Corona City Council
March 1, 2023

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY

OF CORONA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

FOR THE CITY OF CORONA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
ELEMENT REZONING PROGRAM UPDATE PROJECT;

ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND A

STATEMENT OF OVERIDDING CONSIDERATIONS

PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY ACT, ADOPTING A MITIGATION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND

TENTATIVELY APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
CITY’S GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE

DESIGNATION ON VARIOUS PROPERTIES TO ALLOW

CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL LAND USES CONSISTENT

WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT SITES INVENTORY AS
PART OF THE CYCLE 1 OF GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENTS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2023 (GPA2022-
0002).

WHEREAS, on June 3, 2020, the City Council of the City of Corona (“City”) adopted Resolution No. 2020-036 certifying a Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”) for the Corona General Plan Technical Update (SCH # 2018081039) (“General Plan Update”), made findings of fact and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and
WHEREAS, as noted above, Resolution No. 2020-036 included a Statement of Overriding Considerations following a determination that the benefits of the General Plan Update outweigh any significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts that remain after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2021, the City Council of the City of Corona (“City”) adopted Resolution No. 2021-121 adopting an Addendum to the Final EIR and approving GPA2021-001, an amendment to the City’s General Plan to update the Housing Element for the 6
th Cycle covering planning period 2021-2029 (“2021-2029 Housing Element Update”); and
WHEREAS, as part of the implementation of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, the City is required to accommodate the planning of a sufficient number of low- and moderate-income households in the City in order to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”), which allocates regional housing needs by income level among member jurisdictions within the Southern California Association of Governments (“SCAG”); and 2 WHEREAS, the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update includes an inventory or list of housing sites at sufficient densities to accommodate a specific number of units at various levels of affordability to satisfy the RHNA assigned to the City by SCAG (“Housing Sites Inventory”); and
WHEREAS, in order to accommodate development of low- and moderateincome units, the Housing Sites Inventory identifies certain properties that are intended to be rezoned to higher density residential or an Affordable Housing Overlay (“AHO”) zone, which is a new zoning designation that the City proposes to establish in order to create by-right development standards for affordable housing projects; and WHEREAS, the City also proposes to create development standards and architectural design guidelines for the AHO zone, which would cover existing properties that are developed with non-residential uses and would allow these properties to be redeveloped with residential land uses provided that a percentage of the housing units include low- and moderateincome housing; and WHEREAS, on January 23, 2023, the Planning and Housing Commission of the City of Corona (“Planning Commission”) conducted a duly noticed public hearing and recommended that the City Council of the City of Corona (“City Council”) approve GPA2022- 0002 as part of the General Plan Amendments for Cycle 1 for calendar year 2023 to amend the City’s General Plan to change the land use designation on various properties, as identified in Exhibits “C” and “D,” to make certain text changes and to allow certain residential land uses consistent with the Housing Sites Inventory (“GPA2022-0002”); and WHEREAS, in connection with and in addition to GPA2022-0002, the City also proposes to approve: (1) a zone text amendment to Title 17 (Zoning) of the Corona Municipal Code to establish regulations for the AHO zone (ZTA2023-0001); (2) an amendment to the South Corona Community Facilities Plan to change the designation on two acres located at 1220 W. Ontario Avenue and 5.40 acres located at 2880 California Avenue from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (CFPA2022-0002); (3) a change of zone on various properties to allow certain residential land uses consistent with the Housing Sites Inventory (CZ2022-0003); (4) an amendment to various specific plans to change the land use on certain properties to allow certain residential land uses consistent with the Housing Sites Inventory (SPA2022-0003); and (5) Resolution No. 2023-014 adopting the High Density Residential and Mixed-Use Objective Development Standards and Design Guidelines (collectively referred to herein as the “Housing Element Rezoning Project”); and
WHEREAS, on the basis of the initial study and pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”), and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et seq.) the City has determined that a Supplement to the Final EIR (“SEIR”) should be prepared pursuant to CEQA in order to evaluate proposed changes to the General Plan Update that was originally analyzed in the Final EIR; and 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Supplement to the Final EIR is the appropriate environmental document to analyze all potential adverse environmental impacts of the Housing Element Rezoning Project because only minor additions or changes are necessary to make the Final EIR adequately apply to the Housing Element Rezoning Project; and
WHEREAS, the initial study identified impacts related to Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Tribal Cultural Resources requiring a more detailed evaluation; and WHEREAS, the City issued a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") of a Draft SEIR (“Draft SEIR”) for the Housing Element Rezoning Project on or about July 1, 2022, and circulated the NOP for a 30- day public review period commencing July 1, 2022 and ending August 1, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Draft SEIR found that prior to mitigation, implementation of the Housing Element Rezoning Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise and Transportation; and WHEREAS, in the NOP, the City solicited comments from various public agencies, other entities, and members of the public; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2022, the City held a public scoping session meeting to further solicit comments on the scope of the Draft SEIR; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Availability for the Draft SEIR was released for public review and comment for a 45-day public review and comment period commencing September 19, 2022 and ending November 2, 2022; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15086, the City consulted with and requested comments from all responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory agencies and other interested parties during the 45-day public review and comment period; and WHEREAS, the City received one (1) comment letter, including emails, during the public comment period for the Draft SEIR; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21092.5, the City provided copies of the written responses to all commenting public agencies; and WHEREAS, on January 23, 2023, the Planning and Housing Commission of the City of Corona (“Planning Commission”) conducted a duly noticed public hearing to hear and consider evidence and testimony concerning GPA2022-0002 and the contents and sufficiency of the Draft SEIR, and to investigate and make findings in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, the Planning Commission received evidence and reports, including all written comments received during the 45-day public review period and 4 directed that a Final SEIR (defined below) be prepared for certification by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City has evaluated the comments received from public agencies and persons who reviewed the Draft SEIR and has prepared responses to the comments received during the public review period; and
WHEREAS, in conformance with the requirements of Sections 15131 and 15362(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared a Final Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Corona General Plan Housing Element Rezoning Program Update Project (SCH # 2022060732), consisting of all comments received during the public review and comment periods on the Draft SEIR, written responses to those comments, and revisions, if any, to the Draft SEIR (“Final SEIR”); and WHEREAS, in conformance with the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared, or caused to be prepared: (a) CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations relating to the Final SEIR, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full; and (b) a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full; and
WHEREAS, as contained herein, the City has endeavored in good faith to set forth the basis for its decision on GPA2022-0002; and
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing at which all persons wishing to testify in connection with GPA2022-0002 and the Final SEIR were heard and GPA2022-002 and the Final SEIR were comprehensively reviewed; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and comments of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors relating to GPA2022-0002, including the Final EIR, the Final SEIR, including the potential environmental impacts addressed in the Final SEIR, the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied by the City in the Final SEIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant environmental effects of GPA2022-0002 have been adequately evaluated; and
WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by the City Council pursuant to this Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence presented to it as a whole and the entirety of the administrative record for the Final SEIR, which are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full, and not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and
5 WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the City Council has heard, been presented with, reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including, but not limited to, the Final EIR, as revised by the Final SEIR, and all oral and written evidence presented to it during all the meetings and hearings, all of which are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full; and
WHEREAS, the Final SEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council and is deemed adequate for the purpose of making decisions on the merits of GPA2022- 0002; and
WHEREAS, no comments made in the public hearings conducted by the City or any additional information submitted to the City have produced substantial new information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CORONA, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. CEQA Findings. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final SEIR, the initial study and the administrative record for Housing Element Rezoning Project, including all written and oral evidence provided during the comment period. Based upon the facts and information contained in the whole record before it, including the Final SEIR, the initial study and the administrative record, including all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council, the City Council finds as follows:

A. The Final SEIR, initial study and administrative record have been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Corona Local CEQA Guidelines.

B. The Final SEIR and initial study contain a complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts associated with the Housing Element Rezoning Project and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.

C. Based upon the information contained in the Final SEIR, the City Council finds that the Final SEIR provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Housing Element Rezoning Project.

SECTION 2. Adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

The City Council hereby adopts the CEQA Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and which: (a) documents and supports the conclusion that even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures recommended in the Final SEIR, it is infeasible to reduce certain impacts of the Housing Element Rezoning Project to a level of insignificance; and (b) further sets forth the overriding 6 benefits of the Housing Element Rezoning Project, which outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts of the Housing Element Rezoning Project. Accordingly, the City Council finds and determines that the Housing Element Rezoning Project’s overriding benefits outweigh the Housing Element Rezoning Project’s unavoidable environmental impacts SECTION 3. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit “B”. Implementation of the Mitigation Measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is hereby made a condition of approval of GPA2022-0002.

SECTION 4. Certification of Final SIER Based on all the foregoing, the City Council hereby certifies the Final SEIR.

SECTION 5. General Plan Amendment Findings. Based on the entire administrative record before the City Council, including all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council, the City Council hereby makes and adopts the following findings:

A. GPA2022-0002 is in the public interest and would not be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare for the following reason:
(i) GPA2022-0002 plans for higher density residential development within the City’s High Quality Transit Area, which is intended and suited for transit- oriented development that supports urban density residential development that is within proximity to general commercial services and medical services.
(ii) GPA2022-0002 considers the land uses of the surrounding properties and proposes land uses that are consistent with the surrounding environment to avoid land use incompatibilities associated with development.

B. GPA2022-0002 is internally consistent with the elements of the General Plan, including the goals and polices stated therein, for the following reasons:
(i) GPA2022-0002 is consistent with Housing Goal H-1 because it establishes land use designations on certain properties that will help promote a balance of housing types for corresponding affordability levels, which will assist in meeting the demand for housing within all economic segments of the City.
(ii) GPA2022-0002 is consistent with Housing Policy H-1.3 because it provides sites for residential development, including sites for affordable housing, which will help ensure that the scarcity of land does not unduly increase the cost or decrease the availability of housing for all economic segments of the community.

SECTION 6. Tentative Approval of General Plan Amendment GPA2022-0002 The General Plan Amendment (GPA2022-0002) is hereby tentatively approved. The City’s General Plan shall be amended as shown in Exhibit “C” attached hereto and incorporated herein 7 by reference, subject to final approval of the General Plan Amendments for Cycle 1 of calendar year 2023.

SECTION 7. Tentative Approval of Land Use Map. The City Council hereby tentatively adopts the amendment to the City’s General Plan Land Use Map as set forth on the map attached hereto as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein by reference, subject to final approval of the General Plan Amendments for Cycle 1 of calendar year 2023.

SECTION 8. Final Approval. The General Plan Amendment GPA2022-0002 shall become effective upon final approval of the General Plan Amendments for Cycle 1 of calendar year 2023.

SECTION 9. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the findings set forth in this Resolution have been based are located at City of Corona City Hall, 400 S. Vicentia Avenue, Corona, California 92882. The custodian for these records is Joanne Coletta, Planning and Development Director. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6.

SECTION 10. A Notice of Determination shall be filed with the County of Riverside and the State Clearinghouse within 5 (five) working days of final approval of the Housing Element Rezoning Project.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1
st day of March, 2023.
________________________________________
Mayor of the City of Corona, California
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Corona, California
8 CERTIFICATION
I, Sylvia Edwards, City Clerk of the City of Corona, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Corona, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 1 st day of March, 2023, by the
following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Corona, California, this 1
st day of March, 2023.

City Clerk of the City of Corona, California
[SEAL]
A-1
EXHIBIT “A”

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

FOR THE

CITY OF CORONA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT REZONING PROGRAM

UPDATE PROJECT
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2022060732
[SEE ATTACHED FORTY-THREE (43) PAGES]
A-2

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Having received, reviewed and considered the Final SEIR and other information in the record of the proceedings, the City Council hereby adopts the following findings in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines:

Part 3.1: Findings regarding environmental effects of the proposed Project which are considered unavoidable significant impacts.

Part 3.2: Findings regarding environmental effects evaluated in the Final SEIR which can be avoided or substantially lessened to less than significant levels with implementation of the identified mitigation measures.

Part 3.3: Findings regarding environmental effects found to be less than significant.

Part 4: Findings regarding considerations that make alternatives analyzed in the Final SEIR infeasible.

Part 5: Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City Council certifies that these findings are based on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these findings, concerning the environmental issues identified and discussed in the Final SEIR. The City Council adopts the findings and the statements in Parts 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4 and 5 for the proposed Project.

In addition to the findings regarding environmental impacts and mitigation measures, Part 6, below, identifies the custodian and location of the record of proceedings, as required by CEQA.

Part 7 describes the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed Project As described in Part 7, the City Council hereby adopts the MMRP as set forth in Exhibit B.
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE
This statement of Findings of Fact addresses the environmental effects associated with the City of Corona General Plan Housing Element Rezoning Program Update Project (Project), located in Corona, California. These Findings are made pursuant to the CEQA under Sections 21081 and 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and Sections 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Cal. Code Regs. 15000, et. seq. The potentially significant impacts were identified in both the Draft SEIR and the Final SEIR, as well as additional facts found in the complete record of proceedings.

Public Resources Code 21081 and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines require that A-3
the lead agency prepare written findings for identified significant impacts, accompanied by a brief explanation for the rationale for each finding. The City of Corona is the lead agency responsible for preparation of the SEIR in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines states, in part, that:
a. No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

In accordance with Public Resource Code 21081 and Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, whenever significant impacts cannot be mitigated to a level below significance, the lead agency is required to balance, as applicable, the benefits of the proposed Project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the proposed Project. If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable." In that case, the decision-making agency may prepare and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines states that:
a. CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the proposed project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
b. When the lead agency approves a proposed project, which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Final SEIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final SEIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

A-4
c. If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the proposed project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. As required by CEQA, the City, in adopting these findings, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the proposed project. The City finds that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is incorporated by reference and made a part of these findings, meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the proposed project.

The Final SEIR for the proposed Project identified potentially significant effects that could result from Project implementation. However, the City Council finds that the inclusion of certain mitigation measures as part of the project approval will reduce most, but not all, of those effects to less than significant levels. Those impacts that are not reduced to less than significant levels are identified and overridden due to specific project benefits in a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

In accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council adopts these findings as part of its certification of the Final SEIR for the proposed Project. Pursuant to Section 21082.1(c)(3) of the Public Resources Code, the City Council also finds that the Final SEIR reflects the City's independent judgment as the lead agency for the proposed Project.

1.2 ORGANIZATION AND FORMAT OF FINDINGS
Section 1.0 contains a summary description of the proposed Project and background facts relative to the environmental review process. Section 2.0 discusses the CEQA finding of independent judgment. Section 3.0 identifies the impacts of the proposed Project that were studied in the SEIR. Section 3.1 of these Findings identifies the significant impacts of the proposed Project that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, even though all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the proposed project.

Section 3.2 identifies the potentially significant effects of the proposed Project that would be mitigated to a less than significant level with implementation of the identified mitigation measures. Section 3.3 identifies the proposed Project's potential environmental effects that were determined not to be significant and, therefore, do not require mitigation measures. Section 4.0 discusses the feasibility of Project alternatives. Section 7.0 discusses findings with respect to mitigation of significant adverse impacts, and adoption of the MMRP.

1.3 SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In accordance with California Government Code Section 65584, projected housing needs for each city and county in the Southern California region are prepared by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) under a process known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA allocates regional housing needs by income level among member jurisdictions. California law established the planning period for the current RHNA from A-5
June 30, 2021, to October 15, 2029.

