Highland City Council
August 12, 2025

C• / OnW o0f1- l100G I o—i— — n 5
ERSC will provide design services for Phase 2 storm drain improvements. During the development of this proposal, 2 alignment concepts were evaluated:

Concept # 1 consists of protecting the existing Elder Creel 96" RCP storm drain in place and constructing approximately 580' of 84" RCP parallel pipe that is hydraulically tied together with the 96" RCP at the upstream and downstream ends using modified junction structures. This concept is consistent with ERSC' s technical memorandum recommendations, and the direct storm drain construction cost would be cheaper than Concept # 2. However, there are many underground utilities in the area and right of way is limited in Park View Lane. These challenges could result in costly utility relocations, significant utility coordination, and sustained noise and vehicular access impacts to the adjacent residential neighborhood.

Concept # 2 consists of removing and replacing approximately 580' of existing 96" RCP with a proposed 12' x8' RCB. This option significantly reduces the potential for utility relocations, easement access, and disruption to the adjacent neighborhood. However, it poses a higher upfront construction cost for removal and replacement of the entire storm drain segment.

The City and ERSC ultimately decided Concept # 2 would be the most feasible approach, given that the existing alignment will have the least amount of impact on right of way, utility relocations, and disruption to the neighboring residents. At the request of the City, ERSC is providing design services for 1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373 Page 14
6 Phase 2 as an optional cost, since it is unknown if there is enough available funding to construct Phase 2 improvements. ERSC' s professional design services for Elder Creek Phases 1 and 2 are described in further detail below.

SCOPE OF WORK

1. 0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
ERSC will administer a kick- off meeting with City personnel, SBCFCD staff, and other involved stakeholders. The purpose of the meeting is to introduce the project team and contact person, review the scope of work and schedule, and facilitate discussions focused on critical issues and project constraints. Three progress meetings will be held at each main design milestone ( 60%, 90%, and 100% design phases). ERSC' s Project Manager and Project Engineer will provide ongoing coordination with the design team and subconsultants, City staff, and affected utilities for the duration of the project design.

Deliverables: ( 4) Meeting Agendas and Minutes

2. 0 DESIGN SURVEY AND MAPPING
Topographic Survey and Base Mapping
ERSC will conduct an aerial survey of the Project site, extending from SBCFCD' s Elder Creek channel at Old Greenspot Road and Tyler Street intersection to Love Street cul de sac north of Arroyo Verde Elementary School. The aerial coverage will support the engineering design for the storm drain improvements through Greenspot Road and Park View Lane but also provide topo data for conceptual planning of future improvements adjacent to Arroyo Verde Elementary School. A ground topographic survey will also be conducted along Park View Lane and Greenspot Road within the storm drain limits for more precise reconnaissance of the existing utilities and surface features. Mapping will include street rights - of -way ( ROW), flood control ROW, and City' s drainage easements. Field crews will develop horizontal and vertical control and provide aerial control points for the project' s topographic survey. t Approximate aerial
2Y,
f°'° : " survey limits.

T
a s i
yti 1
l
l *:
y ;:
r,. •
r
DCreek Storm r
Drain
r
T' it . left
SBCFCD
channe i ! t 1 I{ 1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373 Page 15 7
ERSC will work with subconsultant, Inland Aerial Surveys, to complete the base mapping. The aerial survey will collect horizontal and vertical locations for all surface features. The topographic survey will include all features within the project area and extend 100' beyond the project limits. Topographic surveys will be based on local basis of bearings and vertical datum using NAVD88 and horizontal datum using NAD83. Field data will be reduced and compiled into 1- foot contours and a scale to be determined for the project' s basemap.

Deliverables: Project Topographic Basemap with Plotted Right of Way and Easements

3. 0 CEQA EXEMPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING
CEQA Exemption
ERSC will work with Compass Consulting Enterprises Inc. ( Compass) to prepare a defensible CEQA compliance document that supports a CEQA exemption under 4 CC, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15401 for this project. Compass believes that either Class 1, " Existing Facilities" or Class 4, " Minor Alterations to Land" could be appropriate for this project. The approach is utilize ERSC' s hydrology and hydraulics technical studies to determine if any threshold is exceeded where the Project would no longer qualify as an exemption. Because the Project occurs underground, no further technical studies are needed.

Assuming the results are positive, Compass will prepare a CEQA Exemption Findings Justification document and the Notice of Exemption. One the City has reviewed and approved the Exemption Justification, Compass will file the Notice of Exemption with the Clerk of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. An exemption finding does not require City Council action.

Jurisdictional Water Permits ( As Needed)
Recent discussions between Compass and SB County environmental staff indicate that jurisdictional waters permits are not needed for the connection of the City' s Elder Creek Storm Drain to SBCFCD' s channel. However, the final design would need to be reviewed and compared to the permits SBCFCD obtained for the overall Elder Creek Channel Improvements Project. If permits are required, this proposal includes a cost for obtaining jurisdictional water permits from the following agencies:

1. USACE Section 404 Permit

2. Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 Waste Discharge Requirements Order

3. California Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement The proposal assumes the City will pay for any application filing fees.

Deliverables: CEQA Exemption Findings Justification document, Notice of Exemption filing, and ( 3) Jurisdictional Waters Permits.

4. 0 UTILITY VERIFICATION AND MAPPING
Utility Research, Letters, and Coordination
ERSC will compile record data associated with utility and infrastructure improvements adjacent to and within Old Greenspot Road, Greenspot Road and Park View Lane. The data to be acquired from the City and other appropriate agencies includes recorded maps, easements, record drawings for street improvements, water plans, sewer plans, storm drain plans, and dry utility improvements and reports.

Utility research letters will be prepared utilizing the City' s Logo and letterhead to obtain the available record drawings and reports. Upon receipt, the record drawings will be entered into a utility log indicating the type of utility and date received. The utility log contains information regarding utility coordination, such as pothole data ( as necessary), relocation requirements, and record of utility 1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373 Page 16
8 company contact, notes, and other written correspondence. Existing utility linework from record maps will be converted to an AutoCAD utility base file and referenced in all the deliverable plan sheets.

Deliverables: Record Drawings, copies of all utility letters/ correspondence/ notices with affected utility agencies, and utility base file in AutoCAD or PDF format.

Subsurface Utility Investigation
If potential utility conflicts are identified ( approximately in the 60% to 90% design phase), ERSC will prepare a potholing map to identify the pothole locations. Underground Solutions, Inc. ( USI) will perform potholing, including any traffic control and obtaining appropriate permits. Based on the utility record research performed by ERSC in this project location in 2022, ERSC has identified the following existing utilities in Greenspot Road that cross the proposed storm drain alignment. These utilities are color -coded in the image below:
20" and 8" EVWD water lines ( blue)
30" SBVMWD recycled water line ( purple)
EVWD 12" sewer main and other unknown size sewer ( green) 4" SoCal gas lines ( yellow)
CATV line ( red)
Li
o m
m \\ \\\
1 y0
9 N o`
A
79 U1 \ \ % V H\
B8
22 \ %
XI G \
EE D
THIS WiG A
DWG, 7 o
Z
n
m m ro iN \ 020-
0) 20 1211 N Z N w <
itU o \\ HERNANDEZ
f- o o F v \
R2
r4- a zw zzZ4 \ Reviewing
the proposed storm drain alignment against SBCFCD' s plan, the proposed storm drain alignment crosses seven (7) subsurface utility lines. ERSC assumesatotal of seven (7) potholes forthe purpose of this proposal. ERSC may be able to utilize recent as-built/ pothole utility information from 1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373 Page 17 T.
innnnnn w ncr_ 1 r. innn\ nnn nnnc i ..............
9 SBVMWD' s 30" RW waterline project in Greenspot Road. In addition, sewer manhole inverts can be captured during the topographic survey. This would reduce the number of potholes needed for this project. ERSC will coordinate with City staff to retrieve 30" RW line as- built/ pothole records.

Deliverables: 24" x36" potholing map, pothole report (Electronic PDF file), and utility conflict matrix ( MS Excel Format)

5. 0 HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS REPORT
60% Hydraulics and Preliminary Calculations
At the 60% design phase, ERSC will prepare a draft report with WSPG hydraulic calculations. The hydrology section of the report will reference ERSC' s original hydrology review and SBCFCD' s previously approved 2, 326 cfs for Q100 flows at the upstream end of SBCFCD' s channel per the District' s Hydrologic Basis of Design Interoffice Memo dated July 8, 2020. Any hydrology re -calculations needed will be performed using Civil Design' s Rational Method software in accordance with San Bernardino County' s Hydrology Manual. Inlet capacity calculations will determine the size of catch basin/ inlet locations to contain flows within the flow areas during the 10-, 25-, and 100- year storm events. Hydraulic calculations for the catch basin laterals will be performed utilizing the mainline HGL and the flow rates intercepted by the catch basins.
90% H& H Report and Updated Calculations
ERSC will prepare a comprehensive hydrology and hydraulic report, including narrative, hydrology, and hydraulic calculations, and supporting hydrology documentation. The report will incorporate the City' s 60% review comments and SBCFCD' s 1s' permit plan review comments. At this point, Phase 2 conceptual design will be nearing completion and an alignment option will have been selected. Therefore, the select conceptual design' s hydraulic approach will be included in the H& H report and calculations.

Final 100% H& H Report and Calculations
ERSC will finalize the hydrology and hydraulics report by incorporating the City' s 90% review comments and SBCFCD' s final plan review comments. The reports will be signed and sealed by a licensed civil engineer.

Deliverables: Two ( 2) bound copies and one ( 1) electronic PDF file of Final H& H report signed and sealed by a licensed civil engineer.

6. 0 PHASE 1: PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS & ESTIMATE ( PS& E) 60% Plans and Estimate
A preliminary storm drain plan and profile drawing set will be prepared on a 24" x 36" layout using the City' s standard title block with a scale of 1" = 20' or larger to provide the necessary design clarity. The plans will be accompanied by an Engineer' s Estimate based on recent bid results from nearby storm drain projects. The storm drain plans will include the following sheets:

Title sheet
Notes, Structural Details, Sections sheet
Storm Drain plan/ profile sheet( s)
Demolition and Street Improvement Sheet
1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373 Page 18
10 90% Plans, Specifications and Estimate
The 90% storm drain plan set will incorporate any design adjustments made based on the City' s review comments on the 60% plan set, as well as data provided by pothole investigation and utility coordination with the utility agencies. A specification bid package will be prepared using the City' s standard specification template and including all front-end bid documents, bid schedule, and general and technical provisions. The plans and specifications will be accompanied by an updated construction cost estimate.
100% Plans, Specifications, and Estimate
ERSC will finalize plans based on the final comments received from the City. All appropriate revisions will be made in order to be considered approved. If requested by the City, the approved plans will be printed to mylar and digitally signed. The plans will be accompanied by a final specification bid package signed and sealed by a registered civil engineer and a final construction cost estimate.

Deliverables: Final Project Plans in mylar and electronic PDF format, Final Specifications ( Spiral Bound hard copy and electronic PDF format), and Final Cost Estimate in electronic PDF format.

7. 0 PHASE 1: PERMIT PROCESSING AND COORDINATION
ERSC will provide coordination support between SBCFCD and the City on this project. ERSC will prepare and submit an encroachment permit application to SBCFCD to reconnect the City' s storm drain to SBCFCD' s Elder Creek Channel. As part of the application submittal, the project' s hydrology and hydraulics report, design plans, and supporting environmental documents, will be provided to the District for their approval. ERSC assumes 3 rounds of plan check review with the District. Since 2020, ERSC and the City have been worked closely with SBCFCD during the planning stages of this project. This up -front coordination will make the permit process much smoother moving forward.

Deliverables: Permit application submittal, ( 3) rounds of plan review and resubmittals with SBCFCD, obtain approved SBCFCD encroachment permit for construction.

8. 0 PHASE 2• PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS & ESTIMATE ( PS& E) ( Optional Task) As discussed above in ERSC' s Project Approach section, ERSC will prepare a final design for Phase 2 Concept #2 alignment (Greenspot Road to Park View Lane Cul De Sac) as an optional task for the City.

Concept #2 consists of removing and replacing approximately S80' of existing 96" RCP with a proposed 12' x8' RCB. This option significantly reduces the potential for utility relocations, easement access, and disruption to the adjacent neighborhood. However, it poses a higher up -front construction cost for removal and replacement of the entire storm drain segment.

Deliverables: Final Plans, Specifications, and Estimate for Phase 2 storm drain improvements incorporated with Phase 1 improvements.

9. 0 BID SUPPORT SERVICES
If requested by the City, ERSC will respond to prepare up to 2 addendums and respond to questions and RFIs related to the project design. The City will not be charged for responding to questions related to omissions or conflicts in design.
1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373

11 ASSUMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS
This proposal makes the following assumptions and exclusions:

1. As a cost- effective approach to this proposal, it is assumed ERSC will reference a geotechnical report from either SBCFCD related to their Elder Creek Channel project or SBVMWD related to the 30" Recycled Water pipeline project with boring information within close approximation to the City' s project limits. ERSC can provide a project -specific geotechnical investigation report under a separate fee.

2. Discussions with the City of Highland suggest the City may request SBCFCD to revise the channel' s upstream junction structure to accommodate the City' s proposed 12' x8' RCB. If this cannot be achieved, ERSC will provide the structural design needed to remove and reconstruct the junction structure to accommodate the proposed RCB.

3. All permit fees will be borne by the City. Although it is unclear which agencies are involved with the project at this point, this may include SBCFCD encroachment permit, USACE Section 404 permit, CDFW Section 1602 permit, and RWQCB Section 401 permit.

4. Project progress meetings will be held virtually via MS Teams or Zoom.

5. Per the San Bernardino County' s TGD Transportation Project BMP Guidance, this project is considered exempt from having to prepare and implement a WQMP. This project falls under Category 2 projects for providing safety enhancement that results in no new transportation surfaces. In addition, this project' s resurfacing is related to utility cuts for the storm drain system.

6. Preparation of temporary construction easements legal and plats.

7. Preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) is excluded from this proposal.

This project will likely not require Construction General Permit coverage. The project' s anticipated impacts will disturb less than 1 acre of erodible subgrade.

8. Design and preparation of utility relocation plans ( i. e. water or sewer improvement plans) is not included in this scope of work. It is assumed the City of Highland has prior rights over EVWD and SBVMWD.

FEE ESTIMATE
Please see the attached Fee Schedule.

All amounts noted in the Fee Schedule will be billed on a time and materials basis. Fees and charges associated with completion of the various tasks will be billed monthly as the work progresses. All invoices are due and payable upon receipt unless other arrangements are made in advance.

SCHEDULE
The City would prefer to solicit construction bids as soon as possible such that the project will begin construction around the same time that SBCFCD is finishing construction of their Elder Creek Channel Improvement project. ERSC anticipates completing the above -mentioned design tasks by December 2025 under the assumption that jurisdictional permitting is not required for the project and the District' s permit review process can be completed within 2 months.

This Proposal shall remain in effect for minimally ninety ( 90) days from submittal date. 1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373 Page 110
T. innn\ onn 4ncc 1 r. innni nnn nnnc i__-- 12
If you have any questions regarding the content of this proposal, please contact me at your convenience.

Respectfully Submitted,
Y14
Moe Ahmadi, PE, MS, QSD
Vice President
Ben Booth, PE, QSD
Engineer V
1861 W. Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373
T• ianw Pon- i,) FF I P. tanw s:zan- oaQR I orcrrinr rnm

13 V I
Resumes
14 Similar Project Experience:
z East Drop Structure Repair Mitigation Within Whitewater River Channel, City Of Indian Wells, Indian Wells, CA — Project Manager for redesign of the East Drop Structure along the Whitewater River. Site analyses and development of potential replacement structures such as a concrete drop structure that incorporates a baffle chute at the outlet of the low flow channel, a USBR stilling basin or a drop structure similar to the one constructed in 1995 using materials sized to withstand the anticipated flows. Regulatory permitting and clearance for an RWQCB CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification, CDFW 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement, USACE Nationwide Section 404 Dredge and Fill Permit, and CEQA IS/ MND coordination.

CA, Civil Engineer No. C58784
QSD/ QSP No. 00706 CSPD Line 3- 5, and Master Drainage Plan ( MDP) Update, City of Colton, CA — Managing Engineer fora Master Plan Update and the design of a regional drainage facility to convey Education 1, 000 cfs from a 2, 045- acre area. The MDP included hydrology and hydraulic analysis, preliminary design and sizing of drainage facilities, cost estimates and a project report BS, Civil Engineering, Texas A& M University for the 3- 5 and 3- 8 watersheds within the City of Colton. The Project 3- 5 required the College Station, TX installation of 11, 500 feet of 108- and 120- inch reinforced concrete pipe from Valley Blvd MS, Civil Engineering Construction south to the Santa Ana River, including the installation of approximately 1, 700 feet of Management, Texas A& M University, College 108- inch RCP by boring and jacking methods at multiple locations.

Station, TX Section 29 Stormwater Basin, City of Palm Desert, CA — Project engineer during design Affiliations for the failed rock slope protection downstream of the existing spillway and collapsed slope that undermined a significant portion of the spillway crest. Work also included American Society of Civil Engineers hydrology analysis of approximately 519 acres of drainage watershed, development of National Society of Prof. Engineers a unit hydrograph tributary to Mid -Valley Channel, flood routing through the existing drainage channels and Section 29 Retention Basin, hydraulic analysis for design and Areas of Expertise reconstruction of the rock slope protection, spillway, forensic analysis to investigate the cause of the failure, produce contract documents guiding the repair of the Section 29 Water Resources, Flood Control, Hydraulics Basin and an 18- inch basin inlet. Relocation of an existing 12- inch sewer line under the and Hydrology, Erosion Control basin spillway.

MDP Lines 6A and 8, Laterals 20C and 20A, City of Palm Springs, CA — Project engineer during the design of the three major flood control projects commissioned by the City.

Line 6A and Line 8 along Sunrise Way resulted in the elimination of " down and under Over the past 30 years Ahmadi has actively drains" and support commercial development between Via Escuela and Vista Chino participated pa ration of numerous dthe preparation Drive and Andreas Road and the Baristo Channel, respectively. Similarly, Laterals 20C feasibility studies, design reports, construction and 20CA resulted inthe elimination of "down and under drains" and support residential plans, specifications and cost estimates for drainage
and flood control facilities throughout development along El Cielo and Baristo Road. Services included review and modification Southern California. Mr. Ahmadi is experienced of master plan hydrology, design surveys, utility coordination, geotechnical engineering, with numerous computer programs including alignment selection and analysis, hydraulic modeling and the development of plans, AutoCAD 2019, CivilCAD Hydrology programs, specifications and estimates. Water Surface Profile Gradient ( WSPG), and San
Jacinto Area Master Drainage Plan Line "E- 2", City of San Jacinto, CA —Managing HECRAS flood plain analysis software. Engineer toprepare construction plans for MDP Lines E-2 and E-2A in the City of San He is also experienced in preparation of Storm Jacinto and Hemet. The project reach for MDP Line E-2 is over 7100 feet along State Water Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required Street between Menlo Avenue and MDP Line E and over 250 feet for MDP Line E-2A by the NPDES Industrial General Permit and along Esplanade Avenue. The size of the storm drain facilities are from 36-inch to 72-inch the Construction General Permit (CGP), which diameter. Work included hydrology analysis to determine the 10- and 100- year storm identify BMPs used to reduce or eliminate potential
pollutant discharges in storm water runoff within the MDP facilities watershed. using CivilDesign software. runoff.

Under his direction, plans for various San Jacinto Area Master Drainage Plan Line " H". City of San Jacinto, CA — Managing residential, commercial, and industrial projects Engineer toprepare afeasibility study toevaluate alternative alignments for MDP Line H, in the Counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, H-2 and H-3 per the current City of San Jacinto MDP. Work also included preparation of and Orange have been prepared. As part of construction requirements of the CGP, Mr. Ahmadi has plans for the most cost-effective alignment. The project included evaluation the provided SWPPP services to address new of the existing drainage facilities atthe intersection of Ramona Expressway and State requirements.

This work included Data Submitter Street; to mitigate drainage deficiencies as required. It also includes Rational Method services, conducting the risk assessment; an Hydrology using CivilDesign software todetermine the 10- and 100- year storm runoff. evaluation of a project' ssediment risk and Sierra Way Storm Drain Project, City of San Bernardino, CA - Project Manager responsible receiving water risk, and then determining the for Ian pp design and supporting analysis g y duringthe g design ofpp approximately5, y overall 000 If of p Risk Level for traditional projects, or 39„ —
84" storm drainLUP in the City. The project sought to eliminate surface drainage on the r Type for linear utility projects, and assisting clients to register and submit applications in the local streets and temporary lines that traversed private property. SMARTS System to obtain the applicable WDID numbers
from the SWQCB prior to construction. 15
CA, Professional Engineer No. 92625 Similar Project Experience:

Sth Street Storm Drain Connection to City Creek, City of Highland, CA - ERSC prepared the hydrology and hydraulics studies, plans, specifications, and estimate ( PS& E) needed to Education extend an existing City -maintained 72" RCP storm drain on Greenspot Road and 5th Street BS, Civil Engineering, Arizona State University, to SBCFCD' s City Creek channel facility. ERSC obtained permit approvals from SBCFCD by Tempe, AZ designing the proposed storm drain outlet to maximize velocity dissipation and minimize the hydraulic impacts to the channel. Ben assisted with the hydraulic modeling, report Areas of Expertise
1 preparation, and PSE procurement. The project requires SBKR relocation and preparation of an LEHCP. As the project lead, Ben facilitated coordination between the City, SBCFCD Pavement Rehabilitation Services staff, USFWS and CDFW and supplied the City' s environmental consultant with exhibits Utility Services and project descriptions to help obtain approvals from the various jurisdictional resource Land Development Services agencies.

Sycamore Storm Drain, City of Highland, CA - ERSC was contracted by the City to prepare storm drain plans, specifications, and estimate ( PS& E) needed to replace an existing concrete open channel with 1, 250 feet 54" RCP storm drain along Bledsoe Creek located Mr. Booth has a broad base of experience on the north side of Sycamore Drive. As the project engineer and project manager, Ben in various disciplines such as site prepared the hydraulics study to properly size the storm drain pipe and quantify the development, street improvements, and hydraulic impacts on the downstream environment for CEQA compliance. Ben led the grading and drainage, pavement rehab development of the PS& E and served as the main poiont of contact for the City. design and construction, and utility design. Overland Bridge at Murrieta Creek, Federal Highway Bridge Program Fund, Temecula, Mr. Booth is a recent graduate from Arizona State University and interned with notable CA - As a partner to the CNS Engineers' team, Ben served as Project Engineer during companies such as Schuler Constructors, the design of a bridge structure over and across Murrieta Creek connecting Avenida PACE, and Huc during his undergraduate
Alvarado with Overland Drive at the intersection of Enterprise Circle to the east of the studies. He worked fora local private creek. The ERSC team was responsible for all ancillary improvements to the design of engineering e consultant where he served as
the bridge, including street improvements, drainage improvements, right of way legals/ survey chairman and a design engineer. plats, channel hydraulic/ hydrology analysis, and WQMP, all facilitated in- house by the Projects recently undertaken by Mr. Booth ERSC team. The project required compliance with Caltrans LAPM requirements and involving the design and construction federal funding requirements. ERSC is assisting CNS with obtaining permits from various services include the following significant
agencies such as USACE Section 408, RCFC& WCD Encroachment Permit, CDFW Section 1602, and RWQCB Section 401 for improvements within the channel. assignments.

PW 19- 11 Bike Lane and Trail Program, ATP Funded, Temecula Creek South Side Trail, City of Temecula, CA - Under an on -call engineering agreement, ERSC completed preliminary and final engineering services necessary to provide project scoping and final design.

Project tasks include hydrology review and channel hydraulics modeling, bike trail plan and profile design, specifications, estimates, WQMP preparation, and environmental and geotechnical services. ERSC and our subconsultants coordinate with various permitting agencies such as RCFC& WCD, CDFW, and RWQCB Section 401 for trail improvements within the Temecula Creek Channel.

City of Highland Elder Creek Hydrology Analysis and Feasibility Study, City of Highland, Highland, CA — Project Engineer for the preparation of a drainage feasibility study report for Elder Creek Storm Drain Facilities at Greenspot Road. The report was prepared to determine the tributary flows to the existing 12' x 4' Reinforced Concrete Box ( RCB) at Greenspot Road and Elder Creek Channel.

Sewer Capacity Improvement Project C- 1, City of Victorville, Victorville, CA — Project Engineer designer during the upgrading of 3, 022 feet to 15- inch pipe from existing 10- inch pipe. The project intends to allow additional capacity to the sewer system to allow and account for increased commercial and industrial development in this part of the City.

The project is generally located in an industrial area around Hesperia Road and Nisqualli Road and generally has impacts on several distribution sites as well as some retail/ gas stations.

Sewer Capacity Improvement Project C- 2, City of Victorville, Victorville, CA — Project Engineer designer during the upgrading of 1, 748 feet to 12- inch pipe from existing 8- inch pipe. The project is generally located in a residential area and crosses an existing golf course. The project is also contiguous to City sewer project C3 as well as several Structural Sewer Replacement Lines. This was important to note because turned out to be beneficial to include both items of work in the same project/ contract. This work generally took place in easements, and only has impacts on a small segment of Public La Paz Drive as well as Arrowhead
16 Drive.

CA, Civil Engineer No. C74906
DE, Civil Engineer No. C13235
BS, Civil Engineering, Southern University and
A& M College, Baton Rouge, LA
MS, Civil Engineering, New Jersey Institute of
Technology, Newark, NJ
American Concrete Institute
Construction Management
Structural Engineering
Structural Analysis
Material Analysis
Mr. Toorzani joined the ERSC team in 2003,
with more than 26 years of rich and extensive
experience. He has gained particular skill in
design, and a distinguished reputation for the
overall supervision of large and complicated
projects, insuring that the contracted works
meets the required specifications. He has
managed several site supervision teams and
played a major role in completing projects
according to program and within budget. In
addition, Mr. Toorzani has practiced as an
analyst, designer and site superintendent in
the implementation of major civil infrastructure
projects mainly in the United States and Iran.

Since joining ERSC, Mr. Toorzani has focused
his extensive experience and expertise on the
design and peer review of various structures.

His design experience includes large scale solar
projects, walls and foundations, reinforced
concrete box storm drains and substructures
and block enclosures and small wood framed
structures at pump station and large metal
buildings. Has conducted peer review for conical
wind turbine foundations in the City of Palm
Springs, Con - Span bridge structures along the
Cactus Valley Wash in the City of Hemet and
reinforced concrete structures crossing the East
Garden Grove/ Winters burg Channel in the City
of Huntington Beach.

Similar Project Experience:

MDP Lines 6A and 8, Laterals 20C and 20A, City of Palm Springs, CA — Project engineer during the design of the three major flood control projects commissioned by the City of Palm Springs. Line 6A and Line 8 along Sunrise Way resulted in the elimination of "down and under drains" and support commercial development between Via Escuela and Vista Chino Drive and Andreas Road and the Baristo Channel, respectively. Similarly, Laterals 20C and 20CA resulted in the elimination of " down and under drains" and support residential development along El Cielo and Baristo Road. Services provided include review and modification of master plan hydrology, design surveys, utility coordination, geotechnical engineering, alignment selection and analysis, hydraulic modeling and the development of plans, specifications and estimates.

CP 19- 15 MDP Line 20, City of Palm Springs, CA —Project engineerforthe design of master drainage plan facilities in Ramon Road and Farrell Drive as part of the revised Master Drainage Plan ( MDP). Line 20 originates at Tahquitz Creek and exit along El Cielo drive to its intersection with Ramon Road. Catch basins located on Ramon Road and El Cielo Drive indicate short extensions of Line 20 and Lateral 20C west and north along each roadway.

Plans, specifications and estimates ( PS& E) and all calculations will be dictated by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ( RCFC& WCD) Drafting Manual. Items prepared for CP19- 15 will guide the installation of reinforced concrete box and various diameter reinforced concrete pipe storm drains in Ramon Road from El Cielo Drive to Farrell Drive and in Farrell Drive from Ramon Road to Tahquitz Canyon Way. Catch basins associated with Line 20 will intercept street flows at critical locations and locations where existing down and under drains require elimination and potential nuisance flows could enter the public right-of-way.

San Jacinto Area Master Drainage Plan Line " E- 2", City of San Jacinto, CA — Project Engineer for the preparation of construction plans for MDP Lines E- 2 and E- 2A in the City of San Jacinto and Hemet. The project reach for MDP Line E- 2 is over 7100 feet along State Street between Menlo Avenue and MDP Line E and over 250 feet for MDP Line E- 2A along Esplanade Avenue. The size of the storm drain facilities are from 36- inch to 72- inch diameter. The scope of work included hydrology analysis to determine the 10- and 100-year storm runoff within the MDP facilities watershed. using CivilDesign software.

The Hydraulic calculations for the proposed MDP facilities was performed utilizing Water Surface Profile Gradient (WSPG) program, latest version by CivilDesign.

San Jacinto Area Master Drainage Plan Line " H". City of San Jacinto, CA— Project Engineer for the preparation of a feasibility study to evaluate alternative alignments for MDP Line H, H- 2 and H- 3 per the current City of San Jacinto MDP. The scope of work also included preparation of construction plans for the most cost- effective alignment of the above facilities. The project included evaluation of the existing drainage facilities at the intersection of Ramona Expressway and State Street; to mitigate drainage deficiencies as required. It also includes Rational Method Hydrology using CivilDesign software to determine the 10- and 100- year storm runoff. The Hydraulic calculations for the proposed MDP facilities was performed utilizing Water Surface Profile Gradient ( WSPG) program, latest version by CivilDesign.

CSDP Storm Drain Line 3- 5, City Of Colton, CA — Project engineer during the design of a regional drainage facility conveying 1, OOOcfs from a 2, 045- acre area. The project included installation of 10,000 feet of 108 and 120- inch reinforced concrete pipe from Valley boulevard south to the Santa Ana River, as well as protection of sewer and water mains, MCI fiber optics cable, major petroleum products line and gas lines, and an existing aqueduct system. Approximately 1, 700 feet of 108-inch RCP by boring and jacking methods were also installed. Final design of the facilities included preparation of construction plans and specifications meeting San Bernardino County Flood Control District requirements, utility coordination and relocation, preparation of right-of-way documentation and coordination of construction permits from the State of California and the Southern Pacific Railroad.
17 EIT # 174538
responsiDle Tor cnannei design, ueunec- m/ A3 rAndrysis, dna Hrepdrduvii vi NrUjeu documents and completion of computer aided design throughout all phases of the assignment. The Haystack Channel is located along the north side of Haystack Road between State Route 74 ( SR 74) and Portola Avenue in the City of Palm Desert. The City of Palm Desert has issued a contract for the analysis of each reach and the development alternative designs to replace a nuisance water drain system in the reach from SR 74 to Heliotrope Drive and bank erosion and sediment control from Heliotrope Drive to Portola Avenue. The scope of work provides for the development of hydrology calculations, hydraulic analysis of the existing condition, analysis of existing culverts at Alamo Road, Heliotrope Drive and Portola Avenue, alternative development and analysis, preparation of project costs and recommendations. After review and input form the city, final plans, specifications, and estimates will be provided for the preferred alternative.

Prado Regional Park, STK Architecture, County of San Bernardino, CA - Project Designer California Baptist university, Civil Engineering responsible for hydrology calculations to size culverts and preparation of project documents and completion of computer aided design throughout all phases of the assignment. ERSC was contracted to provide professional engineering services for the removal of existing parking and access improvements and the construction of new improvements. The proposed improvements included a concrete pathway and culvert AutoCAD between the existing picnic shelter and existing restrooms. Creating an accessible CIVILD path across the watercourse between the picnic structure and restrooms required the GeoHEC- RAS construction of a culvert, or other conveyance, to move runoff generated upstream of HEC- RAS the new crossing under the engineered fill necessary to support an accessible path of travel.

Winchester Gateway Property, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, San Jacinto, CA - Project Designer responsible for the Conceptual Drainage Plan and preparation of project documents and completion of computer aided design throughout all phases of the Travis Moffatt first joined ERSC asas an intern assignment. ERSC was contracted to provide engineering services related the preparation during his collegiate journey. is now of conceptual level plans and exhibits related to phasing, site circulation and first phase permanent member of our design team, development, wet and dry utilities, and site drainage. ERSC developed a proposed phasing having earned his EIT. Travis continues plan based on the availability of infrastructure, best use of available frontage, favorable to expand his engineering toonti by land use, and potential for absorption. ERSC also developed backbone circulation for the performing various engineering tasks such entire property and a working site plan for the proposed first phase of development. as AutoCAD drafting, hydrology calculations
with CIVILD, analysis using GeoHEC- RAS Overland Bridge at Murrieta Creek, CNS Engineers, Temecula, CA - Project Designer and HEC- RAS, Excel calculations and responsible for preparation of project documents and completion of computer aided spreadsheets, surveying and project design throughout all phases of the assignment. ERSC served as a partner to the CNS coordination for plan checks. Engineers' team, during the design of a bridge structure over and across Murrieta Creek connecting Avenida Alvarado at the intersection of Diaz to the west of the creek, with Overland Drive at the intersection of Enterprise Circle to the east of the creek. The ERSC team was responsible for all ancillary improvements to the design of the bridge. Street improvements, drainage improvements, legals/ plats, hydraulic/ hydrology analysis, and WQAR were all facilitated in house by the ERSC team.

Paloma Wash Pedestrian Bridge, City of Menifee CA - Project Designer responsible for GeoHec- RAS Analysis and preparation of project documents and completion of computer aided design throughout all phases of the assignment. ERSC was contracted to prepare plans, specifications and cost estimates for the construction of a Pedestrian Bridge crossing the Paloma Wash. The bridge will provide access from the Countryside Marketplace to the mixed use Town Center area and Central Park. 18 CA, Land Surveyor No. 7731 Similar Project Experience Survey for Traffic Signal Design Services for Rubidoux Blvd at 24th St and Wineville Rd Education at Riverside Dr, STC Traffic, Inc., Jurupa Valley, CA - Project Manager responsible for day - to -day project guidance, team oversight, client contact, as well as schedule and budget Civil Engineering & Land Surveying Coursework, University of California at
management throughout the assignment. ERSC' s team provides support to the STC Traffic, Inc. team for the completion of improvement plans for the HSIP and local funded Riverside, Riverside, CA projects in the City of Jurupa Valley. The planned improvements include traffic signals and upgraded curb ramps to comply with ADA at two intersections. ERSC provides field Areas of Expertise and office support to STC' s team in mapping existing right-of-way, existing topography, Civi13D
and contours at each site.

MicroStation Survey Services, Fire Station No. 3, Clty of Palm Springs, CA - Project Manager responsible ArcMap for day-to-day project guidance, team oversight, client contact, as well as schedule Boundary Surveying and budget management throughout the assignment. ERSC was contracted to provide Right - of -Way & Easements professional surveying services related to the development of a Boundary, Topographic, Construction Surveying and Utility AsBuilt for Fire Station # 3 in the City of Palm Springs. More specifically, the Topographic Mapping site -in -question is located at the northwest corner of Via Miraleste and Raquet Club.

Consulting Surveyor to Municipal Agencies Reservoir Site Survey, Riverside Highland Water Company - Project Manager responsible for day-to-day project guidance, team oversight, client contact, as well as schedule and budget management throughout the assignment. ERSC provided surveying services at the RHWC Spring Mountain Ranch reservoir site. ERSC survey crews located existing Robert has over 35 years of professional monumentation for the site and searched for existing monuments. it was found that experience in land surveying for municipal mounuments were destroyed by construction of the Site' s wall and ERSC provided agencies. He has managed a wide variety of services to replace damaged or missing monuments. land survey projects including surveys for Riverside County Surveyor - Under direction of the County Surveyor, checked tract maps topographic mapping, geodetic control, right for conformance with the Subdivision Map Act, County ordinances, and development of -way, boundary, and construction projects. standards. Reviewed records of surveys and corner records for conformance with the Land Surveyor' s Act. Managed on -call field surveying services for aerial mapping, control, Most recently, Robert' s responsibilities as the topographic and construction surveys.

Principal Surveyor include the management and
coordination of construction staking contracts County of Riverside Winchester Road ( Highway 79) Widening - Survey manager for for civil engineering projects, boundary surveys, control and topographic surveying of over eight miles of Highway 79/ Winchester Road title analysis, topographic mapping, detailed for ultimate widening to six lanes from Domenigoni Parkway to Benton Road. design surveys, ALTA Surveys and mapping. City Surveyor Services - Currently the acting City Surveyor for the Cities of Rialto, Lake Since joining ERSC, Robert' s wide range of skills Elsinore and Colton. Supervises the review of subdivision maps, parcel mergers, lot line and background have enabled ERSC to provide adjustments, dedications and easements. clients with localized and personalized service, Street Improvements, City of Temecula - Managed and performed construction surveying keeping true to ERSC' s philosophy of dedication for street improvements along Jefferson Street and Winchester Road. to customer service and satisfaction.

Widening and signalization of State Highway 79 at Auld Road - Performed construction surveying for the widening of State Highway 79 and extending improvements towards the Temecula Valley Airport.

Cucamonga Valley Water District, La Senda Road - Preparation and delivery of a 1, 500- lineal foot topographic survey map. Map included found monuments, street centerline, right- of-way, property lines, and location of wet and dry utilities.

Limonite Avenue Phase IV Widening Project, Riverside County Economic Development Agency, in conjunction with the Riverside County Transportation Department - Managed topographic and construction surveying services for widening of Limonite Avenue to four lanes.

Highway 111 Widening from Jefferson Street to Madison Street, City of Indio - Managed the construction surveying for the widening of Highway 111 which included new street curbs, sidewalks and medians and over one mile of 48" storm drain.

Highway 111 Bridge over the La Quinta Channel, City of Indio - Managed construction staking for the bridge, underground utilities and a commercial parking lot.

Monroe Street Widening, City of Indio - Managed control, topographic and construction staking for the widening of Monroe Street between Avenue 52 and Avenue 49. The project included the undergrounding of over a mile of electrical transmission lines and street improvements.
19 n
rni
c
n
d3m
n
Ia 9 N
V1
I
d ai"
Oi
A
9;
Principal
In
Charge -
Vice
President
Moe
Ahmadi,
PE,
MS,
QSD
Project
Manager- EngineerV Ben
Booth,
PE,
QSD
Structural
Engineer -
Assist.

