Agenda packet — Fontana City Council, June 23, 2026 (part 5 of 6)

d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

As documented in the CE Justification, the Project is an allowable use under the General Plan and Zoning designations and therefore has been evaluated as such in the General Plan EIR. According to the City of Fontana General Plan Land Use Map, the Project Site has a land use designation of Light Industrial (I-L) and is zoned as West End Specific Plan. The Project Site is surrounded by a Target warehouse to the north, Vision Communications and Open Door Solutions to the east, Southern California Edison to the west, and a Service Partners, a building supply warehouse to the south. Surrounding uses predominantly consist of industrial uses.

The land uses and zoning designations surrounding the Project Site are as follows:

• North: Uses to the north are designated Light Industrial (L-I) and zoned West End Specific Plan (BP3).
• East: Uses to the east are designated Light Industrial (L -I) and zoned West End Specific Plan (BP3).
• South: Uses to the south are designated Light Industrial (L-I) and zoned West End Specific Plan (BP3).
• West: Uses to the west are designated Light Industrial (L -I) and zoned West End Specific Plan (BP3).

Comment Letter 1 -Lozeau Drury LLP Letter Dated May 11, 2026

General Response to Comment Letter 1

The Lozeau Drury law firm has submitted comments on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER), a nonprofit led by Southern California District Council of Laborers1.

In general , multiple comments provided by Lozeau Drury assert that the technical analyses supporting the CEQA Exemption improperly evaluate d the Project’s potential environmental impacts. Per the discussion below, these claims are without merit. As documented here, in the CE Justification, and in the studies prepared in support of the Memo, the City has appropriately found the Project exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15332.

The analytic documents provided by the commenter are acknowledged. However, these analytic documents and supporting remarks at most present evidence a “difference of opinion”. The City’s factual determination that the Project satisfies the criteria for application of a categorical

1 https://www.dailyjournal.com/article/379577-union-linked-group-challenges-project-s-ceqa-exemption 948
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 3 ends

exemption must be upheld if it is supported by substantial evidence. ( San Francisco Beautiful v.

City and County of San Francisco (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1012, 1021 (“ San Francisco Beautiful”); Banker’s Hill, Hillcrest, Park West Community Preservation Group v. City of San Diego (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 249. 267 -269 [substantial evidence test governs review of city’s determination that project falls within the Infill Development exemption].)

Substantial evidence includes “facts, reasonable assumptions predicated on facts, and expert opinion supported by facts” and is “enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair argument can be made to support a concl usion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15384.) Substantial evidence does not include “[a]rgument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, evidence which is clearly erroneous or inaccurate, or evidence of social or economic impacts ….” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21082.2, subd. (c); CEQA Guidelines, § 15384.)

In applying this substantial evidence standard, the City does not need to “weigh conflicting evidence,” “determine who has the better argument,” nor will a court set City’s the agency’s decision “on the ground that an opposite conclusion would have been equally or more reasonable.” (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal . (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 393.) The City “is the finder of fact,” and courts “must indulge all reasonable inferences from the evidence that woul d support the agency’s determinations and resolve all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the agency’s decision.” (Save Our Peninsula Com. v. Monterey County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 117.) The City’s decision that a project is categorically exempt is to be affirmed unless “there is no basis in the record for its determination that the project was exempt from CEQA.” ( World Bus. Academy v. Cal. State Lands Commn . (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 476, 496.)

In Banker’s Hill Hillcrest Park West Community Preservation Ground v. City of San Diego, supra, 139 Cal.App.4th 249, the Court expressly considered the standard of review that applies to the question of whether the Infill Development Exemption applies, by its own terms, to a project. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15332, subd. (d); Banker's Hill, at pp. 268 -269.) The Court held that the Infill Development Exemption “requires the agency to determine that ‘[a]pproval of the project would not result in a significant effect to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. Thus, the [exemption] calls for the agency to make a definitive finding, at the preliminary review stage, as to whether or not there will be a significant environmental effect. The use of this language leads us to conclude that the fair argument standard does not apply.” ( Ibid.) Accordingly, use of the Infill Development Exemption does not depend on whether a project may have a significant effect, but instead depends on if it will have a significant effect. The Court concluded “[w]e inquire whether the record contains substantial evidence to support the City's finding that the Project will not have a significant effect. If we locate substantial evidence in the record to support that conclusion, we will uphold the City's determination, even if other evidence arguably supports a different conclusion.” (Ibid.)

Page 4 ends

exemption applies.” (San Francisco Beautiful, supra, 226 Cal.App.4th at p. 1023.) To satisfy that burden “a party challenging an agency’s exemption decision must produce substantial evidence that the project has the potential for a [significant] adverse environmental impact.” ( Association for Protection of Environmental Values in Ukiah v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720, 728.)

Accordingly, despite the disagreements expressed by the commenter, and as documented here, in the CE Justification Memo, and in the studies prepared in support of the Memo, substantial evidence supports the City’s findings that the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15332. As so, no additional environmental review is required.

The Lozeau Drury letter was submitted with an exhibit (A), a letter prepared by Shawn Smallwood, PhD. The Lozeau Drury letter and e ach of the comments within the exhibit have been numbered and responses are provided herein by letter/comment number.

Comment 1-1

This is an introductory comment stating the law firm is providing comments on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”) and does not provide any CEQA-related comments.

Response to Comment 1-1

The comment is noted for the record and no response is required.

Comment 1-2

This comment states that SAFER maintains the Project does not qualify for the Infill Exemption because substantial evidence shows the Project will have significant adverse impacts related to biological resources and therefore the City cannot rely on the Exemption.

Response to Comment 1-2

A Categorical Exemption Justification and supporting technical documents (Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report (Jennings Environmental, September 2025), Traffic Memorandum (Ganddini Group, December 9, 2025), Noise Impact Analysis (Ganddini Group, December 23, 2025), Hydrology Study (LDDC, revised July 22, 2024), and Cul tural Resources Report (LSA Associates, March 2022) were prepared to evaluate the Project’s consistency with the requirements for a Class 32 CE. Th e memorandum evaluated whether any of the exceptions to categorical exemptions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to the Project.

950
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 5 ends

CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 states that a Class 32 CE applies when:

f) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
g) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
h) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. i) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
j) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 lists the following exceptions to categorical exemptions:

a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR. e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

As more specifically addressed below, the CE Justification and supporting analyses, as well as this Memo, document that the Project meets all criteria shown above to qualify for an Infill Exemption 951
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 6 ends

and n o significant impacts that could not be mitigated to levels of less than significant were identified; the City has made the determination that an Infill Exemption is the appropriate CEQA document to use in approval of the project.

Comment 1-3

This comment states that SAFER’s review of the Project was assisted by wildlife ecologist Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D whose credentials and comments are submitted as Exhibit A attached to SAFER’s letter.

Response to Comment 1-3

The comment is noted for the record and no response is required. Responses to the referenced Exhibit comments are provided in subsequent responses.

Comment 1-4

Comment presents overview of the Project.

Response to Comment 1-4

The comment is noted for the record and no response is required.

Comment 1-5

This comment points out the three -tiered structure required by CEQA to determine whether a project is exempt from CEQA or if an Initial Study or EIR is required, and states that because the City exempted the Project from CEQA entirely, the first step of the CEQA process applies.

Response to Comment 1-5

If substantial evidence in the record supports the agency’s exemption determination, “the burden then shifts to the challenging party to produce evidence showing that one of the exceptions to the exemption applies.” (San Francisco Beautiful, supra, 226 Cal.App.4th at p. 1023.) To satisfy that burden “a party challenging an agency’s exemption decision must produce substantial evidence that the project has the potential for a [significant] adverse environmental impact.” ( Association for Protection of Environmental Values in Ukiah v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720, 728.)

Accordingly, despite the disagreements expressed by the commenter, and as documented here, in the CE Justification, and in the studies prepared in support of the Memo, substantial evidence supports the City’s findings that the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15332. As so, no additional environmental review is required.

952
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 7 ends

Comment 1-6

Commenter summarizes the classes of projects that are exempt from CEQA and highlights that a Class 32 Exemption is applicable to a project site that has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

Response to Comment 1-6

Comment does not identify any specific deficiencies or errors in the CE Justification for the Project. The comment is noted for the record and no response is required.

Comment 1-7

This comment states that the project does not qualify for an infill exemption because the project site has value as habitat for several special-status species, and that an initial study must be prepared. categorical exemptions.

Response to Comment 1-7

Comment 1-8

Comment states that there is substantial evidence that the project will have significant adverse impacts on biological resources precluding reliance on the Infill Exemption.

Response to Comment 1-8

Refer to General Response to Comments and Response to Comment 1-7.

Comment 1-9

The commenter states that Noriko Smallwood visited the site and found special -status species during March 21, 2026 and March 24, 2026 surveys.

Response to Comment 1-9

Comment does not identify any specific deficiencies or errors in the CE Justification for the Project. The comment is noted for the record and no response is required.

953
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 8 ends

Comment 1-10

Commenter states that their surveyor detected over five times the total number of species as Jennings.

Response to Comment 1-10

The Project’s potential to serve as habitat for special-status species were evaluated in an update to the Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report prepared for the Project September 10, 2025, by Jennigs Environmental, a biological resources consultant with over 13 years of professional experience working for public and private clients throughout Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Mr. Jennings found that, based on a literature review and personal observations made on the Project site and in the imme diate vicinity of the Project site , no State and/or federally -listed threatened or endangered species are documented/or expected to occur within the Project site.

Additionally, no plant species with the CNPS California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1 or 2 were observed on -site or documented to occur on -site in the relevant databases. No other sensitive species were observed within the project area or buffer area. The Project Site is highly disturbed.

The habitat on-site is ruderal/disturbed vegetation with gravel surfaces. The site offers no suitable habitat for any sensitive species or listed species. The Assessment concludes no further surveys for sensitive species are required.

The Assessment also notes that because the proposed Project is within Fontana it is subject to the City of Fontana General Plan Update 2015 -2035. When the City approved the General Plan it adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the General Plan Update 2015-2035 Environmental Impact Report (Resolution 2018 -096) as a condition of approval of the General Plan Update. The Program includes the following specific requirements as conditions of approval for individual development projects:

MM-BIO-1

1. Prior to initial grading or clearing of areas of suitable habitat within the Planning Area (e.g., a vacant site with a landscape of grassland or low -growing, arid scrub vegetation or agricultural use or vegetation), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey, in accordance with the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, to determine the presence or absence of burrowing owl within the proposed area of impact.

2. Results of surveys, including mitigation recommendations (i.e., a Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Report) shall be incorporated into the project -level CEQA compliance documentation.

3. Construction grading/clearing of areas of suitable habitat should occur between September 1 and January 31 to avoid impacts to breeding owls. If occupied burrows are discovered, they shall not be removed during nesting season (February 1 through August 31), unless a qualified biologist can determine that either the owls have not 954
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 9 ends

laid eggs or are incubating eggs, or that any young from the burrows are able to forage independently. If initial grading is scheduled to occur during nesting season, the following measures shall be implemented.

4. If removal of occupied burrows is necessary, passive relocation outside of nesting season shall be implemented under the supervision of the qualified biologist. This shall include covering/excavation of burrows and installation of one -way doors as necessary. One-way doors will allow owls inside the burrow to exit but not allow them to re-enter. The biologist shall wait a minimum of one week before the burrow may be excavated to allow the owls time to leave the area.

MM BIO-2

To avoid impacts to nesting birds and to comply with the MBTA, clearing of vegetation and removal of trees should occur between non -nesting (or non -breeding) season for birds (generally, September 1 to January 31). If this avoidance schedule is not feasible, the alternative is to carry out such activities under the supervision of a qualified biologist. This shall entail the following:

1. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction nesting bird survey no more than 14 days prior to initiating ground disturbance activities. The survey will consist of full coverage of the proposed disturbance limits and up to a 500 foot buffer area, determined by the biologist and taking into account the species nesting in the area and the habitat present.

2. If no active nests are found, no additional measures are required.

3. If “occupied” nests are found, their locations shall be mapped, species documented, and, to the degree feasible, the status of the nest (e.g., incubation of eggs, feeding of young, near fledging) recorded. The biologist shall establish a no-disturbance buffer around each active nest. The buffer area will be determined by the biologist based on the species present, surrounding habitat, and type of construction activities proposed in the area.

4. No construction or ground disturbance activities shall be conducted within the buffer until the biologist has determined the nest is no longer active and has informed the construction supervisor that activities may resume.

MM-BIO-3

The City of Fontana Planning Division shall require that all future project applicants prepare a Biological Assessment in conjunction with a project -level analysis. The Biological Assessment shall include a vegetation map of the proposed project area, analysis of the impacts associated with plant and animal species and habitats, and conduct habitat evaluations for burrowing owl, Delhi Sands flower -loving fly, San Diego pocket mouse, western mastiff bat, western yellow bat, and San Diego desert 955
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 10 ends

woodrat. If any of these special status species are determined to be present, then coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish and Game shall be concluded to determine what, if any, permits or clearances are required prior to development.

Each project-level Biological Assessment shall include an analysis of potential impacts to rare plants and rare natural communities in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Game’s November 2009 guidance for Protocols for Surveying and Evalu ating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. For those projects located in the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly Recovery Unit, the project -level Biological Assessment shall include focused surveys. The Biological Assessmen t shall prescribe actions necessary to mitigate the impacts identified for a particular project. Such actions shall include either avoidance of a sensitive resource, or payment of in -lieu fees that shall be used to purchase off -site replacement habitat. In instances where transplantation/relocation, off-site preservation, or fee payment is selected, habitat mitigation ratios shall be a minimum of 1:1, unless a greater ratio is required by a state or federal wildlife agency. The requi rements of the Biological Assessment shall be a condition of approval of the individual development project.

As recommended in the 2025 Biological Resources Assessment prepared in accordance with the General Plan’s adopted Condition of Approval s, nesting bird surveys shall be implemented prior to construction if construction occurs during the period of February 1 through September 15.

Comment 1-11

Commenter discusses other deficiencies found in the Jennings’s survey findings.

Response to Comment 1-11

See Response to Comment 1 -9. As noted in the General Biological Assessment prepared on September 10, 2025, the Project site does not contain suitable habitat for these species and thus no wildlife surveys are justified. Further, CEQA Guidelines section 15332 does not require wildlife surveys, it only queries whether a project site has value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. As the Project site does not provide such habitat, that is the end of the CEQA Guidelines section 15332 inquiry with regard to endangered, rare or threatened species.

Comment 1-12

Commenter states they found that the City’s desktop review was incomplete.

956
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 11 ends

Response to Comment 1-12

The commenter incorrectly states that only one database was used. As noted in the Biological report “The most recent records of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) managed by CDFW (CDFW 2025), the USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS 2025), and the California Native Plant Society’s Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2024) were reviewed”. 2 The findings of which are included in Table 1 in Attachment C of the report. The findings concluded that no habitat for listed or rare species.

The most recent records of these databases were searched for the following quadrangles containing and surrounding the Project site: Fontana, Devore, Guasti, and Cucamonga Peak USGS

7.5-minute quadrangles. The Devore, Guasti, and Cucamonga Peak quads were included in this search due to the site’s proximity to their borders. Given the developed nature of the surrounding land uses, 5 miles is considered an over estimation. Typically, a 1 -mile radius is sufficient for a site location consistent with the Project site. However, the additional radius was included to make the analysis conservative and included all relevant species.

The commentor’s claim that 138 special status species of wildlife occur close to the Project site is incorrect, as the commenter relies on unreliable public, not scientific, databases to offer this occurrence data.

Comment 1-13

Commenter states that the CE Memo and Jennings Report deficiently described the Project’s “environmental setting” and thereby insufficiently analyzed the Project’s biological impacts.

Response to Comment 1-13

CEQA Guidelines section 15332 does not require analysis of potential impacts to wildlife species, it only queries whether a project site has value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

As the Project site does not provide such habitat, that is the end of the CEQA Guidelines section 15332 inquiry with regard to endangered, rare or threatened species.

Regardless, the following responses are provided for informational purposes:

As documented in the Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report prepared for the Project September 10, 2025, the Project Site is highly disturbed. The habitat on -site is ruderal/disturbed vegetation with gravel surfaces and previous development. The site offers no suitable habitat for any sensitive species or listed species. Therefore, no further surveys are required. The site contains gravel and concrete, imported soils, and is routinely mowed and disked per fire code. The minimal amount of ruderal vege tation that is present on site does not support any sensitive species as it

2 Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report, Jennings Environmental, September 10, 2025, Page 1 957
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 12 ends

offers no habitat for nesting, roosting, or breeding. Simply seeing an airborne species fly over the site does not determine the site’s ability to host said species.

Comment 1-14

Commenter deems the site as habitat for special -status species and therefore an Infill Exemption is inappropriate.

Response to Comment 1-14

See Responses to Comments 1 -9, 1 -10, 1 -11, 1 -12, and 1 -13 above. The Project has been adequately evaluated to determine that, per CEQA Guidelines section 15332(c) the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The City concludes that a Categorical Exemption is the appropriate documentation.

Comment 1-15

Commenter concludes that the Project will have significant adverse impacts on biological resources, including: (a) habitat loss; (b) interference with wildlife movement; (c) traffic mortality; and (d) cumulative impacts.

Response to Comment 1-15

See Responses to Comments 1 -9, 1 -10, 1 -11, 1-12, and 1 -13 above. The Project has been adequately evaluated to determine that, per CEQA Guidelines section 15332(c) the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

Comment 1-16

Commenter states that the Project will have a significant impact on the reproductive capacity of the Project site as a result of habitat loss.

Response to Comment 1-16

Jenning Environmental notes that the Commenter does not explain how their alleged number in the Comment was calculated and what the scientific literature supports th e conclusion. Without this information, there is no substantial evidence to support Commenter’s estimate. As stated in the 2025 Biological Assessment, there is no suitable habitat for any sensitive species.

Comment 1-17

Commenter states that, as one of the last remaining patches of open space in the region, the Project site provides wildlife with essential stopover and staging opportunities, thereby facilitating wildlife movement.
958
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 13 ends

Response to Comment 1-17
CEQA Guidelines section 15332 does not require analysis of potential impacts to wildlife species, it only queries whether a project site has value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

As the Project site does not provide such habitat, that is the end of the CEQA Guidelines section 15332 inquiry with regard to endangered, rare or threatened species.

Regardless, the following responses is provided for informational purposes:

As mentioned previously, the Project site is a ruderal site with non -native vegetation and large amounts of disturbance. The site is completely surrounded by developed commercial budlings.

Additionally, the site is not mapped within a designated area for wildlife movement as mapped by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 3. According to Center for Biological Diversity October 2003 Principles of Wildlife Corridor Design, wildlife movement corridors, also called dispersal corridors or landscape linkages as opposed to linear habitats, are linear features whose primary wildlife function is to connect at least two significant habitat areas.4 The conditions on site do not support the uses described in the comment as it is within a mostly developed area of Fontana. Furthermore, the proposed Project will have landscaping associated with the project. This landscaping could be used by wildlife post construction.

The commenter states that a certain number of birds would be impacted by the Project, however, that calculation is incorrect and flawed. The commenter’s opinion regarding the number of birds suggested is based on flawed analysis (see discussed above) as to the Project site’s ability to host said species. The commenter has incorrectly evaluated the site, which does not support high quality habitat as presumed in the commenter. Instead, as discussed above, the Project site contains no such habitat. Therefore, the Project site will not affect the species listed in the comment.

Comment 1-18

Commenter states that the Project will have a significant adverse impact on wildlife as a result of collisions with the additional traffic generated by the Project.

Response to Comment 1-18

The commenter states that a certain number of wildlife would be impacted by the Project, however, that calculation is incorrect and flawed. Regarding an increase in traffic, The CE Memo rely on daily trip generation of 99 daily trips with 9 trips to occur in the AM peak hour and 11 trips to occur in the PM peak hour. Converting the Project’s truck trips to passenger car equivalents results in approximately 150 daily trips with 13 trips occurring during AM peak hours and 15 occurring during PM peak hours.5 An annual VMT is not used to determine trip generation or traffic patterns.

3 https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios6/?bookmark=648
4 https://biologicaldiversity.org/publications/papers/wild-corridors.pdf 5 Hilton Industrial Facility Project Transportation Screening Assessment, December 9, 2025, Ganddini Group, Inc. 959
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 14 ends

The commenter’s opinion regarding the number of animals suggested is also based on flawed analysis (see discussed above) as to the Project site’s ability to host said species. The commenter has incorrectly evaluated the site, which does not support high quality habitat as presumed in the commenter. Instead, as discussed above, the Project site contains no such habitat. Therefore, the Project site will not affect the species listed in the comment.

Comment 1-19

Comment states that there was no evaluation of cumulative impacts on biological resources as no past, ongoing, or future projects in the area were listed.

Response to Comment 1-19

As documented in the CE Justification, cumulative impacts were evaluated under CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2(b). CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2(b) disallows a categorical exemption to be used for a project when the cumulative impact of successive projects “of the same type in the same place over time.” It has a narrower definition than the broad definition of cumulative impacts as defined and applied elsewhere in CEQA practice. Further in Robinson v. City & County of San Francisco (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 950, 958, the court of appeal held that the phrase “in the same place” should be interpreted to refer to the area where the environmental impact will occur and that the affected area will depend on the nature of the environmental impact. Here, SAFER has not identified successive projects of the same type in the same area that would result in a significant impact or provided evidence of a significant cumulative biological impact.

Based on findings of the experts who prepared Project-specific technical reports in support of the CE Justification, the Project site has no value as habitat for several special-status species, and the Project will not have significant adverse impacts rela ted to biological resources. Therefore, there is no substantial evidence that the Project would contribute to a significant cumulative biological impact. As explained in Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce v. City of Santa Monica (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 786, 7 99, where a project itself contributes no cognizable environmental impact, adding that impact to the impacts of other projects does not create a cumulative impact.

Further, the Project Site is surrounded by a Target warehouse to the north, Vision Communications and Open Door Solutions to the east, Southern California Edison to the west, and a Service Partners, a building supply warehouse to the south. Surrounding uses predominantly consist of industrial uses and the project area is already built out such that there are no projects proceeding in the same place and no cumulative impacts per CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2(b) could occur.

Comment 1-20

Comment states that agencies cannot rely on a Categorical Exemption if to do so would require the imposition of mitigation measures, and further disputes the City’s reliance on a Condition of Approval requiring the Applicant to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds. 960
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 15 ends

Response to Comment 1-20

The proposed Project is within Fontana and is therefore subject to the City of Fontana General Plan Update 2015-2035. When the City approved the General Plan Update 2015-2035, it adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the General Plan Update 2015 -2035 Environmental Impact Report (Resolution 2018 -096) as a condition of approval. The Program includes the following specific requirements as conditions of approval that must be imposed on future individual development projects such as the Project:

MM-BIO-1

2. Results of surveys, including mitigation recommendations (i.e., a Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Report) shall be incorporated into the project -level CEQA compliance documentation.

3. Construction grading/clearing of areas of suitable habitat should occur between September 1 and January 31 to avoid impacts to breeding owls. If occupied burrows are discovered, they shall not be removed during nesting season (February 1 through August 31), unless a qualified biologist can determine that either the owls have not laid eggs or are incubating eggs, or that any young from the burrows are able to forage independently. If initial grading is scheduled to occur during nesting season, the following measures shall be implemented.

MM BIO-2

961
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 16 ends

2. If no active nests are found, no additional measures are required.

Although significant biology impacts will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of the above mitigation measures, the following mitigation measures are considered as best practices to be applied to future projects as may be necessary to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. This following list of mitigation measures is not all inclusive of mitigation measures that may be adopted for future projects but serve as a guide and performance standards that constitute the minimum level of measures to reduce environmental impacts to acceptable levels.

MM-BIO-3

The City of Fontana Planning Division shall require that all future project applicants prepare a Biological Assessment in conjunction with a project -level analysis. The Biological Assessment shall include a vegetation map of the proposed project area, analysis of the impacts associated with plant and animal species and habitats, and conduct habitat evaluations for burrowing owl, Delhi Sands flower -loving fly, San Diego pocket mouse, western mastiff bat, western yellow bat, and San Diego desert woodrat. If a ny of these special status species are determined to be present, then coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish and Game shall be concluded to determine what, if any, permits or clearances are required prior to development.

Page 17 ends

Biological Assessment shall prescribe actions necessary to mitigate the impacts identified for a particular project. Such actions shall include either avoidance of a sensitive resource, or payment of in -lieu fees that shall be used to purchase off -site replacement habitat. In instances where transplantation/relocation, off-site preservation, or fee payment is selected, habitat mitigation ratios shall be a minimum of 1:1, unless a greater ratio is required by a state or federal wildlife agency. The requi rements of the Biological Assessment shall be a condition of approval of the individual development project.

The General Plan Update applies to all development in the City ; its provisions constitute regulations of general applicability. Thus, the City’s imposition as a condition of approval of one of these regulations of general applicability is not the imposition of a project -specific mitigation measure, and does not preclude the City from findings the Project categorically exempt from CEQA.

Comment 1-21

Commenter reiterates their position that mitigation is being provided in the CE to reduce impacts and therefore the project cannot be exempt from CEQA.

Response to Comment 1-21

Refer to Response to Comment 1-20.

Comment 1-22

Commenter believes that the nesting bird surveys described in the General Plan are flawed.

Response to Comment 1-22

Per the City’s adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the General Plan Update 2015-2035 Environmental Impact Report (Resolution 2018-096) as a condition of approval of the General Plan Update, the Project, as an individual development project, is subject to General Plan MMs BIO-1, 2 and 3, including the provisions which provides that “the requirements of the Biological Assessment shall be a condition of approval of the individual development project .” The City disagrees that the recommendation is flawed , as the condition meets the intent of protecting migratory and nesting birds protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) while conforming to CDFW guidelines and recommendations.

Further, typically, minimum qualifications for a Qualified Biologist include a bachelor’s degree in biological or environmental science, natural resources management, or related discipline; field experience in the habitat types that may occur at the project site; familiarity with the Covered Species (or closely related species) that may occur at the project site; and prior preconstruction survey, construction monitoring, or construction oversight experience. 963
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 18 ends

Comment 1-23

Commenter states “ The mitigation measure would only apply to the breeding season of the preconstruction survey, after which there would be no further production of birds from the project site, since the Project’s impact on birds would be permanent. (Id.) Thus, the conservation benefits of this measure would be minimal compared to the Project’s potential impacts on breeding birds. (Id.)”

Response to Comment 1-23

See Response to Comment 1-22.

Comment 1-24

Regarding the text on burrowing owl surveys in particular, Dr. Smallwood found that the language is outdated because it does not adhere to the CDFW’s burrowing owl survey and mitigation guidelines and does not indicate whether consultation with the CDFW about whether to obtain an incidental take permit has been initiated.

Response to Comment 1-24

As stated in the Biological Report , t he conditions present on -site are not suitable for BUOW.

California ground squirrels, a burrow surrogate species, were not observed on -site. No evidence of BUOW was found in the survey area. No burrows of appropriate size, aspect, or shape were located and no BUOW pellets, feathers, or whitewash were found. No burrowing owl individuals were observed. 6 Additionally, the site does not contain friable soils, as evidence of gravel and cobble fill was found on -site. These factors preclude this species from the site. Therefore, no further surveys or mitigation measures are required or recommended.

