Chino Water Act) require that comprehensive water quality control plans be developed for all waters within the State of California. The Project Site is located within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB. Water quality information for the Santa Ana River watershed is contained in the Sant a Ana Basin Plan, as most recently updated in June 2019.
The Basin Plan describes actions by the RWQCB and others that are necessary to achieve and maintain the water quality standards. The RWQCB regulates waste discharges to minimize and control their effects on the quality of the region’s groundwater and surface water. Permits are issued under several programs and authorities. The terms and conditions of these discharge permits are enforced through a variety of technical, administrative, and legal means. The RWQCB ensures compliance with the Santa Ana Basin Plan through its issuance of NPDES Permits, issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR), and Water Quality Certifications pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA. As discussed under Threshold 4.10.a, with adherence to State and local water quality regulations as well as applicable GPU objectives and policies , the potential for future development within the Annexation Area to generate pollutants and impact water quality during construction and operation would be less than significant.
Future development within the Annexation Area would not degrade water quality, cause the receiving waters to exceed the water quality objectives, or impair the beneficial use of receiving waters. As such, the Project would not result in water quality impacts that would conflict with the Santa Ana Basin Plan.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 209
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-48 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project physically divide an established community? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR noted that the GPU sets forth goals, objectives, policies, and actions intended to foster greater connectivity, particularly between the northern and southern portions of the City, and to prevent new development from dividing existing uses. Objective LU-1.2 in the Land Use Element was cited as a policy that seeks to create walkable neighborhoods that are cohesive and connected. Generally, the land use designations in the GPU were found to seek the creation of vibrant, cohesive communities. The GPU EIR concluded that implementation of these policies would ensure that new development would be compatible with and sensitive to the existing built environment, thereby resulting in a less -than-significant impact due to the physical division of established communities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the Project has no potential to physically divide an established community.
Notwithstanding, residential and public land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU ( comparable to the u ses already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and zoning classifications that apply to the Annexation Area ) and additional development could occur in the future.
Future, potential development within the Annexation Area would occur on existing, legal parcels, and would consist of a continuation of the existing residential development pattern in the area. As such, future development within the Annexation Area would have no potential to physically divide an established community, and no impact would occur.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 210
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-49 Lead Agency: City of Chino b) Would the Project c ause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR included an extensive discussion of proposed land use designation changes that were included in the GPU. Although the GPU EIR notes that continuation of existing uses and the development of new adjacent land uses could appear incompatible; however, the goals and policies in the GPU as well as the right- to-farm ordinance were found to minimize land use conflicts. The GPU EIR also indicates that new land use conflicts between industrial and residential developments would not occur because the GPU did not propose any new residential developments adjacent to industrial uses. Additionally, the GPU EIR discussed the GPU’s potential to result in conflicts between land use plans. Other planning documents within the City were determined not to conflict with the GPU since these documents would be required to be updated to ensure consistency with the GPU. Due to policies included in the GPU that require appropriate transitions within the City’s SOI, the GPU also was determined not to conflict with the San B ernardino County General Plan. The GPU EIR determined that the GPU would not result in a substantial conflict with the Chino Airport Master Plan. Finally, under GPU EIR Section
4.11, Population, Employment, and Housing, the GPU EIR concluded that although implementation of the GPU would result in more growth than previously projected in SCAG’s regional growth projections, impacts would be less than significant because the City requires all new development to include adequate services and infrastructure and significant environmental impacts to be mitigated pursuant to the City’s CEQA review of implementing projects. As such, the GPU EIR concluded that the GPU would have a less-than-significant impact due to conflicts with other planning documents.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would result in the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project . All future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to compliance with applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the City of Chino General Plan, the City’s zoning requirements, the City’s Municipal Code requirements, and other applicable regulations (e.g., regulations promulgated by the SCAQMD) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. There are no components of the proposed Project that would result in a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect . No impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 211
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-50 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
residents of the state?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or
other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the only potentially significant mineral resources within the City are aggregate materials that may be found in the MRZ -3 zone, a s delineated on GPU EIR Figure 4.6 -4 (Mineral Resources Zones). However, the GPU EIR concluded that there is not sufficient information to determine whether such deposits are significant. Furthermore, the GPU EIR noted that future development allowed by the GPU would occur primarily on land that is currently developed. Moreover, policies included in the GPU were determined to protect mineral resources on land that was not already developed, including the following policies under Open Space and Conservation Objective OSC-3.1: Policy P1 (requiring the City to restrict uses adjacent to important sand and gravel resources to those compatible with mining operation); Policy P2 (requiring the reclamation of mined property to allow for reuse in conformance with t he GPU land use designations and the requirements of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act [ SMARA]); and Policy P3 (directing the City to encourage the reuse and recycling of existing aggregate construction material). As such, the GPU EIR found that impacts due to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : According to mapping information available from the CDC, the Project Site is classified as Mineral Resources Zone (MRZ) 3, which includes “Areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data” (CDC, n.d.). Furthermore, the Annexation Area predominately contains residential uses under existing conditions, which are not a compatible use with mining operations – and additional residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU (and by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan). Accordingly, the Annexation Area does not contain any known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State, and future development within the Annexation Area would result in no impacts to mineral resources . Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 212