Implementation of the Project is intended to accommodate the planning of low- and moderate-income households in the City, in accordance with the City’s recently adopted 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update. In addition to including goals, policies, and implementation programs regarding housing issues, housing elements must include an inventory or list of housing sites at sufficient densities to accommodate a specific number of units at various levels of affordability assigned to the City by SCAG. The Housing Element Update includes an inventory of properties that are intended to be rezoned to high density residential or an Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) zone in order to plan for low- and moderate-income units.

The AHO zone is a new zoning designation that the City proposes to establish in order to create by-right development standards for affordable housing projects. The City also proposes to create development standards and architectural design guidelines for the AHO zone, which would cover existing properties that are developed with non-residential uses. The AHO zone would allow these properties to be redeveloped with residential land uses should a percentage of the housing units include low- and moderate-income housing.

Refer to Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft SEIR for a complete description of the proposed Project.

1.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
CEQA states that the statement of project objectives should be clearly written and define the underlying purpose of the proposed project, in order to permit the development of a reasonable range of alternatives and aid the lead agency in making findings.

As provided by the City, the objectives of the proposed Project are to:
• Implement the 2021-2029 Housing Element Programs to provide adequate housing sites for all income levels within the City.
• Promote housing opportunities that support the City’s state mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
• Promote fair housing opportunities that encourage access to lower- and moderate-income housing.
• Promote safe and healthy housing opportunities to discourage overcrowding.

1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
Initial Study: To determine the number, scope and extent of environmental issues, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study (IS) to inform agencies and the general public that a SEIR was being prepared. The NOP was circulated between July 1, 2022, and August 1, 2022, for the statutory 30-day public review period. The City invited comments on the scope and content of the document, and participation at a public scoping meeting on July 20, 2022, at Corona City Hall Multi-Purpose Room. During the public comment period for the NOP, A-6
four comment letters were received regarding the proposed Project’s Initial Study and none were received during the public scoping meeting.

Draft SEIR: In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, a Draft EIR was prepared to address the potential significant environmental effects associated with the proposed project identified during the NOP process. Based on the NOP and Initial Study scoping process, the EIR addressed the following potential significant environmental issues:
• Air Quality • Recreation
• Energy • Noise
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Transportation
• Land Use and Planning • Tribal Cultural Resources
• Public Services
The Draft SEIR was released for public and agency review for a 45-day period, from September 19, 2022, to November 2, 2022. During the Draft EIR public review period, the City received one comment letter.

Final SEIR:

Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the lead agency responsible for the preparation of an SEIR evaluate comments on environmental issues and prepare a written response addressing each of the comments. The intent of the Final SEIR is to provide a forum to address comments pertaining to the information and analysis contained within the Draft SEIR, and to provide an opportunity for clarifications, corrections, or minor revisions to the Draft EIR as needed.

The Final SEIR assembles in one document all of the environmental information and analysis prepared for the proposed Project, including comments on the Draft SEIR and responses by the City to those comments.

Pursuant to Section 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Final SEIR consists of the following:
a. The Draft SEIR, including all of its appendices;
b. The Response to Comments Document, which includes a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, copies of all letters received by the City during the Draft SEIR public review period, and responses to the comments; and c. Any other information added by the lead agency.

1.6 ABSENCE OF SIGNFICANT NEW INFORMATION
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requires that a lead agency recirculate an EIR for further review and comment when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of a Draft EIR, but before certification of the Final EIR. New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives A-7
the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the proposed project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the project proponent declines to implement. Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR.

The Guidelines provide examples of significant new information under this standard, which include the following:

1. A new significant environmental impact that would result from the proposed project (or any alternative) or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.

2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.

3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the proposed project (or an alternative), but the project's proponents decline to adopt it.

4. The Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

Having reviewed all the information in the record, the City Council finds that no significant new information has been added to the Final SEIR since public notice was given of the availability of the Draft SEIR. No new or substantial changes to the Draft SEIR were proposed as a result of the public comment process. The Final SEIR responds to comments and does not make any technical changes, clarifications or additions to the Draft SEIR. There are no changes, clarifications, or additions to the Draft DEIR which would identify any new significant impacts or substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impacts, and there are no new mitigation measures included that would have a potentially significant impact. Therefore, the City Council finds that recirculation of the SEIR is not required.

1.7 DIFFERENCES OF OPINION REGARDING THE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT In making its determination to certify the Final SEIR and to approve the proposed Project, the City Council recognizes that a range of technical and scientific opinion exists with respect to certain environmental issues. The City Council acknowledges that it has acquired an understanding of the range of this technical and scientific opinion by its review of the Draft SEIR as well as testimony, letters, and reports regarding the Final SEIR and its own experience and expertise in these environmental issues. The City Council acknowledges that it has reviewed and considered, as a whole, the evidence and analysis presented in the Draft SEIR, the evidence and analysis presented in the Final SEIR, the information submitted on the Final SEIR, and the reports prepared by the experts who prepared the SEIR, by the City’s consultants, and by staff, addressing those comments. The City Council acknowledges that it has gained a comprehensive and well-rounded understanding of the environmental issues presented by the proposed project.

The City Council acknowledges that in turn, this understanding has enabled the City Council to make its decisions after weighing and considering the various viewpoints on these important issues. The City Council accordingly certifies that its findings are based on full appraisal of all of the evidence contained in the Final SEIR, as well as the evidence and other information in the A-8
record addressing the Final SEIR.
2 CEQA FINDING OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT
The Final SEIR reflects the City’s independent judgment. The City has exercised independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its own environmental consultant in the preparation of the SEIR, as well as reviewing, analyzing and revising material prepared by the consultant.

Having received, reviewed, and considered the information in the Final SEIR, as well as any and all other information in the record, the City Council hereby makes findings pursuant to and in accordance with Sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. 3 FINDINGS OF FACT

3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT WHICH ARE CONSIDERED

UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT IMAPCTS
This section identifies the significant unavoidable impact that requires a statement of overriding considerations to be issued by the City, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, if the proposed Project is approved. Based on the analysis contained in the Final SEIR, the following impact has been determined to be significant and unavoidable:
• Air Quality: The proposed Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable AQMP; would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of VOCs, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 for which the project region is non-attainment under applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard; and would contribute to elevated levels of TACs in the air basin. Additionally, the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative air quality impact. Therefore, impacts related to air quality would remain significant and unavoidable as noted in the General Plan EIR.
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Implementation of the proposed Project may not meet the long-term greenhouse gas reduction goal under Executive Order S-03-05 and would also result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative greenhouse gas emission impact. Therefore, impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions would remain significant and unavoidable as noted in the General Plan EIR. • Noise: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in impacts with respect to temporary construction noise and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as noted in the General Plan EIR.
• Transportation: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in increase in VMT from existing conditions and would also result in a cumulative considerable contribution to a significant transportation impact, and therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as noted in the General Plan EIR.

A-9

3.1.1 Project Impact Air Quality 1 (AIR-1)
An evaluation of the Project-specific and cumulative impact on air quality associated with Project implementation is found in Section 3.1, Air Quality, of the Draft SEIR.

Project Impact AIR-1: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The SCAQMD released its Draft 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in May 2022; however, the most current adopted plan is the 2016 AQMP. The two principal criteria for evaluating conformance with the AQMP are:

1. Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP.

2. Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay attainment of air quality standards.

For Criterion 1, the City of Corona 2019 General Plan Update EIR found that the General Plan Update would result in higher population and lower employment for the City of Corona compared to the SCAG projections. Thus, it would not be consistent with projections used in estimating emissions in the 2016 AQMP. The General Plan EIR concluded that once the General Plan Update was adopted and the AQMP revised, SCAG and SCAQMD would incorporate the revised growth projections in their regional planning projections and the General Plan Update would become consistent with the AQMP. However, until that time, the full buildout of the General Plan Update would not be consistent with the AQMP. The 2022 Draft AQMP presumably includes the General Plan Update growth projections in its emissions inventory; however, the population growth associated with future residential development resulting from Project implementation would increase the growth projections slightly so that full buildout of the General Plan with Project implementation would not be consistent with the AQMP.

For Criterion 2, the emissions from the General Plan Update would contribute cumulatively to the nonattainment designations in the Southern California Air Basin (SoCAB), which would result in a significant air quality impact and not be consistent with the AQMP under the second criterion. Overall, buildout of the General Plan Update including Project implementation would still result in long-term emissions that exceed daily SCAQMD thresholds.

As such, future development resulting from Project implementation would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment status in the SoCAB, which would result in a significant air quality impact and not be consistent with the AQMP under the second criterion.

Project implementation would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable AQMP and would result in a significant impact. Implementation of General Plan Update EIR Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 would slightly reduce impacts; however, impacts would not be reduced to below the threshold of significance, and the impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, as noted in the General Plan Update EIR.

Findings for Impact AIR-1: The City Council finds that the Project-specific air quality A-10
impacts related to the implementation of air quality plans will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified Project-specific air quality impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.2 Project Impact Air Quality 2 (AIR-2)
Project Impact AIR-2: 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? To result in a less than significant impact, the following criteria must be true:

1. Regional analysis: emissions of nonattainment pollutants must be below the SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds.

2. Summary of projections: the project must be consistent with current air AQMPs including control measures and regulations. This is an approach consistent with Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Due to the scale of development associated with future Project implementation, construction emissions would exceed SCAQMD regional significance thresholds, which would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. As discussed in the 2019 General Plan Update EIR, air quality emissions will be addressed on a project-by-project basis to determine if future individual development projects consistent with the rezoning and AHO would exceed the SCAQMD short-term regional construction emissions.

General Plan Policy ER-12.13 would require the implementation of best practices to control fugitive dust emissions from construction, and General Plan Policy HC-2.5 would require the preparation of a technical air quality study for all new development projects to assess potential impacts. While individual development projects may not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, the construction-related regional air quality impacts of development associated with future development projects resulting from Project implementation would be potentially significant, similar to impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan Update. The General Plan includes many policies that would help to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants and implementation of General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 would help to reduce impacts, but not to a less than significant level.

Findings for Impact AIR-2: The City Council finds that air quality impacts related to the cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified Project-specific air quality impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific A-11
overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.3 Project Impact Air Quality 3 (AIR-3)
Project Impact AIR-3: Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Future construction associated with Project implementation would occur over the same timeframe as the General Plan Horizon Year of 2040 or longer, through smaller individual development projects each with its own construction timeframe and equipment. Like the General Plan Update EIR, the proposed Project’s potential future development and redevelopment could occur close to existing sensitive receptors. Future development projects that would be accommodated by Project implementation have the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Construction equipment exhaust combined with fugitive particulate matter emissions has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of criteria air pollutant emissions and result in a significant impact.

While the implementation of applicable General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 would serve to reduce the impact, on a regional basis, Project implementation would contribute to elevated levels of toxic air contaminants in the air basin; as such, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Findings for Impact AIR-3: The City Council finds that the Project-specific air quality impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified Project-specific air quality impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.4 Project Impact Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1 (GHG-1) An evaluation of the Project-specific and cumulative impact on greenhouse gas emissions associated with Project implementation is found in Section 3.3, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the Draft SEIR.

Project Impact GHG-1: Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Buildout of the proposed project would result in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the Project implementation horizon consistent with the General Plan of 2040 or greater. The proposed Project would implement zoning changes that would permit future additional dwelling units and population to the current growth projections beyond what was anticipated from the 2019 General Plan Update. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a reduction in GHG emissions in horizon year 2040 from existing baseline and is projected to meet the GHG reduction target established under SB 32; however, it may not meet the long-term GHG A-12
reduction goal under EO S-03-05. Accordingly, this is a potentially significant impact. The City would continue to implement General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure GHG-1, which requires the City to track and monitor the City’s GHG emissions and update the CAP every five years.

However, the General Plan Update EIR identified that at this time there is no plan past 2030 that achieves the long-term GHG reduction goal established under EO S-03-05, and there are currently no additional statewide measures available to help the City meet the goal. Therefore, impacts related to future Project implementation would continue to be significant and unavoidable even with the continued incorporation of General Plan Update EIR Mitigation Measure GHG-1, as noted in the General Plan Update EIR.

Findings for Impact GHG-1: The City Council finds that the Project-specific GHG emissions impacts related to the generation of emissions will remain significant and unavoidable.

Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified Project-specific GHG impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.5 Project Impact Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3 (GHG-3) Project Impact GHG-3: Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative greenhouse gas emission impact? GHG impacts are a cumulative impact. On their own, GHG emissions from one project cannot result in changes in climatic conditions; therefore, the emissions from one project must be considered in the context of their contribution to cumulative global emissions, which is a significant cumulative impact. As discussed above, Project would be consistent with the City’s CAP and other regulations related to the reduction of GHG emissions. However, the General Plan Update EIR identified that at this time there is no plan past 2030 that achieves the long-term GHG reduction goal established under EO S-03-05, and there are currently no additional statewide measures available to help the City meet the goal. As such, this impact was conservatively determined to be significant and unavoidable, even though it would be less than significant with respect to its SB 32 reduction targets and with respect to year 2040. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be consistent with best practices for reducing GHGs through the incorporation of greater energy efficiency, higher densities, and locating future residential development predominantly in a High Quality Transit Area (HQTA). Other projects in the region and the State would also have to show consistency with local and State GHG reduction plans and comply with the Title 24 and CalGreen requirements. However, since the proposed Project cannot demonstrate how it would meet the long-term 2050 reduction goal, GHG impacts would be conservatively considered to have a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative GHG impact.

Findings for Impact GHG-3: The City Council finds that cumulatively considerable greenhouse gas emissions impacts will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or A-13
other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified cumulative GHG impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.6 Project Impact Noise 1 (NOI-1)
An evaluation of the Project-specific and cumulative impact on noise associated with Project implementation is found in Section 3.5, Noise, of the Draft SEIR.

Project Impact NOI-1: Would the Project result in 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?
Construction noise is a major source of temporary noise within the City and would continue to be so regardless of whether or not the proposed Project is implemented. Noise levels near individual future construction sites resulting from Project implementation would not be substantially different from what they would be under the existing planning protocol. All development projects in the City would still be subject to the time restrictions listed in the City of Corona Municipal Code and the requirements contained within General Plan Update EIR Mitigation Measure N-1. Therefore, the impact of future residential development resulting from Project implementation with respect to temporary construction noise would remain significant and unavoidable, as noted in the General Plan Update EIR.

Findings for Impact NOI-1: The City Council finds that the Project-specific temporary construction noise impacts will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified Projectspecific construction noise impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.7 Project Impact Transportation 2 (TRA-2)
An evaluation of the Project-specific and cumulative impact on transportation associated with Project implementation is found in Section 3.8, Transportation, of the Draft SEIR.

Project Impact TRA-2: Would the Project conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and City guidelines state that projects located along a HQTA may be assumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact on VMT because they may improve job-housing balance and/or otherwise generate less vehicle miles traveled (VMT). OPR guidelines also recognize that projects with a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis to find a less than significant impact on VMT than developments located outside of a HQTA; however, the City does not currently include affordable housing as a screening criterion. Since research indicates that low-income A-14
earners generate less household VMT overall, affordable housing is more likely to be found to have a less than significant transportation impact.