Principal
Engineer
Reza
Toomam,
PE
Project
Engineere
Enginer
III
Travis
Moffatt,
ITT
Design
Engineer Engineer
IE
Nathan
Shea,
EIT
Principal
Surveyor
Robert
011erton,
PLS
Surveyor I
Bryce
Romaine
2-
Man
Survey
Crew
Std. Equipment/
Truck)
ERSUBTOTAL
inland
Aerial
Surveys,
fj
Inc.

I
Underground
Solutions,
Inc. - Potholing Compass
Consulting - Environmental SUBCONSUL7ANT ' SUBTOTAL TOTAL 20 Professional Staff
President........................................................................... $ 320. 00 VicePresident.................................................................... 275. 00 Sr. Principal Engineer......................................................... 270. 00 Principal Engineer.............................................................. 240. 00 Assistant Principal Engineer .............................................. 225. 00 EngineerV......................................................................... 205. 00 EngineerIV........................................................................ 185. 00 EngineerIII........................................................................ 170. 00 EngineerII......................................................................... 155. 00 EngineerI.......................................................................... 135. 00 Engineering Staff
Principal Engineering Associate ......................................... 220. 00 Senior Engineering Associate ............................................ 200. 00 Engineering Associate V.................................................... 175. 00 Engineering Associate IV ................................................... 150. 00 Engineering Associate III .................................................... 140. 00 Engineering Associate II ..................................................... 125. 00 Engineering Associate I ...................................................... 120. 00 Engineering Aide II.............................................................. 70. 00 Engineering Aide I............................................................... 65. 00 Survey Staff and Services
Principal Surveyor.............................................................. $ 225. 00 SeniorSurveyor................................................................. $ 185. 00 SurveyorIII........................................................................ $ 150. 00 SurveyorII......................................................................... $ 130. 00 SurveyorI.......................................................................... $ 110. 00 2- Man Survey Crew (Std Equipment/ Truck) ...................... $ 320. 00 1- Man Survey Crew ( Std Equipment/ Truck) ...................... $ 250. 00 3rd Man on Survey Crew ................................................... $ 140. 00 Construction Support Staff
Construction Manager....................................................... $ 225. 00 Chief Construction Inspector ............................................. $ 175. 00 Sr. Construction Inspector ................................................. $ 155. 00 Construction Inspector...................................................... $ 150. 00 Inspector Overtime ( Hours 8- 12/ Saturdays) ..................... $ 200. 00 Inspector Overtime ( Hours 12+/ Sundays) ......................... $ 235. 00 Administrative Staff
Operations Manager......................................................... $ 125. 00 Operations Specialist......................................................... $ 105. 00 Administrative Assistant II ................................................... $ 95. 00 Administrative Assistant I .................................................... $ 85. 00 Other Direct Expenses
Vehicle Mileage ................................................ $ 0. 70/ Mile Subconsultant................................................... Cost + 20% Reimbursable Expenses/ Charges ..................... Cost + 15% Forensic Analysis ................................. Standard Rate X 2 Expert Witness .................................... Standard Rate X 3 NOTE: All rates hereon are subject to automatic increase upon July 1st of each year. Rates will be adjusted by the percent increase in California Consumer Price Index -All Urban Consumers for the twelve- month period ending February as calculated by the California Department of Industrial Relations ( CADIR) California Consumer Price Index Calculator. Prevailing Wage Rates are dictated by the CADIR. All classifications which are subject to Prevailing Wages will be adjusted when revised determinations are published by the CADIR.

Unless otherwise established by contractual agreement,
payment is due and payable upon receipt. Payment is considered delinquent if not paid within 30 days of invoice date. If payment is not completed within agreed terms, Client agrees to pay a service charge on the amount past due at the rate of 1. 5% per month 18% per annum).
21 January 1, 2025

STAFF REPORT

TO THE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: August 12, 2025
FROM: Carlos Zamano, City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Octavio Duran, Public Works Director/City Engineer u` PREPARED BY: Chastity Scott, Engineering Technician I CS SUBJECT: Notice of Completion
Bid No. 2024- 03, " Highland Regional Connector Project "( Project No.

STR22002)
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Accept Bid No. 2024- 03, "" Highland Regional Connector Project" ( Project No.

STR22002) as complete;

2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the Notice of Completion; and

3. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The original construction contract to Matich Corporation was $ 792, 659. 22 The final contract amount is 805, 032 with a net increase of $ 12, 372. 78 ( 1. 5%) due to change orders and quantity adjustments.

This project was included in the City' s adopted Capital Improvement Program CIP) FY 2022/ 2023- 2026/ 2027 with $ 103, 119 in Measure I and $ 701, 913 in Federal Carbon Reduction Program grant funds.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

Notices of the Council Meeting agenda were posted at the three locations required by Resolution No. 2011- 047 and on the City' s website.

Approved Motion
Denied Ayes
Continued Noes
Tabled Abstain
Absent
City Clerk
Second Agenda Item No.

File No.

City meager
1 BACKGROUND:

The Project rehabilitated pavement on various streets, upgraded curb ramps, installed bicycle markings and signage to provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to Arroyo Verde Elementary School, Highland Grove Elementary School, and Beattie Middle School. Street Segments included:

Orange Street from Greenspot Road to Tonner Drive
Tonner Drive from Orange Street to Glenheather Drive
Streater Drive/ Glenheather Drive/ Love Street from Base Line to Church Street Love Street from Church Street to east end of cul- de -sac The city received a Federal Carbon Reduction Program Grant in the amount of $ 702, 000 which covered 88% of construction and construction engineering costs for the Project. The local match and remaining project costs will be covered using Measure I Funds. The Project was originally part of a joint project between the Cities of Highland and Redlands known as the " Highland/ Redlands Regional Connector Project." Due to environmental constraints, it was split up into three separate projects. Highland is delivering the northerly phase, Redlands is delivering a southern phase and both agencies have partnered with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to deliver the middle gap segment.

Attachments: Project Location Map
Notice of Completion
MAPUBWRK\ str22002 Highland Regional Connector\ NOC
2 Project Location Map
Base Line
a
o
y
c Eucalyptus Ave
D
C Greenspot Rd
5th St
Tonner Dr
c
ii
m
cc
cn
cn
Lave St
Glenheather Dr
ru
Q7
0 CD
4 3

RECORDING REQUESTED BY &
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

CITY CLERK

CITY OF HIGHLAND
27215 BASE LINE
HIGHLAND, CA 92346
No APN

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

1. The undersigned is owner or agent of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described.

2. The full name of the owner is City of Highland.

3. The full address of the owner is 27215 Base Line, Highland, CA 92346.

4. All work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was substantially completed on or before August 12, 2025.

5. The work of improvement completed is described as follows: Project No. STR22002, Highland Regional Connector Project" ( Bid No. 2024- 03).

6. The name of the original contractor for such work of improvement is Matich Corporation.

7. The property on which said work of improvement is located at various City of Highland streets.

Date and Place Penny Lilbum
Mayor, City ofHighland
I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am the Mayor of the aforesaid interest or estate in the property described in the above notice; that I have read the said notice, that I know and understand the contents thereof, and that the facts stated therein are true and correct.

Date and Place Penny Lilbum
Mayor, City of Highland
4 DATE:

FROM:

REVIEWED BY:

PREPARED BY
SUBJECT:

RECOMMENDATION:

STAFF REPORT

TO THE CITY COUNCIL
August 12th, 2025
Carlos Zamano, City Manager
Octavio Duran, Public Works Director/ City Engineer
Chastity Scott, Engineering Technician
Notice of Completion — 3rd Street / 5tn Street Corridor Improvement Project ( STR18001) Bid No. 2022- 02
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Accept Bid No. 2022-02, Street Corridor Improvement Project (STR18001) as complete;

2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the Notice of Completion, and

3. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The original construction contract was $ 9, 395, 939. 00 The final contract amount is 9, 578,796. 82 with an increase of $182, 857. 82 ( 1. 95%). The project construction cost was funded as follows:

Federal Economic Development Administration ( EDA) Grant $ 3, 857, 787. 80 State Local Partnership Program SB- 1 Grant $ 1, 700, 000. 00 San Manuel Band of Mission Indians $ 1, 340, 198. 87
Inland Valley Development Agency $ 1, 340, 198. 87
City of Highland $ 1, 340, 611. 28
Total $ 9, 578,796. 82
Approved Motion Second Agenda Item No.

Denied Ayes
Continued Noes File No.

Tabled Abstain
Absent
City Clerk
Z
M:\ PUBWRK\ str18001 - 3rd St- 5th St Corridor Improvements\ zuz5 ivuc1 PUBLIC NOTICE:

Notices of the Council Meeting agenda were posted at the three locations required by Resolution No. 2011- 047 and on the City's website.

BACKGROUND:

The 3rd Street/ 5th Street Corridor Improvements Project involved roadway improvements to the following streets:
3rd Street ( Palm Avenue to 5th Street)
5th Street ( Victoria Avenue to Palm Avenue — South Side only) 5th Street ( Palm Avenue to SR- 210)
Palm Avenue ( 3rd Street to 5th Street)
Central Avenue ( 3rd Street to 5th Street)
The completed improvements included pavement rehabilitation and widening, new curbs, gutters, sidewalks, right -turn pockets, street extension, traffic signal modifications, drainage catch basins, streetlights, bike lanes, pavement markings, signage, and striping.

Construction of the project has been completed with the approved plans and specifications by the contractor, Granite Construction Company. The project is ready for City Council acceptance.

Attachments: Location Map
Notice of Completion
2 k
f
7 0\ j}
EE
4 5\
3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY &
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

CITY CLERK

CITY OF HIGHLAND
27215 BASE LINE
HIGHLAND, CA 92346
No APN

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

1. The undersigned is owner or agent of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described.

2. The full name ofthe owner is City of Highland.

3. The full address of the owner is 27215 Base Line, Highland, CA 92346.

4. All work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was substantially completed on or before March 28d', 2025.

5. The work of improvement completed is described as follows: Project No. STRI8001 Yd Street / 5d' Street Corridor Improvement Project" ( Bid No. 2022- 02).

6. The name of the original contractor for such work of improvement is Granite Construction Company.

7. The property on which said work of improvement is located on various streets in the City of Highland.

DATE:

Penny Lilburn
Mayor, City of Highland
I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am the Mayor of the aforesaid interest or estate in the property described in the above notice; that I have read the said notice, that I know and understand the contents thereof, and that the facts stated therein are true and correct.

Date and Place Penny Lilburn
Mayor, City of Highland
4 STAFF REPORT

TO THE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: August 12th, 2025
FROM: Carlos Zamano, City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Octavio Duran Jr., Public Works Director/ City Engineer r PREPARED BY: Chastity Scott — Engineering Technician I
SUBJECT: Measure 15-Year Capital Improvement Plan ( 2025/2026-2029/2030) RECOMMENDATION:
1) Approve the Measure I Capital Improvement Plan Expenditure Strategy ( 2025/ 2026- 2029/ 2030) and
2) Approve Resolution No. 2025- adopting the Measure 15-Year Capital Improvement Plan 2025/ 2026- 2029/ 2030) and
FISCAL IMPACT: Based on SBCTA' s estimate, the City' s annual Measure I Local Pass -Through revenue for the next 5 years ranges from $ 1, 451, 456 to $1, 622,230 per year. The total amount of revenue for the 5- year period ( 2024/ 2025- 2028/ 2029) is estimated at $ 7, 676, 041. The proposed 5- year plan will serve as a planning guide for the City' s expenditure of Measure I Local Pass -Through Funds. Since Measure I funds are restricted to roadway/ traffic/ transit type improvements, adoption of the 5- year plan will not affect other City services.

PUBLIC NOTICE: Notices of the Council Meeting agenda were posted at the three locations required by Resolution No. 2011- 047 and on the City' s website.

BACKGROUND: The SBCTA Measure I Strategy Plan requires that each local jurisdiction receiving Local Pass -Through Funds annually adopt a 5- Year Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP) to outline the specific projects upon which these funds will be expended. SBCTA also requires each jurisdiction to adopt an Expenditure Strategy to clarify its policy approach for expenditure of these funds.

Currently, the City has an estimated $5, 069, 260 of carryover Measure I Local Pass -Through Funds, along with the projected $ 7, 676, 041 revenue for the next 5 years. A total of $12, 745, 301 in Measure I funds are estimated for programming in the 5- year CIP.

Approved Motion
Denied Ayes
Continued Noes
Tabled Abstain
Absent
City Clerk
Second Agenda Item No.

File No.
anager
1 In the 5- year CIP, Measure I funds are being programmed to provide the necessary local match for competitive grant projects, CDBG projects, and to provide funding for committed pavement rehabilitation and street improvement projects, as listed below:

Pavement Manaaement Proqram:
ola23002 2025 Arterial Resurfacing Project
ola25001 11th St & Sparks St Pavement Rehab ( 25/ 26 CDBG) ola26001 26- 27 Pavement Rehab ( 26/ 27 CDBG)
ola27001 27- 28 Pavement Rehab ( 26/ 27 CDBG)
ola28001 28- 29 Pavement Rehab ( 27/ 28 CDBG)
Pacific Street - Del Rosa Drive to Sterling Avenue ( Joint project with San Bernardino County)
str23003 — Sector A & B Pavement Rehab
str25001 — Sector C Pavement Rehab
str25002 — Sector A, B, & C Pavement Maintenance
str26001 — Sector D Pavement Rehab and Maintenance
str27001 — Sector E Pavement Rehab and Maintenance
Streets:
str15002 — Highland/ Redlands Regional Connector
Sidewalks:

Swk19001 - 9t" Street Valaria Dr to Victoria Ave ( Article 3 grant) Swk23001 - City-wide sidewalk repairs
Signals:
sig25001 — Church St/ Love St Signal & Citywide Signal Head Retrofit sig25002 — Base Line & Greenspot Corridor Signal Equipment Upgrades In addition, $ 250, 000 of Measure I funds are being programmed for Miscellaneous City-wide Street Repairs. The total estimated programmed Measure I Local Pass -through is $ 8, 336, 235.

Attachments: Measure I CIP Expenditure Strategy
Resolution - Measure 15- Year Capital Improvement Plan
2 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 -

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

ADOPTING THE MEASURE I FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR FY2025/ 2026 THROUGH FY2029/2030
WHEREAS, San Bernardino County voters approved passage of Measure I in November 2004, authorizing the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to impose a one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Bernardino; and WHEREAS, revenue from the tax can only be used for transportation improvement and traffic management programs authorized in the Expenditure Plans set forth in Ordinance No. 04-01 ofthe Authority; and
WHEREAS, the Strategic Plan requires each local jurisdiction applying for revenue from the Local Street Program to annually adopt and update a Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Highland, State of California, that the Measure I Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan, attached to this resolution as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the Council ofthe City of Highland held on August 12, 2025.

Penny Lilbum
Mayor
ATTEST:

Alondra Munoz
City Clerk
3 CITY/ TOWN/ COUNTY OF HIGHLAND

MEASURE I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

EXPENDITURE STRATEGY
Fiscal Year 2025/ 2026 thru 2029/ 2030
The City of Highland intends to expend Measure I Local Street Program Pass -Through revenue primarily to ( 1) improve pavement conditions of the City' s roadway network by constructing various pavement management projects including pavement rehabilitation, overlay, slurry seal and crack seal projects, and ( 2) provide local match to grant funding of roadway/ bikeway improvement projects
4 W
F- U uj z
F- F2
ID:

LQ:

IT:

CD:

W
0 V
Ni4:
10 10
ICDD
0 0
U1
CD
Imo
CD
0):

CD
M?.

C":
rv
co
0 rco
M
CD
1-
0 M
C41
cn
0 LO
0):

M
cm
N
U')
W
V
o0-
i
toi
N
i
m
cn:
cn:
co
CO
0 cn:
r-:
co
co
v
cn:
co
CD:

CN:
cn
n
LO
Lq:
cli:

Lq:
rl.:
co
C.
v
1:
11 CD
1 0
N
N
t-:
r-.:

U.

CN
0 FM:
r0
0 cn:

D:

V
0 r-:

CD:
rz
0 N:

CM
Of
fA
a:
bFI:
lbF,:

IV):

IF,:
bog,:
169:
64,:

60.:
6c,:
69:
69 69 ::

D
C%
4 OD
00 0
qD
OD
C4
q
rt0
LO
0 ro)
0 Cl)
CD
0 11
M
OD
0 W
0 t_
W
N
It
N
0')
0)
0)
00 v)
i
CD
o
h
O
r
C4
C,
r-.
7 V
6 C5
C6
C6
o
5 1.-
7 C4
cy)
cl
c,)
qr64
N
ob
oo
T
r
o
c)
oo
co
v
i
W)
O
D
C14
V)
N
Cl)
0 t--
C)
04 0
0 CO
CN
n
LO
0)
C\
f
cli
6 1-
7 L6
Ld
oi
C,;
6 C4
7 C6
LL
69 69
69 69
613,
69 69
V)
64 64
69 69
69 69
69 69
i
49 rCo
M
IT
rM
OD
tO
0)
0 0
N
C)
CD
0 CO
V)
OD
rN
PD
0 N
t
n
rLO
N
D
0 M
M
CO
D
r--
0)
a)
0 0
0 V)
M
LO:
0)
O
cl
V
V
r
r
d
C6
C6
d
cr;
6 6
P-:
q7
C4:
cq
0 M
CO
D
r0
LO
cn
0 LO
CN
NIt
Cp
D
0 M
v)-
r0
M
0 M
IT
Z
in
qcli
cli
6 to
i
C4
C4
6 C\[
cn
i
ll
LL
0 9 E
69 64
69 61).
61).
69 69
M
69 69
69 ta
69 69
69 4A
CM
D
N
Iq
00 0
NCl)
N
0)
LO
0)
1-
rU)
D
LO
N
w
rm
Cl)
rMN
r0
1--
0 W
M
r0
M
rM
M
Oct
d
V7
Md
7 C6
r-:

Ni
M
N
d
0')
D
Ntl
L()
C:)
U)
C:)
n
M
co
N
0)
1-
0 Cl)
m
Lo
CO
tq.

Lo
t
0)
Cl)
LO
D
0 M
tCD
00 NN
N
N7
nV7
V7 NR
J
Cf
ct)
s)
LL
cc
6-
k
69 69
V)
69 69
69 r9
69 69
VI
V9'
69 Q!)
VA
69 4-
1).
04 0)
D
C%
4 04
0 Ce)
rlCf)
Ce)
OD
to
0 N
00 CO
i
0 D
f)
00 0)
CD
N
IT
0)
C)
IT
N
Cl)
0 0
q.

Q
CD
D
It
P.

V7
d
C4
7 CO
P.

L6
C6
P,:

C4
0-
1-
co
co
00 T
co
q.
3)
0 0)
Lo
T
vCD
r--
3)
V
L()
i
W)
eD
V
O
V
P--
Cl)
IT
CD
0)
OD
0 CF)
r0
0 q
04 C*
4 N
N
r
LO
r
V
It
N(
6 NM
ENV69
69 69
69 69
6/
9 60
69 69
04 60
e4
69 60
69 fA
mIle
0 D
00 0
co
0 CY)
v
LO
C14
Iv
co
0 c)
A
o
CF)
0 4
C
e)
to
M
rLr)
0)
0 LO
0 CLS)
0 0)
r0)
T
OD
0 t
04 POD
00 CO
V
No
Lrdc."
0 6;
LC61)
L06
6-
Tc.
4 in
2 W"
LO
L60
tdN"'
OP'
O:

OD6
q;
r
cy
C'!
LQ
C')
T
D
CY)
P--
0000
cD
CY)
0 T
N
U)
cNi
L6
N_:

MLL
604
6q
64 69
9 69
613
69 69
69 69
69 69
69 69
69 69
0 1,
to
M
M
r
FLO
0 M
M
0 0
T
i
40 M
M
T
M
N
0 T
M
0 0
tM
0 C.

N(
q
to
tQ
LQ
C,!
cl
Q
cl
C',!
oc
cl!
to
V
Ilk
M LO
IM
M
LO
to
IM
N
M
M
IT
0 ra
a)
CII
LQ
V)
t
0 M
I--
LO
CO
CO
0)
0 It_
LL
04 r
LO
V
V
C4
L6
04 w
64 69
69 69
69 69
64 69
69 69
69 69
69 09
09 64
r
02 cn
Lv
A
rLr)
Lo
LQ
Ce)
00 ID
0)
0)
0)
o
Cl?
75 0
00 CD
Cf)
OD
1 f)
U)
Ce)
Lo
O
CL
2 L6
i
4 i
C'
i
i
i
ci
i
Cj
i
t
i
N
i
t
i
i
i :(
6 i
i
V
i
C6
LO)
CL
o

0. Im
LLJ
Im
4) co
r
A:
u):
ci
uj
r
r
Cc .
r
E
r
T :
r
0:
r
r
00:

Z:
5 r
0 ., :
0 0 :
r
cc:
v:
cc :
a:
m :
0 LL
0 i2
n
0 5
Resolution Number: 2025-
Resolution Approval Date: 8/ 12/ 2025
Contact Person/ Title: Octavio Duran, Jr. / Public Works Director & City Engineer Phone: 909) 864- 6861
Email: o_duran@clty0fhlghland.. org
ola23002 — 2025 Arterial Resurfacing Project
ola25001 — 11th St & Sparks St Pavement Rehab ( 25/ 26 CDBG) ola26001 — 26- 27 Pavement Rehab ( 26/ 27 CDBG)
ola27001 — 27-28 Pavement Rehab ( 26/ 27 CDBG)
ola28001 — 28- 29 Pavement Rehab ( 27/ 28 CDBG)
sig25001 — Church St/Love St Signal & Citywide Signal Head Retrofit sig25002 — Base Line & Greenspot Corridor Signal Equipment Upgrades str15002 — Highland/ Redlands Regional Connector
str22001 — Pacific Street (Joint Project with SB County - City's Share) str23003 — Sector A & B Pavement Rehab
str25001 — Sector C Pavement Rehab
str25002 — Sector A, 6, & C Pavement Maintenance
str26001 — Sector D Pavement Rehab and Maintenance
str27001 — Sector E Pavement Rehab and Maintenance
swk19001 — 9th St Transit Stops, Sidewalk and Bikeway Improvements swk23001 — City -Wide Sidewalk Repairs
Categorical Project - Miscellaneous City -Wide Street Repair Is Project in City' s
Non - motorized Transportation Plan?
Yes/ No)
Does Project have an ATP
Component?
Yes/No)
Is the Project on the Citys Nexus Study List?
Public/ DIF Share % )
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
100. 0%
100. 0
100. 0%
No No 100. 0%
No No 100. 0%
No No 100. 0%
No No 100. 0%
Yes Yes 100. 0%
No No 100. 0%
No No 1uu
No No 100
No
No
No
No
100
100
No No 100
Yes Yes 100
No No 100
No No 100
Jurisdiction:

Measure I Local Pass -through Program
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Highland
Fiscal Years 2025/ 2026 thru 2029/ 2030
6/ 30/ 25 Carryover Balance $ 5, 069, 260. 00
FY2025/ 26 Est. Revenue FY2026/ 27 Est. Revenue FY2027/28 Est. Revenue FY2028/29 Est. Revenue FY2029/ 30 Est. Revenue Total Est. Rev.

Estimated Total 1, 451, 456 1, 491, 806 1, 533, 576 1, 576, 973 1, 622, 230 7, 676, 041 Project Cost
Current Current Current Current Current
Total
Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate

0. 0% 3, 000, 000 1, 687, 235 0 0 0 0 1, 687

0. 0% 295, 000 65, 000 0 0 0 0 65

0. 0% 295, 000 0 65, 000 0 0 0 65

0. 0% 295, 000 0 0 65, 000 0 0 65

0. 0% 295, 000 0 0 0 65, 000 0 65

0. 0% 1, 549, 000 12, 000 144, 000 0 0 0 156

0. 0% 1, 339, 000 20, 000 90, 000 0 0 0 110

0. 0% 1 $ 401, 0001 $ 401, 0001 $ 01 $ 01 $ 01 $ 01 $
401

0. 0% 3, 094, 000 1, 168, 000 0 0 0 0 1, 168, 000

0. 0% 1, 906 787, 000 0 0 0 0 787, 000

0. 0% 1, 500, 000 1, 500, 000 0 0 0 0 1, 500, 000

0. 0% 1, 748, 000 0 800, 000 0 0 0 800, 000

0. 0% 1, 643, 000 0 0 800, 000 0 0 800, 000

0. 0% 1, 007, 000 452, 000 0 0 0 0 452, 000

0. 0% 555, 000 15, 000 0 0 0 0 15, 000

0. 0% 555, 000 50, 000 50, 0001 50, 0001 50, 0001 50, 0001 250, 000
Projects Total: 6, 307, 235 1, 099, 000 865, 000 65, 000 01$ 8,336,235
Must not exceed 150% of Carryover
Balance + Total Estimated Revenue)
Total Programming is currently 65%
Total Estimated Programming: $
8, 336, 235
6 STAFF REPORT

TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: August 12, 2025
FROM: Carlos Zamano, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Octavio Duran, Public Works Director/ City Engineer OD SUBJECT: Municipal Code Amendment ( MCA 25- 002) " to consider amending Chapter 16. 76 Floodplain Management of the
Highland Municipal Code with Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) requirements.

RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council open the public hearing, take any testimony, and conduct a first reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2025- XX, entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

HIGHLAND AMENDING THE CITY' S MUNICIPAL CODE,
TITLE 16 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT, CHAPTER 16.76

FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT AND MAKE A FINDING OF

EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15061( B)( 3)
MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT MCA 25- 002)
FISCAL IMPACT: None.

PUBLIC NOTICE: The agenda for this item was posted at the three locations per Resolution No. 2011- 047 and on the City' s website.

BACKGROUND: The Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) has conducted a review of Chapter 16. 76 Floodplain Management of the City' s Municipal Code to ensure compliance with California Department of Water Resources along with flood provisions of the California Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24). This review was deemed imperative due to the impending implementation of the new Flood Insurance Study ( FIS) and associated Flood Insurance Rate Maps ( FIRMs) in San Bernardino County. pproved Motion
enied Ayes
ontinued Noes
abled Abstain
Absent
Second Agenda Item No.

File No.

City Clerk anager
1 Upon receiving new or revised flood hazard data from FEMA and recommended amendments to Chapter 16.76 Floodplain Management, the City of Highland is obligated to ensure that the floodplain management regulations are in compliance with California Department of Water Resources along with flood provisions of the California Building Standards Code ( CCR Title 24) and are legally enforceable by the effective date, October, 30, 2025, of the FIRM and FIS report.

ANALYSIS: Upon a meticulous review of Chapter 16. 76 Floodplain Management, FEMA has observed that certain areas require attention to ensure full compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program ( NFIP) minimum development standards.

The utilization of the model ordinances developed by the California Department of Water Resources along with flood provisions of the California Building Standards Code ( CCR Title 24) for buildings and structures in Special Flood Hazard Areas ( SFHA) served as a resource in aligning City regulations with state and federal floodplain management requirements. By incorporating these model ordinances, recommendations were made to the City of Highland to update the Chapter 16. 76 Floodplain Management to meet compliance, enhance its resilience to flood hazards, and ensure the protection of lives and property within Special Flood Hazard Areas.

Collaboration between FEMA, California Department of Water Resources, and the City of Highland has been essential to swiftly address any compliance issues and facilitate the adoption of legally enforceable floodplain management regulations before the impending effective date of the new FIS and FIRMs: October 30, 2025. A review of the FEMA recommended revisions to Chapter 16. 76 has been completed, and the attached recommended ordinance includes those revisions
On July 15, 2025, the Planning Commission reviewed the item and adopted Resolution No 2025- 017, making a finding of exemption under California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) and recommending the City Council approve the proposed ordinance.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed Municipal Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (" CEQA") and the City' s local CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061( b)( 3).

Attachment: 1. Ordinance No. 2025 -

2. Adopted PC Resolution No. PC 2025- 017
2 ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND AMENDING THE CITY' S MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 16
LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT, CHAPTER 16. 76 FLOODPLAIN

MANAGEMENT AND MAKE A FINDING OF EXEMPTION

PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT SECTION 15061( B)( 3) ( MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT MCA 25- 002)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings and Intent
WHEREAS, The Federal Emergency Management Agency (" FEMA") has reviewed the City' s floodplain ordinance. This review was deemed imperative due to the impending implementation of the new Flood Insurance Study ( FIS) and associated Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in San Bernardino County. Upon receiving new or revised flood hazard data from FEMA, the City of Highland is obligated to ensure that the floodplain management regulations comply fully, are adopted by the City Council, and are legally enforceable by the effective date of the FIRM and FIS report, which is October 30, 2025. As such, the City is amending Chapter 16. 76, Floodplain Management, of the Municipal Code to comply with the new FEMA requirements (" Municipal Code Amendment 25- 002");
WHEREAS, Sections § 65302, § 65560, and § 65800 in accordance with Government Code, the Legislature of the State of California conferred upon local governments the authority to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizenry. Therefore, the City Council of the City of Highland does hereby adopt floodplain management regulations; WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has identified special flood hazard areas within the boundaries of the City of Highland and such areas may be subject to periodic inundation which may result in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare; WHEREAS, Sections 59 and 60 of Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations, the City of Highland was accepted for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program on August 28, 2008, and the City desires to continue to meet the requirements necessary for such participation;
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65854 provides that the Planning Commission shall hold a public meeting on the proposed amendment to a zoning 3 ordinance. Notice of the hearing shall be given pursuant to Government Code Section 65090;
WHEREAS, the City of Highland is the Lead Agency, and is charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Project; WHEREAS, the City of Highland Planning Commission held a public hearing at the Highland City Hall Council Chambers in Highland, California, on July 15, 2024, at 6: 00 P. M., and, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Highland Municipal Code, heard and considered evidence for and against said Municipal Code Amendment, and investigated and made findings and recommendations in connection herewith. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City of Highland Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2025-XXX recommending that the City Council adopt this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City of Highland City Council did hold a public hearing at the Highland City Hall Council Chambers in Highland, California, on August12, 2025, at 6: 00 P. M. with a second reading held on September 9, 2025 and notice of said public hearing( s) having been duly given, as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Highland Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said Municipal Code Amendment.

WHEREAS, consistent with the Highland Municipal Code Section 16. 08. 040. D. 1-

4. Amendments to zoning districts and other provisions. Findings, the City Council has found and determined as follows:

The proposed change of zone or revision is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the general plan, and is necessary and desirable to implement the provisions of the general plan; Response: The proposed revision will ensure compliance with the General Plan, specifically its Public Health, Safety and Environmental Justice Element in the areas of " Emergency Events" and " Flooding". The revision will assist in the implementation of Goal 3 to " Minimize risks, such as loss of life, injury.

Property damage, and natural resource destruction from natural and human - caused hazards" and Policy 3. 2 to "Build and maintain public infrastructure that collects and conveys stormwater and enhances water quality."

2. The proposed change of zone or revision will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern; Response: The proposed revision ( MCA) will improve public health, safety and welfare related to floodplain management. It will ensure the propre review of new construction and substantial improvements within the 100- year floodplain.

It will disapprove projects that cannot minimize the flood risks to acceptable levels in areas mapped by FEMA or as determined by site -specific hydrologic 4 studies for areas not mapped by FEMA. It will prohibit the construction, location, or substantial improvement of structures in areas designated as floodways, except upon approval of a plan that provides that the proposed development will not result in any significant increase in flood levels during the occurrence of a 100- year flood. It will require development within the floodplain to be capable of withstanding flooding and to minimize use of fill. It will ensure the City continues to assess and upgrade inundation risk and protection, and it will encourage periodic reevaluation of the 500- year, 100- year, and 10- year flood hazard zones by state, federal, county, and other sources and use such studies to improve existing protection, review flood protection standards for new development and redevelopment, and update emergency response plans.

3. The proposed change of zone or revision is consistent with the purpose and intent of the remainder of this title not under consideration; and Response: The proposed revision is in compliance with the remainder of Title 16 Land Use and Development including the remainder of Chapter 16. 76 Floodplain Management, as well as Chapter 16. 08 Definitions, 16. 64 Environmental Management, and 16. 68 Land Divisions.

4. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed change of zone or revision are insignificant or there are overriding considerations which outweigh the potential impacts.

Response: There is no possibility that the Municipal Code Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment and is thus exempt from the requirements pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061( b)( 3).

Section 2. Amendment to Section 16. 76. 020. Definitions.

Definitions for " Area of shallow flooding," " floodway," and " floodproofing in Section

16. 76. 020 (Definitions) of Chapter 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development) of the Highland Municipal Code are hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows with additions shown in underlined text and deletion shown in strikethrough text:

Area of shallow flooding
Area of shallow flooding" means in areas of shallow flooding ( AO Zones), buildings and structures shall have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to a height above the highest adjacent grade of not less than the depth number specified in feet mm) on the FIRM plus 1 foot ( 305 mm) or not less than 3 feet ( 915 mm) if a depth number is not specified. ( CA Residential Code R322. 2. 11 5 Floodproofing
Flood proofing" means any combination of structural and nonstructural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures, and their contents. Guidance on dry and wet floodproofing can be found in FEMA NFIP Technical Bulletin 3 ( 2021) Non -Residential Floodproofinq — Requirements and Certification and FEMA NFIP Technical Bulletin 7 ( 2022) Wet Floodproofinq Requirements. i . - ORSiRiTt
Floodway
Floodway" means to require until a regulatory floodway is designated, that no new construction substantial improvements or other development ( including fill) shall be permitted within Zones Al- 30 and AE on the community' s FIRM, unless it is demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development, when combined with all other existing and anticipated development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point within the community. NFIP Regs 60. 3( C)( 10)
Section 3. Amendment to Section 16. 76. 020. Definitions.

Add definitions for "regulatory floodway" and " recreational vehicle" in Section 16. 76. 020 Definitions) of Chapter 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development) of the Highland Municipal Code are hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows with additions shown in underlined text and deletion shown in strikethrough text:

Regulatory Floodway
Regulatory Floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the 6 adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasinq the water surface elevation more than a designated height. Communities must regulate development in these floodways to ensure that there are no increases in upstream flood elevations. For streams and other watercourses where FEMA has provided Base Flood Elevations ( BFEs), but no floodway has been designated the community must review floodplain development on a case -by -case basis to ensure that increases in water surface elevations do not occur, or identify the need to adopt a floodway if adequate information is available.

Recreational Vehicle
Recreational vehicle means a vehicle which is: ( 1) Built on a single chassis;( 2) Four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal pro iection;(3) Designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light -duty truck; and( 4)Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.

Section 4. Amendment to Section 16. 76.030 B. Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard. Section 16. 76. 030 B ( Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard) of Chapter 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development) of the Highland Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows with additions shown in underlined text and deletion shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 16. 76. 030 remaining unchanged:

The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) in the " Flood Insurance Study ( FIS) for San Bernardino County, California, and Incorporated Areas" dated August 28, 2008, with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps ( FIRMs) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps ( FBFMs), dated August 28, 2008, and all subsequent amendments and/ or revisions, are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter." The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) in the " Flood Insurance Study ( FIS) for San Bernardino County, California, and Incorporated Areas" dated September 28, 2008, with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps ( FIRMs) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps ( FBFMs), dated August 28, 2008, and all subsequent amendments and/ or revisions, are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter." Section 5. Environmental Exemption. The City Council of the City of Highland hereby finds that under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and the CEQA Guidelines promulgated thereunder, the Municipal Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061( b)( 3). This determination is 7 based on the fact that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Municipal Code Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment because this amendment will only amend the Highland Municipal Code to require that applicants for building permits comply with the flood restraint construction requirements of the Building Code if the work constitutes a substantial improvement, require that certain studies be performed, require that certain information be submitted to FEMA, establishing building standards, and make other technical amendments to the Municipal Code. The Community Development Director is hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.

Section 6. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.

Section 7. Execution. The Mayor is hereby directed to attest to the adoption of this Ordinance by signing where indicated below and the City Clerk shall publish and/ or post this ordinance according to applicable law.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 9t" Day of September, 2025.

Penny Lilburn
Mayor
ATTEST:

Alondra Munoz
City Clerk
8 0
RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - 017

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HIGHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 16 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT), CHAPTER 16. 76 ( FLOODPLAIN

MANAGEMENT) TO UPDATE REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ( FEMA), AND MAKE A

FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ( CEQA); MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT ( MCA 25-002).

RECITALS
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (" FEMA") has reviewed the City' s floodplain ordinance. This review was deemed imperative due to the impending implementation of the new Flood Insurance Study ( FIS) and associated Flood Insurance Rate Maps ( FIRMs) in San Bernardino County.

2. Upon receiving new or revised flood hazard data from FEMA, the City of Highland is obligated to ensure that the floodplain management regulations comply fully, are adopted by the City Council, and are legally enforceable by the effective date of the FIRM and FIS report, which is October 30, 2025. As such, the City is amending Chapter 16.76, Floodplain Management, of the Municipal Code to comply with the new FEMA requirements (" Municipal Code Amendment 25- 002").

3. Government Code Section 65854 provides that the Planning Commission shall hold a public meeting on the proposed amendment to a zoning ordinance.

4. Government Code Section 65855 provides that after the public meeting, the Planning Commission shall render its decision in the form of a written recommendation to the legislative body ( City Council). Such a recommendation shall include the reasons for the recommendation, the relationship of the proposed amendment to the General Plan and shall be transmitted to the City Council.

5. The City of Highland Planning Commission held a public meeting at the Highland City Hall Council Chambers in Highland, California, on July 15, 2025 at 6: 00 p. m. Notice of said public meeting having been duly given as required by law, and in accordance with the provisions of the Highland Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said Land Use and Development Code Amendments and Notice of Exemption, and investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith.

6. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. 9 B. RESOLUTION
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Highland as follows:

The Planning Commission finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part " A" of this Resolution, are true and correct.

2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the July 15, 2025, Public Meeting, including public testimony and written and oral Staff Reports, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
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 Environmental Findings, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
a. A Notice of Exemption was prepared for the proposed project Pursuant to the General Rule ( 14 C. C. R. Section 15061( b)( 3)) of the CEQA Guidelines, which is the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and CEQA does not apply where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment since the Code Amendment is not proposing development of a project.

4. Based on the Findings and Conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt a Notice of Exemption and direct Staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of the Board; Introduce an Ordinance to amend section 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development Code) of the Highland Municipal Code as attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Exhibit A.