Comment 1-25

Commenter suggests multiple other mitigation measures that the City should implement to effectively reduce the Project’s significant adverse impacts on biological resources, should the Project proceed. Potential mitigation measures include compensatory habitat protection, compensatory mitigation for traffic mortality, donations to wildlife rehabilitation facilities, and native plant landscaping. ( Id. at 34-35.) An MND or EIR is required to address the issues in the City’s mitigation measure for pre-construction nesting bird surveys and implement the mitigation measures suggested by Dr. Smallwood.

6 Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report, Jennings Environmental, September 10, 2025 (pp. 3-4; Attachment C, Table 1, p. 15.)
964
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 19 ends

Response to Comment 1-25

See Response to Comment 1-24.

Comment 1-26

Commenter states that the Project does not qualify for CEQA’s Infill Exemption due to the Unusual Circumstances Exception.

Response to Comment 1-26

The Unusual Circumstances Exception (“Exception”) prohibits categorical exemptions where there is a “reasonable possibility” that a project will significantly impact the environment “due to unusual circumstances.” (14 CCR § 15300.2(c).) This exception applies only when both unusual circumstances and a significant impact as a result of those unusual circumstances are shown. (Berkeley Hillside Preservation v City of Berkeley “Berkeley Hillside” (2015) 60 Cal.4th 1086, 1104) As the Supreme Court explained in Berkeley Hillside, the City’s determination whether this exception applies involves two distinct questions: (1) whether the project presents unusual circumstances, and (2) if the project presents unusual circumstances, whether there is a reasonable possibility that a significant environmental impact will result from those unusual circums tances. (60 Cal.4th at 1098.) The City considers the second prong of this two part test only if it first finds that some circumstance of the project is unusual. If the City finds that the project does not present unusual circumstances, the exception is inapplicable, and the City need not reach the second prong of the two part test.

Here, as documented in the CE Justification, the City’s determination whether the Project presents unusual circumstances involves a factual inquiry under which the City weigh ed the relevant evidence to determine if those circumstances are unusual in comparison with other projects in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. It determined that the Project would not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circu mstances and involves construction activities typical for other similar projects in the City that have been approved pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines section 15332 exemption. An example of a similar project approved by the City pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 exemption is the warehouse project (MCN22-057), which was approved by the Fontana Planning Commission on December 20, 2022. As such the Project does not present unusual circumstances and the City need not reach the second prong of the two part test.

Comment 1-27

Commenter states that they have submitted substantial evidence that the Project will have significant adverse impacts related to biological resources. The fact that these impacts will occur constitutes an unusual circumstance, thereby precluding the City’s reliance on the Exemption.

965
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 20 ends

Response to Comment 1-27

See Response to Comment 1-26.

Comment 1-28

Concluding comment that the City cannot rely on a CEQA Infill Exemption because SAFER has provided substantial evidence showing that the Project will have significant adverse impacts on biological resources. Therefore, SAFER respectfully requests that the City Council find that the Project does not qualify for the Exemption. The City instead must prepare an MND or EIR before Project approval.

Response to Comment 1-28

Comment noted; refer to prior responses. The City has determined that a Class 32 Exemption is appropriate for the Project.

966
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 21 ends

Comment Letter 1A – Exhibit A to Lozeau Drury Letter

This letter dated March 30, 2026 was prepared by Shawn Smallwood, PhD and addresses biological resources impacts associated with the Project.

Comment 1A-1

The commenter states that they have concerns regarding use of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption because the site supports substantial habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species and cumulative impacts would be significant. Commenter believes the biological technical re port mischaracterizes the existing environment. Also provides is their qualifications and experience and states

Response to Comment 1A-1

Comment noted. Comment is introductory, does not address specifics of CEQA -related concerns and does not require a response.

Comment 1A-2

The Commenter provides his opinion as to CEQA’s requirements with regard to the protection of wildlife species.

Response to Comment 1A-2

Comment noted. Comment does not present any comments specific to the Project. No further comment is required.

Comment 1A-3

Comment states that the site was surveyed and a summary of Commenter’s site visit follows.

Response to Comment 1A-3

Comment noted. No response required to introductory comment.

Comment 1A-4

Comment provides an introduction to two surveys commenter states were conducted at the Project site by Noriko Smallwood, wildlife biologist , during March of 2026 and states how the surveys were conducted.

967
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 22 ends

Response to Comment 1A-4

Comment noted. No response required to introductory comment.

Comment 1A-5

The Commenter states the weather conditions at the site during the two March 2026 surveys.

Response to Comment 1A-5

Comment noted. No response required.

Comment 1A-6

The Commenter states that vegetation found at the site was primarily annual grassland bordered by mature pine and eucalyptus trees. Commenter provides two photos of the site.

Response to Comment 1A-6

The types of vegetation cited by commenter are not what was found by the Jenning Environmental biologists (Project Biologist) in September 2025. The Project Site is highly disturbed. The habitat on-site is ruderal/disturbed vegetation with gravel surfaces.

Comment 1A-7

The comment lists a number of species allegedly found at or adjacent to the site by Ms. Smallwood and provides photographs of these species, stating these photographs were taken at the Project site.

Comment also includes sonigrams of canon bat and possible western red bat detected allegedly at the site.

Response to Comment 1A-7

While the photos submitted by the commenter show some of the species that were documented on site, Jennings Environmental has advised that the photos do not show these species actively using the Project site for any nesting, roosting, or breeding. An airborne species may fly over a site at any time, but that does not constitute the occupation of the site by that species. Simply seeing a species fly over the site does not indicate habitat suitability or occupation of the site.

The Commenter also includes a photo of a red -tailed hawk that was not found during either site visit conducted by Jennings Environmental. The Project will be required to follow all previously adopted Conditions of Approval that were approved as part of the City’s approval of its General Plan 2015-2035 Draft and Final EIR, including pre-construction survey for birds prior to removing any trees within the City (see Response to Comment 1-10). Therefore, no impacts to any nesting birds are anticipated.
968
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 23 ends

Comment 1A-8

Certification Comment.

Response to Comment 1A-8

No response required.

Comment 1A-9

Commenter states that during their surveys, 27 species of vertebrate wildlife were detected and that the species listed in their Table 1 would lose habitat as a result of the project and its replacement of natural ground covers with impervious surfaces. They further state that they confirmed this habitat loss by measuring the impacts of similar developments on species richness and the abundances of wildlife by comparing the species and the numbers of animals observed prior to development to the those observ ed after development, while they did the same at control sites.

Response to Comment 1A-9

The comment conflates data with actual observations on the Project site. The graph included with this Comment indicate that it can be applied to any site, with any conditions, under normal circumstances. Jenning Environmental has reviewed this claim and concludes that it is false, and a prime example of causation without correlation. The Comment does not provide the input data or the relevant information to support the model. Therefore, there is no support for the veracity of the claims made based on the model . Jenning Environmental’ s opinion, based on 13 years of experience with studying wildlife, a single model cannot be applied all of the various types of habitats present with the City, within the County, or within the State. Each site with the City must be evaluated based on current conditions and suitability for sensitive species. The data presented in this Comment lacks a factual foundation upon which to reach any conclusion regarding the Project site. Additionally, the first sentence in the comment refers to Grassland Habitat in Altamount Pass Wind Resource Area. This area is a diverse and species rich habitat. So, applying this model to a vacant lot in an industrial area of Fontana is not only inaccurate but inappropriate.

Comment 1A-10

Commenter alleges that because many species are seasonal in their occurrence, some require more survey effort because they are highly cryptic, and the members of other species would visit the site only periodically while patrolling large home ranges. Surve ys on only two days cannot possibly detect all of the species of the local wildlife community.

969
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 24 ends

Response to Comment 1A-10

Again, the commentor incorrectly and drastically over states the available uses of the site for any wildlife species. The site is not within a sensitive area, is completely surrounded by development, exposed to ongoing disturbances, and consists of imported soil material. Th ere is no suitable habitat for any listed species (Refer to Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report (Jennings Environmental, September 2025, Appendix C, Table 1) and therefore, no impacts will occur.

Comment 1A-11

Commenter alleges that at least a year’s worth of surveys would be needed to more accurately report the number of vertebrate species that occur at the project site, and that although they conducted only one survey, the use of an analytical bridge, a modeli ng effort applied to a large, robust data set from a research site can predict the number of vertebrate wildlife species that likely make use of the site over the longer term.

Response to Comment 1A-11

See Response to Comment 1A-9.

Comment 1A-12

Commenter presents their modeling and results.

Response to Comment 1A-12

Comment 1A-13

Commenter provides their interpretation of CEQA and how species occurrence likelihood should be evaluated.
970
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 25 ends

Response to Comment 1A-13

See Response to 1-10 thru 1-12.

Comment 1A-14

Commenter states that a review of species occurrence records, also known as “desktop review” is needed to identify the other species that potentially occur on the site – a process that is also referred to as “habitat assessment” and that there should be some means of validating habitat assessments based on the thous ands of habitat assessments that have already been conducted in support of CEQA reviews.

Response to Comment 1A-14

The commenter again conflates the database occurrences with the occupation of the site. Jennings Environmental has reviewed this Comment and notes that the broad search, up to 30 miles away from the Project site, that is recommended by commenter presents a n inaccurate picture of the potential for species to occur on-site. Additionally, the data presented in Comment is from public observation databases (eBird and iNaturalist). Because these databases are based on the self - certification of public observations , they cannot be relied upon to provide accurate information.

Instead, biological experts reference the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the US Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) Species Occurrence GIS Layer. Both are databases from scientific sources, and the occurrence data is verified prior to publishing. A record of the CNDDB and USFWS Species Occurrence GIS Layer is provided in Table 1 of Appendix C of the Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report, Jennings Environmental, September 10, 2025, Page 1.

Further, Dr. Smallwood does not provide an explanation of the suitable habitat elements for each species listed, and as such, the data presented does not address the site’s actual suitability to host these species. As noted in the Table 1 of Attachment C of the Biological Assessment performed by Jennings Environmental, the Project site does not contain suitable habitat for any sensitive species.

Comment 1A-15

Commenter states that Jennings relied on a one -hour reconnaissance survey and an improperly curtailed desktop review, neither of which comports with the findings of Commenter’s survey or desktop review for known occurrences of special status species of wildlife. Furthermore, project reports vastly diminishes the accuracy of the characterization of the existing environmental setting.

Response to Comment 1A-15

See response to Comment 1A-9 thru 1A-14.

971
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 26 ends

Comment 1A-16

Commenter states that their surveys identified more species than that of Jennings who reported no comparison of his findings to the findings made at other survey sites.

Response to Comment 1A-16

The survey conducted by Dr. Smallwood occurred at a different time of day, during a different time of year. So naturally the species documented on -site can change from season to season. But Dr. Smallwood still did not document any sensitive, listed, rare, or endangered species which is the issue the City considered when determining that the Project is categorically exempt.

Comment 1A-17

Commenter disputes the findings of Jennings and states that the data cannot be relied upon to represent the wildlife community of the project site.

Response to Comment 1A-17

See Response to Comment 1A-16.

Comment 1A-18

Commenter states that the one hour of Jennings’s survey was not compared to typical reconnaissance survey efforts or to any standard minimum level of survey effort. Further there was no attempt in the CE Justification to defend the implication that Jenning ’s survey outcome is definitive of the species composition of the local wildlife community.

Response to Comment 1A-18

See Response to Comment 1A-9 thru 1A-14.

Comment 1A-19

Commenter states the CE Justification fails to consider the very low likelihood that special-status species would have been detected in one person hour of reconnaissance survey and that there is a fundamental difference in meaning between detection likelihood and occurr ence likelihood, but this difference is not mentioned or discussed in the CE Justification.

Response to Comment 1A-19

See Response to Comment 1A-9 thru 1A-14.

972
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 27 ends

Comment 1A-20

Commenter again disputes the findings of Jennings report related to the occurrence likelihoods of rare plants.

Response to Comment 1A-20

There are no rare plants because, as documented in the experts studies prepared for the project and referenced in this Memo7, there is no suitable habitat for any rare plants on site. Protocol Surveys are not required if there is no habitat, as such none were conducted for this site. The commentor continues to be incorrect in the assumption that this site is anything more than a vacant lot in the middle of an industrial area.

Comment 1A-21

Commenter states that the CE Justification determines “The site offers no suitable habitat for any rare sensitive species including listed species” With no survey to conducted to support this conclusion.

Response to Comment 1A-21

See Response to Comment 1 -9. As noted in the General Biological Assessment prepared on September 10, 2025, the Project site does not contain suitable habitat for these species and thus no wildlife surveys are justified. Further, CEQA Guidelines section 153 32 does not require wildlife surveys, it only queries whether a project site has value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. As the Project site does not provide such habitat, that is the end of the CEQA Guidelines section 15332 inquiry with regard to endangered, rare or threatened species.

Comment 1A-22

Commenter alleges special -status species of birds with potential to occur on the site include burrowing owl, northern harrier, white-tailed kite, California horned lark, loggerhead shrike, and many others which are not mentioned in Jennings report.

Response to Comment 1A-22

A record of the CNDDB and USFWS Species Occurrence GIS Layer is provided in Table 1 of Appendix C of the Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report, Jennings Environmental, September 10, 2025, Page 1. The commenter’s named special-status species nor their habitat are at the site.

7 Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report, Jennings Environmental, September 10, 2025, Page 1

973
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 28 ends

Comment 1A-23

Commenter alleges that Jennings misuses the CNDDB.

Response to Comment 1A-23

See Response to Comments 1A-14.

Comment 1A-24

Commenter alleges that based on other surveys, the site supports at least four special-status species of wildlife, and it carries the potential for supporting many more special-status species of wildlife based on the proximities of recorded occurrences ; e vidence therefore suggests that habitat assessments are needed for these species.

Response to Comment 1A-24

See Response to Comment 1A-14.

Comment 1A-25

Commenter again disputes methodology employed by Jennings.

Response to Comment 1A-25

See Response to Comments 1A-14.

Comment 1A-26

Commenter again claims Jennings misuses CNDDB.

Response to Comment 1A-26

See Response to Comments 1A-14.

Comment 1A-27

Commenter argues for the need to prepare an EIR to accurately characterize the wildlife community on the project site as a suitable baseline from which to predict project impacts and to formulate an appropriate mitigation strategy.

974
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 29 ends

Response to Comment 1A-27

The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for any sensitive species 8. There is no need for further mitigation other than that provided in the Fontana General Plan EIR. The City concludes that a Categorical Exemption is the appropriate documentation.

Comment 1A-28

Commenter disputes the CE findings as the accuracy of the predictions of impacts and their significance ultimately relies on the degree of accuracy in the characterization of the existing environmental setting and a comparative method is provided to enable the use of scientific inference to predict impacts and the efficacies of mitigation strategies, the latter of which should be also amply available in the record. Commenter provides in subsequent comments how they analyzed several types of impacts likely to result from the project.

Response to Comment 1A-28

Introductory comment to subsequent comments regarding prediction modeling. Responses below.

Comment 1A-29

Commenter discusses their determination of the loss of 13 nest sites and 18 nest attempts per year which would qualify as significant impacts that were not been analyzed in the biological assessment or CE Justification.

Response to Comment 1A-29

Jennings has reviewed the Comment and concludes that the data is inaccurate because the estimate used was for a grassland in a different county. The Project site is within San Bernardino County and in a largely developed area. The Project site does not contain grassland habitat. Additionally, the information in the Comment does not explain how the estimate was obtained. It simply asserts that this was the number that was used. Additionally, Jennings notes that the Commenter does not explain how that number in the Comment was calculated and what the scientific literature supports the conclusion. Without this information, there is no substantial evidence to support Commenter’s estimate. As stated in the 2025 Biological Assessment, there is no suitable habitat for any sensitive species. Refer to Response to Comment 1-10.

Comment 1A-30

Commenter asserts that how the project would interfere with wildlife movement in the region was not discussed in the CE Justification.

8 Biological Resources Assessment Letter Report, Jennings Environmental, September 10, 2025 975
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 30 ends

Response to Comment 1A-30

The commentor asserts that the site is used for stop over opportunities, but fails to say how a terrestrial species would access the site since it completely surrounded by industrial budlings. Any airborne species can and will simply find an alternative or use the surrounding landscaping within the area. Also see response to comment 1A-14.

Comment 1A-31

Commenter asserts that Project-generated traffic would endanger wildlife citing U.S. and Canadian data.

Response to Comment 1A-31

As stated multiple times and shown to the commentor during their site visit, the Project is within an industrial area. Traffic is already using the existing roads, freeways, alleyways, etc. The Project will utilize these existing roads and does not present a new or heightened treat to any species. The Project’s estimated daily trip generation of 99 daily trips with 9 trips to occur in the AM peak hour and 11 trips to occur in the PM peak hour is not considered a significant increase. 9 Additionally, the report from Dr. Smallwood shows photos of animals in a roadway; some are even killed in the roadway. But as he clarifies under the photo captions, these photos are not from the site. They are not even from the same County. So, to incorrectly relate project impacts of this specific Project to another project outside the County is unfounded and incorrect.

Comment 1A-32

Commenter cites additional data related to wildlife and traffic collisions.

Response to Comment 1A-32

See Response to Comments 1-18 and 1A-31.

Comment 1A-33

Commenter states that using their predictions and the traffic estimated to be generated by the project, would predict 266 vertebrate wildlife fatalities per year due to project-generated traffic.

Response to Comment 1A-33

See Response to Comment 1A-32.

9 Hilton Industrial Facility Project Transportation Screening Assessment, December 9, 2025, Ganddini Group, Inc. 976
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 31 ends

Comment 1A-34

Commenter details results of a survey conducted of wildlife fatalities on arterial roads in Davis, California.

Response to Comment 1A-34

See Response to Comment 1A-32.

Comment 1A-35

Commenter states that based on his analysis, the project-generated traffic would cause substantial, significant impacts on wildlife which was not addressed or mitigated in the CE Justification.

Response to Comment 1A-35

See Response to Comment 1A-32.

Comment 1A-36

Commenter states that the CE Justification fails to analyze the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts on biological resources.

Response to Comment 1A-36

See Responses to Comments 1A-7 through 1A-35.

Comment 1A-37

Commenter states that the environmental review for the project needs to include a cumulative impacts analysis.

Response to Comment 1A-37

See Responses to Comments 1A-7 through 1A-35.

Comment 1A-38

Commenter states that there is at least a fair argument that can be made for the need to prepare an EIR.

977
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 32 ends

Response to Comment 1A-38

See Responses to Comments 1A-7 through 1A-35. Based on the substantial evidence in the record, the City concludes that a Categorical Exemption is the appropriate documentation.

Comment 1A-39

Commenter states that the mitigation strategy needs to follow the steps under Assess species occurrence likelihoods and Characterize wildlife community, followed by Step 7: Predict impacts which is not followed in the CE Justification.

Response to Comment 1A-39

Compensatory mitigation is only required when impacting habitat of a listed species. Since , as discussed above, no listed species were observed on the Project site, and none are expected to occur, no mitigation is required.

Comment 1A-40

Commenter states that preconstruction surveys for nesting birds should be implemented, but this measure would not avoid the permanent loss of habitat nor the collision mortality with automobiles. Preconstruction take-avoidance surveys should consist of two steps, both of which are very difficult.

Response to Comment 1A-40

See Response to Comment 1-10.

Comment 1A-41

Commenter discusses number of nests on-site and states that the mitigation measure would apply only to the breeding season of the survey. After the breeding season of the preconstruction survey, there would be no further production of birds from the projec t site. The project’s impact on birds would be permanent.

Response to Comment 1A-41

See Response to Comment 1A-29.

Comment 1A-42

Commenter asserts that the mitigation language allows a single individual to make a subjective decision, outside the public’s view, to determine the buffer area and buffer timing for any given species. This measure lacks objective criteria, and it is therefore unenforceable. 978
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 33 ends

Response to Comment 1A-42

See Response to Comment 1-10.

Comment 1A-43

Commenter states that what qualifies as a “qualified biologist” is not defined.

Response to Comment 1A-43

The term “qualified biologist” is subject to discretion. Depending on the agency, it will carry different qualifications. The term “qualified biologist” is industry standard and is used by federal, state, and local agencies. Nothing further is required.

Comment 1A-44

Commenter believes that the mitigation measure for Burrowing owl is outdated.

Response to Comment 1A-44

As stated in prior Responses to Comments, and in the Biological Report, there is no habitat for any listed or sensitive species. This includes Burrowing Owls. A habitat assessment was completed and it was determined that the site is not suitable for this species and therefore no mitigation was recommended.

Comment 1A-45

Commenter provides their additional opinions regarding what is needed for and protect ion of burrowing owl.

Response to Comment 1A-45

The commentor continues to incorrectly state that simply because a species is found a certain distance away, then any site within that range must host the species. As any biologist familiar with the local region knows, burrowing owl will not occur in areas that do not have suitable habitat.

Therefore, no mitigation is required and no further surveys are warranted or recommended.

Comment 1A-46

Commenter states that the applicant needs to consult with CDFW to determine whether an ITP can be issued for burrowing owl.

979
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 34 ends

Response to Comment 1A-46

See Response to Comment 1A-45.

Comment 1A-47

Commenter again asks what defines a qualified biologist.

Response to Comment 1A-47

See Response to Comment 1A-43.

Comment 1A-48

Commenter again states that there is a fair argument for the need to prepare an EIR to formulate an effective mitigation strategy.

Response to Comment 1A-48

See Response to Comment 1A-45. Substantial evidence supports the City’s conclusions that a Categorical Exemption is the appropriate documentation.

Comment 1A-49

Commenter states that c ompensatory mitigation as near to the site as possible is needed for destruction of birds and other wildlife.

Response to Comment 1A-49

See Responses to Comments 1A-9 and 1A-48.

Comment 1A-50

Commenter reiterates that loss of burrowing owl foraging opportunities would need to be mitigated.

Response to Comment 1A-50

See Responses to Comments 1A-9 and 1A-48.

Comment 1A-51

Commenter states that compensatory mitigation is needed for the increased wildlife mortality that would be caused by collisions with automobiles due to project-generated road traffic. 980
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 35 ends

Response to Comment 1A-51

See Responses to Comments 1A-9 and 1A-48.

Comment 1A-52

Commenter states that compensatory mitigation is needed, and it ought to also include funding contributions to wildlife rehabilitation facilities to cover the costs of injured animals that will be delivered to these facilities for care as a result of the project.

Response to Comment 1A-52

Compensatory mitigation is only required when impacting habitat of a listed species. Since no listed species were observed on the Project site, and none are expected to occur, no mitigation is required.

Comment 1A-53

Commenter states that California native plant landscaping (i.e., grassland and locally appropriate scrub plants) should be considered to be used as opposed to landscaping with lawn and exotic shrubs and trees.

Response to Comment 1A-53

Landscaping will be in compliance with the General Plan and the City of Fontana’s Landscape Ordinance (ORDINANCE NO. 1734).

981
16498.00432\45091390.1
Ms. Alexia Barberena
June 11, 2026

Page 36 ends

Lilburn Corporation Conclusion

As detailed above, based the CE Justification Memo as well as expert review of the Appeal and supporting comment letters, substantial evidence supports the City’s determination that the Project is categorically exemption under CEQA Guidelines section 15332.

The Appeal and its supporting comment letters provide: 1) no new information regard significant impacts; 2) no evidence to support the need to conduct additional environmental ; and 3) no substantial evidence supporting the preparation of additional environmental review.

If you should have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to give us a call.

Sincerely,

Cheryl A. Tubbs
Vice President
982
City of Fontana
Action Report
Planning Commission
8437 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
File #: 26-0868 Agenda Date: 3/17/2026
Agenda #: PH-A Category: Public Hearing
FROM:

Planning Department
TITLE:

Master Case No. (MCN) 18-000053: Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) and Design Review No. 18-000010 - A request to split one (1) parcel into two (2) and for site and architectural approval for the development of two (2) new industrial commerce center buildings, Building No. 1 will have 41,218 square feet and Building No. 2 will have 30,767 square feet, and with associated site improvements, on 3.98 acres, located north of Hilton Drive and west of Hemlock Avenue (APN: 1110-151-03), pursuant to a categorical exemption in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332.

RECOMMENDATION:

Based on the information contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2026 -___, and

1. Determine that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section No. 15332 (Class No. 32, Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act, and Section No. 3.22 (Categorical Exemption) of the Local 2019 Guidelines for Implementing the CEQA, and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption; and

2. Approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950); and

3. Approve Design Review (DR) No.18-000010
APPLICANT:

C. VanDerHoek Architects, Inc.
4109 E. Fernwood Avenue
Orange, CA 92869
LOCATION:

The project site is located north of Hilton Drive and west of Hemlock Avenue, (APN: 1110-151-03) REQUEST:

Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) - A request to divide one (1) parcel into two (2) parcels. Parcel No. 1 will be approximately 2.29 acres and Parcel No. 2 will be approximately 1.69 acres, with a total of approximately 3.98 adjusted acres.

Design Review (DRP) No. 18-000010; A request for site and architectural approval for two (2) new industrial commerce center buildings, Building No. 1 will be 41,218 square feet including 4,668 City of Fontana Printed on 3/11/2026Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
1983
File #: 26-0868 Agenda Date: 3/17/2026
Agenda #: PH-A Category: Public Hearing
industrial commerce center buildings, Building No. 1 will be 41,218 square feet including 4,668 square feet office space and Building No. 2 will be 30,767 square feet including 4,668 square feet of office space, and associated site improvements on approximately 3.98 acres.

PROJECT PLANNER:

Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The Project was previously scheduled for Planning Commission consideration on June 4, 2019. At that time, staff presented a memo to the Planning Commission requestion that the project be continued off calendar so that staff could adequately respond to a general comment letter submitted by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility objecting to the Categorical Exemption determination under CEQA Guideline Section 15332. The Applicant has submitted a justification memo with technical studies to support the Categorical Exemptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. Staff has reviewed and concurs with the analysis in the justification memo.

Land Use Table
General Plan Zoning/Overlay Existing Land Use
Site: Light Industrial (I-L) West End Specific
Plan (SP)- BP-3
District.

Vacant
North: Light Industrial (I-L) West End Specific
Plan (SP) BP-3 District
Warehouse use
South: Light Industrial (I-L) West End Specific
Plan (SP) -BP-3
District
Warehouse
use/Business Park
East: Light Industrial (I-L) West End Specific
Plan (SP)- BP-3
District
Warehouse
use/Business Park
West: Light Industrial (I-L) West End Specific
Plan (SP)- BP-3
District
Industrial use
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

Building# Square Foot Parcel Size Parking Height Landscaping 1 Total Building:
41,218 sq.ft.

Office: 4,668
sq.ft.

Warehouse:
36,550 sq.ft.

2.29 acres
99,887
sq.ft.

Required:

55.2 Provided:
56 47’5” Req: 15%
9,163 sq.ft.

Provided: 22%,
12,614 sq.ft.
2 Total Building:
30,767 sq.ft.

Office: 4,668
sq.ft.

Warehouse:
26,099 sq.ft.

1.69 acres
73,638
sq.ft.

Required:

44.8 Provided:
48 47’5” Req: 15%
6,793 sq.ft.

Provided: 18%
7,343 sq.ft.

City of Fontana Printed on 3/11/2026Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
2984
File #: 26-0868 Agenda Date: 3/17/2026
Agenda #: PH-A Category: Public Hearing
Building# Square Foot Parcel Size Parking Height Landscaping 1 Total Building:
41,218 sq.ft.