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-51 Lead Agency: City of Chino b) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any impacts associated with the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan, except for the less-than-significant impact discussed above under Threshold 4.12.a.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: As part of the Project, the Annexation Area would be designated by the City’s General Plan for RD 2, RD 4.5, and Public uses (as previously summarized in Table 3-1), which do not allow for min ing activities. The Annexation Area also is not located within a specific plan, nor is the Annexation Area identified as a locally-important mineral resource recovery site by any other land use plan. Accordingly, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 213
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-52 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.13 NOISE
New
Significant
Impact
More
Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR disclosed that residences and other noise -sensitive uses located adjacent to proposed development areas would be affected by construction noise. However, the GPU EIR notes that the GPU incorporates policies that address construction noise, including the following policies under Noise Element Objective N-1.3: Policy P1 (requiring a noise monitoring plan for all construction projects to identify appropriate noise control measures and monitoring); and Policy P2 (limiting construction hours within the vicinity of noise- sensitive land uses, and the incorporation of noise control measures to reduce construction noise impacts). The GPU EIR concluded that short-term noise impacts would be less than significant with implementation of applicable GPU policies.
The GPU EIR determined that traffic within the City poses the greatest potential for long -term ambient noise increases, although the GPU EIR notes that these increases woul d only range from a decrease of 0.4 dB to an increase of 0.8 dB, which would not be discernible by the average person. Additionally, the GPU EIR cites GPU policies that address ambient noise levels, including Policy P1 under Noise Element Objective N-1.2 (directing the City to minimize transportation noise through street and right-of-way design or route coordination) and Policy P6 under Noise Element Objective N-1.1 (directing the City to ensure evaluation of projects for compliance with the adopted noise standards or CEQA requirements). With implementation of these policies, the GPU EIR concludes that there would be a less-than-significant impact on permanent ambient noise levels.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 214
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-53 Lead Agency: City of Chino No Substantial Change f rom Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would c onsist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur as part of the Project . As such, the proposed Project would not directly result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanen t increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexa tion Area by the GPU and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply to the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Potential future construction activities within the Annexation Area would be subject to Noise Element Objective N-1.3: Policy P1 (requiring a noise monitoring plan for all construction pr ojects to identify appropriate noise control measures and monitoring) and Policy P2 (limiting construction hours within the vicinity of noise - sensitive land uses, and the incorporation of noise control measures to reduce construction noise impacts).
Consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, short-term noise impacts associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant with implementation of these GPU policies.
Potential future residential development within the Annexation Area would not result in a substantial, permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity, as residential uses are not associated with the generation of substantial amounts of stationary noise. Additionally, the GPU EIR accounted for future development within the Annexation Area, including traffic that would be associated with the development of new residential dwelling units. As concluded by the GPU EIR, and subsequently re-affirmed by the conclusions in the EIR for the San Bernardino County Countywide Plan and Yorba Villas pro ject, future development within the Annexation Area would not result in a substantial, permanent increase in local traffic-related noise. Additionally, the GPU EIR cites GPU policies that address ambient noise levels, including Policy P1 under Noise Element Objective N-1.2 (directing the City to minimize transportation noise through street and right-of-way design or route coordination) and Policy P6 under Noise Element Objective N-1.1 (directing the City to ensure evaluation of projects for compliance with the adopted noise standards or CEQA requirements). Accordingly, long-term noise impacts associated with potential future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR notes that development under the GPU with the potential to create excessive groundborne vibration or noise would be subject to environmental review. As indicated in the GPU EIR, GPU policies would serve to address such noise, including Policy P4 under Noise Element Objective N -1.2 (requiring mitigation of noise impacts for new roadway projects). With implementation of this policy, the GPU EIR concludes that impacts associated with groundborne vibration and noise would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would result in the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries . The Project does no t include any new development or construction. As
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 215
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-54 Lead Agency: City of Chino such, the proposed Project would not directly result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be develope d with residential dwelling units. Construction equipment associated with potential future construction activities within the Annexation Area has the potential to result in groundborne vibration or noise. However, as the majority of future development would involve the construction of individual single-family homes, it is not anticipated that there would be a large number of construction vehicles on any site within the Annexation Area capable of producing sufficient groundborne vibration or noise levels that would affect sensitive receptors or cause damage to existing structures. Accordingly, vibration impacts associated with future construction activities within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