Exhibit A — Draft Administrative Ordinance No.

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 15th day of July 2025.

ATTEST:

Randall Hamerly, Chairman Lawrence A. Mainez,
Planning Commission Community Development Director
10 ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HIGHLAND AMENDING THE CITY' S MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 16
LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT, CHAPTER 16.76 FLOODPLAIN

MANAGEMENT AND MAKE A FINDING OF EXEMPTION

PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT SECTION 15061( 8)( 3) ( MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT MCA 25- 002)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings and Intent
WHEREAS, The Federal Emergency Management Agency (" FEMA") has reviewed the. City's floodplain ordinance. This review was deemed imperative due to the impending implementation of the new Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and associated Flood Insurance Rate Maps ( FIRMs) in, San Bernardino County. Upon receiving new or -revised flood hazard data from FEMA, Jhe City of.`Highland is obligated to ensure that the floodplain management' regulations comply. fully, are adopted. by the City Council; and are legally enforceable by the effective date of the FIRM and FIS report, which is October 30, 2025. As such,. -the City`is: amending Chapter 16. 76, Floodplain' Management, of the Municipal Code , to comply' with the new FEMA requirements (" Municipal Code Amendment 25-002");
WHEREAS, Sections § 65302, :_ §65560, and § 65800 in accordance with Government Code, the.! Legislature of. the State of `California conferred upon local governments the authority to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizenry. Therefore, the City Council of the City of Highland does hereby adopt floodplain management regulations; WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has identified special flood hazard areas within the boundaries of the City of Highland and such areas may be subject to periodic inundation which may result in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare; WHEREAS, Sections 59 and 60 of Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations, the City of Highland was accepted for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program on August 28, 2008, and the City desires to continue to meet the requirements necessary for such participation;
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65854 provides that the Planning Commission shall hold a public meeting on the proposed amendment to a zoning MAStaff Reports\ 2025\ Ju1y\ FEMA\ FINAL
11 ordinance. Notice of the hearing shall be given pursuant to Government Code Section 65090;
WHEREAS, the City of Highland is the Lead Agency, and is charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Project; WHEREAS, the City of Highland Planning Commission held a public hearing at the Highland City Hall Council Chambers in Highland, California, on July 15, 2024, at 6: 00 P. M., and, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Highland Municipal Code, heard and considered evidence for and against said Municipal Code Amendment, and investigated and made findings and recommendations in connection herewith. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City of Highland Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2025-XXX recommending that the City Council adopt this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City,: of -Highland City' Council did hold a public: hearing at the Highland City Hall Council Chambers in Highland, California, on August12; 2025, at 6: 00 P. M: with a second reading held on September 9, 2025 and notice of said public hearing( s) having been duly given, as required , by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Highland Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said Municipal Code Amendment.

WHEREAS, consistent with the Highland Municipal Code Section 16. 08. 040. D. 1-

4. Amendments to zoning districts and other provisions. Findings, the City Council has found and determined as follows:

1. The proposed change of zone or revision is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the general plan, and is necessary and desirable to implement the provisions of the general plan; Response: The proposed revision will ensure compliance with the General Plan, specifically its Public Health, Safety and Environmental Justice Element in the areas of "Emergency Events" and " Flooding". The revision will assist in the implementation of Goal 3 to " Minimize risks, such as loss of life, injury.

Property damage, and natural resource destruction from natural and human - caused hazards" and Policy 3. 2 to " Build and maintain public infrastructure that collects and conveys stormwater and enhances water quality."

2. The proposed change of zone or revision will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern; Response: The proposed revision ( MCA) will improve public health, safety and welfare related to floodplain management. It will ensure the propre review of new construction and substantial improvements within the 100-year floodplain.

It will disapprove projects that cannot minimize the flood risks to acceptable levels in areas mapped by FEMA or as determined by site -specific hydrologic MAStaff Reports\ 2025Uu1y1FEMAIFINAL
12 studies for areas not mapped by FEMA. It will prohibit the construction, location, or substantial improvement of structures in areas designated as floodways, except upon approval of a plan that provides that the proposed development will not result in any significant increase in flood levels during the occurrence of a 100- year flood. It will require development within the floodplain to be capable of withstanding flooding and to minimize use of fill. It will ensure the City continues to assess and upgrade inundation risk and protection, and it will encourage periodic reevaluation of the 500- year, 100- year, and 10-year flood hazard zones by state, federal, county, and other sources and use such studies to improve existing protection, review flood protection standards for new development and redevelopment, and update emergency response plans.

3. The proposed change of zone or revision is consistent with the purpose and intent of the remainder of this title not under consideration; and Response: The proposed revision is in compliance with the remainder of Title 16r Land Use and Development including the remainder of Chapter 16.76 Floodplain Management, as well;, as Chapter, . 16. 08 Definitions,' 16. 64 Environmental Management, and. 16. 68 Land Divisions.

4. The potential. environmental impacts of, the proposed change of: -zone or revision are insignificant or there are overriding considerations which outweigh the potential impacts,`.

Response: ' There is. no possibility that the Municipal Code Amendment will have; a significant effect. on the environment and is thus exempt from the requirements pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section ;15061( b)( 3).

Section i Amendment to Section 16.76. 020. Definitions.

Definitions for " Area of shallow flooding," " floodway," and " floodproofing in Section

16. 76. 020 ( Definitions) of Chapter 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development) of the Highland Municipal Code are hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows with additions shown in underlined text and deletion shown in strikethrough text:

Area of shallow flooding
Area of shallow flooding" means in areas of shallow flooding (AO Zones) buildings and structures shall have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to a height above the highest adjacent grade of not less than the depth number specified in feet mm) on the FIRM plus 1 foot ( 305 mm) or not less than 3 feet (915 mm) if a depth number is not specified. ( CA Residential Code R322. 2. 1) MAStaff Reports120251] u1y1FEMA\ FINAL
13 1. -- 7. - - ..- 0
Floodproofing
Flood proofing" means any combination of structural and nonstructural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures, and their contents. Guidance on dry and wet floodproofing can be found in FEMA NFIP Technical Bulletin 3 ( 2021) Non -Residential Floodproofinq — Requirements and Certification and FEMA NFIP Technical Bulletin 7 ( 2022) Wet F000dproofing Requirements.

TB393 andTB793'
Floodway :.

Floodway" means to require until a regulatory floodway is designated, that no new construction substantial improvements or other development ( including fill) shall be permitted within Zones Al- 30' and AE on the community' s FIRM, unless it is demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development, when combined with all other -existing and anticipated development will not increase the water surface elevation' of the base flood more than one foot at any point within the community. NFIP Regs 60. 3( C)( 10) "
u n
land aFeas that must be Fesewed iR GFdeFte II—f9 the base flood without r Fegulatery
Section 3. Amendment to Section 16. 76. 020. Definitions.

Add definitions for " regulatory floodway" and " recreational vehicle" in Section 16. 76. 020 Definitions) of Chapter 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development) of the Highland Municipal Code are hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows with additions shown in underlined text and deletion shown in strikethrough text:

Regulatory Floodway
Regulatory Floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the MAStaff Reports\ 2025\ July\FEMA\ FINAL
14 adiacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height Communities must regulate development in these floodways to ensure that there are no increases in upstream flood elevations. For streams and other watercourses where FEMA has provided Base Flood Elevations ( BFEs), but no floodway has been designated the community must review floodplain development on a case -by -case basis to ensure that increases in water surface elevations do not occur, or identify the need to adopt a floodwav if adequate information is available.

Recreational Vehicle
Recreational vehicle means a vehicle which is: ( 1) Built on a single chassis•( 2) Four hundr1.ed square feet or; less when measured at the largest horizontal proiection:( 3) Designed to`be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light -duty truck and(4) Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational camping travel, or seasonal use.

Section 4. Amendment to Section 16 76 030 B. Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard. Section 16. 76, 030 B ( Basis for Establishing the' Areas of Special Flood Hazard) of Chapter 16. 76 ( Floodplain Management) of Title 16 ( Land Use and Development) of the Highland .Municipal Code: is hereby amended to read as follows with additions shown in'.underlined: text and deletion .shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions' of Section 16. 76. 030 remaining unchanged The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) in the " Flood Insurance Study ( FIS) for San Bernardino County, California, and Incorporated Areas" dated Septen4bef August 28, 2008, with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps ( FIRMs) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps ( FBFMs), dated August 28, 2008, and all subsequent amendments and/ or revisions, are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter." Section 5. Environmental Exemption. The City Council of the City of Highland hereby finds that under the California Environmental Quality Act (" CEQA"), and the CEQA Guidelines promulgated thereunder, the Municipal Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061( b)( 3). This determination is based on the fact that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Municipal Code Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment because this amendment will only amend the Highland Municipal Code to require that applicants for building permits comply with the flood restraint construction requirements of the Building Code if the work constitutes a substantial improvement, require that certain studies be performed, require that certain information be submitted to FEMA, establishing building standards, and make other technical amendments to the Municipal Code. The MAStaff Reports\ 2025\ Ju1y\ FEMA\ FINAL
15 based on the fact that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Municipal Code Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment because this amendment will only amend the Highland Municipal Code to require that applicants for building permits comply with the flood restraint construction requirements of the Building Code if the work constitutes a substantial improvement, require that certain studies be performed, require that certain information be submitted to FEMA, establishing building standards, and make other technical amendments to the Municipal Code. The Community Development Director is hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.

Section 6. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.-:'.

Section 7. Execution. ' The Mayor is hereby directed to attest to the adoption of this Ordinance by signing where indicated below and. the City Clerk shall publish and/ or post this ordinance according to applicable law.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 9t" Day of September, 2025 r
Penny Lilburn'`} 1N
Mayor
ATTEST:

Alondra Munoz
City Clerk
M:\ StatYRepom\ 2025\ July\ FEMA\ FINAL
16 STATE OF CALIFORNIA }

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )

CITY OF HIGHLAND )
I, Camille Duarte, Administrative Assistant III of the City of Highland, California, do hereby certify Resolution No. 2025- 017 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Highland, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of July 2025, by the following vote.

AYES: Hamerly, McCance, Miller, Thomas
NOES; None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
41 A *&
Camille Duarte, Administrative Assistant III
17 STAFF REPORT

TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: August 12, 2025
FROM: Carlos Zamano, City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Lawrence A. Mainez, Community Development Director) A*01 Maricela Marroquin, City Attorney
PREPARED BY: Kim Stater, Assistant Community Development Director t j SUBJECT: An Application by East Highland Land, LLC for the development of a 113- unit single- family planned residential community requiring a General Plan Amendment ( GPA 24- 002) and Zone Change ( ZC 24- 002) from Low Density/ Single- Family Residential ( LD/ R1- 10, 000) to Planned Development ( PD); Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 24- 006) for the adoption of a Planned Development; Design Review Application ( DRA 24- 009) for a related Site Plan, Building Elevations, Conceptual Landscaping and Grading Plan; Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 ( TTM 24- 003) for the subdivision of two parcels into 113 residential lots and common areas; and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( ENV 24- 003).

LOCATION: Two vacant parcels comprised of approximately 12 acres, located north of Greenspot Road, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east and west of Alta Vista. Assessor' s Parcel Numbers: 1210- 371- 14 and 1210- 371- 16.

PROPERTY OWNER: East Highland Land, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE: Diversified Pacific
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council:

Approved Motion
Denied Ayes
Continued Noes
Tabled Abstain
A sent
City Clerk

1. Adopt Resolution No. 25 - to approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ENV 24- 003) and direct Staff to File a Notice of Determination with San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors; Second Agenda Item No.

File No.

City Manager
1 15

2. Adopt Resolution No. 25 - to approve a General Plan
Amendment ( GPA 24- 002) to change the land use designation of the site from Low Density Residential ( LD) to Planned Development ( PD);

3. Introduce an Ordinance to approve a Zone Change ( ZC 24- 002) to change the zoning designation of the site from Single -Family Residential ( R1- 10, 000) to Planned Development ( PD); and

4. Adopt Resolution No. 25 - to approve a Conditional Use Permit CUP 24- 006), Design Review Application ( DRA 24- 009), and Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 ( TTM- 24- 003) for a Residential Planned Development consisting of a 113- unit single- family development, design plans and subdivision of 11. 98 acres subject to the Design Directives, Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact.

PUBLIC NOTICE: As required by State law and City Council Resolution, notice of the public hearing was posted at the City' s three designated posting locations and published in the SB Sun newspaper on July 23, 2025. On the same day notice was posted on the City' s website, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site and to parties requesting notice. All legal requirements for noticing have been met.

PUBLIC COMMENT: Staff circulated Project Notices for the proposed project on September 23, 2024. Staff received verbal comments from two nearby residential property owners.

Both were concerned that the area would be developed with high density rental housing. When they learned that the proposed product was detached, single family homes, they expressed less concern. Both parties have been provided with updated project plans, and neither submitted further comment.

Following the Planning Commission public hearing and action, Staff received a public comment email from Mr. Steve Howes, a nearby resident. Mr. Howes expressed concern regarding potential negative health effects of the adjacent radio transmission towers on future residents, building setback conflicts with the existing San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District ("the District") pipeline, and limited driveway and on -street parking ( Attachment 8 — Public Comment). A Technical Memorandum was prepared in response to Mr. Howes' comment regarding health effects of radio waves ( Attachment 9 — Technical Memo). With respect to the pipeline, the District provided comments early during the Project's design phase. The Applicant made the requested adjustments to setbacks, and the current plan is in conformance with District' s guidance. Additionally, the Applicant will submit construction -level plans to the District priorto the issuance of building permits.

With respect to parking, the Project provides two garage parking spaces for each unit and an additional 67 guest spaces throughout the site as needed, a total of 293 parking spaces.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The Project is located north of Greenspot Road, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east and west of Alta Vista. The 11. 98 acre site is generally flat with increasing slopes to the north. Existing grades range from approximately 1, 445 feet at the southwest to 1, 466 feet along Santa Ana Canyon Road. Both Greenspot Road and Alta Vista have been constructed to their full widths with curb, gutter, sidewalks, and streetlights. The northerly frontage along Santa Ana Canyon Road is partially improved with curb and gutter and constructed to its full width only along the easterly portion of the project, adjacent to Tract 14362. 2 In recent history, the property was used for agricultural purposes, primarily citrus groves and was part of the larger McLean ranch to the north. The majority of the site is now vacant and consists of naturally occurring vegetation including oak and pepper trees, cacti, and scattered boulders. There is a 50' easement across the site, running diagonally from the northwest to southeast, to protect a 78" water pipeline.

The Project is considered an infill site with improved roads on each side and residential development within close proximity to the north, east and west. Plunge Creek flows southerly within an earthen channel to the east managed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. It converges with the Santa Ana River to the southwest. A portion of the project was previously within a Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) designated flood zone but improvements were made to remove this portion of the waterway from that designation. A Letter of Map Revision LOMR) was approved by FEMA on May 28, 2025.

The property is currently zoned Single Family Residential ( R1- 10, 000 minimum lot size) with a General Plan Land Use designation of Low Density ( LD, 2. 1- 6. 0 dwelling units/ acre). The representative is requesting a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Planned Development ( PD). This change will increase the density allowed on the Project site. Surrounding land uses and zoning are noted in the table below:

Location Current Use General Plan. / Zoning
Low Density Residential ( LD) /
Site: Vacant Sinqle-Family Residential R1- 10, 000
Single-family homes. Beazer Low Density Residential ( LD) / North:

TR 20142 Single- amilResidential R1-10, 000 Vacant
land & Plunge Creek Open Space (OS) / South:

Flood Control Channel Open Space OS Plunge
Creek Flood Control Low Density Residential (LD) / East:

Channel Single- amilResidential R1- 10,000 Vacant land & FM Radio Low Density Residential ( LD) West: transmission towers
and office Single - Family Residential R1-10,000 As noted in the City' s General Plan Public Health Safety and Environmental Justice Element, the project is inan area of suspected liquefaction, paleontological sensitivity, andhigh fire hazard. Mitigation for potential hazards is discussed in detail within the Environmental Analysis below and the project' s Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. PROJECT REVIEW:

The proposed Project is the development ofaresidential community with 113 detached small lot, single- family homes with private rear yards and shared recreational amenities/ open space (Attachment 5 — Project Plans, Exhibit to CUP/DRA/ TTM Resolution). Lot sizes range from 1,920 square feet to5,186 square feetwith anaverage of2,702 square feet, and density of

9.5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed
homes will all be two- story, sized between 1,566 to 1,740 square feetwith three (3) floor plans; 35 for Plan One, 43 for Plan Two, and 35 for Plan Three. Each floor plan will be offered in three ( 3) architectural styles; Spanish, Cottage and Farmhouse. The community is designed with private streets and alleys and will not be a gated community. There will be a total of 293 parking spaces, comprised of 226 covered garage spaces and an additional 67 uncovered guest spaces distributed throughout the project, eight (8) of which are on - street parking spaces on Street'A'. There will be two primary open space amenities, one on each 3 side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000 square feet. Open Space 1 features play equipment, benches, picnic tables, barbecues, turf, and exercise equipment. Open Space 2 is designed as a passive area with benches, turf, and exercise equipment along a pathway.

The homes will be sold at " market -rate". The project as proposed will not include affordable housing units restricted to lower income households. The project proponent will pay the City' s Inclusionary Housing Fee to assist with the City' s/ Housing Authority' s goals to provide lower income housing, ensuring safe and affordable housing for all of Highland' s residents. This fee is currently set at $ 3, 750 per unit, but subject to change. These funds become assets of the Highland Housing Authority and will be utilized for a larger, comprehensive housing project at an alternate location as determined to be appropriate by the Housing Authority.

A. General Plan Amendment ( LD to PD)
As noted above, the current General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Density ( LD) Residential permits a development density between 2. 1 and 6. 0 dwelling units per acre. To accommodate the proposed small lot subdivision with a density of 9. 5 dwelling units per acre, the Applicant seeks to change the designation to Planned Development (PD). PD is a unique land use designation which allows individualized development standards and is intended to encourage superior development through a greater degree of design and land use flexibility.

The Highland Municipal Code permits amendments to General Plan designations if the pertinent Findings of Fact can be made ( HMC 16. 08. 030.G. Required Findings for General Plan amendments). These include consistency with the General Plan as revised by the amendment, no adverse effects to public health/ safety/ welfare, consistency with the Municipal Code as amended, and no significant environmental impacts ( Attachment 3 — Resolution for GPA).

If approved, the project would continue to be residential in nature as previously envisioned by the General Plan but will increase the density by approximately 57 percent ( 6. 1 to 9. 5 du/ ac). The proposed Tract Map details a development pattern of single- family detached homes not diverging from the patterns to the north and east with the exception of overall lot size and setbacks. The Project will have sufficient parking for each unit as well as guests within designated areas and will contain private and shared open space, quality amenities, fencing and landscape setbacks comparable to the surrounding developments. The project is bound by street right- of-way and flood control facilities on three sides providing additional buffers and transitions into existing neighborhoods. The increased density within this site is not anticipated to negatively affect existing neighborhoods. Staff recommends the required findings be made as enumerated above and included in the corresponding resolution.

B. Zone Change
The Applicant is requesting a Zone Change from Single- family Residential ( R1- 10, 000) to Planned Development ( PD) as noted above to achieve the desired density and development standards Attachment 4 — Draft Ordinance for Zone Change). There are residential zones on all four sides of the project within close proximity and the adjacent northerly properties are currently developed with single- family detached homes. Findings for a Zone Change require that the proposal must not result in an illogical land use pattern ( HMC 16. 08. 040. D., Required Findings for Amendments to zoning districts and other provisions). This Zone Change meets this goal because it will not result in a change in the overall residential character of the neighborhood. It will contain similarly sized single- family homes with complimentary parking, open space, circulation and amenities found in 4 the surrounding area. While it will increase the overall density, and reduce building setbacks, it will not result in an inconsistent land use pattern because it will continue the pattern of detached, single- family type uses. Additionally, the site is separated from adjacent development by expanses of public right- of-way ( Greenspot Road and Alta Vista) and public facilities ( Plunge Creek Flood Control Channel) and thus will not create an abrupt transition. All Findings are further discussed in the corresponding resolution.

C. Conditional Use Permit establishing the Planned Development A Planned Development ( PD) community may be adopted via a Conditional Use Permit ( CUP). The CUP identifies the project configuration including layout, minimum lot size, maximum number of lots, location and dimensions of public and private streets, right- of-way, shared open space, and overall development standards. Plans associated with the CUP include Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 and its conceptual grading, sections and plot plan ( Sheets 1- 3) as well as the Conditions of Approval from each responding City Division and outside agencies.

The proposed project -specific development standards are listed below and are codified in the Planning Conditions. The Tract Map, Building Elevations and Landscape Concept Plan were designed to these standards:

Proposed Develo merit Standards
Maximum density du/ ac 9. 5 du/ ac
Minimum building site net area ins . ft. 1, 900 s . ft.

Minimum lot width 40'
Minimum lot depth 50'
Minimum front yard setback 3'
Minimum interior side yard setback 5'
Minimum street side yard setback 3'
Minimum rear yard setback 10' flat usable
Maximum lot coverage 65%
Maximum height for structures 35'
Minimum distance between structures
and/ or main structures
No less than permitted by the Uniform
accessory Building Code
Minimum dwelling unit size ins . ft. 1, 500 s . ft.

Total Open Space Active & Passive Usable 35, 143 square feet / 6. 7 % Parking ( 293 total spaces) 2 garage spaces/ unit plus 67 shared spaces designated throughout the project,
8 of which are on -street parking stalls.

Maximum number of residential units 113
Tract boundary walls 6' CMU, precision cap, split face where public facing ( tan color) &
6' tube steel perimeter fence ( black color)
2' CMU, precision cap, split face ( tan color)
where public facing with 4' tube on top steel
black color
Fencing for side yards, interior rear yards, and
returns
5' 5" Vinyl, tan color
Fencing bordering Water Quality basins 6' Tube steel, black color 5 Where the CUP and related plans are silent with respect to development standards and municipal regulations, the Highland Municipal Code will apply. Because the CUP plans are duplicative of the Design Review and Tract Map, they are discussed in more detail below. If amendments are required by the Planning Commission and/ or City Council for the DRA or TTM applications, plans will be revised and reflected in the final resolution.

D. Design Review
Tract Lavout/Plottin
The Design Review Application includes the project' s Plot Plan, Conceptual Grading Plan, Building Elevations, Landscape Concept Plan, and Color/Materials samples. An 8. 5x11" copy of all plans including the Color/ Materials Sample Boards are included with the project plans attached as well as large scale plans " under separate cover". Material sample boards will be presented to the City Council in person at the public hearing.

The site' s overall layout is shown on Sheet 1 of the Tract Map, various Sections on Sheet 2 and the Plot Plan on Sheet 3. The lots measure a minimum of 40 feet wide by 50 feet deep with a maximum lot coverage of 65 percent. All homes are two- story with two -car garages. Of the 113 units, there are three (3) different floor plans. Plan 1 is 1, 566 square feet with three bedrooms on the second floor. Plan 2 is 1, 740 square feet also with three bedrooms on the second floor. Plan 3 has two bedrooms upstairs with an optional 3rd bedroom/ den downstairs and 4th bedroom/ loft option upstairs. The unit mix is comprised of 35 Plan 1 s, 43 Plan 2s and 35 Plan 3s.

There will be two (2) active pocket parks in the development. One park will be located at the tract' s westerly entry measuring 13, 072 square feet of active recreation including a tot lot, shade structure with picnic table, barbeque, bench and open turf play area. A second, more passive park is at the easterly portion of the tract also along Alta Vista. This area has open turf area, tree shade, sitting benches, and concrete paths. The pathway through each park has several exercise equipment stations. The parks will be private, available only to its residents. Smaller pockets of landscaping around the perimeter of the site at its northwestern boundary and the project entry that bisects Alta Vista. The General Plan and Municipal Code require . 962 acres of Parkland, and the Project is providing approximately 1. 05 acres.

The site conditions and tract design call for two ( 2) water quality basins. The larger of the two is 25, 005 square feet, located at the southwestern corner of the site. It is proposed to be landscaped with a variety of groundcover compatible with the approved Final WQMP as well as multiple tree species; Acacia, Western Redbud, Sweet Bay and Flowering Pear. The second basin is at the northeast corner of Alta Vista and Greenspot Road and will be planted with similar species. The basins will be secured with 6' black tube steel fencing. The water quality basins will be maintained by the HOA.

The entry to the tract at Greenspot Road and Alta Vista will have a wall mounted tract identification sign on the westerly corner which has not yet been designed. Planning Condition of Approval No. 13 requires that the future sign be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval per the City' s Municipal Code requirements for Tract Identification Signs. The landscaping will be adjusted as needed to account for the final height and width of the sign. 6 Building Elevations
The three ( 3) different floor plans will also have available three ( 3) exterior architectural styles which are Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse, yielding nine ( 9) different elevations. The Spanish style has a dominant hip roof with brown and gray "S" the roofing, numerous "pop -outs", arches and shutters for variety. The Plan 1 Spanish style has arched front doorway with decorative Spanish tilework. There are three color variations with brown and gray toned concrete tile roofing, a light white and beige colored stucco body, tan, gray and blue accents on the shutters, door, decorative iron and clay wall pipes. The Cottage style has a hip and multiple gables with corbels, columned front porch, and pot shelves. There is varying stone and brick treatments on each of the three Cottage plans. The rear and side yard windows have enhanced treatments including window grids and surrounds. The bodies are light white and tan, with white, and dark gray accents. The Farmhouse has similar window and roof detailing and is defined by its use of board and batten siding on the front elevation. This style will also come with generally light colored stucco with blue and gray toned siding on the front. Each style has its own style of garage and front doors. Where there is a specialized brick or stone treatment on a front elevation, it will be wrapped around to the side elevation to the side fence line.

Landscape Plan / Wall & Fence Plan / Open Space Amenities The Conceptual Landscape Plan demonstrates landscape theming within the parks, right-of-way, HOA maintained areas and water quality basins. The plans note that the landscape concept will consist of California -friendly, low water use plant materials chosen from the low and medium water use category. Tree species include True Green Elm, Aristocrat Flowering Pear, Bloodgood Sycamore, Sweet Bay, Cherokee Crepe Myrtle, Western Redbud and Purple -Leaf Bailey Acacia measuring from 15 gallon to 48" box. There is a large variety of shrubs and groundcover that are generally low water users to be planted in 1 to 5 gallon size as well as Red Trumpet Vines and Pink Jasmin that will provide nice color variation and wall coverage. Twenty- three ( 23) percent of the overall site is landscaping and the parking areas in particular have fifty ( 50) percent landscape coverage
The Conceptual Landscape Plan incorporates the proposed walls and fencing. The perimeter of the tract will be delineated with a 6' tall split face wall on the north, easterly and southerly boundaries. Portions along the west where there are large grade differences are masonry ( CMU) stem walls with up to 6' tube steel fencing. CMU will also be used within the interior of the tract where side and rear yards are visible from the roadways. The wall will be tan in color and have a precision cap. Interior side and rear yards will be 55" tall vinyl also tan in color. Six foot tall tube steel fencing will be used around the perimeter of the water quality basins.

Homeowners will maintain their own private front yard, side and rear yards. Certain slopes and perimeter areas will be maintained by the HOA as shown on the plan. A Landscape Maintenance District ( LMD) along the frontage of the Alta Vista westerly access will also be HOA maintained.

The Landscape Concept Plan includes a note stating that the southeast corner of the project designates an approximately 1, 100 square foot of vacant land as " Offsite Landscaping City of Highland". This area is east of Alta Vista, between Greenspot Road and the project boundary. It is currently within City right- of-way. During review of the project, the City offered to vacate this rightof-way and grant it to the Applicant upon recordation of the Tract Map. The Applicant agreed to accept the land and incorporate it into the project. Early discussions between City staff and the Applicant have led to a conceptual plan where the area behind the sidewalk would be developed in coordination with the Greenspot Corridor and the City' s master trail program. It would include a decomposed granite path, 3 rail vinyl fencing, and landscape planters on either side, buffering the 7 trail from the road. A pedestrian gate would be constructed at the entry to the Plunge Creek Levee at Greenspot Road. It would remain locked until such time that the City acquires an access agreement for this section of the Plunge Creek Trail from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. Planning and Engineering Conditions reflect this future condition.

Conditions of Approval were prepared by the City' s Landscape Architect and provided within the Planning Conditions of Approval for the Design Review portion of the project.

E. Tentative Tract Map
Tentative Tract Map 20721 would subdivide the property into 113 residential lots and 22 lettered lots ( Lots A- V) consisting of various landscape parkways, open space, perimeter landscaping, and water quality basin. As noted above, the residential lots range from 1, 920 square feet to 5, 186 square feet and the lettered lots from 254 square feet to 105, 173 square feet. The residential lots have a minimum width of 40' and depth of 50'. This is a reduction from the site' s current zoning standards of 60' wide and 100' deep.

The projectwill complete public road improvements along its frontage including Santa Ana Canyon Road with a 6.5 foot wide sidewalk and 4. 5 feet of landscaping. The internal road system will be private. It will contain several streets and alleys, all of which will be maintained by the tract' s Homeowner's Association. The map labels the interior roads as Streets "A" through "F", and Alleys A" through " D". Street A sits atop the SBVMWD easement and measures 30 feet across with 13 and 17 foot lanes, 6 inch standard curbs on both sides and a five (5) foot sidewalk on one side.

The remaining streets are 26 feet wide with a 4 inch rolled curb on one side and zero (0) inch curb on the opposite. Street " B" does have some additional sidewalks on its west side. The alleys are 24 foot wide with a rolled curb and gutter on one side and zero ( 0) inch curb on the opposite side.

On each street and alley, there is a three ( 3) foot minimum setback from the front of the curb to the building wall" of each house. Due to the width of the street and necessary emergency vehicular access, there will be minimal on -street parking. Eight (8) spaces will be available on the south side of Street A. Drainage is designed so that water will sheet flow to the side of the street with the curb.

The Applicant prepared a traffic study to analyze impacts to the City' s nearby intersections. Based on the volumes generated by the Project, it is required to pay a fair share of eight ( 8) percent towards the installation of a future traffic signal at Alta Vista and Greenspot Road. Although not required to build the signal, the project is conditioned to design the future signal. This will allow the City to have a shovel ready project once funding is fully secured.

The project is conditioned to install pavement embellishments marking at the entry to the tract on both sides of Alta Vista. These are only shown on the landscape plan. Details will be transferred to the Tentative Tract Map Civil Plans before they are stamped approved for construction.

The map has been reviewed by the City' s Public Works/ Engineering Division, Fire Marshal, Police Dept, and CalFire to ensure they meet the necessary design standards including sight distance, private vehicle and emergency vehicle circulation. The Police Department had no comment, and the others provided Conditions of Approval as attached. In addition, in accordance with City Council Policy, an Engineering Condition was added to include a public safety assessment to help offset the cost of Police and Fire services.
8 Gradinq Plan ( Sheet 1_ of the Tentative Tract Ma
The 11. 98 acre site will contain 7. 01 acres of residential lots, 2. 7 acres of open space and 2. 28 acres of streets. There will be cut and fill portions of the tract resulting in a net of 23, 500 cubic yards of fill.

A variety of retaining conditions exist throughout the tract to level the site and provide usable space. There are numerous 2. 1 slopes along the north perimeter, east perimeter, south perimeter and along Alta Vista. There will be a 34downslope onthe lots along the westerly perimeter of Alta Vista.

The interior ofthe site is relatively flat with minor slopes along lots 100 and 101. Retaining walls will be constructed downslope along the Flood Control property with a maximum height of four ( 4) feet, visible from the interior ofthe private lots. The retaining wall along the westerly boundary will be more, 6-7 feet, visible from the adjacent private property. To reduce visual impacts, the rear property fencing will be tube steel view fence. The various retaining sections are shown on Sheet 1 (Grading) of the Tentative Tract Map. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: An Initial Study was prepared forthe project. A Notice ofIntent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration ( MND) was circulated through the California State Clearinghouse and made available for public comment between April 28, 2025, and May 28, 2025. The Notice was mailed to surrounding property owners within 300 feet as well as interested agencies and parties attheir request. The Notice was also posted on the City's website, outside City Hall, the Sam J. Racadio Library and Environmental Learning Center, and Fire Station # 1. Potential impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology, noise, and tribal cultural resources were identified. Project specific design features and mitigation measures have been identified to reduce said impacts to below alevel of significance and included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment 2, Resolution forthe IS/MND & MMRP). Mitigation required toreduce certain impacts to Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources may result ina minor redesign of no more than three of the residential lots. These amendments will be reviewed by City Staff to ensure continuing compliance with the project plans and its Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS:

Each aspect ofthe project was reviewed toensure compliance withthe City' s General Plan, Municipal Code, policies and procedures. The project isconsistent with all aspects of the General Plan with special consideration given to the Land Use, Housing, Circulation, and Public Health/ Safety/ Environmental Justice Elements. It maintains the integrity of existing neighborhoods bycontinuing the residential nature of development inthe area and providing appropriate transitions between density types. It was designed ina manner topreserve thequality of life with the inclusion of adequate infrastructure, recreation, open space, landscaping, and quality residential housing products (General Plan Goal 2.2). It helps provide avariety of housing types to help meet the City' s Regional Housing Needs by the construction of 113 new homes, slightly more than anticipated inthe City' s 6th Cycle Housing Element (Goal 2.3). The City' s 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies the location as "Vacant" and within the "Above Moderate -Income Site" designation ( Housing Element, Appendix ESites Inventory Figure 5). It notes that the two parcels have the potential toaccommodate 53single family units. By virtue of allowing the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Planned Development, the project will exceed the prescribed minimum identified inthe Housing Element and will also create adevelopment with a higher level of community amenities and cohesiveness and more desirable by the current housing market than could be achieved through conventional subdivision design. The proposed project meets the City of Highland's Municipal Code requirements as mandated by Title 16, Land Use and Development. This includes Chapter 16.12 Special Districts which outlines provisions for Planned Developments. The Planned Development Document, through the 9 Conditional Use Permit process, establishes a list of specific limits, parameters and planning objectives to guide development based on the identified development constraints and opportunities. The proposed land uses and architectural building styles are appropriately designed for the site and surrounding area. The site grading, circulation, lighting, paving, parking, screening, setbacks, recreation and open space areas were all reviewed, modified as necessary prior to public hearing and conditioned for compliance with all City regulations.

PREVIOUS ACTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on the project on July 15, 2025. They amended two Planning Conditions of Approval requiring future Neighborhood Identification Signs and frontage landscaping be returned to the Commission for final approval. These amendments are noted in bold and strike out in the Conditions. The Commission also gave Directives to Staff meant to guide the project' s final design as it proceeds to construction plan check through Building & Safety ( See Attachment 6 — PC Design Directives). At the termination of the Hearing, the Commission approved PC Resolution No. 25-016, recommending the City Council approve the project subject to the modified Conditions of Approval and Commission Directives ( see Attachment 7 — PC Draft Minutes).

ATTACHMENTS: 1) Area Map
2) Resolution to Approve the IS/ MND
IS/ MND & MMRP Exhibit attached
3) Resolution to Approve the General Plan Amendment
GPA Map Exhibit attached
4) Draft Ordinance to Approve the Zone Change
ZC Map Exhibit attached
5) Resolution to Approve the CUP, DRA and TTM

8. 5x11" Project Plans attached including TTM, Building Elevations, Landscape Concept and Materials/ Colors
Large scale plans under separate cover
Conditions of Approval attached
6) PC Design Directives
7) PC Draft Minutes
8) Public Comment
9) Technical Memorandum
10 ATTACHMENT 1
Area Map
11 a
t
N1 n 2025 Diaital Mao Products. All riahts reserved.
12 ATTACHMENT 2
Resolution to Approve the
Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/ MND) 13 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 -

A RESOLUTION OF THE HIGHLAND CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, ENVIRONMENTAL FILE
NO. ENV 24-003, TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 113- UNIT

SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LOCATED

NORTH OF GREENSPOT ROAD, SOUTH OF SANTA ANA CANYON
ROAD, EAST AND WEST OF ALTA VISTA. ASSOCIATED
APPLICATIONS INCLUDE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ( GPA 24-
002), ZONE CHANGE ( ZC 24- 002), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ( CUP 24-006), DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ( DRA 24-009) AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ( TTM 24-003/ TTM 20721), ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBERS 1210- 371- 14 & 1210- 371- 16.

Applicant: East Highland Land, LLC
A. RECITALS

1. On August 8, 2024, the Applicant submitted numerous applications for the development of a 113- unit single- family residential Planned Development including General Plan Amendment No. GPA 24- 002 to change the General Plan Land Use Designation from Low Density Residential ( LD) to Planned Development ( PD); Zone Change No. ZC 24- 002 to change the Zoning Designation from Single -Family Residential ( R1- 10, 000) to Planned Development ( PD); Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24- 006 for the adoption of a Planned Development; Design Review Application No. DRA 24- 009 for the related Site Plan, Building Elevations, Conceptual Landscape Plan and Conceptual Grading Plan; Tentative Tract Map No. 20721/ TTM 24- 003 for the subdivision of two parcels into 113 residential lots and common areas. The aforementioned entitlements are referred to collectively as " the Project".

2. The Project site is located on two ( 2) vacant parcels comprised of approximately 12 acres, located north of Greenspot Road, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east and west of Alta Vista, also known as Assessor' s Parcel Numbers: 1210- 371- 14 and 1210- 371- 16.

3. Pursuant to the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) and State and Local CEQA Guidelines, the City of Highland is the Lead Agency and is charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Project.

4. The Project was processed, including but not limited to all public notices, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code 21000, et seq. and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs 15000 et seq.
14 5. ECORP Consulting, Inc. independently prepared an Initial Study to analyze the potential environmental effects of the Project. The Initial Study identified potential impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology, noise, and tribal cultural resources. Project design features and specific mitigation measures are needed to reduce said impacts to below a level of significance.

A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared.

6. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration ( MND) was circulated through the California State Clearinghouse and made available for public comment between April 28, 2025, and May 28, 2025. The Notice was mailed to surrounding property owners within 300 feet as well as interested agencies and parties at their request. The Notice was also posted on the City' s website, at Highland City Hall ( 27215 Base Line, Highland), the Sam J.

Racadio Library and Environmental Learning Center ( 7863 Central Avenue, Highland), and Highland Fire Station # 1 ( 26974 Base Line, Highland). The Notice was published in the San Bernardino Sun, a newspaper of general circulation.