The VMT Evaluation prepared for the Project found that the majority of Project parcels are located within a HQTA and, therefore, are exempt from VMT analysis due to an assumption of a less than significant transportation impact. Additionally, the remaining AHO and rezone parcels not located within a TPA are recognized by the OPR and SCAG as screened out of VMT analysis, are presumed to generate less household VMT that the uses being replaced or are located within low VMT generating traffic analysis zones. Therefore, they are likely to have a less than significant transportation impact. However, the General Plan EIR identified that buildout would result in an increase in VMT from existing conditions and would have a potentially significant impact.

The General Plan EIR identified that future development projects consistent with the General Plan would need to consider transportation demand management (TDM) consistent with those identified in the City’s Circulation Element such as TDM techniques which include incentives to use transit, incentives to form carpools, and making home, work, and shopping closer together to shorten travel distances. The General Plan EIR identified Mitigation Measure T-1 to lessen impacts which would require the City to consider a VMT offset program to offset any increase project-level VMT generated by Project implementation. However, because the effectiveness of TDM measures included in the General Plan and the feasibility of a VMT offset program has not been determined, the General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Therefore, though Project implementation would have a less than significant impact on VMT without the incorporation of mitigation, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as noted in the General Plan EIR.

Findings for Impact TRA-2: The City Council finds that the Project-specific VMT impacts will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified Project-specific VMT impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.8 Project Impact Transportation 3 (TRA-3)
Project Impact TRA-3: Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative transportation impact? The geographic setting for cumulative impacts related to transportation is the City and the regional roadway network surrounding it. Development associated with the implementation of the proposed Project, when combined with cumulative projects, could result in cumulatively considerable transportation impact. Future residential development associated with Project implementation would be required to comply with all applicable programs, plans, ordinances, and policies addressing the circulation system, such as the City’s General Plan and SCAG’s RTP/SCS, and, as such, this impact would be less than significant. Future residential A-15
development associated with Project implementation, in conjunction with cumulative projects, would also require transportation evaluations and compliance with all applicable regulations, on a project-by-project basis. Therefore, there would be no cumulatively considerable impact with respect conflicting with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation systems, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

The VMT Evaluation completed for the Project identified that Project implementation would be consistent with the goals of the SCAG’s RTP/SCS. Furthermore, the VMT Evaluation identified that Project implementation within the proposed AHO and rezone areas would be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. Since the Project would have a less than significant impact related to VMT at the Project level, the Project would have a less than significant impact at the cumulative level per OPR’s Technical Advisory (OPR 2018). However, since the General Plan EIR determined that the effectiveness of TDM measures included in the General Plan and the feasibility of a VMT offset has not yet been determined, this impact would conservatively be considered a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative transportation impact.

Findings for Impact TRA-3: The City Council finds that the cumulative VMT impacts will remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, make infeasible the alternatives identified in the SEIR and the identified cumulative VMT impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding considerations (see Statement of Overriding Considerations).

3.1.9 Mitigation Measures for Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Even with the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions and noise would remain significant and unavoidable:
• AIR-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
• AIR-2: 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?
• AIR-3: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations
• GHG-1: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? • NOI-1: Would the project result in 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?
A-16
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Project proponents of new development projects shall incorporate mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities.

Mitigation measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents/plans (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to the City and shall be verified by the City’s Development Services Division. Mitigation measures to reduce construction related emissions could include, but are not limited to:
• Requiring fugitive-dust control measures that exceed SCAQMD’s Rule 403, such as:
o Use of nontoxic soil stabilizers to reduce wind erosion. o Applying water every four house to active soil-disturbing activities. o Tarping and/or maintaining a minimum of 24 inches of freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials.
o Using construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 3 (model year 2006 or newer) or Tier 4 (model year 2008 or newer) emission limits, applicable for engines between 50 and 750 horsepower.
o Ensuring that construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained to the manufacturer’s standards.
o Limiting nonessential idling of construction equipment to no more than five consecutive minutes.
o Limiting onsite vehicle travel speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. o Installing wheel washers for all existing trucks or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the project area.
o Using Super-Compliant VOC paints for coating of architectural surfaces whenever possible. A list of Super-Compliant architectural coating manufacturers can be found on the SCAQMD’s website at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/planning/ architectural-coatings/super-compliant-manf-list.pdf?sfvrsn=71.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Project proponents of new development projects shall incorporate mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions during operational activities.

Mitigation measures shall be included on construction drawings associated with the project’s permit. Mitigation measures to reduce long-term emissions could include, but are not limited to the following:
• For site-specific development that requires refrigerated vehicles, the construction documents shall demonstrate an adequate number of electrical service connections at loading docks for plug-in of the anticipated number of refrigerated trailers to reduce idling time and emissions.

A-17
• Applicants for manufacturing and light industrial uses shall consider energy storage and combined heat and power in appropriate applications to optimize renewable energy generation systems and avoid peak energy use.
• Site-specific developments with truck delivery and loading areas and truck parking spaces shall include signage as a reminder to limit idling of vehicles while parked for loading/unloading in accordance with California Air Resources Board Rule 2845 (13 CCR Chapter 10 § 2485).
• Provide changing/shower facilities as specific in Section A5.106.4.3 of the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures).

Provide bicycle parking facilities per Section A4.106.9 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code.
• Provide preferential parking spaces for low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles per Section A5.106.5.1 of the CALGreen Code (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures).
• Provide facilities to support electric charging stations per Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) and Section A5.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures of the CALGreen Code.
• Applicant-provided appliances shall be Energy Star-certified appliances or appliances of equivalent energy efficiency (e.g., dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers). Installation of Energy Star-certified or equivalent appliances shall be verified by Building and Safety during plan check.
• Applicants for future development projects along existing and planned transit routes shall coordinate with the City of Corona and Riverside Transit to ensure that bus pads and shelter improvements are incorporated, as appropriate.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: The City of Corona shall update the Climate Action Plan (CAP) every five years to ensure the City is monitoring the plan’s progress toward achieving the City’s GHG reduction target and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified level. The update shall consider a trajectory consistent with the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goal established under Executive Order S-03-05 for year 2050 and the latest applicable statewide legislative GHG emission reduction that may be in effect at the time of the CAP update (e.g., Senate Bill 32 for year 2030). The CAP update shall include the following:
• GHG inventories of existing and forecast year GHG levels • Tools and strategies for reducing GHG emissions to ensure a trajectory with the longterm GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05 • Plan implementation guidance that includes, at minimum, the following components consistent with the proposed CAP:

A-18
o Administration and Staffing
o Finance and Budgeting
o Timelines for Measure Implementation
o Community Outreach and Education
o Monitoring, Reporting, and Adaptive Management Tracking Tools Mitigation Measure N-1: Construction contractors shall implement the following measures for construction activities conducted in the City. Construction plans submitted to the City shall identify these measures on demolition, grading, and construction plans submitted to the City. The City Corona Public Works Department shall verify that grading, demolition, and/or construction plans submitted to the City include these notations prior to issuance of demolition, grading and/or building permits.
• During the active construction period, equipment and trucks used for project construction shall utilize the best available noise control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds), wherever feasible.
• Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers and hoe rams) shall be hydraulic- or electric-powered wherever feasible. Where the use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used along with external noise jackets on the tools. • Stationary equipment such as generators and air compressors shall be located as far as feasible from noise-sensitive uses.
• Stockpiling shall be located as far as feasible from noise-sensitive receptors. • Construction traffic shall be limited—to the extent feasible—to approved haul routes established by the City.
• Prior to the start of construction activities, a sign shall be posted at the entrance(s) to the job site, clearly visible to the public, which includes permitted construction days and hours, as well as the contact information of the City’s and contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint.

If the authorized contractor’s representative receives a complaint, they shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City. • Signs shall be posted at the job site entrance(s), within the on-site construction zones, and along queueing lanes (if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling.

All other equipment shall be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes. • During the entire active construction period and to the extent feasible, the use of noiseproducing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only. The construction manager shall be responsible for adjusting A-19
alarms based on the background noise level, or to utilize human spotters when feasible and in compliance with all safety requirements and laws. • When construction noise is predicted to exceed established noise standards and when the anticipated construction duration is two years or more, contractors shall erect temporary noise barriers, where feasible.

3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS EVALUATED IN THE FINAL EIR WHICH CAN

BE AVOIDED OR SUBSTANTIALLY LESSENED TO LESS THAN

SIGNIFICANT LEVELS WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IDENTIFIED

MITIGATION MEASURES
This section identifies significant adverse impacts of the proposed Project that require findings to be made pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. Based on information in the Final SEIR, the City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, adoption and implementation of the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce the identified significant impacts to less than significant levels. Based on the analysis contained in the Final SEIR, the following impacts have been determined to be impacts that can be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of the mitigation measures set forth below:
• BIO-1: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or regulated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • BIO-2: Would the project 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
• BIO-3: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? • CUL-1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as identified in Section 15064.5?
• CUL-2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
• GEO-6: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
• MIN-1: Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? A-20
• NOI-2: Would the project exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
• TCR-1: 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) listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, 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 of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?

3.2.1 Resources
Impact BIO-1: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or regulated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Applicants for future development projects shall include a biological resources survey if it has been determined that the site in its existing condition may contain biological habitat or species. The biological resources survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The biological resources survey shall include, but not be limited to:
• An analysis of available literature and biological databases, such as the California Natural Diversity Database, to determine sensitive biological resources that have been reported historically from the proposed development project vicinity. • A review of current land use and land ownership within the proposed development project vicinity.
• An assessment and mapping of vegetation communities present within the proposed development project vicinity.
• An evaluation of potential local and regional wildlife movement corridors. • A general assessment of potential jurisdictional areas, including wetlands and riparian habitats.

Habitat Assessment. If the proposed development project site supports vegetation communities that may provide habitat for plant or wildlife species, a focused habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the potential for special status plant and/or animal species to occur within or adjacent to the proposed A-21
development project area. Adjoining properties should also be surveyed where direct or indirect project effects, such as those from fuel modification or herbicide application, could potentially extend off-site. If feasible, the habitat assessment should be conducted during non-drought years. Vegetation communities should be classified and mapped to the alliance or association level using classification methods and membership rules according to A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd edition (2009).

Focused Surveys. If one or more special status species has the potential to occur within the proposed development project area, focused species surveys shall be conducted to determine the presence/absence of these species to adequately evaluate potential direct and/or indirect impacts to these species. The focused survey shall record the location and boundary of special status species by use of global positioning system (GPS). The number of individuals in each special status plant population shall be provided as counted (if population is small) or estimated (if population is large). If applicable, information about the percentage of individuals in each life stage, such as seedlings vs. reproductive individuals, should be provided. If feasible, images of the target species and representative habitats should be included to support information and descriptions.

Preconstruction Surveys. If construction activities are not initiated immediately after focused surveys have been completed, additional preconstruction special status species surveys may be required to ensure impacts are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. If preconstruction activities are required, a qualified biologist would perform these surveys as required for each special status species that is known to occur or has a potential to occur within or adjacent to the proposed development project area.

Biological Resources Report. The results of the biological survey for proposed development projects with no significant impacts may be presented in a biological survey letter report. For proposed development projects with significant impacts that require mitigation to reduce the impacts to below a level of significance, the results of the biological survey shall be presented in a biological technical report.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2. If sensitive biological resources are identified within or adjacent to the proposed development project area, the construction limits shall be clearly flagged to ensure impacts to sensitive biological resources are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. Prior to implementing construction activities, a qualified biologist shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the construction limits and sensitive resources to be avoided.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3. If sensitive biological resources are known to occur within or adjacent to the proposed development project area, a project-specific contractor training program shall be developed and implemented to educate project contractors on the sensitive biological resources within and adjacent to the proposed development project area and measures being implemented to avoid and/or minimize impacts to these species. A qualified biologist shall develop and implement the contractor training program.

A-22
Mitigation Measure BIO-4. If sensitive biological resources are present within or adjacent to the proposed development project area and impacts may occur from implementation of construction activities, a qualified biological monitor may be required during a portion or all of the construction activities to ensure impacts to the sensitive biological resources are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. The specific biological monitoring requirements shall be evaluated on a project-by-project basis. The qualified biological monitor shall be approved by the City on a project-by-project basis based on applicable experience with the sensitive biological resources that may be impacted.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7. The City of Corona shall require applicants for future development projects to contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a preconstruction general nesting bird survey within all suitable nesting habitats that may be impacted by active construction during general avian breeding season (February 1 through August 31). The preconstruction surveys shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to initiation of construction. If no active avian nests are identified within the proposed development project area or within a 300-foot buffer of the proposed development project area, no further mitigation is necessary. If active nests of avian species covered by the Fish and Game Code are detected within the proposed development project area or within a 300-foot buffer of the proposed development project area, construction shall be halted until the young have fledged, until a qualified biologist has determined the nest is inactive, or until appropriate mitigation measures that respond to the specific situation have been developed and implemented in consultation with the regulatory agencies. Based on the discretion of the qualified biologist, the 300-foot buffer may be expanded as appropriate to the species.

Findings for Impact BIO-1: Mitigation Measure BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, and BIO-7 are required to reduce Project-specific impacts biological resources. The purpose of these measures to is to avoid any future impacts to biological resources and habitats. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to biological resources.

Impact BIO-2: Would the project 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-4, outlined above, is required.

Findings for Impact BIO-2: Mitigation Measure BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, and BIO-4 are required to reduce Project-specific impacts biological resources, with respect to riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities. The purpose of these measures to is to avoid any future A-23
impacts to biological resources and habitats. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to biological resources.

Impact BIO-3: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Mitigation Measure BIO-5. The City of Corona shall require applicants of development project that have the potential to affect jurisdictional resources to contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a jurisdictional delineation following the methods outlined in the 1987 USACE Wetland Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 2008) to map the extent of wetlands and non-wetland waters, determine jurisdiction, and assess potential impacts. The results of the delineation shall be presented in a wetland delineation report and shall be incorporated into the CEQA document(s) required for approval and permitting of the proposed development project.

Applicants of development projects that have the potential to impact jurisdictional features, as identified in the wetland delineation letter report, shall obtain permits and authorizations from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and/or Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The regulatory agency authorization(s) would include impact avoidance and minimization measures as well as mitigation measures for unavoidable impacts. Specific avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures for impacts to jurisdictional resources shall be determined through discussions with the regulatory agencies during the proposed development project permitting process and may include monetary contributions to a mitigation bank or habitat creation, restoration, or enhancement.

Findings for Impact BIO-3: Mitigation Measure BIO-5 is required to reduce Projectspecific impacts biological resources, with respect to wetlands. The purpose of these measures to is to avoid any future impacts to biological resources and habitats. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to biological resources.

3.2.2 Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as identified in Section 15064.5? Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Prior to any construction activities that may affect A-24
historical resources (i.e., structures 45 years or older), a historical resources assessment shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history.

This shall include a records search to determine if any resources that may be potentially affected by the project have been previously recorded, evaluated, and/or designated in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), or Corona Register of Historic Resources. Following the records search, the qualified architectural historian or historian shall conduct a reconnaissance-level and/or intensive-level survey in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) guidelines to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that may be potentially affected by the proposed project. Pursuant to the definition of a historical resource under CEQA, potential historical resources shall be evaluated under a developed historic context.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2. To ensure that projects requiring the relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of a historical resource not impair its significance, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties shall be used to the maximum extent possible. The application of the standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the PQS. Prior to any construction activities that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of character-defining features and construction activities shall be provided to the City of Corona.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3. If a proposed project would result in the demolition or significant alteration of a historical resource, it cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, recordation of the resource prior to construction activities will assist in reducing adverse impacts to the resource to the greatest extent possible.

