5. Ensure that buildings are constructed to prevent adverse noise transmission between differing uses located in the same structure and individual residences in multi -family buildings.
Actions.
1) As a condition of approval, limit non -emergency construction activities adjacent to existing noise - sensitive uses to daylight hours between 7: 00 a. m. and 7: 00 p. m. Discourage construction on weekends or holidays except in the case of construction proximate to schools where these operations could disturb the classroom environment.
2) Ensure that the design and placement of air conditioning units and pool equipment within residential areas is accomplished in a manner that does not intrude upon the peace and quiet of adjacent noise -sensitive uses.
3) Encourage the use of portable noise barriers for heavy equipment operations performed within 100 feet of existing residences or make applicant provide evidence as to why the use of such barriers is infeasible. aj Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase In ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Short -Term Construction Noise
Less -than -Significant Impact. Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction activities were to exceed the allowable hours of operation, as permitted by the City. Noise -sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the project include legal non -conforming 15255
AUGUST2023
sa
212
-235-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
residences to the southeast' s ( within approximately 85 feet), to the east-northeast ( within approximately 1, 000 feet of the construction boundary) and to the southwest ( within approximately 1, 400 feet of the construction boundary); a Head Start school to the east ( within approximately 85 feet of the construction boundary); zoned residential uses to the north ( north of 5th Street, within approximately 120 feet of the construction boundary). The construction noise assessment focused on noise levels that would occur at the nearest noise -sensitive land uses; construction noise levels at greater distances from the site would be lower. Modeling assumptions and output calculations are provided in Appendix 1- 2, Construction Noise Modeling Inputs and Outputs.
Project -generated construction noise will vary depending on the construction process, the type of equipment involved, the location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the schedule proposed to carry out each task ( e. g., hours and days of the week), and the duration of the construction work. A likely worst -case construction noise scenario using information provided by the project applicant and equipment identified by CaIEEMod ( see Section 3. 3, Air Quality) for this type and size of project was calculated using a spreadsheet model based the Federal Highway Administration' s Roadway Construction Noise Model ( FHWA 2008). Table 3.3-2 in Section 3.3 presents the equipment list used for the construction noise analysis. The results are summarized in Table 3.13- 4 ( see Appendix 1- 2 for model results).
Table 3. 13- 4 provides construction noise estimates for both a " typical worst -case" 1- hour average scenario in which construction equipment may be operating in proximity to any one receiver for extended periods, as well as a typical 8-hour workday in which it is assumed that the equipment would be in motion and working both near and far from any one receiver, operating ( on average) at the approximate acoustic center of the project site. The average noise levels ( based upon the acoustic center16) are considered a better representation of the overall noise exposure experience for adjacent receivers over the duration of each construction phase.
As shown, the highest noise levels from construction are predicted to range from approximately 68 dBA Leq i•hour ( during the architectural coating phase) to 77 dBA Leq 1•hcur ( during site preparation and grading) at the nearest receivers. These maximum noise levels are considered to be a peak exposure, applicable to not more than 10%- 15% of the total construction period, only while the construction activity is taking place alongthe property boundary closest to these nearest off -site receivers. In terms of a typical 8-hour workday, the highest noise levels from construction are predicted to range from approximately 56 dBA Leq 8-hour during the architectural coating phase) to 68 dBA Leq s.iww ( during demolition) at the nearest receivers.
Noise levels, while relatively high when equipment is operating near the project boundaries, would not exceed the FfA' s 80 dBA Leq 8•hour threshold.
15 Based upon the City of ^ Highland Zoning Map( http:// maps. ciigitaimapcentra1. com/ production/ VECommunityView/ cities highland/ index. aspx?), the proposed project site as well as the entire two blocks ( from 3rd Street to 5th Street in the north/ south direction and Victoria Ave. to Alabama Street in the east -west direction) is zoned BP: Business Park. Similarly, the block at the northeast corner of Central Ave. and 5th Street is zoned I: Industrial. 6 The acoustic center is the combination of al! construction work occurring on -site, near and far, and is considered to be equivalent to the geometric center, for the purposes of this analysis. 15255 89
AUGUST 2023
213
-236-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Table 3. 13-4. Construction Noise Summary of Results (dBA L,!q t-hour/ dBA Lgs.honr) Construction Noise Level by Construction Phase'
s
Description
r / , Site
i7 inn.
Ptep.
Head start Business Park 77/ 68 76/ 65
school to the
east ( as near as
85 feet)
Non -conforming Business Park 77/ 66 76/ 62
residence to
the southeast
Residence to I
residential I
73/ 69 I
72/ 66
the north ( 120
Grading
Building Pawling canst.
77/ 67 70/ 61 71/ 63
77/ 64 70/ 59 71/ 61
72/ 68 1 66/ 62 1 67/ 64
AtCh.
Coating
68/ 56
68/ 54
64/ 57
Source: Appendix 1. 2.
Notes: dBA = A -weighted decibels; Lea; mm = equivalent continuous sound level (time -averaged sound level) during a 1- hour period near the project boundary; Lcusaa = equivalent continuous sound level ( time -averaged sound level) during an 8- hour construction work day; Demo. = Demolition; Site Prep. = site Preparation; Building Coast. = Building Construction; Arch. Coating = Architectural Coating, 1 See Section 3. 3, Air Quality.
Based on the construction noise analysis, noise levels during construction are estimated to create noise levels at sensitive receivers that would not exceed the FTA construction noise threshold of 80 dBA Leq E. hour.
The project would be required to adhere to City of Highland General Plan limitations on construction noise through restrictions on allowable construction hours (Goal 7. 3, Action 1): " As a condition of approval, limit non -emergency construction activities adjacent to existing noise -sensitive uses to daylight hours between 7: 00 a. m. and 7: 00 p.m. Discourage construction on weekends or holidays except in the case of construction proximate to schoo)s where these operations could disturb the classroom environment." Thus, with incorporation of the City's standard conditions, impacts associated with short-term construction noise would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.
Long -Term Operational Noise
Less -than -Significant Impact. Operation of the project would result in the generation of noise both on and off site. Consistent with similar warehouse and light industrial uses, business operations supported by the project would primarily be conducted within the enclosed buildings, except for traffic movement, parking, and loading and unloading of trucks at designated loading bays. As such, on -site operational noise sources are expected to include roof -top air conditioning units, parking lot activity, and truck loading dock activity. Off -site noise could be generated by vehicles, including heavy trucks, accessing the project site and contributing to vehicular roadway noise. As detailed below, these operational project activities would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies. 15255
AUGUST 2023
90 214
-237-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
On -Site Operational Noise
Implementation of the project would result in changes to existing noise levels on and around the project site by developing new stationary sources of noise, including introduction of outdoor HVAC equipment.
These sources may affect noise -sensitive vicinity land uses off the project site.
The proposed warehouse space overall would not be served by heating or air conditioning equipment.
However, the floor plan includes an office with an associated mezzanine space at the northwest building corner. For the analysis of noise from HVAC equipment operation, a York Model zF-048 package HVAC unit was used as a reference. Based upon the square footage of the office and mezzanine spaces (4,000 square feet total), it was assumed that two such units would be required for the office/ mezzanine areas. The York Model ZE-048 package HVAC unit has a sound power rating of 80 dBA (Johnson Controls 2015). Based on the warehouse roof design provided, there will be a 2. 8-foot- high parapet extending along the perimeter of the roof, which would minimize sound from the HVAC unit at nearby noise -sensitive land uses.
Assuming all the HVAC equipment is operating simultaneously for a minimum period Of 1 hour, the worst - case calculated noise level at each property line and at the nearest noise -sensitive land uses is presented in Table 3. 13- 5. The maximum hourly noise level for all the HVAC equipment operating at each examined point along the property and the nearest noise -sensitive uses would range from 15 to 33 dBA Leq, which is well below the City' s noise standard for both commercial zoning ( 70 dBA Leq daytime, 65 dBA Leq nighttime) and residences ( 60 dBA Leo daytime, 55 dBA Le, nighttime). The noise level calculation spreadsheets for the HVAC package units are included in Appendix 1- 3, Equipment Specifications and Noise Calculations.
Table 3. 13- 5. Mechanical Equipment Operation Noise Summary of Results age IReceiver Location Average N* 15e Level ( dBA Legs
HVAC NI 32
HVAC W1 29
HVAC_ E1 _ a 15
HVAC S1 19 _-
HVAC Residence to N 31
HVAC Head Start to E ___.. ..._. 16
HVAC Residence to SE 19
Source: Appendix 1- 3.
Note: dBA - A -weighted decibels; Leq = equivalent continuous sound level ( time -averaged sound level); CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; HVAC = heating, ventilation, and air conditioning.
The results of the mechanical equipment operations noise analysis indicate that the project would comply with City and State of California noise standards.
Parking Lot Activity
A comprehensive study of noise levels associated with surface parking lots was published in the Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management ( Baltrenas et al. 2004). The study found that average noise levels during the peak period of use of the parking lot ( generally in the morning with arrival 15255
AUGUST 2023
41 215
-238-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
of commuters and in the evening with the departure of commuters) were 47 dBA at 1 meter ( 3. 3 feet) from the outside boundary of the parking lot. The parking area would function as an area source for noise, which means that noise would attenuate at a rate of 3 dBA with each doubling of distance. The employee parking lots are proposed to be situated on the east and west sides of the warehouse, no closer than 25 feet from the property line of the project site (from center of drive -aisle to fence) on the northern side, 40 feet on the western side, and approximately 35 feet on the eastern and southern sides. At a distance of 25 feet, parking lot noise levels would be approximately 38 dBA Len at the northern property boundary. At a distance of 40 feet, parking lot noise levels would be approximately 36 dBA Leq at the western property boundary. At a distance of 35 feet, parking lot noise levels would be approximately 37 dBA Leq at the eastern and southern property boundaries. Parking lot activity noise levels are summarized in Table 3. 13- 6.
Truck Loading Dock Activity
The parking tot study (Baltrenas et al. 2004) also examined noise levels associated with cargo truck delivery activity, including noise produced by backup alarms and forklift/ yard hostler operations. The study concluded that average noise levels from truck loading/ unloading areas was 96 dBA at 1 meter (3.3 feet) from the boundary of the truck activity area. The truck loading dock area ( i. e., the truck court) would be located on the eastern side of the proposed warehouse building. The loading docks would be located approximately 110 feet from the northern property line, approximately 290 feet from the western property line, approximately 145 feet from the eastern property line and approximately 110 feet from the southern property line, At the northern, western and southern property lines the noise and view of the loading docks would be entirely obstructed by the warehouse building, and at the eastern property Iine the noise and view of the loading docks would be obstructed by the proposed 8-foot- high perimeter screen wall. Screen walls are also proposed to be constructed around the entire truck yard perimeter ( i. e., along the northern and southern sides of the truck yard). Using the outdoor attenuation rate of 6 dBA with each doubling of distance, truck loading activity along the project property lines would produce noise levels ranging from approximately 57 to 66 dBA Lea, not accounting for the shielding effects from the warehouse building and the proposed screen walls. Accounting for this acoustical shielding, the truck loading dock noise would range from approximately 30 to 60 dBA Leq. Truck loading dock activity noise levels are summarized in Table 3.13- 6 and combined with the other on -site noise sources.
Table 3. 13-6. Combined On -Site Noise Summary of Results - Noise Levels (d3A Lam) at Property Boundaries
N1 Business Park 70/ 65
70/ 65 __
70/ 65
32 1 38 40 42 No
W1 Business Park
El Business Park
S1 BusinessPark 29
36 30 38 No 15
37 56 56 No 70/
65 19 37 60 34
60 No Residence
Residential to
N 70/
65 31 31 37 No 15255
AUGUST
2023 92
216
-239-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Table 3. 13- 6. Combined On -Site Noise Summary of Results - Noise Levels WBA L. R) at Property Boundaries
Head Business Park 60/ 55 16 I 31 54 54 No
Start to E i
Residence tBlsiness Park 70/ 65 19 31 34 36 No
to SE
Source: Appendix 1- 3
As shown in Table 3. 13-6. on -site noise sources associated with the proposed project would not exceed applicable noise standards. Thus, on -site operational noise would be less than significant.
Project -Generated Off -Site Traffic Noise
The project is expected to generate 92 daily trips to the roadway system; in terms of passenger car equivalent ( PCE), which accounts for truck percentages, the project would generate 131 daily PCE trips. On an hourly basis, the project would result in a total of 9 AM and 10 PM peak -Dour trips, consisting of 7 passenger vehicles and 2 trucks ( ranging in size from 2- axle trucks to 4+ axle trucks) during the AM peak - hour and 7 passenger vehicles and 3 trucks during the PM peak -hour. In terms of PCE, the project would result in a total of 13 AM and 16 PM PCE peak -hour trips. 17 Vehicles entering and exiting the project site would use 5th Street, which has average daily traffic volumes of approximately 9,939. 18 This amounts to a small fraction of the total daily volume on 5th Street. The project would not result in a doubling of trips on any particular road segment. Typically, a doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as a doubling of traffic volume, would increase noise levels by 3 dB. 19 Given that it would result in only a modest increase in traffic on local and regional roadways, the project is not expected to result in an increase of 3 dBA or greater on roadways in the study area. The change in noise level due to the project would not be audible.
Therefore, Impacts associated with off -site project -generated traffic noise would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? Less -than -Significant Impact. The main concern associated with groundborne vibration is annoyance; however, in extreme cases, vibration can cause damage to buildings, particularly those that are old or otherwise fragile. Some common sources of groundborne vibration are trains and construction activities such as blasting, pale -driving, and heavy earth -moving equipment. The primary source of groundborne vibration occurring as part of the proposed project is construction activity. 17 Data from the proposed project' s trip generation estimates ( Section 3. 17, Transportation). 38 Airport Gateway Specific Plan, Traffic Impact Analysis 2019. 19 Under normal circumstances ( i. e., outside of a controlled setting such as a listening laboratory), a 3 dB increase in noise levels is considered to be the smallest increase that is audible to the human ear; whereas a less than 3 d6 increase in noise levels is considered to be a barely or non - audible increase.
15255
AUGUST 2023
93 217
-240-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Groundborne vibration information related to construction/ heavy equipment activities has been collected by Caltrans. Information from Caltrans indicates that transient vibrations ( such as from construction activity) with approximately 0. 035 inches per second peak particle velocity ( PPV) may be characterized as barely perceptible, and vibration levels of 0.24 inches per second PPV may be characterized as distinctly perceptible ( Caltrans 2020). The heavier pieces of construction equipment, such as large bulldozers or hoe rams, would register up to approximately 0.089 inches per second PPV at a distance of 25 feet, and a clam shovel drop would measure up to approximately 0.202 inches per second PPV at a distance of 25 feet ( FfA 2018).
Groundborne vibration is typically attenuated over relatively short distances. At the nearest existing noise/ vibration- sensitive use distance to the nearest construction area ( approximately 85 feet - the Head Start building to the northeast) and with the anticipated construction equipment, the vibration level would be approximately 0.014 inches per second PPV. This vibration level would be lower than the threshold of barely perceptible" of 0.035 inches per second PPV and would also be lower than the threshold of distinctly perceptible" of 0. 24 inches per second PPV.
The major concern with construction vibration is related to building damage. Construction vibration as a result of the proposed project would not result in structural building damage, which typically occurs at vibration levels of 0.5 inches per second PPV or greater for buildings of reinforced -concrete, steel, or timber construction. Therefore, impacts related to groundborne vibration would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use Flan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Less -than -Significant Impact. No private airstrips are located in the project vicinity. The SB1A is approximately 0.3 miles south of the project site. The project site is located within the Airport Influence Area ( General PIan Figure 6-7) outlined in the City' s General Plan ( City of Highland 2006). As required by state law for real estate transactions within the Airport Influence Area, notification/ disclosure statements are required to alert potential buyers and tenants of the presence of and potential impacts from the San Bernardino International Airport. According to Exhibit 4H ( Existing and ultimate Noise Contours) of the Airport Layout Plan Narrative Report for San Bernardino International Airport ( San Bernardino International Airport Authority 2010), the SBIA' s 65 dBA CNEL ultimate noise contour would be located approximately
0.2 miles south of the project site.
Policy 1 of Goal 11. 1 (" Reduce exposure of people to aircraft noise and overflights, and ensure adequate public notification through buyer awareness measures") within the City' s General Plan ( City of Highland 2006) states: " Umi€ the development of sensitive land uses located within the 65 decibel ( dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level ( CNEL)." The City considers residential dwellings and institutional uses such as hospitals, convalescent homes and churches to be sensitive noise receptors, while retail and office uses are considered to be relatively insensitive land uses. Other land use types, including industrial and manufacturing, are considered to be least impacted by noise. Because the proposed project is not noise - sensitive, and because the project site is located outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Thus, aircraft and airport -related noise would be less than significant. 15255
AUGUST 2023
94 218
-241-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
3. 14 Population and Housing
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and El Z
businesses) or indirectly ( for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere? , ._
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly ( for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less -than -Significant Impact. The project would require a temporary construction workforce and a permanent operational workforce, both of which could potentially induce population growth in the project area. The temporary workforce would be needed to construct the proposed warehouse building and associated improvements. The number of construction workers needed during any given period would largely depend on the specific stage of construction but will likely average a few dozen workers at any given time throughout the workday. These short-term positions are anticipated to be filled primarily by workers who reside in the project area vicinity. Therefore, construction of the project would not generate a permanent increase in population within the project area.
In terms of operational employees, because the future tenant is not yet known, the number of jobs that the project would generate cannot be precisely determined, but it can be estimated. For purposes of analysis, employment estimates are calculated using average employment density factors reported by SCAG. SCAG reports that for every 1, 195 square feet of warehouse space in San Bernardino County, the average numbers of jobs supported is one employee (SCAG 2001). The proposed warehouse would be 53,665 square feet, and as such, the estimated number of employees required for operation would be approximately 41 people.
According to the SCAG Demographics and Growth Forecast, employment in the City is anticipated to grow from 7, 200 employees in 2020 to 10, 200 employees in 2045 ( SCAG 2023). The project -related increase in employment would be minimal in comparison to the anticipated increase in the SCAG Demographics and Growth Forecast.
15255
AUGUST 2023
95 219
-242-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Additionally, as of March 2023, the California Employment Development Department found that the unemployment rate for Riverside - San Bernardino - Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area, includingthe City of Highland, is at 4.4%, which is similar to the state average ( 4.8%) and higher than the national average
3. 9%) for the same period ( EDD 2023). Therefore, the project' s temporary and permanent employment requirements could likely be met by the City' s existing labor force without the need for people to relocate to the project region. The project would not stimulate population growth or a population concentration above what is assumed in local and regional land use plans. Therefore, impacts associated with population growth would be less than significant.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Less -than -Significant Impact. The western portion of the project site is currently developed with one single-family residence. The remainder of the project site is vacant. Development of the proposed project would result in displacement of one existing household. Although it is speculative where the previous on - site residents would ultimately be relocated, assuming that they would be relocated in the project area, vacant housing opportunities are available within the City. The City has approximately 17, 127 housing units with a vacancy rate of 2.6% (DOF 2022b). As such, there are approximately 445 vacant housing units in the City. Therefore, impacts associated with displacement of housing would be less than significant.
3. 15 Public Services
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project:
a) ~ Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? Li
Police protection? D,
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
15255
AUGUST2023
96 220
-243-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Less -than -Significant Impact. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection { CAL FIRE) provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the City of Highland, including the project site, through a cooperative agreement that provides for CAL FIRE employees to staff City -owned facilities and apparatus ( City of Highland 2006). The City of Highland also has available fire protection services from other area agencies such as the cities of Redlands and Yucaipa, and the U. S. Forest Service ( City of Highland 2006). The City also participates in the Statewide Master Mutual Aid Agreement, which provides additional assistance from San Bernardino City and County Fire Departments and the San Manuel Fire Department ( City of Highland 2006).
The closest fire station to the project is Highland Fire Department Station No. 541 ( 26974 Base Line Street), located approximately 1 mile north of the project site. Considering the proximity of the project site to Station No. 541, and given the fact that the project site is already located within CAL FIRE' s service area, the project could be adequately served by the various fire departments without adversely effecting personnel -to -resident ratios, response times, or other performance objectives.
In addition, the project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth in the City. Although the project could potentially result in a slight, incremental increase in calls for service to the project site in comparison to the existing conditions, this increase is expected to be nominal and would not result in the need for new CAL FIRE facilities. Nonetheless, similar to other development projects in the City, the project applicant would still be required to pay their fair share of development impact fees to help offset incremental impacts to fire protection services. Therefore, impacts associated with CAL FIRE facilities and response times would be less than significant.
Police protection?
Less -than -Significant Impact. The City of Highland contracts with the San Bernardino County Sheriff' s Department ( SBSD) to provide police protection to the City, including the project site ( City of Highland 2006). The SBSD has one patrol station in the City of Highland, located at 26985 East Base Line Street, approximately 1 mile north of the site.
The project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth in the City. Although the project would potentially result in a slight, incremental increase in calls to the SBSD for service to the project site in comparison to the existing conditions, this increase is expected to be nominal and would not result in the need for new SBSD facilities. In addition, the project site is already located within S1350' s service area and would not require an expansion of service area, which could otherwise result in longer response time.
Overall, it is anticipated that the project would be adequately served by existing SBSD facilities, equipment, and personnel. Nonetheless, similar to other development projects in the City, the project applicant would still be required to pay their fair share of development impact flees to help offset incremental impacts to police protection. Therefore, impacts associated with SBSD facilities and response times would be less 15255
AUGUST 2023
97 221
-244-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
than significant. In addition, the applicant will be required to follow the City of Highland' s Development Impact Fee Ordinance ( Fee Ordinance). The Fee Ordinance requires the applicant submit a fee payable to the City which will apply to the funding of public facilities, including law enforcement facilities. Therefore, impacts to police protection resources resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant.
Schools?
No Impact. The project site is located within the San Bernardino City Unified School District. It is not anticipated that people would relocate to the City as a result of the project, and an increase in school -age children requiring public education is not expected to occur as a result of the project. Nonetheless, all residential and non- residential development projects are subject to SB 50, which requires payment of mandatory impact fees to offset any impact to school services or facilities. The provisions of SB 50 are deemed to provide full and complete mitigation of school facilities impacts, notwithstanding any contrary provisions in CEQA or other state or local laws ( Government Code Section 65996). In accordance with SB 50, the project applicant would pay its fair share of impacts fees based on the number/ type of dwelling units. These impact fees are required of most residential, commercial, and Industrial development projects in the City. Therefore, no impacts associated with school facilities would occur.
Parks?
No Impact. Given the lack of population growth as a result of the project, neither construction nor operation of the project would generate new residents to the extent that new or expanded park facilities would be required. Therefore, no impacts associated with park facilities would occur.
Other public facilities?
No Impact. The project would not directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth in the City. As such, it is unlikely that the project would increase the use of other public facilities such as libraries.
Therefore, no impacts associated with libraries and other public facilities would occur.
3. 16 Recreation
XVI. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of
T
existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
15255
AUGUST 2023
98 222
-245-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The project would construct a new warehouse building and associated improvements. The project does not propose any residential uses and would not directly or indirectly result in a substantial and unplanned increase in population growth within the project area. As such, the project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood parks or regional parks in the City and surrounding area. Therefore, no impacts associated with the use of existing residential facilities would occur. b) floes the project Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The project would construct a new warehouse building and associated improvements. The project does not propose any recreational facilities. As an industrial use, the project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, no impacts associated with the construction of new or expansion of existing recreational facilities would occur.
3. 17 Transportation
XViI_ TRANSPORTATION - Would the oroiect:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system, p
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064. 3,
subdivision ( b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature ( e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses ( e.g., farm equipment)?
15255
AUGUST 2023
99 223
-246-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The following analysis is based, in part, on the Transportation Technical Memorandum prepared by Dudek in May 2023, included as Appendix J.
The following analysis was prepared consistent with the City of Highland Public Works Policies, Procedures and Standards ( City of Highland 2022), and the San Bernardino Council of Governments Congestion Management Program ( SANBAG 2016) to determine the level of analysis required based on the number of two- way peak hour trips generated by the project. Additionally, based on guidance from City of Highland staff, the City of San Bernardino' s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, were utilized to evaluate the project. Many of the VMT criteria listed in the City of San Bernardino' s Guidelines are based on the Governor' s Office of Planning and Research ( OPR) Guidelines ( OPR 2018).
Trill Generation Analysis
Trip generation estimates for the project are rased on daily and AM and PM peak hour trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 11th Edition ( ITE 2021), using the Warehousing land use ( ITE Code 150).
Additionally, per the City' s direction on a similar project, the warehouse (non -cold storage buildings) truck fleet mix from the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) Warehouse Truck Trip Study Data Results and Usage ( SCAQMD 2014) was used to estimate project -related truck traffic. Based on the SCAQMD data, passenger cars would account for 72. 5% trips of the total trips generated bya warehouse facility, and truck trips would account for approximately 27.5% of the total trips. The total percentage of truck trips were further divided by 2-axle, 3-axle, and 4+ axle trucks per the SCAQMD study. These truck trips generated by the project were then converted to passenger car equivalent ( PCE) trips by using the recommended PCE factors. PCE factors consistent with the County' s Congestion Management Plan ( CMP) guidelines. Table 3. 17- 1 presents the project' s daily, and AM and PM peak hour trip generation estimates.
Table 3. 17- 1. Project Trip Generation Summary
Trip Rates and Trip Generation
Warehousing; I per TSF 1. 71 1 0.13 1 0.04 10.17 10.05 j 0. 13 1 0.18 Land Use
Proposed Project 53.665 TSF 92 7 2 i 9 3 7 10
Nan- PCE Trips Passenger Cars ( 72. 5%) 67 5 2 7 2 5 7
2- axle Trucks ( 4.6%) 25 2 0 2 1 2 3
3- axle Trucks ( 5. 7%) 5 0 0, 0 0 0 0
15255
AUGUST 2023
100
224
-247-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Table 3. 17-1. Project Trip Generation Summary
Size/ Units Daily In Mum M
4+axle Trucks ( 17. 2%) 16 2 0 2 1 2 3
Total Non- PCE Trips 92 7 1- 2 1 9 3 7 10
Project Trip Generation PCE
PCE TOO Passenger Cars ( 1.0 PCE) 67 5 2 7 2 5 7
2-axle Trucks ( 1. 5 PCE 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
3- axle Trucks ( 2.0 PCE) I 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
4+ axle Trucks ( 3-0 PCE) ! 48 6 0 6 3 6 9
Total PCE Trips = 131_ ._. . 12... _.. 2 . 13 5 ._ _ _ 11 _J _ 1.6 Source: Appendix 3
Notes: TSF = thousand square feet, PCE = passenger car equivalent Some of the totals may not match exactly due to rounding.
I Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 11th Edition, 2021. Land Use Code 150 - Warehousing. 2 Vehicle Mix and Percent from SCAQMD 2014.
a Passenger Car Equivalent ( PCE) factors per the San Bernardino County CMP ( SANBAG 201-6).
As shown in Table 3.17-1, the proposed project would generate approximately 92 dailytrips, with 9 trips (7 inbound and 2 outbound) in the AM peak hour, and 10 trips ( 3 inbound and 7 outbound) in the PM peak hour. Adjusting for PCE, the trip generation Is approximately 131 daily PCE trips, 13 AM PCE peak hour trips ( 11 inbound and 2 outbound) and 16 PM PCE peak hour trips (5 inbound and 11 outbound). a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less -than -Significant Impact. As detailed in the following text, the project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
Roadway Facilities
The project is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Highland; therefore, the following consistency requirements would apply.
San Bernardino Associated Governments Congestion Management Plan The City of Highland is located in San Bernardino County and therefore, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority CMP applies to the City. To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion is impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, Proposition 111 created the CMP in 1990. The intent of the CMP is to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program process. In 1990, the San Bernardino Associated Governments was designated the Congestion Management Agency for San Bemardino County.
Although implementation of the CMP was made voluntary by the passage of AB 2419 ( Bowler 1996), the CMP requirement has been retained In San Bernardino County. 15255
AUGUST 2023
101
225
-248-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The LOS at each CMP location is monitored by local jurisdictions in order to implement the statutory requirements of the CMP. If LOS standards deteriorate, then local jurisdictions must prepare a deficiency plan to meet conformance standards outlined by the countywide plan. The local CMP requires that a transportation impact analysis report be prepared when a project' s trip generation exceeds 250 two-way peak hour trips and expects to add at least 50 two-way peak hour trips to a State highway facility. For the CMP roadway system, the LOS standard shall be E for all segments and intersections except those designated LOS F, as listed in Table 2- 1 of the CMP ( SANBAG 2016).
Based on the project' s trip generation estimates as described above, development of the proposed project would not be likely to result in degradation of the nearby CMP facilities due to the low volume of vehicular traffic ( less than 250 peak hour trips, and less than 50 peak hour trips to a State highway facility, per the CMP). Therefore, impacts associated with project -related traffic on both the local and regional circulation system would be less than significant.