7. No comment letters were received during the public and agency review period.

8. The " Final Mitigated Negative Declaration" (" Final MND") consists of the Draft MND, all of its appendices and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Final MND was made available to the public and all agencies on July 9, 2025, which is at least 10 days prior to adoption of the Final MND, in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21092. 5( a).

9. On July 15, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Highland conducted a public hearing on the Project, concluded the hearing on that date, and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 25- 016, recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( ENV 24- 003) for the Project.

9. On July 23, 2025, the City gave notice of a public hearing before the City Council to consider the Project by advertising in the SB Sun newspaper, a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Highland, and by mailing notices to property owners within 300-feet of the Project site as well as interested parties requesting notice.

10. On August 12, 2025, the Highland City Council conducted a public hearing on the Project and concluded the hearing on that date. Prior to taking action at the noticed City Council public hearing held on August 12, 2025, the City Council has heard, been presented with, reviewed, and considered the information and data in the administrative record, as well as oral and written testimony presented to it during meetings and hearings. No comments or any additional information submitted to the City have produced any substantial new information to support a fair argument requiring additional environmental review or re -circulation of the Final MND under CEQA because no new significant environmental impacts were identified, nor was any substantial 15 increase in the severity of any previously disclosed environmental impacts identified.

11. 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. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Highland City Council during the August 12, 2025, Public Hearing, including public testimony and written and oral Staff Reports, the Highland City Council finds that 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. Agencies and interested members of the public have been afforded ample notice and opportunity to comment on the Draft MND, the Final MND, and on the Project. The Project has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines.

4. The City Council has independently considered the administrative record before it, which is hereby incorporated by reference and which includes the Final MND, comments on the Draft MND, the Draft MND and its Appendices, staff reports and presentations, and all oral and written testimony.

5. The City Council has reviewed the Final MND and all comments received regarding the Final MND prior to and at the August 12, 2025 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: ( 1) the Final MND was prepared in compliance with CEQA; ( 2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and ( 3) the Final MND reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.

6. The Highland City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration ENV 24- 002) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( MMRP), both of which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Exhibit A — Final Mitigated Negative Declaration including MMRP

7. The City Council hereby directs staff to file a Notice of Determination as set forth in Public Resources Code section 21152( a).
16 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 12th day of August, 2025.

Penny Lilburn, Mayor
ATTEST:

Alondra Munoz
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Maricela E. Marroquin
City Attorney
17 Exhibit " A"
Final Mitigated Negative Declaration including MMRP
18 Final Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Residences at Alta Vista
June 2025
Lead Agency:

City of Highland
27215 Base Line Highland, CA 92346
Prepared by:

ECORP Consulting, Inc.

E\ VlR0iNMFNTAL C'() NSi 1 i" AA4 215
North 5th Street Redlands,
CA 92374
19 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
20 Residences at Alta Vista
Final
Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
June 2025
21 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
22 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

CONTENTS
Final Mitigated Negative Declaration........................................................................................................ 1 SECTION1. 0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1- 1 SECTION2. 0 PROJECT OVERVIEW..................................................................................................... 2- 1

2. 1 Project Background....................................................................................................................................... 2- 1

2. 2 Project Characteristics.................................................................................................................................. 2- 1

2. 3 Project Timing................................................................................................................................................. 2- 3

2. 4 List of Commenters....................................................................................................................................... 2- 4 SECTION3. 0 AB 52 CONSULTATION................................................................................................. 3- 1 SECTION 4.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES..................................................................................... 4- 1 SECTION 5. 0 CLARIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION............................................................................................................................ 5- 1

5. 1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................... 5- 1

5. 2 Clarifications..................................................................................................................................................... 5- 1 SECTION 6. 0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN ................................................. 6- 1

6. 1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................... 6- 1

6. 2 Purpose of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.......................................................... 6- 1

6. 3 Roles and Responsibilities..........................................................................................................................6- 1

6. 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan......................................................................................... 6- 1 SECTION7. 0 LIST OF APPENDICES..................................................................................................... 7- 1 Appendix A — Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix B — Summary of AB 52 Consultation
Table of Contents i
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
23 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Table of Contents II
June Mb
2023- 095. 03
24 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Lead Agency:

Project Proponent:

City of Highland
27215 Base Line
Highland, CA 92346
Diversified Pacific
10621 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Project Location: The Residences at Alta Vista ( Project, Proposed Project) Project Site is located north of Greenspot Road, South of Santa Ana Canyon Road, and on either side of Alta Vista in the City of Highland. The approximately 12- acre irregularly shaped Project Site includes Assessor Parcel Numbers APNs) 1210- 371- 16 and 1210- 371- 14.

Project Description: The Project would construct 113 detached single- family homes at a density of 9. 42 dwelling units per acre ( du/ ac). The Project would have three distinct floor plans ranging from 1, 987 - 2, 365 square feet with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles. Each lot would include private rear yard space. The Project would include a total of 293 parking spaces, comprised of 226 garage spaces and an additional 67 uncovered guest spaces. The Project proposes approximately 4, 213 linear feet of roadway improvements including six private streets and three alleys. The Project would also provide two primary open space areas, one on each side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000 square feet.

The proposal includes the following entitlement applications: Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 ( TTM 24- 003), General Plan Amendment ( GPA 24- 002), Zone Change ( ZC 24- 002), Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 24- 006), and Design Review Application ( DRA 24- 009).

Public Review Period: April 28, 2025 to May 28, 2025
Mitigated Negative Declaration June 202b
2023- 095. 03
25 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects:

Biological Resources
BI0- 1: Pre -construction Special -Status Plant Surveys. Prior to Project implementation a protocol -level pre -construction plant survey shall be conducted for the 16 special -status plant species that have varying levels of potential to occur on the Project Site, including Parry' s spineflower, slender - horned spineflower, Santa Ana River woollystar, California satintail, salt spring checkerbloom, Nevin' s Barberry, and thread -leaved brodiaea. The protocol -level survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of year when plants will both be evident and identifiable (usually, during flowering or fruiting), the season or the year prior to the start of ground -breaking Project activities. The survey should be conducted by a qualified botanist or biologist experienced with surveying for and identifying these flora. The surveys should be conducted in consideration of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS) Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plants ( USFWS 1996), General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines ( Cypher 2002), CDFW' s Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities ( CDFW 2018), and the California Native Plant Society' s ( CNPS) Botanical Survey Guidelines ( CNPS 2001). If no federally or state -listed or California Rare Plant Rank ( CRPR) List 1 or 2 plant species are identified during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin, and no further action is necessary.

If CRPR List 1 or 2 plant species or any federally or state -listed plant species are observed on the Project Site during the survey, then a qualified botanist or biologist shall establish a non - disturbance buffer around the location( s) of the individuals or population. The size of the non -disturbance buffer shall be determined by the qualified botanist or biologist based on location of special - status species and expected construction activities. If one or more CRPR List 1 or 2 plant species or any state or federally listed plant species are found on the Project Site and avoidance of the location( s) is not feasible during Project construction, then the qualified biologist and the Project Proponent shall coordinate with CDFW and/ or USFWS to determine if additional mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation measures could include, but are not limited to, additional biological monitoring, seasonal work avoidance, seed collection, or transplanting.

B1O- 2: Biological Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall be present to monitor all initial ground - disturbing and vegetation - clearing activities conducted for the Project. During each monitoring day, the biological monitor shall perform clearance survey " sweeps" at the start of each workday that vegetation clearing takes place to minimize impacts on special - status species with potential to occur. The monitor will be responsible for ensuring that impacts to special - status species, nesting birds, and active nests will be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Biological monitoring shall take place until the Project Site has been completely cleared of any vegetation. If an active nest is identified, the biological monitor shall establish Mitigated Negative Declaration 2
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
26 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
an appropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking.

Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest is deemed no longer active by the biologist. If special - status wildlife species are detected during biological monitoring activities, then consultation with the USFWS and/ or CDFW shall be conducted, and a mitigation plan shall be developed to avoid and offset impacts to these species. Mitigation measures may consist of work restrictions and/ or additional biological monitoring activities after ground - disturbing activities are complete.

B1O- 3: Pre -construction Crotch Bumble Bee Survey. If the Crotch bumble bee is no longer a Candidate or formally Listed species under the California Endangered Species Act at the time ground - disturbing activities occur, then no additional protection measures are proposed for the species.

If the Crotch bumble bee is legally protected under the California Endangered Species Act as a Candidate or Listed species at the time ground - disturbing activities are scheduled to occur, it is recommended pre -construction surveys be conducted in accordance with the established survey protocol provided by CDFW. If no such protocol is available and ground - disturbing activities are scheduled to occur during the Crotch bumble bee flight season February 16 through October 31), then it is recommended a minimum of two Crotch bumble bee pre- construction surveys are conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in identifying the species prior to ground disturbing activities (including vegetation and tree removal). The surveys shall be conducted no more than 14 days and three ( 3) days prior to ground- disturbing activities and vegetation clearing activities that are to occur during the flight season.

Should vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities be scheduled to begin during the overwintering season ( November 1 to February 15), when Crotch bumble bee are not detectable aboveground, then four ( 4) focused surveys shall be conducted at least three ( 3) weeks apart during the peak flight season ( late March through August) immediately prior to start of construction.

If Crotch bumble bee is determined to occur within the Project Site at any time, coordination with CDFW shall be required prior to the initiation of Project activities.

BI0- 4: Pre -construction Burrowing Owl Surveys. Pre - construction surveys for burrowing owls shall be conducted. Prior to ground disturbing activities, a qualified wildlife biologist (i. e., a wildlife biologist with previous burrowing owl survey experience) shall conduct pre - construction surveys of the Project Site, plus a 500- foot buffer (where access is permissible and suitable habitat is present), to locate active breeding or wintering burrowing owls and burrowing owl burrows between 30 and 14 days prior to construction. The survey methodology shall be consistent with the methods outlined in the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation ( California Department of Fish and Game 2012). Additionally, a qualified biologist shall conduct a second pre -construction survey of the Project Site plus an approximately 500- foot buffer no more than 24 hours prior to the start of ground -disturbing Mitigated Negative Declaration 3
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
27 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
activities associated with construction to identify any additional burrowing owls or burrows necessitating avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures.

If no burrowing owls or active burrowing owl burrows ( e. g., with sign present) are observed during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin, and no further action is necessary.

If burrowing owl( s) or suitable burrowing owl burrows with sign ( e. g., whitewash, pellets, feathers, prey remains) are identified on the Project Site during the surveys, these features must be completely avoided, and the qualified biologist and Project proponent shall coordinate with CDFW prior to preparing a Burrowing Owl Plan to determine the most appropriate avoidance measures. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall describe proposed avoidance, minimization, and monitoring actions. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall include the number and location of occupied burrow sites, acres of burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted, details of site monitoring, and details on proposed buffers and other avoidance measures if avoidance is proposed. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow cannot be avoided, the Burrowing Owl Plan shall also describe relocation actions that will be implemented. Proposed implementation of burrow exclusion and closure should only be considered as a last resort, after all other options have been evaluated as exclusion is not in itself an avoidance, minimization, or mitigation method and has the possibility to result in take. If impacts to occupied burrows cannot be avoided, information shall be provided regarding adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls along with proposed relocation actions. The Permittee shall implement the Burrowing Owl Plan following CDFW review and approval.

If ground - disturbing activities occur but the Project Site is left undisturbed for more than 30 days, a pre -construction survey for burrowing owl shall be conducted as described above. If a burrowing owl is found, the same coordination described above shall be necessary.

B10- 5: Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. To lessen impacts to nesting birds and raptors, it is recommended that vegetation and tree removal be conducted between September 1 and January 31, outside of the typical nesting period for birds protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. If vegetation or tree removal, or initial ground disturbing Project activities are planned to occur during the nesting season (typically February through August), then a pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be performed no more than three days prior to the start of construction to determine whether the site is being used for nesting. This will avoid violations of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503. 5, and 3513. The pre -construction nesting bird survey shall include the Project impact area and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to cause nest failure. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in: identifying local and migratory bird species of special concern; conducting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology; nesting surveying techniques, recognizing breeding and nesting behaviors, locating nests and breeding territories, and identifying nesting stages and Mitigated Negative Declaration 4
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
28 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
nest success; determining/ establishing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures; and monitoring the efficacy of implemented avoidance and minimization measures..

The pre -construction survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day, during appropriate weather conditions, no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of Project activities. The surveys shall encompass all suitable areas including trees, shrubs, bare ground, burrows, cavities, and structures. Survey duration shall take into consideration the size of the Project Site; density, and complexity of the habitat; number of survey participants; survey techniques employed; and shall be sufficient to ensure the data collected is complete and accurate.

If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin. If active nests are found, they shall be flagged and a qualified biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nest ( generally a minimum of 200 feet up to 500 feet for raptors and a minimum of 50 feet up to 300 feet for passerine species), with specific buffer widths to be determined by a qualified biologist. The buffer around the nest shall be delineated and flagged, and no construction activity shall occur within the buffer area until a qualified biologist determines nesting species have fledged and the nest is no longer active, or the nest has failed. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of Project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such Project activities ( e. g., increase in number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy of the buffer. If the qualified biologist determines that such Project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the qualified biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within these buffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished ( i. e., thejuveniles are surviving independent from the nest) or failed.

The qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found.

BIO- 6: Pre -construction San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Survey. Within two years prior to the start of Project activities, a biologist in possession of a Federal 10( a)( 1)( A) Recovery Permit and CDFW Scientific Collecting Permit and Memorandum of Understanding shall perform SBKR trapping surveys in accordance with the protocols outlined by USFWS and in the biologist' s permit. The survey shall consist of five consecutive nights of trapping, when the animal is active above ground and when the overnight temperatures are 50 degrees Fahrenheit or higher, while avoiding periods of overnight precipitation. The traps shall be spaced approximately 10 meters apart and set in habitats most likely to yield SBKR, to confirm presence/ absence of the species.

If San Bernardino kangaroo rat is found on the Project Site and avoidance of the location( s) is not feasible then coordination with CDFW and USFWS shall occur prior to the initiation of Project activities.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 5
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
29 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
Cultural Resources
CUL- 1: Monitoring and Treatment Plan. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is reflective of the project mitigation (" Cultural Resources" and " Tribal Cultural Resources") shall be completed by the archaeologist and submitted to the Lead Agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department ( YSMN, also known as San Manuel Band of Mission Indians). Once all parties review and approve the plan, it shall be adopted by the Lead Agency — the plan must be adopted prior to permitting for the project. Any and all findings will be subject to the protocol detailed within the Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

CUL- 2: Contractor Awareness Training. The Lead Agency shall ensure that a Contractor Awareness Training Program is delivered to train equipment operators about cultural resources. The program shall be designed to inform construction personnel about: federal and state regulations pertaining to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources; the subsurface indicators of resources that shall require a work stoppage; procedures for notifying the lead agency of any occurrences; Project - specific requirements and mitigation measures; and enforcement of penalties and repercussions for non- compliance with the program.

The training shall be prepared by a qualified professional archaeologist and may be provided either through a brochure, video, or in - person tailgate meeting. Tribal representatives from the Consulting Tribes, such as Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department ( YSMN, also known as San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) will be allowed to attend and/ or participate in the Contractor Awareness Training should they elect to and will be given ten days' notice prior to the training. The training shall be provided to all construction supervisors, forepersons, and operators of ground - disturbing equipment.

All personnel shall be required to sign a training roster. The construction manager is responsible for ensuring that all required personnel receive the training. The Construction Manager shall provide a copy of the signed training roster to the lead agency as proof of compliance.

CUL- 3: Archaeological Monitoring. Due to the heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed project area, an archaeological monitor with at least 3 years of regional experience in archaeology shall be present for all ground - disturbing activities that occur within the proposed project area (which includes, but is not limited to, tree/ shrub removal and planting, clearing/ grubbing, grading, excavation, trenching, compaction, fence/ gate removal and installation, drainage and irrigation removal and installation, hardscape installation benches, signage, boulders, walls, seat walls, fountains, etc.], and archaeological work). A sufficient number of archaeological monitors shall be present each work day to ensure that simultaneously occurring ground disturbing activities receive thorough levels of monitoring coverage.

CUL- 4: Post Review Discovery. There always remains the potential for ground -disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources. Both CEQA and Section 106 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration 6
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
30 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
NHPA require the lead agency to address any unanticipated cultural resource discoveries during Project construction as described below.

If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100- foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior' s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology, shall evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no - work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find:

If the professional archaeologist in consultation with the Tribal monitor/ representative for YSMN determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required.

If the professional archaeologist in consultation with the Tribal monitor/ representative for YSMN determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the lead agencies. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined by CEQA or a historic property under Section 106 NHPA, if applicable. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA or a Historic Property under Section 106; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.
o If the find represents a Native American or potentially Native American resource that does not include human remains, then the agencies shall consult with the Consulting Tribes on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 21074 of the CEQA Guidelines. Preservation in place is the preferred treatment, if feasible. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.
o If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance ( AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).

Mitigated Negative Declaration 7
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
31 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
The provisions of § 7050. 5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097. 98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant ( MLD) for the Project (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097. 94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located ( AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

Geology and Soils
GEO- 1: Unanticipated Discovery of Paleontological Resources. If paleontological resources are discovered during Project construction, a 50- foot buffer would be established around a find until a qualified paleontologist has determined the significance of the find. All work in the area of the find shall cease and a qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the City to investigate the find and to make recommendations on its disposition.

Noise
N0I- 1: Project Noise Abatement Measures. To ensure interior noise levels at all residences comply with the City of Highland' s interior noise reduction standards, all residential structures shall incorporate the following noise control measures:

Building Construction
o Walls:

All penetrations in exterior walls for pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal and minimize sound transmission.
o Roof Construction:

Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be per manufacturer specifications or consist of caulked plywood of at least'/ z inch thickness.

Ceilings shall be well -sealed gypsum board of at least'/ z inch thickness.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 8
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
32 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
Attic insulation with a minimum R- 19 rating shall be used to enhance noise attenuation.

Ventilation & Mechanical Systems
o While keeping windows closed for noise reduction, all habitable rooms shall be equipped with:

A forced air circulation system ( e.g., HVAC system or air conditioning unit), or
An active ventilation system ( e. g., fresh air supply system) that meets Uniform Building Code requirements. Population and Housing
NOI- 2: Additional Noise Abatement Measures for Lot 8. To mitigate interior and exterior noise impacts at Lot 8, the following measures shall be implemented:

Interior Noise Reduction Measures
o The second floor of the residence on Lot 8 shall be constructed with well - fitted, well - weather- stripped upgraded windows and glass doors with a minimum Sound Transmission Class rating of 30 to ensure compliance with the City of Highland' s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. o All penetrations in exterior walls ( e. g., for pipes, ducts, conduits) shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal and prevent sound leakage.

Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR- 1: Tribal Monitoring. Due to the heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed project area, at the discretion of the consulting tribe( s), Tribal monitor( s) authorized to represent YSMN shall be present for all ground - disturbing activities that occur within the proposed project area ( which includes, but is not limited to, tree/ shrub removal and planting, clearing/ grubbing, grading, excavation, trenching, compaction, fence/ gate removal and installation, drainage and irrigation removal and installation, hardscape installation [ benches, signage, boulders, walls, seat walls, fountains, etc.], and archaeological work). At the discretion of the consulting tribes, a sufficient number of Tribal monitors shall be present each work day to ensure that simultaneously occurring ground disturbing activities receive thorough levels of monitoring coverage. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is reflective of the project mitigation ("Cultural Resources" and " Tribal Cultural Resources") shall be completed by the archaeologist, as detailed within CUL- 1, and submitted to the Lead Agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department ( YSMN). Once all parties review and agree to the plan, it shall be adopted by the Lead Agency — the plan must be adopted prior to permitting for the project. Any and all findings will be subject to the protocol detailed within the Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 9
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
33 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
TCR- 2: Treatment of Cultural Resources During Project Implementation. If a pre -contact cultural resource is discovered during project implementation, ground - disturbing activities shall be suspended 60 feet around the resource( s), and an Environmentally Sensitive Area ( ESA) physical demarcation/ barrier constructed.

The Project Archaeologist shall develop a research design that shall include a plan to evaluate the resource for significance under CEQA criteria. Representatives from YSMN, the Archaeologist, and the Lead Agency shall confer regarding the research design, as well as any testing efforts needed to delineate the resource boundary. Following the completion of evaluation efforts, all parties shall confer regarding the resource' s archaeological significance, its potential as a Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR), and avoidance (or other appropriate treatment) of the discovered resource. Removal of any cultural resource( s) shall be conducted with the presence of a Tribal monitor representing the Tribe, unless otherwise decided by YSMN. All plans for analysis shall be reviewed and approved by the applicant and YSMN prior to implementation, and all removed material shall be temporarily curated on - site.

It is the preference of YSMN that removed cultural material be reburied as close to the original find location as possible. However, should reburial within/ near the original find location during project implementation not be feasible, then a reburial location for future reburial shall be decided upon by YSMN, the landowner, and the Lead Agency, and all finds shall be reburied within this location. Additionally, in this case, reburial shall not occur until all ground - disturbing activities associated with the project have been completed, all monitoring has ceased, all cataloguing and basic recordation of cultural resources have been completed, and a final monitoring report has been issued to Lead Agency, CHRIS, and YSMN. All reburials are subject to a reburial agreement that shall be developed between the landowner and YSMN outlining the determined reburial process/ location, and shall include measures and provisions to protect the reburial area from any future impacts.

Should it occur that avoidance, preservation in place, and on -site reburial are not an option for treatment, the landowner shall relinquish all ownership and rights to this material and confer with YSMN to identify an American Association of Museums ( AAM)- accredited facility within the County that can accession the materials into their permanent collections and provide for the proper care of these objects in accordance with the 1993 CA Curation Guidelines. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository shall be developed between the landowner and museum that legally and physically transfers the collections and associated records to the facility. This agreement shall stipulate the payment of fees necessary for permanent curation of the collections and associated records and the obligation of the Project developer/ applicant to pay for those fees.

All draft records/ reports containing the significance and treatment findings and data recovery results shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the Lead Agency and YSMN for their review and comment. After approval from all parties, the final reports Mitigated Negative Declaration 10
June 2u2b
2023- 095. 03
34 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
and site/ isolate records are to be submitted to the local CHRIS Information Center, the Lead Agency, and YSMN.

TCR- 3: Inadvertent Discoveries of Human Remains. If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity within a 100- foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code § 7050. 5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project.

Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2U2b
2023- 095.03
35 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Mitigated Negative Declaration 12
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
36 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 1. 0 INTRODUCTION
This document is the Final Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration ( IS/ MND), including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ( MMRP) for the Residences at Alta Vista Project ( Proposed Project). It has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) ( Public Resource Code Section 21000 et. seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.), as amended. This Final IS/ MND document supplements the Draft IS/ MND released for public review on April 28, 2025, and Agency review on April 29, 2025 ( Appendix A).

The City of Highland ( City) is the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project. On April 28, 2025, the City distributed the Draft IS/ MND for the Proposed Project to the general public for review and comment. The following day, on April 29, 2025, the Draft IS/ MND for the Proposed Project was distributed to public agencies for review and comment. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, the Draft IS/ MND was circulated for a 31- day public review period and 30- day agency review period, which ended on May 28, 2025. No comments on the Draft IS/ MND were received during the public and agency review period. This Final IS/ MND document is organized as follows:

Section 1. 0 provides a discussion of the purpose of the document and discusses the structure of the document;
Section 2. 0 contains a summary of the project description; Section 3. 0 includes a summary of AB 52 consultation;
Section 4. 0 includes comment letters received and response comments; Section 5. 0 includes corrections and clarifications made to the Draft IS/ MND in response to comments; and,
Section 6. 0 includes the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ( MMRP) This Final IS/ MND document and the Draft IS/ MND ( Appendix A) together constitute the environmental document for the Proposed Project. An MMRP document has been prepared for the Proposed Project and is included in Section 6. 0 of this Final IS/ MND.

Introduction June 2025
2023- 095. 03
37 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Introduction 1- 2
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
38 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 2. 0 PROJECT OVERVIEW

2. 1 Project Background
The Project Site consists of approximately 11. 98 acres of land located north of Greenspot Road, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road, and on either side of Alta Vista in the City of Highland, San Bernardino County, The Project Site is currently vacant and generally bounded by vacant land and residential uses to the north, flood control district property to the east, radio towers to the west, and Greenspot Road to the south. The Project Site and land to the north, east, and west have a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential ( LD: 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac). Land south of Greenspot Road has a General Plan land use designation of Agricultural Equestrian ( A/ EQ: 0- 2 du/ ac). Refer to Table 2- 1 below for details.

Table 2- 1. Surrounding Land Uses
Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land Use Project LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10,000 ( Low Density Vacant Site Residential Residential ( 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac)
LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10, 000 ( Low Density Residential North Residential Residential ( 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac)
Vacant Land and
LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10,000 ( Low Density Gated San Bernardino East
Residential Residential ( 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac) Flood Control District Property
South AG/ EQ) Agricultural/ Equestrian
AG/ EQ Agricultural Equestrian ( 0- 2
Vacant
d u/ a c)
LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10,000 ( Low Density West Vacant
Residential Residential ( 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac)
Source: Highland 2006, 2025; Google Earth Pro 2025

2. 2 Project Characteristics
The Project would construct 113 detached single- family homes at a density of 9.42 dwelling units per acre du/ ac). The Project would have three distinct floor plans ranging from 1, 987 - 2, 365 square feet ( sf) with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles. Each lot would include private rear yard space. The Project would include a total of 293 parking spaces, comprised of 226 garage spaces and an additional 67 uncovered guest spaces. The Project proposes approximately 4,213 linear feet of roadway improvements including six private streets and three alleys. The Project would also provide two primary open space areas, one on each side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000- sf.

Project Overview 2- 1 June 202b
2023- 095. 03
39 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
The Project includes the following entitlement applications: Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 ( TTM 24- 003), General Plan Amendment ( GPA 24- 002), Zone Change ( ZC 24- 002), Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 24- 006), and Design Review Application ( DRA 24- 009).

The property is currently vacant and zoned R- 1 ( 10, 000 Single Family Residential) with a General Plan Land Use designation of LID ( Low Density, 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac). The Proposed Project would require a zone change and general plan amendment to PD ( Planned Development).

The Project proposes development of 113 detached single- family homes ( 9.42 du/ ac) with private rear yard space. Lot sizes will range from 1, 920 to 5, 186- sf. There will be three distinct floor plans with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles. The area of each floor plan is provided below in Table 2- 2 through Table 2- 4, with the total number of units proposed as part of the Project presented in Table 2- 5.

Table 2- 2. Floor Plan 1
Floor Plan Section Area ( Square Feet)
First Floor 618
Second Floor 948
Total Living Area: 1, 566
Two -Car Garage 421
Porch 11
The Proposed Project would construct 35- units following the design of Floor Plan 1. As shown in Table 2- 2, Floor Plan 1 would be the smallest of the three floorplans constructed as part of the Project. Floor Plan 1 would include 1, 566- sf of living area, a 421- sf two -car garage, and an 11- sf porch.

Table 2- 3. Floor Plan 2
Floor Plan Section Area ( Square Feet)
First Floor 689
Second Floor 1, 051
Total Living Area: 1, 740
Two -Car Garage 423
Porch 78
The Proposed Project would construct 43- units following the design of Floor Plan 2. As shown in Table 2- 3, Floor Plan 2 would include 1, 740- sf of living area, a 423- sf two -car garage, and the largest porch of the development mix at 78- sf.

Project Overview 2- 2 June 202b
2023- 095. 03
40 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
Table 2- 4. Floor Plan 3
Floor Plan Section Area ( Square Feet)
First Floor 722
Second Floor 1, 160
Total Living Area: 1, 932
Two - car Garage 433
Porch 20
The Proposed Project would construct 35- units following the design of Floor Plan 3. As shown in Table 2 - 4, Floor Plan 3 would be the largest of the three floor plans constructed as part of the Project. Floor Plan 3 would include 1, 932- sf of living area.

Table 2- 5. Project Development Mix
Floor Plan Type Units Proposed
Floor Plan 1
35 Floor Plan 2
43 Floor Plan 3
35 Total Number of Units: 113
In summary, the Proposed Project would develop 113 residential lots, totaling 7. 13- acres on an approximately 12- acre site at a density of 9.42- lots/ ac ( gross) with single family homes. The Proposed Project would not include gated access. In addition to the 113 Proposed single- family homes, the Project would include a total of 293 on -site parking spaces, comprised of 226 garage spaces, and 67 additional uncovered guest spaces distributed throughout the Project. Project access would be provided by six private streets ( 4, 213 linear feet). There would be two primary open space amenities, one on each side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000 square feet.

Open Space 1 would play equipment, benches, picnic tables, barbecues, turf, and exercise equipment.

Open Space 2 is designed as a passive area with benches, turf, and exercise equipment along a pathway.

Additional Project improvements include 6- foot- high walls along Greenspot Road at Lots 104 through 110 and Lot 8, two flood control basins, a new storm drain connection underneath Greenspot Road, an improved concrete v- ditch, retaining walls, a 20- foot utility easement, and associated utility connections.

2. 3 Project Timing
Project construction is anticipated to start in January 2026 for a duration of approximately 12 months.

Project Overview 2- 3 June 2025
2023- 095. 03
41 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

2. 4 List of Commenters
The Draft IS/ MND was distributed for public comment for 31- day review period from April 28, 2025 to May 28, 2025, and distributed for agency comment for 30- day public review period from April 29, 2025 to May 28, 2025. No comment letters were received during the public and agency review period.

Project Overview 2- 4 June 2025
2023- 095. 03
42 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 3. 0 AB 52 CONSULTATION
Effective July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill ( AB) 52 amended CEQA to require that: 1) a lead agency provide notice to those California Native American tribes that requested notice of projects proposed by the lead agency; and 2) for any tribe that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request for consultation, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Topics that may be addressed during consultation include tribal cultural resources (TCRs), the potential significance of project impacts, type of environmental document that should be prepared, and possible mitigation measures and project alternatives.

The City of Highland notified all the tribes on the contact list of California Native American Tribes which have requested formal notification from the City. On September 4, 2024, the City notified the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians and the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation ( YSMN) were notified on September 5, 2024.

The City received a response from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation on September 5, 2024, indicating the desire to consult, but later deferred consultation to other California Native American Tribes on October 16, 2024. On September 16, 2024, the YSMN, also referred to as the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, indicated the desire to consult regarding potential impacts to TCRs and requested additional information regarding the Proposed Project. On May 27, 2025, YSMN provided comments to clarify mitigation measures provided in the Public Draft IS/ MND as part of AB 52 consultation. The City has incorporated the requested edits to the mitigation measures as part of Section 5. 0 of this Final I S/ MND.

On June 17, 2025, the City requested formal acknowledgement by YSMN that consultation has concluded.

On June 30, 2025, YSMN confirmed that consultation is formally concluded. The City and YSMN, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, have concluded consultation.

Documentation of the AB 52 consultation process is included in Appendix B.

AB 52 Consultation 3- 1 June 2025
2023- 095. 03
43 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
AB 52 Consultation 3- 2 June mb
2023- 095. 03
44 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 4. 0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
No comment letters were received during the public and agency review period. As a result of AB 52 consultation process, clarifications have been made to the Draft IS/ MND text as described in Section 5. 0 of this Final IS/ MND.

Comments and Responses 4. 1
June n2b
2023- 095. 03
45 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Comments and Responses 4- 2
June zuzo
2023- 095. 03
46 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 5. 0 CLARIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT INITIAL

STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

5. 1 Introduction
As a result of comments received on the Proposed Project, clarifications have been made to the Draft IS/ MND text, which include:

1. Minor changes to the Project Characteristics.

2. Minor changes to MM- CUL- 2 to clarify the scope of the Mitigation Measure.

3. Minor changes to MM- CUL- 4 to clarify the scope of the Mitigation Measure.

Changes in text are identified by str+keewt where text is removed and by underline where text is added.

5. 2 Clarifications
As a result of AB 52 consultation process and TTM updates, clarifications have been made to the Draft IS/ MND text. Changes in text are identified by strikeout where text is removed and by underline where text is added. The revisions are provided below.

5. 2. 1 Project Characteristics
The Project would construct 113 detached single- family homes at a density of 9.42 dwelling units per acre du/ ac). The Project would have three distinct floor plans ranging from 1, 987 - 2, 365 square feet ( sf) with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles. Each lot would include private rear yard space. The Project would include a total of 293 parking spaces, comprised of 226 garage spaces and an additional 67 uncovered guest spaces. The Project proposes approximately 4, 213 linear feet of roadway improvements including six private streets and three alleys. The Project would also provide two primary open space areas, one on each side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000- sf.

The Project includes the following entitlement applications: Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 ( TTM 23- 002 24- 003), General Plan Amendment (GPA 24- 002), Zone Change (ZC 24- 002), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 24- 006), and Design Review Application ( DRA 24- 009).

The property is currently vacant and zoned R- 1 ( 10, 000 Single Family Residential) with a General Plan Land Use designation of LID ( Low Density, 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac). The Proposed Project would require a zone change and general plan amendment to PD ( Planned Development).

The Project proposes development of 113 detached single- family homes ( 9.42 du/ ac) with private rear yard space. Lot sizes will range from 2-,889 1, 920 to 5, 186- sf. There will be three distinct floor plans with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles. The area of each floor plan is provided below in Table 2- 2 through Table 2- 4, with the total number of units proposed as part of the Project presented in Table 2- 5.

Clarifications to the Draft IS/ MND 5- 1
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
47 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
Additional Project improvements include 6- foot- high walls along Greenspot Road at Lots 403 104 through a-9-9 110 and Lot 8, two flood control basins, a new storm drain connection underneath Greenspot Road, an improved concrete v- ditch, retaining walls, a 20- foot utility easement, and associated utility connections.

5. 2. 2 Mitigation Measures
CUL- 2: Contractor Awareness Training. The Lead Agency shall ensure that a Contractor Awareness Training Program is delivered to train equipment operators about cultural resources. The program shall be designed to inform construction personnel about: federal and state regulations pertaining to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources; the subsurface indicators of resources that shall require a work stoppage; procedures for notifying the lead agency of any occurrences; Project - specific requirements and mitigation measures; and enforcement of penalties and repercussions for non- compliance with the program.

The training shall be prepared by a qualified professional archaeologist and may be provided either through a brochure, video, or in -person tailgate meeting. Tribal representatives from the Consulting Tribes such as Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department ( YSMN also known as San Manuel Band of Mission Indians) will be allowed to attend and/ or participate in the Contractor Awareness Training should they elect to and will be cciven ten days' notice prior to the training. The training shall be provided to all construction supervisors, forepersons, and operators of ground -disturbing equipment. All personnel shall be required to sign a training roster. The construction manager is responsible for ensuring that all required personnel receive the training. The Construction Manager shall provide a copy of the signed training roster to the lead agency as proof of compliance.

CUL- 4: Post Review Discovery. There always remains the potential for ground - disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources. Both CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA require the lead agency to address any unanticipated cultural resource discoveries during Project construction as described below. Therefere, ECORP FecemFAeRds the f llew,rn If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100- foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior' s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology, shall evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no -work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find:

If the professional archaeologist in consultation with the Tribal monitor/ representative for YSMN determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required.

Clarifications to the Draft IS/ MND 5- 2
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
48 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
If the professional archaeologist in consultation with the Tribal monitor/ representative for YSMN determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the lead agencies. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined by CEQA or a historic property under Section 106 NHPA, if applicable. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA or a Historic Property under Section 106; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

If the find represents a Native American or potentially Native American resource that does not include human remains, then the agencies shall consult with the Consulting tTribes on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 21074 of the CEQA Guidelines. Preservation in place is the preferred treatment, if feasible. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance ( AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner ( per § 7050. 5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050. 5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097. 98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant ( MLD) for the Project (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097. 94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located ( AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

Clarifications to the Draft IS/ MND 5- 3
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
49 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
June Clarifications to the Draft IS/ MND 5. 4 2023- 095. 5 03 50 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 6. 0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN

6. 1 Introduction
In accordance with CEQA, an IS/ MND that identified adverse impacts related to the construction activity for the Residences at Alta Vista was prepared. The MND identified mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate these impacts to below the level of significance.

Section 21081. 6 of the Public Resources Code and Sections 15091( d) and 15097 of the State CEQA Guidelines require public agencies to adopt a reporting and monitoring plan for changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ( MMRP) is required for the Proposed Project because the IS/ MND identified potentially significant adverse impacts related to construction activity, and mitigation measures have been identified to mitigate these impacts. Adoption of the MMRP will occur along with approval of the Proposed Project.

6. 2 Purpose of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan This MMRP has been prepared to ensure that all required mitigation measures are implemented and completed according to schedule and maintained in a satisfactory manner during the construction and operation of the Proposed Project, as required. The MMRP may be modified by the City during project implementation, as necessary, in response to changing conditions or other project refinements. Table 6- 1 has been prepared to assist the responsible parties in implementing the MMRP. This table identifies the category of significant environmental impact( s), individual mitigation measures, monitoring and mitigation timing, responsible person/ agency for implementing the measure, monitoring and reporting procedure, and notation space to confirm implementation of the mitigation measures. The numbering of the mitigation measures follows the numbering sequence in the IS/ MND.

6. 3 Roles and Responsibilities
The City of Highland, as Lead Agency, is responsible for oversight of compliance of the mitigation measures in the MMRP.

6. 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
The column categories identified in the MMRP table (Table 6- 1) are described below.

Mitigation Measure — This column lists the mitigation measures by number.

Monitoring Activity/ Timing/ Frequency/ Schedule — This column lists the activity to be monitored for each mitigation measure, the timing of each activity, and the frequency/ schedule of monitoring for each activity.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 6. 1
June 2025
2023- 095. 03
51 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
Implementation Responsibility/ Verification — This column identifies the entity responsible for complying with the requirements of the mitigation measure and provides space for verification initials and date.

Responsibility for Oversight of Compliance/ Verification — This column provides the agency responsible for oversight of the mitigation implementation, and is to be dated and initialed by the agency representative based on the documentation provided by the construction contractor or through personal verification by agency staff.

Outside Agency Coordination — this column lists any agencies with which the City may coordinate for implementation of the mitigation measure.