Under long-term conditions, the single-family dwelling units that could be developed within the Annexation Area would not result in the generation of substantial numbers of large truck trips that could produce excessive ground- borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. Ground-borne vibration levels from automobile traffic are generally overshadowed by vibration generated by heavy trucks that roll over the same uneven roadway surfaces. However, due to the rapid drop-off rate of ground-borne vibration and the short duration of the associated events, vehicular traffic-induced ground-borne vibration is rarely perceptible beyond the roadway right -of-way, and rarely results in vibration levels that cause damage to buildings in the vicinity. Accordingly, and consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, operational vibration impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR did not identify any impacts associated with excessive noise levels due to private airstrips. The GPU EIR determined that airport noise associated with the Chino Airport is not anticipated to expose any lands designated for residential use to noise levels in excess of 65 dB, and that buildout of the GPU would not expose residents to excessive noise associated with the LA/Ontario Airport (ONT ). The GPU EIR concluded that since no residential or other noise-sensitive uses were proposed in areas subject to elevated aircraft noise in the GPU, there would be a less-than-significant impact with regard to airport noise.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the proposed Project would not directly expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels associated with airport operations.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 216
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-55 Lead Agency: City of Chino As previously discussed under the analysis of Threshold 4.9.e, the only airports in the Project vicinity are the Chino Airport, which is located approximately 5.0 miles southeast of the Annexation Area, and the Ontario International Airport, which is located approximately 4.7 miles northeast of the Annexation Area . According to Figure II-5 of the Chino Airport CLUP, the Annexation Area is located far to the northwest of the 65 dBA CNEL contour associated with the Chino Airport (65 dBA CNEL is considered “acceptable” for residential land uses), indicating that potential future development within the Annexation Area would not be subject to excessive noise associated with airport operations (SB County, 1991, Figure II- 5). According to ONT ALUCP Map 2 -3 (Compatibility Policy Map: Noise Impact Zones), the Annexation Area is located outside of the 60-65 dB CNEL contour for the Ontario International Airport, indicating that potential future development within the Annexation Area would not be subject to excessive noise associated with operations at the Ontario International Airport (Ontario, 2011, Map 2-3) .
Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels, and impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impac ts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 217
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-56 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project i nduce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU would resu lt in substantial population growth within the City, portions of which would result from additional commercial and industrial development in the City that would increase the number of available jobs. However, the GPU EIR noted that buildout of the GPU would not affect the ratio of jobs to housing within the City, and would therefore not create a disproportionate increase in jobs that could result in population growth. However, the GPU EIR concludes that although a substantial population increase would occ ur, the growth would be expected, would be planned for, and would not exceed available infrastructure or public services; as such, impacts were determined to be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. As previously summarized in Table 3-1, the land use designations and zoning classifications proposed for the Annexation Area would be substantially similar to the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and zoning district classifications that apply to the Area, and would allow up to 114 new residential dwelling units to be built within the Annexation Area in the future. As such, the proposed Project would not result in an increase in total development intensity within the Annexation Area as compared to what is allowed to be developed under existing land use regulations that apply to the Area .
Accordingly, the Project has no potential to induce substantial population growth withi n the Annexation Area , either directly or indirectly , and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 218
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-57 Lead Agency: City of Chino b) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU would not result in the elimination of existing people or housing, and would therefore not require the construction of replacement housing. Impacts were found to be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the proposed Project would not result in the removal of any existing homes or displacement of existing residents. Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designat ions and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units , which would result in an increase in the City’s housing stock. Additionally, potential future development within the Annexation Area is anticipated to occur on vacant parcels, and therefore would not displace substantial people or housing. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 219
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-58 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii) Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iii) Schools? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iv) Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
v) Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant en vironmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR noted that the CVFD has sufficient existing or already planned facilities to accommodate planned growth within the City. In addition, the GPU EIR identified a goal to provide excellent fire protection and emergency response services (Goal PFS-1) and adopted policies within the GPU that would ensure adequate provision of fire protection facilities in the City, inc luding Policies P4 and P5 under Objective PFS-1.1 (directing the City to support and implement the CVFD’s Master Plan and requiring a development impact fee for fire facilities); and Policy P4 under Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-1.2 (requiring that the CVFD plan fire station locations to maintain or enhance current response levels). The GPU EIR concludes that implementation of the GPU would have a less -than-significant impact from the provision of new fire protection facilities.
No Substantial Change from Previous An alysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project. As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in demand for fire protection facilities or services. Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units. The future construction of 114 additional dwelling units would not by itself result in the need for new or expanded fire protection facilities because the expected growth within the Annexation Area is anticipated
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 220
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-59 Lead Agency: City of Chino to occur gradually over a period of approximately 20 years and the CVFD is expected to be able accommodate the increased demand as it arises. Additionally, pursuant to Chapter 3.40 (Development Impact Fees) of the City’s Municipal Code, each of these dwelling units would be subject to the City’s Development Impact Fee (DIF), portions of which are used to provide funding for fire suppression facilities, vehicles, and equipment. Payment of DIF fees would offset the incremental increase in demand for fire protection services and facilities associated with future development within the Annexation Area. When combined with implementation of applicable GPU policies related to fire protection facilities and services, impacts associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in an y new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provi sion of new or physically altered police protection facilities, need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU would result in a need for up to 60 additional police officers by 2025, which would be accommodated by a new facility planned at the former Home Depot site, which is now constructed, and/or a new satellite station that may be located in The Preserve Specific Plan area.