Recordation shall take the form of Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), or Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS) documentation, and shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the PQS. Documentation shall include an architectural and historical narrative; medium- or large-format black and white photographs, negatives, and prints; and supplementary information such as building plans and elevations, and/or historic photographs. Documentation shall be reproduced on archival paper and placed in appropriate local, state, or federal institutions. The specific scope and details of documentation would be developed at the project level.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4. If cultural resources that are eligible for listing to the NRHP, CRHR, or Corona Register of Historic Resources are identified within or adjacent to the proposed development, the construction limits shall be clearly flagged to assure impacts to eligible cultural resources are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. Prior to implementing construction activities, a qualified archaeologist shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the construction limits and eligible resources to be avoided. Since the location of some eligible cultural resources is confidential, these resources will be flagged as environmentally sensitive areas.

A-25
Findings for Impact CUL-1: Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, CUL-3 and CUL-4 are required to reduce Project-specific impacts to historical resources. The purpose of these measures to is to avoid any future impacts to cultural and historical resources. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to cultural resources.

Impact CUL-2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Mitigation Measure CUL-5. To determine the archaeological sensitivity for projects within the City, an archaeological resources assessment shall be performed under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards (PQS) in either prehistoric or historic archaeology.

The assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search and a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The records searches shall determine if the proposed project has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys, and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated. A Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in areas that are undeveloped to locate any surface cultural materials. a. If potentially significant archaeological resources are identified through an archaeological resources assessment, and impacts to these resources cannot be avoided, a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an archaeologist who meets the PQS prior to any construction-related grounddisturbing activities to determine significance. If resources determined significant or unique through Phase II testing, and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken. These might include a Phase III data recovery program that would be implemented by a qualified archaeologist and shall be performed in accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR):

Recommended Contents and Format (1990) and Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs (1991).
b. If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant archaeological resources within the proposed General Plan area but indicated the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, a qualified archaeologist shall monitor all ground disturbing construction and pre-construction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the A-26
event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an archaeologist who meets the PQS. If the discovery proves to be significant, it shall be curated with a recognized scientific or educational repository. c. If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but indicates the area to be of medium sensitivity for archaeological resources, an archaeologist who meets the PQS shall be retained on an on-call basis. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologist is contacted. If the discovery proves to be significant, it shall be curated with a recognized scientific or educational repository.

Findings for Impact CUL-2: Mitigation Measure CUL-5 is required to reduce Projectspecific impacts to archaeological resources. The purpose of this measure to is to avoid any future impacts to cultural and archaeological resources. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to cultural resources.

3.2.3 Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-6: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Mitigation Measure GEO-1: High and Low-to-High Sensitivity. In areas designated as having “high” or “low-to-high” sensitivity for paleontological resources, the project applicant shall be required to submit a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (PRMMP). The PRMMP shall be prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist meeting the standards of Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). The plan shall address specifics of monitoring and mitigation based on the project area and project’s construction plan, and shall take into account updated geologic mapping, geotechnical data, updated paleontological records searches, and changes to the regulatory framework at the time of analysis. The PRMMP shall be submitted to the City of Corona’s Community Development Department prior to approval of a grading permit.

Mitigation Measure GEO-2: High Sensitivity. Projects involving ground disturbances in previously undisturbed areas mapped as having “high” paleontological A-27
sensitivity shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis, under the supervision of the Qualified Paleontologist. Monitoring shall include inspection of exposed sedimentary units during active excavations within sensitive geologic sediments. The monitor shall have authority to temporarily divert activity away from exposed fossils to evaluate the significance of the find and, if the fossils are determined to be significant, professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. The paleontological monitor shall use field data forms to record pertinent location and geologic data, measure stratigraphic sections (if applicable), and collect appropriate sediment samples from any fossil localities.

Mitigation Measure GEO-3: Low-to-High Sensitivity. Projects involving ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas mapped with “low-to-high” paleontological sensitivity shall require monitoring if construction activity exceeds the depth of the low-sensitivity surficial sediments. The underlying sediments may have high sensitivity; therefore, work in those units shall require paleontological monitoring, as designated by the Qualified Paleontologist in the Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (PRMMP).

Mitigation Measure GEO-6: All Projects. In the event of any fossil discovery, regardless of depth or geologic formation, construction work shall halt within a 50-foot radius of the find until its significance can be determined by a Qualified Paleontologist.

Significant fossils shall be recovered, prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and deposited in a designated paleontological curation facility in accordance with the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). The most likely repository is the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA). The repository shall be identified, and a curatorial arrangement shall be signed, prior to collection of the fossils.

Findings for Impact GEO-6: Mitigation Measures GEO-1, GEO-2, GEO-3, and GEO-6 are required to reduce Project-specific impacts related to geology and soils, specifically paleontological resources. The purpose of these measures is to avoid any future impacts to paleontological resources. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to geology and soils.

3.2.4 Mineral Resources
Impact MIN-1: Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Mitigation Measure MIN-1. Prior to project approval for proposed development of properties classified as either regionally significant construction aggregate MRZ-2 or industrial minerals MRZ-2a, a mineral resource evaluation shall be conducted to determine the significant and economic viability of mining the resource. If development A-28
of a property would preclude future extraction of a significant mineral resource, in accordance with CEQA, the City shall make the appropriate findings and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to permitting development of the property.

Mitigation Measure MIN-2. Prior to approval of any project on lands classified as either regionally significant construction aggregate MRZ-2 or industrial mineral MRZ2a, a report shall be prepared that analyzes the project’s value in relation to the mineral values found onsite. The analysis shall consider the importance of construction aggregate mineral resource onsite to the market region as a whole, and not just the importance of the resources found within the City and SOI. The report shall be submitted to the City, such that the City has adequate information to develop a statement of reasons for permitting the proposed land use to the California Department of Conservation, State Mining and Geology Board, for subsequent review, in accordance with SMARA, Article 2, Section 2762 and 2763 for areas designated of regional significance.

Findings for Impact MIN-1: Mitigation Measures MIN-1 and MIN-2 are required to reduce Project-specific impacts to mineral resources. The purpose of these measures is to avoid any future impacts to mineral resources. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to mineral resources.

3.2.5 Noise
Impact NOI-2: Would the project exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Mitigation Measure N-2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a project requiring pile driving during construction within 135 feet of fragile structures such as historical resources, 100 feet of non-engineered timber and masonry buildings (e.g., most residential buildings), or within 75 feet of engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster), or a vibratory roller within 25 feet of any structure, the project applicant shall prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. This noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted by a qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer. The vibration levels shall not exceed Federal Transit Administration (FTA) architectural damage thresholds (e.g., 0.12 in/sec PPV for fragile or historical resources, 0.2 in/sec PPV for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, and 0.3 in/sec PPV for engineered concrete and masonry), or the City threshold of 0.05 in/sec RMS (94 VdB). If vibration levels would exceed this threshold, alternative uses such static rollers and drilling piles as opposed to pile driving shall be used.

Findings for Impact NOI-2: Mitigation Measure N-2 is required to reduce Projectspecific impacts related to noise. The purpose of this measure to is to avoid any future impacts to noise, specifically relating to potential vibration impacts. Implementation of the identified A-29
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact related to noise.

3.2.6 Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TCR-1: 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) listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, 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 of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-5, outlined above, is required.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1. Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring. The project archaeologist, in consultation with interested tribes, the developer and the City of Corona, shall develop an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) to address the details, timing and responsibility of archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. Details in the AMP shall include:

1. Project-related ground disturbance (including, but not limited to, brush clearing, grading, trenching, etc.) and development scheduling;

2. The development of a rotating or simultaneous schedule in coordination with the developer and the project archeologist for designated Native American Tribal Monitors from the consulting tribes during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site: including the scheduling, safety requirements, duties, scope of work, and Native American Tribal Monitors’ authority to stop and redirect grading activities in coordination with all project archaeologists (if the tribes cannot come to an agreement on the rotating or simultaneous schedule of tribal monitoring, the Native American Heritage Commission shall designate the schedule for the onsite Native American Tribal Monitor for the proposed project);

3. The protocols and stipulations that the developer, City, Tribes and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.

A-30
At least 30-days prior to application for a grading permit and before any brush clearance, grading, excavation and/or ground disturbing activities on the site take place, the future developer shall retain a tribal cultural monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources.

Pursuant to the AMP, a tribal monitor from the consulting tribe (e.g., Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, or Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation) shall be present during the initial grading activities. If tribal resources are found during grubbing activities, the tribal monitoring shall be present during site grading activities.

Mitigation Measure TCR-2. Treatment and Disposition of Cultural Resources. In the event that Native American cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during the course of any ground disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, grading, trenching, etc. grading for the proposed project, the following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:

1. Temporary Curation and Storage: During the course of construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location onsite or at the offices of the project archaeologist. The removal of any artifacts from the project site will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversite of the process; and

2. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and non-human remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City of Corona with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for onsite reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloguing, basic analysis, and other analyses as recommended by the project archaeologist and approved by consulting tribes and basic recordation have been completed; all documentation should be at a level of standard professional practice to allow the writing of a report of professional quality;
b. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository within San Bernardino County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and therefore would be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility within San Bernardino County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation;
c. For purposes of conflict resolution, if more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the A-31
disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at the San Bernardino County Museum by default;
d. At the completion of grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pre-grade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist. All reports produced will be submitted to the City, County Museum, and consulting tribes.

Mitigation Measure TCR-3. During construction activities, the project applicant shall allow additional archaeological monitors of Native American tribes to access the project site on a volunteer basis to monitor grading and excavation activities Findings for Impact TCR-1: Mitigation Measures CUL-5, TCR-1, TCR-2 and TCR-3 are required to reduce Project-specific impacts to tribal cultural resources. The purpose of these measures to is to avoid any future impacts to tribal cultural and archaeological resources.

Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant impact to tribal cultural resources.

3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT This section identifies impacts of the Project that are less than significant and do not require mitigation measures. Based on information in the Final SEIR, the City Council finds that based upon substantial evidence in the record, the following impacts have been determined to be less than significant: growth inducement; significant environmental changes; aesthetics; agricultural and forestry resources; air quality (odors); biological resources (movement of native resident or migratory species, conflict with local policies or ordinances, and conflict with provisions of Habitat Conservation Plan); cultural resources (disturbance of human remains); energy; geology and soils (all topics except paleontological resources); greenhouse gas emissions (conflict with applicable policies to reduce GHG emissions); hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use and planning; mineral resources (loss of availability of locally-important resource); noise (proximity to an airport); population and housing; public services; recreation; transportation (incompatible features and inadequate emergency access); utilities and service systems; and wildfire.

3.3.1 Growth-Inducing Impacts
A-32
The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR identify the likelihood that a proposed project could “foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment” (Section 15126.2(d)). This section of the Draft SEIR is intended to evaluate the impacts of such growth in the surrounding environment.

Examples of projects likely to have significant growth-inducing impacts include removing obstacle to population growth, for example by extending or expanding infrastructure beyond what is needed to serve the project. Other examples of growth inducement include increases in population that may tax existing service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects.

The Project involves the rezoning of certain parcels within the City to high density residential. The rezone program will establish a new AHO zone that will allow the City to properly plan for housing sites to meet its state mandated RHNA allocation of low- and moderate-income units. The Project does not involve the actual development of specific parcels but does allow for the planning of higher density housing. The Project would amend the General Plan to ensure that the City’s projected and planned growth meets its RHNA allocation. The Project would result in more lands within the City being allocated for future residential development to accommodate projected population growth; however, the Project would be a part of the planned growth in the General Plan. Furthermore, the Project would not result in or require the expansion of utilities or roadways. Therefore, the growth that would occur as a result of the Project implementation would not be substantial or adverse.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to growth-inducing impacts.

3.3.2 Significant and Irreversible Environmental Changes As mandated by the CEQA Guidelines, the SEIR must address any significant irreversible environmental changes that would result from implementation of the proposed project. Specifically, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.2(c)), such an impact would occur if:
• The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; • Land area committed to new project facilities;
• Irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project; and
• The proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project results in the wasteful use of energy).

The Project involves the rezoning of certain parcels within the City to accommodate the planning of higher density residential development. The sites are infill and located in parts of the City that include existing developed parcels and public infrastructure. The AHO zone is an overlay to the zoning that already exists on the subject sites identified, which already allows for urban development. Additionally, some sites area already developed with existing buildings and A-33
utilities. If future residential development is proposed on the subject parcels identified, development would be required to adhere the City’s adopted development standards in the Corona Municipal Code, General Plan, California Building Standards and mitigation measures identified in the SEIR. Therefore, Project implementation would not result in land area being committed to new project facilities.

Project implementation would not result in a large commitment of nonrenewable resources or consumption of resources that is not justified. Additionally, the rezoning of the parcels would not result in any activities that could lead to irreversible damage resulting from environmental accidents. Project implementation would not result in new significant and irreversible environmental changes.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to significant environmental changes.

3.3.3 Aesthetics
The Project would not result in any significant impacts related to aesthetics. During implementation, the Project would comply with the established policies and requirements indicated in the City’s General Plan in relation to the protection of scenic vistas and resources, state-designated scenic highways, and maintenance of the City’s visual character. Additionally, the Project would comply specific General Plan policies and Municipal Code, and all other applicable regulations to minimize impacts of light and glare.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to aesthetics and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.4 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Implementation of the Project would have no impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources. The Project area is located on land that is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land according to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The Project area is not used for agricultural production, nor does it support forestry resources.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be no impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.5 Air Quality
Individual construction activities associated with future residential development associated with Project implementation could result in short-term odorous emissions from exhaust associated with construction equipment and application of asphalt and architectural coatings. However, these emissions would be intermittent and would dissipate rapidly from the source. In addition, these odors would only be present temporarily and would dissipate below A-34
any air quality concern. Residential land uses that would be accommodated by future Project implementation could result in the generation of odors, such as exhaust from landscaping equipment and from cooking. Residences are not considered potential generators of odors that could affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, impacts from potential odors generated from residential land uses associated with Project implementation would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to air quality, specifically, other emissions, such as odors, adversely affecting a substantial number of people and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.6 Biological Resources
Parcels identified for rezoning as part of the Project are located within the central portion of the City and are located within a highly urbanized area. Areas where the identified parcels for the Project are located are not located within areas identified as potential wildlife movement corridors. Parcels identified for future residential development resulting from Project implementation are either currently developed with existing uses or are located within highly urbanized areas with existing development surrounding the sites. Therefore, the potential for identified parcels to be used by wildlife species as movement corridors or nursery sites are highly unlikely. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement General Plan policies identified to reduce impacts to wildlife movement. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not interfere substantially with the movement of wildlife species or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites, and impacts would be less than significant.

Project implementation would have no impact with respect to conflicting with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, as future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to abide by the City Municipal code and ensure the Project does not lead to removal of designated landmark trees. Furthermore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to biological resources, specifically impacts related to wildlife movement corridors, and no impact with respect to conflicting with local policies protecting biological resources or conflicting with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.7 Cultural Resources
Construction activities associated with development of the Project could result in the discovery of human remains; however, compliance with existing law would ensure that significant impacts to human remains would not occur. Therefore, implementation of relevant A-35
General Plan policy and compliance with existing laws and regulations would ensure that future residential development resulting from Project implementation does not disturb any human remains, and impacts would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to cultural resources, specifically impacts related to inadvertent discovery of human remains, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.8 Energy
Energy usage associated with Project implementation would be temporary in nature. In addition, energy usage associated with Project operation would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources, and energy impacts would be negligible at the regional level. The Project would not conflict with the energy objectives of the General Plan.

Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be constructed to CALGreen and Title 24 standards, which would help increase efficiency and reduce energy demand. The proposed Project would avoid or reduce the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy and not result in any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of energy. Therefore, potential impacts related to energy use would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to energy, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.9 Geology and Soils
Implementation of the Project would have less than significant impacts related to rupture of an earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure (including liquefaction), and landslides; substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil; located on unstable soil, resulting in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; or bring located on expansive soil. Compliance with existing regulations, site-specific geotechnical evaluations, and the preparation of soil engineering reports will prevent significant risk of loss associated with seismic events. All future development would be constructed in accordance with California Building Code and City Municipal Code requirements to minimize the seismic effects.

Furthermore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be connected to the City’s municipal sewer system and would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, resulting in no impact.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to geology and soils, specifically related to rupture of an earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure (including liquefaction), and landslides; substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil; located on unstable soil, resulting in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; or bring located on expansive soil. There would be no impact with respect to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, and no mitigation measures are required.

A-36

3.3.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Project implementation would be consistent with all feasible and applicable strategies recommended to reduce GHG emissions in the applicable California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan Update, the strategies outlined in the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and the City’s Climate Action Plan. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, and there would be no impact.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be no impact related to GHG emissions impacts related to conflicting with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.11 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Project implementation would be conducted in accordance with all applicable regulations, laws, and plans, including Municipal Code and General Plan policies that would minimize risks to the public associated with the use or transport of hazardous materials; the emissions or handling of hazardous materials; impairment with an emergency response plan; or significant risks associated with wildland fires. Adherence to applicable regulations would reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials to less than significant levels.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.12 Hydrology and Water Quality
Project implementation would be conducted in accordance with all applicable regulations, laws, and plans, including Municipal Code and General Plan polices that would minimize risks associated with the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; decrease of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge; alteration of existing drainage patterns resulting in erosion, increased rate of runoff, exceedance of runoff capacity, or impeding and redirecting flood flows; flood hazards, tsunami, seiche or inundation; and conflict or obstruction with implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Adherence to applicable regulations would reduce impacts related to hydrology and water quality to less than significant levels.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality, and no mitigation measures are required

3.3.13 Land Use and Planning
The Project sites identified for rezoning and AHO zone overlay for the Project are located A-37
primarily within the highly developed central portion of the City where adjacent lands are developed with existing uses. Development of sites identified for the Project may result in changes to existing land use patterns; however, new developments within the City would be required to comply with and implement applicable General Plan policies that would improve connectivity and compatibility with existing and planned uses. The candidate sites identified for future residential development resulting from Project implementation are unlikely to cause major changes to the circulation system or land use patterns of the area and would be located within already established communities. Furthermore, the candidate sites are primarily situated along an established HQTA. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not physically divide an established community, and impacts would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to land use and planning, related to the physical division of an established community, and no mitigation measures are required

3.3.14 Mineral Resources
Parcels identified for rezoning and AHO are not located at any mineral resource recovery sites and are not designated for mineral resource recovery uses. Therefore, Project implementation would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site, and impacts would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to mineral resources, related to the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site, and no mitigation measures are required

3.3.15 Noise
The identified Project sites are not located within the designated noise contours for the Corona Municipal Airport, and therefore, they would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels from airport uses. Therefore, the Project would have no impact.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be no impact related to noise, with regard to being located within the vicinity of an airport land use plan, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.16 Population and Housing
The Project proposes to meet and exceed the RHNA allocation for low- and moderate-income households, and when considering the additional buffer in the AHO zone, Project implementation could result in the development of up to 6,221 units. This would represent a very conservative surplus of approximately 2,415 units, assuming that every candidate parcel was developed at a density of 60 units per acre, which is unlikely. The 594 units required to meet RHNA and the surplus provided by the buffer would represent, in total, an increased population A-38
growth of approximately 9,990 residents, thereby resulting in a 5.4 percent population increase and a 5.6 percent increase in housing units over what was estimated at General Plan buildout.

Even with the buffer and accounting for the surplus units, Project implementation would be in compliance with General Plan and Housing Element policies to provide for balanced housing types and affordability levels and provide access to affordable housing to lower and moderateincome households. Additionally, the Project would ensure that the City is in compliance with the state’s RHNA allocation for the City. Therefore, since Project implementation would result in a less than significant increase to the projected population and housing units within the City and would be in compliance with General Plan and Housing Element policies and the City’s RHNA allocation, Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts related to population growth. Furthermore, any existing housing that would be demolished as a result of future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be replaced at a higher ratio of residential units. Therefore, Project implementation would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and impacts related to population and housing would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to population and housing, and no mitigation measures are required

3.3.17 Public Services
Project implementation would rezone and create an AHO zone for parcels within the City to provide residential units in excess of the amount planned for in the General Plan Update. These additional units would result in an increase in demand for fire services and facilities, police and emergency services, schools, parks and other public facilities such as libraries. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to pay all required fees to offset impacts to fire protection services and facilities, police and emergency services, and schools. The General Plan Update EIR identified that impacts to public services resulting from increase in demand would be less than significant with payment of the Development Impact Fee and the Community Facilities District fees. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with all applicable local, state and federal codes, buildings codes, and nationally recognized safety standards. The Project would also be required to comply with applicable General Plan policies relating to public services and impacts to public services were determined to be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to public services, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.18 Recreation
Chapter 16.35, Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees, of the City’s Municipal Code requires the dedication of park land and/or payment of an in-lieu fee for new developments within the City and Chapter 16.23, Development Impact Fees, provides for the means to finance adequate infrastructure and other public improvements and facilities made necessary by the impacts A-39
created by new residential and non-residential development in the City. To maintain the current level of service for parks in the City, Chapter 16.24, Improvement Requirements, requires payment of development impact fees for recreational facilities to assure the acquisition and improvement of adequate recreational facilities to serve the subsequently annexed areas. The availability of new facilities would prevent the accelerated physical deterioration of existing facilities. In addition to the dedication of land and/or payment of in-lieu fees, recreational facilities provided by a future implementing residential development project would be developed in accordance with the standards, specifications and requirements of the City’s General Plan, the City’s Park Master Plan, and any other adopted resolution, policy, or standard of the City. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement and comply with General Plan policies related to the provision of recreational facilities.

Furthermore, Project implementation would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which could have an adverse physical effect on the environment, and impacts would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to recreation, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.19 Transportation
As with the General Plan, Project implementation would result in the alteration and intensification of existing land uses in the City. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would require individual evaluations of the roadway alignments, intersection geometrics, and traffic control features. Roadway improvements would be made in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan and roadway design guidelines, as well as the Caltrans Roadway Design Manual, in addition to the General Plan Circulation Element policies pertaining to roadway design and improving the safety of all users of the transportation system. Furthermore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be subject to review and approval by the City’s Public Works Department to evaluate roadway alignments, intersection geometrics, and traffic control features, which would be made in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan and all applicable local and state requirements related to emergency access and the safety of all users of the transportation system. Therefore, with adherence to all applicable guidelines, policies and requirements related to roadway design, Project implementation would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use or result in inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to transportation, with respect to increased hazards to a geometric design feature or incompatible use or inadequate emergency access, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.20 Utilities and Service Systems
A-40
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or stormwater which could cause significant environmental effects. With respect to water supply, future residential development resulting from implementation of the Project would be subject to City permits, fees, and applications to ensure that adequate water supply and infrastructure are available to serve each development. In addition, there are numerous General Plan policies that would be applicable to reduce potential water supply and distribution impacts which may result from Project implementation. In addition, Project implementation would not 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. Implementation of the City’s waste reduction programs and General Plan policies, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not generate solid waste in excess of standards or capacity of infrastructures. Implementation of General Plan policies would ensure that new developments are constructed and operated in accordance with solid waste statues and regulations, and therefore, impacts associated with future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be less than significant.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be less than significant impacts related to utilities and service systems, and no mitigation measures are required.

3.3.21 Wildfire
The City is not designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) by CAL FIRE and is designated as a local responsible non-VHFHSZ. Additionally, the US Forest Service classifies a majority of the City as non-burnable, with some areas ranging from low to moderate wildfire hazard potential with high and very high wildfire hazard potential areas located along the undeveloped area surrounding the City.

Findings. The City Council finds that, based on the substantial evidence in the record, there would be no impacts related to wildfire, and no mitigation measures are required. 4 FINDINGS REGARDING CONSIDERATIONS THAT MAKE

ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THE FINAL SEIR INFEASIBLE
The analysis of alternatives to the proposed Project is found in Section 7.0 of the Draft SEIR.

4.1 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing zoning designations of the identified parcels would be retained, and no rezoning program would take place. The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives and the City would not meet its RHNA allocation in the planning of low- and moderate-income housing sites. The City’s total RHNA allocation is 6,088 units with 3,888 allocated to low- and moderate-income housing units, A-41
consisting of 2,792 units and 1,096 units, respectively. The General Plan Update EIR anticipated an additional 5,494 residential units which results in a deficiency of 594 units from the RHNA allocation.

Environmental Effects: Based on current General Plan growth forecasts, the No Project Alternative would have the same significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas, noise and transportation.

Relation to Proposed Project Objectives: The No Project Alternative would not achieve the basic project objectives as it would maintain the status quo of the General Plan Update and would not result in the City meeting its RHNA requirements in accordance with the Housing Element Update and achieving any of the project objectives to provide adequate housing sites for all income levels within the City, promote housing opportunities that support the City’s state mandated RHNA, promote fair housing opportunities that encourage access to lower and moderate income housing, and promote safe and healthy housing opportunities to discourage overcrowding.

4.2 REDUCED DENSITY ALTERNATIVE UP TO 45 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
Under the Reduced Density Alternative up to 45 Dwelling Units per Acre, vacant parcels (750 units) and nonvacant parcels (452 units) could accommodate a total of approximately 1,202 new housing units, and potential rezone parcels (368 units) and AHO parcels (3,492 units) at a maximum density of 45 units per acre would accommodate a total of approximately 5,062 additional housing units. As with the proposed Project, the majority of candidate rezoning sites would be located within a HQTA. Based on this, by implementing the Reduced Density Alternatives, the City would be able to accommodate the 2021-2029 RHNA and provide a RHNA-buffer of 4 percent for low-income households and a 1.5 percent buffer for moderateincome households.

Environmental Effects: While the severity of significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and transportation, including cumulative impacts, would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project, these impacts would not be reduced to a less than significant level, even with the incorporation of mitigation measures.

Impacts related to vibration impacts and tribal cultural resources would be similar as compared to the proposed Project.

Relation to Proposed Project Objectives: The Reduced Density Alternative Up To 45 Dwelling Units per Acre would meet all of the project objectives; however, an adequate buffer would not be provided, thereby putting the City at risk of reevaluating additional sites in the future should the subject sites be deemed unsuitable for any reason.

4.3 ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT AREAS ALTERNATIVE
The Alternate Development Areas Alternative is consideration of different locations for redevelopment. A Citywide comprehensive land survey has been conducted, and the candidate A-42
sites have been selected in order to support the City’s objectives to sustainably increase residential density, especially in a transit-oriented community. Consideration of alternative locations may take place in areas that are not well-suited for the intensified residential redevelopment, within a HQTA, or may not meet the criteria established by HCD for “nonvacant” sites to be considered as viable sites that would be repurposed for residential development. Development standards within transit-oriented communities aim to support the highest density for the proposed Project, as they are intended to encourage compact development, improve access to transit, and promote a pedestrian-oriented environment. Transitoriented community development standards would require a minimum of 60 units per acre, as provided by the proposed Project.

Environmental Effects: Without the siting of residential development within a HQTA, impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and transportation would be more severe than under the proposed Project, as housing would be developed in less transit-oriented locations and would not provide alternative transportation options. Impacts related to vibration impacts and tribal cultural resources would be similar as compared to the proposed Project.

Relation to Proposed Project Objectives: The Alternate Development Areas Alternative would not meet most of the project objectives, as it would not implement the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element Update Programs to provide housing sites for all income levels within the City, it would not promote housing opportunities that support the City’s state mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment, and it would not promote fair housing opportunities that encourage access to lower- and moderate-income housing.

5. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the proposed project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered "acceptable" (CEQA Guidelines 15093(a)). CEQA requires the agency to state, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final SEIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines 15093(b)).

In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program, when implemented, will avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant effects identified in the Final SEIR for the City of Corona General Plan House Element Rezoning Program Update Project. However, significant impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, transportation, and tribal cultural resources are unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. The Final SEIR provides detailed information regarding this impact.

The City Council finds that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final SEIR A-43
within the purview of the City will be implemented with the proposed Project, and that the remaining significant unavoidable effects are outweighed and found to be acceptable due to the following specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits based upon the facts set forth above, the Draft SEIR, and the record, because implementation of the City of Corona General Plan House Element Rezoning Program Update Project will:
• Implement the 2021-2029 Housing Element Programs to provide adequate housing sites for all income levels within the City.
• Promote housing opportunities that support the City’s state mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
• Promote fair housing opportunities that encourage access to lower- and moderate-income housing.
• Promote safe and healthy housing opportunities to discourage overcrowding.

Considering all factors, the City Council finds that there are specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations associated with the proposed Project that outweigh the Project's significant unavoidable effect, and the adverse effect is therefore considered acceptable.

6. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For all purposes of CEQA compliance, including these Findings of Fact, the administrative record of all City proceedings and decisions regarding the environmental analysis of the Project include but are not limited to:
• The Draft and Final SEIR for the Project, together with all appendices and technical reports referred to therein, whether separately bound or not, or on a CD/portable drive; • All reports, letters, applications, memoranda, maps, or other planning and engineering documents prepared by the City, its planning consultant and environmental consultant, the Applicant or others and presented to or before the decision-makers or staff; • All minutes of any public workshops, meetings or hearings, and any recorded or verbatim transcripts or videotapes thereof;
• Any letters, reports, or other documents or evidence submitted into the record at any public workshops, meetings or hearings; and
• Matters of common general knowledge to the City, which it may consider, including applicable state or local laws, ordinances and policies, the General Plan and all applicable planning programs and policies of the City.

Documents or other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which Findings are made are located at the City of Corona Planning and Development Department, 400 S. Vicentia Avenue, Suite 120, Corona, CA 92882.

A-44

7. FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO MITIGATION OF SIGNIFICANT

ADVERSE IMPACTS, AND ADOPTION OF MITIGATION

MONITORING PROGRAM
Based on the entire record before the City and having considered the unavoidable significant impacts of the proposed project, the City Council hereby determines that all feasible mitigation within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the project Applicant has been adopted to reduce or avoid the potentially significant impacts identified in the Final SEIR, and that no additional feasible mitigation is available to further reduce significant impacts. The feasible mitigation measures are discussed in Section 3.1 and 3.2, above, and are set forth in the MMRP.

Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires the City to adopt a monitoring or compliance program regarding the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed to lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. The City Council adopts the MMRP for the City of Corona General Plan House Element Rezoning Program Update Project, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit “B”, because it fulfills the CEQA mitigation monitoring requirements:
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is designed to ensure compliance with the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed on the project during project implementation; and
• Measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment are fully enforceable through conditions of approval, permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.