Comments — this column provides space for written comments, if necessary.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 6- 2
June Mb
2023- 095. 03
52 k E
7u 0E
7 r
e
M
2 y
e
0 o«
o
z
c
y
4 5
2 z
0 v
2v
2 F
0 o
c
w
oIM
3 \
o
v
o
E
0 5Eco
k
E
e
4-
1 a
k
7 c
s
b
2 2
a
2 a
w
G /
c /
t
0&
c°
g
s—
5(/
o
g
3:
2 15
c
m
g
n
E
7 2
o
0 a
o
0 x
o
w
3 M
E
0 7
W
0)
CL
2 t
2/
2 u
2 2
w
m/
y
g/
f\
@
y
s
4 u
CL
m
7 M
0 W
0 y
c
8 $
d
2 L \
V,
M
V
ME
53 k ZZ
Q 0 E k
o «
Q 0o
2 $
2 v
JC
o >
@c
i
A
E
2 >
c
cm
o
E
2 c »
cr
2 E
k

6. Q
0 Ln
co
2 2
w
k
0 f
e
2&
m
zw=
v\
y
7 m
m\
5 z
c
5 e
2 e
s
e
e
s
2 a
o
e
2 g
2 O/
s
e
x\
f\
5±
J
y}©®
E
7/
m.
0 c
3 f
TO
t
G
g
8 0-
b
5 e
c
y
E
e'
0 a=
0 0
t
o
2 s
e
c
s
3 m
2 2/
2 3
R
E\~
2=
2 G///
j
m\
e=
e
z
0 C: 3
c
e
C
G
a®
6 v
E\:
0 Ln
ri
F
e
c
5 m
m
cl
CO
o
0 Q
Z3
2 5
u
2=
e
n
e
e«
z
g
z
54 0
kca2J 2k 2
k §
J
v u 0 Ek
I2
c@
2 2
2 o«
0 z0
0 4
2 e
80 v
v0
r
L
E
o
d
2 U
o
k
k
E
w
E
a
ru 3
5 k
E
0 3
5 p
c
e
5 e
k
7 fu
LA
o
0 2
U
3 S
r
E
s
g \
0 @:
2 u\°~
2 7
0 9
6 2%±)»
Ln
u
3 t
a
e
m
e
c
y
0 E
g
S
23 cu
g
a
7 c
z
c »
c
d
y
2 Eo
6 E o
E
5 g
m.
0 s}
3=
w
e
m
u/
Ln
g
e
2 uƒ
x[
U
U
2®
e/
0-
4 u '\
2 2
6 u\
3 0
u
a9
0 0
2=
@
3 o
c±
m S
E&
2 3// m
4 u\
3 mm
5 e
5 a
4 0
2i k I 0
55 ME
u 0 Ek
q
k
k
o «
u 0b
k
J \ k22 r $
Om D
E
a % 7
E
2 >
E §
2 7
y
0 J /
c
7 2
a
LL.
g
0 0
7 0-
w
@
2 0
0 f
y
2 w
4 c
c
e
t
5 2
3 @
e
2 t
9 E
oy
7 2
0 2
w
t
g
e
0 n
E
m
5 c
2 f
LA/
2 50
0 2
0 e
0 5
a
y
0 m\&\
e\
s
7\
x=
3%\=
a
0=
S@
k
2 x
3 e
6 9
c
z
E
a
g
2 E
y
E
6 2
2 g
f
5 5
S
x
z
0)
7 0)
5 u
0 0
E
0 0
5 56
Q) m a R a0
m
d Z
Q
R
tyi6
c
m
ca:
2 U) N
c La a 7
u 0 EE dVf i+ C
O c
v
r
d
o
7 U
o
a
Q
0 Y
uQ
3 0
c
a
r
r
v
O
s
c
a
m °
s
C •
L
2 o >
0,
uQ
a
u
S - E
o o
C
r+
r+
fA
O
O
Ed
aQ' rO
G1
d >
y
m rn
E
oc
o

4. 1
a L
E
Q
ru
C1
v
0 o
ro
p
C)
raLo
C
O
4!
r
y
y
L
O
p
L.

L.
m
c
p
C
Q
t
n
ro
V_
C
7 O
C
Ol
i
i
y+
LA.

V
E
rO
L
m
Y
V
ra
i
O7
a
a
a) a
r
m>
V
V)`°
o, v
0 Q
d
C O
d
0 6
a)
Q)
rn
N
n
rp
N
0 E
0 E
v
ro
w
v
c
Ni
a)
a6
O
a)
c
J v
00 S'
E
c
m
6 p
D
p
N
L
o
O
C
O
V
N
V)
O
O
O
OC
O
ro
C
u
0 O
C
v
O
v
U
0 O
pro
p
v
V
r"
o
a
a)
O
3 O
U
oU
a)
a
a
L
w
2 f0
r
N
a-'
N
a) -
CC
V
C
C
a
0 a
0)
a..+
O
Q
6 a)
Ol
G1
C+ in
L
roa
m
pC
i
a)
ro
C
v
u
V
a)
V
a)
c
c
0 V Q
C
Q)
ro
V
E
0)
0 C
V)
rn
Q)
i
co
7 i
C
C
L
O
O
U
NQ
i
O
v
V
V
u
r
p
Op
n
0—
N
N
O
d L
ro U
j
Q °
0 0
a)
Q
r
o
0 EN
a)
tt
v
6 r6
a)
OL
rn ra
O
N
O
rn
O
N +
vi a)
U
rn
rna)
a)
rn
C
u
N
C
U
O
rnv
M
N
O
O
O
Z3
d
O
Q .
0 Q
v
00 p
3 p
CO
00 O
Q
in
ra
Q
Q
V)
Q
r6
V
a
U
m
L,
LO
rh
N
O
O
L6
rV
61 0
O
C
N
ONCh
0) m 0 0 O O1 C cu On
a) 0) a. m
57 E
u 0EE
M
w
o «
Q 00
0 r $
k
m
S
J \
2 V
E §
E
E
r
2 E
3 w\_»
a
k
g
E
z
0 t
y
D
a)
g «
cr _
0 3
g
u
2 3
2 5
k
2 3
3 D
e
u
0%
e\
@
e
0 2
w
0 g
g
2 e
3 0
D
Ln
E
0 7
0 0
S
J
3 E
e
c
u\
3\
0 2
e
c> y
0 e
La
0 0
I
t
0 S&
2i
58 ca k ZC S
c
c
0 I 2 2 i
e
6 3
In
o
ro
t
a
3 c
u
0 0
J
c
5 a
o n
0 J \
3 c \
O
2 0
CZ.
2 e
2 a
t
3 y
C
e
y
e
n
4 2
v
G
E
g
3 2
LA
@
a)
S
g
o
y
e
m
g\ w
b«
2\\
9 y
6 o
5 2
o
7/
6 s_%®_
g
0 2
s°
u
2 7
g
S
G
e
3 w
4 a
c
7°%
2 7_
4 m/
@
g
@
w
cg
E
2 o
2 k
J
co
3 Y
4 g
4 4
a
2 j2
7 E
E
o
e<
5 m&
e
2=[
o
0 a
m
s
c
lE
59 2 E
y
5 Fa
94 3
6 e
g
G
t
m
5 E
m
5f
0 w
g
u
4°
5 J
o
y
w
6 s
S
G
b
3 y
O
m
3 2
e
e
k
f
w
2 c

0.\
f
Q
ut
7 g
g
0 e
6 7
s
6 g.
e
k
n
Ln
7 J
6 E
2 5
4 5
A
2 3
2 5
5 60
k 0
Co
E\
cc
cm
a f
k
v
m
41 E
I
J
u 0
v
0 C
t
ce
ro
0 k
IA
w
0 M
E
a
3 cn
IM
E
v ±
c
s
crk
5 k
w
k
e \
m
c (. \
4 a
cm_
0 g
f / \ $
g \ %
2 $
o
o
E
T
E:
2 [ / ƒ
0- ®
a)
a)\
S /
5 o
o/
0 FoU
N \
A \ / ./
n
k \ \ \
o / \
7 .[
m
E
7 0-
3\
g
U
y
2 0
@
y
0ƒ
u
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 z
0 D
0 e
0 s
7 2
E
a)\
7 0
k
o
0 0w
0 »
0 _
r
n
t =
0 Z
2 \
F /
0)
0 \
E
E \ \
7 +
0 Ln \
2 E
2 .

IA
0 c
u
E
c
3 \
Co
L
e>
2 0
5 z
75 61
CD 7 q
k
0)
cc
k
2L)
2 71,
E

4. u 0E
o «
k
u0 o
o
0 c
45 '
r.

EE §
0 E
E
c
33®
M
E
Eƒ
j
3 0
0 f
2 0
E\
E
7 t
o
0 4
L.
z
s
c
m
LJ6
O
e
c
ru
0 z
V)
F
ro
o
6 0
k
a
y
E
E
2 s
2 0
J
n
d
0 0
2 2
c
0 c
2 @
2 e
a
a
e
0 G
m®_/
E/
E
Cl.
s
5$_
3§
5 0
0)
2 e
c=
z
0 2
3 5\_»\=
3 0
J
z
c
c\
k§\
y
e
@
E
S
i
j
c( 2
5 y
2'
E
0 k'
0 0
5 7
w=
s
7 7
0 7=
6 0
t
e
0 @
0°
o5
x
e
oo\
c$
e/
s
m n
ro y
c
ee
2 3/
o»/
n'
t\
c»
g
c\
3 y
6 E
4a
m
x'
2 c
8 E
e=
g
5g
CA)
7 T o
c
g
wƒ°
a
2 7
ec
e
e
2 2
e
e=
4 e a
m/[\
f
J
5 e»\
A
m
62 k ZFI
u 0 EE
2 k
o « 70a
Q 0o
2 z
E
k
E
ECD E
c
c . c «
c _
2 d
I
IA
a
o
5 a)
5 7
c)
o
z==
2@
2 EG
0 c
g%
2 f
2 5
g
@
x
s
2 a
z
a
E
2 3
5 3
a
a
a
E
n
e
a
a
2 om\
mo[&
3\
2 3(
e=.
7 7
u
02 2
s
E\_
m
t
s
y
0 @
o
w
S
j
e
x
c
e
e
g
E
y
2 t
S
o
j
c
t
Ln
p
e
5®
e=
o
ru
o
E
E
3 0
e
ou
s
y
e
w7
m
o
u 0
s a
E E
y
c
a
o
E
e
E
ae
w
2 z
o
z
c
2 E=
m
2i I
k
63 r_ J 0
u O E E c h
0c
N _ _
Lo
O
Q
u0
0L
O
r
V
O
m
V
Q
L
w
c
E
G! L
CL
O
u >
GC ar
c \
c
2 .-'
o
c
o
W
E ar
o
E
Ol
01 = \ c £
v
QJ
C
o
0CDc _
VH
G
y1
Li
V
C Q
y
y
V0
O
0 o
0 a,
c
rU
LAa>
ia1
i
O
i
V
i
U
0 ru
C
a)
0 i
N
U
Q)
Ln
LA
i
u
u
m
d0
y
O
p
cB
cp
p
a)
O
N
O
O
aC
O
O
E
N
in
OQj
o_ a)
v
6 n
czE
O
6 O
O
N
O
C
O
n
Q) a)
v
Ov
i
w
N
6 O
O>
u
u
a)
Q—
N
y
L
y
CZ
YQ)
m
Ln
cm
0 V1
y>
u
c
0N
L3 0
O
C
y
1--
a
N
y
U
E
L
In
i
N
O
L
y
C0
Ln
n3
mO
Ey
uVf
O
y
vm
w
a)
E
V1
t1: L
a)
v)
n3
N
c
a
a)
n3
y
r0
Lf)
Cl)
N
O
O
u7
CV
C,
a)
O
C
Ch
O
N
co N
cm d- 0
0 G 0) C o c6 LL Nd
64 2E k
0 ƒ
Ch
0 o«
o
o£
y
u
s z
fA 0
Q
3 '
w _
v
E §
E
m s
2 U (
D
v
E
ao
3 2
2 I 2
0 E
0 D
LE
0 2
a\ U.'
ou
I
u
C)
0-
5 um
o
e
t
0)/
2 z
e
2 c
o/
m
o
5 a
g
y
e
e
c
e
3 EG
c%
u)
2/\
6 c»\
6 2\£\
g(
w
m—
G
S
c
r
a
3 4
w
S
S
2 e
c
w
z
7 A
E
F
5 E
gc
c
Q
E
c
c
5 G
u
ro
o
y
u
2 E
2 S
E
w
2 g
7 e
a
o
a
4 5
a
u
y
3 0
e
9 7
g
3 z
0 7
0 o
c(\
D(
2 u
LA
5 A
m
2 &
5 2 \
y
e
n
2 E
2E
65 0 cc Q
ka) a2 2J2m n
k
u 0EEk
E
0 dE
A

04. k c
E
0CL
7 E
3 I
Im
5 0
5 2
c
0 n~=
U
c
e
z
2 @
g
c®
f
a
c
V
2 2
W
2 :
a
m &
o
3 o
e
e
E
a)
m
m
2 e
2 3 »
s \
o
3 m
5 7
E
w
c
2 e
0/
2 5
S
u
J
t
5 5
G
S
4 7
0)
i
2 2/[\
5 k
m
7/ƒ/?
5 Z/
7/
f
2 7
@
E
z
5 E
o
E
2 W
M
M
E
c
e
2 2
f
E
7 0«
20 5
3/\ LAc
5 u
u 7
U<\
G
G
c=
c6®
2 m
0\<
2E
66 E
u 0EE
5 c
t
Of o
0 0
c
cc
0 @c
k
ow
t

0. L.

E
2 G
cn
2 CD
E ƒ
2 3
2 0
g
c
v
e
2 E
E
a « &
s
E
s
E
B_
U.
w_ cr
e
2 2
f
0»
o/
0 5&
e
0_
LL
O
0 o
e /
c %
g
7 O
S
E
a
g
c
E
2 n
0 o
e/
@
3 o/
E
c
n
wz
n
e
0-
E
y
u
7 a
2 s
a
c
k
a
t
E
k
k
E
k
E
g
E
6 c
2 o
7 C:
j
a
G
c
Ira6
7 0
0 A
y
s
LA\
a
t

4. e
a
5 s_
2 c=:
2 e4
y
s
o
7 @
k
u
s
U
0 y
0g
w
e
2 g
0 2
e
5 e
a
x
u
E
5 67
ITA E
k
Q 0 Ek
o «
u 0o
0 0
C2
2 C
0 c
E
I
G
E
2 >
r- Im
i:-
U.
e
0 o
a
u
0 0
0 3
0 e
0 0
o
0 f
e
o
ya
5 s
2 0
2 a
e
E
u
e
e
e
gw
g
3 e
0 f
s
e
G E
x
e
0 a
OT
o
u/
0 o)
c
3 m
o
o
2 0
em
s
c
3 E
7—/&_/
2#{
J
u= o
a
5 k
E
0 c
a
E
c
c
0 G
@
s
y
y=
@
o5—
u
s
a'
E
e
7 3
J
g
5 3
o
m
68 LL. k
u 0 Ek
2 E
C:
7 c
2 E
k
3=
s
5 0)
t
o
7 j/
2 0@\
u
2 v
S
0 ru
m
A.
@c
0 aRz
4 E
w
v
3 Im I
4 z
I » _
5 J
2 :&
A
U.
g \
g
e
c
o
g
z
0)/
E
c
5\\\
a
U.\\
S
e
2 E
o
a
2(
2 e
s
E
k
e
p
6 0)
2 o
S
5 0
e
9 6
e
c'[
2 m
oLn
2 2
5 w
0 2
G
e &
s
5 2
E
3 E
2 c
s
R c
4 E/
s
c
5/#
0\
3 E
0 6\
0 a)/
s
E
cG
5§°
e
m
cf
E®— o
a
w
5 Eaa
E
u
2 D
E o
E
2 5
5 E
69 LL k E
u 0 Ek
c t
7 E
s
3 5
O
2o
0 0
A
2 m
7 2
t
0 g
J
e
w
u
3 0c
2 w'
v
ow 0
k
3 g
E
s
c
2 a
E
5 Q
2 S
UM
S
s\
U
e
m_
c
0 2
cn
m
c
j
@°
e\
2 5
3 m\\
5 J
w
4 10 s
k
c
0 U
0-
5 E
c
m
2 0
w
w
a
e
e
E
u=
s
@
u
2\
a/
5 0
E
n
2 2
E
0 f
c
7 a
z
o
2 A
o
2 0
e\\
t
3 5;±
c
m
0 4
c
c
3 g/
u
J
S
5 70

LL TA E
Q 0EEk
0 w
m
k
0 «
Q 0 o
0 0
7 2v
E 0
9 S
E §
E
ECA2
2c
c _
d
I
g
z
t
3o
o
a«
g
z
m
2 a
5 0
w
Y
o
0 5
2 e
g
g
j
k
7 5
o
u.
w
m
4 0.-
u
z
f
U
0 6
CD%
0 0
4 3
2 E
0 C
J
m
c
t
o
c
0 T
o
w
n
5 3
f
S
E
y
E
y
s
j
o±
5%
y
E
S
5 S
E\
e
E/
t
G
E
2E
71 Q 0
0 7
r
2 k
u o
0 0
9 3
E
E
2»
2 2
d
U.
0 J
3 2
t
w
@
2 e
10 t
E
2 2
E
k
o
o
z
g
R
D
G
E
m
3 En
z
6 k
j
J
g
2 R
t
a
E
0 E
0 m
a
Ln
7 j
u
E
k
O
2 2
7 2
E
E
D
c)/
a
5 u
m 2
t
e
Q
g
e
u
0 72
YX
u 0 E E
2 E
I
O
Q 0
0 0
2 2aW. 2v 0
CD
0c
E'
w
E
cc
E
a
E
2 > 7y12 c _ k
2 I
7 s
e
0 0
E
2 a)
Ms
e
6:
a±
n
m'
q\
0\
c
3\
e
j
0 3
0%
E±
0//
w
g
2 R'
z
2 E
e
E
0)
E
5 g
g
s
u
E G
e
e
3 4
u
0 7
2 2
n
s
c
4 g
2 5
E
5 0
9 6
E\
E
2 G=_—
6 s
c
s
5 7
J
2/°\
o0®
9 7
e@ƒ
g
s
3 e
7n
t
20 2
m
4 0
Q)
k
t
g
e
j
E
e
7 G
o
5 ru
E
e
k
k
n
f
0 m
a
J
m
ru
5 i
Q)
2 U
o
E
5 2
Cl.
u
3 2
2E
73 k Q 0EEk
o «
u 0o
2 @ c
t § E
E
E
c
c
2 k '
L
0 m
E
E
9 0[
J
2 a)
4 7
0 2
2 w
o
e\
a)#
g
6/
j
E
e=
0-
u=
3 2
2 n
coƒ
2 E
6 5
Ln
a
c
2 r
3 k
0 e\$
Ln
3 c
ro
2 E
c
7 7
E
E
0a L
0 a\°
E/
o
w
c
g>
m
s)\
0 5
u
S
c
3 E
a
E CL E
74 u
0 E
Ek
0 um
3cioa0c
Q22
A
cn
X
cm
CL
2 t
Im
I
0 E
co41 J2 E2
O
E — u am
E § dng
c/. c
w> L az ti
22 b / \ GE6u
2 : za25
I7SkE
at
a0
n@
Ln
w0n2 k
Ero a LA 2t
o4e cLA 3
ko 0
Ln djJ2
m=
m) e7u01
m§%/
2ke
G®
u/ Eo
E6
e.\
s/ E
2 2e
0 k2e
5I
k
75 k
u 0EEk
0 v
m
2 E
2 O §
u
0 v
0 m
o
0 >
v 0c
E §
b
E
1w
E
Ch
C * E ƒ
22 2 :
m
F
LL
5 0
0 s0
E
E
g§®
gLn
S
5 E
2 6
a/
6 3
3 y
c
LA
0 @
g
R°
E
g
2 e
a
@
0 E
E
u
4 e
3©
5 2
3 E
m»
2 z=\
2 5
u
G
2 9
2 7
s
0 0
g
R
7 S
e
E
S
g
4[
9 j
cc
o
E
E
76 ZPI
70EE 0

22. o « k
u 0 o
0 0
La
W
o
o
2 c
w
2 »
7 w
cc
E
E
I
CL
2 3
D
e
Ch
CD
c
0 w
w
c
5 w
e
p
g
o
E/
P E
o
E
o
n
E
0 a
0 Ln
0 3
o
e
c
3 G
3 e
g
s
g
a
G
3\_®
5 0\
a
E
7 3
t
9/
2 g
K
x
t
a
t
m
3 g
f
5 E \
0 5
u
E

5./
I
J
z
0 4
E
2 0
2 c
o\
u
m
2 e
2 g
c/<
S<\
0 e
J?
z
g
y
y=
e\\
4 2
t
o
z
E
77 0
RLL.
c
u OE G1 C VI
O
Y
E
c
Y
U
E
O
Q
O
Ln
o
v
v
u
i
o
z
of
o
Lo
a0+
O
s
c=
o
a
01 t
L
O
0 a
CO >
0 u
a,
C C \
1 6
A Ol
w &
A
V
cc
O
d
A
0 N
RO
V,
a
3 L
C
Q
Vi o
v
RR
V•
C \
Y
0 O
11 y ,
C
U
0 O
s
C
Q
Y
L
YU
O>
i {
A
io
C
a
p
O
v
y
LA.
a+
p
N
d
E
s..
a
O
Q
Q
H
H
v
in
a
v
C
O
o)
ro
O
vN
Y co
C
O
c
LNLn
C O
c
al
Q
a'
a'
Q
D
m
Gi
L
LJJ
41 V
N
O
7 T0rn
Ep
z Ln
O'
N
C
Xr6
ro Ol
V
ut
vvi
V
7 V z
N X
ra
al f6
N
N
Nv'
E
N
V
OO
N
Q
D V
O i
C
N
GJ
rY—n
L
N
O
Y
ro
Ol
C
O
C
L
V,
6 C
C
i
Q
O
fB
O
O
N
Y
W
V
c
al
O
M
ro
N
Y
Y
Q O
o
O
d
O
O+
ro
p
Q)
O
Y
N
L
O

1. Y
U
Y
Qi
O
L
Vl
C
Vj
t
O
O
r
L O.

L.
0 V
p
0 3Y
p
O
p
6 ro
V
3 O
E
Q
V
Y
O
Q
r
i
c
Q
U
0 N
O
V
N
N
O
O
O
fp
Q
O
N
O
VO
V
pC
m
N
N
ro
a
li
Y
C
U')
Cl)
N
O
O
N
of
O
O
C "
Z3
N N
2E
78 z 7 M 2
2Jn
k § kk cc 2 2
u0 Ek
E
e
g
o « §
2 7
k
0k§
2 O
c
2 E
k
k
7 0
IA
E
2 O
E § ƒ
2 0
c 0-
CT
0 4.
7 5
2 t
4 0
g
3 c
7 w
e
s
3 3
0 @
u
a
4 c
t
G
3/%
g
U
0%
E o¥\/
u\
3 E[\\
3 5
g
@
G
2 2
2\
e
c
E
7\
a=
02 2
u§
E{
0 w
E
w
5 E
In»
c
e
c
o
0 w
5 3
5 m
I
E
0 p a
2 E
0Ln
e
2 5-
e
4 2
u
2 0
c
o 0
6 3
c
2 o
y
c/
6\
y(
o
E@/
E
y
m
2\»
s
ep
2 0e.
s
o
o
c. e
E
t
k
Ln
5 5/\
2 E
O
s
o
T
u
w
CL
m
e
w
E
79 c
J O
V O EGCd N
O
D
c
Q
V
10 C
C
E
N
ice+
GJ
c0
i
Ol
o
a
o
o
V
V
r)
O
O \
i+
O
0 U.

E
L
CL
O
c
i >
a
Gc7 f6
C
FV
L
O
O
d
4A
Ln Eru H
C
Ln
V
N
C
V
L
c
3 f6
cp
d
c
L
6 Y p
ra
N
a"
L
V
N
c
cT
O
L
yu
E
C_
i6
C
p
u
i
Vf
cr
Q
a
E
H
a)
3 Ln
La
u
U.

Q
CD
t6
O
C
C
V
Cfl a,
u
Q
O
tL0
O
c N
V
c
Ln
N
i
p
u
cQn
OUO
N
C
W
w
u
u
N
L
O
Oc
O
O
a
a
Q
0 to
O
p
p
N
cp
C
Ln
p
N
i
Ln
C
O
N
O
N
to
LO
Q
N
N
N
Q
co
N
n
O
L
N
p
u
V
N
Q—
Q
z
O
O~
v
Fra
10 N
a)
N
7 O
co
N
z
c
Ln
O
V)
O
N
u=
2N
O
3 y
N
V
p
0 N
C
L
o
pl 0
C
LL'
0-
O
C
is
L O
UV
C
p
f6
BM
u
oL
N
F
N
L
w
N
rpo
u
L
p
c6
L
u
n.`
L
CO
L
z
V
7 N
L
L N
c
N
O
j
c C51
7 u
v
7 t
N
L
Q
p
w
Q
fQ
C
41 L
n
V
0_
0 u+
L
O
n
m
LO
Cl)
N
O
O
Ln
N
O
N
O
c
Ch NON
0 o c 6 0Q d co 0
00 cuw 0
80 k E
u 0EEk
M
k
o «
Q o
0 0
m
2 %§
L.
d
Z%
E
7 V
E §
E
E
Im
0 ( c
d
2 7
I
e
4 Q s\
e
LE
g
3 b
9 ru
k
c
m
o
u
7 Id
0 2
w
g
z
S
a
e
e
e
t
3 e
9 2
6 3
E
w
m
5 g
m
n
m
e
y
co
a
g
k
o)
E
m
3 E
s
n
a e
3c
0 E
3 g
y
f
E
ee
0 o
z o
f
E
a
W
0 E
3 e
5 3
4 c
3 E
2 e
u
E
E
2i
81 k E
u 0 E
2 &
I
O
u 0
0 w
2 %
C
L.
2 E E § =
J >
C
tA
d
U.
v
y
c
@
k
2 3
t
0 s
a
m
n
e
g
e
41 f
I
u
2 2
2 0
E
m
7 u®
o
2 0
s 0
3 5 m
m
5g
5 m\
06 e
4 c
f
u
c
LN
n
2 y
e
c
E
0 G
3 2
0-
5 i
G°
f
2 2
2»
5 g%_°
z
5 j
u
3 E
82 LL k 0
w
m
2 E
I
o
u 0
g
E
3 s
e
E
@
0 2 / ƒ
J ƒ
Lm
0 7
7 k
J
@A
0 k
k §
V)
O
c
3 0
c
k /
k
0 a
7 E
70-
ewe>
O «
2 0
I
v .
0 k
g
6 o /
2 ±
0 g \
2 0
e
c
E
0/
P
2 c
5¥
e
4\
2 7
m
c
t
e
0 '
9 a)\ > /
U \
o .
2 7 \ \ \ %
0 t %
s
U \ )
s
o/
E°\
c
3 e®
m
s
2 U -
0 {
I
S '
0'
e
0 u
0=
e
s
c
z
z
E
@ ®
ru
k /
E
w / \ /
2 t
0\
2/±
2\%
f\/\
t
5 90
4_
2 u
0 0)
E°
o
o ±
a
z
m
x
G
e
o
z /
5 2
7 \ £ & \
75 83
a
Z m m0 a 0
w
N
Q
A
R
w
0 N
a
C
C
a
T
w
0 C f6 l 0
A C
i+ V OEEd
O C
V
a
m
N
C
C
O'
a
u Oo
OL
O \
O
A s =
C.
v:

O >
E
Ly
O >
u°
OC a+
C
O
c
C .
d
V
E
It
o
w
C.

IE
01 C
E
V
p
y -
p
C
o
3 u
C
CC
VN
N i
cr
C
LL
C:

N
C
a"
0 U.

Q
G Cr f0r O C LC7V1R aL
2i
co LCJ O
O O
M
ONN
84 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista
SECTION 7. 0 LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A — Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix B — Summary of AB 52 Consultation
List of Appendices 7- 1 ,
rune 2u25
2023- 095. 03
85 Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Residences at Alta Vista

APPENDIX A
Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration
86 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the
East Highland Ranch
Residences at Alta Vista ( TTM 20721)
Highland, California
Lead Agency:

City of Highland
27215 Base Line
Highland, CA 92346
Prepared for:

Diversified Pacific Communities
10621 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Prepared by:

ECORP Consulting, Inc.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
215 North 5th Street
Redlands, CA 92374
April 2025
87 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
88 Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration

DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Lead Agency:

Project Proponent:

City of Highland
27215 Base Line
Highland, CA 92346
Diversified Pacific
10621 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Project Location: The Residences at Alta Vista ( Project, Proposed Project) Project Site is located north of Greenspot Road, South of Santa Ana Canyon Road, and on either side of Alta Vista in the City of Highland. The approximately 12- acre irregularly shaped Project Site includes Assessor Parcel Numbers APNs) 1210- 371- 16 and 1210- 371- 14 ( Figures 1 and 2).

Project Description: The Project would construct 113 detached single- family homes at a density of 9.42 dwelling units per acre ( du/ ac). The Project would have three distinct floor plans ranging from 1, 987 - 2, 365 square feet with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles. Each lot would include private rear yard space. The Project would include a total of 293 parking spaces, comprised of 226 garage spaces and an additional 67 uncovered guest spaces. The Project proposes approximately 4, 213 linear feet of roadway improvements including six private streets and three alleys. The Project would also provide two primary open space areas, one on each side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000 square feet.

The proposal includes the following entitlement applications: Tentative Tract Map No. 20721 ( TTM 23- 002), General Plan Amendment (GPA 24- 002), Zone Change ( ZC 24- 002), Conditional Use Permit ( CUP 24- 006), and Design Review Application ( DRA 24- 009).

Public Review Period: April 28, 2025 to May 28, 2025
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 1 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
89 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects:

Biological Resources
11310- 1: Pre -construction Special - Status Plant Surveys. Prior to Project implementation a protocol -level pre -construction plant survey shall be conducted for the 16 special -status plant species that have varying levels of potential to occur on the Project Site, including Parry' s spineflower, slender - horned spineflower, Santa Ana River woollystar, California satintail, salt spring checkerbloom, Nevin' s Barberry, and thread -leaved brodiaea. The protocol -level survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of year when plants will both be evident and identifiable ( usually, during flowering or fruiting), the season or the year prior to the start of ground - breaking Project activities. The survey should be conducted by a qualified botanist or biologist experienced with surveying for and identifying these flora. The surveys should be conducted in consideration of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS) Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plants ( USFWS 1996), General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines ( Cypher 2002), CDFW' s Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities ( CDFW 2018), and the California Native Plant Society' s ( CNPS) Botanical Survey Guidelines ( CNPS 2001). If no federally or state -listed or California Rare Plant Rank ( CRPR) List 1 or 2 plant species are identified during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin, and no further action is necessary.

If CRPR List 1 or 2 plant species or any federally or state -listed plant species are observed on the Project Site during the survey, then a qualified botanist or biologist shall establish a non - disturbance buffer around the location( s) of the individuals or population. The size of the non -disturbance buffer shall be determined by the qualified botanist or biologist based on location of special -status species and expected construction activities. If one or more CRPR List 1 or 2 plant species or any state or federally listed plant species are found on the Project Site and avoidance of the location( s) is not feasible during Project construction, then the qualified biologist and the Project Proponent shall coordinate with CDFW and/ or USFWS to determine if additional mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation measures could include, but are not limited to, additional biological monitoring, seasonal work avoidance, seed collection, or transplanting.

BIO- 2: Biological Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall be present to monitor all initial ground - disturbing and vegetation -clearing activities conducted for the Project. During each monitoring day, the biological monitor shall perform clearance survey " sweeps" at the start of each workday that vegetation clearing takes place to minimize impacts on special - status species with potential to occur. The monitor will be responsible for ensuring that impacts to special -status species, nesting birds, and active nests will be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Biological monitoring shall take place until the Project Site has been completely cleared of any vegetation. If an active nest is identified, the biological monitor shall establish ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
90 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration an appropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking.

Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest is deemed no longer active by the biologist. If special - status wildlife species are detected during biological monitoring activities, then consultation with the USFWS and/ or CDFW shall be conducted, and a mitigation plan shall be developed to avoid and offset impacts to these species. Mitigation measures may consist of work restrictions and/ or additional biological monitoring activities after ground -disturbing activities are complete.

BIO- 3: Pre -construction Crotch Bumble Bee Survey. If the Crotch bumble bee is no longer a Candidate or formally Listed species under the California Endangered Species Act at the time ground - disturbing activities occur, then no additional protection measures are proposed for the species.

If the Crotch bumble bee is legally protected under the California Endangered Species Act as a Candidate or Listed species at the time ground -disturbing activities are scheduled to occur, it is recommended pre -construction surveys be conducted in accordance with the established survey protocol provided by CDFW. If no such protocol is available and ground - disturbing activities are scheduled to occur during the Crotch bumble bee flight season February 16 through October 31), then it is recommended a minimum of two Crotch bumble bee pre- construction surveys are conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in identifying the species prior to ground disturbing activities ( including vegetation and tree removal). The surveys shall be conducted no more than 14 days and three ( 3) days prior to ground- disturbing activities and vegetation clearing activities that are to occur during the flight season.

Should vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities be scheduled to begin during the overwintering season ( November 1 to February 15), when Crotch bumble bee are not detectable aboveground, then four (4) focused surveys shall be conducted at least three ( 3) weeks apart during the peak flight season ( late March through August) immediately prior to start of construction.

If Crotch bumble bee is determined to occur within the Project Site at any time, coordination with CDFW shall be required prior to the initiation of Project activities.

BIO- 4: Pre -construction Burrowing Owl Surveys. Pre -construction surveys for burrowing owls shall be conducted. Prior to ground disturbing activities, a qualified wildlife biologist ( i. e., a wildlife biologist with previous burrowing owl survey experience) shall conduct pre - construction surveys of the Project Site, plus a 500- foot buffer (where access is permissible and suitable habitat is present), to locate active breeding or wintering burrowing owls and burrowing owl burrows between 30 and 14 days prior to construction. The survey methodology shall be consistent with the methods outlined in the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation ( California Department of Fish and Game 2012). Additionally, a qualified biologist shall conduct a second pre -construction survey of the Project Site plus an approximately 500- foot buffer no more than 24 hours prior to the start of ground - disturbing ECORP Consulting, Inc. 3 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
91 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration activities associated with construction to identify any additional burrowing owls or burrows necessitating avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures.

If no burrowing owls or active burrowing owl burrows ( e. g., with sign present) are observed during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin, and no further action is necessary.

If burrowing owl( s) or suitable burrowing owl burrows with sign ( e.g., whitewash, pellets, feathers, prey remains) are identified on the Project Site during the surveys, these features must be completely avoided, and the qualified biologist and Project proponent shall coordinate with CDFW prior to preparing a Burrowing Owl Plan to determine the most appropriate avoidance measures. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall describe proposed avoidance, minimization, and monitoring actions. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall include the number and location of occupied burrow sites, acres of burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted, details of site monitoring, and details on proposed buffers and other avoidance measures if avoidance is proposed. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow cannot be avoided, the Burrowing Owl Plan shall also describe relocation actions that will be implemented. Proposed implementation of burrow exclusion and closure should only be considered as a last resort, after all other options have been evaluated as exclusion is not in itself an avoidance, minimization, or mitigation method and has the possibility to result in take. If impacts to occupied burrows cannot be avoided, information shall be provided regarding adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls along with proposed relocation actions. The Permittee shall implement the Burrowing Owl Plan following CDFW review and approval.

If ground -disturbing activities occur but the Project Site is left undisturbed for more than 30 days, a pre -construction survey for burrowing owl shall be conducted as described above. If a burrowing owl is found, the same coordination described above shall be necessary.

B10- 5: Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. To lessen impacts to nesting birds and raptors, it is recommended that vegetation and tree removal be conducted between September 1 and January 31, outside of the typical nesting period for birds protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. If vegetation or tree removal, or initial ground disturbing Project activities are planned to occur during the nesting season ( typically February through August), then a pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be performed no more than three days prior to the start of construction to determine whether the site is being used for nesting. This will avoid violations of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503. 5, and 3513. The pre -construction nesting bird survey shall include the Project impact area and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to cause nest failure. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in: identifying local and migratory bird species of special concern; conducting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology; nesting surveying techniques, recognizing breeding and nesting behaviors, locating nests and breeding territories, and identifying nesting stages and ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
92 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration nest success; determining/ establishing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures; and monitoring the efficacy of implemented avoidance and minimization measures..

The pre -construction survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day, during appropriate weather conditions, no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of Project activities. The surveys shall encompass all suitable areas including trees, shrubs, bare ground, burrows, cavities, and structures. Survey duration shall take into consideration the size of the Project Site; density, and complexity of the habitat; number of survey participants; survey techniques employed; and shall be sufficient to ensure the data collected is complete and accurate.

If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin. If active nests are found, they shall be flagged and a qualified biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nest ( generally a minimum of 200 feet up to 500 feet for raptors and a minimum of 50 feet up to 300 feet for passerine species), with specific buffer widths to be determined by a qualified biologist. The buffer around the nest shall be delineated and flagged, and no construction activity shall occur within the buffer area until a qualified biologist determines nesting species have fledged and the nest is no longer active, or the nest has failed. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of Project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such Project activities ( e. g., increase in number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy of the buffer. If the qualified biologist determines that such Project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the qualified biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within these buffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished ( i. e., the juveniles are surviving independent from the nest) or failed.

The qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found.
113I0- 6: Pre -construction San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Survey. Within two years prior to the start of Project activities, a biologist in possession of a Federal 10( a)( 1)( A) Recovery Permit and CDFW Scientific Collecting Permit and Memorandum of Understanding shall perform SBKR trapping surveys in accordance with the protocols outlined by USFWS and in the biologist' s permit. The survey shall consist of five consecutive nights of trapping, when the animal is active above ground and when the overnight temperatures are 50 degrees Fahrenheit or higher, while avoiding periods of overnight precipitation. The traps shall be spaced approximately 10 meters apart and set in habitats most likely to yield SBKR, to confirm presence/ absence of the species.