The GPU EIR also cites GPU policies that would ensure the adequate provision of law enforcement facilities, including Policy P1 under Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS- 2.1 (directing the City to maintain adequate police staffing, performance levels, and facilities), and Policy P3 under Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-2.2 (requiring a development impact fee for new development for the provision of police services and facilities). The GPU EIR concludes that implementation of the GPU would result in a less -than- significant impact from the provision of new police facilities.
No Substantial Change fro m Previous Analysis: The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No development or construction would occur within the Annexation Area as part of the Project. As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in demand for police protection facilities or services. Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units. The future construction of 114 additional dwelling units would not by itself result in the need for new or expanded police protection facilities because the expected growth within the Annexation Area is anticipated to occur gradually over a period of approximately 20 years and the Police Department is expected to be able accommodate the increas ed demand as it arises . Additionally, pursuant to Chapter 3.40 (Development Impact Fees) of the City’s Municipal Code, each of these dwelling units would be subject to the City’s DIF, portions of which are used to provide funding for law enforcement facilities, vehicles, and equipment. Payment of DIF fees would offset incremental increase in demand for police protection services and facilities associated with future development within the Annexation Area . When combined with implementation of applicable GPU policies related to police protection facilities and services, impacts associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 221
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-60 Lead Agency: City of Chino impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities, need for new or physically altered school facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR indicated that the design capacity of schools serving the City would be 16,701 students with buildout of the K-7 school in The Preserve Specific Plan, which would be more than adequate to handle students that would be generated under buildout of the GPU. The GPU EIR also cites a number of GPU policies that would ensure the adequate provision of school facilities, including Public Facilities and Services Element Goal PFS-3 (directing the City to provide the highest possible level of educational services and facilities to serve new and existing development); Policies P1 and P2 under Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-3.1 (requiring coordination with the CVUSD to provide sufficient educational facilities, requiring concurrency between new development and the provision of school services , and directing the City to assist the CVUSD in implementing the Facilities Master Plan); and Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PFS-3.2, Policy P2 (requiring the reservation of land for new schools or the collection of school impact fees in accordance with State Law). The GPU EIR concludes that there would be a less -than-significant impact associated with the provision of school facilities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The Annexation Area is located within the boundaries o f the CVUSD. The nearest schools to the Annexation Area are: E. J. Marshall Elementary School, located approximately
0.4-mile east of the Annexation Area ; Ramona Junior High School, located approximately 0.4 -mile south of the Annexation Area ; and Don Anto nio Lugo High School, located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Annexation Area. The proposed Project evaluated herein would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries; the Project would not alter any school district boundaries or enrollment boundaries for individual schools. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project . As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in demand for school services or facilities.
Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately co uld be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units. The potential future construction of 114 additional dwelling units would not by itself result in the need for new or expanded school services or facilities – especially considering this growth is expected to occur gradually over a period of approximately 20 years, but could incrementally contribute to the ultimate need for new or expanded school facilities within the CVUSD area. However, potential future development within the Annexation Area and all other cumulative developments within the CVUSD service area would be required to contribute school impact fees pursuant to Government Code Section 65995-6. Pursuant to Section 65995(3)(h) of the California Government Code, the payment of statutory fees is “deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization as defined in Section 56021 or 56073, on
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 222
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-61 Lead Agency: City of Chino the provision of adequate school facilities.” Therefore, mandatory payment of school impact fees would ensure that the potential cumulatively-considerable impacts to school facilities and services associ ated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered par k facilities, need for new or physically altered park facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that buildout of the GPU would require between 368 -375 acres of total parkland to meet future population demands, while only 339 -345 acres were accommodated under the GPU.
However, GPU EIR indicated that the projected deficiency would be acc ommodated through leasing land in the Prado Basin for a park, along with leasing land from the ACOE for wilderness parks, trails, and habitat restoration.
In addition, the GPU EIR identified GPU policies that would address the need for additional parks and recreational facilities, including Policy 1 under Parks and Recreation Element Objective PR-1.1 (requiring the City to achieve and maintain a standard of 3 acres of parks per 1,000 Chino residents, and specifying the types of park facilities that may be accounted as part of the City’s park acreage totals). As such, the GPU EIR concludes that there would be a less-than-significant impact from the provision of parks and recreation facilities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Proj ect would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. Additionally, no parks or recreational facilities are proposed as part of the Proje ct. As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in demand for park facilities and would not result in any impacts due to the construction of recreational facilities.
Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexatio n Area by the GPU, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units, which, if developed, would increase the City’s population by approximately 370 persons (SRHA, 2023, p. 4). Based on the City’s park standard of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, future development within the Annexation Area could result in a demand for approximatel y 1.11 acres of additional parkland in the City over the approximately 20-year development horizon for the Annexation Area (370 residents x 3 acres/1, 000 residents = 1.11 acres).
Pursuant to Chapter 3.40 (Development Impact Fees) of the City’s Municipal Code, each of these dwelling units would be subject to the City’s DIF, portions of which are used to provide funding for public use facilities, including recreational facilities. With mandatory payment of fees, combined with implementation of applicable GPU policies, impacts to parks associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 223
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-62 Lead Agency: City of Chino Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
e) Would the Project resul t in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered library facilities, need for new or physically altered library facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR evaluated potential impacts associated with the provision of library facilities in the City. The GPU EIR identified a future demand of between 49,059 s.f. and 50,054 s.f. of library space in the City by 2025 to meet the future population demand. The GPU EIR notes that this demand would be met through collection of Development Impact Fees that would be used to fund the expansion of the curr ent library or to develop additional branch library to meet this demand. The GPU EIR also cites General Plan policies that would assure the adequate provision of library facilities within the City, including Public Facilities and Services Objective PFS-6.2 (requiring the provision of sufficient library services in the City of Chino), and associated Policies P1 and P2 (directing the City to work with the County to expand library services, establishing a ratio of 0.5 square feet of library space per resident, and requiring a development impact fee for new residential development in support of new library services and facilities). Although additional facilities would be needed to meet future population projections under the GPU, the GPU EIR indicates that pot ential environmental impacts from such additional facilities would be analyzed under separate environmental review when the specific goal and scale of the facilities is known. As a result, the GPU EIR concludes that impacts to library facilities would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Projec t. As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in library facilities or services.
Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and zoning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. Based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units. The future construction of 114 additional dwelling units would not by itself result in the need for new or expanded library facilities. If developed, the 114 additional residential dwelling units would increase the City’s population by approximately 370 persons (SRHA, 2023, p. 4) . Based on the City’s standard of 0.5 square feet (s.f.) of library space per resident , future development within the Annexation Area could result in the demand for approximately 185 s.f. of additional library space ; this additional demand for library space is expected to occur gradually over a period of approximately 20 years. Pursuant to Chapter 3.40 (Development Impact Fees) of the City’s Municipal Code, each of these dwelling units would be subject to the City’s DIF, portions of which are used to provide funding for library facilities. Payment of DIF fees would offset the incremental increase in demand for library facilities associated with future development within the Annexation Area . When combined with implementation of applicable GPU policies related to library facilities, impacts associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 224
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-63 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.16 RECREATION
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that buildout of the GPU would require between 368 -375 acres of total parkland to meet future population demands, while only 339 -345 acres were accommodated under the GPU.
However, GPU EIR indicated that the projected deficiency would be accommodated through leasing land in the Prado Basin for a park, along with leasing land from the ACOE for wilderness parks, trails, and habitat restoration.
In addition, the GPU EIR identified GPU policies that would address the need for additional parks and recreational facilities, including Policy 1 under Parks and Recr eation Element Objective PR-1.1 (requiring the City to achieve and maintain a standard of 3 acres of parks per 1,000 Chino residents, and specifying the types of park facilities that may be accounted as part of the City’s park acreage totals). As such, the GPU EIR concludes that there would be a less-than-significant impact due to the physical deterioration of parks and recreation facilities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the Project would not result in an increase in the area’s population such that substantial physical deterioration of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities would occur.
As indicated above under Response 4.15.d., and based on the analysis presented in the Project’s PFS (Technical Appendix A), vacant parcels within the Annexation Area ultimately could be developed with up to 114 additional residential dwelling units, which, if developed, would increase the City’s population by approximately 370 persons (SRHA, 2023, p. 6). This increase in population is expected to occur gradually over a period of approximately 20 years and would result in an incremental inc rease in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and other recreational facilities within the local area. Pursuant to Chapter 3.40 (Development Impact Fees) of the City’s Municipal Code, each of these dwelling units would be subject to the City’s DIF, portions of which are used to provide funding for public use facilities, including re creational facilities. With mandatory payment of fees,
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 225
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-64 Lead Agency: City of Chino combined with implementation of applicable GPU policies, the City would be able to accommodate the increase in population through the construction of new park facilities or expansion of existing facil ities. Accordingly, impacts due to the increase d use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities resulting in substantial physical deterioration would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that buildout of the GPU would require between 368 -375 acres of total parkland to meet future population demands, while only 339 -345 acres were accommodated under the GPU.