City of Highland
Traffic Study Guidelines
The City of Highland Traffic Study Guidelines are included in Chapter 9 of the City' s Public Works Policies, Procedures and Standards Manual. Although changes in CEQA regarding S133 743 implementation shifts the primary metric for traffic analyses from LOS to VMT, the City has not yet adopted updated guidelines or thresholds related to VMT. As such, the City continues to require a Traffic Report toanalyze the surrounding transportation network to evaluate the project's effect on the City's transportation infrastructure, and identify improvements required to maintain consistency with the City' s LOS standards. Per the Traffic Study Guidelines, a Traffic Report would be required if a project exceeds the CMP thresholds ( 250 two-way peak hour trips) or generates more than 1,000 new two-way daily trips, or 100 two-way peak hour trips.
Additionally, the City may require a Traffic Report if there are concerns regarding access, roadway structural impacts or level of service on intersection or roadway segments adjacent to the project. Trip generation estimates for the project are summarized above.
Based on the project' s trip generation estimates as described above, development of the proposed project would likely not result in degradation of the nearest intersections of 5th Street/ Central Avenue, Central Avenue/ 3rd Street, or other nearby intersections due to the low volume of vehicular traffic ( less than 100 peak hour trips). However, the scoping of a focused Traffic Report is in progress with the City and is subject to review and approval by the City prior to project approval. By proceeding with scoping of a Traffic Report, the project complies with and would not conflict with the City' s Traffic Study Guidelines. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
General Plan Circulation Element
The City of Highland adopted its most recent version of its Circulation Element of the General Plan in March 2006. The General Plan Circulation Element takes into consideration transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and other multimodal uses. The Circulation Element primarily utilizes volume -to -capacity LOS as a measurement in the rating of the performance of streets. The Circulation Element establishes the following LOS criteria:
LOS D or better for major intersections in the City.
IS255
AUGUST 2023
102
226 -249-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
LOS D is considered acceptable for peak operating periods.
Any City of Highland intersection operating at LOS " E" or " F" is considered deficient.
As the proposed project is forecast to generate 13 AM peak hour trips and 16 PM peak hour trips ( PCEadjusted), the proposed project would not exceed the 250 two- way peak hour trip threshold for the preparation of a transportation impact analysis report per the CMP or the 100 two-way peak hour trip threshold for preparation of a Traffic Report per the City' s Traffic Study Guidelines. Therefore, a transportation impact analysis report and further LOS analysis would not be required, unless requested by the City for a focused analysis of specific facilities as noted above.
Additionally, the project site is bordered by 5th Street to the north, Central Avenue is located to the east of the project site, and 3rd Street is located to the south of the project site. In the vicinity of the project, Central Avenue is not designated in the City' s General Plan Circulation Element; however, north of 51h Street, Central Avenue is designated as a Major Highway. The project does not border Central Avenue, therefore, no improvements to Central Avenue is proposed.
5th Street is designated as a Major Highway per the City' s General Plan Circulation Element. Per the Circulation Element, a Major Highway is generally designed as a four -lane roadway intended to provide nonlocal through trips and limited local access, with an 88-foot curb -to -curb width ( with a 12- f0ot median), within a 104-foot ROW. The project would improve the pedestrian and ROW as required along 5th Street along the project' s frontage. 5th Street is also designated as a truck route, with a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour.
Therefore, impacts related to project consistency with the General Plan Circulation Element would be less than significant.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Although the General Plan Circulation Element includes several bicycle classifications, the City of Highland Active Transportation Plan, adopted February 2021, provides a more comprehensive and updated overview of the City' s current and future recommendations to enhance multi -modal facilities:
Class I Shared -Use Paths are paths completely separated from motor vehicle traffic used by people for walking and biking. These paths are typically located immediately adjacent and parallel to a roadway or in its own independent ROW, such as within a park or along a body of water.
Class II Bicycle Lanes are dedicated lanes for bicycle travel adjacent to traffic. A painted white line separates the bicycle lane from motor vehicle traffic.
Class 113 Buffered Bicycle Lane are dedicated lanes for bicycle travel separated from vehicle traffic by a painted buffer. The buffer provides additional comfort for users by providing space from motor vehicles or parked cars.
Class Iq Bicycle Routes are signed bike routes that people biking share with motor vehicles, which can include pavement markings.
15255
AUGUST 2023
103
227
-250-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Class IRS Bicycle Boulevards are calm, local streets where bicycles have priority but share roadway space with motor vehicles. These boulevards include shared roadway bicycle markings on the pavement as well as traffic calming features such as speed humps and traffic diverters to keep these streets more comfortable for bicycles.
The only bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site are Class If Bike Lanes along 5th Street. The project is not expected to generate a significant amount of bicyclists and therefore would not affect the existing bicycle facilities. As such, the project would not conflict with existing or proposed bicycle facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
Pedestrian facilities are provided along the frontage of the project site on both sides of 5th Street, with a continuous sidewalk on the southern side of 5th Street past Cunningham Street, before reaching Victoria Avenue, the sidewalk ends. If needed, the project would improve the curb and gutter, and pedestrian facilities where the project frontage exists, and follow all of the City' s standard plans and guidelines for pedestrian facilities, curb and gutter, and drainage. Additionally, along both sides of Central Avenue. there are no pedestrian facilities, except for a portion of the west side of the road near the Central Avenue/ 5th Street intersection. The project is not expected to generate a significant amount of pedestrians and therefore, would not affect existing pedestrian facilities. As such, development of the project would not conflict with the existing pedestrian facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
Transit Facilities
Omnitrans provides public transportation throughout the San Bernardino Valley and would serve as the nearest transit service to the project site. Omnitrans Route 15 is the nearest bus route that services the project site. Route 15 connects the Fontana Metrolink Transit Center, the San Bernardino Transit Center, and the Redlands Transit Center, and also provides stops within the City of Highland. The nearest bus stop to the project site is located at the intersection of 5th Street/ Central Avenue, approximately 375-feet east of the project. Route 15 provides daily service with average headways of approximately one hour, with service beginning as early as 5:05 a. m. and ending as Iate at 9:45 p. m. on weekdays ( Omnitrans 2023).
Development of the proposed project would not conflict with the existing bus routes or bus stops. Therefore, impacts to transit would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. 3, subdivision ( b)? Less -than -Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3( b) focuses on VMT for determining the significance of transportation impacts. As shown in the analysis below, the project' s impact due to conflict or inconsistency with Section 15064. 3( b) would be less than significant.
On September 27, 2013, SB 743 was signed into law, which creates a process to change the way that transportation impacts are analyzed under CEQA. SB 743 required OPR to amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to LOS for evaluating transportation impacts. Under the new transportation guidelines, LOS, or vehicle delay, will no longer be considered an environmental impact under CEQA. OPR recommended VMT as the most appropriate measure of project transportation impacts for land use projects and land use plans. The updates to the CEQA Guidelines required under SB 743 were approved on December 28, 2018. The OPR Technical Advisory ( OPR 2018) provides guidance and tools to properly carry out the principles within SIB 743 and how to evaluate transportation impacts in CEQA. 15255
AUGUST2023
104
228 -251-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Under these guidelines, VMT has been adopted as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts under CEQA. The OPR' s regulatory text indicates that a public agency may immediately commence implementation of the new transportation impact guidelines, and that the guidelines must be implemented statewide by July 1, 2020. The Updated CEQA Guidelines state that " generally, vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts" and define VMT as "the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project." It should be noted that ` automobile" refers to on -road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light trucks. Heavy- duty truck VMT could be included for modeling convenience and ease of calculation ( for example, where models or data provide combined auto and heavy truck VMT). Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non - motorized travel.
Although the project is located within the boundary of the City of Highiand, the City has adopted the City of San Bernardino' s CEQA Assessment - VMT Analysis Guidelines ( SBCTA 2020), which were developed in coordination with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority with support of agencies throughout the county. Therefore, the City of San Bernardino' s CEQA Assessment - VMT Analysis Guidelines were utilized as the primary source of analysis of VMT and transportation -related impacts herein. The guidance developed is generally based upon the OPR Guidelines and thresholds.
The details of applicable screening and VMT analysis methodology are provided below. If the project does not meet the applicable screening criteria, then further analysis is required.
VMT Screening
As stated previously, the City of San Bernardino' s VMT Guidelines were utilized within this memorandum as the primary source of analysis of VMT and transportation -related impacts. The VMT Guidelines suggest that land use projects may screen out of VMT impacts using a variety of factors. The following steps have been used in screening the project' s VMT assessment, consistent with the applicable VMT guidelines for SB 743 compliance:
Transit Priority Area Screening:
Projects located within one-half mile of a Transit Priority Area is defined as one- half mile area around an existing major transit stop20 or an existing stop along e high quality transit corridor. 21 The project is not within one- half mile of a Transit Priority Area, and therefore cannot be presumed to be less than significant under this threshold.
Low- VMT Area Screening:
Low- VMT generating areas ( as shown in the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority screening tool). A low VMT area is defined as an individual traffic analysis zone where total daily Origin/ Destination VMT per service population is lower than the City average total daily Origin/ Destination VMT per service population.
20 Public Resources Code Section 21064. 3 -' Major transit stop' means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. 21 Public Resources Code, Section 21155 - For purposes of this section, a ' high -quality transit corridor' means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. 15255 105
AUGUST 2023
229
-252-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The project is not located in a low-VMT generating area. x
Local Serving Uses and Small Projects Presumed to have Less Than Significant Impact:
Local parks
Day care centers
Local serving retail uses less than 50,000 square feet, including:
Gas Stations
Banks
Restaurants
Shopping Center
Student housing projects on or adjacent to college campuses Local serving assembly uses ( places of worship, community organizations) Community institutions ( public Iibraries, fire stations, local government) Hotels ( non -destination or resort; no banquet or special event space) Affordable or supportive housing
Assisted living facilities
Senior housing
Local serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in the Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy
Projects generating less than 110 daily vehicle trips
This generally corresponds to the following " typical" development potentials:
11 single family housing units
16 multi -family, condominiums, or townhouse units
10, 000 square feet of office
15,000 square feet of light industrial
63, 000 square feet of warehousing
79,000 square feet of high cube transload and short-term storage warehouse Based on the trip generation estimates provided in Table 3. 17- 1, the project would generate 92 daily trips ( non- PCE). Since the project would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips, the project impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, a detailed VMT analysis is not required, and the project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 150645. 3( b).
As shown in the screening analysis above, the project would be screened out based on its daily traffic generation being Iess than 110 daily trips. Therefore, further VMT analysis is not required and the project' s impact to VMT can be presumed to be less than significant. 15255
AUGUST 2023
106
230
-253-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
c) Would the project substantially Increase hazards due to a geometric design feature ( e.g., sharp curves or dangerous Intersections) or incompatible uses ( e.g., farm equipment)? Less -than -Significant Impact. Access to the project site would be provided two driveways along 5th Street.
The eastern driveway along 5th Street would serve as truck access driveways, with the western driveway along 5th Street dedicated to passenger vehicle access only. Passenger vehicles would also be permitted to utilize the eastern driveway. Both driveways would have full access ( right-in/ right-out and left-in/ left-out) Figure 12, Project Trip Assignment).
The project would construct frontage improvements of existing segments of 5th Street, and new driveways for project access.
During site plan review, the internal roadway and driveway widths, curb radii to facilitate passenger car and truck turning and movement would be reviewed, designed, and constructed per City standards and applicable street design requirements.
For on -site construction and any improvements required within the public ROW, the proposed project would be required to comply with standards set forth by the City to ensure that the project does not introduce an incompatible design feature that would impede traffic flow on roadway facilities. There would be no incompatible or hazardous uses associated with the proposed project and impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less -than -Significant Impact. Site access would be provided via two driveways along 5th Street. As stated above under threshold (c), the project would not increase roadway hazards. Emergency vehicle access will be available at all driveways and facilitated within the entirety of the project site. The project site would be accessible to emergency responders during construction and operation of the project. Therefore, impacts associated with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant.
3. 18 Tribal Cultural Resources
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined In Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as ® Q
defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020. 1{ k), or
15255
AUGUST 2023
107
231
-254-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
b) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024. 1? In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision ( c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024. 1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.
The evaluation of potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources is based on the findings resulting from tribal consultation conducted by the City of Highland ( City), as the lead agency, as well as the findings of the Archaeological Resources Assessment conducted by Dudek in 2023 (Appendix Q. Background research conducted to inform this analyses include the results of a NAHC SLF search, ethnographic research, archival research and CHRIS database records search, and the results of formal tribal consultation completed by the lead agency, the City, pursuant to California Assembly Bill (AB) 52, a brief summary of which is provided in this section.
Ex#sting Setting -- Ethnohistoric
The history of the Native American communities prior to the mid-1700s has largely been reconstructed through later mission -period and early ethnographic accounts. The first records of the Native American inhabitants of the region come predominantly from European merchants, missionaries, military personnel, and explorers. These brief, and generally peripheral, accounts were prepared with the intent of furthering respective colonial and economic aims and were combined with observations of the landscape. They were not intended to be unbiased accounts regarding the cultural structures and community practices of the newly encountered cultural groups. The establishment of the missions in the region brought more extensive documentation of Native American communities, though these groups did not become the focus of formal and in- depth ethnographic study until the early twentieth century ( Bean and Shipek 1978; Boscana 1846; Harrington 1934, Laylander 2000; Sparkman 1908; White 1963). The principal intent of these researchers was to record the precontact and culturally specific practices, ideologies, and languages that had survived the destabilizing effects of missionization and colonialism.
This research, often understood as " salvage ethnography," was driven by the understanding that traditional knowledge was being lost due to the impacts of modernization and cultural assimilation. Alfred Kroeber applied his memory culture" approach ( Lightfoot 2005, p. 32) by recording languages and oral histories within the region.
Ethnographic research by Dubois, Kroeber, Harrington, Spier, and others during the early twentieth century seemed to indicate that traditional cultural practices and beliefs survived among local Native American communities.
It is important to note that even though there were many informants for these early ethnographies who were able to provide information from personal experiences about native life before the Europeans, a significantly large proportion of these informants were born after 1850 ( Heizer and Nissen 1973); therefore, the documentation of precontact, aboriginal culture was being increasingly supplied by individuals born in California after considerable contact with Europeans. As Heizer ( 1978) stated, this is an important issue to note when examining these 15255
AUGUST 2023
108
232 -255-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ethnographies, since considerable culture change had undoubtedly occurred by 1850 among the Native American survivors of California.
Based on ethnographic information, it is believed that at least 88 different languages were spoken from Baja California Sur to the southern Oregon state border at the time of Spanish contact ( Johnson and Lorenz 2006, p. 34)_ The distribution of recorded Native American languages has been dispersed as a geographic mosaic across California through six primary language families ( Golla 2007).
Golla contended that one can interpret the amount of variability within specific language groups as being associated with the relative "time depth" of the speaking populations (Golla 2007: 80). A large amount of variation within the language of a group represents a greater time depth than a group' s language with less internal diversity. One method that he has employed is by drawing comparisons with historically documented changes in Germanic and Romantic language groups. Golla observed thatthe " absolute chronologyof the internal diversification within a language family" can be correlated with archaeological dates ( 2007: 71). This type of interpretation is modeled on concepts of genetic drift and gene flows that are associated with migration and population isolation in the biological sciences.
The tribes of this area have traditionally spoken Takic languages that may be assigned to the larger Uto- Aztecan family (Golly 2007: 74). These groups include the Gabrielino, Cahuilla, and Serrano. GolIa interpreted the amount of internal diversity within these language -speaking communities to reflect a time depth of approximately 2, 000 years. Other researchers have contended that Takic may have diverged from Uto- Aztecan ca. 2600 BC - AD 1, which was later followed by the diversification within the Takic speaking tribes, occurring approximately 1500 BC - AD 1000 ( Laylander 2000).
Serrano
Traditionally, the Serrano lived in an area east of the Gabrielino and north of the Cahuilla, near present-day western San Bernardino County and northeastern Los Angeles County ( Laylander 2000). The Serrano occupied an area in and around the San Bernardino Mountains between approximately 1, 500 and 11,000 feet above mean sea level. Their territory extended west alongthe northern slope of the San Gabriel Mountains, east as far as Twentynine Palms, north alongthe Mojave River, and south to the San Jacintoarea. Kroeber (1925) divided the Serrano into four distinct groups within the western Mojave Desert: the Kitanemuk, Tataviam, Serrano, and Vanyume. Each group held a distinct territory within the region ( Kroeber 1925), According to Bean and Smith ( 1978a: 570), "the Serrano resided in an area that extended east of the Cajon Pass, located in the San Bernardino Mountains, to Twenty- nine Palms, the north foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains and south to include portions of the Yucaipa Valley." Serrano social organization was based on patrilineal and patrilocal lineages. Exogamy rules required that a man could not marry a woman related to them within five generations. Women moved to their husband' s village, but kept their identity as a member of their natal lineage ( Cultural Systems Research 2005: 15).
The Serrano were mainly hunters and gatherers who occasionally fished. Game hunted included mountain sheep, deer, antelope, rabbits, small rodents, and various birds, particularly quail. Vegetable staples consisted of acorns, pinon nuts, bulbs and tubers, shoots and roots, berries, mesquite, barrel cacti, and Joshua tree ( Bean and Smith 1978a; Cultural Systems Research 2005: 15). A variety of materials was used for hunting, gathering, and processing food, as well as for shelter, clothing, and luxury items. Shells, wood, bone, stone, plant materials, and animal skins and feathers were used for making baskets, pottery, blankets, mats, nets, bags and pouches, cordage, awls, bows, arrows, drills, stone pipes, musical instruments, and clothing ( Bean and Smith 1978a). 15255
AUGUST2023
109
233
-256-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The majority of the Serrano lived in small villages, close to sources of fresh water ( Benedict 1924). Houses and ramadas were round, dome -shaped, and constructed of poles covered with bark and tule mats ( Benedict 1924; Kroeber 1925). The Serrano also had sweat houses and ceremonial houses for religious activities. Further, according to Benedict ( 1924), a typical Serrano settlement was a village with multiple small satellite Camps surrounding it. Most Serrano villages also had a ceremonial house used as a religious center. Other structures within the village might include granaries and sweathouses (Bean and Smith 1978a). Accordingto DeBarros (2004), one of the more prominent Serrano villages was called Guapiabit, and it was located in Summit Valley.
Gabrieleno/ Tongva
The archaeological record indicates that the Gabrieleno arrived in the Los Angeles Basin around 500 B.C.
Surrounding native groups included the Chumash and Tataviam to the northwest, the Serrano and Cahuilla to the northeast, and the Juaneno and Luiseno to the southeast.
The names by which Native Americans identified themselves have, for the most part, been lost and replaced by those derived by the Spanish people administering the local Missions. These names were not necessarily representative of a specific ethnic or tribal group, and traditional tribal names are unknown in the post -Contact period. The name " Gabrielino" or " Gabrieleno" was first established by the Spanish from the San Gabriel Mission and included people from the established Gabrielino area as well as other social groups ( Bean and Smith 1978b; Kroeber 1925). Some contemporary Gabrielino identify themselves as descendants of the indigenous people living across the plains of the Los Angeles Basin and refer to themselves as the Tongva ( King 1994: 12). This term is used in the remainder of this section in addition to the name " Gabrieleno" to refer to the precontact inhabitants of the Los Angeles Basin and their descendants.
The Gabrieleno/ Tongva established large, permanent villages along rivers and streams, and lived in sheltered areas along the coast. Gabrieleno/ Tongva lands included the greater Los Angeles Basin and three Channel Islands —San Clemente, San Nicolas, and Santa Catalina —and stretched from the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. Archaeological sites composed of villages with various sized structures have been identified through the Los Angeles Basin. A total tribal population has been estimated of at least 5,000 (Bean and Smith 1978b: 540), but recent ethnohistoric work suggests a number approaching 10,000 seems more likely ( O' Neil 2002). At least one Gabrieleno/ Tongva village was located near Glendora: Ashuukshanga ( also Azucsagna), located near the mouth of the San Gabriel River in present- day Azusa ( McCawley 1996: 44). Within the permanent village sites, the Gabrieleno/ Tongva constructed large, circular, domed houses made of willow poles thatched with tule, each of which could hold upward of 50 people ( Bean and Smith 1978b). Other structures constructed throughout the villages probably served as sweathouses, menstrual huts, ceremonial enclosures, and communal granaries.
Cleared fields for races and games, such as lacrosse and pole throwing, were created adjacent to Tongva villages McCawley 1996).
The Gabrieleno/ Tongva subsistence economy was centered on gathering and hunting. The surrounding environment was rich and varied, and the tribe exploited mountains, foothills, valleys, and deserts as well as riparian, estuarine, and open and rocky coastal eco-niches. Like most native Californians, acorns were the staple food ( an established industry by the time of the early Intermediate Horizon). Acorns were supplemented by the roots, leaves, seeds, and fruits of a variety of flora ( e.g., islay, cactus, yucca, sages, and agave). Freshwater and saltwater fish, shellfish, birds, reptiles, and insects, as well as large and small mammals, were also consumed Bean and Smith 1978b, p. 546; Kroeber 1925, pp. 631- 632; McCawley 1996, pp. 119- 123, 128- 131). 15255
AUGUST 2023
110
234
-257-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The Gabrieleho/ Tongva participated in an extensive exchange network, trading coastal goods for inland resources.
They exported Santa Catalina Island steatite products, roots, seal and otter skins, fish and shell€ish, red ochre, and lead ore to neighboring tribes, as well as to people as far away as the Colorado River. In exchange, they received ceramic goods, deerskin shirts, obsidian, acorns, and other items. This burgeoning trade was facilitated by the use of craft specialists, a standard medium of exchange ( OliveIla bead currency), and the regular destruction of valuables in ceremonies, which maintained a high demand for these goods (McCawley 1996, 112- 115).
Assembly Bill 52
AS 52 of 2014 amended Public Resources Code Section 5097.94 and added Public Resources Code Sections 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3. AS 52 established that tribal cultural resources must be considered under CEQA and also provided for additional Native American consultation requirements for the Iead agency. Public Resources Code Section 21074 describes a tribal cultural resource as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object that is considered of cultural value to a California Native American Tribe. A tribal cultural resource (TCR) is either.
On the CRHR or a local historic register;
EIigible for the CRHR or a local historic register; or
A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision ( c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024. 1.
AS 52 formalizes the lead agency - tribal consultation process, requiring the lead agency to initiate consultation with California Native American groups that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area, including tribes that may not be federally recognized. Lead agencies are required to begin consultation prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report by contacting those tribal groups who have previously provided formal written request for notification of projects under the agency' s jurisdiction.
Section 1 ( a)(9) of AS 52 establishes that " a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource has a significant effect on the environment." Effects on TCRs should be considered under CEQA. Section 6 of AB 52 adds Section 21080.3. 2 to the Public Resources Code, which states that parties may propose mitigation measures capable of avoiding or substantially lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource." Further, if a California Native American tribe requests consultation regarding project alternatives, mitigation measures, or significant effects to TCRs, the consultation shall include those topics ( PRC Section 21080. 3. 2[ al). Finally, the environmental document, for which the tribal consultation is focused, and the mitigation monitoringand reporting program ( where applicable), developed in consideration of information provided by tribes during the formal consultation process, shall include any mitigation measures that are adopted (PRC Section 21082.3[a]).
Assembly Bill 52 Consultation
The project is subject to compliance with AS 52 ( PRC 21074), which requires consideration of impacts to TCRs as part of the CEQA process, and that the lead agency notify California Native American Tribal representatives (that have requested notification) who are traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project. All NAHC- listed California Native American Tribal representatives that have requested project notification pursuant to AS 52 were sent letters by the City on March 30, 2023, via United States Postal Service ( LISPS) mailing.
The notification letters contained a project description, outline of AS 52 timing, an invitation to consult, a project 15255
AUGUST 2023
M
235 -258-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
site plan, and contact information for the appropriate lead agency representative. Table 3. 18- 1 summarizes the results of the AB 52 process for the project.
Table 3. 18- 1. Assembly Bill 52 Native American Heritage Commission -listed Native American Contacts
Andrew Salas, Chairman
Gahrieleho Band of Mission Indians - Kizh
Nation
Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Director
Soboba Band of LuiseTio Indians
Ryan Nordness
Cultural Resources Management Department
Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation ( YSMN)
a)
No response has been received to date.
No response has been received to date.
May 4, 2023:
An email response was received by City Planner, Angela Tafolla, from Ryan Nordness, Cultural Resource Analyst for the YSMN.
Mr. Nordness stated that the proposed project area is within Serrano ancestral territory, however, due to the nature and location of the project and the CRM Department' s present knowledge, the YSMN does not have any concerns with the project as planned at this time. Mr. Nordness then provided mitigation Ianguage and requested that it be included for the project permit and planning. Mr_ Nordness also requested to be provided a final copy of the project permit and plan to review the included language.
To date, no additional responses have been received by the City from the YSMN and the City has formally concluded
consultation with the YSMN.
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in public Resources Code section 21.074 as eithera site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)7 Less -than -Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 3. 5, a CHRIS records search and NAHC SLI= search were conducted for the project site. The SLIF was completed with positive results; however, it should be noted that the results relate to the general regional area do not necessarily equate to the existence of resources within the specific area occupied by the proposed project site. The results of the CHRIS records search identified 20 historic built environment resources within the records search area. No prehistoric resources were identified as a result of the records search. South Central Coastal Information Center records also indicate that that 12 previous cultural resources investigations have been conducted within one- half mile of the proposed project site between 1984 and 2014. One previous study (report SB-07309) completed in 2011 (Tang and Hogan 2011) addressed the entirety (100 percent) of the present proposed project site. The 2011 study consisted of a background research and a literature search, tribal consultation, outreach to local historical societies, and a field survey. No cultural resources were identified within the proposed project site as a result of the 2011 study. 15255
AUGUST 2023
112
236
-259-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIALSTUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Additionally, as discussed in Section 3. 5. based on the intensive -level archaeological pedestrian survey and research conducted as part of the Archaeological Resource Assessment ( Appendix D), it was determined that the potential to encounter intact deposits containing archaeological resources within soils from current grade to between 1 and 2 feet below ground surface is unlikely. However, the potential for intact cultural deposits to exist within native soils ( below between 1 and 2 feet bgs) to the proposed depths of disturbance is unknown. Given that City Creek and associated wash/ creek bed historically overlapped the western portion of the proposed Project site, there is a potential for yet unidentified archaeological resource deposits within the proposed Project site to be buried by alluvial and flood deposits. Additionally, the City notified California Native American Tribal representatives who are traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project area pursuant to AS 52. One response was received from the YSMN. No tribal cultural resources were identified on the project site as a result of AB 52 consultation between the City and the YSMN. Therefore, the proposed project would not adversely affect known TCRs that are listed or eligible for listing in the state or local register. No mitigation is required. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, In its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision ( c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024. 1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision ( c) of public Resource Code Section 5024. 1, the lead agency shall consider the signfcance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Less -than -Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project is subject to compliance with AB 52 ( PRC 21074), which requires consideration of impacts to tribal cultural resources as part of the CEQA process and requires lead agencies to provide notification of proposed projects to California Native American Tribal representatives that have requested such notifications.
As discussed above, the YSMN consulted with the City under AS 52, and stated that due to the nature and location of the project and the CRM Department' s present knowledge, the YSMN does not have any concerns with the project as planned at this time. Nonetheless, the YSMN requested that mitigation measures be included for the project permit and planning.
As discussed in Section 3. 5 Cultural Resources, no prehistoric resources or resources of Native American origin have been identified within the project site or records search radius through the CHRIS records search at the SCCIC. Although the NAHC SLF search results were positive, it is important to note that Sacred Land Files maintained by the NAHC represent a curation of " ancient places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans and known ancient graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private and public lands in California" ( nahc. gov 2021) provided by Tribal entities and Native American representatives. For various reasons, Tribal entities and Native American representatives do no not always report sacred lands or TCRs to the NAHC; as such, the NAHC' s SLF is not necessarily a comprehensive list of known TCRs and searches of the SLF must be considered in concert with other research and not used as a sole source of information regarding the presence of TCRs. Additionally, results of the SLF provided relate to the general regional area within and surrounding the project site and don' t necessarily equate to the existence of resources within the specific area occupied by the project site. As such, there are no resources in the project site, as presented during AS 52 consultation, that have been determined by the City to be significant pursuant to the criteria set forth in Public Resources Code Section 5020. 1( k).
TCRs have not been identified through tribal consultation under AB 52, the City, acting as lead agency, has not identified any TCRs within the project site that would warrant discretionary designation of a resource 15255
AUGUST 2023
113
237
-260-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
as a TCR. However, the City, in an abundance of caution, has considered the information provided for review through consultation and determined to implement mitigation measures to ensure if unknown subsurface tribal cultural resources were inadvertently encountered, they would be addressed properly. Therefore, in addition to the cultural resources mitigation measures ( MM- CUL- 1, MM- CUL-2, and MM- CUL- 3), tribal cultural resources mitigation measure MM-TCR- 1 has been included to ensure retention, by the applicant, of a YSMN Native American monitor to observe ground disturbing activities at the election of the YSMN cultural resources manager. As stipulated within mitigation prepared for Cultural Resources - appropriate handling of human remains will be completed in compliance with Public Resources Code 5097. 98 and Health and Safety Code 7050.5. This includes establishing a process of respectful treatment through discussions with the identified MLD. Implementation of MM- TCR- 1 would ensure that potential construction impacts related to an unknown tribal cultural resource would be reduced to a level less than significant.