Office: 4,668
sq.ft.

Warehouse:
36,550 sq.ft.

2.29 acres
99,887
sq.ft.

Required:

55.2 Provided:
56 47’5” Req: 15%
9,163 sq.ft.

Provided: 22%,
12,614 sq.ft.
2 Total Building:
30,767 sq.ft.

Office: 4,668
sq.ft.

Warehouse:
26,099 sq.ft.

1.69 acres
73,638
sq.ft.

Required:

44.8 Provided:
48 47’5” Req: 15%
6,793 sq.ft.

Provided: 18%
7,343 sq.ft.

ANALYSIS:

The applicant, Hilton Lane, LLC. is requesting that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) to subdivide one parcel into two parcels and Design Review No. 18-000010, for development of two new industrial commerce center buildings, and associated site improvements on approximately 3.98 total acres.

Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950)
Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) subdivides one parcel (APN: 1110-151-03) into two parcels. Parcel No. 1 will have approximately 2.29 acres and Parcel No. 2 will have approximately 1.69 acres, with a total of approximately 3.98 adjusted acres. The resulting parcels will meet the development standards of the Zoning and Development Code and West End Specific Plan and will enable the development of the industrial commerce center facilities.

Design Review (DR) No. 18-000010
The development seeks site and architectural approval of two (2) new industrial commerce center buildings on two (2) parcels, Building No.1 will be 41,218 square feet including 4,668 square feet of office space and Building No. 2 will have 30,767 square feet including 4,668 square feet of office space, totaling approximately 71,985 square feet.

Both buildings are designed with similar architectural features. The architectural features of the industrial commerce center buildings will include an exterior white and grey tone color palette with black accents. The architectural style includes metal doors, glazed aluminum storefront windows, and exterior lighting.

The variations to the buildings’faces, varying roof lines will make the Project architecturally pleasing and consistent with the surrounding area. The Project includes associated on and off -site improvements including parking spaces, new landscaping, enhanced lighting, curb, gutter, sidewalks, and utilities related to the Project.

The proposal has been designed to be compatible with surrounding industrial uses. The Project Site is physically suitable in size and shape to support the development of the proposed industrial commerce center buildings. Applicable building codes, zoning codes, Specific plan requirements, and fire codes and standards will be met and make for a safe, attractive, and well-designed project. The Project incorporates safety measures for automobiles and pedestrians in the area.

Grading/Walls:

The project site is relatively flat and currently vacant. The existing drainage pattern flows from the northeast to the southwest. An underground water chamber system will be constructed for the Project.

City of Fontana Printed on 3/11/2026Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
3985
File #: 26-0868 Agenda Date: 3/17/2026
Agenda #: PH-A Category: Public Hearing
The project plans include a six-foot high tubular steel fence along the north, east, and west sides of the property. The Project Site will have a six-foot high swing gate located at the west side of Project Site. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to construct an eight-foot-high retaining wall at the rear of the property to level the project site.

Site Access/Circulation/Parking:

Primary vehicle access to the Project Site is provided from Hilton Drive with two driveways, one on the east end of the property and one on the west end. The internal circulation has been reviewed by the Planning, Fire, Traffic, and Engineering Departments and found to be sufficient to support this type of use.

Environmental:

The project environmental consultant (Lilburn Corporation) prepared a CEQA Categorical Exemption Justification Memo and supporting technical studies, (see link below) to support the Project Categorical Exemption from CEQA.

Environmental Documents | Fontana, CA - Official Website <https://www.fontanaca.gov/2137/Environmental-Documents>.

Therefore, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Section No.

3.22 (Categorical Exemption) of the City of Fontana’s2019 Local Guidelines for Implementing CEQA, the proposed Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section No. 15332 as a Class 32, Infill Development Project. The project site is considered Infill Development and meets the CEQA requirements of Infill: (1) The Project is consistent with the Light Industrial (I-L) designation of the General Plan and the West End Specific Plan/BP-3 District regulations; (2) The Project Site is less than five (5) acres (3.98 acres); (3) The Project Site is not within any known sensitive or threatened habitat area; (4) The Project will not have any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and (5) There are adequate public services for the development of the proposed industrial project. Further, none of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply to the Project.

MOTION:

Approve staff’s recommendation.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment No. 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment No. 2 - Project Plan Set
Attachment No. 3 - Planning Commission Resolution, Findings & Conditions of Approval Attachment No. 4 - Notice of Exemption
Attachment No. 5 - Public Hearing Notice
City of Fontana Printed on 3/11/2026Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
4986

CITY OF FONTANA PLANNING DEPARTMENT

VICINITY MAP
DATE: March 17, 2026

CASE: Master Case No. 18-000053
Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005
(TPM No. 19950)
Design Review No. 18-000010
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
Hilton Drive
Hemlock Avenue
Redwood Avenue
Foothill Blvd
Project Site
5987
·
·
·

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 6988

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 7989
·
·
·

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 8990

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 9991

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 10992

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 11993

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 12994

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 13995

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 14996

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 15997

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 16998

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 17999

HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
.

FONTANA, CA

HILTON DRIVE
4109 E. Fernwood Ave
Orange, CA 92869
Tel: 714087662
MASTER CASE NO. 18-053 TPM NO. 18-005 DESI*N REVIE: NO. 18-010 181000
191001
201002
HILTON DRIVEBUILDING 1BUILDING 2
33 1
2 6
7 P.L.

R.O.W.

P.L.

P.L.
4 5
TYP. LOW GROUNDCOVER PLANTINGWITHIN R.O.W.PARKWAY PERLEGEND.

TRANSFORMER LOCATION PER CIVIL PLANS.PLANT FICUS VINES ALONG WALL TO SCREENTRANSFORMER FROM PUBLIC VIEW.PLANT DOUBLE ROW OF EVERGREENSCREEN SHRUBS TO SCREEN PARKING FROMPUBLIC VIEW.3:1 MAX. BERMPER CIVIL PLANS OBSERVECITY'S SIGHTLINES VIEWLINE. TYPICAL.

TYP. LOW GROUNDCOVER PLANTINGWITHIN R.O.W.PARKWAY PERLEGEND.

GRAVEL UNDERGATE SWING
30'-0"
30'-0"
TREES SYMBOL TREE NAMEQTY.WUCOLS*NEW STREET TREE ALONG HILTON DRIVEPODOCARPUS GRACILIOR, FERN PINE24" BOX SIZE.4L SMALL ACCENT TREELAGERSTROEMIA I. 'WATERMELON RED', CRAPE MYRTLE24" BOX SIZE.4L NEW PARKING LOT SHADE TREEULMUS PARVIFOLIA 'TRUE GREEN', EVERGREEN ELM24" BOX SIZE.14L VERTICAL TREE ALONG BUILDING/SECONDARY PARKING LOT TREETRISTANIA LAURINA, WATER GUM TREE15 GAL. SIZE.ALT: PODOCARPUS GRACILIOR, FERN PINE9L EVERGREEN SCREEN TREEPINUS ELDARICA, MONDELL PINE36" BOX SIZE.7L

PLANTING LEGEND
*NOTE: PROPOSED STREET TREES SHALL BE CONSISTANT WITH EXISTING TREES ALONG HILTON DR. TO BECONFIRMED IN THE FIELD.TOTAL # OF TREES = 38 TREES SHRUBS SHRUBS SHALL BE CHOSEN FROM THE FOLLOWING LIST:WUCOLSXYLOSMA CONGESTUM, SHINY LEAF XYLOSMA5 GAL. SIZEL LEUCOPHYLLUM FRUTESCENS, TEXAS RANGER5 GAL. SIZEL WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA, COAST ROSEMARY5 GAL. SIZEL ROSMARINUS 'TUSCAN BLUE', TUSCAN BLUE ROSEMARY5 GAL. SIZEL BUXUS JAPONICA, JAPANESE BOXWOOD5 GAL. SIZEL GROUND COVER/SHRUB MASSES GROUND COVER AND SHRUB MASSES SHALL BE CHOSEN FROM THE FOLLOWING LIST:WUCOLSSENECIO MANDRALISCAE, BLUE CHALKSTICKS1 GAL. SIZE @ 24" O.C.L ROSMARINUS O. 'PROSTRATUS', CREEPING ROSEMARY1 GAL. SIZE @ 30" O.C.L SALVIA GREGGII, AUTUMN SAGE1 GAL. SIZE @ 36" O.C.L MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS, DEER GRASS1 GAL. SIZE @ 42" O.C.L BACCHARIS PILULARIS, COYOTE BUSH1 GAL. SIZE @ 42" O.C.L TYP. LOW GROUND COVER PLANTING WITH PUBLIC R.O.W. (PARKWAY)SUGGEST LANTANA DWARF YELLOW.L

1.NEW SIDEWALK PER CIVIL DWGS.2.NEW STREET TREE ALONG HILTON DRIVE (MATCH EXISTING)3.SMALL ACCENT TREE AT PROJECT FOCAL AREAS PER LEGEND4.TYP. FOUNDATION SHRUB PER LEGEND5.BROAD CANOPY PARKING LOT SHADE TREE PER LEGEND6.DROUGHT TOLERANT GROUND COVER AND SHRUB PLANTING PER LEGEND7.ENHANCED PAVING AT BUILDING ENTRY. INTEGRAL COLORED CONC.

DESIGN KEY NOTES:

VINE SYMBOL VINE NAMEQTY.WUCOLSFICUS PUMILA, CREEPING FIG5 GAL. SIZE @ 3'-0" O.C.5L WUCOLS PLANT FACTORTHIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN 'WUCOLS'REGION '4-SOUTH INLAND VALLEY'.H = HIGH WATER NEEDSM = MODERATE WATER NEEDSL = LOW WATER NEEDSVL= VERY LOW WATER NEEDS·SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1 SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH EROSION CONTROL GROUND COVER PERLEGEND, AND MULCH MATERIAL WITH 'BINDER' MATERIAL SHALL BE APPLIED FOR EROSIONCONTROL.·ROCK RIP-RAP MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE DRAIN LINES CONNECT TO INFILTRATIONAREAS.·ALL UTILITY EQUIPMENT SUCH AS BACKFLOW UNITS, TRANSFORMERS, FIRE DETECTOR CHECKSAND FIRE CHECK VALVES WILL BE SCREENED WITH EVERGREEN PLANT MATERIAL ONCE FINALLOCATIONS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED.

GENERAL NOTES:

THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN. IT IS BASED ON PRELIMINARY INFORMATION WHICH ISNOT FULLY VERIFIED AND MAY BE INCOMPLETE. IT IS MEANT AS A COMPARATIVE AID INEXAMINING ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES AND ANY QUANTITIES INDICATED ARESUBJECT TO REVISION AS MORE RELIABLE INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE.IRRIGATION NOTE:THE PROJECT WILL BE EQUIPPED WITH A LOW FLOW IRRIGATION SYSTEM CONSISTING OF ETWEATHER BASED SMART CONTROLLER, LOW FLOW ROTORS, BUBBLER AND/ OR DRIP SYSTEMSUSED THROUGHOUT. THE IRRIGATION WATER EFFICIENCY WILL MEET OR SURPASS THE CURRENTSTATE MANDATED AB-1881 WATER ORDINANCE. PER MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION NO. 9-71(d) ALLLANDSCAPING AREAS WILL BE PROPERLY IRRIGATED FOR THE LIFE OF THE FACILITY TO ALLOW FORPLANTS AND TREES TO MAINTAIN GROWTH.

CONCEPTUAL PLAN NOTE:

NORTHFEBRUARY 12, 2025HILTON INDUSTRIAL FACILITYFONTANA, CACONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN L-1
80'40'60'20'0'SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"
ETO FOR FONTANA AREA = 55.6MAWA (210,969 GALLONS) = 55.6 X 0.62 X 0.45 X 19,560MAWA (ANNUAL GALLONS ALLOWED) =ETO X 0.62 X ETAF X AREAPRELIMINARY WATER USE CALCULATIONS AVERAGE DAILY IRRIGATION WATER USE = 303,423
TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA = 19,560 SQ. FT.LANDSCAPE DATA
HILTON LANE, LLCP.O. BOX 54903IRVINE, CA 92619CONTACT: DOUG MCCAN REQUIRED TREE QUANTITY MATRIX·TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS = 104 STALLS·TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES REQUIRED AT 1 TREE PER 4 STALLS 106 / 4 = 26 TREES·TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES PROVIDED = 27 TREES BASED UPON PROJECT TREE INVENTORY CONDUCTED BY CITY'SCERTIFIED ARBORIST, THE TALLY OF REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIREDPURSUANT TO FONTANA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE III,SECTION 28-67 IS THIRTY-EIGHT 15-GALLON CONTAINER TREES.NUMBER OF 15-GALLON TREES PROVIDED ON-SITE = 38 TREES.

PER MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION NO. 9-71(c) ALL LANDSCAPING WILL BE DROUGHT TOLERANT, AND TO THEEXTENT FEASIBLE, SPECIES WITH LOW BIOGENIC EMISSIONS. PALM TREES WILL NOT BE UTILIZED.PLANTING NOTE:

TOTAL PARKING LOT AREA =16,714 SQ. FT.TOTAL SHADE AREA REQUIRED WITHIN 15 YRS. = 5,014 SQ. FT.TOTAL PROJECTED SHADE AREA WITHIN 15 YRS. =5,140 SQ. FT.PER MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION NO. 9-71(e)30% OF PARKING STALL AREAS TO BE SHADED WITHIN15 YEARS AFTER PLANTING

PARKING LOT SHADING CALCULATIONS
211003
221004
231005
241006
PARCEL 1P.M. 16893P.M.B. 214/44-45P.M.B. 124/ 13-14PARCEL 1P.M. 9760 P.M.B. 124/ 13-14PARCEL 3P.M. 9760
M.B. 220/98-100TR. 13643LOT 2LOT 1M.B. 220/98-100TR. 13643 TRACT NO. 13219PORTION OF LOT 1M.B. 221/3-6PARCEL 2P.M. 16893P.M.B. 214/44-45PARCEL 3P.M. 16893P.M.B. 214/44-45 LOT 3TR.13643M.B. 220/98-100
251007
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

RESOLUTION NO. PC 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
FONTANA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 18-000005 (TPM NO. 19950) TO SUBDIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 18-000010 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO

NEW INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE CENTER BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON 3.98 ACRES OF VACANT LAND LOCATED ON

THE NORTH SIDE OF HILTON DRIVE , EAST OF REDWOOD AVENUE, IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 1110-151-03,

PURSUANT TO A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332.

WHEREAS, the project site, identified as Assessor Parcel Number (“APN”) 1110- 151-03 (“Project Site”), was annexed from San Bernardino County and incorporated into the City of Fontana on April 28, 1970; and

WHEREAS, on May 9, 2018, the City of Fontana (City”) received an application from C. VanDerHoek Architects, Inc. (“Applicant”), for a Tentative Parcel Map (“Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005) (TPM No. 19950)”), to subdivide one (1) parcel into two (2) and a Design Review ( “DRP No. 18-000010”) seeking approval to construct two (2) new warehouse buildings and associated site improvements at the Project Site ( “Project”); and

WHEREAS, the Project Site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Light Manufacturing (I-L) and is located within the West End Specific Plan’s BP-3 zoning district, which allows for the development; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §§ 2100 et seq.) (“CEQA”), the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32, Infill Development) and Section No. 3.22 of the 2019 Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; and

WHEREAS, all notices required by statute and the Fontana Municipal Code (“FMC”) have been given as required; and

WHEREAS, on March 6, 2026, a notice of the public hearing was published in Fontana Herald newspaper and simultaneously displayed at City Hall and at the Project Site; and

WHEREAS, the owners of property within 660 feet of the Project Site were notified via public hearing notice mailer prior to the public hearing; and

WHEREAS, on March 17, 2026, a duly notice public hearing on Tentative Parcel Map No. 18 -000005 ( TPM No. 19950 ) and DRP No. 18 -000010 was held b efore the Fontana Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) to consider testimony and evidence presented by the Applicant, City Staff, and other interested parties; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received public testimony and evidence presented by the Applicant, City Staff, and other interested parties, at the public hearing on 261008
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

the Project, and the Planning Commission carefully considered all information, evidence, and testimony presented at its public hearing on Tentative Parcel Map No 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) and DRP No. 18-000010; and

WHEREAS, the City wishes to protect and preserve the quality of life throughout the City, through effective land use and planning; and

WHEREAS, the Conditions of Approval are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" for Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950), and Exhibit “B” for Design Review No. 18-000010, and

WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission RESOLVES as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true, correct and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 2. CEQA. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section No. 15332 (Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act and Section No. 3.22 (Categorical Exemption) of the 2019 Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This project site is considered In-Fill Development and meets the CEQA requirements of Infill: (1) The project is consistent with the I-G General Plan land use designation, and the West End Specific Plan -BP-3 district regulations; (2) The project site is less than five (5) acres at approximately 3. 98 adjusted gross acres; (3) The project site is not within any known sensitive or threatened habitat area; (4) The project site will not have any significant effect related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and (5) There are adequate public utilities services for the development of the proposed residential development. Furthermore, none of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to the Project. The Planning Commission further directs Staff to file a Notice of Exemption pursuant to this Finding.

Section 3. Tentative Parcel Map Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings for Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) pursuant to Section 26-218(D) “Processing of application”, of the Fontana Zoning and Development Code:

Finding No. 1: The proposed map is consistent with the city’s general plan and any applicable specific plan.

Findings of Fact: Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map of Light Industrial (I-L) as it will enable industrial development as allowed under the city’s general plan and the West End Specific Plan. The Tentative Parcel Map proposes to subdivide one parcel in to two parcels (Parcel No. 1 will have approximately 2.29 acres and Parcel No. 2 will have approximately 1.69 acres) to support the industrial development.

271009
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

Finding No. 2: That the design or improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan.

Findings of Fact: The Project is designed to be consistent with the General Plan and the on-site improvements meet the General Plan goals and objectives as well as the zoning requirements of the West End Specific Plan - BP-3 district.

The General Plan Land Use designation for the Project Site is Light Industrial (I -L), which is intended to provide for industrial uses. The Project will develop an industrial commerce center consistent with this designation of the General Plan. The construction of the on-site and off- site improvements such as curb, gutter, sidewalks, and underground utilities will ensure that the Project meets the requirements set for the in the FMC and the specific plan . Therefore, the proposed improvements will be consistent with the existing development. The Project has been reviewed by the Planning Department, Engineering Department and Fire Protection, and it was determined that the conditions of approval will ensure compliance with FMC and regulations.

Finding No. 3: The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed.

Findings of Fact: The approximately 3.98 gross acre Project Site is adequate in size to accommodate the two industrial commerce buildings totaling 7 1,985 square feet (Building No.1 will be 41,218 square feet and 4,668 square feet of office space and Building No. 2 will have 30,767 square feet and 4,668 square feet of office space) . The existing topography is relatively level and is conducive to the development of the Project and public improvements are designed to enable access and services to the Project Site. Therefore, the site is suitable for this type of development. The lot size is consistent with nearby industrial development.

Finding No. 4: The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cau se substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

Findings of Fact: The design of Tentative Parcel Map No. 18 -000005 (TPM No. 19950) and the associated improve ments will not likely cause public health problems. The development complies with the Zoning and Development Code and General Plan . The improvements will provide safe walking paths and driving routes which will promote public health and safety.

Therefore, there will be no significant effect on the environment.

Finding No. 5: The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems.

Findings of Fact: The design of Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) will not cause public health problems. The development comp lies with the Zoning and Development Code and General Plan and the West End Specific Plan. Improvements include connection to the public sewer and 281010
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

public storm drain systems, modifications to the existing sidewalks, and drainage and grading improvements to ensure a safe and well-designed Project.

Finding No. 6: The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

Findings of Fact: The design of Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) and associated public improvements will not conflict with access easements acquired by the public. Vehicular a ccess to and from the Project Site would be provided from two driveways on Hilton Drive, a publicly maintained street. The internal circulation has been reviewed by Planning, Fire, Traffic, and Engineering and was found to be sufficient to support this Project.

Section 4. Design Review Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings for DR No. 18-000010 in accordance with Section No. 30-120, “Findings for approval” of the Fontana Zoning and Development Code:

Finding No. 1: The proposal is consistent with the general plan, Zoning and Development Code, and any specific plan or area plan.

Findings of Fact: The Project is consistent with the Land Use designation of Light Industrial (I-L) by constructing two industrial commerce center buildings within the industrial area of the West End Specific Plan. The Project will develop two (2) new industrial commerce ce nter buildings totaling 7 1,985 square feet (Building No.1 will be 41,218 square feet and 4,668 square feet of office space and Building No. 2 will have 30,767 square feet and 4,668 square feet of office space) on 3.98 acres. Architectural features for the Project include metal doors, glazed windows, and exterior lighting. Additionally, the Project Site aligns with Chapter 15 (Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Development) of the General Plan Land Use designation because it provides industrial uses where there is easy access to regional transportation routes.

The site and building design comply with the criteria contained in the design review section of the Fontana Zoning and Development Code and the West End Specific Plan. The industrial commerce center buildings design will feature an exterior light gray tone color pallet with black accents. The variations to the building face, varying roof lines and building height of 47’- 6” will make the project architecturally pleasing and be consistent with the surrounding area as well as the design criteria contained in the Zoning and Development Code and the Specific Plan . The Project has high quality architecture and appropriate screening comprised of landscaping that will make for an appropriate and desirable development.

Finding No. 2. The proposal meets or exceeds the criteria contained in Chapter 30 and will result in an appropriate, safe, and desirable development 291011
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

promoting the public health, safety, and welfare of the community.

Findings of Fact: The Project consists of the development of two (2) new industrial commerce center buildings totaling 71,985 (Building No.1 will be 41,218 square feet and 4,668 square feet of office space and Building No. 2 will have 30,767 square feet and 4,668 square feet of office space) on approximately 3.98 acres. The site is currently vacant. The Project will be constructed pursuant to all applicable building, zoning and fire codes, in addition to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibits A and B. Architectural features suc h as glazing, metal features and a variety of colors add structural and visual interest to the building s. Additionally, variations to the building face and roof lines area architecturally pleasing and consistent with the existing development in the surroun ding area.

Street lighting and on -site lighting have been incorporated to create an attractive atmosphere along adjacent parcels. The site improvements have been evaluated by the City of Fontana Fire, Building and Safety, and Engineering Departments. During the review process, changes were made to the plans to ensure that the Project is safe and well-designed.

Finding No. 3: The proposal, in its design and appearance , is aesthetically and architecturally pleasing, resulting in a safe, well -designed facility while enhancing the character of the surrounding neighborhood.

Findings of Fact: The Project is aesthetically and architecturally pleasing and compatible with the surrounding area. The Project Site is physically suitable in size and shape to support the two new industrial commerce center buildings which will be built in accordance with the zoning and fire codes.

Architectural relief utilized for the buildings consists of decorative lighting, varied roof lines, and other features appropriate to the style. The Project enhances the surrounding neighborhood by incorporating architectural style that complements the surrounding area. Additionally, landscaping will utilize plants to complement the architecture of the buildings and the development of as a whole. The Project has been reviewed by the Engineering, Building and Safety and Fire Departments for safety.

Finding No. 4: The site improvements are appropriate and will result in a safe, well- designed facility.

Findings of Fact: The development has appropriate site improvements. Project features include sidewalks, drainage, perimeter walls, and fencing to provide a safe and well-designed neighborhood. The Project has been reviewed by the Planning, Engineering, Building and Safety Departments, as well as the Fontana Fire Prevention for site circulation, access, and safety and found to meet the requireme nts for all applicable building code, zoning, and fire code standards.

Section 5. Approvals. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) , and DRP No. 18- 301012
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

000010 subject to the Conditions of Approval, attached hereto as “Exhibit A" and “Exhibit B”, respectively, and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein.

Section 6. Resolution Regarding Custodian of Record: The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution has been based are located at the Planning Department, 8353 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6.

Section 7. Certification. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

Section 8. Effective Date . This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

Section 9. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Fontana, California, at a regular meeting held on this 17th day of March 2026.

City of Fontana

Joseph Armendarez, Chairperson

ATTEST:

I, Torrie Lozano , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Fontana, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 17th day of March 2026, by the following vote, to-wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Torrie Lozano, Secretary
311013
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

Exhibit “A”

CITY OF FONTANA

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PROJECT: Master Case No. 18-000053 DATE: March 17, 2026 Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950)

LOCATION: North of Hilton Drive and west of Hemlock Avenue (APN: 1110-151-03).

PLANNING DEPARTMENT:

1. The rights and privileges granted by this project shall not become effective, nor shall the applicant commence the use for which this project is granted, until both of the following have occurred:

A. All requirements of the Fontana City’s Municipal Code shall be complied with.

B. All Conditions of Approval imposed on this project have been fulfilled.

2. The applicant /developer/ property owner shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of Fontana or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City of Fontana or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the Planning Commission and/or City Council concerning this subdivision, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Fontana shal l promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City of Fontana shall cooperate in the defense. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of Fontana or its agents, officers, attorneys and employees from any and all actual or alleged claims, actions or proceedings against the City of Fontana or its agents, officers, attorneys or employees to attack, set aside, void, annul or seek monetary damages arising out of any challenge to the applicant’s propo sed project or to any approvals of the Planning Commission and/or City Council concerning this project, including but not limited to actions challenging CEQA actions, permits, variances, plot plans, design plans, maps, licenses, and amendments. The City of Fontana shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City of Fontana shall cooperate in the defense.

3. In the event of any such third -party action or proceeding, the City shall have the right to retain its own separate legal counsel to defend the interests of the City. The applicant shall be responsible for reimbursing the City for such legal fees and costs, in their entirety, including actual attorneys’ fees, which may be incurred by the City in defense of such action or proceeding. This indemnification shall also include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorneys’ fees, and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such claim, 321014
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

action, or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, the City and/or any parties bringing such forth.

The City of Fontana and the applicant acknowledge that the City would not have approved this project if the City were to be liable to applicant in damages under or with respect to all or any part of this application or this condition of approval. Accordingly, applicant shall not sue the City for damages or monetary relief for any matter arising from or related to this condition of approval. Applicant’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be limited to declaratory/injunctive relief, mandate, and/or specific performance.

4. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2 2-000005 (TPM No. 19950) shall comply with all applicable development standards of, Chapter 26 (Subdivisions), Chapter 30 (Zoning and Development), and the Subdivision Map Act.

5. The applicant/developer shall underground all utilities, pursuant to Section 27 -50 through 27-54 of the City of Fontana Municipal Code, which for the purpose of this condition shall also include all boxes, structures and/or other equipment located in the public right-of-way, any public utility easement(s) and on any private property, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. A note to this effect shall be placed on the map prior to recordation of the final map.

6. Tentative Parcel Map No. 22-000005 (TPM No. 19950) shall become null and void two (2) years from the date of approval, unless the appropriate permits have been obtained and construction, defined as permit obtainment, commencement of construction of the primary building on site, and successful completion of the first Building and Safety Division inspection, has commenced within this period.

7. In the event that one or more of the Conditions of Approval for this project needs to be amended and/or deleted due to health, safety or welfare concerns, the City Manager is authorized to approve or conditionally approve such amendment/deletion, provided that City Manager shall bring such proposed amendment/deletion to the City Council at the next available meeting for City Council ratification, but in no event later than sixty (60) days following the City Manager’s decision. The noticing of such City Council meeting for possible ratification shall be pursuant to Section No. 30-30 of the Municipal Code.