B-1
EXHIBIT “B”

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
[SEE ATTACHED SIXTEEN (16) PAGES]

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation

AIR QUALITY
Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Project proponents of new development projects shall incorporate mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities. Mitigation measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents/plans (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to the City and shall be verified by the City’s Development Services Division. Mitigation measures to reduce construction related emissions could include, but are not limited to:
• Requiring fugitive-dust control measures that exceed SCAQMD’s Rule 403, such as:
o Use of nontoxic soil stabilizers to reduce wind erosion. o Applying water every four house to active soil-disturbing activities.
o Tarping and/or maintaining a minimum of 24 inches of freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials. o Using construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 3 (model year 2006 or newer) or Tier 4 (model year 2008 or newer) emission limits, applicable for engines between 50 and 750 horsepower. o Ensuring that construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained to the manufacturer’s standards.
o Limiting nonessential idling of construction equipment to no more than five consecutive minutes.
o Limiting onsite vehicle travel speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
o Installing wheel washers for all existing trucks or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the project area.

Using Super-Compliant VOC paints for coating of architectural surfaces whenever possible. A list of Super-Compliant architectural coating During
Construction
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
manufacturers can be found on the SCAQMD’s website at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/planning/ architecturalcoatings/super-compliant-manf-list.pdf?sfvrsn=71.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2. Project proponents of new development projects shall incorporate mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions during operational activities. Mitigation measures shall be included on construction drawings associated with the project’s permit.

Mitigation measures to reduce long-term emissions could include, but are not limited to the following:
• For site-specific development that requires refrigerated vehicles, the construction documents shall demonstrate an adequate number of electrical service connections at loading docks for plug-in of the anticipated number of refrigerated trailers to reduce idling time and emissions.
• Applicants for manufacturing and light industrial uses shall consider energy storage and combined heat and power in appropriate applications to optimize renewable energy generation systems and avoid peak energy use.
• Site-specific developments with truck delivery and loading areas and truck parking spaces shall include signage as a reminder to limit idling of vehicles while parked for loading/unloading in accordance with California Air Resources Board Rule 2845 (13 CCR Chapter 10 § 2485).
• Provide changing/shower facilities as specific in Section A5.106.4.3 of the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures).
• Provide bicycle parking facilities per Section A4.106.9 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code.
• Provide preferential parking spaces for low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles per Section A5.106.5.1 of the CALGreen Code (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures).
• Provide facilities to support electric charging stations per Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) and Section A5.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures of the CALGreen Code.

During
Construction,
During
operation
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
• Applicant-provided appliances shall be Energy Star-certified appliances or appliances of equivalent energy efficiency (e.g., dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers). Installation of Energy Star-certified or equivalent appliances shall be verified by Building and Safety during plan check.

Applicants for future development projects along existing and planned transit routes shall coordinate with the City of Corona and Riverside Transit to ensure that bus pads and shelter improvements are incorporated, as appropriate.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Applicants for future development projects shall include a biological resources survey if it has been determined that the site in its existing condition may contain biological habitat or species.

The biological resources survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The biological resources survey shall include, but not be limited to:
• An analysis of available literature and biological databases, such as the California Natural Diversity Database, to determine sensitive biological resources that have been reported historically from the proposed development project vicinity.
• A review of current land use and land ownership within the proposed development project vicinity.
• An assessment and mapping of vegetation communities present within the proposed development project vicinity.
• An evaluation of potential local and regional wildlife movement corridors.
• A general assessment of potential jurisdictional areas, including wetlands and riparian habitats.

Habitat Assessment. If the proposed development project site supports vegetation communities that may provide habitat for plant or wildlife species, a focused habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the potential for special status plant and/or animal species to occur within or adjacent to the proposed development project area. Adjoining properties should also be surveyed where direct or indirect project effects, such as those from fuel modification or herbicide Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
application, could potentially extend off-site. If feasible, the habitat assessment should be conducted during non-drought years. Vegetation communities should be classified and mapped to the alliance or association level using classification methods and membership rules according to A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd edition (2009).

Focused Surveys. If one or more special status species has the potential to occur within the proposed development project area, focused species surveys shall be conducted to determine the presence/absence of these species to adequately evaluate potential direct and/or indirect impacts to these species. The focused survey shall record the location and boundary of special status species by use of global positioning system (GPS). The number of individuals in each special status plant population shall be provided as counted (if population is small) or estimated (if population is large). If applicable, information about the percentage of individuals in each life stage, such as seedlings vs. reproductive individuals, should be provided. If feasible, images of the target species and representative habitats should be included to support information and descriptions.

Preconstruction Surveys. If construction activities are not initiated immediately after focused surveys have been completed, additional preconstruction special status species surveys may be required to ensure impacts are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. If preconstruction activities are required, a qualified biologist would perform these surveys as required for each special status species that is known to occur or has a potential to occur within or adjacent to the proposed development project area.

Biological Resources Report. The results of the biological survey for proposed development projects with no significant impacts may be presented in a biological survey letter report. For proposed development projects with significant impacts that require mitigation to reduce the impacts to below a level of significance, the results of the biological survey shall be presented in a biological technical report.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2. If sensitive biological resources are identified within or adjacent to the proposed development project area, the construction limits shall be clearly flagged to ensure impacts to sensitive biological resources are avoided or minimized to the extent Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
feasible. Prior to implementing construction activities, a qualified biologist shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the construction limits and sensitive resources to be avoided.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3. If sensitive biological resources are known to occur within or adjacent to the proposed development project area, a project-specific contractor training program shall be developed and implemented to educate project contractors on the sensitive biological resources within and adjacent to the proposed development project area and measures being implemented to avoid and/or minimize impacts to these species. A qualified biologist shall develop and implement the contractor training program.

Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure BIO-4. If sensitive biological resources are present within or adjacent to the proposed development project area and impacts may occur from implementation of construction activities, a qualified biological monitor may be required during a portion or all of the construction activities to ensure impacts to the sensitive biological resources are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. The specific biological monitoring requirements shall be evaluated on a project-byproject basis. The qualified biological monitor shall be approved by the City on a project-by-project basis based on applicable experience with the sensitive biological resources that may be impacted.

Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure BIO-5. The City of Corona shall require applicants of development project that have the potential to affect jurisdictional resources to contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a jurisdictional delineation following the methods outlined in the 1987 USACE Wetland Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 2008) to map the extent of wetlands and non-wetland waters, determine jurisdiction, and assess potential impacts. The results of the delineation shall be presented in a wetland delineation report and shall be incorporated into the CEQA document(s) required for approval and permitting of the proposed development project.

Applicants of development projects that have the potential to impact jurisdictional features, as identified in the wetland delineation letter report, shall obtain permits and authorizations from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and/or Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The regulatory agency Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
authorization(s) would include impact avoidance and minimization measures as well as mitigation measures for unavoidable impacts.

Specific avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures for impacts to jurisdictional resources shall be determined through discussions with the regulatory agencies during the proposed development project permitting process and may include monetary contributions to a mitigation bank or habitat creation, restoration, or enhancement.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7. The City of Corona shall require applicants for future development projects to contract with a qualified biologist to conduct a preconstruction general nesting bird survey within all suitable nesting habitats that may be impacted by active construction during general avian breeding season (February 1 through August 31). The preconstruction surveys shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to initiation of construction. If no active avian nests are identified within the proposed development project area or within a 300-foot buffer of the proposed development project area, no further mitigation is necessary. If active nests of avian species covered by the Fish and Game Code are detected within the proposed development project area or within a 300- foot buffer of the proposed development project area, construction shall be halted until the young have fledged, until a qualified biologist has determined the nest is inactive, or until appropriate mitigation measures that respond to the specific situation have been developed and implemented in consultation with the regulatory agencies. Based on the discretion of the qualified biologist, the 300-foot buffer may be expanded as appropriate to the species.

Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Prior to any construction activities that may affect historical resources (i.e., structures 45 years or older), a historical resources assessment shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history. This shall include a records search to determine if any resources that may be potentially affected by the project have been previously recorded, evaluated, and/or designated in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), or Corona Register of Historic Resources. Following the records search, the qualified architectural historian or historian shall conduct a reconnaissance-level and/or Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
intensive-level survey in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) guidelines to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that may be potentially affected by the proposed project. Pursuant to the definition of a historical resource under CEQA, potential historical resources shall be evaluated under a developed historic context.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2. To ensure that projects requiring the relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of a historical resource not impair its significance, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties shall be used to the maximum extent possible. The application of the standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the PQS.

Prior to any construction activities that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of character-defining features and construction activities shall be provided to the City of Corona.

Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure CUL-3. If a proposed project would result in the demolition or significant alteration of a historical resource, it cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, recordation of the resource prior to construction activities will assist in reducing adverse impacts to the resource to the greatest extent possible. Recordation shall take the form of Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), or Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS) documentation, and shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the PQS. Documentation shall include an architectural and historical narrative; medium- or largeformat black and white photographs, negatives, and prints; and supplementary information such as building plans and elevations, and/or historic photographs. Documentation shall be reproduced on archival paper and placed in appropriate local, state, or federal institutions. The specific scope and details of documentation would be developed at the project level.

Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure CUL-4. If cultural resources that are eligible for listing to the NRHP, CRHR, or Corona Register of Historic Resources are identified within or adjacent to the proposed development, the construction limits shall be clearly flagged to assure impacts to eligible cultural resources are avoided or minimized to the extent feasible. Prior Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
to implementing construction activities, a qualified archaeologist shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the construction limits and eligible resources to be avoided. Since the location of some eligible cultural resources is confidential, these resources will be flagged as environmentally sensitive areas.

Mitigation Measure CUL-5. To determine the archaeological sensitivity for projects within the City, an archaeological resources assessment shall be performed under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards (PQS) in either prehistoric or historic archaeology. The assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search and a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The records searches shall determine if the proposed project has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys, and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated. A Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in areas that are undeveloped to locate any surface cultural materials.

1. If potentially significant archaeological resources are identified through an archaeological resources assessment, and impacts to these resources cannot be avoided, a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an archaeologist who meets the PQS prior to any construction-related ground-disturbing activities to determine significance. If resources determined significant or unique through Phase II testing, and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken. These might include a Phase III data recovery program that would be implemented by a qualified archaeologist and shall be performed in accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR):

Recommended Contents and Format (1990) and Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs (1991).

2. If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant archaeological resources within the proposed General Plan area but indicated the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, a qualified archaeologist shall monitor all ground disturbing Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
construction and pre-construction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting, and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an archaeologist who meets the PQS. If the discovery proves to be significant, it shall be curated with a recognized scientific or educational repository.

3. If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant archaeological resources, but indicates the area to be of medium sensitivity for archaeological resources, an archaeologist who meets the PQS shall be retained on an on-call basis. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery.

The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial onsite safety meeting, and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologist is contacted. If the discovery proves to be significant, it shall be curated with a recognized scientific or educational repository.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: High and Low-to-High Sensitivity. In areas designated as having “high” or “low-to-high” sensitivity for paleontological resources, the project applicant shall be required to submit a Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (PRMMP). The PRMMP shall be prepared by a Qualified Paleontologist meeting the standards of Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). The plan shall address specifics of monitoring and mitigation based on the project area and project’s construction plan, and shall take into account updated geologic mapping, geotechnical data, updated paleontological Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
records searches, and changes to the regulatory framework at the time of analysis. The PRMMP shall be submitted to the City of Corona’s Community Development Department prior to approval of a grading permit.

Mitigation Measure GEO-2: High Sensitivity. Projects involving ground disturbances in previously undisturbed areas mapped as having “high” paleontological sensitivity shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor on a full-time basis, under the supervision of the Qualified Paleontologist. Monitoring shall include inspection of exposed sedimentary units during active excavations within sensitive geologic sediments. The monitor shall have authority to temporarily divert activity away from exposed fossils to evaluate the significance of the find and, if the fossils are determined to be significant, professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. The paleontological monitor shall use field data forms to record pertinent location and geologic data, measure stratigraphic sections (if applicable), and collect appropriate sediment samples from any fossil localities.

Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure GEO-3: Low-to-High Sensitivity. Projects involving ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas mapped with “low-to-high” paleontological sensitivity shall require monitoring if construction activity exceeds the depth of the low-sensitivity surficial sediments. The underlying sediments may have high sensitivity; therefore, work in those units shall require paleontological monitoring, as designated by the Qualified Paleontologist in the Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (PRMMP).

Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure GEO-6: All Projects. In the event of any fossil discovery, regardless of depth or geologic formation, construction work shall halt within a 50-foot radius of the find until its significance can be determined by a Qualified Paleontologist. Significant fossils shall be recovered, prepared to the point of curation, identified by qualified experts, listed in a database to facilitate analysis, and deposited in a designated paleontological curation facility in accordance with the standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010). The most likely repository is the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA). The repository shall be identified, and a curatorial arrangement shall be signed, prior to collection of the fossils.

During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Mitigation Measure GHG-1. The City of Corona shall update the Climate Action Plan (CAP) every five years to ensure the City is monitoring the plan’s progress toward achieving the City’s GHG reduction target and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified level. The update shall consider a trajectory consistent with the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goal established under Executive Order S-03-05 for year 2050 and the latest applicable statewide legislative GHG emission reduction that may be in effect at the time of the CAP update (e.g., Senate Bill 32 for year 2030). The CAP update shall include the following:
• GHG inventories of existing and forecast year GHG levels • Tools and strategies for reducing GHG emissions to ensure a trajectory with the long-term GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05
• Plan implementation guidance that includes, at minimum, the following components consistent with the proposed CAP:
o Administration and Staffing
o Finance and Budgeting
o Timelines for Measure Implementation
o Community Outreach and Education
o Monitoring, Reporting, and Adaptive Management Tracking Tools
Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction,
During
Operation
City of Corona

MINERAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure MIN-1. Prior to project approval for proposed development of properties classified as either regionally significant construction aggregate MRZ-2 or industrial minerals MRZ-2a, a mineral resource evaluation shall be conducted to determine the significant and economic viability of mining the resource. If development of a property would preclude future extraction of a significant mineral resource, in accordance with CEQA, the City shall make the appropriate findings and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to permitting development of the property.

Prior to
Construction
Project
Applicant
Mitigation Measure MIN-2. Prior to approval of any project on lands Prior to Project Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
classified as either regionally significant construction aggregate MRZ-2 or industrial mineral MRZ-2a, a report shall be prepared that analyzes the project’s value in relation to the mineral values found onsite. The analysis shall consider the importance of construction aggregate mineral resource onsite to the market region as a whole, and not just the importance of the resources found within the City and SOI. The report shall be submitted to the City, such that the City has adequate information to develop a statement of reasons for permitting the proposed land use to the California Department of Conservation, State Mining and Geology Board, for subsequent review, in accordance with SMARA, Article 2, Section 2762 and 2763 for areas designated of regional significance.

Construction Applicant
NOISE
Mitigation Measure N-1. Construction contractors shall implement the following measures for construction activities conducted in the City.

Construction plans submitted to the City shall identify these measures on demolition, grading, and construction plans submitted to the City. The City Corona Public Works Department shall verify that grading, demolition, and/or construction plans submitted to the City include these notations prior to issuance of demolition, grading and/or building permits. • During the active construction period, equipment and trucks used for project construction shall utilize the best available noise control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds), wherever feasible.
• Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers and hoe rams) shall be hydraulicor electric-powered wherever feasible. Where the use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used along with external noise jackets on the tools. • Stationary equipment such as generators and air compressors shall be located as far as feasible from noise-sensitive uses. • Stockpiling shall be located as far as feasible from noise-sensitive receptors.
• Construction traffic shall be limited—to the extent feasible—to approved haul routes established by the City.