MM- TCR- 1 Tribal Cultural Resources The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department (YSMN) shall be contacted, as detailed in MM-CUL-3, in the case of a discovery of pre -contact and/ or historic -era cultural resources of or potentially of Native American origin. The Tribe shall be provided relevant information regarding the findings of the archaeological assessment as well recommendations regarding further study and treatment, if necessary. The Tribal shall be provided the opportunity to consult with the qualified archaeologist regardingthe findings and recommendations. Should the resource be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA ( as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan ( Plan) to include a research design, if data recovery is determined necessary, shall be created by the retained archaeologist for the project. A draft of the Plan shall be provided to YSMN for review and comment, prior to finalization of the Plan. This Plan shall allow for a YSMN Native American monitor to observe ground disturbing activities at the election of the YSMN cultural resources manager. Any and all archaeological/ cultural documents created as a part of the project ( isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and the City of Highland for dissemination to YSMN. The City and/ or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with YSMN throughout the life of the project.
3. 19 Utilities and Service Systems
AX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
waste water treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
15255
AUGUST 2023
u
114
238
-261-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Potentially
SignificantLess
Than
Impact
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the waste
water treatment provider which serves or
may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the projecees projected
demand in addition to the provider' s
existing commitments?
di Generate solid waste in excess of state or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
El of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, waste water treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed project would involve construction of a warehouse building, as well as paved parking areas and landscape areas. The project site currently consists of an existing residential home, garage structures, and vacant land. As such, the proposed project would increase demand for water supply compared to existing land uses.
As part of the project, utility service lines, including those for water, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications services, would be extended from their current locations in the public ROW surrounding the project site for operation of the proposed warehouse building. The proposed project would connect to existing 30-inch- diameter water line within 5th Street, as well as various underground pipes to convey stormwater to a 72-inch corrugated metal pipe infiltration system.
Given that the activity of connecting utilities from their current locations within the public right- of-way would require ground disturbance and the use of heavy machinery associated with trenching, the connection of these utility services to the proposed warehouse building could potentially result in environmental effects. However, the extension of these utility lines is part of the proposed project analyzed herein. As such, any potential environmental impacts related to these components of the project are already accounted for in this IS/ MND as part of the impact assessment conducted for the entirety of the project. No adverse physical effects beyond those already disclosed in this IS/ MND would occur as a result of implementation of the project' s utility system connections. Additionally, the project 15255
AUGUST 2023
115
239
-262-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
would constitute a nominal increase in utility usage, which has already been accounted for in growth projections for the City and by each utility provider. No modifications to utility infrastructure would be necessary outside of the immediate project area. As such, impacts associated with the construction or expansion of utility line connections would be Iess than significant. b) Would the project have sufficient watersupplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less -than -Significant Impact. Domestic water would be provided to the project site by the EVWD. The EVWD provides domestic water for the City and for portions of both the City and County of San Bernardino.
The primary water source for EVWD is groundwater from the Bunker Hill Basin. The Bunker Hill Basin has the capacity to provide 70,000 acre-foot per year of water from groundwater and surface water sources City of San Bernardino 2005). The San Bernardino Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan contains existing and projected water supplies for the region, including the EVWD. Table 3.19-1 shows projected water supplies during single- and multiple -dry year conditions, which represents ` worst -case" conditions during extended periods of drought when supplies would be reduced.
Table 3. 19-1. Projected Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison (Acre -Feet) Multiple Dry Year Scenario• 2040 04.
First Year
Supply Totals
Demand Totals
Difference ( supply minus demand)
Second Year
Supply Totals
Demand Totals
Difference ( supply minus demand)
Third Year
Supply Totals
Demand Totals
Difference ( supply minus demand)
Fourth Year
Supply Tota Is
Demand Totals
Difference ( supply minus demand)
Fifth Year
26, 676 { 26, 676 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
26, 676 { 26, 676 26, 676 52, 972 { 52, 972
0 ! 0 0 0 0
26, 676 26, 676 { 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
26, 676 26, 676 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
0 j 0 0 0 0
26, 676 26, 676 26, 676 j 52, 972 52,972
26, 676 26, 676 26, 676 .. I.. 52, 972 52, 972
0 0 0 0 0
26, 676 26,676 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
26, 676 26,676 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
0 0 0 0 ! 0
Supplly Totals 26, 676 26, 676 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
Demand Totals
V
26, 676 26, 67fry 26, 676 52, 972 52, 972
Difference ( supply minus demand) 0 0 E 0 0 0
Source: SBVMWD 2021.
Table 3. 19- 1 demonstrates that EVWD anticipates adequate supplies for years 2025 to 2045 under multiple dry year conditions based on current land use projections. However, in the unlikely event of a 15255
116
AUGUST 2023
240
-263-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
drought, natural disaster such as earthquake, a regional power outage, the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District has prepared a water shortage contingency plan for the region ( SBVMWD 2021). This plan provides specific actions that should be taken to ensure critical water needs of the region are met during a period in which water supplies are out by 50%. Based on the future and existing capacity, and water management measures, it is anticipated there are sufficient water supplies to serve the proposed project.
Therefore, impacts associated with water supplies would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projects projected demand in addition to the provider' s existing commitments?
Less -than -Significant Impact. Highland' s sewer system is maintained by the EVWD, which has joint powers with the City of San Bernardino to accept all sewage generated within the EVWD's boundaries. The project would coordinate with the EVWD to meet sewer requirements established by the DHS to ensure the continued sewer services in Highland, which has the potential to be impacted with continued growth within the City. However, water recycling programs, such as the project' scorrugated metal pipe infiltration system, assist in reducing the amount of wastewater conveyed to the sewage system. The sewage from Highland is treated at the San Bernardino WRP, operated by the San Bernardino City Municipal Water District ( City of Highland 2006). The WRP treats residential and industrial wastewater generated in the City of San Bernardino, the City of Loma Linda, and EVWD ( City of San Bernardino 2005). The WRP processes an average sewage flow of approximately 26 to 27 million gallons per day and has a total sewage capacity of 33 million gallons per day (City of Highland 2006).
SBMWD forecasts adequate capacity to treat wastewater in the upcoming years. As noted above in Section
3. 19( b), the proposed project is consistent with the existing zoning designation established by the City. As such, anticipated wastewater generation for an industrial use has already been accounted for in growth projections for the City. Existing infrastructure is adequate to convey wastewater without requiring the expansion of the facilities. In addition, the project applicant would pay applicable connection fees and monthly charges which offset the need for incremental wastewater conveyance and treatment. Therefore, impacts associated with wastewater capacities would be less than significant.
In addition, EVWD has constructed a new wastewater treatment plan, Sterling Natural Resources Plan, at the intersection of Del Rosa Avenue and 5th Street. This new facility will provide improved and expanded service to all sewer clients in Highland.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less -than -Significant Impact. Solid waste generated in the City is collected and transported by the City's contract waste hauler, Burrtec Waste Industries (Burrtec) (City of Highland 2018). Solid waste from demolition and construction would be collected and sent to the East Valley Transfer and Recycling Materials Recovery Facility, located at 1150 and 1250 S. Tippecanoe Avenue, San Bernardino, California 92408, where it is separated from recyclable materials. Solid waste is then shipped to the Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill at 2390 N. Adler Avenue in the City of Rialto. The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery CalRecycie) publishes solid waste generation rates based on land use types. According to CalRecycle, rnanufacturing/ warehouse uses generate 1.42 pounds per 100 square feet per day (CalRecycle n. d.). Based 15255
AUGUST2023
117
241
-264-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
on these generation rates, construction of the proposed 54,330-square-foot warehouse building could generate solid waste at a rate of approximately 0.38 tons of solid waste per day. 22 The Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill currently has a daily permitted throughput of 7, 500 tons a day and a remaining capacity of 61,219,377 cubic yards (CalRecycle 2019). As a result, solid waste generated by the proposed project would represent a nominal percentage of the collective maximum daily throughput permitted for this landfill. Therefore, impacts associated with permitted landfill capacity would be less than significant.
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and focal management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less -than -Significant Impact. All collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste generated by the project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. The City of Highland contracts Burrtec for the residential and commercial refuse collection program, which is designed to efficiently collect trash, recyclables, and green waste, and to assist the City in meeting mandated diversion goals established by the State of California. Solid waste is disposed of at the Colton, Mid -Valley, and San Timoteo landfills ( City of Highland 2006).
Waste from construction activities, including demolition and construction, would comply with the City' s requirementto submit and obtain an approved construction waste diversion plan to help divert construction and demolition waste from landfills, as outlined in Section 8.12.285 of the City' s Municipal Code, and also to comply with mandates of CalRecycIe. The City diversion requirement, as outlined in Section 16.40.400 of the City' s Municipal Code, Is 50%, which means that projects that involve construction and demolition such as the proposed project), are required to divert 50% of the construction and demolition waste tonnage at a project site from landfills.
Burrtec operated five material recovery facilities in Southern California, which sort and process recyclables; the remaining waste is then taken to the nearby Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill ( Burrtec n. d.). As of the most recent capacity inspection completed in 2019, the remaining capacity at Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill currently has a maximum permitted throughput of 7, 500 tons per day and a remaining capacity of 61,219,377cubic yards ( CalRecycle 2019).
As required by existing regulations, any hazardous materials collected on the project site during demolition, construction, or operational activities would be transported and disposed of by a permitted and licensed hazardous materials service provider at a facility permitted to accept such hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts associated with permitted landfill capacity and solid waste statutes and regulations would be less than significant.
22 This estimate does not account for diversion of recyclables from the solid waste stream and, thus, should be considered a conservative projection.
15255
AUGUST 2023
118
242
-265-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
3. 20 Wildfire
XX. WILDFIRE - If located In or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity 7nnes. would the orolect:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of f
associated infrastructure ( such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power Iines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post -fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
aj Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The City of Highland has an Emergency Plan to ensure the most effective and economical allocation of resources for the maximum benefit and protection of the City in times of emergency. No revisions to this plan would occur as a result of the project. The project does not propose any changes to the geometryof evacuation routeroadways tothe extent thatthese roadways' ability toserve as emergency evacuation routes would be compromised. Inaddition, the project site is currently comprised of vacant and developed land and is located in a developed portion ofthe City. The City's General Plan outlines major evacuation routes within the San Bernardino Valley as 1-10, 15, and 215, and State Highway 30, 31, 60, 66, and 71 (City of Highland 2006). In the case of an emergency, 5th Street and Central Avenue may be used as evacuation routes, but these roads are not explicitly outlined as evacuation routes by the City. Therefore, no impacts associated with an emergency response or evacuation plan would occur. 15255 AUGUST2©
23 119
243
-266-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRALAVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and outer factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? No Impact. The project site is not located within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to the Local Responsibility and State Responsibility Area maps by CAL FIRE ( CAL FIRE 2007, 2022). In addition, the project site is currently partially developed and located within a developed portion of the City. Further, the project site Is relatively flat and contains only limited amounts of ornamental vegetation associated with existing landscaping and does not contain extensive amounts of vegetation or wildfire fuel. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would exacerbate wildfire risks or expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Thus, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildfires, exacerbate wildfire risks, or otherwise result in wildfire - related impacts. Therefore, no impacts associated with wildfire would occur. c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure ( such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporaryor ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact. The project site is not located within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to the Local Responsibility and State Responsibility Area maps by CAL FIRE ( CAL FIRE 2007, 2022). In addition, the project site is currently developed and located within a developed portion of the City that is not prone to wind hazard (City of Highland 2022). The project would construct surface parking lots, new internal circulation roadways, and infrastructure for the proposed development. It is not anticipated that installation or maintenance of internal driveways would exacerbate fire risk, as the driveways would be surrounded by developed land. Further, the project site is in a predominately developed area and would connect to existing utilities. The project would not require installation or maintenance of other associated infrastructure such as fuel breaks, power lines, or other utilities that would exacerbate fire risk. As such, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildland fires, exacerbate wildfire risks, or otherwise result in wildfire -related impacts. Therefore, no impacts associated with wildfire would occur.
d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No Impact. The project site is not located within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to the Local Responsibility and State Responsibility Area maps by CAL FIRE ( CAL FIRE 2007, 2022). As discussed in Section 3. 7, Geology and Soils, and Section 3. 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the project would not result in significant risks associated with flooding, landslides, runoff, or drainage changes, and the project does not propose the use of fire ( such as for a controlled vegetation burn) that would result in post -fire instability. Further, the project site is located within a developed portion of the City that is not susceptible to wildland fires, given its considerable distance from open, natural areas.
Thus, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildland fires, exacerbate wildfire risks, or otherwise result in wildfire -related impacts. Therefore, no impacts with wildfire would occur.
15255
AUGUST 2023
120
244
-267-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
3. 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a ® plant or animal community, substantially
reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of the major
i periods of California history or prehistory?_ _
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively E
considerable? (" Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed i ® in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c} Does the project have environmental effects i
which will cause substantial adverse effects ®
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range ofa rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less -than -Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As described throughout this IS/ MND, with the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures, the project would not degrade the quality of the environment, would not substantially reduce the habitats of fish or wildlife species, would not cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, would not threaten to eliminate a plant oranimal, and would not eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 15255
AUGUST 2023
121
245
-268-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (" Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobable future projects.) Less -than -Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. When evaluating cumulative impacts, it is important to remain consistent with Section 15064( h) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that an EIR must be prepared if the cumulative impact may be significant and the project' s incremental effect, though individually limited, is cumulatively considerable. " Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.
Alternatively, a lead agency may determine that a project' s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable through mitigation measures set forth in an MND or if the project will comply with the requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program that provides specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem within the geographic area in which the project is located.
The proposed project would potentially result In project -related air quality, biological, cultural and tribal cultural, and geological impacts that could be potentially significant without the incorporation of mitigation.
Thus, when coupled with air quality, biological, cultural resources and TCRs, and geological impacts related to the implementation of other related projects throughout the broader project area, the project would potentially result in cumulative -level impacts if these significant impacts are left unmitigated.
However, with the incorporation of mitigation identified herein, the project' s impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, and geological resources would be reduced to less -than -significant levels and would not considerably contribute to cumulative impacts in the greater project region. In addition, these other related projects would presumably be bound by their applicable lead agency to (1) comply with all applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements; and ( 2) incorporate all feasible mitigation measures, consistent with CEQA, to further ensure that their potentially cumulative impacts would be reduced to less -than -significant levels.
Although cumulative impacts are always possible, the project, by Incorporating all mitigation measures outlined herein, would reduce its contribution to any such cumulative impacts to less than cumulatively considerable; therefore, the project would result in individually limited, but not cumulatively considerable, less -than -significant impacts with mitigation incorporated. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly at indirectly?
Less -than -Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As evaluated throughout this IS/ MND, with incorporation of mitigation identified herein, all environmental impacts associated with the project would be reduced to less -than -significant levels. Thus, the project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 15255
AUGUST 2023
122
246
-269-
4 References and Preparers
4. 1 References
Abbott, P. L. 1999. The Rise and Fall of San Diego: 150 Million Years of History Recorded in Sedimentary Rocks.
San Diego, California: Sunbelt Publications.
Baltrenas, P., D. Kazlauskas, and E. Petraitis. 2004. "Testing on Noise Level Prevailing at Motor Vehicle Parking Lots and Numeral Simulation of its Dispersion." Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management 12( 2): 63- 70.
Bean, L.J. and F. C. Shipek, 1978. "Luiseno." in Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 8, California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, 550- 563, Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Bean, Lowell J., and Charles R. Smith. 1978a. " Gabrielino," in California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 538- 549.
Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Bean, L.J., and C. R. Smith. 1978b. "Serrano," in California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, 570- 574. Vol. 8 in Handbook of North American Indians, edited by William C. Sturtevant. Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution. CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2007. FHSZ Viewer.
Accessed April 2023. https,.// egis. fire. ca. gov/ FHSZ/.
Benedict, R. F. 1924. " A Brief Sketch of Serrano Culture." American Anthropologist 26(3): 366- 392.
Boscana, G. 1846. " Chinigehinich; A Historical Account of the Origin, Customs, and Traditions of the Indians at the Missionary Establishment of St. Juan Capistrano, Alta California." In Life in California, translated by Alfred Robinson, 227- 341. New York, New York: Wiley & Putnam.
Burrtec ( Burrtec Waste Industries) n. d. " Our Facilities". Accessed April 2023. https:// www. burrtec. com/ our -facilities/.
CAL FIRE ( California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2007. FHSZ Viewer, Accessed April 2023. https:// egis.fire. ca.gov/ FHSZ/.
CAL FIRE. 2022. Fire Hazard Severity Zones Viewer in State Responsibility Area. Accessed April 2023. https:// osfm. fire. ca, gov/ divisions/ commun ity- wildfire- preparedness- and- mitigation/ wi Idfire- p re pa red ness/ fi re -hazard -severity -zones/.
California Geological Survey. 2002- California Department of Conservation California Geomorphic Provinces.
Accessed April 2023. https:// www. coastal. ca. gov/ coasta; voices/ resources/ California- Geomorphic_ Provinces. pdf
CalRecycie. 2019. " SWIS Facility/ Site Activity Details." Accessed April 2023. https,// www2. caI recycle. ca. gov/ Solid Waste/ SiteActivity/ Deta i Is/ 1880?sitel D= 2 662. 15255
AUGUST 2023
123
247
-270-
S0UTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CalRecycle, n. d. " Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates". Accessed April 2023. https:// www2. ca I recycle. ca. gov/ WasteCharacteri zation/ Gene ra I/ Rates.
Caltrans ( California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California. September 2013.
Caltrans. 2018. `California State Scenic Highway System Map." Accessed April 2023. https:// caltrans.maps,arcgis.com/ a pps/ we bappviewer/ index. html? id= 465dfd3d8O7c46cc8e8O57116f1aacaa.
Caltrans. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. April 2020. https:// dot.ca. gov/ media/ dot- media/ programs/ environmental- analysis/ documents/ env/ tcvgm- apr202O- a 11y. pdf.
CAPCOA ( California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2008. " CEQA & Climate Change January 2008." https:// www. contracosta. ca. gov/ DocumentCente r/ View/ 34122/ CAPC0A- 2008- CEQA-and- Cli mateCha nge- PDF.
CAPCOA. 2021. California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) User's Guide Version 2020.4.0. Prepared by Trinity Consultants and the California Air Districts. May 2021, https// wvrw. caleemod. com/.
CARB ( California Air Resources Board). 2005. Air Qualityand Land Use Handbook. A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. http:// www.arb. ca. gov/ ch/ landuse. htm.
CARE. 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan Building on the Framework Pursuant to AB 32 - The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. May 2014. http:// www.arb.ca. gov/ cc/ scopingplan/ 2013_ update/ first_ update_ climate_ change_ scoping_ plan. pdf.
CARE. 2017a. California' s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November 2017. https:// www.arb.ca. gov/ cc/ scopin gpla n/ scoping_ pla n_ 2017. pdf.
CARE. 2017b. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update —The Proposed Strategy for Achieving California' s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. January 20, 2017. https:// www. arb. ca. gov/ cc/ scopingplan/ 2030sp_ p p_ fi na l. pdf.
CARB. 2021. EMFAC 2021 Web Database ( v1.0. 0). Accessed June 2021. https:// arb.ca. gov/ emfac/ emissions -inventory.
CARB. 2022. " Maps of Current State and Federal Area Designations." Accessed April 2023. https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/ resou rces/ doc u ments/ ma ps-state-a nd-federal-area-designations.
CDFW ( California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating impacts to Special -Status Native Populations and Natural Communities. March 20, 2018. Accessed April 2023 https:// nrm. dfg.ca.gov/ FileHandler. asbx? DocumentlD= 18959& inline.
CDFW. 2022a. " State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California." California Natural Diversity Database. CDFW, Biogeographic Data Branch. 15255
AUGUST 2023
124
248
-271-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CDFW. 2022b. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). RareFind 5. 2. 14 (Commercial Subscription).
Sacramento, California: CDFW, Biogeographic Data Branch. Accessed April 2023 hops:// map. dfg. ca. gov/ rarefind/ view/ RareFind. aspx.
City of Highland. 2006. General Plan. March 2006. https:// www.cityofhighland. org/ 191/ General-Plan.
City of Highland. 2018. " Trash Services". September 2018. Accessed May 2022. https,// www.cityofhighland. org/ 197/ T rash -Se ry ices.
City of Highland. 2022. Public Works Policies, Procedures, and Standards Manual.
City of San Bernardino. 2005. General Plan. November 1, 2005. Accessed May 2022. http:// sbcity. org/ eivicax/ ilebank/ blobdload. aspx? blobid= 26199.
CNPS ( California Native Plant Society). 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants ( online edition, v8-03
0. 45). Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society. Accessed April 2023 www. rareplants. cnps. org.
Cohen, K.M., S. C. Finney, P.L. Gibbard, and J.- X. Fan., 2023. "The ICS International Chronostratigraphic Chart." Episodes 36: 199-- 204. 2013; updated. Available at: https:// stratigraphy. org/ ICSchart/ Chrono5tratChart2021- O5. jpg. Cultural Systems Research 2005 DeBarros, P. 2004. Cultural Resources Overview and Management Plan - Rancho Las Flores Project, Hesperia, San Bernardino County, California, On file at the South Central Coast Information Center.
Dibblee, T. W. and J. A. Minch. 2004. Geologic map of the Harrison Mountain North/ North 1/ 2 of Redlands Quadrangles, San Bernardino and Riverside County, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF- 126, 1: 24, 000.
DOC ( California Department of Conservation). 2018. DOC Maps: Agriculture. Accessed April 2023. https:// maps. conservation. ca. gov/ agriculture/.
DOC. 2021. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed April 2023. https-// maps. conservation. ca. gov/ cgs/ EQZApp/.
DOF ( Departmentof Finance). 2022a. " E- 5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020- 2022." Accessed April 2023. https:// dof.ca.gov/ Forecasting/ Demographics/ Estimates/ e-5- po pu lation- and- housing- estimates- for- cities-counties- and-the-state- 2020- 2022/.
DOF. 2022b. " E- 4 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2021- 2022." Accessed April 2023. https:// view.officeapps. live.com/ op/ view.aspx?src= https%3A%2F%2Fdof.0a.gov% 2Fwp- content% 2Fuploads% 2Fsites% 2F352% 2FForecasti ng%2FDemographics% 2FDocuments% 2FE-4_2022_ InternetVers ion. xisx& wdOrigi n= BROWSELINK.
DTSC ( Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2023. Hazard Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese).
Accessed April 2023. https:// www.envirostor. dtsc.ca.gov/ public/ 15255
AUGUST 2023
125
249
-272-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
EDD ( Employment Development Department). 2023. " Riverside - San Bernardino - Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) ( Riverside and San Bernardino Counties)." Accessed April 2023. https:// laborma rketinfo. edd. ca. gov/ fi le/ Ifmonth/rive $ pds, pdf#:-: text= The%20u nern ploymen t% 20rate% 20in%20the% 20Riverside- San%2OBernardino- Ontario%20MSA, County°/.2C%20and% 204. 5%20percent% 20in%20San% 206ernardino% 20County. EPA (
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2018. AERMOD Implementation Guide. April 2018. https:// gaftp. epa.gov/Air/ agmg/ SCRAM/ models/ preferred/ aermod/ ae rmod_im plementation_ gu ide. pdf. EPA. 2023a. " Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants ( Green Book)." Accessed April 2023. https:// www. epa.gov/ green - book. EPA.
2023b. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. Accessed April 2023. https:// ca lepa.ca.gov/ siteclean up/cortesel ist/section- 65962-5a/. EPA. 2023c. Learn the Basics of Hazardous Waste. Accessed April 2023. https://www, epa.gov/ hw/ lea rn-basics- ha za rdous-waste#cradle. FFMA (
Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2016. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Accessed April 2023. https-// msc_ fema.gov/a rcgis/rest/ d i rectories/arcgisjobs/nfh I_print/ mscprintb_ gpserver/ j995 78549e85f4be 79f5a 5c70117 ddd54/scratch/ FI RM ETTE_fc0575a 6-12e5- 4d41-a8ef-17a5decftO39. pdf. FHWA ( Federal Highway Administration). 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.
1. U. S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, JohnA. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Washington, D.C. December 8, 2008. FICON (
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise). 1992, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis issues. Prepared by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. August 1992. https,// fica n1.fi les. wordpress. co m/2015/ 10/ reports_ noise_ o na lysis. pdf. FTA ( Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Prepared byJohn A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. September 2018. https.,// www. transit.dot.gov/s'ites/fta. dot. gov/fi le s/docs/ research- innovation/ 118131/ tra nsit-noise- a n d-vibration- m pact -assessment - ma nua I-fta- report- no-0123_O. pdf. Golla, V. 2007. " Linguistic Prehistory." In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T.L. Jones and K.A. Klar, 71-82. New York, New York: Altamira Press. Harrington, J.P. 1934. " A New Original version of Boscana' s Historical Account ofthe San Juan Capistrano Indians of Southern California." Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 92(4). Heizer, R. 1978. " Introduction." in California, edited by R.F. Heizer, 1-6. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, edited by W.C. Sturtevant. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. 15255 AUGUST
2023 126
250
-273-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Heizer, R. and K. M. Nissen. 1973. The Human Sources of California Ethnography. Berkeley, California: Universityof California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley.
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. NongameHeritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. October 1986.
IPCC ( Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Climate Change 2007. Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. https:// www. ipcc. ch/ report/ ar4/ syr/.
ITE ( Institute of Transportation Engineers). 2021. Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.
Johnson Controls. 2015. York Technical Guide. R- 410A zE/ ZF/ ZR/ XN/ XP SERIES, 3- 6 TON 60 Hertz. 251933- Y7G- Y-0715.
Johnson, J. R., and J. G. Lorenz. 2006. " Genetics, Linguistics, and Prehistoric Migrations: An Analysis of California Indian Mitochondrial DNA Lineages." Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 26: 33- 64.
King, Chester D. 1994. Native American Placenames in the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, Agoura Hills. Topanga Anthropologicai Consultants, California.
Kroeber, Alfred J. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78. Dover Publications, Inc., New York.
Layiander, D. 2000. Early Ethnography of the Californias, 1533- 1825. Salinas, California: Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory.
Lightfoot, K.G. 2005. Indians, missionaries, and merchants: the legacy of colonial encounters on the California frontiers. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
McCawIey, William 1996. The First Angel inos, the Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles, Malki Museum Press, Banning.
Morton, D. M. and F. K. Miller. 2006. Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California: U. S. Geological Survey, Open -File Report OF- 2006- 1217, scale 1: 100, 000.
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County ( NHMLA). 2023. Paleontological Resources for 5th and Central Project ( PN: 15255). Unpublished Records Search Results Letter from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California.
Oberbauer, T., M. Kelly, and J. Buegge. 2008. Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego County. Based on Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California, Robert F. Holland, Ph. D., October 1986.
OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Risk Assessment Guidelines. Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, Air Toxics Hot Spots Program. February 2015. http:// oehha. ca. gov/ air/ hot_spots/ 2015/ 2015GuidanceManual. pdf 15255
AUGUST 2023
127
251
-274-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Omnitrans. 2023. Route 15 Schedule and Times. Accessed April 2023. httpsV/ omnitrans. orVroutes/ route- 15/ .
O' Neil, Stephen. 2002. " The Acjachemen in the Franciscan Mission System: Demographic Collapse and Social Change." Masters thesis: Department of Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton.
OPR ( Governor' s Office of Planning and Research). 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Accessed April 26, 2022. http:// opr.ca.gov/ docs/ 20190122- 743_ Tech n ical_Advisory. pdf.
OSHA ( Occupational Safetyand Health Administration). n. d. " Hazard Communication Standard. Safety Data Sheets." Accessed April 2023. https:// Www.Osha. gov/ sites/ default/ files/ publications/ OSHA3514.pdf.
RWQCB ( Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region). 2010- National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, the County of San Bernardino, and the Incorporated Cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region. January 29, 2010.
SANBAG ( San Bernardino Council of Governments). 2016. San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program CMP). Accessed April 2023, https:// www.gosbcta.com/ plan/ congestion-management-plan-2016/.
San Bernardino International Airport Authority. 2010. Airport layout Plan Narrative Report for San Bernardino International Airport. Prepared by Coffman Associates, Inc. for San Bernardino International Airport Authority. November 2010. Accessed April 2023. http.,// www. sbiaa. org/ wp- content/ uploads/ 2015/ 10/ ALP- Na rrative- Report- Com plete. pdf.
Sawyer, J., T. Keeler -Wolf, and J. Evens. 2009. The Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd Edition. Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society.
SBTCA (San Bernardino County Transportation Authority). 2020. Recommended Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level ofService Assessment, February 2020. https:// www. sboounty. gov/ uploads/ D PW/ docWTraffi c-Study-Gu id e l ines. pdf
SBVMWD (San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District). 2021. Upper Santa Ana River Watershed 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Accessed April 2023. https,// wuedata. water. ca. gov/ public/ uwmp_attach me nts/ 1604352653/ Part%202%20Cha pter%201_Va€ ley%2ODistrict%202020% 20UWMP_ Final. pdf.