8. The applicant shall post a publicly visible sign on the project site with the telephone number and 24-hour point of contact for dust, noise and construction complaints. The 24-hour point of contact shall be available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and have authority to commit additional assets to control dust, or respond to construction complaints after hours, on weekends and on holidays. Construction shall be limited to 7:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturdays, and no constructi on on Sundays and Holidays.

9. Historic Archaeological Resources:

A. Upon discovery of any tribal cultural or archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All tribal cultural and a rchaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant. If the resources are Native American in origin, interested Tribes 331015
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

(as a result of correspondence with area Tribes) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request preservation in place or recovery for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation takes place.

B. Preservation in place shall be the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavation to remove the resource along the subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. All Tribal Cultural Resources shall be returned to the Tribe. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non -profit institution with a research interest in the materials, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to the Tribe or a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

Principal personnel shall meet the Secretary of the Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years’ experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California. The Qu alified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified.

10. The applicant shall meet all requirements identified in the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards (Ordinance No. 1891).

11. A copy of the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards requirements shall be placed on the final grading plans and the final building plans.

12. The project shall comply with all applicable provisions, regulations, and development standards of the Fontana Municipal Code.

13. The applicant shall adhere to all landscape setback requirements as outlined in the Fontana Municipal Code.

14. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the Trip Reduction Measures in of the Zoning and Development Code (Section 30-962).

ENGINEERING:

15. The Applicant shall provide a Land Improvement Agreement, with accompanying security.

The agreement shall be executed on City-provided forms.

341016
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

Exhibit “B”

CITY OF FONTANA

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PROJECT: Master Case No. 18-000053 DATE: March 17, 2026 Design Review No. 18-000010

LOCATION: North of Hilton Drive and west of Hemlock Avenue (APN: 1110-151-03).

PLANNING DEPARTMENT:

1. This Design Review shall become null and void two (2) years from the date of approval, unless the appropriate permits have been obtained and construction, defined as permit obtainment, commencement of construction of the primary building on site, and successful completion of the first Building and Safety Department inspection, has commenced within this period.

2. The rights and privileges granted by this project shall not become effective, nor shall the applicant commence the use for which this project is granted, until both of the following have occurred:

A. All requirements of the Fontana City’s Municipal Code shall be complied with.

B. All Conditions of Approval imposed on this project have been fulfilled.

3. The applicant/developer/property owner shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of Fontana or its agents, officers, attorneys and employees from any and all actual or alleged claims, actions or proceedings against the City of Fontana or its agents, officers, attorneys or employees to attack, set aside, void, annul or seek monetary damages arising out of any challenge to the applicant’s proposed project or to any approvals of the Planning Commission and/or City Council concerning this project, including but not limited to actions challenging CEQA actions, permits, variances, plot plans, design plans, maps, licen ses, and amendments. The City of Fontana shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City of Fontana shall cooperate in the defense. 351017
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

In the event of any such third -party action or proceeding, the City shall have the rig ht to retain legal counsel. The applicant shall be responsible and reimburse the City for such legal fees and costs, in their entirety, including actual attorneys’ fees, which may be incurred by the City in defense of such action or proceeding. This inde mnification shall also include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorneys’ fees, and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, or proceeding w hether incurred by applicant, the City and/or any parties bringing such forth.

Except as required under applicable State and Federal law, the City of Fontana and the applicant acknowledge that the City would not have approved this project if the City were to be liable to applicant in damages under or with respect to all or any part of this application or this condition of approval. Accordingly, applicant shall not sue the City for damages or monetary relief for any matter arising from or related to this c ondition of approval.

Applicant’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be limited to declaratory/injunctive relief, mandate, and/or specific performance.

4. This project shall comply with all applicable provisions, regulations and development standards of the Fontana Zoning Code and Development Code, Fontana Municipal Code (FMC).

5. The applicant shall meet all requirements identified in the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards (Ordinance No. 1891).

6. The applicant shall adhere to all landscape setback requirements as outlined in the Fontana Municipal Code.

7. The applicant/developer shall underground all utilities pursuant to Section 27 -50 through 27-54 of the City of Fontana Municipal Code, which for the purpose of this conditions shall also include all boxes, structures and/or other equipment located in the public right-of-way, any public utility easement(s) and on any private property, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. A note to this effect shall be placed on the map prior to recordation of the final map.

8. Historic Archaeological Resources
A. Upon discovery of any tribal cultural or archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All tribal cultural and archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant. If the resources are Native American in origin, interested Tribes (as a result of correspondence with area Tribes) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request preservation in place or recovery for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation takes place.

Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non -profit institution with a research interest in the ma terials, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to the Tribe or a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

C. Archaeological and Nativ e American monitoring and excavation during construction projects shall be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated funerar y objects shall be taken. Principal personnel shall meet the Secretary of the Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years’ experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern Californi a. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified.

9. All Conditions of Approval contained herein shall be incorporated into all applicable final construction plans and a copy of these conditions, si gned by the property owner or legal representative, shall be placed on a sheet in the final building and grading plans prior to issuance of any building or grading permits.

10. The current development fees must be paid prior to issuance of building/constructi on permits.

11. In the event that one or more of the Conditions of Approval for this project needs to be amended and/or deleted due to health, safety or welfare concerns, the City Manager is authorized to approve or conditionally approve such amendment/deletion, provided that City Manager shall bring such proposed amendment/deletion to the City Council at the next available meeting for City Council ratification, but in no event later than sixty (60) days following the City Manager’s decision. T he noticing of such City Council meeting for possible ratification shall be pursuant to Sections No. 30-30 of the Municipal Code.

12. Color combinations and color schemes for buildings approved under a design review application shall not be modified or changed without prior approval of the original approving body by a revision to the original application. Minor hue color changes may be approved by the Director of Planning. The Director of Planning may refer minor hue color changes to the original approving body for consideration under a revision to the original application.

13. Exterior lighting compatible with the design of the building shall be provided for the parking lot. The lighting shall be directed and shielded so as to illuminate only the parking area and to avoid glare impacts on adjacent properties.

14. Sidewalks shall be provided for all new developments in accordance with the city’s circulation element of the General Plan.

15. The applicant/developer shall provide sufficient bicycle racks to accommodate a minimum of four bicycle spaces.

16. The applicant/developer shall provide bicycle racks that include locks as well as electric plugs to charge electric bikes. The racks shall be located as close as possible to employee entrance(s).
371019
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

17. All parking stalls shall be clearly marked by double striping pavement painting. Parking stall sizes shall be measured from the mid -point between the striping. No parking spaces shall be designated in an industrial parking facility, except for disabled persons parking, van pool, carpool, or any other designated parking as required by law.

18. All signs shall be reviewed under a separate Design Review Sign application.

19. All roof-mounted equipment and ground mounted equipment shall be screened from view from adjacent properties and streets to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning.

20. All landscaping shall be healthy and maintained in a reasonable manner as determined by the Director of Planning or his/her designee.

21. The transformer shall be screened by a solid screen wall and mature, dense landscaping, and not visible from the public right-of-way.

22. After the fifteen (15) day appeal period, the applicant shall remove the notice of Filing sign(s) from the project site. The applicant may request a refund of the sign deposit; the request shall be in writing accompanied with a refund application. The request shall be submitted to the Planning Department.

23. Development fees and Planning Department final inspection fees must be paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy.

24. Applicant shall p ay all applicable service fees pursuant to the City of Fontana Municipal Code.

25. The applicant/developer/property owner shall provide up-lighting on the perimeter and up- light proposed trees to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and his/her designee.

26. In the event that any off -site utility and/or infrastructure improvements are required as a direct result of future projects, construction of such off -site utility and infrastructure improvements shall not occur concurrently with the demolition, site preparation, and grading phases of project construction. This requirement shall be clearly noted on all applicable grading and/or building plans.

27. Adhere to the City standard of one foot candle minimum for all entrances, exits, pedestrian paths, parking lots, and activity areas. Reflect all light fixtures on the site plan. All areas shall be illuminated during all hours of darkness and all luminaries utilized shall be vandal- resistant fixtures. The type of lighting shall be fluorescent, white L.E.D.s or metal halide.

Provide a photometric layout under separate exhibit to ensure the minimum light standard is met.

28. Incorporate an anti-graffiti coating onto the exterior of all proposed block walls to discourage graffiti.

29. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the Trip Reduction Measures in of the Zoning Code (Article XIV, Transportation Demand Management and Trip Reduction Measures). 381020
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

30. There shall be no refrigerated uses on site; unless a future tenant proposing to have such uses conducts an update of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document and any applicable studies/memorandums to amend this Condition of Approval.

31. The applicant shall incorporate hostile landscape into the interior, perimeter landscape setback areas to discourage subjects from accessing the site.

32. The applicant shall post a publicly visible sign on the project site with the telephone number and 24-hour point of contact for dust, noise and construction complaints. The 24-hour point of contact shall be available 24 ho urs a day, 7 days a week and have authority to commit additional assets to control dust, or respond to construction complaints after hours, on weekends and on holidays. Construction shall be limited to 7:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekends, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturdays, and no construction on Sundays and Holidays.

33. Adhere to the Standard Building Security Specifications of the Fontana Police Department.

34. A copy of the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards requirements shall be placed on the final grading plans and final building plans.

Prior To Issuance of Grading Permit

35. All Conditions of Approval and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP) contained herein shall be incorporated into all applicable final construction plans and a copy of these conditions shall be placed on a sheet in the final building and grading plans prior to issuance of any building or grading permits.

BUILDING AND SAFETY:

36. The applicant shall design the project to show compliance with the latest adopted edition of the following codes as applicable:

A. California Building Code
B. California Residential Code
C. California Electrical Code
D. California Mechanical Code
E. California Plumbing Code
F. California Energy Code
G. California Fire Code
H. California Green Building Standards Code

37. The applicant shall install an automatic fire suppression system, which is required in all new construction per FMC Chapter 11 Article II. Design and type of system shall be based upon the requirements of the Building Code, Fire Code and th e requirements of the Fontana Fire Prevention District.

38. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (909 -396-2000). SCAQMD requirements shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of any permit if hazardous materials are stored and/or used.

391021
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

39. The applicant shall verify that any temporary building, trailer, commercial coach, etc. installed and/or used in connection with a construction project complies with FMC Chapter 5 Article XIV.

40. The applicant shall verify that all perimeter/boundary walls are designed and constructed so that the outer/exterior face of the wall is as close as possible to the lot line. In any case, the outer/exterior face of the wall shall be within two (2) inches of the lot line. Distances greater than two (2) inches may be approved prior to construction by the Building Official on a case-by-case basis for extenuating circumstances.

41. The applicant shall have the tract or parcel map recorded prior to the issuance of any building permits.

42. The applicant shall comply with the following grading requirements:

A. Grading plans shall be submitted to and approved by Building & Safety. The grading plans shall indicate all site improvements and shall indicate complete drainage paths of all drainage water run-offs.

B. All drainage water shall drain via approved methods to an approved location, such as a public street, a public drainage system, etc.

C. Drainage water shall not cross over a public sidewalk. Drainage water may, however, cross under a sidewalk if an approved drainage structure is used.

D. A recorded drainage acceptance agreement is required from adjoining property(s) receiving flows from this property.

E. No water course or natural drainage shall be obstructed.

F. Minimum slope or grade for ALL drainage structures shall be one half (0.50) percent for concrete and one (1.0) percent for all other, or as otherwise approved by the Building Official.

G. Drainage water shall not pass from an ‘improved’ type of drainage structure to an ‘unimproved’ type of drainage structure (e.g., concrete swale to a dirt swale) unless otherwise approved by the Building Official.

H. A complete hydrology study using the latest edition of the San Bernardino County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, and complete hydraulic calculations justifying the size, slope, capacity, etc. of any and all drainage structures being utilized, shall be submitted to and approved by Building & Safety.

The on-site drainage system shall, as a minimum, be designed to handle the run-off generated by a ten (10) year storm. Check for flooding of all on -site structures (buildings) and all adjacent properties during a hundred (100) year storm.

I. The grading plans shall, as a minimum, contain sections at all lot lines and/or permit boundary lines. These sections shall clearly indicate:

1. The relationship between the proposed finished on-site grade elevations and the existing adjacent property grade elevations (Indicate any additional drainage water that may come from an adjacent property.); and

2. The ground c over/finished surface material being proposed (e.g., type of pavement, plant material, etc.); and

3. All proposed drainage structures; and

4. Any proposed and/or required walls or fencing.

43. The applicant is required to obtain permits for the removal and/or demolition of structures.
401022
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

44. The applicant shall verify that all exterior lighting shall be oriented, directed, and/or shielded as much as possible so that direct illumination does not infringe onto adjoining properties.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING/CONSTRUCTION PERMITS

45. The following items (as applicable) shall be completed by the applicant and submitted to Building & Safety prior to the issuance of building permits for this project:

A. Precise grading plans shall be approved
B. Rough grading completed
C. Compaction certification
D. Pad elevation certification
E. Rough grade inspection signed off by a City Building Inspector

46. Any proposed structure(s) shall not cross any lot line and shall comply with all requirements of the California Building Code, prior to any building permits being issued.

ENGINEERING:

47. The Project shall be served by the City’s sanitary sewer system, all sewer facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the City Standards. Main trunk sewer line shall be in accordance with master sanitary sewer plan or as approved by the City Engineer. Onsite Sewer shall be privately maintained.

48. The Applicant shall obtain design and plan approval from all utility providers having jurisdiction over the on-site and off-site utilities. Completion of all undergrounding of on- site and off -site utilities is required by Section 27 -52 of the City Municipal Code and in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the City Engineer.

49. The Applicant shall maintain all improvements and utilities within the public right- of-way, including street sweeping, prior to issuance of final certificate of occupancy by the City.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT

50. The Applicant shall submit and gain approval of a complete Water Quality Management Plan report in accordance with the County of San Bernardino Technical Guidance Document and latest template.

51. The Applicant shall submit, and gain approval of a final drainage study prepared in accordance with the County of San Bernardino Hydrology Manual and F ontana Master Plan of Drainage.

PRIOR TO MAP RECORDATION

52. The Applicant shall provide a Land Improvement Agreement, with accompanying security.

The agreement shall be executed on City-provided forms.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY OTHER CONSTRUCTION PERMITS

53. The Applicant shall record All map’s, right-of-way dedications, easements, as required for the development.

411023
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

54. The Applicant shall submit engineered improvement plans and obtain full approval. All required public improvements, including but not limited to streets, storm drainage systems, sewers, traffic signals, streetlights, striping, signs, landscape, and any required traffic control and/or detour plans. For a full list of traffic requirements, refer to the Traffic Division's conditions of approval. All p lans shall conform to City Standards and Specifications and must be approved by the City Engineer.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY

55. Complete all public improvements required of the project. Underground utilities required of the project. Ensure streetlights are energized and operating properly.

56. The Applicant/Engineer to provide the City of Fontana with As Built/Record Drawings for all public improvement plans. The Applicant/Developer shall provide a copy of the streetlight electric bill.

57. Slurry seal roads effected by the development as directed by the inspector. Slurry seal limits may extend past the project frontage to address existing striping/pavement markings that conflicts with new striping/pavement markings, repair trenches, and other areas as determined by the inspector.

58. The Surveyor of Record shall provide centerline ties to the City of Fontana reflecting proper setting of all survey monuments within the project limits and replace any existing survey monuments damaged or removed during construction.

59. The Surveyor of Record shall set survey monuments as required by the map and corner records must be recorded with the County. The Surveyor of Record shall notify the City in writing that monuments have been set in accordance with the recorded subdivision map and he/she has been paid in full for doing so.

60. All sewers shall be video inspected by applicant/contractor. Sewer video shall include clean-out connection, clean -out to lateral segment, lateral, and main line. Contractor performing the video inspection must have a NASSCO P ACP, LACP, and MACP certification. Applicant shall provide a copy of the video on DVD or flash drive to inspection staff with an accompanying full report. Videos to be inspected and approved by City Inspector. If removal and replacement of any utility is r equired, a subsequent video of the repair will be required.

61. All storm drains shall be video inspected by applicant/contractor. Storm drain video shall include main lines and laterals. Applicant shall provide a copy of the video on DVD or flash drive to inspection staff. Videos to be inspected and approved by City Inspector. If removal and replacement of any utility is required, a subsequent video of the repair will be required.

62. The Applicant/Engineer of Record shall submit a conforming copy of the recorded Memorandum of Agreement for the Water Quality Management Plan and Storm Water Best Management Practice transfer. The Access, Maintenance, and the WQMP Certification for BMP Completion must be submitted to the City Project Engineer.

421024
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

ENGINEERING TRAFFIC:

63. Project ingress and egress locations and restrictions shall be as follows, with additional or lesser restrictions being necessitated subject to changes in the site plan and approval of the City Engineer:

A. The Project may have up to two (2) ingres s/egress points along Hilton Drive. The westerly access point shall be designed, constructed, and signed to restrict access to left- and right-turning ingress movements only. Egress for all vehicle types shall be prohibited at the westerly driveway. The ea sterly driveway may accommodate full access (i .e., left - and right -turning inbound and outbound) movements for passenger vehicles, and shall be designed, constructed, and signed to restrict truck access to left - and right-turning egress movements only. Ing ress for trucks shall be prohibited at the easterly driveway.

B. Ingress and egress restrictions shall be reinforced with appropriate signage and pavement markings within the Project site and in the public Right -of-Way, as appropriate. The prohibition of tru ck ingress at the easterly driveway shall be visible to drivers in the public Right-of-Way.

64. Left-turn ingress and/or egress at all access locations may be restricted in the future due to traffic operational or safety concerns. Alternatives to such restric tions may be considered, subject to approval of the City Engineer.

65. All gated ingress locations which do not provide adequate space within the Project site for the design vehicle to turn around shall be designed so that the gate position as either opened or closed is visible to drivers in the public Right-of-Way. At no time shall the design and gating of Project driveways require vehicles to reverse into a travel lane in the public Right-of-Way in order to depart or turn around. This requirement may be excl uded if the gate is manned at all times with personnel who may permit an errant driver to enter the site in order to turn around and depart.

66. Stopping sight distance must be shown to meet the required standards both horizontally and vertically at all ingress/egress locations including consideration for walls, landscaping, grading, and vegetation. Sight distances shall comply with current AASHTO requirements.

67. The site plan shall identify the on-site vehicular traffic flow patterns and circulation, on-site signing and striping, and any restricted, reserved, or other pre-designated parking areas.

68. The location of bicycle parking shall be depicted on the site plan . The number of bicycle parking spaces shall be determined in compliance with the City of Fontana Zoning and Development Code. Bicycle parking shall comply with the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals’ (APBP) bicycle parking design guidance. In the event that the Fontana Zoning and Development Code and the APBP guidance differ, the Fontana Zoning and Development Code requirements shall prevail.

69. The site plan shall identify all pedestrian access ways and traffic crossings. Crossings shall be clearly marked, lighted, and identified throughout the interior of the project. Pedestrian walkways shall have sufficient pathway lighting.

431025
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

70. The site plan shall identify the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant path(s) of travel to/from the public right of way and from all ADA accessible parking spaces.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING/CONSTRUCTION PERMITS

71. The Applicant shall provide a striping and signing plan for all roadway improvements, subject to the approval of the City Engineer as part of the approval of the street improvement plans.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY

72. The Applicant shall pay the applicable Development Impact Fees prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits at the established rate pursuant to Government Code Section 66007.

FIRE DEPARTMENT:

73. Jurisdiction. The above referenced project is under the jurisdiction of the Fontana fire Protection District (herein “Fire Department”). Prior to any construction occurring on any parcel, the applicant shall contact the Fire Department for verification of current fire protection requirements. All new construction shall comply with the current California Fire Code requirements and all applicable statutes, codes, ordinances, and standards of the Fire Department.

74. Fire Access Road Width. Prior to map recordation, all fire access roadways shall be designed to meet the requirements for this development and shall be approved by the Fire Department. All buildings shall have access provided by approved roads, alleys, and private drives with a minimum twenty-six (26) foot unobstructed width and vertically to fourteen (14) feet six (6) inches in height. Buildings three (3) stories in height or more shall have a minimum access of thirty (30) feet unobstructed width and vertically to fourteen (14) feet six (6) inches in height. California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard A-1.

75. Turnaround. An approved turnaround shall be provided at the end of each roadway one hundred and fifty (150) feet or more in length. Cul -de-sac length shall not exceed six hundred (600) feet; all roadways shall not exceed a 12 % grade and have a minimum of nineteen (19) foot inside radius and a forty -five (45) foot outside radius for all turns.

California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard A-1.

76. Street Signs. Approved temporary or permanent street signs shall be installed throughout the project prior any combustible materials being placed on the construction site. California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard A-2.

77. Fire Lanes. The applicant shall submit a site pl an to the Fire Department for review and approval of all proposed signage and striping for all fire access roadways. All curbs adjacent to fire lanes shall be painted red and “No Parking, Fire Lane” signs shall be installed on public and private roads in accordance with approved standards. SBCoFD Standard A-2.

78. Water System Commercial . Prior to map recordation or lot line adjustment, all water supply systems shall be designed to meet the required fire flow for this development and shall be approved by the Fire Department. The required fire flow shall be determined by using Appendix BB of the California Fire Code. A minimum of one new six (6) inch fire 441026
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

hydrant assembly with two (2) two and one half (2 1/2) inch and one (1) four (4) inch outlet (4”x2.5”x2.5”) shall be provided. All fire hydrants shall be spaced no more than three hundred (300) feet apart as measured along vehicular travel -ways. California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard W-2.

The Fire Flow for this project shall be for Building -1: 2,125 GPM for a two-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. Fire Flow is based on a 41,996 Square Foot structure. The Fire Flow for this project shall be for Building-2: 1,875 GPM for a 1.5 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. Fire Flow is based on a 30,767 Square Foot structure.

79. Hydrant Marking. Blue reflective pavement markers indicating fire hydrant locations shall be installed as specified by the Fire Department. SBCoFD Standard W-2.

80. Water System Certification. The applicant shall provide the Fire Department with a letter from the serving water company, certifying that the required water improvements have been made or that the existing fire hydrants and water system will meet distance and fire flow requirements. Fire flow water supply shall be in place prior to placing combustible materials on the jobsite. California Fire Code Chapter 5.

81. Combustible Protection. Prior to combustibles being placed on the project site an approved paved roadway providing fire access an d fire hydrants providing an acceptable fire flow shall be installed. California Fire Code Chapter 5.

82. Fire Sprinkler-NFPA #13. An automatic fire sprinkler system complying with NFPA 13 and Fire Department standards is required. A fire sprinkler contractor shall submit three (3) sets of detailed plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. The plans shall include hydraulic calculations and manufacturer specification sheets. The required fees shall be paid at the time of plan submittal. California Fire Code Chapter 9 & SBCoFD Standard F -

1. 83. Fire Alarm, Waterflow Monitoring. A water flow monitoring fire alarm system complying with the California Fire Code, NFPA and all applicable codes is required for fire sprinkler systems with twenty (20) sprinkler heads or more. A fire alarm contractor shall submit three (3) sets of detailed plans to the Fire Department for review and app roval. The required fees shall be paid at the time of plan submittal. California Fire Code Chapter 9, NFPA 72 & SBCoFD Standard F-5.

84. Fire Extinguishers. Hand portable fire extinguishers are required. The location, type, and cabinet design shall be approved by the Fire Department. California Fire Code Chapter 9.

85. Commercial Addressing. Commercial, industrial, and multi -family developments of 100,000 sq. ft or less shall have the street address installed on the building with numbers that are a minimum e ight (8) inches in height and with a one (1) inch stroke. The street address shall be visible from the street. During the hours of darkness, the numbers shall be electrically illuminated (internal or external). Where the building is two hundred (200) feet or more from the roadway, additional non-illuminated contrasting six (6) inch numbers shall be displayed at the property access entrances. California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard B-1

451027
Resolution No. PC 2026
ATTACHMENT NO. 3

86. Key Box. An approved Fire Department key box is required. The key box shall be provided with a tamper switch and shall be monitored by a Fire Department approved central monitoring service. California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard A-4

87. Security Gates. In commercial, industrial, and multi-family complexes, all swing gates shall have an approved fire department Knox Lock. Where an automatic electric security gate is used, an approved Fire Department override switch is required. California Fire Code Chapter 5 & SBCoFD Standard A-3

88. Material Identification Pl acards. The applicant shall install, in all locations deemed appropriate by the Fire Department, approved material identification placards on the outside of all buildings and/or storage tanks that store hazardous or flammable materials.

Additional placards shall be required inside the buildings when chemicals are segregated into separate areas. California Fire Code Chapter 50 & NFPA 704.

89. High-Piled Storage. The applicant shall submit an application for a High -Piled Storage permit for storage of over 12’ in height of Class I-IV commodities and/or over 6’ in height of high hazard commodities. Three (3) sets of detailed plans and a commodity analysis report shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. The applicant shall submit to the Fire Department concurrently with any racking permits to the Building and Safety division. California Fire Code Chapter 32 & SBCoFD Standard S-1.

90. Secondary Access. The development shall have a minimum of two points of vehicular access during each phase of construction for fire and emergency access purposes and for evacuation routes. SBCoFD Standard A-1

END OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
461028

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION

TO:
☒
Office of Land Use and Climate
Innovation
State Clearinghouse
P. O. Box 3044, Room 113
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
FROM:
(Public
Agency)
Name: City of Fontana
Address: 8353 Sierra Ave,
Fontana CA 92335
Telephone: 909-350-6656
☒ Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
or
County Clerk (Include County
name)
Address:

1. Project Title: Master Case No. 18-000053; Tentative
Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No.
19950), and Design Review No. 18-000010

2. Project Applicant (include address,
telephone number and email address):

C. VanDerHoek Architects, Inc.

Carl VanDerHoek
(714) 308-7662
[email protected]
4109 E. Ferwood Avenue
Orange, CA 92869

3. Project Location – Identify street
address and cross streets or attach a
map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15’ or 7 1/2’ topographical map
identified by quadrangle name):

The project site is located north of
Hilton Drive and east of Redwood
Avenue (APN: 1110-151-03)

4. (a) Project Location – City: Fontana (b) Project Location – County: San Bernardino

5. Description of nature, purpose, and
beneficiaries of Project:

Request to split one parcel into two
parcels and for site and architectural
review to develop two industrial
commerce center buildings totaling 71,985
square feet (Building No. 1 will have 41,218
square feet and Building No. 2 will have
30,767 square feet) and associated on-site
and off-site improvements on a 3.98 acre
site.

ATTACHMENT NO. 4
471029

6. Name of Public Agency approving
project:

City of Fontana

7. Name of Person or Agency undertaking
the project, including any person
undertaking an activity that receives
financial assistance from the Public
C. VanDerHoek Architects, Inc.