If San Bernardino kangaroo rat is found on the Project Site and avoidance of the location( s) is not feasible then coordination with CDFW and USFWS shall occur prior to the initiation of Project activities.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 5 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
93 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Cultural Resources
CUL- 1: Monitoring and Treatment Plan. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is reflective of the project mitigation (" Cultural Resources" and " Tribal Cultural Resources") shall be completed by the archaeologist and submitted to the Lead Agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department (YSMN, also known as San Manuel Band of Mission Indians). Once all parties review and approve the plan, it shall be adopted by the Lead Agency — the plan must be adopted prior to permitting for the project. Any and all findings will be subject to the protocol detailed within the Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

CUL- 2: Contractor Awareness Training. The Lead Agency shall ensure that a Contractor Awareness Training Program is delivered to train equipment operators about cultural resources. The program shall be designed to inform construction personnel about: federal and state regulations pertaining to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources; the subsurface indicators of resources that shall require a work stoppage; procedures for notifying the lead agency of any occurrences; Project -specific requirements and mitigation measures; and enforcement of penalties and repercussions for non- compliance with the program.

The training shall be prepared by a qualified professional archaeologist and may be provided either through a brochure, video, or in -person tailgate meeting. The training shall be provided to all construction supervisors, forepersons, and operators of ground - disturbing equipment. All personnel shall be required to sign a training roster. The construction manager is responsible for ensuring that all required personnel receive the training. The Construction Manager shall provide a copy of the signed training roster to the lead agency as proof of compliance.

CUL- 3: Archaeological Monitoring. Due to the heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed project area, an archaeological monitor with at least 3 years of regional experience in archaeology shall be present for all ground -disturbing activities that occur within the proposed project area ( which includes, but is not limited to, tree/ shrub removal and planting, clearing/ grubbing, grading, excavation, trenching, compaction, fence/ gate removal and installation, drainage and irrigation removal and installation, hardscape installation benches, signage, boulders, walls, seat walls, fountains, etc.], and archaeological work). A sufficient number of archaeological monitors shall be present each work day to ensure that simultaneously occurring ground disturbing activities receive thorough levels of monitoring coverage.

CUL- 4: Post Review Discovery. There always remains the potential for ground -disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources. Both CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA require the lead agency to address any unanticipated cultural resource discoveries during Project construction. Therefore, ECORP recommends the following procedures.

If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100- foot radius of the discovery. A ECORP Consulting, Inc. 6 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
94 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior' s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology, shall evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no - work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find:
o
If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required.
o
If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the lead agencies. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined by CEQA or a historic property under Section 106 NHPA, if applicable. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA or a Historic Property under Section 106; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

If the find represents a Native American or potentially Native American resource that does not include human remains, then the agencies shall consult with the tribes on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 21074 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Preservation in place is the preferred treatment, if feasible. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.
o If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance ( AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner ( per § 7050. 5 of the Health and Safety Code).

The provisions of § 7050. 5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097. 98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant ( MILD) for the Project (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). The designated MILD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of ECORP Consulting, Inc. 7 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
95 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097. 94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located ( AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

Geology and Soils
GEO- 1: Unanticipated Discovery of Paleontological Resources. If paleontological resources are discovered during Project construction, a 50- foot buffer would be established around a find until a qualified paleontologist has determined the significance of the find. All work in the area of the find shall cease and a qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the City to investigate the find and to make recommendations on its disposition.

Noise
N0I- 1: Project Noise Abatement Measures. To ensure interior noise levels at all residences comply with the City of Highland' s interior noise reduction standards, all residential structures shall incorporate the following noise control measures:

Building Construction
o Walls:

All penetrations in exterior walls for pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal and minimize sound transmission.
o Roof Construction:

Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be per manufacturer specifications or consist of caulked plywood of at least'/ 2 inch thickness.

Ceilings shall be well - sealed gypsum board of at least'/ 2 inch thickness.

Attic insulation with a minimum R- 19 rating shall be used to enhance noise attenuation.

Ventilation & Mechanical Systems
o While keeping windows closed for noise reduction, all habitable rooms shall be equipped with:

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 8
April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
96 Draft Initial Studv and Mitigated Negative Declaration A forced air circulation system ( e.g., HVAC system or air conditioning unit), or
An active ventilation system ( e. g., fresh air supply system) that meets Uniform Building Code requirements. Population and Housing
N0I- 2: Additional Noise Abatement Measures for Lot 8. To mitigate interior and exterior noise impacts at Lot 8, the following measures shall be implemented:

Interior Noise Reduction Measures
o The second floor of the residence on Lot 8 shall be constructed with well - fitted, well -weather- stripped upgraded windows and glass doors with a minimum Sound Transmission Class rating of 30 to ensure compliance with the City of Highland' s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. o All penetrations in exterior walls ( e. g., for pipes, ducts, conduits) shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal and prevent sound leakage.

Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR- 1: Tribal Monitoring. Due to the heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed project area, at the discretion of the consulting tribe( s), Tribal monitor(s) authorized to represent YSMN shall be present for all ground -disturbing activities that occur within the proposed project area ( which includes, but is not limited to, tree/ shrub removal and planting, clearing/ grubbing, grading, excavation, trenching, compaction, fence/ gate removal and installation, drainage and irrigation removal and installation, hardscape installation [ benches, signage, boulders, walls, seat walls, fountains, etc.], and archaeological work). At the discretion of the consulting tribes, a sufficient number of Tribal monitors shall be present each work day to ensure that simultaneously occurring ground disturbing activities receive thorough levels of monitoring coverage. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is reflective of the project mitigation (" Cultural Resources" and " Tribal Cultural Resources") shall be completed by the archaeologist, as detailed within CUL- 1, and submitted to the Lead Agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department ( YSMN). Once all parties review and agree to the plan, it shall be adopted by the Lead Agency — the plan must be adopted prior to permitting for the project. Any and all findings will be subject to the protocol detailed within the Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

TCR- 2: Treatment of Cultural Resources During Project Implementation. If a pre -contact cultural resource is discovered during project implementation, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended 60 feet around the resource( s), and an Environmentally Sensitive Area ( ESA) physical demarcation/ barrier constructed.

The Project Archaeologist shall develop a research design that shall include a plan to evaluate the resource for significance under CEQA criteria. Representatives from YSMN, the ECORP Consulting, Inc. 9
April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
97 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Archaeologist, and the Lead Agency shall confer regarding the research design, as well as any testing efforts needed to delineate the resource boundary. Following the completion of evaluation efforts, all parties shall confer regarding the resource' s archaeological significance, its potential as a Tribal Cultural Resource ( TCR), and avoidance ( or other appropriate treatment) of the discovered resource. Removal of any cultural resource(s) shall be conducted with the presence of a Tribal monitor representing the Tribe, unless otherwise decided by YSMN. All plans for analysis shall be reviewed and approved by the applicant and YSMN prior to implementation, and all removed material shall be temporarily curated on - site.

It is the preference of YSMN that removed cultural material be reburied as close to the original find location as possible. However, should reburial within/ near the original find location during project implementation not be feasible, then a reburial location for future reburial shall be decided upon by YSMN, the landowner, and the Lead Agency, and all finds shall be reburied within this location. Additionally, in this case, reburial shall not occur until all ground - disturbing activities associated with the project have been completed, all monitoring has ceased, all cataloguing and basic recordation of cultural resources have been completed, and a final monitoring report has been issued to Lead Agency, CHRIS, and YSMN. All reburials are subject to a reburial agreement that shall be developed between the landowner and YSMN outlining the determined reburial process/ location, and shall include measures and provisions to protect the reburial area from any future impacts.

Should it occur that avoidance, preservation in place, and on -site reburial are not an option for treatment, the landowner shall relinquish all ownership and rights to this material and confer with YSMN to identify an American Association of Museums ( AAM)- accredited facility within the County that can accession the materials into their permanent collections and provide for the proper care of these objects in accordance with the 1993 CA Cu ration Guidelines. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository shall be developed between the landowner and museum that legally and physically transfers the collections and associated records to the facility. This agreement shall stipulate the payment of fees necessary for permanent curation of the collections and associated records and the obligation of the Project developer/ applicant to pay for those fees.

All draft records/ reports containing the significance and treatment findings and data recovery results shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the Lead Agency and YSMN for their review and comment. After approval from all parties, the final reports and site/ isolate records are to be submitted to the local CHRIS Information Center, the Lead Agency, and YSMN.

TCR- 3: Inadvertent Discoveries of Human Remains. If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity within a 100- foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 10 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
98 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. 0 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................................................. 1- 1

1. 1 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 1- 1

1. 2 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................... 1- 1

1. 3 Environmental Setting.................................................................................................................................. 1- 1

1. 4 Surrounding Land Uses............................................................................................................................... 1- 2

2. 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................................................ 2- 1

2. 1 Project Characteristics.................................................................................................................................. 2- 1

2. 2 Project Timing 2- 20

3. 0 DETERMINATION............................................................................................................................................................ 3- 1

3. 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected......................................................................................... 3- 1

4. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION............................................................................................ 4- 1

4. 1 Aesthetics.......................................................................................................................................................... 4- 1

4. 1. 1 Aesthetics ( 1) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.................................................. 4- 1

4. 1. 2 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................... 4- 7

4. 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources........................................................................................................4- 7

4. 2. 1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ( 11) Environmental Checklist and Discussion......................................................................................................................................... 4- 7

4. 2. 2 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................... 4- 8

4. 3 Air Quality......................................................................................................................................................... 4- 8

4. 3. 1 Air Quality ( 111) Environmental Checklist and Discussion............................................... 4- 8

4. 3. 2 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 23

4. 4 Biological Resources................................................................................................................................... 4- 23

4. 4. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 23

4. 4. 2 Biological Resources ( IV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion ......................... 4- 27

4. 4. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 33

4. 5 Cultural Resources....................................................................................................................................... 4- 37

4. 5. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 37

4. 5. 2 Cultural Resources ( V) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.............................. 4- 38

4. 5. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 39

4. 6 Energy............................................................................................................................................................... 4- 42

4. 6. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 42

4. 6. 2 Energy (VI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.................................................... 4- 44

4. 6. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 45

4. 7 Geology and Soils........................................................................................................................................ 4- 46 ECORP Consulting, Inc. i April 202S
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
99 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 7. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 46

4. 7. 2 Geology and Soils ( VII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion............................4- 47

4. 7. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 50

4. 8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions...................................................................................................................... 4- 50

4. 8. 1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (VIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion .........4- 51

4. 8. 2 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 53

4. 9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials......................................................................................................... 4- 54

4. 9. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 54

4. 9. 2 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ( IX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion....................................................................................................................................... 4- 55

4. 9. 3 Mitigation Measures..................................................................................................................4- 60

4. 10 Hydrology and Water Quality 4- 60

4. 10. 1 Environmental Setting .............................. ................................................................................. 4- 60

4. 10. 2 Hydrology and Water Quality (X) Environmental Checklist and Discussion ........ 4- 61

4. 10. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 64

4. 11 Land Use and Planning.............................................................................................................................. 4- 65

4. 11. 1 Land Use and Planning ( XI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion ....................4- 65

4. 11. 2 Mitigation Measures..................................................................................................................4- 66

4. 12 Mineral Resources........................................................................................................................................ 4- 66

4. 12. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 66

4. 12. 2 Mineral Resources ( XII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion............................4- 66

4. 12. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 67

4. 13 Noise................................................................................................................................................................. 4- 67

4. 13. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 68

4. 13. 2 Noise (XIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.................................................... 4- 71

4. 13. 3 Mitigation Measures..................................................................................................................4- 75

4. 14 Population and Housing ( XIV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion............................... 4- 76

4. 14. 1 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 77

4. 15 Public Services...............................................................................................................................................4- 77

4. 15. 1 Public Services ( XV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion...................................4- 77

4. 15. 2 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 80

4. 16 Recreation....................................................................................................................................................... 4- 80

4. 16. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 80

4. 16. 2 Recreation ( XVI) Materials Checklist.................................................................................... 4- 80

4. 16. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 81 ECORP Consulting, Inc. ii April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
100
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 17 Transportation............................................................................................................................................... 4- 81

4. 17. 1 Transportation ( XVII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion................................ 4- 81

4. 17. 2 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 93

4. 18 Tribal Cultural Resources.......................................................................................................................... 4- 93

4. 18. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................... 4- 93

4. 18. 2 Tribal Cultural Resources ( XVIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion ........... 4- 94

4. 18. 3 Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................. 4- 95

4. 19 Utilities and Service Systems................................................................................................................... 4- 97

4. 19. 1 Utilities and Service Systems ( XIX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.................... ................................................................................................................... 4- 97

4. 19. 2 Mitigation Measures............................................................................................................... 4- 100

4. 20 Wildfire.......................................................................................................................................................... 4- 100

4. 20. 1 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................ 4- 100

4. 20.2 Wildfire (XX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.............................................. 4- 100

4. 20. 3 Mitigation Measures............................................................................................................... 4- 103

4. 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance.................................................................................................. 4- 103

4. 21. 1 Mandatory Findings of Significance ( XXI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion.................................................................................................................................... 4- 103

5. 0 LIST OF PREPARERS....................................................................................................................................................... 5- 1

5. 1 City of Highland.............................................................................................................................................. 5- 1

5. 1. 1 Lead Agency.................................................................................................................................... 5- 1

5. 2 ECORP Consulting, Inc................................................................................................................................. 5- 1

5. 2. 1 CEQA Documentation................................................................................................................. 5- 1

6. 0 REFERENCES..... 6- 1
ECORP Consulting, Inc. ii April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
101
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

LIST OF TABLES
Table1- 1. Surrounding Land Uses........................................................................................................................................... 1- 2 Table2. 1- 1. Floor Plan 1............................................................................................................................................................... 2- 1 Table2. 1- 2. Floor Plan 2............................................................................................................................................................... 2- 1 Table2. 1- 3. Floor Plan 3............................................................................................................................................................. 2- 19 Table2. 1- 4. Project Development Mix.................................................................................................................................. 2- 19 Table 4. 3- 1. Construction - Related Emissions ( Regional Significance Analysis).................................................... 4- 13 Table 4. 3- 2. Construction -Related Emissions ( Localized Significance Analysis)................................................... 4- 17 Table 4. 3- 3. Operational - Related Emissions ( Regional Significance Analysis)......................................................4- 18 Table 4. 8- 1. Construction - Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions.................................................................................. 4- 52 Table 4. 8- 2 Operational - Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions..................................................................................... 4- 52 Table 4. 13- 1. Existing ( Baseline) Noise Measurements.................................................................................................. 4- 70 Table 4. 13- 2 Daytime Construction Noise Level Increases........................................................................................... 4- 71 Table 4. 13- 4. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment.......................................... 4- 73 Table 4. 13- 5. Construction Equipment Vibration Levels................................................................................................ 4- 74 Table4. 17- 1. Trip Generation Rate......................................................................................................................................... 4- 83 Table4. 17- 2. Project - trip Generation.................................................................................................................................... 4- 83 Table 4. 17- 3. Opening: Year 2027 Without Project......................................................................................................... 4- 83 Table 4. 17- 4. Opening: Year 2027 With Project................................................................................................................ 4- 84 Table 4. 17- 5. Cumulative: Year 2050 Without Project.................................................................................................... 4- 85 Table 4. 17- 6. Cumulative: Year 2050 With Project........................................................................................................... 4- 87 Table 4. 17- 7. Year 2050 Project Impact Analysis..............................................................................................................4- 88 Table 4. 17- 8. Calculation of Fair Share Contributions.................................................................................................... 4- 90 Table 4. 17- 9. City of Highland Buildout VMT per Service Population..................................................................... 4- 91 Table4. 17- 10. Project Generated VMT................................................................................................................................. 4- 91

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure1. Project Vicinity............................................................................................................................................................... 1- 3 Figure2. Project Location............................................................................................................................................................. 1- 4 Figure3. Project Site Plan............................................................................................................................................................ 2- 3 Figure4. Project Floor Plan.......................................................................................................................................................... 2- 7 FigureS. Project Landscaping Plan...........................................................................................................................................4- 5 Figure6. Sensitive Receptor Locations................................................................................................................................. 4- 15 ECORP Consulting, Inc. iv April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
102
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A — Air Quality Impact Analysis
Appendix B — Biological Technical Report
Appendix C — Aquatic Resources Delineation
Appendix D Cultural Resource Inventory and Evaluation Report Appendix E — Energy Analysis
Appendix F — Preliminary Geotechnical Report
Appendix G Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Appendix H Phase I ESA
Appendix I — Preliminary Hydrology Report
Appendix J — Conceptual WQMP
Appendix K — Noise Analysis
Appendix L — Traffic Analysis
Appendix M — VMT Analysis
Appendix N — EVWD Will Serve Letter

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term Definition
100- year flood A flood that has a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year 500- year flood A flood that has a 0. 2% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year A/ EQ Agricultural Equestrian
AB Assembly Bill
of Artificial fill
ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
APE Area of Potential Effect
APN Assessor' s Parcel Number
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
ARD Aquatic Resource Delineation
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BMPs Best Management Practices
BSA Biological Survey Area
BTR Biological Technical Report
Btu British Thermal Units
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CaIEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model ( version 2022. 1. 1. 26) CaIEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CalGreen California Green Building Standards Code
ECORP Consulting, Inc. v
April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
103
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Term Definition
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resource Board
CASIO California Independent System Operator
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CGS California Geologic Survey
CHIP California Highway Patrol
City, Highland City of Highland
CMP Congestion Management Program
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO Carbon Monoxide
Cortese List list of hazardous waste sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962. 5 CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CRPR California Rare Plant Ranking
CSS Cross -street stop
CSS Cross -street stop
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
CWA Clean Water Act
cy Cubic yards
DA Drainage Areas
dB Decibels
dBA A -weighted Decibel
DHS California Department of Health Services
DIF Developer Impact Fees
DOC California Department of Conservation
DOF Department of Finance
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
du/ ac Dwelling units per acre
EBX East Branch Extension
Edison Southern California Edison
EIR Environmental Impact Report
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
EV Electric Vehicle
EVWD East Valley Water District
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FEMA Zone A special flood hazard areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual chance flood 100- year flood)
FEMA Zone X areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance flood ( 500- year flood) FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
GHG Greenhouse Gas Emissions
HCM Highway Construction Manual
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
ECORP Consulting, Inc. vi April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
104
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Term Definition
HFD Highland Fire Department
IS/ MND Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
kV kilovolts
LID Low Density Residential
Ldn Day -Night Average
Leq Equavelent Noise Level
LOMR- F Letter Of Map Revision based on Fill
LOS Level of Service
LRA Local Responsibility Area
LST Localize Significance Thresholds
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MILD Most Likely Descendant
MRZs Mineral Resource Zones
MSHCP Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
MSL Mean sea level
MTCO2e/ yr Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
03 Ozone
OSFM/ CAL FIRE Office of the State Fire Marshall
PD Planned Development
PM10 Coarse Particulate Matter
PM2. 5 Fine Particulate Matter
ppm Parts per million
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
PRGP Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province
Project, Proposed The Residences at Alta Vista
Project
PD Planned Development
Q Younger Alluvium
Qal Alluvium, Alluvial valley deposits
Qvyw Quaternary very young wash deposits
Qya5 Quaternary young axial - valley deposits of Unit 5 R- 1 10, 000 Single Family Residential
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe
ROG Reactive Organic Gasses
ROW Right- of-way
RTP/ SCS Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy RUSD Redlands Unified School District
SB Senate Bill
ECORP Consulting, Inc. vii April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
105
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Term Definition
SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
SBD San Bernardino International Airport
SBKR San Bernardino kangaroo rat
SBTAM San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCE Southern California Edison
SIP State Implementation Plan
SLF Sacred Lands File
SM Silty Sand
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SNRC Sterling Natural Resource Center
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company
SP Sand
SP- SM Sand with Silt
SR State Route
SWP State Water Project
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resource Control Board
TCP Traffic Control Plan
TCR Tribal Cultural Resource
TS Traffic Signal
UMWP Urban Water Management Plan
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UST Underground Storage Tank
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
YSMN Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation
ECORP Consulting, Inc. viii April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
106
Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration

1. 0 BACKGROUND

1. 1 Summary
Project Title: Residences at Alta Vista Project
Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Highland
27215 Base Line
Highland, CA 92346
Contact Person and Phone Number: Jake Sowder, Project Manager 909) 373- 2637
Project Location: The Residences at Alta Vista Project ( Proposed Project, Project) Project Site is located north of Greenspot Road, South of Santa Ana Canyon Road, and on either side of Alta Vista in the City of Highland. The approximately 12- acre irregularly shaped Project Site includes Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 1210- 371- 16 and 1210- 371- 14.

General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Zoning: R1 10,000 Low Density Residential ( 2. 1- 6.0 du/ ac)

1. 2 Introduction
The City of Highland is the Lead Agency for this California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) Initial Study.

This Initial Study has been prepared to identify and assess the anticipated environmental impacts of the Residences at Alta Vista ( Project) to satisfy CEQA ( Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 21000 et seq.) and state CEQA Guidelines ( Title 14, California Code of Regulations [ CCR] 15000 et seq.). CEQA requires that all state and local government agencies consider the environmental consequences before approving those projects. The City of Highland will use this CEQA Initial Study to determine which CEQA document is appropriate for the Project: Negative Declaration ( ND), Mitigated Negative Declaration ( MIND), or Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

In accordance with CEQA, this Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration ( IS/ MND) will be circulated for a 30- day public review and comment period. Written comments on the Draft IS/ MND should be submitted to:

Kim Stater, Assistant Community Development Director
City of Highland
27215 Base Line
Highland, CA 92346
kstater@cityofhighland. ora

1. 3 Environmental Setting
The Project Site consists of approximately 11. 98 acres of land located north of Greenspot Road, South of Santa Ana Canyon Road, and on either side of Alta Vista in the City of Highland, San Bernardino County, ECORP Consulting, Inc. 1 1 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
107
Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration
California ( Figure 1 & Figure 2). A chain -link fence and some debris were observed on the western portion of the Project Site. Sparse shrubs and bushes were observed west of Alta Vista while sparse grasses were observed on the east. The Project Site descends at a low gradient generally towards the west- northwest, with elevations on the Project Site ranging from approximately 1, 467 feet above mean sea level ( MSL) in the southeast corner to 1, 445 feet above MSL in the northwest corner.

Existing improvements within Greenspot Road and Alta Vista were observed to include sewer, water, storm drain, and electrical ( streetlights). Overhead power lines are present along Santa Ana Canyon Road.

A gate associated with the San Bernardino Flood Control District easement was observed at the eastern Project Site boundaryjust north of Greenspot Road. Oak Creek, an ephemeral tributary of the Santa Ana River, flows southwestjust to the east of the site.

1. 4 Surrounding Land Uses
The Project Site is currently vacant and generally bounded by vacant land and residential uses to the north, flood control district property to the east, radio towers to the west, and Greenspot Road to the south. The Project Site and land to the north, east, and west have a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential ( LD: 2. 1- 6.0 du/ ac). Land south of Greenspot Road has a General Plan land use designation of Agricultural Equestrian ( A/ EQ: 0- 2 du/ ac). Refer to Table 1- 1 below for details.

Table 1- 1. Surrounding Land Uses
Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land Use Project LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10, 000 ( Low Density Residential Vacant Site Residential 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac)
LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10, 000 ( Low Density Residential Residential North Residential 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac)
Vacant Land and Gated
LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10, 000 ( Low Density Residential San Bernardino Flood East
Residential 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac) Control District
Property
South AG/ EQ) Agricultural/ Equestrian
AG/ EQ Agricultural Equestrian ( 0- 2
Vacant
du/ ac)
LD) Low Density Single Family R- 1 10, 000 ( Low Density Residential Vacant West
Residential 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac)
Source: Highland 2UU6, ZU25; ( joogie tartn Fro zu«
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 1- 2 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
108
ino Fulls
ate Park
18 Rancho
Cucamonga
Ontario
0 Corona
Lake Forest
D O
J
Man Date:

Vctorville
c
San Bernardino
National Forest '
manta Ana River
nd
Project Location
Redlands
Yucaipa
Riverside
i6i1 Banning
0 Perris
Hemet
0 0
Menifee
Murrieta
Asl.
247
62i
Sources. ESRI
Figure 1. Project Vicinity
Zak
ECORP Consulting, Inc. ENVIRRP Con Ming 2023- 095 Diversified Pacific - Highland Project 109
110
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

2. 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2. 1 Project Characteristics
The property is currently vacant and zoned R- 1 ( 10,000 Single Family Residential) with a General Plan Land Use designation of LID ( Low Density, 2. 1- 6. 0 du/ ac). The Proposed Project would require a zone change and general plan amendment to PD ( Planned Development).

The Project proposes development of 113 detached single- family homes (9.42 du/ ac) with private rear yard space. Lot sizes will range from 2, 000 to 5, 186 square feet. There will be three distinct floor plans Plans 1, 2, and 3, Figure 4) with Spanish, Cottage, and Farmhouse architectural styles ( Elevations 1, 2, 3; Figure 4). The area of each floor plan is provided below in Table 2. 1- 1 through Table 2. 1- 3, with the total number of units proposed as part of the Project presented in Table 2. 1- 4.

Table 2. 1- 1. Floor Plan 1
Floor Plan Section Area ( Square Feet)
First Floor 618
Second Floor 948
Total Living Area: 1, 566
2- Car Garage 421
Porch 11
Source: Diversified Pacific 2025, See: Figure 3 Project Site Plan and Figure 4 Project Floor Mans.

The Proposed Project would construct 35- units following the design of Floor Plan 1. As shown in table

2. 1- 1, Floor Plan 1 would be the smallest of the three floorplans constructed as part of the Project. Floor Plan 1 would include 1, 566- sf of living area, a 421- sf 2- car garage, and 11- sf porch.

Table 2. 1- 2. Floor Plan 2
Floor Plan Section Area ( Square Feet)
First Floor 689
Second Floor 1, 051
Total Living Area: 1, 740
2- Car Garage 423
Porch 78
Source: Diversified Pacific 2025, See: Figure 3 Project Site Plan and Figure 4 Project Floor Plans.

The Proposed Project would construct 43- units following the design of Floor Plan 2. As shown in table

2. 1- 2, Floor Plan 2 would include 1, 740- sf of living area, a 423- sf 2- car garage, and the largest porch of the Development mix at 78- sf.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2- 1 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
111
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2- 2 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
112
eN
ti,
Cm cn
IS
11 kol
I.!
62 will
i
0 "
6 1-
15Z
c
j
u
r
III
r
Ig
uu
Nil
A
A
mum,
d
1 1
SM.-
1 oil
NPH It
Sol
as
I
Al !
Map
Jk3o
1 1
185
1h
IV,
I
Al
q1
1111
SM
dig,
Q
MIR Rag
11 g
511
ki
gill
MWOMI
I
M
IM16
MGM
1NIM135
HOW
I
Wan",
wpm
PIP,
q
411,
Oman55
Hsi W
113
i
114
Ri
C
ppBell i
py
3i
tltltl
sill!
11 3
r--------
r---- £
115s
ds
om
Z _
I
jaFnNn
Is
z o
a! oU
x $ U p
ppY
Oan
95m
it
y
7a
MIN tL`
1:
70 SA
YS
E
OCIIUOIZI MEY \ \ \
WIILfOILI MdY II
1 u ] m
wnlwm
000>
J \
L90
wvum
amu I
I.
m
anmxm rrs \
ro
oxwnxele
Nrs II
I
1 i1
t
Og
i,R
z
Ir
if
ss
F{yy
II
Ct
115
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2- 6
April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
116
03 PUDILA6iH '
yoUDN
PUDIL451H
409 _
f
amp
MWAFb
do'
J
N
C
mr[
x
Wb&'
dd
N
oul'
sa{
DIoOSsy'
9 ssoj
j
Ilow •
c
c
o -
ii
f§
Q
1 •
1 1
I
p.
00 0S
I
i
a
I
1 I
I
1 b §
I
I
OI
I
O
O
ii
s=
o
g
a
o
LLO
C D
3 o
I
oX
IO
I
1 00'
09 c
U
M
o
d
a
o L
i
LL
P
Udad _
U
an
U
d
a
W
In
L
O LnQ1 Q MN
O
N
117
vomc xe
03 pupIu61H '
y3upa
puoIu51H
IsD9
ra,
wa,
aoAulwc
oul'
seloioossV 9
aokj
hioW
cv,=
cu
ro
q
N
88 p{ N
44ya
awvai
5'-
a'- 5
4 r•
aA
W
L
W
Ot
LL
U)
N
m
nl.
yz
40 oPWMI
LU
4—
ME
Wo
C7
wm
118
war '
03 PUOIL451H '
uOUg
PUoIy6iH
4S03 i
in
ossv t+'
on
wew'
udu+,
w m
S
e,
9]e
r!
uoN'
eJ
axa
w.
p
Y
wtl
i _ };
NM
DUI '
S2JDI OSS' d4
mio )
PDW • D
DlJlDVd(
131JlSd]
AlO
i8._._._ ,
II
i I
WSJ
i
0 i
Ui
LLJ
nf

OLLLNLU
II
I
u
II
I
II
0o
At
I
w w
I I
J
IIII
S
I
II
v
C
a
Ro
d
oG L
U 21 ru
O
n
4= aCL m v
LL L
R
MNONO Lr'
I
o; wW
119
voNAM
xsw,
w '°
PUDIu61H ' u
ugd
PUDIL
iH
lsc)
N
DUI '
S2ID0IJ0SSVSy F
SSOJo
JOW •• cE R4 NfQ

C , COCOUN
WrW
CEO
Or ( D
AIR
11 y
C
44 o
C
w >
C
m ztz
w
0)
J
t
120
pD
Puplu6iH '
uDupN
puglu6iH
40D
F ••
ero
MR'
1'
NbN
J
l`!
ewi
ewc:

A'
r+'
A
wNW ie
u
Oul
lwlo!
J
v
9 SSOIO
J1Dyy
ry
d
a
rv=
9 a
pp
00 09
I
I 1
to
I
b
a
Y
I
b
1 I
I
O
U
O
I
d
1 1
10 1
S
r
r
dd
d
N
Q
Q
1 I (
2NwN1
E
b
1 o1
f
O -

1. n
gg
z
j '
o
o
x
od
I
w
ez
N
I
mi
o
N
1 (
1 O
Q
oW
o
a
o
u
I.

L
a
LL '
r
a°
6 00'
0S
V
C
v
f0
o
a
a
L
70 O
O
nV
4=
V
L.
d
a
W
L L
ty
LL
0 M
N C) N OA121
OD
PUDIu51H '
14Ou08
puoIu61H
ISDI a
VOW oul .
5240100ssv p
550J;
Y,
JDW •
C> NQ
bao
ggp
I{
1I
OO
LUN
II
Lu
OLV
LL.
in
I
I
4 LUO
LU Q) i
IgI
122
IDO
PUDILA51H '
gOuaN
puaIu61H Ism
n3
I
NUN olll'
S81DI0OSSd Y
SSOIJ
110W • •
C >
AdoY.
q
C
X
CCO
w
O
CEO
ON
i
i
I
C
CQ
Oi
Na
Oww }
IN
123
03 PuaIubiH '
uOu08
PuoIu6iH
IS03
00 I '
ss4opossV' 8
mio
glow
S31ilNnv4KoD ci
5b5N
gQ
1 •
1 GIs"°
LL', sII
W
eo
II , IWEi:.__ _-
J
af
LL
Li
O
O }
I C3
J
Of
I
1I
I
124
OD
pubs
151H '
y0ug8
puoIy6iH
SD3
10c
aria w. s
as .'' b
Ql
DUI'
Selol
SSy' Q
SSUIo
jjov4 i gi
00*
09 I '
NuOEO0U
090
W OzQUrCza
zVF
125
1AN '
03 PUDIu61H '
uOUDN
pUDILAH
a
oU'
SBJ
DIDOSSy '
p
SSOI >
IIDy • =
c
iY
b
N
I
I
O
O
W
W
C
E
O
d --
O
L
ii O
v
III'
p4
I
I
a c
a)
1 i
U
i
N
m
o
d
a
O o L
U L
n
V
O
a
a
Q)
W
L
L
N
LL
CV O
N N MO Lna)
126
ro '
00 purDIu51H '
LADUOy
puglu6iH
4SD3
vl' b9
a0+ 9WW
1'
10!
l'1J
C1
056CGBC
WHVW
JUI'
saJDposrd 9
SSOIO ],
1DW
Ou
WWI#
I
I
i
OO
0L
Uj
O
LLco
i"
i
I
t
sa
Ii
I
t
I
tot
0°-
P
i
I
t _II
rl iI
II
j ..
127
oo
Puolu61H '
y0uOa
pugly51H }
m N
DUI
S270OOSSy FSSOJ!
D ),
1DW O
D
C > £
NWLL b(
oNg
iNI
y} {
Q
13 W ,
W
C:

EI
I
LL
I
00 Ina
j li
WNEW 1
d>
W
128
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 2. 1- 3. Floor Plan 3
Floor Plan Section Area ( Square Feet)
First Floor 722
Second Floor 1, 160
Total Living Area: 1, 932
2- Car Garage 433
Porch 20
Source: Diversified Pacific 2025, See: Figure 3 Project Site Plan and Figure 4 Project Floor Plans.

The Proposed Project would construct 35- units following the design of Floor Plan 3. As shown in table

2. 1- 3, Floor Plan 3 would be the largest of the three floor plans constructed as part of the Project. Floor Plan 3 would include 1, 932- sf of living area.

Table 2. 1- 4. Project Development Mix
Floor Plan Type Units Proposed
Floor Plan 1 35
Floor Plan 2
43 Floor Plan 3
35 Total Number of Units: 113
Source: Diversified Pacific 2025, See: Figure 3 Project Site Plan and Figure 4 Project Floor Plans.

In summary, the Proposed Project would develop 113 residential lots, totaling 7. 13- acres on an approximately 12- acre site at a density of 9.42- lots/ ac ( gross) with single family homes. The Proposed Project would not include gated access. In addition to the 113 Proposed single- family homes, the Project would include a total of 293 on -site parking spaces, comprised of 226 garage spaces, and 67 additional uncovered guest spaces distributed throughout the Project. Project access would be provided by six private streets ( 4, 213 linear feet). There would be two primary open space amenities, one on each side of Alta Vista, totaling approximately 35, 000 square feet.

Open Space 1 would play equipment, benches, picnic tables, barbecues, turf, and exercise equipment.

Open Space 2 is designed as a passive area with benches, turf, and exercise equipment along a pathway.

Additional Project improvements include 6- foot- high walls along Greenspot Road at Lots 103 through 109 and Lot 8, two flood control basins, a new storm drain connection underneath Greenspot Road, an improved concrete v- ditch, retaining walls, a 20- foot utility easement, and associated utility connections.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2- 19 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
129
Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration

2. 2 Project Timing
Construction of the Proposed Project is anticipated to start in January 2026 for a duration of approximately 12- months. Construction of the Proposed Project would involve the use of standard construction equipment. Cut and fill work is required to establish the Proposed Project' s design grades.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2- 20 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
130
Administrative Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

3. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED AND

DETERMINATION

3. 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by the Project, involving at least one impact that is a Potentially Significant Impact as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry. Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

Hazards/ Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/ Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Paleontological Resources
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire
Mandatory Findings of Significance
I find that the Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 1 find that the Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required_
I find that the Project MAY have a " potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects ( a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and ( b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Project, nothing further is required.

Kim Stater, April 10, 2025
Assistant Community Development Director
ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Residences at Alta Vista
3- 1 April 2025
2023- 095. 03
131
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 3- 2 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
132
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION

4. 1 Aesthetics

4. 1. 1 Aesthetics ( 1) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less than
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section Potentially Significant with Less than 21099, would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic Ffl- C E7 vista?
Less than Significant Impact.

The California Scenic Highway Program protects and enhances the scenic beauty of California' s highways and adjacent corridors. The California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) can designate a highway as scenic based on how much natural beauty can be seen by users of the highway, the quality of the scenic landscape, and if development impacts the enjoyment of the view. A highway can be designated as scenic based on how much natural beauty can be seen by users of the highway, the quality of the scenic landscape, and if development impacts the enjoyment of the view ( Caltrans 2023). The California Scenic Highway System indicated that no existing or proposed State Scenic highways are located within the vicinity of the Project Site.

The City of Highland General Plan identifies scenic value from the panoramic views of the mountains which provide a scenic background to the entire city, and locally important scenic highways. Scenic resources within the City include unique visual features which provide attractive views as you approach Highland and from within the City. Major visual resources identified in the City' s General Plan include topographic features, local flora, and historic buildings. Generally, views of local topographic features like the San Bernardino Mountains or the Santa Ana River area are identified as locally important visual resources ( Highland 2006). Furthermore, the City of Highland General Plan identified Greenspot Road as a local scenic highway.

The Proposed Project would construct residences along the northern side of Greenspot Road. However, the residential nature Project would be visually consistent with other residential land uses to the east and west of the Project Site along Greenspot Road ( Figures 3, 4, and 5). As the Project is located to the north of Greenspot Road, the Project would not substantially interfere with views of the Santa Ana river wash to the south. Further, due to the regional topography, and slope to the north of the Project Site it is also assumed that distant views of the San Bernardino Mountains to the north would not be substantially affected. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 1 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
133
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Less than
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section Potentially Significant with Less than 21099, would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and n
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact.

The California Scenic Highway System indicated that no existing or proposed State scenic highways are located in the vicinity of the Project Site. The closest eligible scenic highway is State Route ( SR) - 330, approximately 2. 88- miles northwest of the Project Site. The closest officially designated State scenic highway is SR- 38 approximately 8- miles east of the Project Site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway.

Less than
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section Potentially Significant with Less than 21099, would the Project'
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant No
Impact Impact
c) In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views
of the site and its surroundings? ( Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly 11-7 F7 Vi F7
accessible vantage point). If the Project is in an
urbanized area, would the Project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact.

The City' s General Plan provides the following relevant goals and policies to help preserve the City' s scenic resources ( Highland 2006):

Policy 1: Incorporate view corridor planning in related development efforts and capital improvement programs.

The Project Site is located along Greenspot Road, which is identified as a local scenic highway. However, the Project Site does not contain open space, hillsides, or ridgelines. As discussed above in response 4. 1, a), above, the Proposed Project is consistent with this goal.

Policy 2: Along roadway -based view corridors, frame views of attractive features of the natural and built environment with appropriately placed median and street tree landscaping. Use of fire- resistant vegetation and ample spacing between trees and shrubs is encouraged to reduce the spread of fires.