During
Construction
Construction
Contractors
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
• Prior to the start of construction activities, a sign shall be posted at the entrance(s) to the job site, clearly visible to the public, that includes permitted construction days and hours, as well as the contact information of the City’s and contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. If the authorized contractor’s representative receives a complaint, they shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City.
• Signs shall be posted at the job site entrance(s), within the on-site construction zones, and along queueing lanes (if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. All other equipment shall be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes. • During the entire active construction period and to the extent feasible, the use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only. The construction manager shall be responsible for adjusting alarms based on the background noise level, or to utilize human spotters when feasible and in compliance with all safety requirements and laws.
• When construction noise is predicted to exceed established noise standards and when the anticipated construction duration is two years or more, contractors shall erect temporary noise barriers, where feasible.

Mitigation Measure N-2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a project requiring pile driving during construction within 135 feet of fragile structures such as historical resources, 100 feet of non-engineered timber and masonry buildings (e.g., most residential buildings), or within 75 feet of engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster), or a vibratory roller within 25 feet of any structure, the project applicant shall prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. This noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted by a qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer. The vibration levels shall not exceed Federal Transit Administration (FTA) architectural damage thresholds (e.g., 0.12 in/sec PPV for fragile or historical resources, 0.2 in/sec PPV for nonengineered timber and masonry buildings, and 0.3 in/sec PPV for Prior to
Construction
Construction
Contractors
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
engineered concrete and masonry), or the City threshold of 0.05 in/sec RMS (94 VdB). If vibration levels would exceed this threshold, alternative uses such static rollers and drilling piles as opposed to pile driving shall be used.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
See Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures CUL-5
Mitigation Measure TCR-1. Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring. The project archaeologist, in consultation with interested tribes, the developer and the City of Corona, shall develop an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) to address the details, timing and responsibility of archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site.

Details in the AMP shall include:

1. Project-related ground disturbance (including, but not limited to, brush clearing, grading, trenching, etc.) and development scheduling;

2. The development of a rotating or simultaneous schedule in coordination with the developer and the project archeologist for designated Native American Tribal Monitors from the consulting tribes during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site: including the scheduling, safety requirements, duties, scope of work, and Native American Tribal Monitors’ authority to stop and redirect grading activities in coordination with all project archaeologists (if the tribes cannot come to an agreement on the rotating or simultaneous schedule of tribal monitoring, the Native American Heritage Commission shall designate the schedule for the onsite Native American Tribal Monitor for the proposed project);

3. The protocols and stipulations that the developer, City, Tribes and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.

At least 30-days prior to application for a grading permit and before any brush clearance, grading, excavation and/or ground disturbing activities on the site take place, the future developer shall retain a tribal cultural Prior to
Construction,
During
Construction
City of
Corona,
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources.

Pursuant to the AMP, a tribal monitor from the consulting tribe (e.g., Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, or Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation) shall be present during the initial grading activities. If tribal resources are found during grubbing activities, the tribal monitoring shall be present during site grading activities.

Mitigation Measure TCR-2. Treatment and Disposition of Cultural Resources. In the event that Native American cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during the course of any ground disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, grading, trenching, etc. grading for the proposed project, the following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:

1. Temporary Curation and Storage: During the course of construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location onsite or at the offices of the project archaeologist. The removal of any artifacts from the project site will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversite of the process; and

2. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and non-human remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City of Corona with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for onsite reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloguing, basic analysis, and other analyses as recommended by the project archaeologist and approved by consulting tribes and basic recordation have been completed; all documentation should be at a level of standard professional practice to allow the writing of a report of professional quality; During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Measure
Required
Time of
Compliance
Responsible
Implementing
Party
Responsible
Monitoring
Party
Status of
Implementation
b. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository within San Bernardino County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and therefore would be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility within San Bernardino County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation;
c. For purposes of conflict resolution, if more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at the San Bernardino County Museum by default;
d. At the completion of grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pre-grade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the
archaeologist. All reports produced will be submitted to the City, County Museum, and consulting tribes.

Mitigation Measure TCR-3. During construction activities, the project applicant shall allow additional archaeological monitors of Native American tribes to access the project site on a volunteer basis to monitor grading and excavation activities.

During
Construction
Project
Applicant,
Construction
Contractor
C-1
EXHIBIT “C”

PROPOSED CHANGES TO TEXT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
GPA2022-0002
[SEE ATTACHED THREE (3) PAGES]
General Plan Land Use Table – Amendment
(Added text shown in red underline)
Table LU-1 Corona General Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use
Designation
Description Density/ Intensity
Agriculture Accommodates agricultural activities, such as citrus crops, and allows for housing and ancillary facilities. 1 du/5 acres Rural
Residential I
Accommodates large lot residential development to
maintain the area’s low density, rural, and natural
character.

Density: 0.2–0.5
du/adj. gross acre
Rural
Residential II
Accommodates large lot residential development to reflect estate and/or rural qualities.

Density: 0.5–1
du/adj. gross acre
Estate
Residential
Accommodates moderate to larger size lots for singlefamily detached housing units.Density: 1–3 du/adj. gross acre
Low Density
Residential
Accommodates detached single-family homes. For
properties within Airport Compatibility Zone D, new
development shall have a density of at least 5 du/ac
Density: 3–6
du/adj. gross acre
Low Medium
Density
Residential
Accommodates detached single-family houses or
detached or attached condominium ownership.

Density: 6–8
du/adj. gross acre
Medium
Density
Residential
Accommodates townhomes, duplexes, and single-family
detached units in condo developments, with smaller lots to facilitate clustering of units and expanded recreational amenities and preserve open spaces and topography.

Density: 6–15 du
adjusted gross acre
High Density
Residential
Accommodates multi-family residential (e.g., garden
apartments and condos, including common open space,
landscaping, and other site amenities.

Density: 15–36
du/adj. gross acre,
up to 75 du/adj
gross acre for senior
units
Urban Density
Residential
Accommodates high density residential development
primarily through innovative infill design in the city’s opportunity districts and sites.

Density: 36–60
du/adj. gross acre
Density with an
Affordable
Housing Overlay
Zone: 45-60
du/adj. gross acre
General
Commercial3
Accommodates a range of commercial uses that serve
local neighborhoods, the community, and visitors. Typical uses are governed by implementing zones.

Intensity:

FAR of 0.5
Office
Professional3
Accommodates general business offices, banks, finance,
insurance, and real estate offices, medical offices,
professional offices, and compatible uses.

Intensity:

FAR 2.0
General
Industrial3
Accommodates a wide range of manufacturing,
construction, transportation, wholesale trade,
warehousing, vehicle storage, and related service activities.

Mineral resource activities are included in this category.

Intensity:

FAR 0.5
Table LU-1 Corona General Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use
Designation
Description Density/ Intensity
Light
Industrial3
Accommodates low intensity, nonpolluting manufacturing, R&D, e-commerce, wholesale, and distribution facilities.

Also includes campus-style industrial and business parks.

These are intended to provide a job base for residents in “clean” industries that do not generate nuisance or unsafe levels of noise, vibration, air emissions, or waste.

Intensity:

FAR 0.5
Mixed Use I
Commercial
and
Residential1, 2
Accommodates retail commercial and office uses or an
integrated mix of commercial and residential uses along arterials or at primary community activity centers and
transit stations. Commercial and office uses primarily
serving neighborhood and community needs, is permitted.

Accommodates 100% residential use if affordable housing is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) Zone.

Mixed Use
Commercial and
Residential
Intensity:

FAR 2.0
Density for 100%
residential use:
45-60 du/adj.
gross acre
Downtown
Commercial/
Mixed Use2
Accommodates the development of properties exclusively
for retail commercial uses or an integrated mix of
commercial and residential uses. Commercial uses are
permitted along the street frontages that cumulatively
create a pedestrian-oriented and active street
environment, including retail shops, services, offices, cultural facilities, entertainment, public and civic buildings, and similar and compatible uses.

Intensity:

FAR 3.0
Mixed Use II—
Industrial and
Commercial1
Accommodates the development of light industrial uses or a mix of industrial and commercial uses. Generally, these should be recognized “clean” types of industries, typified by light manufacturing, research and development, and ecommerce.

Accommodates 100% residential use if affordable housing is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) Zone.

Intensity:

FAR 2.0
Density for 100%
residential use:
45-60 du/adj.
gross acre
Open Space
General
Accommodates lands permanently committed or
protected for open space due to value as habitat,
topography, scenic quality, public safety (e.g., flood control channels), or comparable purpose.

Not applicable
Parks and
Open Space
Recreational
Accommodates lands committed as open space for public
or private recreational purposes, such parks and golf
courses.

Not applicable
Public and
Institutional
Accommodates public and institutional uses within areas specifically designated on the land use plan or within any other land use designation in accordance with policies
under Goal LU-15. General categories include schools, civic uses, fire stations, utilities, and other institutional uses, except for public and private parks.

Based on
implementing zone
Table LU-1 Corona General Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use
Designation
Description Density/ Intensity
Notes

1. 1. Approval of a Specific Plan or adoption of citywide development standards and design guidelines is required for entitlement of a mixed-use project.

2. 2. Residential uses may be integrated into the upper floors of structures developed for retail or office uses on the lower floors or horizontally on the same site.

3. 3. Permissible intensity levels (maximum FARs) are lower within Airport Compatibility Zones C and D of the Corona Municipal Airport Influence Area, where limitations on the number of persons per acre apply. Refer to the Corona Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for developments in this area.

D-1
EXHIBIT “D”

PROPOSED CHANGES TO LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN
GPA2022-0002
[SEE ATTACHED (23) PAGES]
91 Capital St
Vander St
S
M
a
ple
St
M arket St
Riverside Fwy
47 48
Via Santiago
Paseo Grande
Beryl Ln
Sumac Pl
Aquamarine
Ln
Via
Bernardo
Vallejo
Dr
Meadowood St
Bern
Dr
Frontage Rd
Kirkwood Dr
ia Josefa
Sapphire
Ln
Via
Felipe
Avenida del Vista
W 6th St
Coronita
Elementary
School
Va
Bern Dr
91 S
S
h
erm
an Av
e
Pleasant View Ave
N
S
mi
N
S
h
Agnes St
Pomona Rd
D St
W E St
Riverside Fwy
Riverside Fwy
Via Santia
g
o
S
S
h
erm
an Ave
Willits
Dr
Rain
broo
k
W
a
y
Norwich Way
Shadowglen Way
Plaz a de Noche
Dyer Way
Aquamarine
Ln
W 8th St
Av
enid
a
d
el Vista
Border Ave
W 6th St
W 10th St
Corona City FS
# 3
Corona High
School
Christian
Heritage School
D St
49 W 9th St
Lincron
W 10th St
S
Linc
oln Av
e
The Palza on
Sixth Street
50 99
85 51
49 71
52 86
13 84
91 98
36 92
78 79
80 35
94 37
34 72
5 38
76 74
77 73
75 33
Copyright nearmap 2015, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Corona, County of Riverside, County of San Bernardino, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA
Zone 1 Parcels and Zoning
0 140 280 560
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Path: X:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx Zone 1 Area
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address
or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
5 615 S
Sherman
Avenue
110040023 0.39 OP MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
13 6th
Street
110020018 0.22 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
33 1338 W
6th
Street
110030004 0.24 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
34 1334 W
6th
Street
110030003 0.48 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
35 1330 W
6th
Street
110030008 0.28 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
36 1865 W
6th
Street
102270015 0.77 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
37 1180 W
6th
Street
110040039 0.69 GC MU1 C C (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
38 1210 W
6th
Street
110040042 1.46 GC MU1 C C (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
49 W 6th
Street
110030030 0.43 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
50 Yorba
Street
102290010 0.17 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
51 W 6th
Street
110040041 1.16 GC MU1 C C (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
52 6th
Street
110020008 0.61 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
71 S Smith
Avenue
110020012 0.50 HDR UDR R3 R3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
72 1362 W
6th
Street
110030015 3.60 HDR UDR R3 R3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
73 1553
Yorba
Street
118050020 0.64 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
74 1549
Yorba
Street
118050019 0.43 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
ID
No.

Site
Address
or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
75 1545
Yorba
Street
118050018 0.65 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
76 1539
Yorba
Street
118050017 0.95 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
77 1535 W
6th
Street
118050016 0.99 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
78 W 6th
Street
102290020 4.56 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
79 1625 W.
6th
Street
102290017 1.62 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
80 1541 W
6th
Street
103280001 0.99 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
84 W. 8th
Street
110040054 0.46 HDR UDR MP R3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
85 W 8th
Street
110061005 0.88 HDR UDR R3 R3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
86 W 8th
Street
110040010 0.20 HDR UDR MP R3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
91 S
Sherman
Avenue
118101014 1.51 HDR UDR R3 R3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
92 1910
Frontage
Road
102250054 1.27 GC MU1 C2 C2 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
94 1434 W
6th
Street
110020005 0.94 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
98 1833 W
6th
Street
102270014 0.82 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
99 1833 W
6th
Street
102270013 0.22 GC MU1 C3 C3 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
General Plan Legend Zoning Legend
GC General Commercial AHO Affordable Housing Overlay
OP Office Professional R-1-7.2 Single Family Residential LDR Low Density Residential
3 to 6 units per acre
R-3 Multiple Family Residential
HDR High Density Residential
15-36 units per acre
MP Mobile Home Park
UDR Urban Density Residential C Commercial
36 -60 units per acre
MU1 Mixed Use 1
Commercial/Residential
C2 Restricted Commercial
C3 General Commercial
28 12
32 18
21 22 25 27
23 26
20 19 28
24 29
100
30 8
41 48
45 6
16 43
44 15 17
14 42
58 59
60 61
40 Path: Y:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx /
Zone 2 Parcels and Zoning
0 110 210 420
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Zone 2
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone Parcel
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
6 510 W
6th Street
117172002 0.53 MU1 -- TC TC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
8 514 W
6th Street
117172001 0.54 MU1 -- TC TC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
12 Railroad
Street
117042010 0.35 LI MU2 M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
14 905 W
6th Street
118283011 1.50 MU1 -- CS CS (AHO) SPA2022-0003
15 901 W
6th Street
118283026 0.16 MU1 -- CS CS (AHO) SPA2022-0003
16 507 S
Vicentia
Avenue
117340022 0.40 MU1 -- CS CS (AHO) SPA2022-0003
17 511 S
Vicentia
Avenue
117340023 0.32 MU1 -- CS CS (AHO) SPA2022-0003
18 852 W
6th Street
110101012 0.35 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
19 844 W
6th Street
110101011 0.20 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
20 836 W
6th Street
110101010 0.38 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
21 832 W
6th Street
110101009 0.15 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
22 828 W
6th Street
110101027 0.18 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
23 826 W
6th Street
110101007 0.11 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
24 820 W
6th Street
110101006 0.21 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
25 816 W
6th Street
110101005 0.18 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
26 812 W
6th Street
110101004 0.18 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
27 808 W
6th Street
110101003 0.15 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
28 802 W
6th Street
110101001 0.10 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
29 612 S
Vicentia
Avenue
110101002 0.10 MU1 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
30 229
Grand
Boulevard
117091022 1.10 GC MU1 CS CS (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
100 526
Railroad
Street
117041001 2.45 LI MU2 M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
Residential Rezone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
28 S Merrill
Street
117133004 0.51 LDR MDR SF MFR SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
32 6th Street 118283033 0.42 MDR HDR MF1 MF SPA2022-0003 GPA2022-0002
40 101 S
Sheridan
Street
117070004 0.24 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
41 103 N
Sheridan
Street
117070003 0.17 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
42 114 N
Belle
Avenue
117070006 0.17 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
43 110 N
Belle
Avenue
117070007 0.17 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
44 49 W
Grand
Boulevard
117070013 0.21 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
45 45 W
Grand
Boulevard
117070014 0.14 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
46 E 8th
Street
117232006 0.16 LDR HDR SF MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
48 312 S
Merrill
Street
117092007 0.52 LDR HDR SF MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
58 -- 117070036 0.14 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
59 115 N.