SLAG ( Southern California Association of Governments). 2001. Employment Density Study Summary Report.
Prepared by The Natelson Company, Inc. Yorba Linda, California. October 31, 2001. Accessed April 2023. http:// www. mwcog.org/ fi le. aspx?A= Ql-nTR24POOOU lw5mPNzK8F4d8djdJe4LFg Exj6lXOU% 3D.
SCAG. 2020. Connect SoCal: The 2040- 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. May 7, 2020. https:// www. connectsocal. org/ Doc men ts/ Adopted/ fConnectSoCal- Pla n. pdf.
15255
AUGUST 2023
128
252
-275-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
SCAG. 2023. " 2016- 2040 RTP/ SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction." Accessed April 2023. https:// scag.ca.gov/ sites/ main/ files/ file-attach ments/ 2016_2040rtpscs_ finalgrowthforecastbyjurisdiction. pdf? 1605576071.
SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
SCAQMD. 2003a. White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution.
August 2003. http:// www. agmd. gov/ docs/ default- source/ Agendas/ Environmental- Justice/ cumulative- impa cts-work ing-grow p/ cum u lative- im pacts -white -pa per. pdf?sfvrsn= 2.
SCAQMD. 2003b. Final 2003 AQMP Appendix V Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations. August 2003. https // www.agmd. gov/ docs/ default-source/ c lean-air-plans/ air-quality-management- plans/ 2003-air-q uaI ity- management- plan/ 2003-agmp-appendix- v. pdf?sfvrsn= 2.
SCAQMD. 2003c. Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis. August 2003. http,// www.agmd. gov/ home/ rules- compliance/ ceqa/ a it -qua lily -analysis -hand book/ mobile-sou rce-toxics-analysis.
SCAQMD. 2008a. Draft Guidance Document - Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas ( GHG) Significance Threshold.
October 2008. http:// www. agmd. gov/ docs/ default- source/ cega/ handbook/ greenhouse- gases-( ghg)- cega-significance-thresholds/ ghgattaohmente. pdf.
SCAQMD. 2008b. " A Resolution of the Governing Board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District AQMD) approving the Interim Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold to Be Used by the AQMD for Industrial Source Projects, Rules and Plans When It Is the Lead Agency for Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)." Resolution No. 08-35. Adopted December 5, 2008.
SCAQMD. 2009. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Revised July 2009.
SCAQMD. 2010. " Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group Meeting # 15." September 28, 2010. http:// www.aqmd.gov/ does/ default-source/ cega/ handbook/ greenhouse-gasesghg)-cega- sign ificance- th resholds/ year-2008- 2009/ ghg- meeting- 15/ ghg- meeting- l5-mai np resentatio n. pdf?sfvrsn= 2.
SCAQMD. 2014. SCAQMD High Cube Warehouse Truck Trip Study White Paper Summary of Business Survey Results. June 2014. http:// www. agmd. gov/ does/ default- source/ cega/ handbook/ high- cube- warehousetri p- rate- study-for-air-qua i ity-a na lysis/ busi ness- survey- summary. pdf.
SCAQMD. 2018. "SCAQMD Modeling Guidance for AERMOD." http:// www. agmd. gov/ home/ air- quality/ air -qua I ity- data- studies/ mete oro logics I - data/ modeii ng-guidance.
SCAQMD. 2019. "SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds." Originally published in CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-11-A. Revised April 2019. http:// www. agmd. gov/ does/ default- source/ cega/ handbook/ scagmd- air-quality-significance- thresholds. pdf?sfvrsn= 2.
SCAQMD. 2021a. " SCAQMD Modeling Guidance for AERMOD." Accessed March 2021- https-// www. agmd. gov/ home/ air-quality/ meteorological- data/ modeling- guidance. 15255
AUGUST 2023
129
253
-276-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
SCAQMD. 2021b. " Meteorological Data for Dispersion Modeling." Accessed March 2021. http:// www. aQmd- gov/ home/ air-quality/ meteorological- data.
SCAQMD. 2022. Air Quality Management Plan. Adopted December 2, 2022. http:// www.agmd.gov/ docs/ defaultsou rce/ c lea n- a it-pla ns/ a it-q ua lity- management- pans/ 2022- a it -qua I ity-management- plan/ fins 1- 2022-agmp/ fi na 1- 2022-a q mp. pdf?sfvrsn= 16.
SCAQMD. 2023a. " South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds." March 2023. Accessed April 2023. https'// www. agmd. gov/ docs/ defau It -sou rce/ eega/ hand book/ south- coast- aq md- air- quality- sign ificanceth resholds. pdf?sfvrsn= 25.
SCAQMD. 2023b. "Meteorological Stations & Years of Meteorological Data Available." Accessed April 2023. https:// www. agmd. gov/ home/ air-q ua I ity/ meteorological- data/ ae rmod-table- 1.
Sparkman, Philip. 1908. The Cultural of the Luiserho Indians. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 8. 187 - 234. Berkeley.
SWRCB ( State Water Resources Control Board). 2023a. " Construction Stormwater Program." Updated April 12, 2023. Accessed April 2023. https:// www.waterboards.ca. gov/ water_issues/ programs/ stormwater/ construction. html.
SWRCB. 2023b. Geotracker Map. Accessed April 2023. https:// geotracker. waterboards. ca. gov/ map/ CMD= run report& mya ddress= h ighla nd +.
The Climate Registry. 2020. " Default Emission Factors." April 2020. https-// www. theclimateregistry. org/ wp-content/ u ploads/ 2020/ 04/ The-CI imate-Registry-2020-Defa u It -Emission -Factor -Document. pdf.
USDA ( U. S. Department of Agriculture). 2023. `Web Soil Survey." USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey Staff. Accessed April 2023. http:// websoilsurvey. nres. usda. gov/.
White, Raymond. 1963. Luiseno Social Organization. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 48:91- 194. Berkeley.
4.2 List ofPreparers
Dudek
HayIey Ward - Project Manager
Clarisa Olaguez - Environmental Planner
Nicholas Lorenzen - Air Quality Specialist
Tommy Molioo - Senior Biologist
Jacob Rogers - Biologist
Linda Kry - Archaeologist
Michael Williams - Paleontologist
Michael Greene - Noise Specialist
Carson Wong - Noise Specialist
Sabita Tewani - Transportation Specialist
Kelsey Bacon - GIS Specialist
15255
AUGUST 2023
130
254
-277-
A
-278-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
132
256
-279-
N%mm- r *MEMO
wig Ft
i
Q Project Bourtdary &
Q Project Parcels
SOURCE: ESSRRI 2020; San Bamardino County 2023
Q U D E K 6 r 100 zOFeel
0 sit t
i
FiGURF 2
Aerial Overview
5th Street and Central Avenue warehouse Project
257
-280-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
134
258
-281-
1777
1 LA_ Li_ L R
rhr e P hllr hl3nr ,
0 Project Boundary
fJ Ctiy Limits
O Parcels
City of Highland General Plan land Use
BP, Business Park
I, Industrial
LD, Low Density
Pll, Publictlnsiitutional
PD, Planned Development
City of San Sernadino General Plan Land Use
Airports
Base ( built- up area)
O Urban Vacant
SQURCE: ESRI 2020, San Bernardino County 2012. 202& City o1 Highland 2014 Q V V E K & 10._ 2110 Feel
City of San Bernardino
FIGURE 3
General Plan Land Use
5th Street and Central Avenue warehouse Project
259
-282-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF $ TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
136
260
-283-
I, inousinat
R- 1, Single Family Residential
P!Q , PublidQuasi• Public
PD, Planned Development
City of San Bernadino Zoning
Airports
Base ( built- up area)
Urban Vacant
SOURCE: ESRI 202D; San Bernardino Counly M2. 20A City of Highland 2014 ee 20Feel
DUDEKMelerx t. Lta4
FIGURB4
Zoning
51h Sheet and Central Avenue Warehme Prot
261
-284-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2D23
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
138
262
-285-
-286-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
140
264
-287-
Im
-288-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BALNK
142
266
-289-
ad
MA
-290-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
144
268
-291-
-292-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
146
270
-293-
i :
i
i _
k
113pps3
333a
3 4.
a
-294-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
148
272
-295-
osttln+ _rm
Project Boundary
Study Area ( 100-foot Bufferj
Vegetation Communities and Land
Soft brome- ffddlerreck• mouse barley'
Bromus hordeaceus- Amsinckra
menziesh- Hordeurn murinum)
Disturbed Habitat
Non -Vegetated Channel or Floodway
Urban/ Developed
1. SOURCE: Bing Maps Aerial (accessed 2023)
DU D E K & 0 _ 55 110Feet
FIGURE 10
Biological Resources
5i15ireet and GeNralAvenue Warehouse Projae)
273
-296-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
150
274
-297-
bt
rCmo
t a
4-
10 "
IllillsibIL
Ink
uj
ga` ''
114E
fr.
p.,
f
t')
r.
f}
It
tYy ": ia
f
r
ts,
i.
6 I.
rf•
t(
rr
r} : ...._'•
yam.. - 1
IC' {
I •'
e" '
AMI
f.
F
i
f
t
rti ,._
s-.. -
L ..
C. .
1 :
rf•
I " P
t c
o
Q1 Lw
-298-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
152
276
-299-
mm
r
c7
aT
m0
J
COO
0 Y
Ol C
vaYFj
co
W
XX
Uii a
v
00 u>
Q
5 IT
000
0 VS
Uo
ui
EL
I
6Rvj, d
Atl
Yd.!' 7
NL3Ytl193L:
1 '
4f•
R 1
iN1+ G
1 '
0 ?+ N
Wx1 N
AR
AMl
NYIIAuo'
J:R
WCSK
iS6lW
W9006E
Sulcm'
aokh
-300-
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH STREET AND CENTRAL AVENUE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
15255
AUGUST 2023
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
154
278
-301-
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration
Southwest corner of 5th
Street and Central Avenue
Warehouse Project
AUGUST 2023
Prepared for:
CITY OF
H r i L
CITY OIL HIGHLAND
27215 Base Line
Highland, California 92346
Contact: Kim Stater
Prepared by:
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contact: Hayley Ward
279
-302-
Printed on 30% post -consumer recycled material.
280
-303-
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... _. 1 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table......................................................................................... 3 TABLE
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program................................................................................................... 3 DUDE i
5255
AUGUST 2023
281
-304-
Southwest Corner of S'' Street and Central Avenue Warehouse Project/ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration
DUDEK
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
15255
AUGUST 2023
282
-305-
1 Introduction
The California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) requires that a public agency adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration ( MND) take affirmative steps to determine that approved mitigation measures are implemented after project approval. The lead or responsible agency must adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the mitigation measures incorporated into a project or included as conditions of approval. The program must be designed to ensure compliance with the MND during project implementation ( California Public Resources Code, Section 21081. 6(a)( 1)).
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( MMRP) will be used by the City of Highland ( City) to ensure compliance with adopted mitigation measures identified in the MND for the proposed Southwest Cornerof 51" Street and Central Avenue Warehouse Project ( project) located at the southwest corner of 5u, Street and Central Avenue in Highland, California ( project) when construction begins. The City, as the lead agency, wifl be responsible for ensuring that all mitigation measures are carried out. Implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce impacts to below a level of significance for air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils paleontological resources), and tribal cultural resources.
The remainder of this MMRP consists of a table that identifies the mitigation measures by resource for each project component. Table 1 identifies the mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements, list of mitigation measures, party responsible for implementing mitigation measures, timing for implementation of mitigation measures, agency responsible for monitoring of implementation, and date of completion. With the MND and related documents, this MMRP will be kept on file at the following location:
DUDEK
City of Highland
Planning Department
27215 Base Line
Highland, California 92346
15255
AUGUST 2023
283
-306-
Southwest Corner of 5a1i Street and Central Avenue Warehouse Project/ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration
DUDEK
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
15255
AUGUST 2023
284
-307-
A
M
1!
7 N
N
O
1 •
IA
N
VJ
ia N
C
Q
Cf
E
i0c7C
C
p "
O
Cm
V
Q U
v
Y
CL
o
i
a
cUi
E
a
r.. U
OSuo
G
fl.
N —
w
aX
O_
i
a)
RS _
m ((
AVa
Q
np ° -
cc
2 z
C3 .
s1t
trim
r
rn .
Q
N
c[
y
y
N
S
0_
aE> ?
mc
U ,,
cx
Ga
m
vao.
v_
oai
a
aanon
r3
jo
C
Cc
F
c
2 m
me
to
d
O
m
U.
y —
c
V
U
m
O
N
F'
ID
C+
o
y
a
nA
co
t3
a'
3 cs
Qz
t
C
C
tz
n3
W
o
o ,,
3 a>
a)
ani
n
w
c -
amN
E
O
Q
O
O -
p
O
En
e
E
N
LO , .
N
w
a)
a
ri
i3
Q
U
W
@
m
o
o <
D
CL
5 « . .
f° .
ru
9 a)
s
t
S, ro3.
w
o
i
m
m
oao,
m'
va
iii
r?
o
f
cLwofsu °
Ca.-,
ro'
6Enaoi
p°
0 Cs
c
m
o
V '
w
E
co
m
a `
U
O
0 C
m >
cuo
Comm°
oo
o
aoacr °
O
O
y
p
4-
C
c - >, ...
c
Vi -
t
i
to
O
0 E
C
O
t6
O
d
42 to
K
N
U
a
j
X
U
f
m
y
Q
CO
O
to
N
O
O
cr
m '
S
N= ¢ -
0 CO
a' (
z (
00 cc
00 m
o
N <
A
N
an'
o
c -
Q
LO
N
-308-
Dc
ca
co
vo
CL
vt b
cp N
a « O
OUL
v
4)
p.
co
N
T L a•+
c
O
9 ¢ 0
to
2E
we
rO
U) iN
N
NN
V Osoa
p h0c ONUOyOc
n> o
cQQ
p, c
s'
N -
aai
N
U -) O0
toC
t+0g
riU
RC
C ( O
co- . 0 U
t— o
a; C
Q .
0 ,_'
C2
Co
7 _ N1G
O
Q)
tN
CI
C4IC0O
E>
N ' d
Co
o .
0a -
Co
CO
cOcNam
a " 2a
al) w
QU
fl0yQ
V ! MCON
inG
fA — N
O
CO .
a > • a
V1
co
roaoo
a.
oU`
t'c
nuo
C_
Cc
w0 E
bm
Qc
mm
co
C) N
N '` +
T(
Oj '
ate-+ <—
TO ( aN
1 in"
i -+ Upp0
C ' OCmcNCUO
VsC
0)X
mO
O. GO
F--. M
lf) O
t6O
LL _
tUg
CD
c
ac4nEi> 3
orM 8
cNmIn
OCU
n' QE
@ °
m' ai
pmiom
a>
toNG
11 G
a . rN
O .
0 `• U
GN
O >
hD VOUo
yy
rib — U 3a' 0
0. LqN2
B •
5D. 0
Ob
47C
cU
t6O
SnN
y_
U1
Q - N
CS3 Q
T [ 6
lf]
p _ ON
c dN
SYi
N _ " C
C . QU
v
-309-
U
0 YiG
0Cc
OOC
c OCO
UVUU
aw0MC
w
Y
oa) c
CL
O
c
oO
oc
yf
a`
caiA
c
CN
O
10 E
iCNata
c
o3N
0a
co
C
Nc
c
Dac!
Yoco)
4=0
r0,
w
o
0uiCmaUp
Ur - 0
tlCO
CY <
DDo
ca)
o 6
aC2L V
ac
0-
0- 0- 0
m _ R
a0)
cw
wmc
doccnomOo
co
N=
mi
M.,
a . 0
c is
n}
rzmU
CuA
ooco`
r'
ECaa
U -
cro
o0LU o
cu
Y)(
D
0 p1
asxunImo°
nn
on
ao '
nou.'
a
c8c0- aOO
TES
c , ( Um
S' 0
V ( •
c6O
co
QS : 1
0to L2N
w0
to
Q"
NO
27OO
Cs
REur
oNmr+
cnc °'
a
asUcn .
tw
iacw C
Q1UOQN
5 _ «
f0
a3
O , c7vC
q)
Q)
A
oconEFo'
onE
a:
iosxouoioc
2Q'
o c
ow
laC, '
rzaa6T<
U' i
a"
ii
0a2n`
n ' v
i °'.
cxn n
LnW
c^
In
coN
-310-
coo y
22 pia
y
Q5' 0C
a0
in3
B - C
C:
s • paOO@
C
OOU O
CL
rnwqu
T3 OQQ oC
KSO
coN
UAo
t6
v , Oy6
V .' 7
QNCO
aIm
aomo
U
c .
Wo
so
cn3 o
z3
m - 0
cov0Wuomc
n)
Q=
rn
Q
5. c
3 -
0N
co55
QYacONOO
p ' ROUc
r
V •.
N .
L7
0 +rz
j
C
CS C Q
m .
0 ( U
Ut
cr
cy
o ' aOe
o'
MRjoNd
isQiO
oN
ti0CC
c '
C7
co
c6N
Q>
QN0
Q' j
0Yma_ 0
3( DS3.
rrim0-
0<0EUi
Q
c
cc
ta0
c
Y
ocw
c} w0VNN
rig '-' c
f"- nQ
ro
U
p =
Qi U
QCQf N3V QCCw0
c.-
I-- - C0
S?
m. 9x
Oa wE
ro
i
E1C
O r
0-- OOCU
@mac
a'
0ommz>
C>
Qi w
o ..' Q
flCCO2o
e0Qm
O ? NWY
t4c
w dj
vp
i :3Q
G '
Y3
tViO
i[s
I) NC
c4
CU @CCQNN
w '
6 .
Q-)
crEONm
Cc
S2
00 00
N
-311-
O
V
u
MW
CO
OC
ON
Q.
7svLm
0 v
c0
u c
Q C
N o, E
Z.
Z
w
ro
0 -
7 o
iO . 5
V
cE
cn Y ( a
a
V
t!s
n3>
ma
c y
ca
o
d ° OOvazNp
ro
cc
0v
o"
woNcm< nn°
nCd(
00 o,
w
oZ
R!
mm
C
oucm - Q
v,
La.
r:
0M
o °
CL
ao m
m0
Nn>
t
C~
o
ooac¢
o ma
5 Co> UO
Ua —=
ot°`'
rowYaccCl
i"': 3DaCCC0
a) —
pa
ocuvnGo
Eacy0mom
oC:
m'
Eo
0 mL G
Ummnca>
cpaaQa0can0a
z7amovc
oac
o
ma
UQaL
v '
GNC
UJ CmU
0- 0
ti7
i1
toOQ
kQ7 mm
v • w
w .-.+ C
w=— O
Q.
CL
rtl
O - - Q
E
mdw3C
m v
Rf
m
Y
cma°
ic>
m
Ana ou
iccria 0
coo
w e
pCi
uvU
oca wovY a
0 a
d yoo
in am
Do oO
OD
vim- x
C
C
Q ` —
i6
aSC3
C pNC
t]
p8
N
C >
7r
L2
010 N m
N
C % .
roN0E
tVlrl C0vo
m ..
W .,..
E
E • 3
o
d> ° : - a0dQryrm
m ,.;
0 ,., - a
15 CL
p
ma
ai 90
c ..
o
ao
Ewo'
3 ° 0 0
0,
c_
owwm
ac
immm
mia3
Lnm
nN NQNN
FN07Qw
N
mro
0 -312-
GO O L
C Gm QNcC O t
CnG m 0s
O
ND d OA g mO7 C
O
0 c
3 m
c
N d
Q V
u G .>
rn m
cc
Z
N -
O
N
N
0 s m Y o > L
0 ol
IL I
0T G V IL m 2 C C
ers 0
m (
V .
Q
c rts
N (
D
C
ro
m
ti
O
m
Q
c O
u
o
U
W .
a
0 000
ro
ca
2 c
@
c
C
a
i
CO
c0
ur
u}
y
o
O )>
O
f4
N
C
0=
pLO «+-
O
UY
v
O
O
w
IV
U
CO'}
O
N
Ry
C
L
CN
a
CI3
C
U
a'
oGaai
aroca¢
0 omn=
2Eavo0
co
L
N
a '
n
a
a
c
c
WCZ
Cn
d
cII
o
0-
0 N
O
Ci
ro
a
c`
Z.
o
0.-'
sMa
o
m
co
v
a
ao
s
coa
x
aci "
w '
o =
o
L) °
Q °
a
C
S3
q
c = c atr Ym D w UpT
tl
f4
C :
ham
Q.
C?
O
Y
C
COL
UU
T '
O
0 O
C
CL
O
4 pN
ro
ro
C
p0
V
0 U
N
Oo
wU
C
O
0)
c
o —
O
oO
N
2q'
OcO
P
as .
G
0p0LL
Cn
V3:
QM'
FM
tO
O
oE
c
OD —
0 i
c
RT
O
q
Us
co
Q
O
U
4 C
dU
O [
gi
p7
p.
N {
S) p
Lw3
ro
O
W
Q. «.
Co "'
m
N
E
ca
a
vc
uoa
w
o
tiny,
c °
ur
p
ro
ma
ma> .
ama
E3ca
ca« w
0a °'
m
ro
m
o
a
s
CO
W
D
C
a
no?
Q
scaoc3oc
u3cs
ei
C
O
Y
O
O
2. C °
c0
0-
0 @ >
O
0 a
o
a
c
a
g
a
a
a
cvr
c
i"
n _
U -`
a
a
w
anon
ai
0 0
0'
w
wo
0 cw"
C7
m
0 cnCo
cn
teauoC
w ,
Q
a
ro
E
E
co
nm
VY
N
N
N O
v2
F
kn
3 l7
Q
0rnN
-313-
G
Q. a» tl N_ IC dS 4i I. C t c
Im
HaW
m
O
L
m
wa0
a
a. Mcc
co
t7pUV
p7NU7
OWVO
O . 0p
CoO
m `
bD ' O
CO
t.
pip
C
U ( > OU
O
TM OO0dCr
O - - 0aN
oa
aau°> c
occoia
ia"
i0 O
ai O0
bfj bo
ccU4 0o
m > 0
O$ '
Y>A
c
w
p'
L .
O >
CLCw
CL0 00
o . U
O .. PpO
Uy
UAMo
UUi
w- m
u'_
owa>'
noc0
w—' °
c
pc0j
ca
piny
@ > N
co
O = OwmamEC
n6
0U
a
U1 O
O-' w+
UJ'
0— p
xxQ
pv
Q1
co
ocw
Co
aEi
aci 0
o
aimma0
uo- mm
Eo
o ©
70 0 ° mw Et
tiEE
owm
mU
f' Nw0 nON
O"
rgs = OO
cD
ai
uUi U
Yw
4i
cocEmmcU
m • 3
c wo
Q. «
o ( AEcQEcmoaEm0T
r
U70
rn
N
-314-
1 G
upaEn0
a> a
N
ciao
y
coiA--_ 3
0 COm
s2a a
m °' m
mM
p °} u N a
i.5
a)
C%
cty
rn
cUo
N
ZS UW
O+
en
m
3~ O
CL
D
U -
lU- N00
L
ilkp6
o0mO
r ZN
U °' - OZ
a,
0mcCw
a)
0O'
02i m
on
aU
acQ'
Ycoc > O
ncu}=
Gca>
v>•
Op
O>
0 ?-
0coV
a>
13O ow E
1. w
c6Nv
CZOp ,
n0
ry
ao
oo
cc.
iaconoc cc
Qcacow
cNE.,.
mv{' c
fi
a
m
ma)
L)
c '
oMcEmmYvy
CML
CL>- 00
Inro
InNO
N
A
FN
LDDQ
N
0N LU
-315-
Attachment 2
PC Minutes from September 19, 2023
-316-
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
September 19, 2023 — 6: 00 P. M.
CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Highland was called to order at 6:00 p. m. by Chair Hamerly at the Donahue Council Chambers, 27215 Base Line, Highland, California.
Present: Chair Randall Hamerly
Vice Chair Chandra Thomas
Commissioner Jarrod Miller
Commissioner Jessica Sutorus
Staff Present: Lawrence Mainez, Community Development Director Kim Stater, Assistant Community Development Director
Angela Tafolla, Associate Planner
Matt Bennett, Assistant Public Works Director
Matt Wirz, Building Official
Scott Rice, City Landscape Architect
Camille Goritz, Administrative Assistant III
Chair Hamerly led the Pledge of Allegiance.
COMMUNITY INPUT ( ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes from the July 18, 2023 Regular Meeting.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Vice Chair Thomas to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried, 4- 0.
2. Minutes from the Auqust 15, 2023 Regular Meeting.
A MOTION was made by Vice Chair Thomas, seconded by Commissioner Sutorus to approve the minutes as amended. Motion carried, 4- 0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 23- 011) and Design Review Application ( DRA 23- 001) proposing the construction of a 3, 906 square foot office/ workshop building and establish a vehicle tow yard on a vacant one ( 1) acre parcel. ( 24989 5th Street, Applicant: Javier Gonzales
Assistant Community Development Director Stater presented the staff report. -317-
Commissioner Miller asked is there an expected date for road widening improvements by the city?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated not to my knowledge.
Commissioner Miller asked does the city have a policy as it relates to discharges to private property?
Chair Hamerly opened the public hearing.
Assistant Public Works Director Matt Bennett stated I don' t know the specific condition, but prior to obtaining grading and construction permission off site, they will get that permission from the neighbor. It's not specifically written to an offsite drainage acceptance easement. The drainage does drain to the rear of the property and the WQMP BMP is at the southwest corner.
The expectation is the development will have the appropriate treatment and mitigation of pre and post development.
Chair Hamerly stated on the right and left exterior elevation there is a pop out soffit that is described as stucco and that is butting up against painted rib metal, and it is showing as a vertical line. They may want to recess that pop out so that it comes to the actual corner of the material, not the corner of the rib as it projects. What is the parapet height around the equipment?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes, 3 feet.
Applicant' s Representative Kevin Kent stated yes, there will be a three- foot parapet around the equipment.
Applicant Javier Gonzalez stated we do not repair cars, we only store vehicles. We are Hazmat certified.
Chair Hamerly closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Vice Chair Thomas, seconded by Commissioner Sutorus to approve
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 033, approving Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 23- 011) to entitle a vehicle tow yard and office building, subject to the Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact;
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 034, approving Design Review Application ( DRA 23- 001) for the related Site Plan,
Landscape Plan, Grading Plan, and Building Elevations,
subject to the Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact; and
3. Direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Motion carried, 4- 0. -318-
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 033
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION DRA 23- 001) FOR THE SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN, GRADING PLAN,
AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF
3, 906 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/ WORKSHOP BUILDING AS PART OF A TOW YARD ON A VACANT ONE ( 1) ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 24989 5T" STREET. ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER: 0279- 141- 06.
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 034
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ( CUP 23- 011) TO ENTITLE A 3, 906 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/ WORKSHOP BUILDING AS PART OF A TOW YARD ON A VACANT ONE ( 1) ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 24989 5T" STREET. ASSESSOR' S PARCEL
NUMBER: 0279- 141- 06.
4. Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 23- 013) Design Review Application ( DRA 23- 003) and a Notice of Exemption for the construction of a 4, 690 square foot metal building related to the expansion of an existing major auto repair facility located 27178 3rd Street. Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 1192- 641- 25. ( Applicant: Dib Saleh)
Assistant Community Development Director Stater presented the staff report.
Chair Hamerly opened the public hearing
Applicant Eliza Ofada stated we do not have any problem with the conditions except Engineering conditions. We have not had a chance to look over them. There is a huge part where the engineering department is asking to go back and re -improve the street, which was done about couple years ago. The sidewalk and the driveway is brand new; I do not know why we need to address this new construction.
Chair Hamerly asked is there an additional right away dedication? Applicant Eliza Ofada stated I think 2 feet, I believe we are at 50 feet now.
Assistant Public Works Director Bennett stated the engineering conditions do ask for construct new street improvements including, parkway landscape improvements.
Chair Hamerly asked if that can be addressed during plan review? Assistant Public Works Director Bennett stated yes, as it stated directed by City Engineer transitional improvements and in final design some of these details could be value engineered.
The city constructed this drive approach and the sidewalk in the past with an IVDA project and the driveway met the residential purposes and is a shorter driveway going to a commercial project.
-319-
Chair Hamerly closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Sutorus to approve:
Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 035, approving Conditional
Use Permit ( CUP 23- 013) and Design Review
Application ( DRA 23- 003) for the construction of a 4, 690 square foot metal building related to the expansion of an existing major auto repair facility on a 0. 92- acre parcel, subject to the Conditions of Approval and Findings of
Fact; and
2. Direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Motion carried, 4- 0.
RESOLUTION NO. 2023- 035
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ( CUP 23- 013) AND DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 23- 003) FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 4, 690 SQUARE
FOOT METAL BUILDING RELATED TO THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING MAJOR AUTO REPAIR FACILITY ON A 0. 92 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 27178 3RD STREET.