The Project Site is located along Greenspot Road, which is identified as a local scenic highway. As discussed above in response 4. 1, a), above, the Proposed Project is consistent with this goal.

ECORP Consulting, Inc 4- 2
April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
134
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Policy 3: Enforce hillside development standards that call for natural contour grading, environmentally sensitive design, shape and siting techniques, and fire -retardant building materials.

The Project Site does not contain hillsides or ridgelines that could be affected by Project Implementation.

No significant hillsides or ridgelines would be modified as part of the Project. The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

Policy 4: Work with San Bernardino County and the City of San Bernardino to develop consistent regulations for the protection of ridgelines, slope areas and hilltops within the surrounding foothill communities.

The Project Site is relatively flat and does not contain hillsides or ridgelines. The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

Policy 5: Require that all excess excavated material (waste materials) be properly removed and disposed of or otherwise reincorporated into the development plan without compromising natural contours or aesthetic qualities of the site.

Although the Proposed Project would require the export of some oversized rocks ( greater than 12- inches) is anticipated. However, the Project would not involve the export of excavated soil materials, the Project would require the import of 12, 102- cy of imported material for grading activities (Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). Further, appreciable cut or fill slopes are not anticipated ( Petra 2024; Appendix F).

The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

Policy 6: Require that hillside development be located below ridgelines and that structures themselves and accompanying landscaping conceal cut slopes and grading.

The Project Site is relatively flat and does not contain hillsides or ridgelines. The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

Policy 7: Encourage developers in high slope gradient areas to use raised floor systems and stepped footoges to leave slope contours in a more natural state.

The Project Site is relatively flat and does not contain hillsides or ridgelines. The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

Policy 8: Retain existing vegetation within or alongside hillside development areas except where such vegetation poses a risk to buildings in high fire hazard zones ( see Goal 6. 5, Public Health and Safety Element). Use native, fire resistant, drought -tolerant plant material in fuel modification areas when existing vegetation cannot be retained.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 3 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
135
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Project Site is relatively flat and is not located within or along a hillside development area. Further, the Project Site is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone ( VHFHSZ). Prior to the issuance of permits, the Project Site plans and Landscaping plans would require City approval. Project Landscaping plan is provided as Figure 5. The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

Policy 9: Preserve mature trees, natural hydrology, native plant materials and areas of visual interest.

The Project Site does not contain existing vegetation that provides an aesthetic benefit. The Project Site consists of large areas of disturbed and developed land, and fallow agriculture. The Proposed Project is consistent with this policy.

The Project Site is located in an urbanized area characterized by residential land uses with a nearby recreational land use. The Project proposes the construction and operation of a residential land use that is in proximity to existing residential uses in the Project vicinity. The Project Site has a zoning designation of R1 10,000. The Project Site would have a gross density of 9.42 du/ ac. A zoning designation amendment is proposed for existing APNs 1210- 371- 14 and 1210- 371- 16 to change them from R- 1 ( 10,000 Single Family Residential) to PD ( Planned Development). With the zoning amendment, the Proposed Project would conform with zoning regulations. The Project would also comply with applicable City Municipal Code design guidelines and development standards for residential development. As such, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Less than
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section Potentially Significant with Less than 21099, would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Would the Project create a new source of
substantial light or glare, which would adversely U U R1 D affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact.

The Project Site is largely undeveloped; however, it is located within an urban area with numerous nearby light sources. In addition to the lighting typical of residential development to the north, east and west, streetlights are present along Alta Vista, Greenspot Road, and Santa Ana Canyon Road. The Proposed Project would require temporary lighting for onsite security and safety during the construction phase.

However, this onsite lighting would be temporary in nature, and no nighttime construction is proposed.

Therefore, project related impacts from glare and additional light sources during Project construction would be less than significant.

With development of the Project new light sources would be added, including lights from vehicle headlights, lighting from the proposed residential units on site, as well as parking lot lighting and nighttime lighting for safety and wayfinding. Thus, light produced by the Proposed Project would be similar to the lighting from residential uses that already exists in the Project vicinity. Therefore, the impact from glare and additional light sources during Project operation would be less than significant.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 4 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
136
L£
9Z-£
L£(
6o6)
VO '
Pue!
yo! H
x
els! n
e71V
Pue
Peob
uoFueo
euV
e;
ueg
p
oELL6
VO '
eouoweao3
oyouea
enu
ja;
uep
e!
n! 0
LZ9o
1 OUPed
POUISJOnip
14OUEN
Pue!
yBIH
M13
0U O, Zjfa MINNUMINE.
gz
a.
ffia
33W$ 3
bo
by
iS
g
o
U
W
c;= o
asaaax
ar,
wn3 „
nndus
ur _.
ziss
annex
aarao
sai r
o:

N
11 1 °
gg
zl
yl
UwiE
COVaaazfig°
0111
m08
1119
AO
6I
Eg@
13"
MEN y
c
r
L . C
to
a; a
aa
C
Vm
LC2C
w
J
O CI)
a
V
LLn 1N
a
LMO
fh
C) NN
137
i
1£
9Z-£
L£ (
606)
VO '
Pue14B! H
MSIA
eAV
Pue
P—N
uOAueO
euV
e+
ueS
e4
0£
LL6
VO'
ecuoweono
04ouea
f
e
eANO
Je4u80
3IA10
Z90
5$ ! i
oy(
aed
POg!
SJGA( p
4auea
PUMBIH
iSe3
70: 1
W }
a
Of
LL
3 YS
w
Eli
aid
4-1v
a)
Q
a
0 1=
2 m
c
aUW n
NN0
M0 LnmN
138
Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration

4. 1. 2 Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required.

4. 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

4. 2. 1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ( II) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less than
Significant
Potentially With Less than
Would the Project'
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance ( Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, El L or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land ( as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 12220( g)), timberland ( as F
defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production ( as
defined by Government Code Section 51104( g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non - forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to El
non- agricultural use or conversion of forest land
to non -forest use?
No Impact ( a, b, c, d, e).

As detailed on the Department of Conservation' s ( DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program FMMP) and Williamson Act maps, neither the Project Site nor adjacent properties are State -designated Farmland, enrolled in Williamson Act contracts, or support forest land or resources ( California Department of Conservation [ DOC] 2022). The Project Site is designated as Grazing Land east of Alta Vista, and Other Land west of Alta Vista and south of Greenspot Road. The DOC FMMP identifies approximately 19.45 acres of Prime Farmland, and 1. 09- acres of Unique Farmland, surrounded on three sides by Urban and Built -Up Land to the North of the Project Site, across Santa Ana Canyon Road. However, at the time of site visit, this appears to have been fully developed with single- family residential homes. Additionally, grading ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 7 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
139
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
activities for this community are visible on aerial imagery dating back to September 15, 2022 ( Google Earth 2025).

The Project Site is zoned R- 1 10, 000, however the Project Proponent is requesting a change of zoning to PD Planned Development to allow for an increase in density. No forest land or Timberland is located on the Project Site. Land zoned Agriculture/ Equestrian ( A/ EQ) is separated from the Project Site by Greenspot Road. Therefore, the Project Site is not located on or adjacent to agricultural land or forest land and the Project would not involve any development that could result in the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. The Project would have no impact with respect to conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use; conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contract; result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use; or other conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use. Therefore, no impact would occur. No further analysis of this subject is required.

4. 2. 2 Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required.

4. 3 Air Quality
This section is based in part on the results of the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads in September 2024 ( Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). This assessment was prepared using methods and assumptions recommended in the rules and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD) and the County of San Bernardino. Regional and local existing conditions are presented, along with pertinent pollutant emissions standards and regulations. The purpose of this assessment is to estimate criteria air pollutants attributable to the Project and determine the level of impact the Project would have on the environment.

4. 3. 1 Air Quality (III) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Less than Significant Impact.

Less than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
FIN
Less than
Significant
Impact
P
No
Impact
A
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( USEPA) requires each State with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan ( SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The SIP must integrate federal, State, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market -based programs. Similarly, under State law, the California Clean Air Act requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment with regard to the federal and State ambient air quality standards. Air ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 8 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
140
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.

The Project Site is located within the South Coast Air Basin ( SoCAB), which is under thejurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment.

In December 2022, SCAQMD released the final 2022 Air Quality Management Plan ( 2022 AQMP). The 2022 AQMP establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving State ( California) and national air quality standards in order to reduce such emissions. The 2022 AQMP is a regional and multi -agency effort including the SCAQMD, CARB, the Southern California Association of Governments ( SCAG), and the USEPA. The plan' s pollutant control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG' s 2024- 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy ( RTP/ SCS), updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG' s latest growth forecasts. ( SCAG' s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.) The Proposed Project is subject to the SCAQMD' s 2022 AQMP.

According to the SCAQMD, in order to determine consistency with SCAQMD' s air quality planning two main criteria must be addressed.

Criterion 1:

With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a project include forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay of attainment. California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAAQS) violations would occur if regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded. a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new air quality violations? As shown in Table 4. 3- 1, 4.3- 2, and 4. 3- 3 below, the Proposed Project would result in emissions that would be below the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds during both construction and operations.

Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations and would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality standards.
b) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP?
As shown in Table 4.3- 1 and 4.3- 3 below, the Proposed Project would be below the SCAQMD regional thresholds for construction and operations. Because the Project would result in less than significant regional emission impacts, it would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or AQMP emissions reductions.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 9 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
141
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Criterion 2:

With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air quality policies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the SoCAB focuses on attainment of ambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are based on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, SCAQMD' s second criterion for determining Project consistency focuses on whether or not the Proposed Project exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented its air quality planning documents. Determining whether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2022 AQMP involves the evaluation of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria. a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of the 2022 AQMP? A project is consistent with regional air quality planning efforts in part if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the SCAQMD air quality plans. Generally, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions in Highland. Specifically, SCAG' s Growth Management Chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide ( RCPG) provides regional population forecasts for the region and SCAG' s 2024- 205 RTP/ SCS provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population growth. The Highland General Plan is referenced by SCAG in order to assist forecasting future growth in Highland. Peak day emissions generated by construction activities are largely independent of land use assignments but rather are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance. Irrespective of the site' s land use designation, development of the site to its maximum potential would likely occur, with disturbance of the entire site occurring during construction activities. As such, when considering that no emissions thresholds would be exceeded, a less than significant impact would result.

The City of Highland General Plan designates the Project Site as " Low Density Residential ( LD)" land uses and " R- 1 10, 000 Single Family Residential ( R- 1)" zoning uses ( Highland 2006). The Project proposes a General Plan Amendment, which would change the land use designation from " Low Density Residential LD)" to " Planned Development ( PD)." The Planned Development ( PD) designation is designated for residential land uses and support uses. The Project proposes a Zone Change Amendment, which would change the zoning use designation from " R- 1 10, 000 Single Family Residential ( R- 1)" to " Planned Development ( PD)."
The Project would develop 113 single family residential dwelling units. The Project is inconsistent with the current land use and zoning designation and would require a General Plan and Zone Change Amendment.

Although this finding is inconsistent with the current land use and zoning designation, the Project on an individual basis does not have an impact and as such, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the goals and objectives of the AQMP. Furthermore, the Project, as evaluated herein, would not exceed the regional or localized air quality significance thresholds.

The Project would not have the potential to result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations. Although the Project' s proposed uses are not consistent with the General Plan land use and zoning designation, as the Project would not exceed the regional or localized construction and operational thresholds, the Project' s ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 10 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
142
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
development intensity is consistent with the development intensities allowed within the General Plan. As such, the Project is considered to be consistent with the AQMP.

As a result, the Project would not conflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population orjob growth projections used by SCAQMD to develop the 2022 AQMP. The City' s population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG' s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to the City as well as the City' s projected growth according to local input received during the SCAG 2024 RTP analysis.; and these are used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. Additionally, as the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into their air quality planning efforts, it can be concluded that the Proposed Project would be consistent with the projections.

SCAG' s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.) Therefore, the Proposed Project would be considered consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of SCAQMD' s air quality plans. b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures? In order to further reduce emissions, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with emission reduction measures promulgated by the SCAQMD, such as SCAQMD Rules 402, 403, and 1113. SCAQMD Rule 402 prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires fugitive dust sources to implement Best Available Control Measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. SCAQMD Rule 403 is intended to reduce coarse particulate matter ( PM10) emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. SCAQMD 1113 requires manufacturers, distributors, and end -users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce reactive organic gases ( ROG) emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories. As such, the Proposed Project meets this consistency criterion. c) Would the project be consistent with the land use planning strategies set forth by SCAQMD air quality planning efforts?
The 2022 AQMP contains air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG' s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG' s growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The Project would not have the potential to result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations.

Although the Project' s proposed uses are not consistent with the General Plan land use and zoning designation, as the Project would not exceed the regional or localized construction and operational thresholds, the Project' s development intensity is consistent with the development intensities allowed within the General Plan.

In conclusion, the determination of AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long- term influence of a project on air quality. The Proposed Project would not result in a long- term impact on the region' s ability to meet State and Federal air quality standards as it is not projected to exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds. The Proposed Project' s long- term influence would also be consistent with the goals and ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 11 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
143
Draft Initial Studv and Mitigated Neqative Declaration
policies of the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP. As the Project would be consistent with the emission -reduction goals of the 2022 AQMP, no impact would occur.

Less than
Significant
Potentially With Less than
Would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the Project F1 1177 F71 F7 region is non - attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact.

By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project' s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project' s individual emissions exceed its identified significance thresholds, the project would be cumulatively considerable.

Projects that do not exceed significance thresholds would not be considered cumulative considerable.

Air pollutant emission impacts were assessed in accordance with methodologies recommended by the SCAQMD. Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model ( CalEEMod), version 2022. 1. 1. 26. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Project construction - generated air pollutant emissions were calculated using CaIEEMod model defaults for San Bernardino County ( Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). Operational air pollutant emissions were based on the Project Site plans and traffic trip generation rates from Urban Crossroads ( 2024d; Appendix Q.

4.3. 1. 2 Construction Impacts
Regional Construction Significance Analysis
Construction - generated emissions are temporary and short- term but have the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. Three basic sources of short- term emissions will be generated through construction of the Proposed Project: operation of the construction vehicles ( i. e., excavators, trenchers, dump trucks), the creation of fugitive dust during clearing and grading, and the use of asphalt or other oil -based substances during paving activities. Construction activities such as excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive PM emissions that affect local air quality at various times during construction.

Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activity taking place, and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summer months creates a high potential for dust generation. Construction activities would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires taking reasonable precautions to prevent the emissions of fugitive dust, such as using water or chemicals, where possible, for control of dust during the clearing of land and other construction activities.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 12 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
144
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Construction -generated emissions associated with the Proposed Project were calculated using the CARBapproved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction requirements. See Attachment A for more information regarding the construction assumptions, including construction equipment and duration, used in this analysis.

Predicted maximum daily construction -generated emissions for the Proposed Project are summarized in Table 4.3- 1. Construction - generated emissions are short- term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD' s thresholds of significance.

Table 4. 3- 1. Construction - Related Emissions ( Regional Significance Analysis) Construction Year
Pollutant ( pounds per day)
ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM,..,
Summer
Construction Year One 1. 34 11. 13 17. 16 0. 03 1. 02 0. 53 Winter
Construction Year One 55. 67 36. 08 33. 08 0. 10 7.66 4.36 Construction Year Two 54. 21 1. 17 1. 93 0.00 0. 14 0. 05 Maximum Daily
Emissions

55. 67 36. 08 33. 08 0. 10 7. 66 4. 36
SCAQMD Regional
Significance Threshold
75 700 550 750 750 55
Exceed SCAQMD
Regional Threshold?
No No No No No No
Source: CaIEEMod version 2022. 1. 1. 26. Refer to Urban Crossroads 2024a ( Appendix A), for Model Data Outputs.

As shown in Table 4.3- 1, emissions generated during Project construction would not exceed the SCAQMD' s regional thresholds of significance. Therefore, criteria pollutant emissions generated during Project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Localized Construction Significance Analysis
As shown in Figure 6, the nearest sensitive receptors to the Project Site include residences located to the north and east. In order to identify localized air toxic -related impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing Localize Significance Thresholds ( LSTs) for construction. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative ( 1- 4).

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 13 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
145
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 14 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
146
LL 0)
147
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 16 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
148
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [ revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized project -specific level impacts associated with proposed projects.

In order to estimate localized pollutant concentrations resulting from Project construction, the SCAQMDapproved American Meteorological Society/ EPA Regulatory Model ( AERMOD) dispersion model was utilized. The SCAQMD' s methodology clearly states that " offsite mobile emissions from a project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs." Therefore, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CaIEEMod " onsite" emissions outputs were considered. Table 4. 3- 2 presents the results of localized emissions. Emissions during the peak construction activity will not exceed the SCAQMD' s localized significance thresholds at the maximally exposed receptor location, as illustrated in Table 4. 3- 2. All other modeled locations in the study area would experience a lesser concentration and consequently experience a lesser impact.

Table 4. 3- 2. Construction - Related Emissions ( Localized Significance Analysis) Peak Construction
CO NO2 PM10 P 12. 5
Averaging Time
1- Hour 8- Hour 1- Hour 24- Hours 24- Hours
Peak Day Localized Emissions 0. 10 0.02 6. 65E- 02 0. 97 0.93 Background Concentration' 1. 6 1. 2 0. 056 N/ A
Total Concentration 1. 70 1. 22 0. 12 0.97 0. 93
SCAQMD Localized Significance
Threshold
20 9 0. 78 10.4 70.4
Exceed SCAQMD Localized
Threshold?
No No No No No
Source: AERMOD California Energy Emissions Model ( CaIEEMod) version 2022. 1. 1. 26. Refer to Urban Crossroads 2024 for Model Data Outputs.

Notes: ' Highest Concentration from the last three years of available data.

PMio and PM2. 5 concentrations are expressed in 1- ig/ m3. All others are expressed in ppm. Based on SCAQMD' s LST Methodology, background concentrations are considered only for CO and NO2.

Table 4. 3- 2 shows that the emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs during construction activities. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative. The SCAQMD Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative program seeks to ensure that everyone has the right to equal protection from air pollution. The Environmental Justice Program is divided into three categories, with the LST protocol promulgated under Category L Further -Reduced Health Risk. Thus, the fact that onsite Project construction emissions would be generated at rates below the LSTs for NOx, CO, PM, o, and PM2.5 demonstrates that the Project would likely not adversely impact the neighboring receptors in the vicinity of the Project. This impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 17 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
149
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 3. 7. 3 Long -Term Operational Impacts
Regional Operational Significance Analysis
Implementation of the Project would result in long- term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants such as PM10, PM2. 5, CO, and S02 as well as 03 precursors such as ROGs and NOx. Project -generated increases in emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use. As previously described, operational air pollutant emissions were based on the Project Site plans and traffic trip generation rates from Urban Crossroads ( Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). Long- term operational emissions attributable to the Project are identified in Table 4. 3- 3 and compared to the operational significance thresholds promulgated by the SCAQMD.

Table 4. 3- 3. Operational - Related Emissions ( Regional Significance Analysis) Emission Source
Pollutant ( pounds per day)
ROG NO. I
CO SO. PM10 PM2. 1
Summer Emissions
Mobile Source 3. 89 3. 41 32. 93 0. 08 7. 44 1. 93
Area Source 5. 57 1. 94 7. 21 0. 01 0. 15 0. 15
Energy Source 0. 05 0.89 0. 38 0.01 0. 07 0.07
Total: 9. 51 6.24 40. 52 0. 10 7. 66 2. 15
SCAQMD Regional Significance
Threshold
55 55 550 750 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD Regional
Threshold?
No No No No No No
Winter Emissions
Mobile Source 3. 63 3. 66 27.69 0. 08 7. 44 1. 93
Area Source 5. 01 1. 87 0.80 0. 01 0. 15 0. 15
Energy Source 0.05 0.89 0.38 0. 01 0. 07 0. 07
Total: 8. 68 6.43 28. 87 0. 10 7. 66 2. 15
SCAQMD Regional Significance
Threshold
55 55 550 750 750 55
Exceed SCAQMD Regional
Threshold?
No No No No No No
Source: California Energy Emissions Model ( CalEEMod) version 2022. 1. 1. 26. Refer to Urban Crossroads 2024a for Model Data Outputs.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 18 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
150
Draft Initial Study and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration
As shown in Table 4. 3- 3, the Project' s emissions would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds for any criteria air pollutants during operation.

The San Bernardino County portion of the SoCAB is listed as a nonattainment area for federal 03, PM2 s standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for 03, PM2. 5 and PM, o ( Urban Crossroads 2024a). 03 is a health threat to people who already suffer from respiratory diseases and can cause severe ear, nose and throat irritation and increases susceptibility to respiratory infections. PM can adversely affect the human respiratory system. As shown in Table 4.3- 3, the Proposed Project would result in increased emissions of the 03 precursor pollutants ROG and NO,,, PM, o, and PM2. 5, however, the correlation between a project' s emissions and increases in nonattainment days, or frequency or severity of related illnesses, cannot be accurately quantified. The overall strategy for reducing air pollution and related health effects in the SCAQMD is contained in the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP. The AQMP provides control measures that reduce emissions to attain federal ambient air quality standards by their applicable deadlines such as the application of available cleaner technologies, best management practices, incentive programs, as well as development and implementation of zero and near -zero technologies and control methods. The CEQA thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD are designed to meet the objectives of the AQMP and in doing so achieve attainment status with state and federal standards. As noted above, the Project would increase the emission of these pollutants but would not exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD for purposes of reducing air pollution and its deleterious health effects.

Localized Operational Significance Analysis
According to the SCAQMD localized significance threshold methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project only if the project includes stationary sources ( e. g., smokestacks) or attracts heavy- duty trucks that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site ( e. g., warehouse or transfer facilities). The Proposed Project does not include such uses. Therefore, in the case of the Proposed Project, the operational LST protocol is not applied. This impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Less than
Significant
Potentially With Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial r
pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact.

As previously described, sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over age 65, children under age 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 19 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095.03
151
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. The location of nearest residences assessed as sensitive receptors relative to the Project Site are shown on Figure 6.

Construction - Generated Air Contaminants
Construction -related activities would result in temporary, short-term Proposed Project -generated emissions of diesel particulate matter ( DPM), ROG, NOx, CO, and PM, o from the exhaust of off -road, heavy- duty diesel equipment for site preparation ( e. g., clearing, grading); soil hauling truck traffic; paving; and other miscellaneous activities. The portion of the SoCAB which encompasses the Project area is designated as a nonattainment area for federal 03 and PM2.5 standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for 03, PM2. 5, and PM, o standards ( Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). Thus, existing 03, PM, o, and PM2_5 levels in the SoCAB are at unhealthy levels during certain periods. However, as shown in Table 4. 3- 1 and Table 4. 3- 2, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD regional or localized significance thresholds for emissions.

The health effects associated with 03 are generally associated with reduced lung function. Because the Project would not involve construction activities that would result in 03 precursor emissions ( ROG or NOx) in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, the Project is not anticipated to substantially contribute to regional 03 concentrations and the associated health impacts.

CO tends to have a localized impact associated with congested intersections. In terms of adverse health effects, CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, reducing the blood' s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of excess CO exposure can include dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of central nervous system functions. The Project would not involve construction activities that would result in CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds. Thus, the Project' s CO emissions would not contribute to the health effects associated with this pollutant.

Particulate matter (PM, o and PM2.5) contains microscopic solids or liquid droplets that are so small that they can get deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Particulate matter exposure has been linked to a variety of problems, including premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing. For construction activity, DPM is the primary TAC of concern. Based on the emission modeling conducted, the maximum onsite construction -related daily emissions of exhaust PM, o, considered a surrogate for DPM and includes emissions of exhaust PM2. 5, would be 4. 36 pounds per day for construction activities associated with the Proposed Project ( Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). PM, o exhaust is considered a surrogate for DPM as all diesel exhaust is considered to be DPM. As with 03 and NOx, the Project would not generate emissions of PM, o or PM2.5 that would exceed the SCAQMD' s thresholds. Accordingly, the Project' s PM,() and PM2. 5 emissions are not expected to cause any increase in related regional health effects for these pollutants.

In summary, Project construction would not result in a potentially significant contribution to regional concentrations of nonattainment pollutants and would not result in a significant contribution to the adverse health impacts associated with those pollutants.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 20 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
152
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Operational Air Contaminants
Operation of the Proposed Project would not result in the development of any substantial sources of air toxics. There are no stationary sources associated with the operations of the Project; nor would the Project attract additional mobile sources that spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. Onsite Project emissions would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. The Project would not have a high carcinogenic or non -carcinogenic risk during operation.

Carbon Monoxide Plot Spots
It has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at intersections. Concentrations of CO are a direct function of the number of vehicles, length of delay, and traffic flow conditions. Under certain meteorological conditions, CO concentrations close to congested intersections that experience high levels of traffic and elevated background concentrations may reach unhealthy levels, affecting nearby sensitive receptors. Given the high traffic volume potential, areas of high CO concentrations, or " hot spots," are typically associated with intersections that are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service during the peak commute hours. It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections.

However, transport of this criteria pollutant is extremely limited, and CO disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. Furthermore, vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly more stringent in the last 20 years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams/ mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control technologies, CO concentration in the SoCAB is designated as in attainment. Detailed modeling of Project -specific CO " hot spots" is not necessary and thus this potential impact is addressed qualitatively.

A CO " hot spot" would occur if an exceedance of the state one -hour standard of 20 parts per million ppm) or the eight -hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur. The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the South Coast Air Quality Management District' s ( SCAQMD' s) 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide in Los Angeles County and a Modeling and Attainment Demonstration prepared by the SCAQMD as part of the 2003 AQMP can be used to demonstrate the potential for CO exceedances of these standards. The SCAQMD is the air pollution control officer for much of southern California, including the Project Site. The SCAQMD conducted a CO hot spot analysis as part of the 1992 CO Federal Attainment Plan at four busy intersections in Los Angeles County during the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway Lynwood), Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue ( Westwood), Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue Hollywood), and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard ( Inglewood). The busiest intersection evaluated was at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. Despite this level of traffic, the CO analysis concluded that there was no violation of CO standards ( SCAQMD 1992). In order to establish a more accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the Los Angeles, a CO " hot spot" analysis was conducted in 2003 at the same four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. This " hot spot" analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards. The highest one -hour concentration was measured ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 21 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095.03
153
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
at 4. 6 ppm at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue and the highest eight -hour concentration was measured at 8. 4 ppm at Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway. Thus, there was no violation of CO standards.

Similar considerations are also employed by other Air Districts when evaluating potential CO concentration impacts. More specifically, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District ( BAAQMD), the air pollution control officer for the San Francisco Bay Area, concludes that under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a given project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour or 24, 000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/ or horizontal air does not mix — in order to generate a significant CO impact.

The Proposed Project is anticipated to result in 1, 066 daily traffic trips ( Urban Crossroads 2024a; Appendix A). Thus, the Proposed Project would not generate traffic volumes at any intersection of more than 100, 000 vehicles per day ( or 44,000 vehicles per day) and there is no likelihood of the Project traffic exceeding CO values. This impact is less than significant.

Less than
Significant
Potentially With Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Result in other emissions ( such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial F1 Ej Pri U number of people?
Less than Significant Impact.

Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person' s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological ( e. g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to physiological ( e. g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache).

With respect to odors, the human nose is the sole sensing device. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals have the ability to smell minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity but may have sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the same odor; in fact, an odor that is offensive to one person ( e. g., from a fast- food restaurant) may be perfectly acceptable to another. It is also important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity. Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of the smell experience. For instance, if a person describes an odor as flowery or sweet, then the person is describing the quality of the odor. Intensity refers to the strength of the odor.

For example, a person may use the word " strong" to describe the intensity of an odor. Odor intensity depends on the odorant concentration in the air. When an odorous sample is progressively diluted, the odorant concentration decreases. As this occurs, the odor intensity weakens and eventually becomes so low that the detection or recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point during dilution, the ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 22 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
154
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
concentration of the odorant reaches a detection threshold. An odorant concentration below the detection threshold means that the concentration in the air is not detectable by the average human.

Construction
During construction, the Proposed Project presents the potential for generation of objectionable odors in the form of diesel exhaust in the immediate vicinity of the site. However, these emissions are short- term in nature and will rapidly dissipate and be diluted by the atmosphere downwind of the emission sources.

Additionally, odors would be localized and generally confined to the construction area. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant construction - related odor impacts.

Operations
The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook ( 1993) identifies certain land uses as sources of odors. These land uses include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Proposed Project would not include any of the land uses that have been identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources.

Therefore, the Project would have less than significant operational -related odor impacts.

4. 3. 2 Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required.

4. 4 Biological Resources
This section is based on the analysis and recommendations presented in the Biological Technical Report BTR) prepared by ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP) for the Proposed Project ( ECORP 2025a, Appendix B).

Reconnaissance - level surveys of the 11. 98- acre Project Site were conducted as part of the BTR to identify plant communities and to assess the presence of suitable habitat for special -status plant and wildlife species. The BTR assessed the Proposed Project' s potential impacts to biological resources identified within the Project' s Biological Study Area ( BSA). The BSA is composed of the Proposed Project' s impact area plus a 500- foot buffer. The buffer was identified to determine potential indirect Project effects on sensitive biological resources that may not be present within the Proposed Project' s impact area but may be indirectly affected by Project activities if located in adjacent areas.

4. 4. 1 Environmental Setting
The Project Site consists of two adjacent parcels which are surrounded by roadways, residential developments, and open undeveloped land. The Project Site is located within an alluvial valley area of the San Bernardino Mountains, upstream of the confluence of Plunge Creek and the Santa Ana River. Soil types within the Project Site consist of Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes; Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes; Psamments, Fluvents, and frequently flooded soils; Soboba gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes; and Soboba stony loamy sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes ( ECORP 2025a). The Project Site is located north of Greenspot Road and is detached from the Santa Ana River floodplain and has been disconnected from periodic flooding and scouring, typical of an alluvial area, due to flood control improvements in the area.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 23 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
155
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 4. 1. 1 Vegetation Communities
The Project Site contained two vegetation communities and three land cover types, including scale broom scrub ( Lepidospartum squamatum shrubland alliance), wild oats and annual brome grasslands ( Avena spp.

Brornus spp. herbaceous semi -natural alliance), fallow agriculture, developed land, disturbed land, and disturbed land ( ECORP 2025a). The Project Site contained large areas of disturbed and developed land, and fallow agriculture, which typically do not provide suitable habitat for the special - status species that could occur in the vicinity of the Project Site. However, the Project Site did contain a large patch of scale broom scrub that could provide habitat for special -status plant and wildlife species.

Scale Broom Scrub
Scale broom scrub is characterized by scale broom as a dominant or codominant with cheese bush Ambrosia salsolo), California sagebrush ( Artemisia californica), California cholla ( Cylindropuntio californica), Brittlebush ( Encelia farinosa), and/ or California buckwheat ( Eriogonum fasciculatum) in an open to continuous shrub layer and variable or grassy herbaceous layer. It is found in intermittently or rarely flooded, low -gradient alluvial deposits along streams, washes, and fans, at elevations ranging from 164 to 4,921 feet (50 to 1, 500 meters) above mean sea level ( ECORP 2025a). Within the Project Site, scale broom scrub was dominated by scale broom and California buckwheat but was also degraded by heavy infestations of nonnative plants such as cheatgrass ( Bromus tectorum), mustard species ( Brassica spp.), foxtail chess ( Bromus rnadritensis), and redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium). Scale broom scrub was documented throughout most of the central portion of the Project Site. Approximately 4. 98 acres of scale broom scrub habitat were mapped within the Project Site.

Wild Oats and Annual Brome Grassland
Wild oats and annual brome grasslands are described as having wild oats and brome species as the dominant or co -dominant species with other nonnatives in the herbaceous layer. This vegetation community is typically composed of annual grasses which originated in the Mediterranean region, which is climatically like southern California, making it easy for them to thrive. Characteristic species include wild oats, foxtail chess, cheatgrass, and ripgut brome. This vegetation community can occur in all topographic settings but is often associated with abandoned fields, eroded washes, overgrazed rangeland, road verges, foothills, waste places, and lower montane slopes. Associated plant species within this community on the Project Site included wild oat, foxtail chess, mustard, and cheatgrass in the north central portion of the Project Site. Approximately 2. 41 acres of Wild oats and annual brome grasslands habitat were mapped within the Project Site ( ECORP 2025a).

Fallow Agriculture
Areas designated as fallow agriculture have previously contained agriculture but are no longer actively being farmed and contain either escaped cultivars or nonnative species. Fallow agriculture is not a vegetation community classification, but rather a land use type that is not restricted to a known elevation.

Within the Project Site, fallow agriculture usually consisted of recently disced areas that contained emergent nonnative grasses and forbs, such as cheatgrass, ripgut brome, and doveweed ( Croton setiger).

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 24 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
156
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Fallow agriculture was documented along the western border of the Project Site. Approximately 1. 20 acres of fallow agriculture were mapped within the Project Site ( ECORP 2025a).

Disturbed
The disturbed classification includes areas where the native vegetation community has been heavily influenced by human actions, such as grading, trash dumping, and off -road use, but lacks development.

Disturbed is not a vegetation classification, but rather a land cover type and is not typically restricted to a known elevation. Disturbed areas located throughout the Project Site included an area previously used for storing agricultural equipment along the northwest border of the Project Site and a recently graded area south and east of Alta Vista. In areas classified as disturbed, vegetation was absent or sparse and consisted primarily of nonnative species, such as red brome, redstem filaree, and Mediterranean grass.

Approximately 3. 93 acres of disturbed land cover were mapped within the Project Site ( ECORP 2025a).

Developed
Areas designated as developed will have infrastructure present and any vegetation in the immediate surroundings represents ornamental landscaping. Developed is not a vegetation classification, but rather a land cover type and is not restricted to a known elevation. The developed area within the Project Site was associated with the Alta Vista ROW which accounts for approximately 1. 02 acres of developed land cover were mapped within the Project Site ( ECORP 2025a).

4.4. 1. 2 Plants
Plant species observed on the Project Site were generally characteristic of scale broom scrub and wild oats and annual brome grasslands. Common plants identified on the Project Site included ripgut grass, common mediterranean grass, California buckwheat, scalebroom, and brittlebush. A full list of plant species observed on the Project Site is included in Appendix B ( ECORP 2025a).

4.4. 1. 3 Wildlife
Wildlife species observed on the Project Site were generally characteristic of the vegetation communities mapped onsite. Vegetation communities that provide wildlife habitat onsite include scale broom scrub, wild oats, annual brome grasslands, and disturbed areas. Some of the wildlife species present on the Project Site at the time of the survey included side -blotched lizard ( Uto stansburiona), California scrub jay Aphelocomo colifornica), California quail ( Collipepla colifornica), Anna' s hummingbird ( Colypte anna), and house finch ( Hoemorhous mexicanus). A full list of wildlife species observed on and adjacent to the Project Site is included in Appendix B ( ECORP 2025a).

4.4. 7. 4 Potential Waters of the U.S.

ECORP prepared an Aquatic Resource Delineation ( ARD) for the Proposed Project ( ECORP 2025b; Appendix Q. As part of the ARID, ECORP mapped a total of 0.008- acres of potential California Department of Fish and Wildlife ( CDFW) jurisdiction, and approximately 0. 001- acres of aquatic resources ( Non - Wetland waters — Intermittent Drainage) within the Study Area. However, ECORP identified that no ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 25 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
157
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
wetlands are located within the area of development, Furthermore, none of the aquatic features present support wetland characteristics ( ECORP 2025b).

4. 4. 1. 5 Special - Status Plants
There were 32 special -status plant species that appeared in the literature review and database searches that could occur on and/ or near the Project Site ( ECORP 2025a). A list was generated from the results of the literature review and the Project was evaluated for suitable habitat that could support any of the special - status plant species on the list. Of the 32 special - status plants identified in the literature review, five species were found to have a high potential to occur, two have a moderate potential to occur and nine have a low potential to occur. The remaining 16 species are presumed absent from the Project Site. A table outlining each species, their designations, and the potential for these species to occur on the Project Site can be found in Appendix B ( ECORP 2025a).

4.4. 1. 6 Special - Status Wildlife
The literature search documented 48 special - status wildlife species that occur within the vicinity of the Project Site. A list was generated from the results of the literature review and the Project Site was evaluated for suitable habitat that could support any of the special - status wildlife species on the list. The Project Site' s disturbed nature, proximity to commercial development, and the presence of anthropogenic influences on the site likely preclude many of these species from occurring. A complete list of the 48 special - status wildlife species, with details regarding habitat requirements and potential for occurrence designations, is included in Appendix B ( ECORP 2025a).

4.4. 7. 7 Wildlife Movement Corridors
Although the Project Site is undeveloped, it is surrounded by development to the north, east, and west and isolated from large, contiguous blocks of native habitat. The Project Site is bordered by Santa Ana Canyon Road to the north, Greenspot Road to the south, and Aurantia Park to the west. Alta Vista Road bisects the southeast section of the Project Site. These features isolate the habitat that is present within the Project Site from its surrounding area and provide potential barriers to wildlife movement.

Additionally, the lack of consistent vegetative cover within the Project Site, the urban nature of the site, and the high level of disturbance on and in. the vicinity of the site would likely deter wildlife from using the Project Site for movement opportunities. Although wildlife could pass through the site while moving about their home range, it would not be considered a movement corridor, linkage, or significant ecological area.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 26 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
158
Draft Initial Studv and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 4. 2 Biological Resources ( IV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- C
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The Project Site contained two vegetation communities and three land cover types, including scale broom scrub, wild oats and annual brome grasslands„ fallow agriculture, developed land, and disturbed land. The areas of disturbed and developed land, and fallow agriculture typically do not provide suitable habitat for the special -status species that could occur in the vicinity of the Project Site. The literature review and database searches identified 32 special -status plant species that could occur in the vicinity of the Project Site. Of the 32 special - status plant species, five species ( Parry' s spineflower, slender - horned spineflower, Santa Ana River woollystar, California satintail, and salt spring checkerbloom) were determined to have a high potential to occur on the Project Site, two species ( Nevin' s barberry and white bracted spineflower) were determined to have a moderate potential to occur on the Project Site, and nine species ( chaparral sand -verbena, Jaeger' s milk -vetch, thread -leaved brodiaea, smooth tarplant, mesa horkelia, Parish' s desert -thorn, Parish' s bush -mallow, chaparral ragwort, and San Bernardino aster) were determined to have a low potential to occur on the Project Site based on the habitat present and documented species records within five miles of the Project Site. Sixteen species were also presumed absent from the Project Site due to the lack of suitable habitat ( including elevation, soils, and vegetation communities) or because the Project is located outside of the known range for the species. A focused protocol -level rare plant survey conducted in 2016 was negative and no special -status plant species were observed ( LSA 2016c).