Carl VanDerHoek
(714) 308-7662
[email protected]
4109 E. Ferwood Avenue
Orange, CA 92869

Agency as part of the activity or the
person receiving a lease, permit,
license, certificate, or other entitlement
of use from the Public Agency as part of
the activity:

8. Exempt status: (check one)
(a) ☐ Ministerial project. (Pub. Resources Code § 21080(b)(1); State CEQA Guidelines § 15268)
(b) ☐ Not a project. State CEQA Guidelines 15050(c)(2)-(3) (c) ☐ Declared Emergency (Pub. Resources Code § 21080(b)(3); State CEQA Guidelines § 15269(a))
(d) ☐ Emergency Project. (Pub. Resources Code § 21080(b)(4); State CEQA Guidelines § 15269(b),(c))
(e) ☒ Categorical Exemption.

State type and section
number:

Exempt under Section 15332, Class 32
(Infill Development) of the California
Environmental Quality Act
(f) ☐ Statutory Exemption.

State Code section number:

(g) ☐ Other. Explanation:
481030

9. Reason why project was exempt: The proposed Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section No. 15332 (Class No.
32 – Infill Development). The project meets
the CEQA requirements of Infill: (1) The
Project is consistent with the Light
Industrial (I-L) designation of the General
Plan and the West End Specific Plan - BP-
3 zoning district; (2) The Project Site is
less than five (5) acres (3.98 acres); (3) The
Project Site is not within any known
sensitive or threatened habitat area; (4)
The Project will not have any significant
effects related to traffic, noise, air quality,
or water quality; and (5) There are
adequate public services for the
development of the proposed industrial
project. Further, none of the exceptions in
CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply to
the Project.

10. Lead Agency Contact Person:

Telephone:

Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
909-350-6656

11. If filed by applicant: Attach Certificate of Determination (Form “B”) before filing.

12. Was a public hearing held by the Lead Agency to consider the exemption? Yes ☒ No ☐
If yes, the date of the public hearing was: March 17, 2026

Date: March 18, 2026

Signature
Name: DiTanyon Johnson
Title: Planning Manager

☒ Signed by Lead Agency ☐ Signed by Applicant

Date Received for Filing:
(Clerk Stamp Here)
491031
Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21110, Public Resources Code.

Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code.

Notice of Exemption FORM “A” 501032

Environmental
Determination:

This project is categorically
exempt pursuant to Section
15332, Class 32 (In -fill
Development) of the California
Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), and Section 3.22
(Categorical Exemption) of
the 2019 City of Fontana
Local Guidelines for
Implementing the California
Environmental Quality Act.

Location of North of Hilton Drive and
Property: west of Hemlock
(APN: 1110-151
03)
Avenue
Date of
Hearing:

March 17, 2026
Place of
Hearing:

Steelworkers
Auditorium
8437 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA.

Time of
Hearing:
6:00 PM

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

SI DESEA INFORMACION EN ESPAÑOL REFERENTE A ESTA NOTIFICACION O PROYECTO, FAVOR DE COMUNICARSE AL (909) 350-6728.

In compliance with Section No. 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section No. 12132) and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof, the Agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Should you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department by calling (909) 350- 6718. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the city to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FONTANA FOR THE FOLLOWING:

Master Case No (MCN). 18-000053, Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950) and Design Review (DRP) No. 18-000010
A request to subdivide one parcel into two parcels along with the site and architectural review for the development of two (2) industrial commerce center facilities totaling approximately 71,985 square feet and associated site improvements on approximately 3.98 acres.

Hilton Dr.

Foothill Blvd.

Redwood Ave.

Hemlock Ave.

Project Site
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
511033
Should you have any questions concerning this project, please contact Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner, at (909) 350-6656 or by e-mail at [email protected].

ANY INTERESTED PARTY MAY PROVIDE INFORMATION BY LETTER OR EMAIL WHICH MAY BE OF ASSISTANCE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. A COPY OF THE APPLICATION AND

ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CITY HALL. PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNER LISTED ABOVE.

IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY ACTION TAKEN CONCERNING THIS ITEM IN COURT, YOU

MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED

AT THE PUBLIC HEARING DESCRIBED IN THIS NOT ICE, OR IN WRITTEN

CORRESPONDENCE PROVIDED TO THE CITY AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE PUBLIC HEARING.

Publish: March 6, 2026
S.B. Sun Newspaper
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
521034
Docusign Envelope ID: 673786CE- 2F76- 4678- 9617- 3A334044933C City of Fontana
Planning Commission
Minutes
Joseph Armendarez, Chair
Ricardo Quintana, Vice Chair
Torrie Lozano, Secretary
Idilio Sanchez, Commissioner
Dylan Keetle, Commissioner
Tuesday, March 17, 2026 6: 00 P. M. Grover W. Taylor Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL:

A. Call to Order/ Roll Call:

A regular meeting of the City of Fontana Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 17, 2026. Chair Armendarez called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m.

Present: Chair Armendarez, Vice Chair Quintana, Secretary Lozano, and Commissioners Sanchez and Keetle

Absent: None
INVOCATION/ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

A. Invocation/ Pledge of Allegiance:

Following the Invocation by Chaplain Diane Fore, the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Secretary Lozano.

PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS:

A. Public Communications:

ATTACHMENT NO. 8
1035
Docusign Envelope ID: 673786CE- 2F76- 4678- 9617- 3A334044933C Planning Commission Minutes March 17, 2026
None.

CONSENT CALENDAR:

A. Approval of Minutes:

Approve the Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2026.

ACTION: A Motion was made by Commissioner Keetle and seconded by Commiss ioner Sanchez and passed by a vote of 5-0 to approve the Consent Calendar.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: Chair Armendarez, Vice Chair Quintana, Secretary Lozano, and Commissioners Sanchez and Keetle

Absent: None
Abstain: None
PH - A
Master Case No. ( MCN) 18- 000053: Tentative Parcel Map No. 18- 000005 ( TPM No. 19950) and Design Review No. 18- 000010 - A request to split one ( 1) parcel into two 2) and for site and architectural approval for the development of two ( 2) new industrial commerce center buildings, Building No. 1 will have 41, 218 square feet and Building No. 2 will have 30, 767 square feet, and with associated site improvements, on 3. 98 acres, located north of Hilton Drive and west of Hemlock Avenue ( APN: 1110- 151- 03), pursuant to a categorical exemption in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332.

Chair Armendarez opened the Public Hearing.

The City Clerk' s Department received one ( 1) written correspondence regarding this item.

Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner presented the staff report.

Commissioner Keetle inquired about access to Parcel No. 2, noting that the only access appears to be from Hilton Drive, and asked whether an easement would be recorded in perpetuity to ensure access if the rear parcel is ever sold. Senior Planner, Quintanilla confirmed that the parcel map designates a reciprocal access agreement and stated that Engineering has included a condition requiring the reciprocal access agreement to be recorded, thereby ensuring perpetual access between the front and rear parcels.

Commissioner Sanchez inquired whether the project access would be right- in/ right- out only. Senior Planner, Quintanilla clarified that the passenger vehicle will use the easterly driveway for ingress/ egress not the westerly drive aisle.

Page 2 of 6 ends

1036
Docusign Envelope ID: 673786CE- 2F76- 4678- 9617- 3A334044933C Planning Commission Minutes March 17, 2026
Doug McCann, on behalf of the applicant Hilton Lane LLC, stated that he read and agreed to the Conditions of Approval and spoke about the project which consist of two industrial warehouse buildings totaling approximately 71, 985 square feet, located along the north side of Hilton Drive between Redwood Avenue and Hemlock Avenue. Access will be provided by drive aisles on the east and west sides of the property. The project is anticipated to accommodate warehousing, storage, and light manufacturing tenants with limited truck traffic.

In response to Commissioner Sanchez inquiry, the applicant confirmed there are no current tenants; however, a broker has been retained and is actively marketing the property.

No individual spoke in favor or in opposition.

The Public Hearing was closed.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Determine that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section No. 15332 ( Class No. 32, Infill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act, and Section No. 3. 22 ( Categorical Exemption) of the Local 2019 Guidelines for Implementing the CEQA, and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption; and,

2. Approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 18- 000005 ( TPM No. 19950); and

3. Approve Design Review ( DR) No. 18- 000010.

ACTION: Motion was made by Vice Chair Quintana and seconded by Commissioner Keetle and passed by a vote of 5- 0 to approve Public Hearing Item " A"; adopt Resolution No. PC 2026- 006; Approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 18- 000005 ( TPM No. 19950) and Design Review ( DR) No. 18- 000010.

The motion carried by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Armendarez, Vice Chair Quintana, Secretary Lozano, and Commissioners Sanchez and Keetle NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None PH- B
Master Case No. 26- 0007 and Municipal Code Amendment No. 26- 0001: Fontana Municipal Code amendments to Chapter 30 to modify multiple sections of the

Page 3 of 6 ends

1037
Docusign Envelope ID: 673786CE- 2F76- 4678- 9617- 3A334044933C Planning Commission Minutes March 17, 2026
Zoning and Development Code, including modifications to definitions for medical land uses in commercial zones, the definition and regulation of business parks, screening requirements for loading areas in industrial zones, and regulations in the Form - Based Code zone, including the definition of frontage coverage, maximum setback standards in the Route 66 Gateway sub - district, glazing requirements for the Shopfront frontage type, and landscaping in parking areas.

Chair Armendarez opened the Public Hearing.

No written correspondence was received.

Cecily Session- Goins, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and noted a memorandum requesting the addition of language to Section 4 of the resolution clarifying that projects deemed complete under current standards may continue processing under those standards.

No individual spoke in favor or in opposition.

The Public Hearing was closed.

RECOMMENDATION:

Based on information on the staff report staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2026- 007; and,

1. Determine that the Ordinance is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060( c), 15061( B)( 3) ( the common- sense exemption), and 15378 and Sections No. 3. 01, 3. 22, and 10. 59 of the 2019 Local Guidelines for Implementing CEQA, in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment where it can be with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA; and,

2. Approve a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance for Municipal Code Amendment ( MCA) No. 26- 0001 to amend Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code.

ACTION: Motion was made by Secretary Lozano and seconded by Commissioner Keetle and passed by a vote of 5-0 to approve Public Hearing Item " B" and adopt Resolution No. PC 2026- 007 with amended conditions of approval.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Page 4 of 6 ends

1038
Docusign Envelope ID: 673786CE- 2F76- 4678- 9617- 3A334044933C Planning Commission Minutes March 17, 2026
AYES: Chair Armendarez, Vice Chair Quintana, Secretary Lozano, and Commissioners Sanchez and Keetle NOES: None; ABSTAIN: None; ABSENT: None DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS:

A. Director Communications:

Director of Planning, Patty Nevins extended Saint Patrick' s Day greetings and thanked attendees.

COMMENTS:

A. Public Communication Commission Comments:

Commissioner Keetle thanked staff and Director Nevins for their continued hard work and support of the Commission. He extended well wishes to everyone for Saint Patrick' s Day and Easter and expressed hope that all would enjoy time with their families.

Commissioner Sanchez thanked staff for consistently supporting the Commission and expressed appreciation for the opportunity to serve. He concluded by wishing everyone a good evening and offering his blessings.

Secretary Lozano echoed appreciation to the planning staff for their support, responsiveness, and presentations. She noted that the Planning Commissioners Academy was informative and beneficial and extended Easter wishes to all families and wished everyone a pleasant evening.

Chair Armendarez announced that Vice Chair Quintana had to leave due to an emergency and conveyed his appreciation to the Planning Department for their hard work.

Chair Armendarez expressed appreciation to the Planning Commission and Planning Department for their ongoing assistance and acknowledged the opportunity to attend the Commissioners Academy, noting it provided valuable knowledge and insight into the Commission' s roles and responsibilities. Chair Armendarez thanked the City of Fontana for supporting attendance at the conference and extended holiday wishes for Saint Patrick' s Day and Easter and offered prayers for families with loved ones serving in military conflicts overseas, expressing hope for a safe resolution. In closing his comments, Chair Armendarez thanked everyone for their attendance and adjourned with well wishes.

ADJOURNMENT:

Chair Armendarez adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting on Tuesday, April 7, 2026, at 6: 00 p. m. in the Steelworkers' Auditorium located at 8437 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, California.

Page 5 of 6 ends

1039
Docusign Envelope ID: 673786CE- 2F76- 4678- 9617- 3A334044933C Planning Commission Minutes March 17, 2026
SutsmAadtwh
Susana Gallardo
Deputy City Clerk

THE FOREGOING MINUTES WERE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE 7t" DAY OF APRIL 2026.
6stfLamuJA"
Joseph Armendarez
Chair

Page 6 of 6 ends

1040
State of California - Department of Fish and Wildlife
2026 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT
DFW 753.5a (REV. 01/01/26) Previously DFG 753.5a
SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE. TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY.

LEAD AGENCY
City of Fontana
I ~EADAGENCY EMAIL

COUNTY/STATE AGENCY OF FILING
!San Bernardino - -- l.:::J

PROJECT TITLE
RECEIPT NUMBER :
36 - 03/19/2026 - 183
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER (If applicable)
NIA
DATE
03/19/2026

DOCUMENT NUMBER
Master Case No. 18-000053; Tentative Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No. 19950), and Design Review No. 18-000010

PROJECT APPLICANT NAME
Carl VanDerHoek-Architect

PROJECT APPLICANT ADDRESS
4109 E. Ferwood Avenue
PROJECT APPLICANT (Check appropriate box)
0 Local Public Agency D School District
CHECK APPLICABLE FEES:

D Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
D Mitigated/Negative Declaration (MND)(ND)

PROJECT APPLICANT EMAIL PHONE NUMBER
[email protected] (714) 308-7662
CITY
Orange
D Other Special District
STATE
CA

ZIP CODE
92869
D State Agency D Private Entity
$ 0.00 -----------
$ ________ o_.o_o
D Certified Regulatory Program (CRP) document - payment due directly to CDFW $4,227.50
$3,043.75
$1,437.25 $ ________ o_.o_o_
0 Exempt from fee
0 Notice of Exemption (attach)
D CDFW No Effect Determination (attach)
D Fee previously paid (attach previously issued cash receipt copy) D Water Right Application or Petition Fee (State Water Resources Control Board only) 0 County documentary handling fee
D Other
PAYMENT METHOD: #lb3407
$850.00
D Cash D Credit 0 Check O Other TOT AL RECEIVED
$
$
$
$

AGENCY OF FILING PRINTED NAME AND TITLE
Alicia Meza, Deputy Clerk

ORIGINAL - PROJECT APPLICANT COPY - CDFW/ASB COPY - LEAD AGENCY COPY - COUNTY CLERK

0.00 50.00

50.00 DFW 753.5a (Rev. 01012026)
1041
DATE Fil.ED & 10S!~
Posted Doc ~ • L\
Removed a: L.\ • 2L\ •
T
Rece ipt No·Olo-Oo'f\2D1.lo- l <3 ~

FONTANA

CALIFORNIA

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
TO: Office of Land Use and Climate
IZI Innovation
State Clearinghouse
P. 0. Box 3044, Room 113
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
IZI Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
or
County Clerk (Include County
name)
Address:

1. Project Title:

2. Project Applicant (include address,
telephone number and email address):

3. Project Location - Identify street
address and cross streets or attach a
map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15' or 7 1 /2' topographical map
identified by quadrangle name):

4. (a) Project Location - City: Fontana

5. Description of nature, purpose, and
beneficiaries of Project:

FROM: Name: City of Fontana
(Public Address: 8353 Sierra Ave, Agency) Fontana CA ~335 > r--..> Cl
Telephone: 909-350-665~
=> C ,....., :r. en CD
~
~~
n~ )> -• :::- .. ~ ,... C)
i·=~
;;;u
- 1
--:j ;:,J \.0 Cl ;
;o::;; ::0-
~a ::i.::
:P-n co 0
C:
z CJ1
-i ,.:--
-<
Master Case No. 18-000053; Tentative
Parcel Map No. 18-000005 (TPM No.
19950), and Design Review No. 18-000010
Carl VanDerHoek
Architect
(714) 308-7662
[email protected]
4109 E. Ferwood Avenue
Orange, CA 92869
The project site is located north of
Hilton Drive and east of Redwood
Avenue (APN: 1110-151-03)
(b) Project Location - County: San
Bernardino
Request to split one parcel into two
parcels and for site and architectural
review to develop two industrial
commerce center buildings totaling 71,985
square feet ( Building No. 1 will have 41,218
square feet and Building No. 2 will have
30,767 square feet) and associated on-site
and off-site improvements on a 3.98 acre
site.
u )
C
- i
r 1
::: ;
"'' -(..)
( )
,
')
1042

6. Name of Public Agency approving City of Fontana
project:

7. Name of Person or Agency undertaking Carl VanoerHoek the project, including any person Architect
undertaking an activity that receives (714) 308-7662
financial assistance from the Public [email protected] 4109 E. Ferwood Avenue
OranQe, CA 92869
Agency as part of the activity or the
person receiving a lease, permit,
license, certificate, or other entitlement
of use from the Public Agency as part of
the activity:

8. Exempt status: (check one)
(a) D Ministerial project. (Pub. Resources Code§ 21080(b)(1 ); State CEQA Guidelines § 15268)
(b) □ Not a project. State CEQA Guidelines 15050(c)(2)-(3) (c) D Declared Emergency (Pub. Resources Code§ 21080(b)(3); State CEQA Guidelines§ 15269(a))
(d) □ Emergency Project. (Pub. Resources Code§ 21080(b)(4); State CEQA Guidelines§ 15269(b),(c))
(e) ~ Categorical Exemption. Exempt under Section 15332, Class 32 State type and section (Infill Development) of the California number: Environmental Quality Act
(f) □ Statutory Exemption.

State Code section number: I
I (g) □ Other. Explanation: J
U) c:;
):> ...... =
c:,
·- ...... :t>
n 1 en :::0
- (Tl ::::r;:: 0 ~ ~ , .. >
.~~~ 7-J OfTi
,-,. -n:;o: __ ...- t/} ;:,:; ""'1:;u \.0
ClCI C: o
;o;:;;: 7J .,.,
~-- :Do
:;:;) = !::O :x
J> n <:::::
0 c:>
-1 •1
c:: .. U l
:z U1
C)
-I ~
,,,,
'f)
-<
1043

9. Reason why project was exempt:

10. Lead Agency Contact Person:

Telephone:

The proposed Project is categorically
exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section No. 15332 (Class No.
32 - Infill Development). The project meets
the CEQA requirements of Infill: (1) The
Project is consistent with the Light
Industrial (I-L) designation of the General
Plan and the West End Specific Plan - BP-
3 zoning district; (2) The Project Site is
less than five (5) acres (3.98 acres); (3) The
Project Site is not within any known
sensitive or threatened habitat area; (4) I
The Project will not have any significant I
effects related to traffic, noise, air quality,
or water quality; and (5) There are I
adequate public services for the I
development of the proposed industrial
project. Further, none of the exceptions in
CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply to J
the Project.

Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
909-350-6656

11. If filed by applicant: Attach Certificate of Determination (Form "B'') before filing.

12. Was a public hearing held by the Lead Agency to consider the exemption? Yes 0 No □
If yes, the date of the public hearing was: March 17, 2026 Date: March 18, 2026
Name: DiTanyon Johnson
Title: Planning Manager
0 Signed by Lead Agency □ Signed by Applicant
(J';
-p
oL-
('):)
rn
tl:-;:')
::.r=
,~:•
::;; ;o
c:,0
::.:>:::;; -~--___ o
)> ,;,
0 C:
-z. .... -<
._:.,
....... c:; => ....., ;.>
Q?
:Dn ::it 0 -
'.P"' ,-
O r,. :;,:J .,., :;:o
(/)~
I.D
~~
:c,, ~-\
3:
,.., _
<-'-
C?.
_ri,
t/')
c...n 0 .,,_
(.)1 (__,. )
1044
Date Received for Filing: 3 / / q / 202 b
(Clerk Stamp Here)
Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21110, Public Resources Code.

Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code. (./)
')>
:;..:
co
f71
0:.-:,
.->:J.:

CJ;>
,i;:,.J
'.::!S2
✓J ---is ..
~-_a
J> ("')
0 C:
z
-l
-<
GJ a-,...)
= 0 ,_, :» en
~
:JC ::,n
:r,.-
0~ ::::0 --n:;:::,
U)~
\.0 :;o
:I> rr, -n
3 ::o:j
O'.) :::~ .. Cl)
Ul 0 .,._
U1 ,0
1045

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

SI DESEA INFORMACION EN ESPAÑOL REFERENTE A ESTA NOTIFICACION O PROYECTO, FAVOR DE COMUNICARSE AL (909) 350-6728.

A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA FOR THE FOLLOWING:

Appeal (APL) No. 26-001 & Master Case No (MCN). 18-000053

A request by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”) (“The Appellant”) to appeal the Planning Commission’s decision on March 17, 2026 , which approved Master Case No. 18-000053 for Tentative Parcel Map No. 18 -000005 (TPM No. 19950), and Design Review No. 18 -000010 along with the Categorical Exemption (Section 15332, Class No. 32 – Infill Development) to divide (1) parcel into two (2) and for site and architectural approval for the development of two (2) new industrial commerce center buildings, Building No. 1 will have 41,218 square feet and Building No. 2 will have 30,767 square feet, and with associated site improvements, on 3.98 acres, located north of Hilton Drive and west of Hemlock Avenue, and identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers 1110-151-03.

Environmental
Determination:

On March 17, 2026, the Planning
Commission adopted a Categorical
Exemption for the development of
the property for Master Case No.
18-000053: Tentative Parcel Map
No. 18 -000005 (TPM No. 19950),
and Design Review No. 18 -000010,
in accordance with Section 15332
(Class No. 32 – Infill Development)
of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and Section

3.22 of the 2019 City of Fontana
Local Guidelines for Implementing
the CEQA.

Location of
Property:

The project site is located on the
north side of Hilton Drive and west of
Hemlock Ave. (APN No.: 1110-151-
03)

Date of Hearing: May 12, 2026

Hilton Dr.

Foothill Blvd.

Redwood Ave.

Hemlock Ave.

ATTACHMENT NO. 10
Project Site
1046

Place of Hearing: Steelworkers’ Auditorium
8437 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335

Time of Hearing:

2:00 P.M.

Should you have any questions concerning this project, please contact Alexia Barberena, Associate Planner, at 909-350-6568 or by e-mail at [email protected].

ANY INTERESTED PARTY MAY APPEAR AND PRESENT ANY INFORMATION BY LETTER OR EMAIL WHICH MAY BE OF ASSISTANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. A COPY OF THE APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION. PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNER LISTED ABOVE.

IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY ACTION TAKEN CONCERNING THIS ITEM IN COURT, YOU MAY BE

LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE PUBLIC

HEARING DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE PROVIDED TO THE CITY AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE PUBLIC HEARING.

Publish date: May 1, 2026
1047
City of Fontana
Action Report
City Council Meeting
8437 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
File #: 26-1074 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: B. Category: Public Hearing
FROM:

Finance
SUBJECT:

Quarterly Lien Action for Delinquent Sewer, Solid Waste and Weed Abatement Accounts RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to complete and record lien against real property for those sewer accounts sixty days or more delinquent, solid waste accounts more than ninety days delinquent, and for properties with delinquent weed abatement charges outstanding as described in attached resolutions and written reports and to direct staff to file for the recording of liens for such properties.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-060, of the City Council of the City of Fontana authorizing the collection of certain annual wastewater and solid waste service charges, including delinquent charges for each service, on the County property tax rolls and determining and record liens against current delinquent parcels.

3. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-061 of the City Council of the City of Fontana adopting the statement of unpaid expenses for weed abatement and imposing a lien against real property for payment thereof.
..End
COUNCIL GOALS:
· To operate in a businesslike manner by becoming more service oriented. · To practice sound fiscal management by developing long-term funding and debt management plans.
· To improve public safety by increasing operational efficiency, visibility, and availability.

DISCUSSION:

Public Hearings on proposed liens are scheduled quarterly to allow for timely collections and recording of indebtedness. The lien process protects revenues due to the City which would have otherwise been subject to loss through skipped accounts or property transfers.

The proposed written reports (one each for sewer, solid waste and weed abatement) are on file with the City Clerk. Each property owner has had notification provided as required by state law regarding the public hearing and intent to record the lien amount, as well as regular billing notification and legal advertisement as required by City Code. Further, with respect to Weed Abatement, all property owners had the opportunity to protest weed abatement citations through an administrative hearing City of Fontana Printed on 6/18/2026Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1048
File #: 26-1074 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: B. Category: Public Hearing
process.

The lists recommended for adoption contain the following; Type of Account Number of Properties Current Lien Amount Receivables Protected to Date
Sewer 374 $97,244.15 $4,618,900.88
Solid Waste* 96 $49,033.59 $9,685,536.71
Weed Abatement 67 $75,197.85 $4,376,201.00 *Collections are payable to Burrtec Waste and should be made directly to them.

Numbers subject to change if payments are collected
An administrative fee will be included to offset the City's costs to record the lien, as well as the County fee associated with release of the lien to ensure that property titles are cleared once payment has been made. All properties with unpaid liens as of July 1st will be subject to having the remaining amounts placed on the property tax rolls for collection through separate City Council action.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The approval of this item will result in liens totaling approximately $221,475 being recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder’s Office and other applicable Countyoffices. These recorded liens will remain in effect until paid and, if still unpaid, will be included in the City’s next annual process to place delinquent charges on the County property tax roll for collection. This action will help prevent increases in customer charges due to uncollectible accounts. The Sewer lien list receivable amount has been included as revenue in the Sewer Operations Maintenance Fund for current and prior budget periods. Recording the solid waste liens strengthens Fontana solid waste’s ability to collect, thereby increasing the amount generated by the 12% franchise fee remitted to the City MOTION:

Approve staff recommendation.

City of Fontana Printed on 6/18/2026Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1049
1 of 4

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-060

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA ,

CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF CERTAIN

ANNUAL WASTEWATER AND SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES,

INCLUDING DELIN QUENT CHARGES FOR EACH SERVICE, TO BE

COLLECTED ON THE SAN B ERNARDINO COUNTY ANNUAL

PROPERTY TAX ROLL , DETERMINING THAT CURRENT

DELINQUENT CHARGES CONSTITUTE A LIEN UPON PROPERTY,

AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND TAKING OTHER ACTIONS

RELATED THERETO

WHEREAS, the City of Fontana (the “City”) City Council (the “City Council”) has by prior resolutions established rates and charges for the provision of sewer and wastewater services (the “ Wastewater Charges”) and solid waste collection services (the “Solid Waste Charges”) (collectively, the Wastewater Charges and Solid W aste Charges are the “Charges”); and

WHEREAS, pursuant to section 5473 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code, the City may collect the Charges , including delinquent Charges, on the San Bernardino County (the “County”) annual property tax roll in the same manner, at the same time as, together and not separately from, its general taxes; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to section 5473 of the Health and Safety Code, the City Council desires to authorize the collection of the Charges for both the wastewater and solid waste services on the tax roll; and

WHEREAS, the City Council further desires to authorize the collection of any delinquent Charges for both the wastewater and solid waste services on the tax roll pursuant to Health and Safety Code, section 5473a , and furth er desires at this time to record a lien against parcels of property currently delinquent with said wastewater and solid waste service Charges and has caused to be prepared a written report for each Charge (each a “Written Report”), copies of which are att ached hereto as Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B” and by this reference incorporated herein, to be prepared and filed with the City Clerk containing the description of each real property parcel which has delinquent Charges outstanding and the amount of the Waste water Charges and Solid Waste Charges thereon; and

WHEREAS, the City Clerk caused a notice of the filing of the Written Reports and of the time and place of the public hearing thereon to be published in a newspaper of general circulation all in accordanc e with section 5473.1 of the Health and Safety ; and

WHEREAS, the City has also provided written notice to each parcel of property subject to the lien for delinquent Charges pursuant to section 5473.1; and

1050
Resolution No. 2026-060

2 of 4

WHEREAS, at the time stated in the notice being the 23rd day of June, 2026, at 2:00 p.m., the City Council conducted the public hearing on the Written Reports and heard and considered all objections or protests thereto, and has determined and hereby finds that protests have not been made by the owners of a majority of the separate parcels of real property described in the Written Reports for any delinquent Charges ; and

WHEREAS, approval of this Resolution shall authorize the collection of Wastewater Charges and Solid Waste Charges, including any delinque nt Wastewater Charges and Solid Waste Charges on the County property tax rolls each year and shall constitute a lien against the parcel or parcels of land in accordance with section 5473 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code; and
WHEREAS, approval of this Resolution shall also constitute a lien against the delinquent parcels of land included in the attached Written Reports in accordance with section 5473 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cit y Council of the City o f Fontana, California as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. Authorization. The City Council hereby authorizes t he collection of the Wastewater Charges and Solid Waste Charges in the future on the County property tax roll, including any delinquent Wastewater Charges and Solid Waste Charges , to be imposed th ereon, and this Resolution has been adopted by at least two -thirds of the members of the City Council.