Conditional Use Permit CUP-23- 003 for the development of a 53,665 square foot speculative industrial warehouse building Variance VAR- 23- 001 to allow the building to exceed the maximum building height permitted in the Business Park Zone by 10', Design Review DRA23- 004 for the project' s Site Plan Building Elevations Conceptual Grading Plan, Public Art Piece Conceptual Landscape Plan and Mitigated Negative Declaration.( 2. 86 acre site on the south side of 5t" Street approximately 250 feet west of Central Avenue Applicant: Patriot USICV
Associate Planner Tafolla presented the staff report.
Chair Hamerly stated the height was being calculated in the plans from finished floor elevation but clarified on the variance that it' s actually from finished grade to determine the maximum building height.
Associate Planner Tafolla stated correct.
Chair Hamerly asked ok, the wording of Item 2 in the recommendation, the variance would read for 49 feet measured from grade apex of parapet?
Associate Planner Tafolla stated correct.
Chair Hamerly opened the public hearing.
Applicant Kevin Rice stated thanks to the staff and everyone for all their hard work, I appreciate all your time as the member of Planning Commission. The teams are here for all -320-
your technical questions because I' m sure you' ll have several of those so thanks so much.
Appreciate your efforts. Thank you.
Public Speaker Anshu Pathak stated I am the owner of the property next to the proposed development. I was offered 101. 6 million [ Correction: The Public Speaker meant $1. 6 million] to sell my property to this buyer or somebody else, but I did not agree to it. I want to live in a very peaceful environment, I do not want trucks all over me, or 45- foot buildings around me. I wanted the city to allow me to put 200 trees and they refused it, so I don' t think city has any interest in the environment or people who are interested in environmental solutions. They purchased a part of the property which is not owned by the past owner. I have filed a lawsuit against the city and the related trespassers, so I will be adding this new developer, so they don' t trespass. If they do, they should leave me alone. My property is here, but the person who has bought this property comes inside my property. The guy who sold it, he entered my side of the property because my property goes straight. The gentleman who purchased the property has a beautiful project, and I don' t want to mess with this project, but I don' t want to sell him my property. The height of the building is too high. The City does not want to let me put trees there. You are using my property for a long time and free of charge. [ Inaudible] I' m not going to allow them to steal my property and allow them to make 45-foot walls around me.
The City Attorney sent me the outdated title report. I told her this is the old title report, give me the new title report.
Chair Hamerly asked did you apply for a permit or ask permission to plant trees on your property?
Public Speaker Anshu Pathak stated the city said no.
Community Development Director Mainez stated this is not on the agenda. He is bringing up a lot that is not relevant tonight. It' s an open code case and mentioned there is a legal court case. I would advise that we don' t discuss this property unless it is block walls that are relevant to the height.
Chair Hamerly stated I thought trees would be a part of it because he stated I do not want to see a 45-foot-tall building my backyard.
Public Speaker Anshu Pathak stated I do not want 45 height building behind in front of me. It is for you to vote on what is right for the residents and environment. I just want to plant trees.
Public Speaker Jody Scott stated I am concerned about the height. Did this project go to SBIAA for air height?
Associate Planner Tafolla stated yes, it was. 45 feet was noticed to SBIAA.
Chair Hamerly stated the change from 45 to 49 is more of a technicality because the truck bay is depressed about four feet. Overall height or maximum height is measured from lowest adjacent to the apex of the tallest portion of the structure. -321-
Vice Chair Thomas asked if you could come up and speak about the public art. What were your thoughts about the design? I like the comparison that was shown on the one on Central Avenue and 31d Street.
Applicants Architect Kevin Alcantra stated we designed the building to the south, so we wanted something complementary but not exact, and the design in it is a little different. It is more upplight. We were just getting creative with something that is easy to maintain, clean, and not damageable.
Commissioner Miller asked can the Applicant speak to the need to have the 45- or 49- foot height and why that's necessary?
Applicant's Architect Kevin Alcantra stated I think this is our 7th project here in City of Highland and we definitely like developing in this city. The market dictates that the building needs to be a minimum of 32 feet clear and the prospective tenants can rack their product up to a certain level within the building. The design of these types of buildings, that parapet is always above that and there is the thickness of the roof above that. Typically, 50 feet is what you would see for something like this.
Commissioner Miller asked is there any opportunity to optimize and meet somewhere in the middle?
Applicant' s Architect Kevin Alcantra stated to clarify we are pretty much 45 above grade, and as you depress those dock doors, the four feet the trucks can back up without needing to go down a ramp. So, if this was a level building, it would be 45 feet tall, but because it' s depressed in the truck bay, and it goes to 49 feet.
Chair Hamerly asked are you able to work with 45 feet?
Applicant' s Architect Kevin Alcantra stated we did spend a lot of our investing time and money to kind of look at a west facing truck bay which could help with that balance of the site. That turn at the northwest corner does not work for trucks at that corner, we tried our very best but the way we have laid out the site is most optimal for logistics and work safely for the community.
Chair Hamerly stated regarding the finished floor elevation is noted at 1, 166, but all the surrounding elevations are running from 1, 169. 5 to 1, 168. 5. Hopefully that doesn't mess up your calculations for maximum height, but that's about 3 feet off on the actual spot elevations that are around the interior of the building. Make a note of that for staff and pick that up on plan check.
Applicant' s Engineer Ryan stated that number is 1, 169.
Commissioner Miller asked was there an analysis done on 5th Street to understand what the flow depth was there? My concern is the entries that we have the entry high point elevations were pretty close to equivalent to topic curb topic curbs, it is typically Q25. -322-
Applicant's Engineer Ryan stated just for the driveway, you will have a little bit of flow going out to the street at the driveway location on the east side. For the west side we will have a reach line at the driveway.
Commissioner Miller stated my concern is if we are providing a high enough high point elevation at the entrance to keep the 5th street flows within 5th Street and not allow those to enter into the site?
Applicant' s Engineer Ryan stated yes. We are not doing any off -site improvements. We will keep the existing conditions.
Commissioner Miller stated City Creek that runs along the northwest section of the project boundary, have you acquired any plans for that Channel that tell you what the 100- year water surface is associated with?
Applicant' s Engineer Ryan stated we have the water flood map and we checked that, and our area is out not covered with the flood map.
Chair Hamerly stated two of trees specified look like they are the only ones that are going to get any kind of height to them. All the Afghan Pines are along the southern property line, was there any thought to you putting some taller species along the street 5th Street? Applicant' s Architect Kevin Alcantara stated our Landscape Architect is not in attendance, but we do not want to cover a lot of the design of our building. We just want it to be integrated with the artwork and not really shade the building.
Chair Hamerly closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Vice Chair Thomas, seconded by Commissioner Sutorus to:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2023 - 036, approving Conditional Use Permit CUP- 23- 003 for the development of a 53, 665 square foot warehouse/ distribution facility and related improvements;
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023 - 037 approving Variance VAR23- 001, allowing an increase in the maximum building height for the subject warehouse from 35 feet to 49 feet tall, 10 feet greater than permitted in the Business Park Zone;
3. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 038 approving Design Review Application DRA- 23- 004 for the Site Plan, Building
Elevations, Conceptual Grading Plan, Public Art Piece and Conceptual Landscape Plan, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and the Findings of Fact; and
4. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 039, approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration and direct Staff to File and Notice of -323-
Determination with San Bernardino County Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors. Motion carried, 3- 1 with
Commissioner Miller no vote.
Commissioner Miller abstained because the additional height of the building is excessive.
6. Development of a 220- unit 4- story multi -family apartment complex utilizing a Density Bonus for eleven ( 11) affordable units under Section 16 40 090 Development Density of the Highland Municipal Code Entitlements include Desiqn Review Application ( DRA 23- 002) of the proiect plans, Lot Line Adjustment ( LLA 23- 003) to relocate the existing parcel boundaries and create separate parcels for a multi -phase development Variance ( VAR 23- 003) to construct a perimeter fence/ wall 29% taller than the maximum height permitted for residential projects and a Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions --- Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Agreement to demonstrate compliance with Highland Municipal Code Chapters 16. 40 Development Density and 16. 50 InclusionaN Housing ( West side of Sterlinq Avenue 250 feet north of 9th Street Applicant: Helios Holdings, LLC) Assistant Community Development Director Stater presented the staff report.
Vice Chair Thomas asked are we adopting a resolution for tonight' s meeting? Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes, and within that resolution will be all of the individual recommendations to the City Council.
Chair Hamerly stated regarding the in -lieu fee, is that a standard per unit Development Impact Fee or fees assessed?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated it is standard. When the city enacted the fee, there was a subcommittee that looked at what it cost to build affordable housing. The subcommittee said we are not going to collect from our developers $ 70,000 a unit to build. The subcommittee recommended to the City Council a fee of $3, 750. The City Council adopted that fee and has not been changed since.
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Urandga stated we have some lovely renderings that we wanted to show off. We wanted you all to get a sense of what we are proposing and why we are proposing it. We want to provide a safe and healthy enclave. I think at the end of the day we wanted a target market for workforce housing, what we call naturally attainable and occurring affordable housing. We are very interested in modern, contemporary, and attractive design. The arrival experience, again, is something that we give a lot of thought to. We wanted something that was attractive, welcoming, but also very secure. We sincerely wanted this to be a catalyst project for the community, so we went a little further into design. We honestly wanted to make a meaningful contribution to the housing crisis. I personally am part of the Multifamily Housing Council for Orange County and Inland Empire. There are many forces that have on a project at any given time, and many of those forces are dynamic. They change over time, and we try to pay a lot of attention to the marketplace. I mentioned an incredible demand for housing which is a regional demand. We are looking for flexibility in terms of phasing, which is why we proposed a lot line adjustments the way that we did. Our interest is in a long-term hold in part because we're in an opportunity zone which are some tax benefits there that could be attractive to equity -324-
investors. We' re monitoring inflation daily, costs are incredible. Rent continues to climb to it' s something that is kind of unprecedented in my career. We took advantage of SB 330 to lock in fees, so out of all of those variables, we were able to make one variable a constant. There is a very high open space requirement, a high inclusionary requirement, and when we strategize about how we can solve all those things we came up with our strategy of providing the 5% very low income. That affords us all those incentives and concessions to accommodate parking. We have put a number of different amenities, that are active, some are passive, some are focused on children and adults. We did have a rooftop deck at one point, but we were told we were the first four story building in the city. Just a lot of thought, a lot of care, iterations, expense, and collaboration with staff went into that plan. We are welcome to answer any questions you may have.
Applicant' s Architect Daniel Gaman stated Assistant Community Development Director Stater did a fabulous presentation on the project. I am more than happy to answer any questions you might have about why we' re proposing the design. It is long skinny building because we have a long skinny site for the building. The colors were chosen as classic evening wear, warmed up a little bit by the wood grain, and the recreational amenity building is kind of a butterfly strangling struggling to break free from that long bar building behind it. Showing on the PowerPoint, this is one of the courtyards in the building B, there is a BBQ area in the front. The client, Mr. Webb, was very family oriented, he has two children of his own and he is thinking about children. We thought about families and children all the way through this, so we have two tot lots. There is also a dog run, which is by the other courtyard. There is a very large pool, indoor and outdoor fitness club house space. It is very much for like a suburban type of design and the imperative of this kind of density is that you begin to think a little bit more urban. Thank you.
Chair Hamerly opened the public hearing.
Public Speaker Jody Scott stated I think this project has a lot of potential, but I do have some concerns. I presented you all with a letter. I have concerns about the schools and traffic which includes ingress and egress. Other two concerns are the height of the project and law enforcement. The concerns can be addressed by requiring staying with it, this includes the city and the owner of the property. The ones here tonight are the developers, they're not the owners, they're not the ones when the project are finished and make certain that the project is held up to some standards. This particular project is right on the entryway into the city so let' s make it a good entryway, not another slum. We all know that apartments have a real bad name, because that is basically what they always turn out to be. They might be good for about four or five years, and then they go down. So, we need to make sure that this this project is done right and enforcement of certain rules. I would like to see a 24/ 7 onsite manager 24/ 7, that is a must. The project must have some CC& R' s, such as no hanging towels or clothes over the balcony. People driving down Base Line or Sterling can see this four-story building. This is not what we want in the City of Highland. No windows or balconies facing private property, I couldn' t tell which side the balconies and windows were on, but we need to make certain that the private citizen has their home is protected. There should be a restriction on the number of people that can be in a certain home.
We don' t want ten families in 456 square foot house. So, stay with the cleanup. Lastly, I would say it is a good project overall. I like what it can bring to the city, thank you.
Public Speaker Margaret Cisneros asked how many owners and neighbors did you contact? Can you answer that?
-325-
Chair Hamerly stated I am writing down everything you are stating. If you have a list of questions, I' ll write them down. I don' t want to interrupt back and forth.
Public Speaker Margaret Cisneros stated when I came to City of Highland, it was County before.
When I closed escrow, it was the City of Highland. So, I have been living here since it has been the city. I did not ever dream that I would not have a home. I understand these projects can move very fast. It has good features, but there' s some features that looks like the Hilton hotel. I may want to live there. You have to consider what is there, not just what you hope to have there. I don't know any of my neighbors that were contacted except Jody Scott. I contacted her, so you are lacking in your input. Please consider us that are there, we have all the negatives to live with.
I am 94 years old now and I would like my years to be tranquil. I live there with my 2 caregivers, and my daughter. Please consider what you are doing. Will you show me where I live? Assistant Community Development Director Stater pointed to where Mrs. Cisneros lives. She lives adjacent to the project on the north hand side.
Public Speaker Margaret Cisneros stated I keep thinking about the good years and try to minimize the negatives I have had to live with to where we had to take down chain link fencing to put steel ones up to keep the negatives out of my house. Please consider the people that are there. I' ve tried to be a good neighbor and I think some of the staff knows I am across the street from the school. They had to remodel all the front of their school and their parking and everything because of so much negative.
Public Speaker Kathleen Ogeen stated I am the daughter to Margaret, and I am a caregiver for her because she has developed lung disease. When they were remodeling the school my mother dedicated frontage to her property so the school children could have easier access to their school safely. She donated that to the city and there was all of that construction and then she' s diagnosed with lung disease because there is not even noticeable particulate matter that goes on with these kinds of developments. I' m partial to that because she is my mother, and she has to live with oxygen 24/ 7 now. She was there first and so were the residents around there. This outside entity wants to come in and say the city needs affordable housing. Well, sure they do, all the displaced people that are being displaced with these warehouses that are getting voted in. Where are they going to go? Is that rent going to be affordable to them? I doubt it. They have a warehouse salary and they' re just trying to make ends meet and working more jobs. I think Highland can look for other places that are more conducive to this instead of trying to put this high density down everybody' s throat. You go through suffering; my mom and all the residents were patient with the remodeling. The Principal came and spoke with the residents and said this is going to be more than a year' s project, they offered us headphones for the noise and masks. Since you do not live in this area, I didn' t see any reports that could be presented to your Planning Commission that would show the crime rate. There are police that do not even want to go down Elm Street to answer calls because it is so violent there. We' re making calls all the time there is graffiti, homelessness, and burglary. I am totally in opposition to this. I think you could do better in finding an area that's conducive to this beautiful affordable housing. I really think there' s a lot of work to do before we entertain this kind of development in the City of Highland. Thank you.
Chair Hamerly asked how many neighbors were interviewed or any interaction with the neighborhood when it was being designed? Is there risk of Mrs. Cisneros being displaced? -326-
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated we went to great lengths to reach out to the church to the north. Staff was actually helpful in trying to introduce this to them. We never actually connected, we tried exhaustively. Through the traffic study process, reached out to the school itself. There's a lot of dialogue between them and the engineering staff on improvements to the Sterling Avenue median or not putting in a median. Again, safety was one of our guiding principles that we really insisted on and we aligned with the school regarding that. I think we found good compromise there and in addition to the public process, the MND was circulated to residents.
Chair Hamerly stated based on the comments it was what type of input from the neighborhood in the conceptual design or the ideation portion of the project that led to the inspiration.
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated we are concerned about safety. We are willing to work closely with our neighbors as we get into final engineering on any kind of custom edge conditions, maybe different plantings. The consideration is baked into the design in the form of very large setbacks and putting the building in the very center of the property. The additional height in the walls does not just provide safety or security for us, but it provides screening for their yards and provides privacy. We think those are good planning principles that we implemented into the design.
Chair Hamerly stated what you mentioned during your presentation was that you viewed this project as long- term ownership, correct?
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated yes, that' s the intention. We are living through some of the most challenging capital markets, high interest rates, difficult financial times of my career. The advantage of the opportunity zone is to hold for a long time to take advantage of some tech tax benefits, and that is the intention. We take a thoughtful and caring approach with all the properties that we develop.
Chair Hamerly asked will there be 24- hour security or on -site management with CC& R' s? Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated with any project these days, we insist on a robust CCTV system and cameras are everywhere. This is a for rental property, so CC& R' s do not apply.
There will be lease terms that force people to comply with certain rules. We do not want stuff hanging over the railing, that would be a violation of their lease agreement. Regarding the number of people in a unit is explicitly spelled out in the affordable housing agreement will show the number of people that can live in a one bedroom or studio. We want to build and maintain a healthy environment. We do not have a property management company picked outjust yet. There will be 24 hours, seven days a week on -site management staff. During construction there will be clear signage that shows who to contact if there' s dust or noise.
Commissioner Miller stated I have a suggestion when looking at the mitigation measures that are applicable to construction is to ensure that someone is coming by weekly and that those measures are being implemented.
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated yes, there is inspections that are required. -327-
Commissioner Miller stated there are 11 very low- income units. How are you going about setting that affordable price for the other units?
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated the market will decide. They will be governed by 30% of 50% of AMI which is published every year as a new schedule. I think some cities have a utility allowance that they even publish that is inclusive. Those 11 units will get parking and treated like everybody else in the complex. You will not be able to tell which one is a very low income versus a market rate unit. The market rate for unit rents will be determined by the marketplace and we are monitoring that.
Public Speaker Margaret Cisneros asked are there any parking spaces that face the neighborhood?
Chair Hamerly stated it is surrounded by cars that will be parked facing outward, but the vehicles will be facing a 7 3/ 4- foot wall. You most likely will not see the vehicles that are parked behind the wall or have lights shining into your backyard because of the perimeter wall.
Chair Hamerly stated any comments on the site plan? There is obviously a main entrance that is at the southern side of the property. Did I hear correctly that the northern access was only emergency access?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated the northern access is egress only.
There is two on Sterling Avenue and on Elm Street that is for emergency access.
Commissioner Sutorus asked if there were only one Electric Vehicle ( EV) charger? Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated there is about 30 EV chargers.
Chair Hamerly asked for high density apartments, is it required to provide or just accommodate EV charging within the garages?
Applicant' s Architect Daniel Gaman stated we have 91 garages and then the rest are surface parking spaces, so I can't quote the code of what the requirement is, but it certainly makes sense from a functional point of view because of covered space. The first EV owners will have garages as well.
Chair Hamerly stated any comments on the landscape plan? Commissioner Miller asked are we meeting the water budget? City Landscape Architect Scott Rice stated yes. The biggest thing was trying to fit in as much landscape as possible into the available space, given the limitations, because of the building and the parking.
Chair Hamerly stated one of the areas that I was looking at since there is a deficit of viable planter areas to get any tree massing against the building. Did we consider anything such as a green wall?
-328-
Applicant' s Architect Daniel Gaman stated you make a very good point. When the elevations come back up, you will notice that the stairs exteriors of the building are expressed. They have a hooded roof form that comes over them so it' s not a blank wall.
Chair Hamerly stated it actually building B south elevation, right hand side has four stories of blank wall facing the south opposite end of the building. I can see the stairwell right there, but at the corner that's exposed to two sides of parking right hand side grid there is four stories of blank wall.
Applicant' s Architect Daniel Gaman stated we can take that into consideration.
Chair Hamerly asked is the dog run real or artificial grass? Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated we are not sure yet. If it is artificial grass, there' s going to be a maintenance element to it.
Chair Hamerly stated lets go over the amenities.
Vice Chair Thomas stated regarding the playground equipment, will there be playground equipment proposed anywhere on site for an older age child? It seemed to be proposed for younger children. I recommend incorporating a playground for older age children, so we have both.
Chair Hamerly stated I recommend the private open areas with each unit have been reduced on the upper floors. You may want to have some contingency plans in place on how we could expand the BBQ areas if those do become a high demand.
Chair Hamerly stated the main entry gate where it states Halcyon, is that going to be back lighted or is that a non -illuminated sign?
Applicant's Representative Oscar Uranga stated not sure, it is a design detail we have to get to.
Chair Hamerly stated I encourage you to provide something since the streetlights probably won' t pick it up if you' re trying to find your way to Halcyon. PL- 6 was the screening, I guess the only thing I would encourage is the shading looks a little meager along the north side. I know the building' s going to put that whole thing in shade anyway, but maybe work with the city landscape architect and your landscape architect.
Applicant' s Representative Oscar Uranga stated that northern side is where we have this drainage and edge condition with another neighbor, and so we didn' t want to overstate how many trees we thought we could fit in there.
Chair Hamerly stated overall I thought there were very artistically done to break up the mass of a fairly large building, so it does not read as monolithic. There are a lot of garage doors in a row and not a lot of opportunities for varying them.
Applicant' s Architect Daniel Gaman the architecture that drops from the third floor we have focused a lot on that long stretch of garage doors. I think we could play more with the color -329-
because they do tend to be monolithic along the bottom. There is language is a little hard to describe why the colors are where they are, but it that could read down into the garage doors better.
Chair Hamerly stated any comments on the grading plan?
Commissioner Miller stated I thought DRC did a really good job on the drainage and the water quality, not only as it relates to the grading plan, but also quantifying the volumes and discharges in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Chair Hamerly stated on page 141 table 2. 3 we have the unit types by phase. This table differs from the composition and the phasing of the table that is declared elsewhere and that is actually in the document that is recorded with this. I don' t know if this needs to be changed so it' s internally consistent or if it doesn' t matter.
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated it changed over time, so this MND was circulated July 1st through July 31st, 2023 but that has been slightly modified. It is not significant enough to go back and change the document without recirculating it.
Vice Chair Thomas stated I understand the needs of the current residents. I think it will serve you well if you continue to keep those communications open, but just overall families need homes to live here in Southern California, that' s crucial. I hear the concerns, but I also hear that housing is a huge problem and we don' t have a lot of wiggle room around that. I like the project; you did a great job.
Commissioner Sutorus stated I appreciate all the residents, concerns, and comments. I know that we are in a fast -changing world. Electric cars are coming, and air quality is going to get better. sit on a Commission just for large trucks, electrifying and turning into hydrogen where things are changing quickly. Interest rates are high, and people cannot afford to buy homes right now and renting is the only option.
Chair Hamerly closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Vice Chair Thomas, seconded by Commissioner Miller to:
Adopt Resolution No. 2023 - 040 approving " Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions --Density Bonus and
Inclusionary Housing Agreement" to facilitate the
development of a 220- unit multi -family housing project utilizing Density Bonus provisions and establishing the Inclusionary Housing Unit requirements for the project;
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 041 approving Design Review Application ( DRA 23- 002) for the site plan, landscape plan, grading plan, and building elevations related to the
construction of a 220- unit, 4-story apartment complex, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
-330-
3. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 042 approving Lot Line
Adjustment ( LLA 23- 003) to relocate the existing parcel boundaries and create separate parcels for a multi -phase development; subject to the Conditions of Approval and
Findings of Fact;
4. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 043 approving Variance ( VAR 23- 003) to allow an increase in the maximum height for the perimeter fence/ wall from 6- feet to 7. 75- feet, 29% greater than the maximum height permitted in the for residential projects; subject to the Findings of Fact; and
5. Adopt Resolution No. 2023- 044 adopting the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration ( ENV 23- 005), and direct Staff to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the Board.
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 040
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE THE CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, AND RESTRICTSIONS---
DENSITY BONUS AND INCLUSTIONARY HOUSING AGREEMENT
RELATED TO DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 23- 002) FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 220- UNIT, 4- STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX, UTILIZING A FIVE ( 5) PERCENT " DENSITY BONUS' FOR ELEVEN ( 11) AFFORDABLE UNITS UNDER SECTION 16. 40. 090 OF THE HIGHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, ON A VACANT 6. 77 ACRE SIT LOVATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STERLING AVENUE, 250 FEET NORTH OF 9T" STREET.
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 041
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 23- 002) FOR SITE
PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN, PHOTOMETRIC PLAN, GRADING PLAN, AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 220- UNIT, 4- STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX ON A VACANT 6. 77 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STERLING AVENUE, 250 FEET
NORTH OF 9TH STREET.
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 042
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ( LLA 23- 003) TO RELOCATE THE
EXISTING PARCEL BOUNDARIES TO CREATE SEPARATE PARCELS FOR THE MULTI -PHASE DEVELOPMENT OF A 220- UNIT, 4- STORY
APARTMENT COMPLEX ON A 6. 77 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST -331-
SIDE OF STERLING AVENUE, 250 FEET NORTH OF 9TH STREET.
ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBERS: 0278- 131- 45, - 46, & - 47 RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 043
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE VARIANCE ( VAR 23- 003) TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR A PERIMETER FENCEMALL FROM 6- FEET TO
7. 75- FEET IN ASSOCIATION WITH DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 23- 002) AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ( LLA 23- 003) TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI -PHASE, 220- UNIT, 4- STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX ON A VACANT 6. 77 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STERLING AVENUE, 250 FEET NORTH OF 9TH STREET.
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 - 044
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ( ENV 23- 005) FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A OF A 220- UNIT, 4- STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX ON A VACANT 6. 77 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STERLING AVENUE, 250 FEET NORTH OF 9TH STREET. RELATED ENTITLEMENTS INCLUDE
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 23- 002), LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LLA 23- 003), AND VARIANCE (VAR 23- 003).
7 Specific Plan Revision ( SPR 23- 001) proposing an amendment to the Greenspot Village & Marketplace Specific Plan ( SPR 06- 001) to increase the maximum dwelling unit count from 946 to 1, 218 dwelling units and Design Review Application ( DRA 23- 009) proposing the construction of a 272- unit multi -family residential development. ( Planning Area 3 of the Greenspot Village & Marketplace Specific Plan Applicant Rexco Development) Assistant Community Development Director Stater presented the staff report.
Commissioner Miller asked if even though we would increase the number of residences, we are decreasing the traffic associated with that commercial is so great that we end up with a net reduction?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes, correct. There is a little bit of change in peak hour times and trips, but overall, you will definitely see a net reduction.
Chair Hamerly asked was it a mixed use before commercial? Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes, it was mixed use.
Commissioner Miller asked is Greenspot Road adequate to handle all the traffic coming in Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes. -332-
Commissioner Miller asked does that extend to the on and off ramps as they currently exist today?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated the city' s making some improvements, as well as Caltrans.
Assistant Public Works Director Matt Bennett stated long range plans will include the build out. The 5th Street interchange is in the planning stages. The collective improvements based on the Specific Plan include intersection improvements well outside of east or west towards 5th Street and Palm Avenue. We are continuing to watch and grow with the development as it comes along.
Chair Hamerly opened the public hearing.
Applicant Patrick Tritz stated I' m here to answer any questions. Assistant Community Development Director Stater did a great job of describing the project.
Chair Hamerly asked when is your anticipated completion on the first phase? Applicant Patrick Tritz stated the end of this year.
Public Speaker Jody Scott stated there is 946 homes approved now and you are adding 272 more homes? So, it's going to be a total of 1218 homes, right? Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes, correct.
Public Speaker Jody Scott stated how many of the increased additions on this site are going to be low and very, very low? Are there any low- income density points that they' re getting for this particular project?
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated this will be a market rate project.
Public Comment Glenn Elssmann stated I am a part of the Greenspot Village and Marketplace Land Holdings and Specific Plan. All of the Planning Commissioners are attentive to the details and really want to see high quality product projects, but also projects that have really thought through the detail. I want to compliment Patrick Tritz and Rexco for their incredible effort to ensure that the traffic impacts have been modified and it meets the different elements here.
Chair Hamedy stated the leasing office rendering was for the other property that was proposed previously. I don't know what the wishes of the other Commissioners would be referencing with that facility. Are we comfortable including a copy of the previously approved leasing office clubhouse or would you like to continue the item and see the actual clubhouse for phase two? Applicant' s Architect Damien Titano stated the intent when we did this project was the second phase was going to have different products than the first phase and to develop a little bit higher density for the desires of the city. The leasing offices are both complementary to create one larger space and that they do mirror each other. We cannot guarantee that that is going -333-
to be the final version yet, because of operations. We can't commit to it because of two different projects, but now the intent is that both leasing offices are mirrored.
Applicant Patrick Tritz stated the intent is for it to be one cohesive project, however the real estate loans shows two separate parcels and loans. I have fences that have multiple openings so that they can flow between each other. There is also an EV gate between the two properties which gives a third point of access in an emergency situation. So, the intent is that one big project, however two separate phases. Does that make sense? Chair Hamerly stated not only the emergency linkage there for safety, but also it makes sense that if it is two phases of the project that there be at least a pedestrian link so that the residents can walk through.
Applicant Patrick Tritz stated there is a pedestrian link.