However, GPU EIR indicated that the projected deficiency would be accommodated through leasing land in the Prado Basin for a park, along with leasing land from the ACOE for wilderness parks, trails, and habitat restoration.
In addition, the GPU EIR identified GPU policies that would address the need for additional parks and recreational facilities, including Policy 1 under Parks and Recreation Element Objective PR-1.1 (requiring the City to achieve and maintain a standard of 3 acres of parks per 1,000 Chino residents, and specifying the types of park facilities that may be accounted as part of the City’s park acreage totals). As such, the GPU EIR concludes that there would be a less-than-significant impact from the construction or expansion of parks and recreation facilities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. No parks or recreational facilities are proposed as part of the Project, and no major park or recreational facilities are planned within the Annexation Area . Accordingly, the Project woul d not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment , and no impact would occur. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 226
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-65 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project c onflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR determined that with implementation of the GPU, all major intersections in the City would operate at level of service (LOS) D or better, consistent with the standard established in GPU Transportation Element Objective TRA-1.2, Policy P.1 to achieve an average LOS D or better at intersections and along roadway segments. As such, the GPU EIR concludes that impacts would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Proje ct. As such, the proposed Project has no potential to conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and no impact would occur. Although an additional 114 dwelling units could be developed on existing vacant parcels within the Annexation Area, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and z oning district classifications that apply within the Annexation Area, all such future development would be required to comply with all applicable programs, plans, ordinances, and policies addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bic ycle, and pedestrian facilities . Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 227
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-66 Lead Agency: City of Chino b) Would the Project c onflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
GPU EIR Finding: Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) was passed in 2013, which required that by July 1, 2020, a project ’s transportation projects must be evaluated based on a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) measure, instead of evaluating impacts based on LOS criteria. In January 2019, the Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to the CEQA Guidelines including the incorporation of the SB 743 modifications. The Guidelines changes were approved by the Office of Administrative Law and are now in effect. Therefore, as of July 1, 2020, LOS can no longer be the basis for determining an environmental effect under CEQA, and the analysis of impacts to transportation is now based on VMT. As this threshold of significance addressing VMT was not in place at the time the GPU EIR was certified, this threshold was not evaluated as part of the GPU EIR. Notwithstanding, the GPU ’s total VMT was assessed as part of the air quality impact analysis included as part of the GPU EIR. Thus, the GPU EIR contained sufficient information about projected total VMT associated with the GPU that with the exercise of reasonable diligence, information about the GPU’s potential effect due to VMT was readily available to the public.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis: Changes to the CEQA Guidelines were adopted in December 2018, which require all lead agencies to adopt VMT as a replacement for automobile delay -based LOS as the new measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects. This statewide mandate went into effect July 1, 2020, and was not in effect at the time the GPU EIR was certified in 2010. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(c) is clear that “[t]he provisions of [ Section 15064.3] shall apply prospectively as described in [CEQA Guidelines] section 15007.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15007(c) specifically states: “[i]f a document meets the content requirements in effect when the document is sent out for public review, the document shall not need to be revised to conform to any new c ontent requirements in Guideline amendments taking effect before the document is finally approved.” As noted above, the Guidelines changes with respect to VMT took effect on July 1, 2020, while the GPU EIR was certified on July 6, 2010. As such, and in a ccordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3(c) and 15007(c), revisions to the GPU EIR are not required under CEQA in order to conform to the new requirements established by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. Accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) , and n o impact would occur.
Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
c) Would the Project s ubstantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR noted that the City of Chino reviews all changes to the roadway system to ensure that plans follow standard policies and guidelines. The GPU EIR found that implementation of the GPU Transportation Element would not result in incr eased hazards due to design features or incompatible land uses, thereby resulting in a less-than-significant impact.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. Additionally, the Project would not involve any changes to the exi sting circulation network in the area, and would not include any design features that could substanti ally increase hazards. Although residential land uses could be constructed on vacant parcels within the Annexation Area in the future, these dwelling unit s would be developed on existing legal parcels and also would not involve changes to the existing roadway network.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 228
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-67 Lead Agency: City of Chino Additionally, the Annexation Area includes residential, agricultural, and public facilities land uses under existing conditions, and the dev elopment of additional dwelling units within the Annexation Area would not comprise a use that is incompatible from a safety standpoint with existing development in the area. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
d) Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR notes that all public and private streets, alleys, drives, and access ways in the City are reviewed by the CVFD for conformance with its design standards that ensure adequate emergency access throughout the City. As such, the GPU EIR conclu des that there would be a less -than-significant impact due to inadequate emergency access.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. Additionally, the Project would not involve any changes to the existing circulation network in the area. All parcels within the Annexation Area are currently served by existing improved roadways, and future development within the Annexation Area is not anticipated to adversely affect the existing roadway network.