Section 3. Written Report Approval . The Written Reports filed with the City Clerk contain the description of each real property parcel which is currently delinquent in the payment of the Wastewater Charges and S olid Was te Charges and the Written Reports are therefore approved and adopted.

Section 4. County Recorder’s Office . The City Clerk, or designee thereof, is hereby directed to file for record with the County Recorder’s Office a copy of the Written Reports, with a statement endorsed thereon over his or her signature that the Written Reports have been fully adopted by the City Council, together with a certified copy of this Resolution, and shall request that the y be recorded as a lien against the parcels contained therein.

Section 5. County Tax Roll . The Wastewater Charges and Solid Waste Charges, including any delinquent Wastewater Charges and Solid Waste Charges, shall be forwarded to the County Tax Collector for collection on the County Property tax roll in the same manner, by the same person, at the same time, together with and not separate from the general taxes , against the property to which they relate, and shall constitute liens on the property in the amount of the Charges, including any delinquent Charges, to be added to the tax bill next levied against each property. 1051
Resolution No. 2026-060

3 of 4

Section 6. Future Proceedings . The City Council shall comply with section 5473 et seq. and cause to be prepared the written report each year the Charges are to be enrolled on the prop erty tax roll pursuant to section 5473 and 5473a of the Health and Safety Code, and the City Clerk shall cause a notice of public hearing pursuant to section 5473.1 of said code each year in compliance with the Health and Safety Code.

Section 7. CEQA. This action has been reviewed per the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State and local CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental regulations. The City, acting as the lead agency, determined that th e resolution is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment as there is no pos sibility that the action would result in a significant environmental impact, and because it does not constitute a “project” as defined in Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3.

Section 8. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.

Section 9. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

_______________________________
City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_______________________________
City Clerk of the City of Fontana
1052
Resolution No. 2026-060

4 of 4

_______________________________
Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

_______________________________
City Clerk
1053

EXHIBIT “A”

WRITTEN REPORT OF ASSESSOR’S PARCELS

DELINQUENT WASTEWATER SERVICE CHARGES

[Report Attached on Following Pages]

1054

Parcel No Name Balance Due Service Address
019121137 Sandoval, Jose Living Trust 6/23/202* $135.71 16431 Orange 019214402 Garcia, Josue $130.85 8575 Emerald 019316105 AMG BROS CORPORATION $492.80 9190 Sierra 019225110 Siddiqi, Sajid $223.16 17525 Arrow 025422156 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. $231.14 17114 Slover 025422135 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. Unit L101 $1,155.66 17216 Slover 019217107 Ustrell, Sandro $223.16 8855 Sierra 019105122 Garcia Jr., Jose $447.16 16379 Foothill 023809183 Yates Commerce Assoc $738.99 10721 Business 022909150 Fontana Capital Llc $1,379.84 13655 Foothill 019418325 Daoud, Jabral $98.56 17682 San Bernardino 019331112-1 D4K Holdings Inc $133.56 9792 Sierra 111026129 Ibarra, Rosa Maria $79.30 15532 Elaine 023809175 Ayres, Richard $258.06 10720 Mulberry 023522153 Sunrise Ford $1,540.28 16005 Valley 019127406 Aguilera, Samuel K $98.56 8561 Nuevo 024608126 Diab, Diab $689.92 18150 Arrow 019316131 Amarikwa, Linus $98.56 9176 Sierra 019212113 Luong, Tho Phuco $133.56 17460 Arrow 019222137 Serrano, Daniel $98.56 17345 Arrow 019409101 Ibrahim, Ibrahim M $124.60 9399 Sierra 110077108 Chado, Richard & Anthony $591.36 7391 East 019225209 Hch Investments Llc $98.56 17695 Arrow 019130332 Padilla, Marin $787.64 8836 Sierra 019202206 Tan, Rocio Revocable $73.95 8285 Wheeler 019130319 Maria Ong $98.56 8832 Sierra 019413226 Layman, Carolyn $79.30 17232 Fontlee 019327130 Pester House TR 11/26/13 $158.60 9605 Oleander 019210213 Kessler, John $158.60 17341 Ivy 019227110 Soriano, Fernando $79.30 8804 Tangelo 019102112 Hunt, Chas $79.30 16268 Ivy 019201106 Rupar, Gary $223.16 8171 Sierra 019223511 Piz, Juana P $101.51 8642 Encinitas 019214138 Reddy, Mallu Campos, Ruth $223.16 8560 Wheeler 019027108 Toms, Kenneth $79.30 17472 Barbee 019127307 Vasili Trust Ivan & Iva $591.36 16803 Arrow 019116206-1 Lancet Contracting Inc $223.16 16786 Arrow 019116206 Lancet Contracting Inc $223.16 16784 Arrow 019011109 Manzanares, Rudolfo $79.30 7956 Juniper 019420338 Mc Lellan, Robert $158.60 9060 Tamarind 1055

019111220 St Luke's Church $174.46 8321 Chantry 019111203 St Luke's Church $158.60 8331 Chantry 019207146 Silva, June $79.30 17129 Upland/8295 Mango 019308144 CYPRESS MANOR HOLDINGS LLC $158.60 9242 Cypress 019026209 Estrada, Melquix $79.30 17387 Fairview 019128203 Malinowski, Ed $138.80 8665 Rosena 019422316 SM Desert Prop LLC. Pfasf, Shawn $158.60 17229 Hibiscus 019321265 Laliberte, Shirley $79.30 9630 Juniper 019217104 Labra Investment LLC $599.48 8885 Sierra 019101117 Mizysak, Dorothy, Dan & Mary Fam TR $411.32 16235 Foothill 019424115 Mizysak, Dorothy $158.60 17379 Holly 019201105 Rupar, Gary $411.32 8181 Sierra 019403205 Heroes Church $158.60 9260 Mango 019406233 Humenik, Raymond $79.30 17476 Randall 019409136 Oana, Nick $71.12 9327 Sierra 019210247 Carlson, Teresa $79.30 17446 Upland 019425132 Loera, Florencio $79.30 17156 Manzanita 019408329 Wood, Jr John $79.30 17576 Pinedale 019420226 Howell, Samantha Estate $79.30 17486 Orchid 019430102 Stevens, Samuel $158.60 17480 Fontlee 019420208 Hale, Mike $101.08 17379 Orchid 019102205 Mizysak, Dorothy, Dan & Mary Fam TR $432.47 16111 Ivy 019421507 Bonani, Gary $79.30 17373 Pine 019414151 Santo, Bryan $79.30 9629 Blanchard 019408414 Botsford, Thomas $78.80 17679 Pinedale 019230205 Johnson, Thomas M $79.30 17616 Upland 019230303 Gall, Michael $79.30 17605 Upland 019333214 Citrus Nursing Cntr $1,046.76 9440 Citrus 019230210 Tannler, Maria M $158.60 17635 Ivy 019315151 Golden Properties Inc $223.16 9008 Sierra 019223210 Valencia, Alice $79.30 17440 Orange 019333211 Citrus Villa Retirmt $182.39 9448 Citrus 024925114 Lapioli, John $158.60 9119 Amber 019233109 Ortiz, Jorge $79.30 17597 Orange 111036124-1 R&b Auto Sales $197.12 16020 Foothill 019432114 Accor Economy Lodging-249 $642.30 10195 Sierra 019303220 Saterfiel, Kenneth $79.30 9141 Pinyon 019227152 Collins, Winnifred $158.60 17509 Ceres 019330119 Piazza Apartments $4,430.00 9971 Juniper 019331112-2 D4K Holdings Inc $133.56 9780 Sierra 019332108 Rossmoine, Harry $158.20 9651 Cherimoya 019211204 Carter, Ronald $158.60 17331 Seville 019109138 Friedman, Gerald S $98.56 16635 Foothill 1056

023528124 Cruz, Marco $79.30 9953 Lime 019005110 Amezcua, Rosa $79.30 16305 Fairfax 019324307 Segel, Gilbert N. $887.04 9530 Sierra 024121140 Hernandez, Refugio $79.30 7445 Tamarind 019332143 Cardoza, Carlos A $79.30 15930 San Bernardino 023817178 Arras, Henry $98.56 11611 Industry 024111121 Santos, Maria E $158.60 7654 Blanchard 023526180 Martinez & Montejo $158.60 9870 Poplar 023526152 Swason, Misti $79.30 9865 Lime 023526151 Smullen, Steve $79.30 9875 Lime 025129228 Campos, Francisco $79.30 9770 Date 019003109 Strotz, Charles & Deborah $79.30 16125 Reed 024123150 Alaniz, Gilbert $79.30 7540 Pepper 024322143 Sickel, Virgie $79.30 17750 Mesa 024303122 Laurel Conv Hospital $4,099.81 7509 Laurel 024112227 Engel, Steve $158.60 17355 Jackson 023634109 Rodican, Gary $79.30 14067 Monterra 024110271 Whiteley, Raymond $79.30 7594 Kaiser 019213343 Crouch, Allen G. $411.32 17690 Arrow 024624414 Rojas, R.c. & P.r. $79.30 18010 Dorsey 019309225 Mi Casa Holdings LTD $98.56 16501 Merrill 111035155 Marquez, Justin, Ashley $158.60 15760 Reed 111034130 Johnson, Lois $79.30 7820 Eugenia 023636131 Wise, Andrew $79.30 11636 Fernwood 024302123 Scholtz, Gilbert $158.60 7425 Laurel 024028216 Castro, Olga P $79.30 17248 Woodhill 024028224 Hagewood, Gary $158.60 17284 Lurelane 023650138 Osollo, Antonio $79.30 14366 Chaparral 023729240 Cuevas, Richard $79.30 14570 Mountain High 023648128 Miller, Everett $79.30 11820 Rustic 023648155 Rodriguez, Noe $72.47 14468 Oakknoll 023648107 Mack, Peter J $79.30 11808 Autumn 023712217 J-m Manufacturing $645.15 10990 Hemlock 023646206 Gonzalez & Vanderpool $79.30 14194 Longview 024032103 Adli, Kayum $158.60 17135 Micallef 024032131 Johnson, Kevin, Megan $79.30 17221 Whatley 024032231 Alexander, Richard $137.90 7169 Kaiser 024108122 Lopez, Samuel $79.30 16858 Miller 023659128 Sena, Edward $158.60 14418 Shadow 110033207 Craven, Mike $79.30 13741 Boston 019347223 Richardson, Bryan $300.36 16340 Windcrest 111003142 Hulsey, Tommie $158.60 14921 Golden 111003161 Robinson, Gregory $79.30 14951 Blue Lake 1057

111003157 Girardot, Yolanda $79.30 7341 Harvest 023739170 Machuca, Evelyn $79.30 11821 Cardinal 019353123 Rodriquez, Mario $212.15 11770 Malagon 023817446 Aqua Serve Eng. $1,290.30 13560 Colombard 023720125-1 Fontana Southridge Partners LP $1,540.28 11673 Cherry 111025107 Quarles, Gwendolyn Living TR 10/7/15 $147.90 15355 Sandhurst 019360478 Ireifej, Ayed $379.66 11467 Aberdeen 025123301 Gonzales, Umberto $158.60 9895 Oleander 110066124 Barnard, Linda $79.30 8056 San Tropez 019126307 Fontana Histor Soc $79.30 8863 Pepper 019207320 Cayon, Mark $79.30 17283 Seville 019029214 Hamilton, Jerry $79.30 17567 Fairfax 019032133 Labra Investments LLC $197.12 17696 Foothill 019116221 City of Fontana $179.20 16767 Spring 019130129 Rhie Property Llc $98.56 16724 Merrill 019412254 Rodriquez, Ricardo $79.30 9645 Acacia 019026204 Blanton, Rayfus $79.30 17337 Fairview 019126101-1 Medrano, Telesforo Shannak, Jamal $98.56 16522 Merrill 019308109 Perez, Cecilia M $79.30 9198 Cypress 019130317 Ong, Marie $295.68 8818 Sierra 019016204 Hightech Floor Covering Inc $223.16 16756 Foothill 019424177 Moscrop, William $79.30 9507 Palmetto 019222138 Happyland Equity Llc $591.36 17487 Arrow 019316103 Guerra Norma $887.04 9146 Sierra 019410101 Facundo, Fuentes $223.16 9491 Sierra 019312142 Valenzuela, Virginia $79.30 9120 Juniper 019429117 Viveros, David & Teresa LV TR $79.30 17671 Fontlee 019420220 Harley, Jim $79.30 17350 Orchid 019304147 Holguin, Sammie $79.30 16275 Dianthus 024120102 Roybal, George $79.30 7622 Alder 019425128 Ragan, Daniel $79.30 17190 Manzanita 019420321 Alsaddi, Yousseif $79.30 17470 Hibiscus 019310141 Nickell, Virgil $79.30 9187 Cypress 019411261 Rodriguez, Francisco $79.30 9592 Mango 025107341 Galardi Group $197.12 10056 Sierra 019344157 Duarte, Dilsa $79.30 9476 Briarwood 019025175 Monge, Honoria $79.30 7738 Encinitas 019025148 Senewiratne, Rohith Alexius Pinto $79.30 17341 Fairfax 023814208 Southwire Co $70.38 11695 Pacific 019125125 Zabolotskikh, Alexey $492.80 16565 Orange 024123157 Barahona, Maria $79.30 16520 Elaine 1058

023512125 Smith, Claudia $79.30 9766 Poplar 023514124 Smith, Claudia $79.30 9769 Poplar 111036124-1 R&b Auto Sales $98.56 16020 Foothill 023714111 Duke Realty $903.21 10905 Beech 019215127 Casey, Kim $98.56 16920 Orange 019218211 Sorour, Sam Soroor, Hany $197.12 17185 Arrow 023527314 Tripp, Michele $79.30 9765 Sycamore 024030210 Martinez, Marcelino $79.30 17018 Farwell 019001354 Nelson, Macietta $79.30 7736 Elwood 024031149 Gatenby, Thomas $79.30 6652 Carmel 024329129 Sifuentes, Antonio $79.30 7829 Grace 110024112 Moran Karina $79.30 7954 Barton 024035111 Tillett, Laurence & Debra $79.30 17034 Cambria 110024129 Alvareze, Clemence $79.30 13590 Amanda 111004179 Tambunan, Omry $79.30 15037 Snapdragon 019235141 Openshaw, Robert $79.30 17300 Ceres 023654120 Manegdeg, Gil $79.30 11841 Perlita 023814307 130** JURUPA LLC $82.11 13055 Jurupa 019359104 Escobar, David $139.00 11412 Citrus Glen 024115207 Camarena, John $79.30 16235 Montgomery 111007150 Rosales, Rosa M Rev Liv TR $79.30 7562 Plumaria 023720125-3 Fontana Southridge Partners $2,464.00 11647 Cherry 019360433 Johnson, Beverley $139.00 11599 Gold Hill 019362254 Ruiz Trust 4/11/2016 $139.00 11448 Hideaway 019353218 Arevalo, Teresa $139.00 15671 Willow 019353214 Baker, Melvis $139.00 15699 Willow 019354233 Hernandez, Paul G $139.00 15424 Martos 111035109 Ruffo, Carlos $79.30 7780 Almeria 110066239 Ibanez, Raymond $158.60 8063 Riviera 019127423 Molina, Pedro $223.16 8550 Sierra 024119421 Lopez, Rene $79.30 7536 Elwood 025131101 Quintana, Dolores $79.30 16101 Tullock 023733173 Carrillo, Ceser $79.30 11991 Sherwood 111006144 Haro, Blanca $79.30 15185 Geranium 019362104 Walker, Michael & Kimberly $139.00 16218 Valleyvale 019032137-2 Loth, David $2,104.76 17500 Foothill 023634121 Munoz, Gerardo, Karina $79.30 13947 Monterra 019006134 Rojas de Rodriguez, Maria $79.30 7811 Oleander 111035115 Popoca, Gregorio $79.30 7815 Whitewood 024319147 Merino, J. Edmundo $158.60 7998 Grace 022807103 Aguilera, Rogelio & Maria $158.51 6788 Almeria 111030170 Magana, Jose $158.60 7540 Cherimoya 022829306 Ramirez, Pablo A $79.30 6614 Jacaranda 1059

019360533 Allen, Arthur $300.36 11464 Aberdeen 024113152 Acosta, Jose $79.30 17415 Ramona 110040109 Sandoval, Raul $79.30 8090 Park Lawn 019128207 Mercado, Cesar $208.20 8633 Rosena 019354113 Mejia, Adolfo $139.00 15464 Villaba 024028204 Mcferguson, Crystal $158.60 17231 Woodhill 019102248 Ramirez, Eustolia $79.30 16196 Upland 022859315 Sabaot, Marcus $79.30 7173 Kitty Hawk 019102301 Roman, Amparo $70.96 8295 Pinyon 110062141 Garza, Luis $79.30 14083 Ticonderoga 019361330 Powdrill, Myrtle $139.00 11438 Privet 110029225 Ortiz, Felix $79.30 7444 Stanford 024037226 Briseno, Marcelino $79.30 17132 Cerritos 019007160 Amezcua, Humberto $79.30 7923 Date 019304112 Grijalva, Jesse $79.30 16128 Randall 111009107 Norman, Eloise $158.60 14908 Dandelion 019413136 Phou, Hy $79.30 17195 Randall 019207215 Rodriguez, Gilberto $79.30 17235 Owen 019223211 Quinonez, Sandra $117.20 8673 Encina 110064104 Nyong $79.30 7353 Siena 111026168 Brooks, Terri $79.30 15516 Raymond 024034125 Andrade, Manuel $79.30 17051 Fern 019218210 Sorour, Sam Soroor, Hany $98.56 17165 Arrow 019115313-2 Fontana Teacher's Assoc. $98.56 16850 Seville 019124103 Ehrman, Marc $98.56 8608 Juniper 019201127 Rosenblum, Jerry A & Cheryl Rev Tr $374.00 8137 Sierra 019130229 Andrade, Cristian, Jacqueline $98.56 16806 Merrill 023515101-3 Fontana Unif Sch $79.30 9820 Citrus 019231101 Melia Holdings LLC $492.80 17509 Foothill 019311134 Cardenas, Junior $197.12 16629 Merrill 023710134 CenterPoint Properties Trust $81.92 10691 Poplar 019214108 Barreto, Nicolas $98.56 8541 Sierra 019125136 Ceres Business Park, Llc $394.24 16510 Ceres 019125137 Ceres Business Park Llc $197.12 16534 Ceres 019125116-3 Ceres Business Park Llc $1,161.27 16620 Ceres 023708112 Ohana-ohai Llc $258.06 15305 Manila 025111126 Aldana, Robert $150.33 17270 Valley 023210117-2 Loma Vista Llc $1,478.40 16055 Foothill 025422156 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. $231.14 17084 Slover 110077108 Chado, Richard $887.04 7337 East 019104131 Lang, Thomas $98.56 16178 Arrow 019213312 Guzman, Tina $197.12 17602 Arrow 019402324 Guzman, Jose T $197.12 9057 Sierra 1060

025422157-1 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. $462.26 17064 Slover 025422156 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. $462.26 17030 Slover 025422141 PCW PROPERTIES LLC $399.22 16920 Slover 025422147 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. $1,617.92 17052 Slover 025422157-2 PCW PROPERTIES, LLC. $231.14 17210 Slover-bldg I 019214106 Rodriguez, Alicia $98.56 8551 Sierra 019438148 Sierra Crossroads Llc $462.26 11255 Sierra 024604216 Brito Cousin Inc $1,379.84 18080 Arrow 019311101 J & M Family Enter LLC $197.12 8910 Juniper 111036120 American Legion Post 262 $98.56 15840 Foothill 024909106 Rajah Family Trust $359.87 9653 Alder 110069111 Kurschner, Thomas $223.07 7460 Cherry 023809187 Jasmine Sieroty Llc $903.21 10681 Jasmine 019024119 Paul Phu Properties, Inc $197.12 17218 Foothill 023619123 Outpost $186.12 11081 Cherry 023607113 Conzonia, Joseph $284.35 13831 Slover 023208178 San Gabriel Valley Water Co $806.40 15966 Arrow 019217106 A & S Prof Real Estate Llc $98.56 8867 Sierra 019115126 Juniper Seville Properties Llc $98.56 8381 Juniper 025504134 Sierra Corner Llc $197.12 10510 Sierra 110012155 ZUHA INVESTMENTS LLC $98.56 8048 Cherry 024601161 Tmic Group Inc $1,163.96 17725 Foothill 023605230 Trotter, Ronald $98.56 14540 Slover 023803141 Watson Land Co $1,164.04 13055 Valley 023803142 Watson Land Company $1,129.04 13265 Valley 023806306 Appel Erwin & Essie Trust $591.40 13369 Valley 023806311-1 Campbell Hawaii Investor Llc $1,728.57 13479 Valley 023806311-2 Campbell Hawaii Investor Llc $1,164.04 13481 Valley 022929139 Almeria Holdings Llc $311.10 13450 Napa 023718112 Dct Prop Management Llc $394.24 15750 Jurupa 019105113 Foothill Blvd Carwash LP $71.68 16345 Foothill 024012143 Sunoaks LLC $689.92 16944 South Highland 023422128 Harb Ahmad $411.32 14675 Valley 111049102 CKA Martial Arts & Fitness $98.56 14976 Foothill 111049108 Alfred Signs Londo, Fredy $98.56 14976 Foothill 023612226 BTC III Fontana Log Center $411.32 10855 Cherry 023424117 Rexford Ind Realty LP Victor Ramirez $281.33 10156 Live Oak 111808370 Gabion Ranch Master Association $300.65 5601 Montelena 023616179 BLV II CA 14019 Rose Ave $387.09 14019 Rose 110081110 LEXIBRAND LLC $281.33 7762 Edison 024108125 Mali & Assoc. Inc $98.56 7672 Sierra 023514106 Valley Boulevard Fontana Holding Gr $98.56 15762 Valley 023517117 BLV II CA 14928 Washington Dr $387.09 14928 Washington 1061

019403234 SIERRA FONTANA99 LLC $197.12 9251 Sierra 025120309 March Bachli $129.03 16726 Slover 023605247 Pinnacle Realty & Holdings LLC $223.16 14562 Slover 025114128 CIVF VI-CA 1W02 LLC $129.03 16288 Boyle 022826255 Highland Park of Fontana Comm Assoc $98.56 14921 Gallery 023608149 Duke Realty Calabash LP $387.09 13930 Santa Ana 025117257 Sierra Business Center $1,020.32 16604 Slover 111804101 BCIF SIERRA IC LP $281.33 5309 Sierra 024012137 Boukdis Trust 7/8/87 $223.16 17010 South Highland 023514104 158** Valley Blvd Investors LLC $281.33 15894 Valley 023719142 AVL ENTERPRISES LLC $98.56 11053 Catawba 025112133 Calabasas Property Inc $223.16 10189 Citrus 111922168 MVP FONTANA I LLC $258.06 6260 Mango 111842101 Lewis, Darius Bravo, Brittney $139.00 16513 BOTANICAL 111842106 Garcia, Erika Perez, Samantha $139.00 16495 BOTANICAL 111842101 Sauceda, Heidi, Jorge $139.00 16505 BOTANICAL 111844101 Sandoval, Michael $139.00 5136 Currant 111842101 Guess, Ronald, Ashley $139.00 16470 BOTANICAL 022675362 Bustamante, Grace $158.60 4780 Milkweed 022672225 LS-FONTANA LLC $158.60 15994 Conservatory 110755143 Yang, Eliana $79.30 16065 JAEGAR 110755127 Padua, Kriesler, Timothy $158.60 16072 JAEGAR 110755115 Chen, Karl $79.30 16035 OLIVAS 110755118 Yanquan Zhan, Shuping Xiao $158.60 16036 OLIVAS 110755125 LG WELL LLC $79.30 16085 OLIVAS 110755152 Johnny Pacio, Lea Marie Hua $79.30 16062 OLIVAS 024040202 Sotomayor, Maria $158.60 16100 Lumia 024040212 Gallon, Destiny D. Huff, Eilene $158.60 16120 Lumia 024040209 Ramos, Mariela, Juan Carlos $158.60 16126 Lumia 111844101 Perez, Claudine $300.36 5132 Currant 022674221 LS-FONTANA LLC $158.60 4822 Caterpillar 022675626 Roberts, Chastity $79.30 15901 Blue Copper 024040205 Torres, David Hernandez, Mary $79.30 16163 Lumia 022671244 LS FONTANA LLC $79.30 15786 Conservatory 110755117 Zhang, Jinhua $79.30 16031 Olivas 110755207 Liang, Qi $79.30 16036 Esparza 022833401 Mahmoudi, Mike $79.30 15931 Los Cedros 022675627 Guzman, Haley $79.30 15889 Blue Copper 022675629 Nicdao, Joshua Paolo $79.30 15893 Blue Copper 022674341 Calderon, Jessica $158.60 4826 Habitat 022675361 Santana, Jovanny $79.30 4782 Milkweed 022674332 Gachett, Kiana $158.60 4775 Paulina 1062