Applicant' s Architect Damien Titano stated legally they are two separate projects, so we have to have they have to act independently for now. I want to specify that the leasing office pictures you have in your packet will be complementary with one another, this photo is just taken from phase one plans.
Chair Hamerly stated when we approve a project, but not all of the information or plans are complete, do we approve it or continue the meeting?
Applicant Patrick Tritz stated the leasing office will be the same as the leasing office from phase one.
Chair Hamerly stated we are stuck in the middle because we are making a recommendation to the City Council. I' ll defer to staff, but technically, we do not have the building that is going to be built and we' re recommending this to the City Council. Hopefully in interim the actual document will be in the packet that is given to the City Council.
Assistant Community Development Director Stater stated yes, the correct document will make it into the City Council agenda packet.
Chair Hamerly stated any comments on the site plan?
Commissioner Miller stated as it relates to drainage, I am concerned about capacity in the Greenspot Road storm drain. We did make certain assumptions about how this whole area was going to drain down Greenspot Road. I think flows will concentrate from both developments along Calhoun Road and enter the storm drain. I think we will get more flow on Calhoun Road and the Greenspot Road intersection than what the initial storm drain design could accommodate. I think this needs to be looked at regionally and rather than meeting water quality criteria.
Chair Hamerly stated as it pertains to the parking that' s around phase two leasing office, where would be the parking for visitors To visit the leasing office for phase two? -334-
Applicant' s Architect Damien Titano pointed to the PowerPoint. This edge along the northern side of the roundabout would be the easiest to accommodate parking. Currently there was some area here ( pointing to the site plan) that was intended for guest spaces.
Chair Hamerly stated one of my concerns is there are three primary recreation areas, and they are all clustered at the east end of the site and I guess their concern is twofold. I would hope that the recreation areas be more evenly distributed throughout the site because that is going to make a quiet side and a noisy side of the project because those play areas are right up against the apartment units.
Applicant Patrick Tritz stated these small recreational areas have never created a problem with other apartments we have built. I see I respect what you' re saying. We have never had an issue of trying to sound mitigate them, there is plenty of landscaping around.
Chair Hamerly stated moving onto the elevations. I like the decorative wall features, and how it breaks up vertically. It adds a nice entry statement to the spanish style architecture.
Commissioner Miller asked will there be awnings on the windows to the south to help with the direct sun?
Applicant Patrick Tritz stated we will have recesses in those windows, we are not sure if we are installing awnings.
Chair Hamerly regarding the conceptual landscape plan, the garden spaces that are between the different blocks of units are a community open space. Are those flower gardens or private planter areas?
Applicant' s Representative Damian Titano stated private planter areas.
Chair Hamerly closed the public hearing.
A MOTION was made by Commissioner Sutorus, seconded by Vice Chair Thomas to adopt Resolution No. 2023- 045 recommending the City Council:
1) Make a finding under Public Resources Code Section
21166 and the corresponding CEQA Guidelines Section
15162 that there are no substantial changes or new
information of substantial importance that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent EIR and further finding that the project is exempt from further environmental review under Government Code Section 65457;
2) Introduce Ordinance No. to amend the Greenspot
Village & Marketplace Specific Plan ( SPR 23- 001); and 3) Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2023- 045 to approve Design Review Application ( DRA 23- 009), subject to the Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact.
-335-
RESOLUTION NO. 2023- 045
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL 1) INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN REVISION ( SPR 23- 001) TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM
DWELLING UNIT COUNT WITHIN THE GREENSPOT VILLAGE & MARKETPLACE SPECIFIC PLAN FROM 946 DWELLING UNITS TO 1, 218 DWELLING UNITS, 2) ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 23- 009) TO CONSTRUCT A 272-UNIT MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX ON A VACANT 12. 6 ACRE SITE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 3, AND 3) MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE
ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER CEQA REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15162, PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21666 AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65457. ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBERS: 1201- 351- 28, 1201- 351- 14, 1201- 351- 15, 1201- 351- 16.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Planning Commissions next regular meeting is scheduled October 3, 2023.
ADJOURN
There being no further business, Chair Hamerly declared the meeting adjourned at 10: 58 p. m.
Submitted by:
Camille Goritz, Administrative Assistant III
Community Development Department
Approved by:
Randall Hamerly, Chair
Planning Commission
-336-
Attachment 3
Dudek Response letter dated November 1, 2023
-337-
MEMORANDUM
To: Angela Tafolla, Associate Planner, City of Highland From: Hayley Ward, Project Manager, Dudek
Subject: Response to Appeal of CUP 23-003 (Environmental) Date: November 1, 2023
cc: Kim Stater, City of Highland
Kevin Rice, Patriot Development Partners
CUP 23-003 was approved on September 19, 2023. Project includes demolition of one existing structure and construction of an approximately 53, 665-square-foot (gross area, inclusive of mezzanine/ office spaces), one-story warehouse building on an approximately 2. 43- acre site ( gross area). The warehouse building would be composed of approximately 49, 665 square feet of warehouse space and 4, 000 square feet of mezzanine/ office space. An appeal was filed on October 2, 2023. The following responses address environmental concerns raised in the appeal. Noted that other, non -environmental concerns related to noticing, planning, etc. were also raised. Those are addressed separately by Staff.
Building Height
Summary: On the notice, it was stated that the proposed building height was 42. 5, but the PC approved the height of 49 feet.
Response: With respect to the environmental analysis in the ISMND the minor variance is analyzed as clearly requesting a 10 foot increase in height. As stated in Section 2. 3, Project Characteristics, Page 4 of the IS/ MND, " Given that the City' s Municipal Code allows for a maximum height of 35 feet in the Business Park zone, a minor variance ( Variance No. VAR 23- 001) is being requested to accommodate the project' s height. Internally, the project would have a clear height of 45 feet..." A variance is sought by the applicant because typical tenants of warehouses similar to the proposed warehouse require internal clear heights of 36feet. After accounting forjoists, lights, and sprinkler systems, modern warehouses require approximately 4- 5 feet to reach the roof of the structure, followed by an additional 4-5 feet above the roof line to screen roof -mounted equipment, such as HVAC systems. The building itself is 45 feettall, and the building parapet is 4 feet tall to hide the HVAC units, therefore the planning commission approved 49 feet, even though the building itself is only 45 feet. It is noted that warehouses are also permitted in the Industrial zone subject to Design Review per Table 16. 24. 030. A- Uses Permitted Within Employment Districts. However, per Table
16. 24. 040. A- Industrial Site Development Minimum Standards, the maximum height limit in the Industrial zone in 50', thus the request is compatible with other warehouse standards in the City.
Proximity to Sensitive Receptors
Summary: Per CARB guidance, siting warehouse facilities so that their property lines are at least 1,000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors.
-338-
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF CUP 23- 003 ( ENVIRONMENTAL) Response:
According to the 2005 CARB, report the commenter is quoting from, the text states that lead agencies should avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center". Land use and zoning is done through the General Plan Land Use designation and Zoning Map prepared and adopted by the City. In the General Plan, the City included policies specific to the sitting of industrial and warehouses uses. The Public Health, Safety and Environmental Justice Element of the General Plan included the following Goals, Policies and Actions:
Goal 1: Protect the health of community members by improving air quality.
1. 1d: Warehouse Standards. Include air quality and vegetation buffer standards for new warehouses uses and loading docks.
Goal 5: Improve the quality of the built and natural environments to reduce disparate health and environmental impacts.
Policy 5. 1: Adopt land use regulations that protect residential and park uses from the impacts of industrial and roadway pollution.
Action 5. 1a: Land Use Review. Conduct a review of existing Municipal Code to determine where existing legislation encourages or allows land uses and programs that are detrimental to the health of residents in DACs.
Action 5. 1b: Monitor Industrial Areas. Establish a monitoring program to periodically evaluate and report the immediate and long-term health and environmental impacts of the proximity of residential and park uses to industrial areas in DACs.
Action 5. 1c: Siting Industrial Uses. Disallow siting and construction of new industrial uses that could impact the health of residents in the DACs
The City's latest General Plan was adopted in 2012. The Land Use Element of the General Plan identified the 5th Street Corridor as a Community Policy Area, stating that, "[ w] ith its strategic location between SBIA and the SR- 3/ 1- 210 corridor, the 5th Street Corridor represents an excellent opportunity to capture employment growth. To position Highland to take advantage of this increased demand, the Land Use Plan for the 5th Street Corridor is dominated by Business Park and Industrial land uses." The General Plan included the following Policies specific to this Community Policy Area:
2) Continue to plan and promote the 5th Street Corridor as the major industrial entryway into the San Bernardino International Airport.
5) Protect and enhance the integrity and desirability of industrial sites from nonindustrial uses.
6) Improve landscaping along the edges and median of 5th Street and the boundaries of the corridor.
15255
D U D E K NOVEMBER 2023 023
-339-
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF CUP 23- 003 ( ENVIRONMENTAL) 7) Ensure quality development through Development Code standards and the Community Design Element policies and guidelines.
As part of the General Plan and consistent with this Community Policy Area, the project area and surrounding properties were designed as Industrial and Business Park usses. Thus, the City has already made the determination for the siting of business park uses.
The 2020 CARBii report states that " Local governments can designate local truck routes and restrict parking near sensitive land uses."
The General Plan also includes Goals and Policies related to Haul Routes, including that " Haul routes have been identified, and will be utilized, which will not create significant impacts within residential areas and will not negatively impact access into commercial/ industrial areas;" The project site is located off a designated truck route in an area zoned and designated for business park uses.
Despite the adjacent residence being a non -conforming use, the project prepared modeling for Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy, in addition to Construction and Operational Health Risk Assessments for the nearby sensitive land uses. According to Tables 3.3-8 and 3. 3- 11 in the ISMND, the mitigated Construction and Operational HRAs determined that the project would not exceed the level of significance for cancer risk and chronic hazard risk. These tables are provided below for convenience.
Table 3. 3- 8. Construction Health Risk Assessment Results - Mitigated Maximum Individual Cancer Risk- Per Million 5. 38 10 Less than Significant Residential
Chronic Hazard Index - Residential Index Value 0. 005 1. 0 Less than Significant Source: SCAQMD 2019.
Notes: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act.
See Appendix A- 2 of the ISMND.
Table 3. 3- 11. Operational Health Risk Assessment Results - Mitigated Project CEQA
Impact Parameter Impact.. Level of Significance
Maximum Individual Cancer Risk- Per Million 1. 0 10 Less than Significant Residential
Chronic Hazard Index - Residential Index Value 0. 0003 1. 0 Less than Significant Source: SCAQMD 2019.
Notes: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act
See Appendix A- 2 of the ISMND.
As seen in the results summarized above, these studies concluded that health impacts to these nearby sensitive receptors such as the commenter' s residence would be less than significant with the incorporation of Tier 4 Interim Engines during construction of the project, and electric- or natural gas -powered forklifts during operation of the project.
1 D U D E K NOVEMBER 2023 0
3 -340-
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF CUP 23- 003 ( ENVIRONMENTAL) Number of Diesel Trucks and TRUs
Summary: The commenter states that the Project Applicant did not disclose the number of diesel truck trips, how many trucks would have truck refrigeration units ( TRUs), and where diesel TRUs would operate more than 200 per week to the City.
Response: Trip generation estimates were conducted for the project within the ISMND and within Appendix J of the ISMND. The project' s trip generation summary was provided in Table 3. 17- 1 of the ISMND, which has been included below for convenience.
Table 3. 17- 1. Project Trip Generation Summary
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates and Trip Generation
Warehousing' I per TSF I 1. 71 I 0. 13 10.04 10. 17 10.05 10. 13 10. 18 Land Use
Proposed Project 53. 665 TSF 92 7 2 1 9 3 1 7 10
Non- PCE Trips Passenger Cars ( 72. 5%) 67 5 2 7 2 5 7
2- axle Trucks ( 4. 6%) 25 2 0 2 1 2 3
3- axle Trucks ( 5. 7%) 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
4+ axle Trucks ( 17. 2%) 16 2 0 2 1 2 3
Total Non- PCE Trips 92 7 2 9 3 7 10
Project Trip Generation PCE
PCE Trips3 Passenger Cars ( 1. 0 PCE) 67 5 2 1 7 2 5 7
2-axle Trucks ( 1.5 PCE) 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
3- axle Trucks ( 2. 0 PCE) 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
4+ axle Trucks ( 3. 0 PCE) 48 6 0 6 3 6 9
Total PCE Trips 131 11 2 13 5 11 16
Souree: Appendix J
Notes: TSF = thousand square feet, PCE = passenger car equivalent Some of the totals may not match exactly due to rounding. 1 Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 11th Edition, 2021. Land Use Code 150 - Warehousing. 2 Vehicle Mix and Percent from SCAQMD 2014.
3 Passenger Car Equivalent ( PCE) factors per the San Bernardino County CMP ( SANBAG 2016).
Regarding the commenter' s concern of TRUs, the project would not include any cold storage space, which was outlined in the Project Description of the ISMND. Because the project would not contain any warehousing space that includes cold storage, TRUs would not be traveling to or from the project site.
Therefore, no diesel truck refrigeration unit trips were analyzed within the ISMND' s transportation analysis.
DUDEK 2023
14 NOVEMBER
023
-341-
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF CUP 23- 003 ( ENVIRONMENTAL) Noise
Summary: The commenter states that planning officials did not conduct a noise impact study for the proposed warehouse, and then provides information regarding idling diesel truck noise levels and information about particulate matter ( PM) emissions.
Response: Noise analysis was conducted for the project within the ISMND and within Appendix I of the ISMND. This study concluded that noise impacts would be less than significant using the City' s noise thresholds listed in Section 8.50 of the City' s Municipal Code.
Summary: The commenter states that several ordinances require that noise not exceed 55 decibels in residential areas.
Response: Section 8. 50 of the City' s Municipal Code states that allowable nighttime ( between the hours of 10 PM and 7AM) noise levels are not to exceed 55 decibels in residential areas.
The project would be required to adhere to City of Highland General Plan limitations on construction noise through restrictions on allowable construction hours ( Goal 7. 3, Action 1): " As a condition of approval, limit non -emergency construction activities adjacent to existing noise -sensitive uses to daylight hours between 7: 00 a. m. and 7: 00 p. m.". Therefore, since construction would not be occurring from 10 PM to 7 AM, construction noise would not exceed 55 decibels during nighttime hours.
During operation, HVAC equipment, parking lot activity and truck loading dock activities would introduce new sources of noise to the project site. According to Table 3. 13- 6 in the ISMND, combined operational activities would not exceed the applicable noise standard outlined in the City Municipal Code. This table is provided below for convenience.
Table 3. 13- 6. Combined On -Site Noise Summary of Results - Noise Levels ( dBA Leq) at Property Boundaries
N1 Business Park 70/ 65 32 38 40 42 No
W1 Business Park 70/ 65 29 36 30 38 No
E1 Business Park 70/ 65 15 37 56 56 No
S1 Business Park 70/ 65 19 37 60 60 No
Residence to N Residential 70/ 65 31 31 34 37 No
Head Start to E Business Park 60/ 55 16 31 54 54 No
Residence to SE Business Park 70/ 65 19 31 34 36 No
Source: Appendix 1- 3 of ISMND
1 D U D E K NOVEMBER 0232023
5 -342-
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO APPEAL OF CUP 23- 003 ( ENVIRONMENTAL) 2005 CARB Report: 20 - CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook 2005. pdf ( sfmohcd. orM https: Hsfmohcd. org/ sites/ defa u It/ fi les/ 20% 20- 20CAR B% 2C% 20Ai r% 20Q ua I ity% 20a nd% 20La nd% 20Use% 2OHa nd book% 202005. pdf 2020 CARB Report: Concept Paper for the Freight Handbook ( ca.gov) https:Hww2.arb. ca. gov/ sites/ defaulVfiles/ 2020- 03/ 2019. 12. 12%20-%20Concept%20Pa per%20for%20the%20Freight%20Ha nd book_ 1. pdf D U D E K NOVEMBER 023
6 2023 _
-343-
Attachment 4
HMC Section 16. 08. 070 — Variances
-344-
11/ 1/ 23, 11: 40AM
16. 08. 070 Variances.
Chapter 16. 08 PERMITS AND APPROVALS
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of variances is to provide for equity in use of property, and to prevent unnecessary hardships that might result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain regulations prescribed by this title.
B. Authority. The authority to grant minor variances shall be vested with the community development director. The authority to grant major variances, as defined herein, shall be vested with the planning commission. Variances from the terms of the regulations of this title shall be granted only when it is demonstrated that the strict application of the zoning regulations deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning district due to special circumstances applicable to the property in question, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings. Consequently, variances to a zoning regulation prescribed by this title may be granted with respect to development standards including, but not limited to, walls, fences, screening and landscaping, site area, width and depth, coverage, front, side, and rear yards, height of structures, usable open space, and on -street and off-street parking and loading facilities. In approving a variance, the community development director and planning commission may impose reasonable conditions.
C. Minor Variances. The community development director may approve requests for minor variances to modify the following requirements of this title:
1. Parking improvements.
2. Up to 30 percent of parking and loading space requirements, not to exceed two spaces.
3. Up to 40 percent of front yard setback requirements.
4. Up to 40 percent of side yard setback requirements, but no closer than three feet from property line.
5. Up to 30 percent of rear yard setback requirements, but no closer than 10 feet from property line.
6. Up to 30 percent of area requirements, excluding lot area requirements.
7. Up to 30 percent of height limitations, except that any height deviation not exceeding two feet shall also be considered a minor variance.
8. Up to 50 percent of maximum gross floor area requirements. https:// www. codepublishing. com/ CA/ Highland/#!/ Highland16/ Highland1608. htm1# 16. 08. 070 1/ 3 -345-
11/ 1/ 23, 11: 40 AM Chapter 16. 08 PERMITS AND APPROVALS D. Major Variances. Any request for a variance other than a minor variance shall be termed a major variance, and shall be reviewed and acted upon by the planning commission, upon conducting the required public hearing.
E. Required Findings. The planning commission, and/ or the community development director, shall make all the following findings in a decision to grant a variance request:
1. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by others within the surrounding area or vicinity;
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification;
3. That the strict interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification;
4. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification;
5. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
6. That the granting of the variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan and the intent of this title.
F. Conditions. Conditions of approval for a variance may include, but shall not be limited to:
1. Requirements for open spaces, fences, walls, and screening buffers; requirements for landscaping and erosion control measures, including maintenance thereof;
2. Requirements for dedications and street improvements;
3. Regulation of vehicular ingress and egress and traffic circulation; and
4. Regulation of hours of operation, and such other conditions deemed necessary to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare, and to https:// www. codepublishing. com/ CA/ High! and/#!/ Highlandl6/ Highland1608. html# 16. 08. 070 2/ 3 -346-
11/ 1/ 23, 11: 40AM Chapter 16. 08 PERMITS AND APPROVALS enable the reviewing authority to make all the findings required above. ( Ord. 213 § 5, 1996; Ord. 171 § 2. 70, 1994)
https:// www. codepublishing. com/ CA/ Highland/#!/ Highlandl6/ Highlandl6O8. html# 16. 08. 070 3/ 3 -347-
Attachment 5
Appeal Application and Support Letter
-348-
CITY OF HIGHLAND
27215 Base Line, Highland, CA 92346
Telephone ( 909) 864- 8732 FAX: ( 909) 862- 3180
HitCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
Q
APPEAL APPLICATION
Filing Fe
v
Date of Actiow—
3 File Index N/—
Project Applicant( s): Z c—A f t c -
Appellant' s Name( s):
Appellant's Add99ress — ua--
Phone: y aC1D st = 9
Assessor' s Parcel No. of Subject PA
City Staff to Complete
Date Appeal Filed:,® j1.5
Receipt Number: dV
G
J
U; l 12023
S l ,
9- 600D
or Street Address:_
General Location of Property:
oI D J G
AppEAL STATEMENT
1. 1/ VN hereby appeal to the City of Highland: (Check one) Public Nuisance Hearing Board from action by: (Check one) tanning Commission from action by: ( Check one)
City Council from action by: (Check one)
Vehicle Abetment Hearing Board from action by: ( Check one) unity Development City Planner
rector! Code Compliance
Building Official / Code Compliance
nning Commission
Historic and Cultural Preservation
City Engineer Board
2 Rev. 03121
-349-
2. I/ We are pealing the project/ Code compliance action taken to:
DENY the project — DENY the project without prejudice
3. APPROVE the project — APPROVE the project with Conditions (Attach a copy of the Conditions, if they are the subject of the
ADOPT a Negative Declaration appeal)
DECLARE the existence of a Public Nuisance and/ or Inoperable Vehicle( s) OTHER (Specify)
Detail what is being appealed and what action or change you seek. Specifically address the findings, mitigation measures, conditions and/or policies with which you disagree. Also state E
4. State why.you are appealing - be specific. Reference any errors or omissions - attach any supporting documentation. /-) I I _ / / / n„ /` c _ _r-, 1/
1/_
5. Public Nuisance/ Inoperable Vehicle Appeals - state why you appealing and if you are the owner of the property or the owner gNh5 vehicl/").
I/ VV,IIe certify that IMe are the:
V
Legal Property Owner( s)
Authorized Legal Agent(s)
Registered Vehicle Owners)
Other Interested Person( s)
Signature of Appeneani( s)j
Date:
Date:
Signature of Appelleant( s)]
Rev.03/ 21
-350-
From
AB Pathak
26855 4th Place.
Highland, CA 92346
7026863369
anshupathakQaol. com
October 2, 2023
To
Community Development Director,
27215 Baseline St.,
City of Highland
Highland, CA 92346
Sub. Amended Appeal Patriot warehouse project ( CUP- 23- 0031 Sir,
I am the owner of the following properties in the City of Highland.
1. 26855 4th Place, Highland, CA 92346. ( 1 192- 561- 12- 0000)
2. 8046 Central Ave., Highland, CA 92346. ( 1 192-561- 10-0000) I was present at the September 19, 2023, Public Hearing to oppose the recommendation based on the Environmental Assessment for the" Patriot warehouse project" (CUP- 23-003) to protect my rights based on the Environmental Assessment.
FRAUD 1 - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
1. The Notice of Public Hearing given to the Public by the City of Highland was fraudulent because the proposal was made for 42.5 feet on the NOTICE.
Exhibit I]
2. Notice of Public Hearing was not given for 49 Feet for the project. [ Exhibit 1 j
3. The Planning Commission approved the height of 49 Feet at a Public Hearing and committed Fraud on the residents of the City of Highland.
4. Based on the facts stated in the above paragraphs, the approval MUST be revoked.
FRAUD 2
1. 1 have attached " Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act" issued by the State of California Attorney General to support my appeal. [Exhibit 21
-351-
2. It' s clarified on Page 6 as follows:
Per California Air Resources Board ( CARE) guidance, siting warehouse facilities so that their property lines are at least 1 000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors.
3. The City of Highland defrauded the residents of the City of Highland and the Planning Commission by concealing the material facts on the Notice of Public Hearing about the guidelines set by " California Air Resources Board. ( CARE) for warehouse facilities.
4. Property lines of Warehouse facilities MUST be at least 1, 000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors.
5. The Planning Commission would NOT have approved the PROPOSAL if the City of Highland had clarified that Warehouse facilities MUST be at least 1, 000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors.
6. Based on the facts stated in the above paragraphs, the approval MUST be revoked.
UNDISPUTED FACTS ABOUT PATRIOT
A. Patriot has submitted applications for the following projects in the City of Highland.
1. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 21- 007 ( NWC Victoria & 6th St.)
2. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-002 ( NWC 3rd St. & Central Ave.)
3. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-003 ( Grape St. south of Cypress St.)
4. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-004 ( SEC Victoria & Cypress)
5. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-011 ( South side of Del Rosa west of 6th St.)
6. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-014 (SEC Victoria Ave. and 5th St.)
7. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 23-003 (South side of 5th St. west of Central Ave.) 1192- 561- 04; 1192- 561- 05; 1192- 561- 06; 1192- 561. 07.
B. Patriot will be filing more projects in the City of Highland because they have purchased vacant land next to my residence. Parcel Number 1192- 561 - 11 - 0000, 1192- 561- 15- 0000, 1192- 561- 16- 0000, 1192- 561- 17. 0000,1192- 561- 18- 0000,1192- 561- 19- 0000, 1192- 561- 20- 0000 and 1192- 561- 21- 0000.
C. A real estate agent of Patriot offered me $ 1. 6 Million for my properties, which I refused in September 2022. 1192-561- 10- 0000; 1192-561- 12-0000.
D. Boundaries of Patriot' s Parcel Numbers ( 1) 1192-561- 11- 0000, ( 2) 1 192-561- 18- 0000, and (3) 1192-561- 19- 0000 are attached to my residence. Parcel Number 1192- 561- 12- 0000.
-352-
UNDISPUTED FACTS ABOUT DISTANCE
1. I reside at 26855 4th Place, Highland, CA 92346. Parcel # 1192- 561- 12- 0000.
2. 1 also own vacant land, 8046 Central Ave. Highland, CA 92346. Parcel # 1192- 561- 10- 0000.
3. Patriot wants to build a Warehouse on Parcel Numbers 1 192- 561- 04; 1192- 561- 05; 1192- 561- 06, and 1192-561- 07.
4. The boundary of my property Parcel Number 1192- 561- 10-0000 is next to Patriot' s Parcel Numbers 1192- 561- 04; 1192- 561- 05; 1192- 561- 06, and 1192-561- 07.
5. My residence, Parcel Number 1192-561- 12, is next to my vacant land, Parcel Number 1192-561- 10.
6. The distance between my residence, Parcel Number 1192- 561- 12, and Parcel Number 1192- 561- 07 is 41 Feet.
7. The Patriot Warehouse Project is 41 Feet from my residence.
8. None of the Council Members of the City of Highland resides within 41 Feet of a 49 Feet High Warehouse.
9. None of the Employees of the City of Highland resides within 41 Feet of a 49 Feet High Warehouse.
10. None of the Attorneys of the City of Highland resides within 41 Feet of a 49 Feet High Warehouse.
11. The City Planner knows that my residence ( 26855 4th Place, Highland, CA 92346) is within 50 Feet of the Patriot Warehouse Project.
12. Patriot Warehouse Project knows that my residence (26855 4th Place, Highland, CA 92346) is within 50 Feet of the Patriot Warehouse Project.
FACTS KNOWN TO PATRIOT WAREHOUSE PROJECT. ( CUP- 23- 003)
1. The Patriot knows my residence is 41 Feet away from their warehouse proiect.
2. Patriot knows that per California Air Resources Board ( CARE) guidance, siting warehouse facilities property lines are at least 1, 000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors.
3. Patriot knows discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortages in the area, and encroachments between me and Patriot.
4. Patriot knows they have purchased vacant land near my residence to build more warehouses. Parcel Number 1192-561- 11- 0000, 1192-561- 15-0000, 1192-561- 16-0000, 1192-561- 17- 0000, 1192-561- 18-0000, 1192-561- 19- 0000, 1192-561- 20-0000 and 1192- 561- 21- 0000.
5. Patriot knows I refused their offer to sell my properties in September 2022 for $1. 6 Million. Parcel Number 1192- 561- 08; 1192- 561- 12,
6. Patriot knows that the boundaries of Patriot' s Parcel Numbers 1192- 561- 11- 0000, 1192- 561- 18-0000, and 1192-561- 19- 0000 are attached to my residence. Parcel Number 1192- 561- 12- 0000.
-353-
7. Patriot knows that they cannot build Warehouses next to my residence within 1000 feet based on guidelines set by the Attorney General of the State of California.
FACTS KNOWN TO CITY OF HIGHLAND - ( CUP- 23- 003)
1. The City of Highland knows the distance between my residence and the Patriot Warehouse Project is 41 Feet.
2. The City of Highland knows that per California Air Resources Board (CARB) guidance, siting warehouse facilities property lines are at least 1, 000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors.
3. The City of Highland knows that The Patriot Warehouse Project did not notify the City in writing of the following.
A. How many diesel trucks would come daily?
B. How many trucks per day with diesel refrigeration units, or C. Where diesel Truck Refrigeration Units (TRU) would operate for more than 300 hours per week.
4. The City of Highland knows discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortages in the area, and encroachments between me and Patriot.
5. The City of Highland knows Patriot has purchased vacant land near my residence to build more warehouses. Parcel Number 1192- 561- 11- 0000, 1192- 561- 15- 0000, 1 l 92-561- 16-0000, 1192-561- 17- 0000, 1192-561- 18- 0000,1192-561- 19- 0000, 1192-561- 20-0000 and 1192-561- 21- 0000.
6. The City of Highland knows that I refused the offer of Patriot to sell my properties in September 2022 for $1. 6 Million. Parcel Number 1192- 561- 08; 1192-561- 12,
7. The City of Highland knows that the boundaries of Patriot' s Parcel Numbers 1192- 561- 11- 0000, 1192- 561- 18- 0000, and 1192- 561- 19- 0000 are attached to MY residence. Parcel Number 1192-561- 12-0000.
8. The City of Highland knows that they cannot allow Patriot to build Warehouses next to my residence within 1000 feet based on guidelines set by the Attorney General of the State of California.