Accordingly, the Annexation Area would be provided with adequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 229
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-68 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cul tural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape , sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
GPU EIR Finding: Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) was signed into law in 2014 and added the above-listed thresholds to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Thus, at the time the GPU EIR was certified in 2010, AB 52 was not in place and the GPU EIR did not specifically address these thresholds. Notwithstanding, the GPU EIR included an extensive analysis of potential impacts to cultural resources. As previously indicated herein in subsection 4.5 , the GPU EIR
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 230
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-69 Lead Agency: City of Chino found that implementation of Objective OSC -7.1, Policy P3 of the GPU’s Open Space and Conservation Element (requiring evaluation and appropriate treatment of any unknown archaeological or paleontological resources discovered during constr uction) and Objective OSC -7.1, Policy P4 (calling for the City to consult with the Native American community if Native American artifacts are discovered to ensure the respectful treatment of sacred places) would ensure that future developments within the C ity adequately protect known and previously undiscovered archaeological resources, thereby ensuring that impacts to archaeological resources would be less- than-significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The above-listed thresholds were added to Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines pursuant to AB 52. As noted above, AB 52 was signed into law in 2014 while the GPU EIR was certified on July 6, 2010. AB 52 requires tribal consultation for certain development projects and applies only to projects that have a notice of preparation or notice of negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration filed on or after July 1, 2015. As demonstrated by the analysis herein, the proposed Project is fully within the scope of analysis of the GPU EIR, and the Project would not trigger any of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR. As such, an Addendum to the GPU EIR has been prepared for the Project pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Project would not require a notice of preparation or notice of negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration. Therefore, the provisions of AB 52 are not applicable to the Project.
Notwithstanding the above, the Cit y was obligated to consult with local Native American tribes regarding the Project pursuant to Senate Bill 18 (SB 18). As part of the SB 18 consultation process, no Tribe provided evidence to the City indicating the presence of tribal cultural resources within the Annexation Area. Furthermore, t he proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the Project wou ld not directly result in impacts to tribal cultural resources. Subsection 4.5 provides an analysis of potential impacts to cultural resources (including tribal cultural resources). As concluded therein, and consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, although there is a potential for cultural resources, including tribal cultural resources, to occur beneath the soil surface, future development within the Annexation Area would be subject to GPU Objective OSC-
7.1, Policy P3 , which requires that if unknown archaeological resources are discovered during construction, the Planning Division should be notified immediately and construction should stop until an archaeologist evaluates the discovered resources and recommends appropriate action. In addition, future discretionary development projects within the Annexation Area would be subject to mandatory compliance with AB 52, which would require the City to consult with interested Native American tribes to determine the potential sensitivity of de velopment sites for tribal cultural resources, and to incorporate avoidance/protective measures as needed. With mandatory compliance with AB 52 and GPU Objective OSC -7.1, Policy P3, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources associated with future development within the Annexation Area would be less than significant.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 231
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-70 Lead Agency: City of Chino
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
New
Significant
Impact
More Severe
Impacts
Ability to
Substantially
Reduce
Previous
Significant
Impact
No Substantial
Change from
Previous
Analysis
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Would the P roject require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that buildout of the GPU would result in an increase in demand for 423 acre- feet per year (AFY) of potable water and an additional 239 AFY of recycled water, which would be accommodated by the City’s projected supplies of water. Additionally, the GPU EIR identified several GPU policies that would serve to reduce water demand within the City, including Public Services and Facilities Element Goal PFS-7, Objective PFS -7.1 and associated Policies P1 through P6 (generally requiring the provision of adequate water supply); and Public Services and Facilities Objective PFS-7.4 (subsequently renumbered as Objective PFS -7.5) and associated Policies P1 and P4 (generally requiring the use of recycled water to reduce potable water demands).
The GPU EIR concluded that although new facilities would be constructed pursuant to the City’s Water System
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 232
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-71 Lead Agency: City of Chino Master Plan (e.g. pipes, pumps, wells, reservoirs, treatme nt systems), technical evaluations would be performed on a project by project basis in order to understand project feasibility and any technically-based recommendations with respect to the operation of those facilities (e.g. well production limits in order to maintain groundwater level, etc.), including any necessary review under CEQA once the scope of such projects are known. As such, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts due to the construction of new or expanded water treatment facilities would be less than significant.
With respect to wastewater treatment facilities, the GPU EIR found that buildout of the GPU would result in an increased demand of between 10.5 and 10.7 mgd, which would not create a need for new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. Additionally, the GPU EIR identified several GPU policies that address wastewater treatment facilities, including Policies P1 and P2 under Public Services and Facility Objective PFS-9.1 (requiring the maintenance of wastewater and collection and conveyan ce infrastructure and requiring all new developments within the City must connect to the public wastewater collection system); Policies P2 and P3 under Objective PFS-
9.2 (directing the City to construct new wastewater conveyance facilities as needed, requiring development projects to construct all necessary collection lines, and requiring new development to demonstrate sufficient capacity for wastewater collection and treatment); and Objective PFS-9.3, Action A1 (directing the City to establish wastewater t reatment demand reduction standards for new development and redevelopment to reduce per capita and total demand for wastewater treatment). The GPU EIR concluded that impacts due to new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant.