110843124 Esquizel, Ashley $79.30 15577 Asana 110843121 Li, Zhang $79.30 15592 Asana 110843122 Li, Zhang $79.30 15589 Asana 022832301 Nijjar, Sanjeet $79.30 6604 Citrus 022832305 Garcia, Marcelino $79.30 6642 Citrus 022832306 Chavez, Luis, Concepcion $79.30 6652 Citrus 022832307 Tello, Sergio $79.30 6662 Citrus 022832310 Morales, Juanita $79.30 6688 Citrus 022833303 Carey, Pearline $79.30 6732 Citrus 110755208 Pinto, Jack $79.30 16042 Esparza 023907125 I-15 LOGISTICS LLC $81.92 4121 Lytle Creek 023515222 Serrano, Jose, Marta $258.06 15990 Valley 110755225 Vineet, Vyas $79.30 16096 Esparza 111840101 TPG AG EHC III CA 2 LP $139.00 16556 Forest 023610123 Horning, Benjamin $750.53 14457 Slover 111844101 Ota, Malinda $139.00 5159 Currant 110755209 Barajas, Yarely $158.60 16044 Esparza 110755215 Perez, Ronaldo $158.60 16064 Esparza 110755218 Mohanty, Elan $158.60 16074 Esparza 110755219 Guerra, Bairon $79.30 16076 Esparza 110805101 Taher, Shams Shams, Azza $185.79 6285 Lytle Creek 110755222 Zhang, Jinhua $130.85 16086 Esparza 110843125 Arafat, Ahmed Elgazery, Sarah $79.30 6343 Moonfire 110843128 Steward, Laura $79.30 6357 Moonfire 022672242 MRP HNHB LLC $174.46 15919 Conservatory 022672218 MRP HNHB LLC $174.46 15916 Conservatory 0226672219 MRP HNHB LLC $174.46 15926 Conservatory 111844105 Araba, Aira Madel Pascual, Bimborneo $486.49 5167 Currant 111844106 Meneses, Benjamin, Blanca N. $416.99 5169 Currant 110755217 Gray, Jacob Bobabilla, Isabella $79.30 16072 Esparza 110755220 Chqo, Chen Wang, Mingchen $79.30 16082 Esparza 111844328 Richmond American Homes $347.50 5157 Loquat 111844305 Zamora, Daniel, Evelyn c. $416.99 5165 Loquat 111844132 Richmond American Homes $416.99 16511 Shallot 111844135 Richmond American Homes $486.49 16535 Shallot 023613127 Duke Realty 14801 Slover LP $87.68 14801 Slover $97,244.15

1063

EXHIBIT “B”

WRITTEN REPORT OF ASSESSOR’S PARCELS

DELINQUENT SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES

[Report Attached on Following Pages]

1064

Parcel Num Owner Name Owner Address Curr Total
0190013010000 BRUMELL, CARLTON 7794 CARTILLA AVE 142.89 0190321330000 LABRA INVESTMENTS LLC 1881 MARCELLA AVE 174.27 0191161180000 CITY OF FONTANA 8353 SIERRA AVE 142.89
0191163240000 CITY OF FONTANA 8353 SIERRA AVE 594.62
0191182360000 PULIDO, VIDAL ANAYA 16269 CERES AVE 219.13 0191241100000 LOPEZ, DAVID ALVAREZ 16628 ORANGE WAY #1 481.56 0191241540000 KAA PROPERTIES LP 4900 SANTA ANITA AVE #2C 368.67 0191261010000 SHANNAK FAMILY REVOCABLE TR 2/ 9448 LEMON AVE 402.42 0191272170000 MERENDA, MARTHA ANN TRUST 05/24/18 17161 UPLAND AVE 577.74 0191274400000 CITY OF FONTANA 8353 SIERRA AVE 224.53
0191282110000 ROBLES, RAUL 4672 MAXWELL CT 368.67
0191302290000 ANDRADE, CRISTIAN P 5808 HELLMAN AVE 174.27 0192011050000 RUPAR, GARY J 8201 SIERRA AVE 487.33
0192011060000 RUPAR, GARY J 8201 SIERRA AVE 841.38
0192121130000 LUONG & NGUYEN FAMILY TRUST 08 3220 COSBEY AVE 748.05 0192133120000 FWK017 LLC 208 S GRAND AVE 594.15
0192151040000 BLUE HOMES GROUP LLC 2416 WALNUT GROVE AVE 174.27 0192151270000 KIM, CASEY 16920 ORANGE WAY 127.08
0192171030000 LABRA INVESTMENT LLC 1881 MARCELLA AVE 733.17 0192221380000 HAPPYLAND EQUITY LLC 276 S WINDSOR BLVD 1,210.41 0193051040000 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SAN BERNA 1053 N D ST 670.47 0193111040000 ARTEAGA, NORMA LIDIA MIRANDA 8944 JUNIPER AVE 230.00 0193111340000 CARDENAS, COSME 16629 MERRILL AVE 594.15
0194011250000 DIAB, WAEL 2215 W ARTESIA BLVD 277.30
0194183220000 ALSADDI, YOUSSEIF 17470 HIBISCUS 218.05
0194342160000 LOT 63 TRUST 1-18-07 - EST OF 8341 STAR VIEW DR 450.82 0194431420000 PAN PACIFIC MILLENNIUM INC 611 SKYLINE DR 142.89 0226756250000 ESCOBAR, LIANNA ELIZABETH DOROTHY 26904 BLUE COPPER WAY 195.57 0227901400000 BASELINE CAPITAL VENTURE LLC 13500 BASELINE AVE 1,837.19 0228152250000 GLEN AT FONTANA BORROWER LLC 850 LARCHMONT BLVD #201 193.06 0228152360000 GLEN AT FONTANA BORROWER LLC 850 LARCHMONT BLVD #201 244.86 0228152490000 GLEN AT FONTANA BORROWER LLC 850 LARCHMONT BLVD #201 255.78 0232191010000 WALKER, SUSAN M 224 EL CAMINO 570.92
0232191090000 WALKER, SUSAN M 224 EL CAMINO 476.64
0232191150000 TREJO, MONICA 16045 DORSEY AVE 841.38
0234221230000 RLF II WEST LLC P O BOX 847 748.05
0234241030000 HARBOR BOULEVARD HOLDING LLC 16416 VALLEY BLVD 1,276.33 0235111050000 STRANDBERG, KATIE 1328 N HARPER AVE #1 1,155.63 0235141360000 REDGATE PARTNERS LLC 2429 S PECK RD 661.45 0236021130000 VO AND LE FAMILY TRUST 11/16/1 4430 ROCKHOLD AVE 142.89 0236052450000 BUSTAMANTE, LILIANA 10466 REDWOOD AVE 208.70 0236071320000 CORTEZ, ENRIQUETA BUCIO REV TR 5/14/ 29655 CLEAR VIEW LN 773.73 0236101170000 2000 CARDENAS FAMILY TR(11/8/0 1035 LA VAUGHN CIR 269.35 0236122030000 DORRIZ, MARK M 14643 ALISO DR 274.36
0236122220000 SALGUERO, SALVADOR 1549 MARSHALL LN 112.60 0236151520000 DESCANSANDO PARTNERS LP P O BOX 4792 748.05 0236161250000 AFFORDABLE LOGISTIC INC 11101 CALABASH AVE 418.05 0236171110000 FERRELINE A WETZEL LLC 15335 VALLEY BLVD 419.90 0236181290000 TREA ALMOND AVENUE INDUSTRIAL P O BOX 30428 747.91 0237031120000 FERRELINE A WETZEL LLC 15335 VALLEY BLVD 339.62 0237042100000 EXP BOYLE LLC 915 WILSHIRE BLVD #1750 748.05 1065

0237053120000 LINDLEY, MARIA O 16032 BOYLE AVE 151.57
0237061020000 DDM FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING TR 6001 CLEGHORN CT 352.34 0237111176000 UNKNOWN OWNER 10863 CATAWBA AVE 142.89
0238111330000 REXFORD INDUSTRIAL-13201 DAHLI 11620 WILSHIRE BLVD #1000 3,530.06 0238142070000 SCHUTZ CONTAINER SYSTEMS INC PO BOX 5950/ 200 ASPEN H LL R 190.42 0238144170000 CARSON ESTATE TRUST 100 BAYVIEW CIR #3500 168.98 0238174390000 VINTAGE PARK EAST LLC 675 PLACENTIA AVE #200 2,701.62 0239071180000 PRINCE TADROS LLC 4030 BIRCH #100 142.89
0239803270000 ESPINOZA, LUCINDA 4563 CONDOR AVE 142.89
0241251050000 SALINAS, VICTOR 7348 PALMETTO AVE 215.64
0243121250000 YASMEH FAMILY LIVING TR 6-18-0 2214 S HOOVER 748.05 0243221220000 IH5 PROPERTY WEST LP PO BOX 4900 82.20
0246081260000 DIAB, DIAB 18150 ARROW BLVD #B 1,094.55
0246121010000 LIMON FAMILY TRUST 6/23/17 5013 LARRY AVE 124.43 0249191170000 MI LINDO ZACATECAS REVOCABLE L 8926 LOCUST AVE 146.93 0251111260000 ALDANA, ROBERT J & K. E. NIELSON FAM P O BOX 310511 194.72 0251121080000 MARCONI LLC P O BOX 86277 132.20
0251121330000 CALABASAS PROPERTY INC 10177 CITRUS AVE 183.45 0251163030000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251163040000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251163050000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251163060000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251163090000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251163100000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251164100000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251164120000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251164150000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0251164160000 DUKE REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHI 1800 WAZEE ST #500 142.89 0254221560000 PCW PROPERTIES LLC 701 S PARKER ST #5200 758.77 0255041320000 FONTANA LODGING LLC 5080 CALIFORNIA AVE #415 4,758.20 0255091060000 CITY OF FONTANA 8353 SIERRA AVE 142.89
0255271080000 866 BERRY COURT LLC 866 BERRY CT 1,057.47 1100121540000 WINDSOR HILLS PROPERTY I LLC 218 VIKING AVE 1,198.58 1100762390000 DE MORON, MARIA ELENA GALLEGOS 13372 GETTYSBURG ST 168.99 1100771010000 7-ELEVEN INC PO BOX 711 200.75
1100771080000 CHADO PHASE THREE 408 E 25TH ST 501.20
1107551170000 ZHANG, JINHUA 7888 CHERRY AVE #C 253.35
1107552090000 BARAJAS, YORELY STELL 16044 ESPARZA LN 186.79 1107552220000 ZHANG, JINHUA 7888 CHERRY AVE APT-C 248.50 1108431070000 NAMOU, KAMAL 15517 ASANA WAY 142.89
1108431110000 NUNEZ, EDGAR GERARDO 15520 ASANA WAY 142.89 1110011120000 BCI IV FONTANA DC LP PO BOX 2209 748.05
1118393110000 DEL RIO, MARTHA L CAVAZOS 16502 CASA GRANDE AVE #125 130.00 1118462050000 GUDIPATI, SAILAJA 14651 OLITE DR 142.89
1119221590000 FICAROTTA, THOMAS JR (JT-ANGELO) 12661 EXCELSIOR ST 1,345.40

49,033.59

1066
1 of 3

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-061

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF UNPAID EXPENSES FOR

WEED ABATEMENT AND IMPOSING A LIEN AGAINST PROPERTY

FOR PAYMENT

WHEREAS, the City of Fontana (“City”) has conducted its weed abatement program pursuant to the Fontana City Code, Chapter 28 et. seq. and California Government Code Section 39501 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 39501 et seq. specifically authorizes the legislative body of a city to require the removal of weeds, rubbish, and other refuse from private property, and to recover the costs of abatement by imposing a special assessment against the property on the County of San Berna rdino (“County”) annual property tax rolls and recording a lien against the property; and WHEREAS, the City has conducted such weed abatement for certain property in the City, certain properties remain delinquent in the payment of the weed abatement costs and now the City Council desires to record a lien against such properties pursuant to Government Code Section 39560 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has caused to be prepared a report containing the properties and the amount of the delinquent weed abatement costs (“Written Report”) , which is on file with the City Clerk, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has previously caused notice to be provided to each property owner pursuant to Section 39560 et seq., and the City has posted a copy of the Written Report pursuant to Section 39575; and
WHEREAS, at the time stated in the notice being the 23rd day of June, 2026, at 2:00 p.m., the City Council discussed and considered all objections to the expenses and other costs of abatement which have remained unpaid to date, as specified in the Written Report; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to confirm and approve the Written Report and record a lien against such delinquent properties.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true, correct and by this reference incorporated herein.

Section 2. Written Report Approval. The Written Report filed with the City Clerk contains the description of each real property parcel which is currently delinquent in the 1067
Resolution No. 2026-061

2 of 3
payment of the weed abatement costs and the amount of such costs, and the Written Report is hereby approved and adopted.

Section 3. County Recorder’s Office . The City Clerk , or designee thereof, is hereby directed to file for recording with the County Recorder’s Office a copy of the Written Report, with a statement endorsed thereon over his or her signature that the Written Report has been fully adopted by the City Council, together with a certified copy of this Resolu tion, and shall request that there be recorded a lien against the parcels contained therein.

Section 4. County Tax Roll . The delinquent weed abatement costs, shall be forwarded to the County Tax Collector for collection on the County property tax roll in the same manner, by the same person, at the same time, together with and not separate from the general taxes, against the property to which they relate, and shall constitute liens on the property in the amount of the delinquent charges, to be added to the property tax bill next levied against each property.

Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adopt ion of this Resolution.

Section 6. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution is based are located at the City Clerk’s office located at 16860 Valencia Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335. The custodian of records is the City Clerk.

Section 7. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion of this Resolution.

Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

1068
Resolution No. 2026-061

3 of 3
READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

____________________________________
City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex-Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

____________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Fontana

____________________________________
Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

____________________________________
City Clerk
1069

EXHIBIT “A”

WRITTEN REPORT OF ASSESSOR’S PARCELS

DELINQUENT WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES

[Report Attached on Following Pages]

1070

APN Name Due
023314109 Minnie Youngblood 173.00
023314109 Minnie Youngblood 813.60
023314109 Minnie Youngblood 93.00
023314109 Minnie Youngblood 223.00
019308105 Mendoza, Jess 223.00
019308105 Mendoza, Jess 173.00
019308105 Mendoza, Jess 1,118.70
019308105 Mendoza, Jess 90.40
019308105 Mendoza, Jess 93.00
019302109 Zarifpour, Raymond 93.00
019302109 Zarifpour, Raymond 173.00
019303118 Zarifpour, Raymond 223.00
019303118 Zarifpour, Raymond 93.00
019303118 Zarifpour, Raymond 173.00
019303118 Zarifpour, Raymond 508.50
111010104 Dayton Hudson Corp 406.80
111010104 Dayton Hudson Corp 90.40
111010104 Dayton Hudson Corp 223.00
111010104 Dayton Hudson Corp 93.00
024009144 Chen, Shih-Tse 173.00
024009144 Chen, Shih-Tse 93.00
019409242 Zhang, Ningning 173.00
019409242 Zhang, Ningning 93.00
019124111 Cruz, Antonio 173.00
019124111 Cruz, Antonio 93.00
110063120 Teng, Si Teng 93.00
110063120 Teng, Si Teng 223.00
110063120 Teng, Si Teng 173.00
110063120 Teng, Si Teng 915.30
023909512 LCD Sierra Crest LLC 93.00
023909511 LCD Sierra Crest LLC 93.00
023909511 LCD Sierra Crest LLC 1,322.10
023909511 LCD Sierra Crest LLC 223.00
019312105 New Legacy Development Corp 223.00
019312105 New Legacy Development Corp 93.00
019312105 New Legacy Development Corp 173.00
019312105 New Legacy Development Corp 610.20
019312104 New Legacy Development Corp 223.00
019312104 New Legacy Development Corp 610.20
019312104 New Legacy Development Corp 93.00
019312104 New Legacy Development Corp 173.00
023038121 Fontana Tract 16337 LLC 93.00
023038121 Fontana Tract 16337 LLC 203.40
023038121 Fontana Tract 16337 LLC 223.00
023038121 Fontana Tract 16337 LLC 173.00
023217114 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 173.00
023217114 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 93.00
023217112 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 93.00
023217112 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 173.00
1071

023217113 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 406.80
023217113 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 223.00
023217113 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 173.00
023217113 Calmat Co/Vulcan Materials 93.00
024036124 Conway, John 173.00
024036124 Conway, John 223.00
024036124 Conway, John 610.20
024036124 Conway, John 93.00
024004131 951 LLC 173.00
024004131 951 LLC 1,220.40
024004131 951 LLC 223.00
024004131 951 LLC 93.00
024616313 Arreola, Maria Cecilia Ramos 223.00
024616313 Arreola, Maria Cecilia Ramos 173.00
024616313 Arreola, Maria Cecilia Ramos 406.80
024616313 Arreola, Maria Cecilia Ramos 93.00 025116420 Duke Realty Limited Partnership - 025116420 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 81.90 025116423 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116423 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116404 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116404 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116410 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116410 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116414 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116414 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116412 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116412 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116416 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116416 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116415 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116415 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116302 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116302 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116303 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116303 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116411 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116411 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116304 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116304 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116305 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116305 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116306 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116306 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116307 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116307 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116308 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116308 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116309 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116309 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 1072

025116310 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116310 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116313 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116313 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116301 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 025116301 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116425 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 025116425 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 173.00 023712207 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 1,627.20 023712207 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 93.00 023712207 Duke Realty Limited Partnership 223.00 023711104 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 223.00 023711104 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 173.00 023711104 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 610.20 023711104 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 93.00 023711137 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 610.20 023711137 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 223.00 023711137 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 93.00 023711137 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 173.00 023711136 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 223.00 023711136 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 93.00 023711136 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 915.30 023711136 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 173.00 023711103 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 223.00 023711103 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 93.00 023711103 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 813.60 023711103 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 173.00 023711122 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 93.00 023711122 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 813.60 023711122 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 223.00 023711122 Lit Industrial Limited Partnership 173.00 024034157 Palomo, Alex 813.60
024034157 Palomo, Alex 223.00
024034157 Palomo, Alex 93.00
024034157 Palomo, Alex 173.00
019326114 Martinez, Adelina Araujo 813.60
019326114 Martinez, Adelina Araujo 173.00
019326114 Martinez, Adelina Araujo 93.00
019326114 Martinez, Adelina Araujo 223.00
023312234 Burchfield, David L 93.00
023312234 Burchfield, David L 173.00
019209124 LSJ Investments, Inc. 223.00
019209124 LSJ Investments, Inc. 915.30
019209124 LSJ Investments, Inc. 173.00
019209124 LSJ Investments, Inc. 93.00
019209124 LSJ Investments, Inc. 271.20
111803101 Sat Purkh Jan 93.00
025104230 Park, Kon Son Park, Young Mi 173.00
025104230 Park, Kon Son Park, Young Mi 223.00
025104230 Park, Kon Son Park, Young Mi 93.00 1073

025104230 Park, Kon Son Park, Young Mi 90.40 025104230 Park, Kon Son Park, Young Mi 915.30
019318149 Gutierrez, Esperanza 813.60
019318149 Gutierrez, Esperanza 93.00
019318149 Gutierrez, Esperanza 173.00
019318149 Gutierrez, Esperanza 223.00
019222138 Happyland Equity LLC 78.00
019222138 Happyland Equity LLC 180.80
019222138 Happyland Equity LLC 173.00
019222138 Happyland Equity LLC 223.00
019222138 Happyland Equity LLC 508.50
023817177 Fontana Fullfillment Center ILP LLC 93.00 023817177 Fontana Fullfillment Center ILP LLC 173.00 023312217 Zhang, Bin 173.00
023312217 Zhang, Bin 93.00
024014121 Arambula, Arnulfo 93.00
024014121 Arambula, Arnulfo 173.00
024105117 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 173.00
024105117 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 93.00
024105117 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 1,118.70
024105117 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 223.00
024105117 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 135.60
024105116 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 813.60
024105116 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 93.00
024105116 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 135.60
024105116 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 173.00
024105116 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 223.00
024105132 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 254.25
024105132 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 223.00
024105132 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 67.80
024105132 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 173.00
024105132 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 93.00
024105102 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 135.60
024105102 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 173.00
024105102 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 93.00
024105102 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 223.00
024105102 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 813.60
024105101 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 1,118.70
024105101 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 173.00
024105101 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 223.00
024105101 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 180.80
024105101 MIDLAND INVESTMENTS LLC 93.00
023615147 Fedex Freight West Inc. 497.20
023615147 Fedex Freight West Inc. 1,322.10
023615147 Fedex Freight West Inc. 223.00
023615147 Fedex Freight West Inc. 93.00
023615147 Fedex Freight West Inc. 173.00
023614108 Golden Horizon Real Estate LLC 223.00 023614108 Golden Horizon Real Estate LLC 1,220.40 023614108 Golden Horizon Real Estate LLC 173.00 1074

023614108 Golden Horizon Real Estate LLC 226.00 023614108 Golden Horizon Real Estate LLC 93.00 022802145 Arion Properties 813.60
022802145 Arion Properties 223.00
022802145 Arion Properties 93.00
110061135 TAITO, FAYE K 93.00
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 173.00
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 915.30
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 223.00
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 93.00
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 173.00
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 915.30
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 223.00
024014122 ELKHATIB, IBRAHIM 78.00
024324141 DIAR LLC 78.00
024324141 DIAR LLC 223.00
024324141 DIAR LLC 152.55
024324142 DIAR LLC 173.00
024324142 DIAR LLC 101.70
024324142 DIAR LLC 223.00
024324142 DIAR LLC 93.00
024324143 DIAR LLC 101.70
024324143 DIAR LLC 223.00
024324143 DIAR LLC 93.00
024324143 DIAR LLC 173.00
024324141 DIAR LLC 93.00
024324142 DIAR LLC 173.00
024324142 DIAR LLC 101.70
024324142 DIAR LLC 223.00
024324142 DIAR LLC 78.00
019018116 CHEUNG, WINNIE REV TRUST 12/15 93.00 019018116 CHEUNG, WINNIE REV TRUST 12/15 1,627.20 019018116 CHEUNG, WINNIE REV TRUST 12/15 223.00 019018116 CHEUNG, WINNIE REV TRUST 12/15 173.00 019028233 REYNOSO, GUADALUPE DEL ROCIO 93.00 019028233 REYNOSO, GUADALUPE DEL ROCIO 813.60
019028233 REYNOSO, GUADALUPE DEL ROCIO 223.00
019028233 REYNOSO, GUADALUPE DEL ROCIO 173.00
019212107 CROMWELL, CAMIILE A TRUST 93.00
019212107 CROMWELL, CAMIILE A TRUST 610.20
019212107 CROMWELL, CAMIILE A TRUST 223.00
019212107 CROMWELL, CAMIILE A TRUST 173.00
019228229 MACCHIO, VICTOR JOSEPH 93.00
019228229 MACCHIO, VICTOR JOSEPH 1,017.00
019228229 MACCHIO, VICTOR JOSEPH 223.00
019228229 MACCHIO, VICTOR JOSEPH 173.00
111036112 GONZALEZ, RICARDO A 1,220.40
111036112 GONZALEZ, RICARDO A 93.00
111036112 GONZALEZ, RICARDO A 173.00
111036112 GONZALEZ, RICARDO A 223.00
1075

019327101 GONZALEZ, ANTONIO GONZALEZ 173.00
019327101 GONZALEZ, ANTONIO GONZALEZ 223.00
019327101 GONZALEZ, ANTONIO GONZALEZ 152.55
019327101 GONZALEZ, ANTONIO GONZALEZ 93.00
019119131 QUINONEZ, ROBERT ADRIAN 223.00
019119131 QUINONEZ, ROBERT ADRIAN 173.00
019119131 QUINONEZ, ROBERT ADRIAN 305.10
019119131 QUINONEZ, ROBERT ADRIAN 93.00
024119104 Rodriguez, Alejandro 173.00
024119104 Rodriguez, Alejandro 93.00
019104114 Ramayya, Sulekha 173.00
019104114 Ramayya, Sulekha 93.00
024622129 Liborio, Carlos Leyva 173.00
024622129 Liborio, Carlos Leyva 93.00
025116403 Duke Realty Alder LP 93.00
025116403 Duke Realty Alder LP 173.00
024003128 Manji Development LLC 406.80
024003128 Manji Development LLC 93.00
024003128 Manji Development LLC 223.00
024003128 Manji Development LLC 173.00
023512146 Rodriguez, Anthony 93.00
023512146 Rodriguez, Anthony 173.00
024134102 Cantarero, Fredrick R. 93.00
024134102 Cantarero, Fredrick R. 173.00
019320103 Arif, Mohammed 173.00
019320103 Arif, Mohammed 93.00
019327319 Patrick, Polk 173.00
019327319 Patrick, Polk 93.00
019308163 Lopez, Yohana Carolina 93.00
019308163 Lopez, Yohana Carolina 173.00
022607423 Simpson, Gary R. Trust 1/26/12 93.00 022607423 Simpson, Gary R. Trust 1/26/12 173.00 023817174 LBA RVI-Company XXIII LLC 93.00
023817174 LBA RVI-Company XXIII LLC 173.00
023817174 LBA RVI-Company XXIII LLC 1,322.10
023817174 LBA RVI-Company XXIII LLC 542.40
023817174 LBA RVI-Company XXIII LLC 223.00
023609136 SNL IOV 10631 Banana Owner LLC 78.00 023609136 SNL IOV 10631 Banana Owner LLC 173.00 025631119 Le, Xuan-EST OF 173.00
025631119 Le, Xuan-EST OF 93.00
024111111 HARNVICHITCHAI, BUNHJONG 173.00
024111111 HARNVICHITCHAI, BUNHJONG 93.00
024111141 Lun, Vouch 223.00
024111141 Lun, Vouch 173.00
024111141 Lun, Vouch 813.60
024111141 Lun, Vouch 93.00
024111140 Casillas Real Estate Investment LLC 93.00 024111140 Casillas Real Estate Investment LLC 173.00 75,197.85
1076

1077
City of Fontana
Action Report
City Council Meeting
8437 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
File #: 26-1081 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: C. Category: Public Hearing
FROM:

Finance
SUBJECT:

Public Hearing to Establish Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Assessment Rates for Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-062, of the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, Confirming a Diagram and Assessment, and Levying the Assessment for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (“LMD #1” throughout the City) for Fiscal Year 2026-2027.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-063, of the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, Confirming a Diagram and Assessment, and Levying the Assessment for Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (“LMD #2” Village of Heritage) for Fiscal Year 2026-2027.

3. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-064, of the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, Confirming a Diagram and Assessment, and Levying the Assessment for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 (“LMD #3” Hunter’s Ridge) for Fiscal Year 2026-2027.

4. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-065, of the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, Confirming a Diagram and Assessment, and Levying the Assessment for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3- 1 (“LMD #3-1” Empire Center) for Fiscal Year 2026-2027.

5. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-066, of the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, Confirming a Diagram and Assessment, and Levying the Assessment for Local Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 (“LLMD #3” Hunter’s Ridge) for Fiscal Year 2026-2027.

COUNCIL GOALS:
· Practice sound fiscal management by fully funding liabilities and reserves. · Practice sound fiscal management by developing long-term funding and debt management plans.
· Enhance the local environment for future generations and create a healthy economic and environmental future by promoting programs that encourage reducing Green House Gas emissions.

DISCUSSION:

On June 09, 2026, City Council adopted Resolutions 2026-032 through 2026-041, inclusive, declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 and setting June 23, 2026, for the public hearing to receive public comment pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Notice of the public hearing was published as required by law. The annual assessment process City of Fontana Printed on 6/17/2026Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1078
File #: 26-1081 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: C. Category: Public Hearing
1972. Notice of the public hearing was published as required by law. The annual assessment process for the landscape and lighting assessment districts must be completed before August 10, 2026, in order to place the assessments on the County tax rolls.