MISREPRESENTATION, CONCEALMENT OF TRUTH, AND FRAUD BY THE CITY OF HIGHLAND
1. The City of Highland concealed the truth to the " Community Development Director" in their written report submitted at the hearing that my residence is less than 50 Feet from the proposed " Patriot Warehouse Project."
2. The City of Highland concealed the truth to the " Community Development Director" in their written report submitted at the hearing that they cannot allow Patriot to build Warehouses next to my residence within 1000 feet based on guidelines set by the Attorney General of the State of California.
-354-
REVOCATION IS NECESSARY
1. I am a senior citizen.
2. 1 have ongoing health issues due to diabetes.
3. My health, safety, and welfare can be served only by revocation.
4. 1 will suffer from excessive noise due to:
A. truck engine idling,
B. shouting,
C. loud music, and
D. backup beepers.
5. Planning officials did not conduct a noise impact study for the proposed warehouse, especially when my residence is within fifty feet.
6. Idling diesel trucks emit noise at 85 dBA (decibels) measured at 50 feet.
7. In 2022, the Union of Concerned Scientists released an update of their 2005 report, Diesel Engines and Public Health. The 2022 report noted:
A. " Diesel -powered vehicles, vessels, locomotives, and equipment account for over 60 percent of all nitrogen oxides ( NOx) and more than 70 percent of all fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions from US transportation sources. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles alone account for 20 percent of all NOx and 25 percent of PM2.5 pollution emitted by vehicles in the country." B. " Particulate matter (PM) irritates the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs, contributing to respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses and even premature death. Although everyone is susceptible to particulate pollution, children, the elderly, and individuals with preexisting respiratory conditions are the most vulnerable. A recent study found that the rates of nine common causes of death, including cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and other prevalent fatal conditions, were associated with exposure even at concentrations of fine particulates lower than the current federal standards."
8. The Clean Air Task Force created Deaths by Dirty Diesel - Mapping the health impacts of diesel nationwide. This interactive map will allow you to see how diesel emissions affect those living in your area. By comparing your area with others with higher Air Pollution from Diesel, you can help elected officials and your neighbors understand why it is vital to encourage greater use of Zero or Near -Zero emission trucks and discourage proposals that add more conventional diesel truck traffic.
9. Consumer Reports has launched a program that partners with area residents and other allies to monitor and document warehouse impacts. A 2022 article describes how sensors installed through this program showed that " air quality was moderately unhealthy 30% of the time." These unhealthful conditions correlated with high levels of truck traffic captured by program sensors.
10. A 2023 article describes how Consumer Reports is also assisting neighborhoods with advancing laws that reduce health and other warehouse impacts. For
-355-
further information, contact Alan Smith, Manager, Consumer Reports Community Leadership, at alan.s[ n#[email protected] -
11. The chart below compares noise levels (in decibels) from various sources, including trucks. Several ordinances require that noise not exceed 55 decibels in residential areas (outside a home).
-356-
uoft
uo d8
loodS
ooft.
so dB:
7048
b0d8
o.dB
DECIBEL SCALE
NILTrombone
Hair ogee
Car..
conversation
f 41 . o
Rain i i t
t:0
toi •
jo dO Rustle U-1 - = of -Leaves
2odB •. Whisper
164
n. ciR.
12. -357-
13. Simple noise models, such as the Distance Attenuation Calculator indicate that a separation distance of 1600 feet would be needed for the 85-decibel noise from idling diesel truck engines to drop to the residential property acceptable level of 55 decibels.
14. If a home is located 400 feet from the portion of a warehouse site where trucks would be idling the noise level could be 67 decibels, which is 12 decibels above the 55-decibel acceptable level for residential areas. 15. As shown in the following graphic, a 5 to 8-decibel decrease can be achieved for every 100 feet of densely growing evergreens and shrubs between a noise source and a home.
to 8: dBA reducxion
per 00 ft of buffer width
Maytpr b a far dMking snow
16, Earth berms and walls are sometimes used to reduce noise from highways and other sources. As shown in the next graphic, these measures only work in the area of the noise shadow created by the berm or wall. In other words, if a berm or wall does riot obstruct your view of a noise source from your home, it may do little to keep your home quiet. Section VI, of the 2022 California Attorney General publication Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act listed a number of measures to reduce noise impacts.
-358-
govnd. Faths
Rom
Traffic Nolsa sources;
UnsM.aldertl House srz ww +
I
B ilding Constfleretl in•W- Assatam0114
Property Value
17. Truck noise may be the aspect of a warehouse with the most significant effect on residential property value. About noise and property value, researchers concluded the following in a 2021 study entitled An Analytical Framework for Evaluating Potential Truck Parking Locations:
18. " Increases in noise pollution are inevitable when dispersed idling trucks are centralized into the new or expanded truck stop.
19. The Federal Highway Administration mandates that maximum noise levels for large trucks not exceed 85 dBA (decibels) 50 feet away. Combined, this data can approximate sound values over different distances. For every 2.5 dBA increase in noise levels above 55 dBA, residential property values are assumed to decrease by 0.2% to 1. 2%, with wealthier communities, containing a higher willingness to pay for peace and quiet, being more sensitive to such increases in noise pollution ( Palmquist, 1980). Any truck stop development project will require a noise impact study that evaluates the feasibility of installing noise barriers to remediate the noise pollution problem."
20. In general, noise decreases by 6 decibels for every doubling of distance from a source. So, if the truck noise level is 85 decibels at 50 feet, it would be 79 decibels at 100 feet, 73 decibels at 200 feet, and then 67 decibels at 400 feet.
21. Simple noise models, such as the Distance Attenuation Calculator, indicate that it would require a separation distance of 1600 feet for the 85- decibel noise from idling diesel truck engines to drop to the residential property acceptable level of 55 decibels.
22. If a home is located 400 feet from the portion of a warehouse site where trucks would be idling, the noise level could be 67 decibels, which is 12 decibels above
-359-
the 55 decibels acceptable level for residential areas. After dividing 12 decibels by 2.5 decibels, we get 4.8, which could result in a ( 0. 217o x 4.8) 0. 96% to ( 1. 2% x
4. 8) 5. 7% decline in home resale value.
23. If the warehouse can be seen from the home, a further decrease in property value may result.
Recommendation for the FBI investigation
I further request the FBI investigation for bribery into the applications and approvals of the warehouse projects in the City of Highland, including the following.
1. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 21- 007 ( NWC Victoria & 6th St.)
2. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-002 ( NWC 3rd St. & Central Ave.)
3. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-003 ( Grape St. south of Cypress St.)
4. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-004 ( SEC Victoria & Cypress)
5. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22-011 ( South side of Del Rosa west of 6th St.)
6. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 22- 014 ( SEC Victoria Ave. and 5th St.)
7. Patriot Development Warehouse CUP 23- 003 ( South side of 5th St. west of Central Ave.) 1192-561- 04; 1192-561- 05; 1192-561- 06; 1192-561- 07.
Respectfully Submitted:
AB Pathak ( Anshu Pathak)
Copy to Employees and Counsel of the City of Highland
Please forward a copy of this letter to the FBI for Investigation.
-360-
CITY OF HIGHLAND
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED BEFORE THE HIGHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
FILE/ INDEX: Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 23- 003)
Design Review Application ( DRA 23-004)
Variance ( VAR 23-001)
APPLICANT: Patriot Partners, LLC
PROPOSAL: The project includes construction of an approximately 53, 665-square- foot, one- story warehouse building composed of approximately 49,665 square T feet of mezzanine/ office space. feet of warehouse space and 4,000 square The warehouse building would have a maximum height of 42.5 feet when V measured Given that the City's Municipal Gode a o from grade. maximum height of 35 feet in the Business Park zone, a minor variance is being requested to accommodate the projects height.
PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is located at a 2.43-acre property on the south side of 5t' Street, approximately 182 feet west of Central Avenue in the City of Highland, California.
Assessor' s Parcel Numbers: 1192- 561- 01, - 03, - 04, - 05, - 06, - 07 and - 10 PLACE OF MEETING: Highland City Council Chambers
27215 Base Line, Highland, CA 92346
DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 6: 00 p.m.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared and a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were prepared and circulated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and will be recommend for approval.
For those wishing to make public comments at the September 19th, Planning Commission meeting, you may do so in person, by mail or e-mail to be read -aloud at the meeting. Comments can be submitted any time prior to the meeting as well as during the meeting' up until the end of the corresponding item. To submit by email, please direct your comments to 12ubliccommentacitvofhighland.oro. When you are making a comment regarding an item on the agenda, please identify the agenda item in the subject line. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would otherwise govern speaker comments at the Planning Commission meeting. Members of the public will be permitted to make public comments in person. if you wish to challenge the proposal or the related environmental determinations 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 delivered to the City of Highland, at or prior to, the public hearing.
Dated: August 29, 2023 Betty Hughes, MMC
City Clerk of the City of Highland
Exhibit 1
13 -361-
City of Highland
27215 Base Line, Highland, CA. 92346
Phone: ( 909) 864- 8732, x 258 Fax: ( 909) 862- 3180
@cit mfhi Contact: Angela Tafolla, Assistant Planner, a#^ F^ 9hland_ora
PROJECT NOTICE
The proposal listed below has been flied with the City of Highland Planning Department. You are invited to comment because you may own property or have a regulatory interest in UGYc. vrn, v... .,.... -.. .. ..
FILE NO.: Conditional Use Permit No: CUP 22. 003 entitling a general distribution warehouse; And
Design Review Application No. ORA No. 23-004, review of the Site Plan, Building: Elevations, Landscaping and Grading for the commercial warehouse use; and
Variance No. VAR 23-001 for a Minor Variance ( 30% increase or less)) t allow a 5-foot increase in building height from 35 feet to 45 feet.
LOCATION. Four (4) parcels located on the south side of 51' Street just west of Central Avenue. The total project site is approximately 2.86 acres: .
APN: 1192-561- 04; 1192-561- 05, 1192-561- 06; 1192-58107 DESCRIPTION: The Applicant is requesting to construct an approximately 53,665 square foot warehouse building and associated; improvements; Including loading docks passenger vehicle parking spaces, a stormwater
detention/ infiltration basin, and landscape area across four (4) parcels totaling approximately 2.86-acres. The project site is located on the south side of 5t Street just west of Central Avenue in the Business Park (BP) zoning district.
9 -362-
PRINTED NAME DATE
COMMENTS REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 23- 003 for Patriot Warehouse on the south side of 5t' Street Just west of Central Avenue:
SIGNATURE
Your comments must be received by this office no later than April 20, 2023- Comments received after that date may not be considered in the decision. If you have no comment, no reply is necessary.
Project Site
N
-363-
l
State of California
ROB BONTA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General
Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and
Mitigation Measures to Comply with the
California Environmental Quality Act
Exhibit 2
-364-
Table of Contents
I.
H.
Background.......................................................................................................................... 1 Proactive Planning: General Plans, Local Ordinances, and Good Neighbor Policies ......... 3 4 III. Community Engagement.....................................................................................................
IV. Warehouse Siting and Design Considerations..................................................................... 5 V. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis and Mitigation ................................ 7 VI. Noise Impacts Analysis and Mitigation............................................................................. 10 VII. Traffic Impacts Analysis and Mitigation............................................................................ 11 VM. Other Significant Environmental Impacts Analysis and Mitigation.................................. 12 13
IX. Conclusion .......................... ................................................... -365-
Updated September 2022
In carrying out its duty to enforce laws across California, the California Attorney General' s Bureau ofEnvironmental Justice ( Bureau)' regularly reviews proposed warehouse projects for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and other laws. When necessary, the Bureau submits comment letters to lead agencies regarding warehouse projects, and in rare cases the Bureau has filed litigation to enforce CEQA.2 This document builds upon the Bureau' s work on warehouse projects, collecting information gained from the Bureau' s review of hundreds of warehouse projects across the state.' It is meant to help lead agencies pursue CEQA compliance and promote environmentallyjust development as they confront warehouse project proposals. 4 While CEQA analysis is necessarily project -specific, this document provides information on feasible best practices and mitigation measures, nearly all of which have been adapted from actual warehouse projects in California.
1. Background
In recent years, the proliferation of e-commerce and rising consumer expectations of rapid shipping have contributed to a boom in warehouse developments California, with its ports, population centers, and transportation network, has found itself at the center of this trend. In 2020, the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland collectively accounted for over 34% of all United States intemational container trade.' The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach alone generate about 35, 000 container truck trips every day.' Accordingly, the South Coast Air Basin now contains approximately 3, 000 warehouses of over 100,000 square feet each, with a total warehouse capacity of approximately 700 million square feet, an increase of 20 percent over the last five years.' This trend has only accelerated, with e- commerce growing to 1 https•// oae ca. gov/ envirogM t/iustice.
2 hgps:// oar ca aov/ environmenticega; People ofthe State ofCalifornia a City ofFontana Super. Ct. San Bernardino County, No. CIVSB2121829); South Central Neighbors United et al. v. City ofFresno et ab ( Super. Ct. Fresno County, No. 18CECG00690). 3 This September 2022 version revises and replaces the prior March 2021 version of this document.
4 Anyone reviewing this document to determine CEQA compliance responsibilities should consult their own attorney for legal advice.
5 As used in this document, " warehouse" or " logistics facility" is defined as a facility consisting of one or more buildings that stores cargo, goods, or products on a short- or long-term basis for later distribution to businesses and/ or retail customers. 6 Data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Container TEUs ( Twenty -foot Equivalent Units) 2020), https:// data.bts. gov/-,tories/ s/ Container- TEU/ X3fb- aeda/ ( forts of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland combined for 14. 157 million TEUs, 34% of 41. 24 million TEUs total nationwide) ( last accessed September 18, 2022).
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, FHWA Operations Support — Port Peak Pricing Program Evaluation (2020), available at httos:// ops. fhwa.dot.gov/pAblications/fliwahonO9Ol4/ sect2.htin (last accessed September 18, 2022).
S South Coast Air Qual. Mgmt. Dist., Final Socioeconomic AssessmentforProposed Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule — Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions WAIRE) Program and Proposed Rule 316 — Fees for Rule 2305, at 7- 8, 41 ( May 2021).
IL
-366-
Updated September 2022
13% of all retail sales and 2021 being a second consecutive record year for new warehouse space leased. 9 The latest data and forecasts predict that the next wave of warehouse development will be in the Central Valley. to
When done properly, these activities can contribute to the economy and consumer welfare. However, imprudent warehouse development can harm local communities and the environment. Among other pollutants, diesel trucks visiting warehouses emit nitrogen oxide N%)-- a primary precursor to smog formation and a significant factor in the development of respiratory problems like asthma, bronchitis, and lung irritation —and diesel particulate matter ( a subset of fine particular matter that is smaller than 2.5 micrometers) —a contributor to cancer, heart disease, respiratory illnesses, and premature death. 11 Trucks and on -site loading activities can also be loud, bringing disruptive noise levels during 24/7 operation that can cause hearing damage after prolonged exposure. 12 The hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of daily truck and passenger car trips that warehouses generate contribute to traffic jams, deterioration ofroad surfaces, and traffic accidents.
These environmental impacts also tend to be concentrated in neighborhoods already suffering from disproportionate health impacts and systemic vulnerability. For example, a comprehensive study by the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that communities located near large warehouses scored far higher on California' s environmental justice screening tool, which measures overall pollution and demographic vulnerability. 13 That 9 U.S. Census Bureau News, Quarterly Retail E- Commerce Sales 4th Quarter 2021 ( February 22, 2022), https // www census aov/retaiUrnrts/ www/ data/ ndf/ec current. pdf (last accessed September 18, 2022); CBRE Research, 2022 North America Industrial Big Box Report: Review and Outlook, at 2-3 ( March 2022), available at https:// www.cbre.com/insights/rgports/2022 nortbamerica- industrial- big-box#download- report (last accessed September 18, 2022). 10 CBRE Research, supra note 9, at 4, 36; New York Times, Warehouses Are Headed tothe Central Valley, Too (Jul. 22, 2020), available at https://
www. nytimes.com/2020/ 07/22/us/ coronavirus- ca-warehouse- workers.html. u California Air Resources Board, Nitrogen Dioxide & Health, httTs•// ww2 arb ca izov/ resources/ nitropen- dioxide-and-health ( last accessed September 18, 2022) ( NOx); California Air Resources Board, Summary: Diesel Particular Matter Health Impacts, ht s://ww2. arb.ca. ov/ resources/ summ -diesel- articulate- matter- health- im acts last accessed September 18, 2022); Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and American Lung Association of California, Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust, naps // ochha ca gov/ media/ downloads/ colenviroscreen/ indicators/ diesel4-02.pdf (last accessed September 18, 2022) ( I)PM). 12
Noise Sources and Their Effects, bttps://
www. chem.purdue.edu/chem afety/ Training/ PPETrain/dlevels. htrn (last accessed September 18, 2022) (a diesel truck moving 40 miles per hour, 50 feet away, produces 84 decibels of sound). 13
South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Final Socioeconomic Assessment for Proposed Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule — Warehouse Actions andInvestments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program and Proposed Rule 316 — Fees for Rule 2305" (May 2021), at 4-5. 2
-367-
Updated September 2022
study concluded that, compared to the South Coast Air Basin averages, communities in the South Coast Air Basin near large warehouses had a substantially higher proportion of people of color, were exposed to more diesel particulate matter; had higher rates of asthma, cardiovascular disease, and low birth weights; and had higher poverty and unemployment rates. 14 Each area has its own unique history, but many ofthese impacts and vulnerabilities reflect historic redlining practices in these communities, which devalued land and concentrated poverty, racial outgroups, and pollution into designated areas. 11
H. Proactive Planning: General Plans, Local Ordinances, and Good Neighbor Policies To systematically guide warehouse development, we encourage local governing bodies to proactively plan for logistics projects in their jurisdictions. Proactive planning allows jurisdictions to prevent land use conflicts before they materialize and direct sustainable development. Benefits also include providing a predictable business environment, protecting residents from environmental harm, and setting consistent expectations jurisdiction -wide.
Proactive planning can take many forms. Land use designation and zoning decisions should channel development into appropriate areas. For example, establishing industrial districts near major highway and rail corridors but away from sensitive receptors 16 can help attract investment while avoiding conflicts between warehouse facilities and residential communities.
Transition zones with lighter industrial and commercial land uses may also help minimize conflicts between residential and industrial uses.
In addition, general plan policies, local ordinances, and good neighbor policies should set minimum standards for logistics projects. General plan policies can be incorporated into existing economic development, land use, circulation, or other related general plan elements. Many jurisdictions alternatively choose to consolidate policies in a separate environmental justice element. Adopting general plan policies to guide warehouse development may also help 14 Id. at 5- 7.
15 Beginning in the 1930s, federal housing policy directed investment away from Black, immigrant, and working- class communities by color -coding neighborhoods according to the purported " riskiness" ofloaning to their residents. In California cities where such `redlining" maps were drawn, nearly all of the communities where warehouses are now concentrated were formerly coded " red," signifying the least desirable areas where investment was to be avoided.
See University ofRichmond Digital Scholarship Lab, Mapping Inequality, ht s: Hdsl. richmond. edu/ anorama/ redlining/# loc-- 12/ 33. 748/- 118. 272& city--- anaeles- ca ( Los Angeles), bttps: Hdsl.richmond. edu/ p aorarna/ redli-ning/# Ioc-- 13/ 32. 685/- 117. 132& citv--sandiego- ca ( San Diego), httys:/ Idsl.richmond. edu/ panorama/ reffliningl# loc= l 1/ 37. 81/- 122 38& city—Oakland- ca ( Oakland),
https // dsl richmond edu/panorama/ redlining/# loc= 13/ 37 956/- 121 326& city=stockton- ca Stockton), https•// dsl ricbmond edu/ panorama/ redlining/# loc- 12/ 36. 751/- 119. 86& crtv fresnaca ( Fresno) ( all last accessed September 18, 2022). 16 In this document, " sensitive receptors" refers to residences, schools, public recreation facilities, health care facilities, places ofworship, daycare facilities, community centers, or incarceration facilities.
3 E
-368-
Updated September 2022
jurisdictions comply with their obligations under SB 1000, which requires local government general plans to identify objectives and policies to reduce health risks in disadvantaged communities, promote civil engagement in the public decision making process, and prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities. 17 Local ordinances and good neighbor policies that set development standards for all warehouses in the jurisdiction are a critical and increasingly common tool that serve several goals. When well -designed, these ordinances direct investment to local improvements, provide predictability for developers, conserve government resources by streamlining project review processes, and reduce the environmental impacts of industrial development. While many jurisdictions have adopted warehouse -specific development standards, an ordinance in the City of Fontana provides an example to review and build upon. 18 Good neighbor policies in Riverside County and by the Western Riverside Council ofGovernment include additional measures worth consideration. 19
The Bureau encourages jurisdictions to adopt their own local ordinances that combine the strongest policies from those models with measures discussed in the remainder ofthis document.
III. Community Engagement
Early and consistent community engagement is central to establishing good relationships between communities, lead agencies, and warehouse developers and tenants. Robust community engagement can give lead agencies access to community residents' on -the -ground knowledge and information about their concerns, build community support for projects, and develop creative solutions to ensure new logistics facilities are mutually beneficial. Examples ofbest practices for community engagement include:
Holding a series of community meetings at times and locations convenient to members of the affected community and incorporating suggestions into the project design.
Posting information in hard copy in public gathering spaces and on a website about the project. The information should include a complete, accurate project description, maps and drawings ofthe project design, and information about how the public can provide input and be involved in the project approval process. The 17 For more information about SB 1000, see httjs•//oae ca. eov/environment/ sb1000. 18 https: Hoav,.ca. gov/ system/ files/ attachments/ pLess docs/Final%2OSigped% 2OFontana% 200rdinance. 12df (last accessed September 18, 2022). 19 For example, the Riverside County policy requires community benefits agreements and supplemental funding contributions toward additional pollution offsets, and the Wester Riverside Council of Governments policy sets a minimum buffer zone of 300 meters between warehouses and sensitive receptors. httns-// www.rivcocob. ora - contentlunloads/ 2020/ 01/ Good Neighbor-Policy-F- 3- Final-Adonted. 1) ( last accessed September 18, 2022) ( Riverside County);
http•//wwwwrr,og.cog.ca.us/DocumentCenterNiew/318/Good-Nei hbor-Guidelines-for-SitinaWarehouse- Distribution- Facilities- PDF?bild= (last accessed September 18, 2022) (Wester Riverside Council of Governments).
4 l 9-
-369-
Updated September 2022
information should be in a format that is easy to navigate and understand for members ofthe affected community.
Providing notice by mail to residents and schools within a certain radius ofthe project and along transportation corridors to be used by vehicles visiting the project, and by posting a prominent sign on the project site. The notice should include a briefproject description and directions for accessing complete information about the project and for providing input on the project. providing translation or interpretation in residents' native language, where appropriate.
For public meetings broadcast online or otherwise held remotely, providing for access and public comment by telephone and supplying instructions for access and public comment with ample lead time prior to the meeting.
Partnering with local community -based organizations to solicit feedback, leverage local networks, co -host meetings, and build support.
Considering adoption of a community benefits agreement, negotiated with input from affected residents and businesses, by which the developer provides benefits to the affected community.
Creating a community advisory board made up of local residents to review and provide feedback on project proposals in early planning stages.
Identifying a person to act as a community liaison concerning on -site construction activity and operations, and providing contact information for the community liaison to the surrounding community.
Requiring signage in public view at warehouse facilities with contact information for a local designated representative for the facility operator who can receive community complaints, and requiring any complaints to be answered by the facility operator within 48 hours ofreceipt.
IV. Warehouse Siting and Design Considerations
The most important consideration when planning a logistics facility is its location.
Warehouses located in residential neighborhoods or near sensitive receptors expose community residents and those using or visiting sensitive receptor sites to the air pollution, noise, traffic, and other environmental impacts they generate. Therefore, placing facilities away from sensitive receptors significantly reduces their environmental and quality of life harms on local communities. The suggested best practices for siting and design of warehouse facilities does not relieve lead agencies' responsibility under CEQA to conduct a proj ect-specific analysis of the project' s impacts and evaluation offeasible mitigation measures and alternatives; lead agencies' incorporation of the best practices must be part of the impact, mitigation and alternatives analyses to meet the requirements of CEQA. Examples ofbest practices when siting and designing warehouse facilities include:
-370-
Updated September 2022
Per California Air Resources Board ( CARE) guidance, siting warehouse facilities so that their property lines are at least 1, 000 feet from the property lines of the nearest sensitive receptors. 20
Providing adequate amounts of on -site parking to prevent trucks and other vehicles from parking or idling on public streets and to reduce demand for off -site truck yards.
Establishing setbacks from the property line ofthe nearest sensitive receptor to warehouse dock doors, loading areas, and truck drive aisles, and locating warehouse dock doors, loading areas, and truck drive aisles on the opposite side ofthe building from the nearest sensitive receptors— e. g., placing dock doors on the north side of the facility if sensitive receptors are near the south side ofthe facility.
placing facility entry and exit points from the public street away from sensitive receptors— e. g., placing these points on the north side of the facility if sensitive receptors are adjacent to the south side ofthe facility.
Ensuring heavy duty trucks abide by the on -site circulation plans by constructing physical barriers to block those trucks from using areas of the project site restricted to light duty vehicles or emergency vehicles only.
Preventing truck queuing spillover onto surrounding streets by positioning entry gates after a minimum of 140 feet ofspace for queuing, and increasing the distance by 70 feet for every 20 loading docks beyond 50 docks.
Locating facility entry and exit points on streets ofhigher commercial classification that are designed to accommodate heavy duty truck usage.
Screening the warehouse site perimeter and onsite areas with significant truck traffic ( e.g., dock doors and drive aisles) by creating physical, structural, and/ or vegetative buffers that prevent or substantially reduce pollutant and noise dispersion from the facility to sensitive receptors.
Planting exclusively 36-inch box evergreen trees to ensure faster maturity and four -season foliage.
Requiring all property owners and successors in interest to maintain onsite trees and vegetation for the duration of ownership, including replacing any dead or unhealthy trees and vegetation.
Posting signs clearly showing the designated entry and exit points from the public street for trucks and service vehicles.
Including signs and drive aisle pavement markings that clearly identify onsite circulation patterns to minimize unnecessary onsite vehicle travel.
Posting signs indicating that all parking and maintenance of trucks must be conducted within designated on -site areas and not within the surrounding community or public streets.
20 CARB, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Apri12005), at ES- 1. CARB staff has released draft updates to this siting and design guidance which suggests a greater distance may be warranted in some scenarios. CARB, Concept Paper for the Freight Handbook (December 2019), available at https•//ww2 arb ca gov/ sites/ default/files/2020- 03/ 2019 12 12°/ u20% 24Concept% 20Paper% 20for%20the% 20Freight% 20Handbook Is ( last accessed September 18, 2022).
6 -371-
Updated September 2022
V. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis and Mitigation Emissions ofair pollutants and greenhouse gases are often among the most substantial environmental impacts from new warehouse facilities. CEQA compliance demands a proper accounting ofthe full air quality and greenhouse gas impacts of logistics facilities and adoption of all feasible mitigation of significant impacts. Although efforts by CARB and other authorities to regulate the heavy-duty truck and off -road diesel fleets have made excellent progress in reducing the air quality impacts oflogistics facilities, the opportunity remains for local jurisdictions to further mitigate these impacts at the project level. Lead agencies and developers should also consider designing projects with their long-term viability in mind. Constructing the necessary infrastructure to prepare for the zero -emission future of goods movement not only reduces a facility' s emissions and local impact now, but it can also save money as demand for zero -emission infrastructure grows. In planning new logistics facilities, the Bureau strongly encourages developers to consider the local, statewide, and global impacts oftheir projects' emissions.
Examples of best practices when studying air quality and greenhouse gas impacts include:
Fully analyzing all reasonably foreseeable project impacts, including cumulative impacts. In general, new warehouse developments are not ministerial under CEQA because they involve public officials' personal judgment as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the project, even when warehouses are permitted by a site' s applicable zoning and/or general plan land use designation. 21 When analyzing cumulative impacts, thoroughly considering the project' s incremental impact in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, even ifthe project' s individual impacts alone do not exceed the applicable significance thresholds.
Preparing a quantitative air quality study in accordance with local air district guidelines.
preparing a quantitative health risk assessment in accordance with California Office ofEnvironmental Health Hazard Assessment and local air district guidelines.
Refraining from labeling compliance with CARB or air district regulations as a mitigation measure -- compliance with applicable regulations is required regardless of CEQA.
Disclosing air pollution from the entire expected length of truck trips. CEQA requires full public disclosure of a project' s anticipated truck trips, which entails calculating truck trip length based on likely truck trip destinations, rather than the distance from the facility to the edge of the air basin, local jurisdiction, or other truncated endpoint All air pollution associated with the project must be considered, regardless ofwhere those impacts occur.
21 CEQA Guidelines § 15369.
M
-372-
Updated September 2022
Accounting for all reasonably foreseeable greenhouse gas emissions from the project, without discounting projected emissions based on participation in California' s Cap -and -Trade Program.