The GPU EIR indicated that although the GPU would result in further urbanization of the City, the City’s Master Plan of Drainage identifies all storm drain deficiencies in Chino as of 1993. The GPU EIR indicated that future stormwater runoff facility upgrades would be implemented through the City’s Conditions of Approval and capital improvement projects. Additionally, the GPU EIR identified several GPU Goals, Objectives, and Policies that would serve to address the City’s stormwater drainage needs, including Policies P1 and P3 under Public Facilities and Services Element Goal PFS-10 (requiring the City to maintain stormwater runoff infrastructure in good condition, and directing the City to require local stormwater runoff drainage improvements to carry design-year runoff flows resulting from buildout of the GPU); Objective PFS-10.1 (directing the City to control stormwater runoff to protect against flooding, account for future development, and address environmental concerns); and Policies P1, P2, P3, and P4 under Objective PFS-11.1 (generally requiring the reduction of storm runoff, the implementation of BMPs, and ensuring new development is adequately served by stormwater runoff infrastructure) . As such, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts associated with storm drains would be less than significant.
The GPU EIR did not identify any s ignificant impacts associated with the construction of electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the Project would not directly require or result in the r elocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Althoug h additional residential land uses could be developed on existing vacant parcels within the Annexation Area in the future, the Annexation Area is largely developed under existing conditions with residential,
11.10.f
Ramona Francis Annexation
Packet Pg. 233
Addendum to City of Chino General Plan
Ramona Francis Annexation Environmental Impact Report
Prepared by: T&B Planning, Inc. Page 4-72 Lead Agency: City of Chino agricultural, and public facilities uses. As su ch, water, sewer, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities already are available to serve the Annexation Area , and future development within the Annexation Area only would require connections to these existing fac ilities within existing, improved roadway rights-of-way. Furthermore, because the proposed Project would not allow for any development that isn’t already allowed under existing conditions, the Project would not result in or require any new or expanded facilities for the provision of water or wastewater treatment services. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts not already analyzed in the GPU EIR or increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the GPU EIR.
b) Would sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? GPU EIR Finding: The GPU EIR found that buildout of the GPU would result in an increase in demand for 423 AFY of potable water and an additional 239 AFY of recycled water, which would be accommodated by the City’s projected supplies of water. Additionally, the GPU EIR identified several GPU policies that would serve to reduce water demand within the City, including Public Services and Facilities Element Goal PFS-7, Objective PFS- 7.1 and associated Policies P1 through P6 (generally requiring the provision of r eliable water supplies in the City); and Public Services and Facilities Objective PFS-7.4 (since renumbered as Objective PFS-7.5) and associated Policies P1 and P4 (generally promoting the use of recycled water to reduce potable water demand). As such, th e GPU EIR concluded that impacts due to insufficient water supplies would be less than significant.
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis : The proposed Project would consist of the annexation of 144.8 acres into the City of Chino boundaries. No new development or construction would be authorized with approval of the Project. As such, the Project would not directly result in an increase in demand for potable water.
Notwithstanding, residential land uses are planned for the Annexation Area by the GPU, and already allowed by the existing San Bernardino County Countywide Plan land use designations and San Bernardino County zoning district classifications that apply wi thin to the Annexation Area, and additional residential development could occur in the future. The MVWD’s and City of Chino’s UWMPs forecast water demands and supplies under normal, single-dry, and multiple- dry year conditions; assesses supply reliability; and describes methods of re ducing demands under potential water shortages. As documented in the MVWD UWMP (see Tables 7-2 through 7-4) and the City of Chino UWMP (see Tables 7-2 through 7-4), both the MVWD and City of Chino expect to have adequate water supply to meet their expected service demands (MVWD, 2021; City of Chino, 2021). The MVWD and City of Chino UWMPs are based, in part, on the land uses planned as part of the City’s and County’s General Plans. As previously indicated in Table 3-1, the land use designations that would apply to the Annexation Area with approval of the Project would be substantially similar to the existing San Bernardino County General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications, which were previously found by the Countywide Plan EIR (see Page 5.18- 41) and Yorba Villas EIR (see Appendix A, Page 72) to not result in near or long -term water shortages within the MVWD or City of Chino . Thus, the Project would n ot allow for a substantial increase in land use intensity that could exceed the growth assumptions of the M VWD or City of Chino UWMPs. As such, and consistent with the findings of the GPU EIR, the proposed Project is fully accounted for by the M VWD and City of Chino UWMPs.