Belle
117070012 0.17 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
60 111 N.

Belle
117070033 0.16 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
61 -- 117070040 0.14 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
General Plan Legend Zoning Legend
GC General Commercial AHO Affordable Housing Overlay
LDR Low Density Residential
3 to 6 units per acre
SF Single Family Residential
MDR Medium Density Residential
6 to 15 units per acre
MF1 & MF Multiple Family Residential
HDR High Density Residential
15-36 units per acre
GC General Commercial
MU1 Mixed Use 1 Commercial/Residential CS Community Services MU2 Mixed Use 2 Commercial/Industrial TC Transitional Commercial LI Light Industry GB Gateway Business
M1 Light Manufacturing
wis Ct

BNSF RR
Railroad St
N
Grant
Ave
Railroad St
Ott St
Bradford Cir
N
Lin
c
oln
Av
e
rpris
e
Ct

BNSF RR
N
Lincoln
Ave

BNSF RR
Railroad St
Adams
Cir
Violet St
Contreras Park
7 Path: Y:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx /
Zone 3 Parcels and Zoning
0 70 140 280
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Zone 3
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone Parcel
ID
No.

Site
Address
or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed General
Plan Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
7 1065
Railroad
Street
118210041 1.86 GC
(General
Commercial)
MU1
(Mixed Use 1
Commercial/Residential)
C3
(General
Commercial)
C3 (AHO)
(General
Commercial
w/
Affordable
Housing
Overlay)
CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
N
S
h
erid
a
n
St
Harrison St
N
M
ain
St
Corona Plaza
Shopping
Center
Circle City
Center

BNSF RR
91 Depot Dr
W Blaine St
N
M
ain
St
W Grand Blvd
Riverside Fwy
Riverside Fwy
CA-91 Express Lanes
CA-91 Express Lanes
51 N
J
oy
St
E Rincon St
E Princeland Ct
Corona City FS
# 2
Nazarene
University

BNSF RR
91 N
J
oy
St
E Harrison St
E Grand Blvd
Riverside Fwy
Riverside Fwy
North Main
Corona
Metrolink
Station
50 METROLINK-North
Main Corona
Riverside Fwy
E Par
BNSF
91 E Har
L
ero
y
Dr
Riverside Fwy
97 56
70 64
59 58
57 65
60 55
61 35
37 38
39 96
102
69 66
36 34
101
68 63
67 62
104
Path: X:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx Zone 5 Parcels and Zoning
0 70 140 280
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Filbert St
E 4th St
E 3rd St
E 5th St
S
J
o
y
St
F
uller St
E 7th St
Circle City Dr
Quarry St
E 8th St
Pine S
C
t
edar St
E
Grand
Blvd
h St
E 6th St
Fullerton Ave
Riverside Fwy
Joy Park
E Francis St
Ford St
Ford St
St
P ark
Ln
Fullerton Ave
d Blvd
Lincoln
Alternative
Elementary
School

BNSF RR
15 Quarry St
Quarry St
Spruce St
Rimpau A
ve
Rimpau Ave
Ford St
Circle City Dr
El S
obra
nte
Rd
E 7th St
E 6th St
E 6th St
C
oro
n
a
F
wy
USFS - Corona
Station 21
96 Acacia St
E Francis St
Circle City Dr
Sycamore Ln
Redwood St
Beverly Rd
El Sobrante
Rd
Corona
Fwy
Corona
Sunnyslope
Cemetery
95 42
43 90
44 40
89 41
81 82
55 56
30 93
31 57
53 54
47 50
88 87
16 21
25 18
53 24
39 54
52 17 22
26 27
20 19
23 103
83 Path: Y:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx /
Zone 5 Parcels and Zoning
0 110 230 450
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Zone 5
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address
or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
39 1201 E
6th
Street
115690013 2.96 MU2 -- BP BP (AHO) SPA2022-0003
40 Circle
City
Drive
111290040 0.44 MU2 -- M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
41 Circle
City
Drive
111290039 1.71 MU2 -- M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
42 Circle
City
Drive
111290021 1.08 MU2 -- M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
43 Circle
City
Drive
111290022 0.77 MU2 -- M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
44 Circle
City
Drive
111290023 0.47 MU2 -- M1 M1 (AHO) CZ2022-0003
47 E 5th
Street
117331006 0.74 MU2 -- BP BP (AHO) SPA2022-0003
53 E 6th
Street
117332015 0.27 MU2 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
54 E 6th
Street
117332016 0.33 MU2 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
55 E Blaine
Street
119311019 0.27 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
56 E Blaine
Street
119311018 0.17 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
57 E Blaine
Street
119311017 0.07 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
58 E Blaine
Street
119311016 0.07 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
59 E Blaine
Street
119311043 0.10 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
60 E Blaine
Street
119311042 0.10 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
61 E Blaine
Street
119311041 0.10 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
62 100 E
Harrison
Street
119311025 1.09 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
63 E Blaine
Street
119311015 0.07 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
64 E Blaine
Street
119311014 0.07 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
ID
No.

Site
Address
or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
65 E Blaine
Street
119311013 0.04 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
66 320 E
Harrison
Street
119311005 0.53 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
67 280 E
Harrison
Street
119311004 0.35 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
68 240 E
Harrison
Street
119311003 0.27 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
69 122 E
Harrison
Street
119311002 0.97 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
70 E Blaine
Street
119311040 0.20 MU1 -- MU MU
(AHO)
SPA2022-0003
81 1210 E
6th
Street
115080002 0.38 MU2 -- BP BP (AHO) SPA2022-0003
82 1210 E
6th
Street
115080041 0.62 MU2 -- BP BP (AHO) SPA2022-0003
83 1210 E
6 th
Street
115080012 1.82 MU2 -- BP BP(AHO) SPA2022-0003
87 1203
Circle
City
Drive
111280005 1.05 HDR UDR R3 R3 (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
88 1154 E
6th
Street
111280001 2.13 MU2 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
89 6th
Street
111280004 0.90 MU2 -- GC GC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
90 n/a 111290036 2.31 MU2 -- M1 M1 (AHO) SPA2022-0003
93 E 3rd
Street
117122003 0.54 MU1 -- TC TC (AHO) SPA2022-0003
96 400 E
Rincon
Street
119280070 3.00 LI MU1 BP BP (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
97 400 E
Rincon
Street
119280071 3.00 LI MU1 BP BP (AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
101 160 E
Rincon
Street
119280044 1.92 GC MU1 CR CR(AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
ID
No.

Site
Address
or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
102 250 E
Rincon
Street
119280068 1.14 LI MU1 BP BP(AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
103 E. Sixth
St.
115080001 0.27 MU2 -- BP BP(AHO) SPA2022-0003
104 170 E.

Rincon
119280045 1.65 GC MU1 CR CR(AHO) SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
Residential Rezone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
16 801
Quarry
Street
117281007 0.25 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
17 805
Quarry
Street
117281008 0.24 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
18 901
Quarry
Street
117281010 0.23 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
19 907
Quarry
Street
117281012 0.21 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
20 911
Quarry
Street
117281013 0.22 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
21 915
Quarry
Street
117281014 0.23 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
22 919
Quarry
Street
117281015 0.22 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
23 923
Quarry
Street
117281016 0.22 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
24 1001
Quarry
Street
117282005 0.84 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
25 1019
Quarry
Street
117290019 0.20 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
26 1023
Quarry
Street
117290020 0.20 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
27 1025
Quarry
Street
117290021 0.20 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
30 Quarry
Street
117281009 0.24 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
31 Quarry
Street
117281011 0.23 LDR MDR SF R2 SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
34 44 E
Grand
Boulevard
117080003 0.18 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
35 116 N
Victoria
Avenue
117080004 0.17 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
36 110 N
Victoria
Avenue
117080005 0.18 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
37 108 N
Victoria
Avenue
117080018 0.17 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
38 115 N
Victoria
Avenue
117080009 0.21 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
39 111 N
Victoria
Avenue
117080022 0.16 GC HDR GB MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
50 551 S Joy
Street
117165020 0.52 MU1 -- RO MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
52 1108 E
5th Street
117332005 0.5 MU2 MU1 GC MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
53 6th Street 117332006 0.5 MU2 MU1 GC MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
54 1111 E
6th Street
117332004 0.67 MU2 MU1 GC MF SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
55 5th Street 117332003 0.32 MU2 MU1 GC MF SPA2022-0003 GPA2022-0002
56 6th Street 117332007 0.17 MU2 MU1 GC MF SPA2022-0003 GPA2022-0002
57 6th Street 117332008 0.17 MU2 MU1 GC MF SPA2022-0003 GPA2022-0002
General Plan Legend Zoning Legend
GC General Commercial AHO Affordable Housing Overlay
LDR Low Density Residential
3 to 6 units per acre
SF Single Family Residential
MDR Medium Density Residential
6 to 15 units per acre
MF Multiple Family
HDR High Density Residential
15-36 units per acre
R-2 Low Density Multiple Family
Residential
UDR Urban Density Residential
36-60 units per acre
R3 Multiple Family Residential
MU1 Mixed Use 1
Commercial/Residential
GC General Commercial
MU2 Mixed Use 2
Commercial/Industrial
CR Commercial Retail
LI Light Industry TC Transitional Commercial
GB Gateway Business
BP Business Park
RO Residential Office
M1 Light Manufacturing
C3 General Commercial
MU Mixed Use Commercial/Residential
Sampson Ave
M
ariah Ct
E 6th St
Magnolia
Ave
Pole Position
Raceway
Compton Ave
Sherborn
S t
olia Ave
Estelle
Somerdale S t
S Neece St
Ellis S t
Harlow Ave
S Temescal S t
Andover S t
Barker Ln
N
Temescal
S t
Candlew
Brotherton S t
Indiana Ave
Indiana Ave
Wagoner Ln
Moody S t
Briarvale St
Windsong S t
Blair St
Blair St
Magnolia Ave
E 6th S t
E 6th St
Christian
School
Home Gardens
All American Way
Path: Y:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx /
Zone 7 Parcels and Zoning
0 190 380 750
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
2 Zone 7 Area
Residential Rezone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General
Plan Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
General
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
2 777 S
Temescal
Street
107050034 1.80 GC
(General
Commercial)
HDR
(High
Density
Residential)
C2
(Restricted
Commercial)
MP
(Mobile
Home
Park)
CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
Turquois
e
Kroonen Dr
Cannes Dr
Hibiscus
St
Eure
k
a
St
M
ang
Nic
e
Dr
S
an R
e
m
o
Dr
Fir
O
a
k
Av
e
Via
Pacifica
Via Pacifica
M
angular Av
e
Orc
h
ard
Ln
Brockton Dr
Tabitha Way
Hibis
cus
St
Bridgeport Rd
Fairmont Dr
Hearthside Dr
Shady Mill Rd
Eure
ka
St
H
eritag
e
Dr
W
aterfall Ln
Peony
St
Pajero Dr
Lavendar Way
Millbrook Rd
Stephanie Dr
Old Hickory Rd
Alee Cir
W Ontario Ave
Ontario Park
Benjamin
Franklin
Elementary
W H
Lincoln Park
Letha Raney
Intermediate
Buena Vista A
ve
Solano St
Othello Ln
S
ena
St
Cortez Dr
Westpark Ln
C
onejo
St
Cordoz
a
St
Galisteo St
Winthrop Dr
D
a
kin Dr
Esther Dr
M
a
c
beth A
ve
Montoya
Horatio Ave
W Ontario Ave
S
Linc
oln Av
e
49 Path: Y:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx /
Zone 9 Parcels and Zoning
0 120 240 480
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Zone 9 Area
Residential Rezone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address or
Street
Assessor’s
Parcel Number
(APN)
Acres
General Plan
Land Use
Designation
Proposed
General Plan
Current
Community
Facilities Plan
Proposed
Community
Facilities Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
49 1220 W
Ontario
Avenue
113020015 2.00 LDR
(Low Density
Residential, 3-6
units per acre)
MDR
(Medium Density
Residential, 6-15
units per acre)
L
(Low Density
Residential, 3-6
units per acre)
M
(Medium Density
Residential, 6-15
units per acre)
R1-9.6
(Single
Family
Residential)
R2
(Low Density
Multiple Family
Residential)
CZ2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
CFPA2022-0002
Anthony
Elementary
School
Rimpau
Ave
Rimpau
Ave
Johnson
Ln
James
Ave
Sweet
Rain
Way
Madison Ln
ase Dr
E Chase Dr
Carter Ln
endrick Ct
Ramsgate Dr
Taft Ln
Thacker
Dr
Vermont
Dr
othill Pkwy
E Foothill Pkwy
Chase Park
Santiago High
School
White Holly Dr
Fern
Hollow
Dr
Haven Tree Ln
Walke
nridg
e
Dr
Eagle
Crest Dr
E Foothill Pkwy
Cooa
CerritoPlaza
15 15
State
St
Piute Creek
Dr
Taber St Calico
Cir
Bla
c
ks
mith
Path
Spring
Meadow
Dr
E Chase Dr
Cherokee Rd
Cottage
Dr
Whispering Wind Ln
Star Crest
Ln
Heartland
Way
Colony Way
California
Ave
E Ontario Ave
Corona
Fwy
93 Starne Rd
State St
Marquez Way
Tamarisk Ln
Calico Cir
ia
Ct
Lupine Cir
Carleton Ct
C
alifornia Ave 58
Copyright nearmap 2015, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Corona, County of Riverside, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Path: Y:\Projects\Mayra's Projects\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps\Zone Area Maps.aprx Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA / Zone 11 Parcels and Zoning
0 140 270 540
Feet
Quasi Public
Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Light Industrial
High Density Residential
General Industrial
Flood Control
Commercial/Office
Commercial
Zone Type
Rezone Sites
AHO Sites
Parcel Type
Agriculture
Zone 11 Area
Residential Rezone Parcels
ID
No.

Site
Address
or Street
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
(APN)
Acres
General Plan
Land Use
Designation
Proposed
General Plan
Current
Community
Facilities
Plan
Proposed
Community
Facilities
Plan
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Application
Type
58 2880
California
Avenue
120130038 5.40 LDR
(Low Density
Residential, 3-
6 units per
acre)
MDR
(Medium
Density
Residential,
6-15 units per
acre)
L
(Low
Density
Residential,
3-6 units
per acre)
M
(Medium
Density
Residential,
6-15 units
per acre)
L
(Low Density)
SCR
(Senior
Citizen
Residential)
SPA2022-0003
GPA2022-0002
CFPA2022-0002