Examples of measures to mitigate air quality and greenhouse gas impacts from construction are below. To ensure mitigation measures are enforceable and effective, they should be imposed as permit conditions on the project where applicable.
Requiring off -road construction equipment to be hybrid electric -diesel or zero - emission, where available, and all diesel -fueled off -road construction equipment to be equipped with CARB Tier IV -compliant engines or better, and including this requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts, with successful contractors demonstrating the ability to supply the compliant construction equipment for use prior to any ground -disturbing and construction activities.
Prohibiting off -road diesel -powered equipment from being in the " on" position for more than 10 hours per day. ifts, and pressure washers, and Providing Using electric -powered hand tools, forkl electrical hook ups to the power grid rather than use of diesel -fueled generators to supply their power.
Designating an area in the construction site where electric -powered construction vehicles and equipment can charge.
Limiting the amount of daily grading disturbance area. Prohibiting grading on days with an Air Quality Index forecast of greater than 100 for particulates or ozone for the project area.
Forbidding idling of heavy equipment for more than three minutes.
Keeping onsite and furnishing to the lead agency or other regulators upon request, all equipment maintenance records and data sheets, including design specifications and emission control tier classifications.
Conducting an on -site inspection to verify compliance with construction mitigation and to identify other opportunities to further reduce construction impacts.
Using paints, architectural coatings, and industrial maintenance coatings that have volatile organic compound levels of less than 10 g/L.
Providing information on transit and ridesharing programs and services to construction employees.
Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations for construction employees.
Examples of measures to mitigate air quality and greenhouse gas impacts from operation include:
Requiring all heavy-duty vehicles engaged in drayage to or from the project site to be zero -emission beginning in 2030.
22 " Drayage" refers generally to transport of cargo to or from a seaport or intermodal railyard. -373-
Updated September 2022
Requiring all on -site motorized operational equipment, such as forklifts and yard trucks, to be zero -emission with the necessary charging or fueling stations provided.
Requiring tenants to use zero -emission light- and medium -duty vehicles as part of business operations.
Forbidding trucks from idling for more than three minutes and requiring operators to turn off engines when not in use.
Posting both interior- and exterior -facing signs, including signs directed at all dock and delivery areas, identifying idling restrictions and contact information to report violations to GARB, the local air district, and the building manager.
Installing solar photovoltaic systems on the project site of a specified electrical generation capacity that is equal to or greater than the building' s projected energy needs, including all electrical chargers.
Designing all project building roofs to accommodate the maximum future coverage of solar panels and installing the maximum solar power generation capacity feasible.
Constructing zero -emission truck charging/ fueling stations proportional to the number of dock doors at the project.
Running conduit to designated locations for future electric truck charging stations.
Unless the owner of the facility records a covenant on the title of the underlying property ensuring that the property cannot be used to provide refrigerated warehouse space, constructing electric plugs for electric transport refrigeration units at every dock door and requiring truck operators with transport refrigeration units to use the electric plugs when at loading docks.
Oversizing electrical rooms by 25 percent or providing a secondary electrical room to accommodate future expansion of electric vehicle charging capability.
Constricting and maintaining electric light -duty vehicle charging stations proportional to the number of employee parking spaces ( for example, requiring at least 10% of all employee parking spaces to be equipped with electric vehicle charging stations of at least bevel 2 charging performance) Running conduit to an additional proportion of employee parking spaces for a future increase in the number of electric light -duty charging stations.
Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer' s recommended maintenance intervals, air filtration systems at sensitive receptors within a certain radius of facility for the life of the project.
Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer' s recommended maintenance intervals, an air monitoring station proximate to sensitive receptors and the facility for the life of the project, and making the resulting data publicly available in real time. While air monitoring does not mitigate the air quality or greenhouse gas impacts of a facility, it nonetheless benefits the affected community by providing information that can be used to improve air quality or avoid exposure to unhealthy air.
Requiring all stand-by emergency generators to be powered by a non -diesel fuel.
Requiring facility operators to train managers and employees on efficient scheduling and load management to eliminate unnecessary queuing and idling of F10116MA
-374-
Updated September 2022
trucks.
Requiring operators to establish and promote a rideshare program that discourages single -occupancy vehicle trips and provides financial incentives for alternate modes of transportation, including carpooling, public transit, and biking.
Meeting CalCrreen Tier 2 green building standards, including all provisions related to designated parking for clean air vehicles, electric vehicle charging, and bicycle parking.
Designing to LEED green building certification standards.
Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations.
Posting signs at every truck exit driveway providing directional information to the truck route.
Improving and maintaining vegetation and tree canopy for residents in and around the project area.
Requiring that every tenant train its staff in charge of keeping vehicle records in diesel technologies and compliance with CARB regulations, by attending CARBapproved courses. Also require facility operators to maintain records on -site demonstrating compliance and make records available for inspection by the local jurisdiction, air district, and state upon request.
Requiring tenants to enroll in the United States Environmental Protection Agency' s SmartWay program, and requiring tenants who own, operate, or hire trucking carriers with more than 100 trucks to use carriers that are SmartWay carriers.
Providing tenants with information on incentive programs, such as the Carl Moyer Program and Voucher Incentive Program, to upgrade their fleets.
VI. Noise Impacts Analysis and Mitigation
The noise associated with logistics facilities can be among their most intrusive impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Various sources, such as unloading activity, diesel truck movement, and rooftop air conditioning units, can contribute substantial noise pollution. These impacts are exacerbated by logistics facilities' typical 24- hour, seven -days -per -week operation. Construction noise is often even greater than operational noise, so if a project site is near sensitive receptors, developers and lead agencies should adopt measures to reduce the noise generated by both construction and operation activities.
Examples of best practices when studying noise impacts include:
Preparing a noise impact analysis that considers all reasonably foreseeable project noise impacts, including to nearby sensitive receptors. All reasonably foreseeable project noise impacts encompasses noise from both construction and operations, including stationary, on -site, and off -site noise sources.
Adopting a lower significance threshold for incremental noise increases when baseline noise already exceeds total noise significance thresholds, to account for the cumulative impact of additional noise and the fact that, as noise moves up the decibel scale, each decibel increase is a progressively greater increase in sound -375-
Updated September 2022
pressure than the last. For example, 70 dBA is ten times more sound pressure than 60 dBA.
Disclosing and considering the significance of short-term noise levels associated with all aspects of project operation ( i.e. both on -site noise generation and off -site truck noise). Considering only average noise levels may mask noise impacts sensitive receptors would consider significant — for example, the repeated but short-lived passing ofindividual trucks or loading activities at right.
Examples of measures to mitigate noise impacts include:
Constructing physical, structural, or vegetative noise barriers on and/ or off the project site.
planning and enforcing truck routes that avoid passing sensitive receptors.
Locating or parking all stationary construction equipment as far from sensitive receptors as possible, and directing emitted noise away from sensitive receptors.
Verifying that construction equipment has properly operating and maintained mufflers.
Requiring all combustion -powered construction equipment to be surrounded by a noise protection barrier
Limiting operation hours to daytime hours on weekdays.
Paving roads where truck traffic is anticipated with low noise asphalt. Orienting any public address systems onsite away from sensitive receptors and setting system volume at a level not readily audible past the property line.
VII. Traffic Impacts Analysis and Mitigation
Warehouse facilities inevitably bring truck and passenger car traffic. Truck traffic can present substantial safety issues. Collisions with heavy- duty trucks are especially dangerous for passenger cars, motorcycles, bicycles, and pedestrians. These concerns can be even greater if truck traffic passes through residential areas, school zones, or other places where pedestrians are common and extra caution is warranted.
Examples of measures to mitigate traffic impacts include:
Designing, clearly marking, and enforcing truck routes that keep trucks out of residential neighborhoods and away from other sensitive receptors.
Installing signs in residential areas noting that truck and employee parking is prohibited.
Requiring preparation and approval of a truck routing plan describing the facility' s hours of operation, types of items to be stored, and truck routing to and from the facility to designated truck routes that avoids passing sensitive receptors.
The plan should include measures for preventing truck queuing, circling, markings, and stopping, and parking on public streets, such as signage, pa queuing analysis and enforcement. The plan should hold facility operators responsible for violations of the truck routing plan, and a revised plan should be required from any new tenant that occupies the property before a business license -376-
Updated September 2022
is issued. The approving agency should retain discretion to determine if changes to the plan are necessary, including any additional measures to alleviate truck routing and parking issues that may arise during the life of the facility.
Constructing new or improved transit stops, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and crosswalks, with special attention to ensuring safe routes to schools.
Consulting with the local public transit agency and securing increased public transit service to the project area.
Designating areas for employee pickup and drop- off.
Implementing traffic control and safety measures, such as speed bumps, speed limits, or new traffic signs or signals.
Placing facility entry and exit points on major streets that do not have adjacent sensitive receptors.
Restricting the turns trucks can make entering and exiting the facility to route trucks away from sensitive receptors.
Constructing roadway improvements to improve traffic flow.
Preparing a construction traffic control plan prior to grading, detailing the locations of equipment staging areas, material stockpiles, proposed road closures, and hours of construction operations, and designing the plan to minimize impacts to roads frequented by passenger cars, pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non -truck traffic.
V17I. Other Significant Environmental Impacts Analysis and Mitigation Warehouse projects may result in significant environmental impacts to other resources, such as to aesthetics, cultural resources, energy, geology, or hazardous materials. All significant adverse environmental impacts must be evaluated, disclosed and mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA. Examples ofbest practices and mitigation measures to reduce environmental impacts that do not fall under any of the above categories include:
Appointing a compliance officer who is responsible for implementing all mitigation measures, and providing contact information for the compliance officer to the lead agency, to be updated annually.
Creating a fund to mitigate impacts on affected residents, schools, places of worship, and other community institutions by retrofitting their property. For example, retaining a contractor to retrofitlinstall HVAC and/ or air filtration systems, doors, dual -paned windows, and sound- and vibration -deadening insulation and curtains.
Sweeping surrounding streets on a daily basis during construction to remove any construction - related debris and dirt.
Directing all lighting at the facility into the interior ofthe site.
Using full cut-offlight shields and/ or anti -glare lighting.
Requiring submission of a property maintenance program for agency review and approval providing for the regular maintenance of all building structures, landscaping, and paved surfaces.
Using cool pavement to reduce heat island effects.
-377-
Updated September 2022
Planting trees in parking areas to provide at least 35% shade cover of parking areas within fifteen years to reduce heat island impacts.
Using light colored roofing materials with a solar reflective index of 78 or greater.
Including on -site amenities, such as a truck operator lounge with restrooms, vending machines, and air conditioning, to reduce the need for truck operators to idle or travel offsite.
Designing skylights to provide natural light to interior worker areas.
Installing climate control and air filtration in the warehouse facility to promote worker well-being.
DL Conclusion
California' s world -class economy, ports, and transportation network position it at the center ofthe e- commerce and logistics industry boom. At the same time, California is a global leader in environmental protection and environmentally just development. The guidance in this document furthers these dual strengths, ensuring that all can access the benefits of economic development. The Bureau will continue to monitor proposed projects for compliance with CEQA and other laws. Lead agencies, developers, community advocates, and other interested parties should feel free to reach out to us as they consider how to guide warehouse development in their area.
Please do not hesitate to contact the Environmental Justice Bureau at ei@doi. ca. gov if you have any questions.
-378-
Attachment 6
City Council Resolution No. 2023 - to uphold PC' s
approval
-379-
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA TO DENY APPEAL ( APP 23- 001), AND UPHOLD PLANNING COMMISSIONS APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ( CUP- 23- 003) FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 53, 665 SQUARE FOOT SPECULATIVE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE, VARIANCE ( VAR- 23- 001) TO ALLOW THE
BUILDING TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT PERMITTED IN THE BUSINESS PARK ZONE BY 14', DESIGN REVIEW ( DRA- 23- 004) FOR
THE PROJECT' S SITE PLAN, BUILDING ELEVATIONS, CONCEPTUAL
GRADING PLAN, PUBLIC ART PIECE, CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN,
AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 5TH STREET, 250 FEET WEST OF CENTRAL
AVENUE. APN: 1192- 561- 04, - 05, - 06 and - 07
PROJECT APPLICANT: PATRIOT 5T" & CENTRAL, LLC)
APPELLANT: ANSHU PATHAK
A. RECITALS
On March 23, 2023, the Applicant, Patriot 5t" & Central, LLC, filed an application for Conditional Use Permit ( CUP- 23-003) to develop a 53, 665 square foot industrial warehouse and associated improvements including loading docks, passenger vehicle parking spaces, a stormwater detention/ infiltration basin, and landscape area. Related applications were also filed for Design Review ( DRA23- 004) including a Site Plan, Building Elevations, Conceptual Grading Plan, Conceptual Landscape Plan; Variance (VAR-23- 001) to increase the maximum building height permitted to 45'.
2. On September 19, 2023, Planning Commission approved of Conditional Use Permit (CUP- 23-003) to develop a 53,665 square foot industrial warehouse and associated improvements including loading docks, passenger vehicle parking spaces, a stormwater detention/ infiltration basin, and landscape area. Related applications were also filed for Design Review ( DRA-23- 004) including a Site Plan, Building Elevations, Conceptual Grading Plan, Conceptual Landscape Plan; Variance (VAR-23- 001) to increase the maximum building height permitted to 49' and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and subsequently filed a Notice of Determination with the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board on September 25, 2023.
3. On October 2, 2023, the Appellant filed an Appeal ( APP 23- 001) to overturn the Planning Commission' s approval of Conditional Use Permit ( CUP- 23- 003); Design Review ( DRA-23-004); and Variance ( VAR- 23- 001).
4. On November 14, 2023, the City of Highland City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the Appeal of the Planning Commission' s determination to -380-
approve Conditional Use Permit ( CUP- 23- 003); Design Review ( DRA- 23- 004); and Variance ( VAR- 23- 001) at the Highland City Hall Council Chambers in Highland, California, at 6: 00 p. m., after providing notice to the public in a manner and for the time required by law to hear and consider both oral and written evidence regarding said Appeal. The City Council directed Staff to prepare a Resolution denying the Appeal and upholding Planning Commission' s approval.
5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this resolution have occurred.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Highland as follows:
1. The City Council finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part "A" of this Resolution, are true and correct.
2. The City of Highland City Council, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself and on its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, including the staff report to the Planning Commission dated September 19, 2023, and staff report to the City Council dated November 14, 2023, does find and determine the following facts:
a. All necessary public meetings and opportunities for public testimony and comment have been conducted in compliance with State Law and the Municipal Code of the City of Highland.
3. Conditional Use Permit ( CUP23- 001) Findings of Fact:
a. The proposed use is permitted within the subject district pursuant to the provisions of this section, and complies with all of the applicable provisions of this title; and is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the Highland General Plan, and the applicable development policies and standards of the city.
Response; The proposed warehouse is permitted in the Business Park Zone and General Plan designation upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Applicable provisions in Title 16, Land Use and Development Code, include but are not limited to, Chapter 16.24 Employment Zones, Chapter
16. 40 General Development Standards, and Chapter 16. 54 Parking. The project meets the standards established in these chapters subject to approval of a variance to increase the maximum building height from 35' to 49'.
The General Plan goals relevant to the project are those established for the 51" Street Corridor Policy Area, and general standards applicable to the Land Use Element, Circulation Element, and Community Design Element specifically:
-381-
Land Use Element:
Goal 2. 5 Promote a mix of attractive employment -generating areas with a mix of uses that provide a sound and diversified economic base and that are compatible with the community' s overall residential character.
Policy:
2. 5. 2 Require development in areas designated for Business Park uses to provide for light industrial, research and development, and/ or office -based firms seeking a pleasant and attractive working environment, as well as for business support services and commercial uses requiring extensive land areas.
Goal 2. 13 Transform the 5th Street Corridor into a major employment center and gateway to the San Bernardino International Airport.
Policies:
2. 13. 3 Develop a comprehensive design and branding program for the 5th Street Corridor, promoting it as a unified, business - friendly employment center.
2. 13. 4 Protect and enhance the integrity and desirability of industrial sites from nonindustrial uses.
2. 13. 8 Until nonconforming residential uses transition out of the area, provide adequate transitions and/ or buffers between existing residential neighborhoods and industrial or other incompatible land uses.
Community Design Element:
Goal 10. 8 Ensure that industrial and business park development is professional and attractive in appearance through coordinated site planning, signage and architectural design guidelines.
Policies:
10. 8. 1 Strengthen the image of industrial and business park areas through entry monument signage, distinctive landscaping and complementary architectural design elements.
10. 8. 2 Encourage contemporary, clean and distinctive industrial buildings with clearly visible entrances.
10. 8. 4 Promote the use of 5th Street as a gateway to San Bernardino International Airport through improved signage, gateway monumentation and skyway landscaping.
10. 8. 6 Provide incentives for consolidating smaller industrial lots into larger parcels.
-382-
10. 8. 7 Screen parking, storage and service areas from public view with landscaped walls, berms and appropriate landscaping treatments.
Circulation Element:
Goal 3. 6 Provide a circulation system that reduces conflicts between commercial trucking, private/ public transportation and land use.
Policies:
3. 6. 1 Maintain designated truck routes for use by commercial trucking that link industrial and commercial activity areas with major roadways and regional transportation routes and
minimize impacts on local traffic neighborhoods.
3. 6. 2 Provide appropriately designed roadways for the designated truck routes that can safely accommodate truck travel.
3. 6. 3 Develop berms and barriers where feasible along truck routes to minimize noise impacts to sensitive land uses.
3. 6. 4 Provide sufficient loading areas to minimize interference with efficient traffic circulation.
The project meets all relevant goals and policies.
b. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located.
Response: The proposed speculative industrial warehouse is in keeping with the integrity and character of Business Park District. It would be developed in compliance with the Highland General Plan and Municipal Code standards related to warehousing in the Business Park District within the 5tn Street Corridor Policy Area. It meets development code standards such as land use, setbacks, density, lighting, parking, circulation, etc. It has a contemporary, clean and distinctive design in keeping with the Policy Area standards ( Goal 10. 8 — Policy 2). It has quality finishes, landscaping, and hardscape and will construct surrounding infrastructure. c. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development which is proposed.
Response: The 2. 86- acre site is adequate for proposed industrial development with a 43% lot coverage area. The Municipal Code permits 60% Per Table 16. 24. 040.A). The topography of the site is predominantly flat, featuring a partially developed parcel, a residential structure, and storage facilities. Utilities are readily accessible within the adjacent right- of-way, and the site offers favorable drainage conditions for both on -site water retention and water quality treatment. The proposed development aligns well with the industrial objectives outlined in the 5th Street Corridor Policy Area.
Accessibility to the site is facilitated through two separate driveways, thus -383-
segregating commercial truck and passenger vehicle traffic. Moreover, the site boasts excellent connectivity to regional transportation networks, being situated approximately half of a mile from the San Bernardino International Airport and a mile from State Route 210 and Interstate 10.
Per Municipal Code Section 16. 24.040 Employment District Development Standards, the project meets the minimum lot size, lot width and dept as well as required building setbacks, lot coverage, and landscape coverage. d. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure public health and safety.
Response: Existing water, public utilities and services for the project are available adjacent to the site within the public right-of-way. East Valley Water District provided a " Will Serve" letter to the Applicant, confirming the provision of water and sanitary sewer services. All utility providers were given notice of the project and expressed no concern. Public health and safety was addressed with the design and conditioning of the project. e. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties and improvements in the vicinity.
Response: The proposed warehouse development will be compliant with Municipal, Fire & Building codes. Each public safety division of the City has reviewed the project and provided relevant Conditions of Approval that will be adopted by resolution. The necessary ingress and egress are provided and all public utilities and services will be in place. The project will include the use of contemporary, clean and distinctive industrial building design elements in keeping with the Policy Area standards. There is no indication that the project would be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties and improvement in the vicinity. f. The proposed use would not result in a significant effect on the environment.
Response: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) and State and Local CEQA Guidelines, the City of Highland is the Lead Agency. The City oversaw preparation of an Initial Study which was made available for public review from July 14 through August 14, 2023. Mitigation Measures were necessary to reduce potential impacts below a level of significance in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, and Tribal Cultural Resources. All other CEQA topics were found to be less than significant or no impact. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate document for this project and will be adopted concurrently with the Conditional Use Permit.
4. Desing Review ( DRA 23- 004) Findings of Fact:
a. That the proposed project is consistent with the general plan or specific plan. -384-
Response: The site' s designation under the General Plan is categorized as a Business Park, a classification that permits an array of light industrial activities, research and development endeavors, and office operations that contribute to aesthetically pleasing and conducive working environments.
Specifically, the Business Park designation allows for light manufacturing, wholesaling, and warehousing activities, provided they are conducted within an enclosed structure, as stipulated in Chapter 2 of the Land Use Element.
The proposed development of a 53, 665- square- foot warehouse aligns well with these permissible uses.
The project is also consistent with the objectives outlined in the 5th Street Corridor Policy Area, Circulation Element, and Community Design Element, thereby fulfilling all pertinent goals and policies specifically:
Land Use Element:
Goal 2. 5 Promote a mix of attractive employment -generating areas with a mix of uses that provide a sound and diversified economic base and that are compatible with the community' s overall residential character.
Policy:
2. 5. 1 Require development in areas designated for Industrial uses to provide for light industrial, research and
development, and office based firms seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment and a prestige
location.
Goal 2. 13 Transform the 5th Street Corridor into a major employment center and gateway to the San Bernardino International Airport.
Policies:
2. 13. 3 Develop a comprehensive design and branding program for the 5th Street Corridor, promoting it as a unified, business -friendly employment center.
2. 13. 4 Protect and enhance the integrity and desirability of industrial sites from nonindustrial uses.
2. 13. 5 Improve landscaping along the edges and median of 5th Street and the boundaries of the corridor.
Community Design Element:
Goal 10. 8 Ensure that industrial and business park development is professional and attractive in appearance through coordinated site planning, signage and architectural design guidelines.
-385-
Policies:
10. 8. 1 Strengthen the image of industrial and business park areas through entry monument signage, distinctive
landscaping and complementary architectural design
elements.
10. 8. 2 Encourage contemporary, clean and distinctive industrial buildings with clearly visible entrances.
10. 8. 4 Promote the use of 5th Street as a gateway to San Bernardino International Airport through improved
signage, gateway monumentation and skyway
landscaping.
10. 8. 6 Provide incentives for consolidating smaller industrial lots into larger parcels.
10. 8. 7 Screen parking, storage and service areas from public view with landscaped walls, berms and appropriate
landscaping treatments.
Circulation Element:
Goal 3. 6 Provide a circulation system that reduces conflicts between commercial trucking, private/ public transportation and land use.
Policies:
3. 6. 1 Maintain designated truck routes for use by commercial trucking that link industrial and commercial activity areas with major roadways and regional transportation routes
and minimize impacts on local traffic neighborhoods.
3. 6. 2 Provide appropriately designed roadways for the designated truck routes that can safely accommodate
truck travel.
3. 6. 3 Develop berms and barriers where feasible along truck routes to minimize noise impacts to sensitive land uses. b. That the proposed use is in accordance with the objectives of Title 16, Land Use and Development of the City of Highland Municipal Code, and the purposes of the land use district in which the site is located.
Response: In alignment with the Highland Municipal Code' s standards for warehousing within the Business Park District, the project is designed to comply with Section 16. 24. 040, which delineates the Employment District Development Standards. The project proposes a lot coverage of 43%, well within the maximum allowable limit of 60% ( per Table 16. 24. 040. A).
Additionally, the project meets the mandated building setbacks and landscape coverage specifications. It is also in compliance with general development standards concerning circulation, parking, and lighting. c. That the proposed use is in compliance with city design and landscape standards and criteria.
-386-
Response: In accordance with the Highland General Plan, specific criteria are outlined for this location under the Land Use ( General Plan Chapter 2) and Community Design Elements ( General Plan Chapter 10). General Plan Chapter 10, Goal 10. 8 is designed to ensure that developments are both professionally executed and aesthetically pleasing through a coordinated approach to site planning, signage, and architectural design. To comply with these guidelines, the project will feature specialized landscaping at its entrances, which serves to enhance the contemporary architectural elements of the building. This approach is congruent with the established thematic development in the Highland area.
The design meets the intent of General Plan Chapter 2, Policy 10. 8. 2 which encourages " contemporary, clean and distinctive buildings with clearly visible entrances" and Policy 10. 8. 3 to " avoid long, blank building walls by incorporating diagonal fagade articulation and modulation and varying use of color, materials and landscaping." Parking and service areas are screened from public view with walls and landscaping and berms and utilities will be underground. The building is set back as far as possible from adjacent educational facilities.
d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or will not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the site.
Response: The warehouse development will be in compliance with Municipal, Fire & Building codes. Each public safety division of the City has reviewed the project and provided relevant Conditions of Approval that will be adopted by resolution. The necessary ingress and egress are provided, and all public utilities and services will be in place. The project will include the use of high -quality material and modern design elements in keeping with the Policy Area standards. There is no indication that the project would be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties and improvement in the vicinity.
5. Variance (VAR 23- 001) Findings of Fact:
a. That a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by others within the surrounding area or vicinity.
Response: The regulation for which a variance is being requested is, Highland Municipal Code, Title 16, Land Use and Development, Table
16. 24.040.A Industrial Site Development Minimum Standards, Requirement No. 8, Maximum building height ( in feet) — 35'. Modern day warehousing built to current industry standards requires 36' clear height to accommodate joists, lights and sprinkler systems with 4- 5 feet to reach the roof of the structure followed by an additional 4- 5 feet above the roofline to screen roof -mounted -387-
equipment, such as HVAC. Limiting the overall building height to 35' makes the use of the building infeasible. The Planning Commission and City Council on Appeal approved a Variance for 14 additional feet which allowed a building at 45 feet with a 4 foot roof line to screen roof equipment for an overall height of 49 feet.
b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification.
Response: The property in question is zoned Business Park which is the limiting condition in this application. While permitting warehousing as a use, the zoning standards did not properly account for the necessary building height to accommodate the operational characteristics as outlined in response 5a above. Within the past two years, the Planning Commission has granted five ( 5) similar variances to allow warehousing buildings additional height in the Business Park Zone for the same reason. Industrially Zoned property elsewhere in the City that permits warehousing, at a maximum building height of 50' ( HMC Table 16. 24. 040.A).
c. That the strict interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification.
Response: The Applicant would be deprived of constructing a fully - functional warehouse due to the fact the HMC height limit of 35' makes the use of the building infeasible. Current industry standards related to a typical tenant of warehouses similar to the proposed warehouse requires internal clear height of 36 feet after accounting for joists, lights, and the sprinkler systems, modern warehouses require additional 4 to 5 feet to reach the roof of the structures, followed by an additional 4 to 5 feet to screen roof top equipment. In this case an overall height of 49 feet was approved similar to other similar zones allowing 50' heights.
d. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification.
Response: The granting of the variance is permitted by the Municipal Code, Section 16. 08. 070 Variances with findings. The Variance was considered by the Commission and City Council on Appeal with respect to the totality of the project and the appropriate findings made. There is no granting of a special privilege as height variances are explicitly listed and have been recently granted to others based on the finding herein. -388-
e. That a granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
Response: The granting of a variance is limited to additional 14' of building height. The site design is consistent with all other HMC standards and General Plan Goals and Policies as noted herein. Potential noise, sound, vibration, lighting and traffic were all analyzed in the project' s Initial Study.
Mitigation Measures were established as appropriate to respond to any potential negative impact to properties and improvements in the area. The Mitigation Measures are adopted with the project's Conditions of Approval. f. That the granting of the variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan and the intent of this title.
Response: The granting of the variance will allow the project to be developed in compliance with current industry standards for warehousing and distribution type uses. This use complies with the General Goals and Policies as noted herein. The project' s design also complies with other development standards in Title 16.
6. Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions set forth above, the City Council hereby upholds the Planning Commission' s approval of Conditional Use Permit CUP- 23- 003); Design Review ( DRA- 23- 004); and Variance ( VAR- 23- 001).
C. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION.
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner prescribed by law.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of November 2023.
Larry McCallon
Mayor
ATTEST:
Betty Hughes, MMC
City Clerk
-389-
STAFF REPORT
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: November 14, 2023
FROM: Joseph A. Hughes, City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Betty Hughes, MMC, City Clerk
PREPARED BY: Alondra Munoz, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: City Manager Report and Comments
Work Program, Regional/ Legislative/ Development Issues, Subcommittees, etc.)
RECOMMENDATION: Discussion and possible action.
Approved
Denied
Continued
Tabled
Motion
Ayes _
Noes
Abstain
Absent
City Clerk
Second Agenda Item No.
File No.
City Manager
-1-
STAFF REPORT
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: November 14, 2023
FROM: Joseph A. Hughes, City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Betty Hughes, MMC, City Clerk
PREPARED BY: Alondra Munoz, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Council Member Comments
Agency/ Committee/ AB1234 Reports, District Updates, etc.) RECOMMENDATION: Discussion and possible action.
Approved
Denied
Motion
Ayes
Continued Noes
Tabled Abstain
GJ/
Absent
v
Second Agenda Item No.
File No.
City Clerk City anager
-1-