The Fiscal Year 2026-2027 proposed assessment rates are as follows:
· LMD # 1 - the proposed rates for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for residential units range from $77.76 to $495.92 per unit, the commercial and industrial areas range from $117.24 to $613.77 per acre. The proposed rates are the same as the prior year rates. · LMD # 2 (Village of Heritage) - the proposed rate for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for residential units is $565.84 per unit, an increase from the prior year of 2% ($11.09 per unit). · LMD # 3 (Hunter’sRidge) - the proposed rate for FY 2026-2027 for residential units is $665.50 per unit, an increase from the prior year of 10% ($60.50 per unit). · LMD # 3-1 (Empire Center) - the proposed rate for FY 2026-2027 for commercial property is $1,000 per acre, the same as the prior year rate.
· LLMD # 3 (Hunter’sRidge) - the proposed rate for FY 2026-2027 for residential property is $22.44 per unit, the same as the prior year rate.

A funding status for each LMD and LLMD is summarized below:
· LMD #1 Citywide (Fund 395) - This district has a structural deficit, with ongoing revenues being insufficient to cover annual operating costs. As a result, it is estimated that General Fund support of $908,520 is required in 2026-27 to maintain current service levels. Although additional funding is necessary, increasing the assessment is not permissible without voter approval.
· LMD #2 Village of Heritage (Fund 396) - This district has a structural deficit, with ongoing revenues being insufficient to cover annual operating costs. As a result, it is estimated that General Fund support of $1.6 million in 2026-27 will be required to maintain current service levels. As such, although the recommended increase of 2% is not adequate to resolve the structural deficit, it is the maximum allowable increase, and any additional increase is not permissible without voter approval.
· LMD #3-1 Empire Center (Fund 397) - This district has a structural deficit, with ongoing revenues being insufficient to cover annual operating costs. As a result, it will require the use of available district fund balance of $22,210 in 2026-27 to maintain current service levels.

Although a structural deficit exists, this district is considered to be solvent as available fund balance can fund operational deficits for more than 10 years, but funding will continue to be monitored annually.
· LMD #3 Hunter’s Ridge (Fund 398) - This district has a structural deficit, with ongoing revenues being insufficient to cover annual operating costs. As a result, it will require the use of available district fund balance of $358,810 in 2026-27 to maintain current service levels. As such, although the recommended increase of 10% is not adequate to resolve the structural deficit, it is the first step in a multi-year plan to achieve solvency. · LLMD #3 Hunter’s Ridge (Fund 399) - This district has a structural deficit, with ongoing revenues insufficient to cover annual operating costs. As a result, it will require the use of available district fund balance of $1,860 in 2026-27 to maintain current service levels.

Although a structural deficit exists, this district is considered to be solvent as available fund balance can fund operational deficits for more than 10 years, but funding will continue to be City of Fontana Printed on 6/17/2026Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1079
File #: 26-1081 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: C. Category: Public Hearing
monitored annually.

It is projected that the proposed rates will be sufficient to fund the estimated maintenance costs for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for all LMD’swith the exception of LMD #1 and LMD #2. Various operational options are being considered to mitigate the on-going funding deficit.

The City’sassessments for all districts have been reviewed in light of the passage of Proposition 218.

The recommended actions comply with the provisions of this proposition.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed assessment rates for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are unchanged from the prior year except for LMD # 2 which will increase by 2% ($11.09 per unit) to $565.84 for the residential rate, and LMD # 3 which will increase by 10% ($60.50 per unit) to $665.50 for the residential rate. The proposed assessment rates for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are projected to generate approximately $4.8 million.

MOTION:

Approve staff recommendation.

City of Fontana Printed on 6/17/2026Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1080
1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-062

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT, AND

LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 1 (“LMD #1” THROUGHOUT THE CITY) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027.

WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council of the City of Fontana, (the “City Council”) adopted Resolution 2026-032 initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (“LMD #1”) pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”), for the maintenance of landscaped areas; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered the fili ng of an Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk, a report pursuant to law for the City Council’s consideration, and subsequently thereto the City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention ( Resolution No. 2026-033) approving the Engineer’s Report and decla ring the intention of the City Council to order the levy and collection of assessments to pay the costs and expenses of maintaining the landscaped areas in the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027, and

WHEREAS, in November 1996, the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 218 which added Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the California Constitution requiring, among other things, new procedures for the approval of the levying of assessments against real property; and

WHEREAS, Article XIIID of the California Constitution requires that assessments comply with stated procedural and approval provisions by July 1, 1997, unless an assessment district meets certain exemptions as set forth in Section 5 of the Artic le, which exemptions include the following:

“(a) any assessment imposed exclusively to finance the capital costs or maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, flood control, drainage system or vector control.”

“(b) any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed;” and

WHEREAS, LMD #1 assessments proposed for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are exempt from Propositi on 218 because the assessments generate revenue for the operation and maintenance of streets and highways, all expenditures thereunder qualifying as street maintenance as defined by the State of California; and

1081
Resolution No. 2026-062
2 of 3
WHEREAS, the adoption of this Resolution, a mong other things, is required in order to levy the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for LMD #1.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 1. Following notice duly given by publication, the City Council has held a public hearing regarding the levy of the proposed assessment within the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027, to pay for the costs and expenses of maintaining and servicing the public landscaped improvements installed and constructed within the District. All interested persons were afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard regarding protests, and objections have been considered by the City Council.

Section 2. The City Council hereby confirms the diagram and assessment set forth in the Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 and orders the maintenance and servicing of the public landscaped improvements installed and constructed in the District in the City of Fontana.

Section 3. The adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of an assessment for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.

Section 4. The maintenance and servicing of the public landscaped areas shall be performed pursuan t to law and the County Auditor of San Bernardino shall enter on the County Assessment Roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of the assessment and such assessment shall then be collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County t axes are collected. After collection by the County, the net amount of the assessments shall be paid to the City Treasurer.

Section 5. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund known as Landscape Maintenance District No. 1, City of Fontana.

Section 6. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption.

Section 7. A certified copy of the assessment diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection.

1082
Resolution No. 2026-062
3 of 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

City Clerk

1083
1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-063

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT, AND

LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 2 (“LMD #2” VILLAGE OF HERITAGE) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027.

WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council of the City of Fontana, (the “City Council”) adopted Resolution 2026-034 initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (“LMD #2”) pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”), for the maintenance of landscaped areas; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered the fili ng of an Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk, a report pursuant to law for the City Council’s consideration, and subsequently thereto the City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention (Resolution No. 2026-035) approving the Engineer’s Report and decla ring the intention of the City Council to order the levy and collection of assessments to pay the costs and expenses of maintaining the landscaped areas in the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027; and

“(b) any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed;” and

WHEREAS, LMD #2 assessments proposed for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are exempt from Propositi on 218 because the assessments generate revenue for the operation and maintenance of streets and highways, all expenditures thereunder qualifying as street maintenance as defined by the State of California; and

1084
Resolution No. 2026-063
2 of 3
WHEREAS, LMD #2 assessments are further exe mpt from proposition 218 because they were approved previously by property owner consent pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment was initially imposed; and

WHEREAS, the a doption of this Resolution, among other things, is required in order to levy the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for LMD #2.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 3. The adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of an assessment for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.

Section 4. The maintenance and servicing of the public landscaped are as shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor of San Bernardino shall enter on the County Assessment Roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of the assessment and such assessment shall then be collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After collection by the County, the net amount of the assessments shall be paid to the City Treasurer.

Section 5. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the Coun ty to the credit of a special fund known as Landscape Maintenance District No. 2, City of Fontana.

Section 6. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resoluti on upon its adoption.

Section 7. A certified copy of the assessment diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection.

1085
Resolution No. 2026-063
3 of 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

City Clerk
1086
1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-064

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT, AND

LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 3 (“LMD #3” HUNTER’S RIDGE) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027.

WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council of the City of Fontana, (the “City Council”) adopted Resolution 2026-036 initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 (“LMD #3” ) pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”), for the maintenance of landscaped areas; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered the filing of an Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk, a report pursuant to law for the City Council’s consideration, and subsequently thereto the City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention ( Resolution No. 2026-037) approving the Engineer’s Report and declaring the intention of the City Council to order the levy and collection of assessments to pay the costs and expenses of maintaining the landscaped areas in the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027; and

WHEREAS, in Nov ember 1996, the voters of the State of California passed Proposition 218 which added Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the California Constitution requiring, among other things, new procedures for the approval of the levying of assessments against real property; and

“(b) any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed;” and

WHEREAS, LMD #3 assessments proposed for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are exempt from Proposition 21 8 because the assessments generate revenue for the operation and maintenance of streets and highways, all expenditures thereunder qualifying as street maintenance as defined by the State of California; and

1087
Resolution No. 2026-064
2 of 3
WHEREAS, LMD #3 assessments are further exempt f rom proposition 218 because they were approved previously by property owner consent pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment was initially imposed; and

WHEREAS, the adopti on of this Resolution, among other things, is required in order to levy the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for LMD #3.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 1. Following notice duly given by publication, the City Council has held a public hearing regarding the levy of the proposed assessment within the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027, to pay for the costs and expenses of m aintaining and servicing the public landscaped improvements installed and constructed within the District. All interested persons were afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard regarding protests, and objections have been considered by the City Council.

Section 3. The adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of an assessment for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.

Section 4. The maintenance and servicing of the public landscaped areas shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor of San Bernardino shall enter on the County Assessment Roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of the assessment and such assessment shall then be collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After collection by the County, the net amount of the assessments shall be paid to the City Treasurer.

Section 5. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund known as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3, City of Fontana.

Section 6. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption.

Section 7. A certified copy of the assessment diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection.

1088
Resolution No. 2026-064
3 of 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

City Clerk
1089
1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-065

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT, AND

LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 3-1 (“LMD #3-1” EMPIRE CENTER) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027.

WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council of the City of Fontana, (the “City Council”) adopted Resolution 2026-038 initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 -1 (“LMD #3-1”) pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”), for the maintenance of landscaped areas; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered the fi ling of an Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk, a report pursuant to law for the City Council’s consideration, and subsequently thereto the City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention ( Resolution No. 2026-039) approving the Engineer’s Report and dec laring the intention of the City Council to order the levy and collection of assessments to pay the costs and expenses of maintaining the landscaped areas in the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027; and

“(b) any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed;” and

WHEREAS, LMD #3 -1 assessments proposed for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are exempt from Propo sition 218 because the assessments generate revenue for the operation and maintenance of streets and highways, all expenditures thereunder qualifying as street maintenance as defined by the State of California; and

1090
Resolution No. 2026-065
2 of 3
WHEREAS, LMD #3 -1 assessments are furth er exempt from proposition 218 because they were approved previously by property owner consent pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment was initially imposed; and

WHEREAS, the adoption of this Resolution, among other things, is required in order to levy the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for LMD #3-1.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 3. The adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of an assessment for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.

Section 4. The maintenance and servicing of the public landsc aped areas shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor of San Bernardino shall enter on the County Assessment Roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of the assessment and such assessment shall then be collected at the same time a nd in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After collection by the County, the net amount of the assessments shall be paid to the City Treasurer.

Section 5. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund known as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3-1, City of Fontana.

Section 6. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of thi s Resolution upon its adoption.

Section 7. A certified copy of the assessment diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection.

1091
Resolution No. 2026-065
3 of 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

City Clerk
1092
1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-066

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT, AND

LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR LOCAL LIGHTING MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 3 (“LLMD #3” HUNTER’S RIDGE) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027.

WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council of the City of Fontana, (the “City Council”) adopted Resolution 2026-040 initiating proceedings for the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for Local Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 (“LLMD #3”) pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”), for the maintenance of landscaped areas; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered t he filing of an Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk, a report pursuant to law for the City Council’s consideration, and subsequently thereto the City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention (Resolution No. 2026-041) approving the Engineer’s Report an d declaring the intention of the City Council to order the levy and collection of assessments to pay the costs and expenses of maintaining the landscaped areas in the District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027; and

WHEREAS, Article XIIID of the California Constitution requires that assessments comply with stated procedural and approval provisions by July 1, 1997, unless an assessment district meets certain exemptions as set forth in Section 5 of th e Article, which exemptions include the following:

“(b) any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed;” and

WHEREAS, LLMD #3 assessments proposed for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 are exempt from P roposition 218 because the assessments generate revenue for the operation and maintenance of streets and highways, all expenditures thereunder qualifying as street maintenance as defined by the State of California; and 1093
Resolution No. 2026-066
2 of 3
WHEREAS, LLMD #3 assessments are fur ther exempt from proposition 218 because they were approved previously by property owner consent pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment was initially imposed; and

WHEREAS, the adoption of this Resolution, among other things, is required in order to levy the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 for LLMD #3.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 3. The adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of an assessment for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.

Section 4. The maintenance and servicing of the public lands caped areas shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor of San Bernardino shall enter on the County Assessment Roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of the assessment and such assessment shall then be collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After collection by the County, the net amount of the assessments shall be paid to the City Treasurer.

Section 5. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund known as Local Lighting Maintenance District No. 3, City of Fontana.

Section 6. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption.

Section 7. A certified copy of the assessment diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection.

1094
Resolution No. 2026-066
3 of 3
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a reg ular meeting on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

City Clerk
1095
City of Fontana
Action Report
City Council Meeting
8437 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
File #: 26-1101 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: B. Category: Public Hearing
FROM:

Engineering
SUBJECT:

Consider Resolution Adopting Findings and Determinations regarding exhaustion of administrative remedies and to proceed with public hearing; Conduct a Public Hearing; and Consider Ordinance and Resolution Adopting sewer rate adjustment for Fiscal Years 2026-27 through 2030-31 RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Resolution No. 2026-067, adopting findings and determinations regarding exhaustion of administrative remedies and to proceed with public hearing;

2. Conduct a public hearing;

3. Approve Resolution No. 2026-068, adopting proposed adjustments to the City’s sewer rates; and

4. Approve Ordinance No. 1993, authorizing adoption of new or increased sewer services fees by Resolution, and taking certain other actions relating thereto.

COUNCIL GOALS:
· Practice sound fiscal management by producing timely and accurate financial information. · Practice sound fiscal management by living within our means while investing in the future. · Practice sound fiscal management by fully funding liabilities and reserves. · Practice sound fiscal management by developing long-term funding and debt management plans.
· Practice sound fiscal management by producing transparent information in a timely matter. · Invest in the City’sinfrastructure (streets, sewers, parks, etc.) by maintaining and improving the city's existing infrastructure.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Fontana owns, operates, and maintains an extensive wastewater collection system consisting of approximately 474 miles of sewer lines, nine lift stations, two inverted siphons, approximately 45,000 service connections, and five regional discharge outlets. The system is comprised primarily of vitrified clay pipe (VCP), with the remaining facilities constructed of ductile iron pipe (DIP) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), located both within and outside the City limits. The City’s responsibility is limited to operation and maintenance of the wastewater conveyance system.

City of Fontana Printed on 6/24/2026Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
1096
File #: 26-1101 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: B. Category: Public Hearing
responsibility is limited to operation and maintenance of the wastewater conveyance system.

Wastewater treatment services are provided separately by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) and the City of Rialto, as applicable.

The City last completed a Proposition 218 sewer rate adjustment in 2021. Since that time, increased operating costs, inflationary pressures, aging infrastructure, and ongoing capital needs have made it necessary to re-evaluate whether the existing sewer collection rates remain sufficient to support the wastewater funds. In order to assess the long-term financial condition of the Sewer Fund, the City Council approved an agreement with Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. (Raftelis) on January 13, 2026, to prepare a comprehensive sewer rate study using the City’s existing rate structure.

The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether current sewer collection revenues are adequate to fund ongoing operations and maintenance, maintain appropriate reserve levels, support continued reinvestment in aging infrastructure, and provide funding for planned capital improvement projects.

The study also considered the establishment of a formal reserve policy for the Sewer Fund, including a target operating reserve equivalent to 60 days of operation and maintenance expenditures.

Raftelis prepared a status quo financial plan to evaluate whether the City’scurrent wastewater rates would be sufficient to fund projected collection system costs over the study period of Fiscal Year 2027 through Fiscal Year 2036. Based on City-provided data, including projected revenues, operating and maintenance expenses, debt service obligations, and capital improvement costs, Raftelis determined that maintaining the current rates throughout the study period would not be financially sustainable. Specifically, the analysis found that the City would fail to meet its reserve target in each year of the study period and would fully deplete available reserves by Fiscal Year 2028. The study further concluded that, under the current rate structure, the Sewer Fund would not generate sufficient revenue to fully fund ongoing operating expenses.

These findings demonstrate that a rate adjustment is necessary at this time to correct the structural imbalance within the Sewer Fund, preserve the City’s ability to maintain reliable wastewater collection service, and avoid the need for more significant rate increases in future years. The proposed rate adjustments are intended to provide a phased approach to restoring the financial health of the wastewater funds while maintaining service levels and funding the City’sinfrastructure obligations.

The table below summarizes the proposed maximum revenue adjustments for the wastewater enterprise and the corresponding estimated monthly increase to the City’ssewer collection charge, which is currently $12.68 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU):

Effective Date Proposed Revenue Adjustment Estimated Monthly Bill Increase July 1, 2026 15% $1.92
July 1, 2027 10% $1.46
July 1, 2028 10% $1.60
July 1, 2029 10% $1.76
July 1, 2030 10% $1.94
The proposed sewer collection rates are based on a financial plan designed to eliminate the current structural deficit and provide sufficient funding for operations, capital expenditures, and reserve levels. As part of this effort, a reserve policy was developed based on the financial risks faced by the City of Fontana Printed on 6/24/2026Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
1097
File #: 26-1101 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: B. Category: Public Hearing
levels. As part of this effort, a reserve policy was developed based on the financial risks faced by the utility. The recommended reserve structure includes an operating reserve to provide working capital for day-to-day cash flow needs, temporary revenue fluctuations, and unforeseen operating expenses, with a target of 60 days of operation and maintenance expenditures. The reserve structure also includes a capital replacement and improvement reserve to help fund annual capital needs, reduce the impact of unexpected infrastructure failures, and support planned capital improvement projects.

It should also be noted that the proposed rate adjustments apply only to the City’ssewer collection charges, which fund the operation and conveyance of wastewater flows to IEUA and the City of Rialto. Treatment charges are assessed separately by IEUA and Rialto and are adjusted independently, generally effective July 1 and January 1, respectively. The treatment charges from each agency are proposed to be passed-through to each sewer service customer as part of the City’s regular billing for sewer service and are subject to an annual cap of 15% per year. In addition, industrial and commercial customers will continue to pay pretreatment fees, separate from the City’s sewer collection fees, to support wastewater regulatory compliance programs. Those pretreatment fees are adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index, effective July 1 of each year.

Environmental Impact
This is not a “Project”as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15378(a), a “Project”means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. According to Section 15378(b), a Project does not include: (5) Organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The anticipated increase in Sewer revenue required to fund ongoing operations and maintenance, maintain appropriate reserve levels, support continued reinvestment in aging infrastructure, and provide funding for planned capital improvement projects is summarized below:

MOTION:

Approve staff recommendation.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2026-067

2. Resolution No. 2026-068
City of Fontana Printed on 6/24/2026Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
1098
File #: 26-1101 Agenda Date: 6/23/2026
Agenda #: B. Category: Public Hearing

3. Ordinance No. 1993

4. Raftelis Wastewater Study, April 16, 2026

5. Proposition 218 Public Notice

6. Raftelis Presentation, April 28, 2026

7. Affidavit of Publication
City of Fontana Printed on 6/24/2026Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
1099
1 of 3

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-067

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS

RELATED TO THE PRESENTMENT OF OBJECTIONS TO THE

PROPOSED SEWER SERVICE FEES IN COMPLIANCE WITH

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE R EMEDIES PROCEDURES

PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS
53759.1 AND 53759.2 , AND TAKING OTHER ACTIONS RELATED

THERETO

WHEREAS, section 6 of Article XIII D of the California Constitution (“Proposition 218”) and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Imple mentation Act (Government Code § 53750, et seq.) require that, prior to imposing any increase to the sewer service fees, the City of Fontana (the “City”) shall provide written notice by mail of: (1) the proposed increases to such sewer service fees to the record owner of each parcel upon which the sewer service fees are proposed for imposition (record owners); (2) the amount of the sewer service fees proposed to be imposed on each parcel; (3) the basis upon which the sewer service fees were calculated; (4) the reason for the sewer service fees ; and (5) the date, time, and location of a public hearing (“Hearing”) on the proposed sewer service fees; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Proposition 218, such written notice is required to be provided to the record owners n ot less than forty -five days (45) prior to the Hearing on the proposed sewer service fees; and

WHEREAS, the City provided written notice (“Notice”) to record owners and to customers of record who are not the property owner (e.g., a tenant) in compliance and consistent with Proposition 218; and

WHEREAS, the Notice included a prominently displayed statement that contained the information that all written objections to the proposed sewer service fees must be submitted within the written objection period and that a failure to timely object in writing bars any right to challenge the proposed sewer service fees through a legal proceeding and that contained all substantive and procedural requirements for submitting an objection to the proposed sewer service fees; and

WHEREAS, the City established a written objec tion period with a deadline of 2:00 P.M. on June 23, 2026, to submit an objection; and

WHEREAS, the City made available to the public the proposed sewer service fees no less than 45 days prior to the deadline to submit an objection; and

WHEREAS, the City posted on its internet website a written basis for the proposed sewer service fees and included a link to the internet website in the Notice; and
1100
Resolution No. 2026-067
2 of 3

WHEREAS, the City mailed the written basis to any property owner upon request or, if no such requests were made, would have mailed the written basis to a ny property owner upon request; and

WHEREAS, the City provided at least 45 days for a property owner or customer of record (e.g., a tenant), to review the p roposed sewer service fees and to timely submit a written objection to the proposed sewer service fees that specifies the grounds for alleging noncompliance; and

WHEREAS, the City considered and responded in writing, including the grounds for which a cha llenge is not resulting in amendments to the proposed sewer service fees, to any timely submitted written objections prior to the close of the Hearing; and

WHEREAS, timely submitted written objections and agency responses were presented to the City Council for consideration prior to or during the Hearing; and

WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to make findings and determinations related to the proposed sewer service fees.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. The City Council has fo und and has determined that the written objections and the City’s responses do not warrant cl arification to any proposed sewer service fee; no reduction in any proposed sewer service fee is warranted; no further review is needed before making a determination on whether clarification or reduction of the proposed sewer service fees is needed; and to proceed with the Hearing.

Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

1101
Resolution No. 2026-067
3 of 3

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Co uncil at a regular meeting on the 23rd day of June, 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana

ATTEST:

City Clerk
1102
1 of 5

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-068

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FONTANA,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING SEWER SERVICE CHARGES , MAKING

CEQA FINDINGS, AND TAKING CERTAIN ACTIONS RELATING

THERETO

WHEREAS, the City of Fontana (the “City”) owns and operates a sewer collection and transmission system and partners with the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (the “IEUA”) and the City of Rialto (“Rialto”) for use of each agency’s sewer treatment plant to provide sewer service to City customers; and

WHEREAS, the City has engaged an independent rate consultant to prepare the City of Fontana Wastewater Rate Study, dated April 2026 (the “Rate Study”) , which is on file in the City Clerk’s Office and incorporated herein by this reference, to analyze the costs of providing sewer service to City customers; and

WHEREAS, the Rate Study determined the City must increase its sewer collection service charges (the “City Collection Charge”) in order to keep pace with the costs of providing sewer service; and

WHEREAS, the City Collection Charge is a uniform fixed charge per month for all customer classes receiving sewer service; and

WHEREAS, in addition to imposing City Collection Charge increases the City will continue to pass -through to sewer service customers as part of their se wer service billing the applicable IEUA (the “IEUA Charges”) or Rialto (the “Rialto Charges”) , as applicable, charged to the City, as may be amended by the IEUA and Rialto from time to time (the IEUA Charges and Rialto Charges shall also be known as the “P ass- Through Charges” and the City Collection Charge and the Pass -Through Charges collectively shall be the “Sewer Service Charges”); and

WHEREAS, the Pass -Through Charges shall be subject to an annual maximum cap not to exceed 15% per year, in no event s hall the Pass -Through Charges exceed the costs to provide sewer service to the parcels, and the City shall provide at least 30 days written notice in advance of increases to the Sewer Service Charges in compliance with State law; and

WHEREAS, the sewer ra te structure is designed to proportionately allocate the cost of service to each parcel, will generate sufficient revenue to provide sewer service , and such revenues will be used only for providing sewer service to parcels served by the City; and

WHEREAS, the City Council determined to hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of the increased Sewer Service Charges , and notices of the public hearing were mailed to the record owner of any parcel upon which the Sewer Service Charges 1103
Resolution No. 2026-068
2 of 5

are proposed for imp osition, and any tenant who is directly liable for the payment of Sewer Service Charges (i.e., a customer of record who is not a property owner); and

WHEREAS, the notices were mailed not less than 45 days prior to the deadline for submitting valid legal o bjections and the date of the pub lic hearing held on June 23, 2026 on the proposed Sewer Service Charges; and

WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 23, 2026, to consider the proposed Sewer Service Charges , and at the public hearing the City Council considered the Rate Study, heard all oral testimony and considered all written materials and written protests concerning the adoption and imposition of, and the proposed adjustments and increases to the Sewer Service Charges; and

WHEREAS, at t he close of the public hearing, the City did not receive written protests against the establishment and imposition of the proposed sewer service charges from a majority of the record owners of the parcels upon which the Sewer Service Charges are proposed for imposition or tenants directly liable for the payment of the Sewer Service Charges; and

WHEREAS, the City Council is authorized and has dete rmined to approve the proposed Sewer Service Charges and act accordingly on the matter.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE I T RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Fontana, California, as follows:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. The City Council has evaluated and hereby approves the maxi mum rates for the Sewer Service Charges , and adopts such rates in accordance with the authority of Health and Safety Code section 5471 et seq. and all other applicable law.

The City may impose the Sewer Service Charges up to the maximum amounts, and on the effective dates, set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto.

Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the remainder of this Resolution, including each section, subsection, sentence, cl ause, phrase, or portion irrespective of the invalidity of any other article, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion.

Section 4. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council has determined that the increases in the Sewer Service Charges are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15378 and Section 15273 of the CEQA Guidelines and Public Resources Code section 21080(b)(8) 1104
Resolution No. 2026-068
3 of 5

because: (i) the increased charges are for the purpose of meeting operational and maintenance expenses of the aforementioned services; and (ii) the charges constitute the creation of a funding mechanism/other governmental fiscal activity which does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may r esult in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on wh ich these findings have been based are located in the Office of the City Clerk, located at 16860 Valencia Ave ., Fontana, CA 92335. The custodian for these records is the City Clerk.

Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately, and that all resolutions, ordinances, or administrative actions by the City Council, or parts thereof that are inconsistent or in conflict with any provision of this Resolution are hereby superseded only to the extent of such inconsistency or conflict.

Section 6. The City Manager, or designee thereof, is authorized to take all actions necessary or convenient to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June, 2026.

READ AND APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

City Attorney

I, Germaine Key, City Clerk of the City of Fontana, and Ex -Officio Clerk of the City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the actual resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting on the 23rd day of June 2026, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

City Clerk of the City of Fontana

Mayor of the City of Fontana
1105
Resolution No. 2026-068
4 of 5

ATTEST:

City Clerk

1106
Resolution No. 2026-068
5 of 5

EXHIBIT “A”

SEWER SERVICE CHARGES

[ENTER ALL RATE TABLES AS PROVIDED IN THE PROP. 218 NOTICE] 1107

Page 1 of 2 ends

Fontana City CouncilJune 23, 2026

Fontana City Council
June 23, 2026