Additionally, no special - status or rare plants were identified during the biological survey conducted in 2023 or 2024. Nonetheless, four special -status plant species with potential to occur on the Project Site are federally or state -listed species ( slender -horned spineflower, Santa Ana River woollystar, Nevin' s barberry, and thread - leaved brodiaea) and any direct impacts associated with Project implementation to these species would be considered significant under CEQA. If special - status plants are present on the Project Site, direct impacts in the form of ground disturbance, vegetation removal, habitat loss, and mortality may occur. Impacts to special -status plants would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 1 and BIO- 2.

The literature review and database searches identified 48 special - status wildlife species that could occur in the vicinity of the Project Site, and although no special - status wildlife species were documented during the biological reconnaissance surveys, one special - status species ( San Diego desert woodrat) was captured during focused San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) trapping surveys ( LSA 2016a; ECORP 2023).

Additionally, the Project Site contained suitable habitat for 13 special -status wildlife species with varying ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 27 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
159
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
levels of potential to occur. Of those 13 species, five species were determined to have a high or moderate potential to occur: California glossy snake, red -diamond rattle snake, coastal California gnatcatcher, Crotch bumble bee, and Los Angeles pocket mouse. California glossy snake, red -diamond rattlesnake, and Los Angeles pocket mouse are all CDFW SSC, and if present on the Project Site, these species could be subject to direct impacts through ground disturbance and indirect impacts from construction noise, vibrations, and increased human activity related to the development of the Project Site. However, due to the lack of high -quality habitat within the Project Site, the site' s history of anthropogenic disturbances, and the presence of urban development immediately adjacent to the Project Site, if present on the Project Site, these three species are only expected to occur in low density and Project -related impacts would not be expected to contribute to the overall decline of populations for these species. Therefore, impacts to California glossy snake and red -diamond rattlesnake would not be considered significant under CEQA, and additional surveys and mitigation are not necessary.

Suitable habitat for coastal California gnatcatcher was present within the scale broom scrub vegetation on the Project Site. Focused protocol - level presence/ absence surveys conducted in 2016 were negative and no gnatcatchers were detected during the survey ( LSA 2016b). Although this species is not expected to occur on the Project Site, if present, this species could be subject to direct impacts through ground disturbance and vegetation removal and indirect impacts from construction noise, vibrations, and increased human activity related to the development of the Project Site. Coastal California gnatcatchers are a federally listed ( endangered) species and any direct or indirect impacts to coastal California gnatcatchers associated with Project implementation would be considered significant under CEQA.

However, impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 2 and BIO- 5.

Crotch bumble bee (candidate species for listing [ endangered] under the California Endangered Species Act) was determined to have a moderate potential to occur on the Project Site based on the presence of marginally suitable habitat and recent species records, but not within five miles of the Project Site. No Crotch bumble bees were observed during the 2023 and 2024 biological surveys. However, if present on the Project Site, this species could be subject to direct impacts through ground disturbance and vegetation removal and indirect impacts from construction noise, vibrations, and increased human activity related to the development of the Project Site. Any direct impacts to Crotch bumble bee associated with Project implementation would be considered significant under CEQA. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 2 and BIO- 3 would reduce impacts to Crotch bumble bee to a level that is less than significant.

Eight species were determined to have a low potential to occur due the presence of marginally suitable habitat for the species occurring on site and a known occurrence has been reported in the database, but not within five miles of the site; or a historic documented observation ( more than 20 years old) was recorded within five miles of the Project Site; or suitable habitat strongly associated with the species occurs on site, but no records were found in the database search. Of these eight species, two are listed or proposed for listing, including burrowing owl ( state candidate for listing [endangered/ threatened]) and San Bernardino kangaroo rat (federally listed [ endangered], state listed [ endangered]. Focused protocol level surveys conducted for these two species in 2016, and an additional focused protocol -level San ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 28 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
160
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Bernardino kangaroo rat survey conducted in 2023 were negative and no burrowing owl or San Bernardino kangaroo rat were observed or detected ( LSA 2016a; LSA 2016d; ECORP 2023). Additionally, no burrowing owls or burrowing owl burrows were observed or detected during the 2023 and 2024 biological surveys. Although these species are not expected to occur on the Project Site, if present, they could be subject to direct impacts through ground disturbance and vegetation removal and indirect impacts from construction noise, vibrations, and increased human activity related to the development of the Project Site. Any direct or indirect impacts to San Bernardino kangaroo rat and/ or direct impacts to burrowing owl associated with Project implementation would be considered significant under CEQA.

However, impacts to burrowing owl would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 2, B10- 4, BIO- 5 and impacts to San Bernardino kangaroo rat would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 2 and BIO- 6.

The remaining 34 special -status wildlife species are presumed absent from occurring on or adjacent to the site due to the lack of suitable habitat; proximity to the surrounding residential, commercial, and industrial development; and the presence of anthropogenic disturbances associated with the commercial and industrial development surrounding the site. Nosignificant impacts tothe 34 special - status wildlife species that are presumed absent are anticipated toresult from the development ofthis Project, and additional surveys and mitigation measures are not required at this time. The trees and large shrubs on the Project Site, as well as the trees adjacent tothe Project Site, could provide nesting habitat for nesting birds and raptors protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META) and California Fish and Game Code. Furthermore, the Project Site could provide nesting habitat for ground - nesting bird species. If constructionfthe Proposed Project occurs during the bird breeding season ( typically February1through August 31), ground - disturbing construction activities could directly affect birds protected bythe MBTA and their nests through the removal of habitat on the Project Site, and. indirectly through increased noise, vibrations, and increased human activity. However, impacts tonesting birds would be less than significant with the implementation , of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 and BIO- 5. Therefore, with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6all potential Project related impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special - status species would be reduced to a less than significant level. Less
than Potentially
Significant with Less than Would
the Project' Significant
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact Impact b)
Have asubstantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies, l
U regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less
than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The
Project Site contained twovegetation communities andthree land cover types, including scale broom scrub, wild oats and annual brome grasslands, fallow agriculture, developed land, and disturbed land ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 29 April 2025 Residences
at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
161
Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration
ECORP 2025a; Appendix B). The Project Site does not contain any riparian habitat and the removal of the remnant area of scale broom scrub would not be significant if determined to be devoid of listed species, since it is a fragmented habitat area separated from Plunge Creek watershed. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 1, BIO- 3, BIO- 4, BIO- 5, and Bio- 6, the potential Project related impacts to other sensitive natural communities would be reduced to a less than significant threshold.

Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands ( including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) F1 E
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
No Impact.

The BTR identified features that required further investigation, as such, ECORP prepared an Aquatic Resource Delineation ( ECORP 2025b; Appendix Q. No wetlands are located within the Study Area. None of the aquatic features present within the ARID Study Area supported wetland characteristics. ECORP mapped a total of 0. 008- acre of potential CDFW jurisdiction within the Study Area across Plunge Creek, which consisted of a partially vegetated streambed. No riparian vegetation communities are present within the Study Area. One intermittent drainage was mapped within the Project Site, Plunge Creek, a small portion flows across the southeastern portion of the Study Area.

The placement of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U. S. would require a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ( CWA) and certification or waiver in compliance with Section 401 of the CWA. The placement of dredge or fill material into Waters of the State that are not Waters of the U. S. would require issuance of a Waste Discharge Requirement by the State or Regional Water Quality Control Board. Impacts to CDFW- regulated resources would require a Section 1600 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement by the CDFW.

ECORP mapped a total of 0.001- acre of intermittent drainage ( Plunge Creek) within the Study Area.

Approximately 0. 008- acre of streambed ( Plunge Creek) within the Study Area would likely be regulated under California Fish and Game Code Section 1600 ( ECORP 2025b; Appendix Q. These acreages represent a calculated estimation of the extent of aquatic resources within the Study Area and are subject to modification following an agency review and/ or verification process. Plunge Creek would be completely avoided and development of the Project would not impact Waters of the U. S., Waters of the State, or streambeds regulated under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code. Therefore, regulatory agency permits for impacts to aquatic resources will not be necessary. As the Project would avoid impacts to state and federal wetlands no impact would occur.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 30 April 202S
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 09S. 03
162
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or n 0 U7
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant Impact.

The Project Site is located adjacent to areas containing existing disturbances ( e. g., paved roads and residential developments). The Project Site could provide wildlife movement opportunities because it consists of open and unimpeded land. The Project Site is exposed and does not contain any large drainages that likely support wildlife movement through the area and the site' s value as a corridor is lessened by the fact that it borders residential developments to the north and the busy Greenspot Road to the south. The study area is separated from the pending Santa Ana River Wash Habitat Conservation Plan by Greenspot Road. No migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites were identified within the Project Site. No impacts to these resources are expected to occur during the development of the Project Site
Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree 0 L L7
preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant Impact.

The BTR notes that there are an estimated 25 non- native Peruvian pepper trees on the study area, which may or may not be considered " heritage trees." There is a cluster of multiple trunk native sycamore trees in the agricultural area of the property, which may meet criteria for City " heritage tree." Also, the laurel sumac shrubs are large specimens that may also be considered " heritage trees" ( ECORP 2025a: Appendix B). City ordinance (Ord. 103 § 4, 1990), defines a " heritage tree" as:

Any native, non- native, or ornamental live tree, shrub or woody plants in excess of 15 feet in height and having a single trunk circumference of 24 inches or more, as measured four and one- half feet above ground level; or multi- trunk tree( s) having a total circumference of 30 inches or more, measured four and one- half feet from ground level; or a stand of trees, the nature of which makes each dependent upon the others for survival; or any other tree as may be deemed historically or culturally significant by the community development director or designee because of size, condition, location, or aesthetic qualities. No person, firm, or corporation shall remove, relocate or destroy any heritage tree within the city limits, including an applicant for a building permit, without first obtaining a tree removal permit from the community development director or designee or reviewing authority. An ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 31 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
163
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
application for a tree removal permit shall be filed, together with any required fee as set by resolution of the city council, with the community development director on forms provided for the purpose.

Therefore, prior to issuance of a construction permit, the Project Proponent would be required by the City to apply for a tree removal permit with payment of all applicable fees prior to issuance of a building permit. With the payment of all applicable fees, and City approval, the Project would comply with local policies regarding the preservation of biological resources. A less than significant impact would occur.

Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community r D ri F1
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact.

San Bernardino Valley -Wide Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The proposed San Bernardino Valley -wide Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ( MSHCP) encompasses approximately 500 square miles containing six unlisted species, six State -listed as endangered or threatened species, 13 federally listed as endangered threatened species, and 53 species of special concern. The schedule for completion and adoption of the San Bernardino Valley -wide MSHCP` is uncertain at this time. Completion of the plan is not expected anytime within the near future. The City participated in previous planning efforts, with the intent of being a Local Permittee upon adoption of the plan.

Upper Santa Ana River Wash Land Management and Habitat Conservation Plan The Project Site is located outside of, but adjacent to areas covered by the finalized Upper Santa Ana River Wash Land Management and Habitat Conservation Plan ( HCP) for the Upper Santa Ana Wash. This HCP involves an area of approximately 4, 365 acres located in the upper Santa Ana River Wash area. The HCP was completed in July 2020 following Federal approval, marking the culmination of a two -decade planning process. The plan facilitates the enhancement of facilities planned for the Wash area. It should be noted that activities related to all utilities belonging to Southern California Edison within the Project footprint and the East Branch Extension ( EBX) Foothill Pipeline, also located within the Project footprint, are excluded from the covered activities described in the HCP. The Project Site is separated from the Santa Ana River Wash Habitat Conservation Plan by Greenspot Road.

Covered Species are those species addressed in the finalized HCP for which conservation actions will be implemented and for which the applicants have received incidental take authorizations for a period of up to 30 years. These include two federally listed endangered plants ( Santa Ana River woollystar and slender - horned spineflower), the federally listed endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat, the federally listed ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 32 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
164
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
threatened coastal California gnatcatcher, and the cactus wren ( Campyforhynchus brunneicopiilus), which is not currently listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

The Project Site is not located in a species habitat conservation plan and the Proposed Project is not a Covered Activity. No action is necessary for compliance with the proposed Santa Ana River Wash Land Management and Habitat Conservation Plan. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan and no impact would occur.

4. 4. 3 Mitigation Measures
BIO- 1: Pre -construction Special -Status Plant Surveys. Prior to Project implementation a protocol -level pre -construction plant survey shall be conducted for the 16 special -status plant species that have varying levels of potential to occur on the Project Site, including Parry' s spineflower, slender -horned spineflower, Santa Ana River woollystar, California satintail, salt spring checkerbloom, Nevin' s Barberry, and thread -leaved brodiaea. The protocol - level survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of year when plants will both be evident and identifiable ( usually, during flowering or fruiting), the season or the year prior to the start of ground -breaking Project activities. The survey should be conducted by a qualified botanist or biologist experienced with surveying for and identifying these flora. The surveys should be conducted in consideration of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS) Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plants ( USFWS 1996), General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines ( Cypher 2002), CDFW' s Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities ( CDFW 2018), and the California Native Plant Society' s ( CNPS) Botanical Survey Guidelines ( CNPS 2001). If no federally or state -listed or California Rare Plant Rank ( CRPR) List 1 or 2 plant species are identified during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin, and no further action is necessary.

If CRPR List 1 or 2 plant species or any federally or state -listed plant species are observed on the Project Site during the survey, then a qualified botanist or biologist shall establish a non - disturbance buffer around the location( s) of the individuals or population. The size of the non - disturbance buffer shall be determined by the qualified botanist or biologist based on location of special - status species and expected construction activities. If one or more CRPR List 1 or 2 plant species or any state or federally listed plant species are found on the Project Site and avoidance of the location( s) is not feasible during Project construction, then the qualified biologist and the Project Proponent shall coordinate with CDFW and/ or USFWS to determine if additional mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation measures could include, but are not limited to, additional biological monitoring, seasonal work avoidance, seed collection, or transplanting.

B10- 2: Biological Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall be present to monitor all initial ground - disturbing and vegetation - clearing activities conducted for the Project. During each ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 33 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
165
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
monitoring day, the biological monitor shall perform clearance survey " sweeps" at the start of each workday that vegetation clearing takes place to minimize impacts on special - status species with potential to occur. The monitor will be responsible for ensuring that impacts to special - status species, nesting birds, and active nests will be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Biological monitoring shall take place until the Project Site has been completely cleared of any vegetation. If an active nest is identified, the biological monitor shall establish an appropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking.

Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest is deemed no longer active by the biologist. If special - status wildlife species are detected during biological monitoring activities, then consultation with the USFWS and/ or CDFW shall be conducted, and a mitigation plan shall be developed to avoid and offset impacts to these species. Mitigation measures may consist of work restrictions and/ or additional biological monitoring activities after ground -disturbing activities are complete.

BIO- 3: Pre -construction Crotch Bumble Bee Survey. If the Crotch bumble bee is no longer a Candidate or formally Listed species under the California Endangered Species Act at the time ground -disturbing activities occur, then no additional protection measures are proposed for the species.

If the Crotch bumble bee is legally protected under the California Endangered Species Act as a Candidate or Listed species at the time ground - disturbing activities are scheduled to occur, it is recommended pre -construction surveys be conducted in accordance with the established survey protocol provided by CDFW. If no such protocol is available and ground - disturbing activities are scheduled to occur during the Crotch bumble bee flight season February 16 through October 31), then it is recommended a minimum of two Crotch bumble bee pre- construction surveys are conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in identifying the species prior to ground disturbing activities ( including vegetation and tree removal). The surveys shall be conducted no more than 14 days and three ( 3) days prior to ground- disturbing activities and vegetation clearing activities that are to occur during the flight season.

Should vegetation removal or ground - disturbing activities be scheduled to begin during the overwintering season ( November 1 to February 15), when Crotch bumble bee are not detectable aboveground, then four ( 4) focused surveys shall be conducted at least three ( 3) weeks apart during the peak flight season ( late March through August) immediately prior to start of construction.

If Crotch bumble bee is determined to occur within the Project Site at any time, coordination with CDFW shall be required prior to the initiation of Project activities.

BIO- 4: Pre -construction Burrowing Owl Surveys. Pre - construction surveys for burrowing owls shall be conducted. Prior to ground disturbing activities, a qualified wildlife biologist ( i. e., a wildlife biologist with previous burrowing owl survey experience) shall conduct pre - construction surveys of the Project Site, plus a 500- foot buffer ( where access is permissible ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 34 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
166
Draft Initial Studv and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration
and suitable habitat is present), to locate active breeding or wintering burrowing owls and burrowing owl burrows between 30 and 14 days prior to construction. The survey methodology shall be consistent with the methods outlined in the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 2012). Additionally, a qualified biologist shall conduct a second pre -construction survey of the Project Site plus an approximately 500- foot buffer no more than 24 hours prior to the start of ground - disturbing activities associated with construction to identify any additional burrowing owls or burrows necessitating avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures.

If no burrowing owls or active burrowing owl burrows ( e. g., with sign present) are observed during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin, and no further action is necessary.

If burrowing owl( s) or suitable burrowing owl burrows with sign ( e. g., whitewash, pellets, feathers, prey remains) are identified on the Project Site during the surveys, these features must be completely avoided, and the qualified biologist and Project proponent shall coordinate with CDFW prior to preparing a Burrowing Owl Plan to determine the most appropriate avoidance measures. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall describe proposed avoidance, minimization, and monitoring actions. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall include the number and location of occupied burrow sites, acres of burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted, details of site monitoring, and details on proposed buffers and other avoidance measures if avoidance is proposed. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow cannot be avoided, the Burrowing Owl Plan shall also describe relocation actions that will be implemented. Proposed implementation of burrow exclusion and closure should only be considered as a last resort, after all other options have been evaluated as exclusion is not in itself an avoidance, minimization, or mitigation method and has the possibility to result in take. If impacts to occupied burrows cannot be avoided, information shall be provided regarding adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls along with proposed relocation actions. The Permittee shall implement the Burrowing Owl Plan following CDFW review and approval.

If ground - disturbing activities occur but the Project Site is left undisturbed for more than 30 days, a pre -construction survey for burrowing owl shall be conducted as described above. If a burrowing owl is found, the same coordination described above shall be necessary. 13I0- 5: Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. To lessen impacts to nesting birds and raptors, it is recommended that vegetation and tree removal be conducted between September 1 and January 31, outside of the typical nesting period for birds protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. If vegetation or tree removal, or initial ground disturbing Project activities are planned to occur during the nesting season ( typically February through August), then a pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be performed no more than three days prior to the start of construction to determine whether the site is being used for nesting. This will avoid violations of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503. 5, and 3513. The pre -construction nesting bird survey shall include the Project ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 35 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
167
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
impact area and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to cause nest failure. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in: identifying local and migratory bird species of special concern; conducting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology; nesting surveying techniques, recognizing breeding and nesting behaviors, locating nests and breeding territories, and identifying nesting stages and nest success; determining/ establishing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures; and monitoring the efficacy of implemented avoidance and minimization measures..

The pre -construction survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day, during appropriate weather conditions, no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of Project activities. The surveys shall encompass all suitable areas including trees, shrubs, bare ground, burrows, cavities, and structures. Survey duration shall take into consideration the size of the Project Site; density, and complexity of the habitat; number of survey participants; survey techniques employed; and shall be sufficient to ensure the data collected is complete and accurate.

If no nesting birds are observed during the survey, Project Site preparation and construction activities may begin. If active nests are found, they shall be flagged and a qualified biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nest ( generally a minimum of 200 feet up to 500 feet for raptors and a minimum of 50 feet up to 300 feet for passerine species, with specific buffer widths to be determined by a qualified biologist. The buffer around the nest shall be delineated and flagged, and no construction activity shall occur within the buffer area until a qualified biologist determines nesting species have fledged and the nest is no longer active, or the nest has failed. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of Project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such Project activities ( e. g., increase in number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy of the buffer. If the qualified biologist determines that such Project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the qualified biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within these buffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished ( i. e., thejuveniles are surviving independent from the nest) or failed.

The qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found.
13I0- 6: Pre -construction San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Survey. Within two years prior to the start of Project activities, a biologist in possession of a Federal 10( a)( 1)( A) Recovery Permit and CDFW Scientific Collecting Permit and Memorandum of Understanding shall perform SBKR trapping surveys in accordance with the protocols outlined by USFWS and in the biologist' s permit. The survey shall consist of five consecutive nights of trapping, when the animal is active above ground and when the overnight temperatures are 50 degrees Fahrenheit or higher, while avoiding periods of overnight precipitation. The traps shall be spaced ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 36 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
168
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
approximately 10 meters apart and set in habitats most likely to yield SBKR, to confirm presence/ absence of the species.

If San Bernardino kangaroo rat is found on the Project Site and avoidance of the location( s) is not feasible then coordination with CDFW and USFWS shall occur prior to the initiation of Project activities.

4. 5 Cultural Resources
ECORP Consulting, Inc. ( ECORP) prepared a Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ( ECORP 2025c; Appendix D) for the Proposed Project to determine if cultural resources were present in or adjacent to the Project Area and assess the sensitivity of the Project Area for undiscovered or buried cultural resources. Cultural resources include prehistoric archaeological sites, historic archaeological sites, and historic structures, and generally consist of artifacts, food waste, structures, and facilities made by people in the past. Prehistoric archaeological sites are places that contain the material remains of activities carried out by the native population of the area ( i. e., Native Americans) prior to the arrival of Europeans in Southern California. Places that contain the material remains of activities carried out by people during the period when written records were produced after the arrival of Europeans are considered historic archaeological sites. Historic structures include houses, garages, barns, commercial structures, industrial facilities, community buildings, and other structures and facilities that are more than 50 years old. Historic structures may also have associated archaeological deposits, such as abandoned wells, cellars, privies, refuse deposits, and foundations of former outbuildings.

The information provided below is an abridged version of the Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report and is included here to provide a brief context of the potential cultural resources in the Project Area. Due to the sensitive nature of cultural resources and their records and documentation, which are restricted from public distribution by state and federal law, the IS/ MND appendices do not include the cultural resources report; however, all pertinent information necessary for impact determinations is included in this section. A redacted version of the cultural resources report that does not include site records or locations may be obtained by contacting the City of Highland.

4. 5. 1 Environmental Setting
The records search results indicate 39 previously recorded historic -era cultural resources are located within one mile of the Project Area. However, these resources are primarily associated with infrastructure and water conveyance systems. None of the 39 resources are located within the Project Area. The nearest resource to the Project Area is the historic - era Greenspot Road Bridge over Plunge Creek. This resource was previously evaluated as not eligible for listing on the Caltrans Historic Bridge Inventory. It was relocated within close proximity to Aurantia Park and replaced in 1992.

ECORP contacted the California Native American Heritage Commission ( NAHC) on April 9, 2024, to request a search of the Sacred Lands File for the Area of Potential Effect ( APE) ( Appendix D). This search was to determine whether Sacred Lands have been recorded by California Native American tribes within the APE, because the Sacred Lands File is populated by members of the Native American community with knowledge of the locations of tribal resources. In requesting a search of the Sacred Lands File ( SLF), ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 37 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
169
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
ECORP solicited information from the Native American community regarding TCRs, but the responsibility to formally consult with the Native American community lies exclusively with the federal and local agencies under applicable state and federal law. The results of the Sacred Lands File search by the NAHC were positive for the presence of Native American Cultural Resources within the Project Area.

ECORP was not delegated authority by the lead agency to conduct tribal consultation.

4. 5. 2 Cultural Resources ( V) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to t1ri El U7 15064. 5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.

An Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report was prepared by ECORP in 2025 ( ECORP 2025c; Appendix D) for the Project to determine if cultural resources were present in or adjacent to the Project Area and assess the sensitivity of the Project Area for undiscovered or buried cultural resources.

ECORP surveyed the Project Area for archaeological resources in 2024. As a result of the field survey, ECORP recorded five cultural resources within the Project Area: EH- 01, EH- 02, EH- 03, EH- 04, and EH- 05- I.

EH- 01 is a historic - period refuse deposit, EH- 02 is a historic - period foundation, EH- 03 and EH- 04 are pre - contact bedrock milling features, and EH- 05- 1 is a granite mano.

ECORP then conducted subsurface testing at resource EH- 01 through EH- 04 in 2025, under the supervision of a tribal monitor from the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation. Resource EH- 05 was not tested, as isolated artifacts do not have associated cultural materials that can be excavated. Further discussion of resource testing results is provided in Appendix D.

ECORP evaluated the significance of all five historic - period resources using the National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources eligibility criteria. ECORP evaluated resources EH- 01, EH- 02, EH- 03, and EH- 05- 1, and recommends that they are not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP and CRHR and, therefore, are not Historical Resources under CEQA or Historic Properties under National Historic Preservation Act ( NHPA) Section 106. ECORP evaluated EH- 04, and concludes this resource has sufficient integrity given the presence of in situ subsurface resources to yield important information. Additionally, the Sacred Lands File search by the NAHC was positive, indicating the presence of Native American resources within the Project Area. Therefore, ECORP recommends site EH- 04 be considered eligible for inclusion in the NRHP and CRHR under Criterion D/ 4; therefore, site EH- 04 is considered a Historical Resource as defined by CEQA or Historic Property under NHPA Section 106. As EH- 04 is considered a Historical Resource as defined by CEQA, the Project has the potential to result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL- 1, would ensure that impacts to resource EH- 04 would be reduced to a less than significant level.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 38 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
170
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource E7 LF
pursuant to § 15064. 5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.

Due to the presence of alluvium along Plunge Creek and the likelihood of pre -contact archaeological sites located along perennial waterways, combined with the positive results from a search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File, and the presence of subsurface resources determined by the testing program, the Project Area has a moderate - to -high potential for buried pre -contact archaeological sites. If previously unrecorded historical resources are encountered during construction, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL- 2, CUL- 3, and CUL- 4 would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant threshold.

Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.

No formal cemeteries are located in or near the Project Area. However, the possibility exists that human remains could be uncovered during construction of the Proposed Project. Additionally, most Native American human remains are found in prehistoric and archeological sites. Due to the presence of alluvium along Plunge Creek and the likelihood of pre -contact archaeological sites located along perennial waterways, combined with the positive results from a search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File, and the presence of subsurface resources determined by the testing program, the Project Area has a moderate - to -high potential for buried pre -contact archaeological sites (ECORP 2025c Appendix D). Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL- 2, CUL- 3, and CUL- 4 would ensure that impacts to human remains are less than significant.

4. 5. 3 Mitigation Measures
CUL- 1: Monitoring and Treatment Plan. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is reflective of the project mitigation (" Cultural Resources" and " Tribal Cultural Resources") shall be completed by the archaeologist and submitted to the Lead Agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Management Department ( YSMN, also known as San Manuel Band of Mission Indians). Once all parties review and approve the plan, it shall be adopted by the Lead Agency — the plan must be adopted prior to permitting for the project. Any and all findings will be subject to the protocol detailed within the Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 39 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
171
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
CUL- 2: Contractor Awareness Training. The Lead Agency shall ensure that a Contractor Awareness Training Program is delivered to train equipment operators about cultural resources. The program shall be designed to inform construction personnel about: federal and state regulations pertaining to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources; the subsurface indicators of resources that shall require a work stoppage; procedures for notifying the lead agency of any occurrences; Project -specific requirements and mitigation measures; and enforcement of penalties and repercussions for non- compliance with the program.

The training shall be prepared by a qualified professional archaeologist and may be provided either through a brochure, video, or in -person tailgate meeting. The training shall be provided to all construction supervisors, forepersons, and operators of ground -disturbing equipment. All personnel shall be required to sign a training roster. The construction manager is responsible for ensuring that all required personnel receive the training. The Construction Manager shall provide a copy of the signed training roster to the lead agency as proof of compliance.

CUL- 3: Archaeological Monitoring. Due to the heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed project area, an archaeological monitor with at least 3 years of regional experience in archaeology shall be present for all ground -disturbing activities that occur within the proposed project area ( which includes, but is not limited to, tree/ shrub removal and planting, clearing/ grubbing, grading, excavation, trenching, compaction, fence/ gate removal and installation, drainage and irrigation removal and installation, hardscape installation benches, signage, boulders, walls, seat walls, fountains, etc.], and archaeological work). A sufficient number of archaeological monitors shall be present each work day to ensure that simultaneously occurring ground disturbing activities receive thorough levels of monitoring coverage.

CUL- 4: Post Review Discovery. There always remains the potential for ground - disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources. Both CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA require the lead agency to address any unanticipated cultural resource discoveries during Project construction. Therefore, ECORP recommends the following procedures.

If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100- foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior' s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology, shall evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no - work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find:

If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 40 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
172
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
o
If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the lead agencies. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined by CEQA or a historic property under Section 106 NHPA, if applicable. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA or a Historic Property under Section 106; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

If the find represents a Native American or potentially Native American resource that does not include human remains, then the agencies shall consult with the tribes on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 21074 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Preservation in place is the preferred treatment, if feasible. Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Tribal Cultural Resource under CEQA; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.
o If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance ( AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner ( per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).

The provisions of § 7050. 5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097. 98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant ( MLD) for the Project (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097. 94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097. 98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located ( AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no -work radius until the ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 41 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
173
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

4. 6 Energy
This section is based in part on the results of the Energy Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads in September 2024 ( Urban Crossroads 2024b; Appendix Q. This IS/ MND analyzes energy consumption due to the potential direct and indirect environmental impacts associated with the Project. Such impacts include the depletion of nonrenewable resources ( e. g., oil, natural gas, coal) and emissions of pollutants during the construction and operational phases.

4. 6. 1 Environmental Setting
Energy relates directly to environmental quality. Energy use can adversely affect air quality and other natural resources. The vast majority of California' s air pollution is caused by burning fossil fuels.

Consumption of fossil fuels is linked to changes in global climate and depletion of stratospheric ozone.

Transportation energy use is related to the fuel efficiency of cars, trucks, and public transportation; choice of different travel modes ( auto, carpool, and public transit); vehicle speeds; and miles traveled by these modes. Construction and routine operation and maintenance of transportation infrastructure also consume energy. In addition, residential, commercial, and industrial land uses consume energy, typically through the usage of natural gas and electricity.

4. 6. 7. 1 Energy Types and Sources
California relies on a regional power system comprised of a diverse mix of natural gas, renewable, hydroelectric, and nuclear generation resources. Natural gas provides California with a majority of its electricity followed by renewables, large hydroelectric and nuclear ( California Energy Commissions [ CEC] 2021). Southern California Edison ( SCE) provides electrical services to Highland through state -regulated public utility contracts. Southern California Edison, the largest subsidiary of Edison International, is the primary electricity supply company for much of Southern California. It provides 15 million people with electricity across a service territory of approximately 50, 000 square miles.

The California Public Utilities Commission ( CPUC) regulates SCE. The CPUC has developed energy efficiency programs such as smart meters, low- income programs, distribution generation programs, self - generation incentive programs, and a California solar initiative. Additionally, the CEC maintains a power plant database that describes all of the operating power plants in the state by county.

SoCalGas provides natural gas services to the Project Area and services approximately 5. 9 million customers, spanning roughly 20,000 square miles of California.

4. 6. 1. 2 Existing Transmission and Distribution Facilities The components of transmission and distribution systems include the generating facility, switching yards and stations, primary substation, distribution substations, distribution transformers, various sized transmission lines, and the customers. The United States contains over a quarter million miles of ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 42 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095.03
174
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
transmission lines, most of them capable of handling voltages between 115 kilovolts ( kV) and 345 kV, and a handful of systems of up to 500 kV and 765 kV capacity. Transmission lines are rated according to the amount of power they can carry, the product of the current ( rate of flow), and the voltage ( electrical pressure). Generally, transmission is more efficient at higher voltages. Generating facilities, hydro -electric dams, and power plants usually produce electrical energy at fairly low voltages, which is increased by transformers in substations. From there, the energy proceeds through switching facilities to the transmission lines. At various points in the system, the energy is " stepped down" to lower voltages for distribution to customers. Power lines are either high voltage ( 115, 230, 500, and 765 kV) transmission lines or low voltage ( 12, 24, and 60 kV) distribution lines. Overhead transmission lines consist of the wires carrying the electrical energy (conductors), insulators, support towers, and grounded wires to protect the lines from lightening ( called shield wires). Towers must meet the structural requirements of the system in several ways. They must be able to support both the electrical wires, the conductors, and the shield wires under varying weather conditions, including wind and ice loading, as well as a possible unbalanced pull caused by one or two wires breaking on one side of a tower. Every mile or so, a " dead- end" tower must be able to take the strain resulting if all the wires on one side of a tower break. Every change in direction requires a special tower design. In addition, the number of towers required per mile varies depending on the electrical standards, weather conditions, and the terrain. All towers must have appropriate foundations and be available at fairly regular spacing along a continuous route accessible for both construction and maintenance.

A right- of- way is a fundamental requirement for all transmission lines. A right- of-way must be kept clear of vegetation that could obstruct the lines or towers by falling limbs or interfering with the sag or wind sway of the overhead lines. If necessary, land acquisition and maintenance requirements can be substantial. The dimensions of a right- of- way depends on the voltage and number of circuits carried and the tower design. Typically, transmission line rights -of -way range from 100 to 300 feet in width. The electric power supply grid within San Bernardino County is part of a larger supply network operated and maintained by SCE that encompasses a large portion of the Southern California region. This system ties into yet a larger grid known as the California Power Pool that connects with the San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric Companies. These companies coordinate the development and operation, as well as purchase, sale, and exchange of power throughout the State of California. Within San Bernardino County, SCE owns most of the transmission and distribution facilities.

The California Independent System Operator ( CAISO) manages the flow of electricity across the high - voltage, long- distance power lines ( high -voltage transmissions system) that make up 80 percent of California' s and a small part of Nevada' s grid. This nonprofit public benefit corporation keeps power moving to and throughout California by operating a competitive wholesale electricity market, designed to promote a broad range of resources at lower prices, and managing the reliability of the electrical transmission grid. In managing the grid, CAISO centrally dispatches generation and coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in California. As the only independent grid operator in the western U. S., CAISO grants equal access to 26,000 circuit miles of transmission lines and coordinates competing and diverse energy resources into the grid where it is distributed to consumers. Every five minutes, CAISO forecasts electrical demand and dispatches the lowest cost generator to meet demand while ensuring enough transmission capacity for delivery of power.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 43 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
175
Draft Initial Study and Mitiqated Neqative Declaration

4. 6. 2 Energy ( VI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project'
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during Project construction or operation?
Less Than Significant Impact.

Construction
Based on CalEEMod estimations within the modeling output files used to estimate GHG emissions associated with the Project, construction - related vehicle trips would result in approximately 231, 729 VMT and consume an estimated 13, 986 gallons of diesel fuel during the construction phases. Additionally, on - site construction equipment would consume an estimated 49, 800 gallons of diesel fuel. Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements that equipment be properly maintained would result in fuel savings. California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449 and 2485, limit idling from both on - road and off -road diesel- powered equipment and are enforced by CARB. Additionally, given the cost of fuel, contractors and owners have a strong financial incentive to avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy during construction.

Due to the temporary nature of construction and the financial incentives for developers and contractors to use energy -consuming resources in an efficient manner, the construction phase of the Proposed Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. Therefore, the construction -related impacts related to electricity and fuel consumption would be less than significant.

Operations
Operation of the Proposed Project would consume energy as part of building operations and transportation activities. Building operations would involve energy consumption for multiple purposes including, but not limited to, building heating and cooling, refrigeration, lighting, and electronics. Based on CalEEMod energy use estimations, operations for the Project would result in approximately 959, 825 kWh/ year of electricity and 3, 535,738 kBtu/ year of natural gas annually.

Development of the Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City' s latest adopted energy efficiency standards, which are based on the California Title 24 energy efficiency standards. Title 24 standards include a broad set of energy conservation requirements that apply to the structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems in a building. For example, the Title 24 Lighting Power Density requirements define the maximum wattage of lighting that can be used in a building based on its square footage. Title 24 standards are widely regarded as the most advanced energy efficiency standards, would help reduce the amount of energy required for lighting, water heating, and heating and air conditioning in buildings and promote energy conservation.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 44 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
176
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Operational energy would also be consumed during vehicle trips associated with the Project envisioned under the Proposed Project. Fuel consumption would be primarily related to vehicle use by residents and visitors associated with the Project. Based on CaIEEMod energy use estimations, Project -related vehicle trips would result in an approximately 3,725, 967 VMT and consume an estimated 147,418 gallons of gasoline and diesel combined, annually.

The Project would provide parking and EV infrastructure that would further reduce fuel consumption demand. For these reasons, operational - related transportation fuel consumption would not result in a significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant.

Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for C r renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact
The Project would be designed in a manner that is consistent with relevant energy conservation plans designed to encourage development that results in the efficient use of energy resources. The Project would be built to the Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, as specified in Title 24, Part 6, of the CCR ( Title 24) Title 24 was established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California' s energy consumption. Title 24 is updated approximately every three years.

The most recent Title 24 updates went into effect on January 1, 2020 ( 2019 Standards). The 2019 Standards focuses on several key areas to improve the energy efficiency of newly constructed and remodeled or altered buildings and are a major step toward meeting Zero Net Energy. Buildings permitted on or after January 1, 2020, must comply with the 2019 Standards. Additionally, in January 2010, the State of California adopted the California Green Building Standards Code ( CalGreen) that establishes mandatory green building standards for all buildings in California. The code was subsequently updated in 2013. The code covers five categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality.

Furthermore, the Project would also be consistent with the City' s General Plan Conservation and Sustainable Communities Element, which strives for energy efficient design in new development. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant.

4. 6. 3 Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 45 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
177
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

4. 7 Geology and Soils

4. 7. 1 Environmental Setting
The Project Site is relatively flat with a low gradient generally towards the west- northwest, with elevations ranging from approximately 1, 467 feet above mean sea level ( MSL) in the southeast corner to 1, 445 feet above MSL in the northwest corner. The surficial soils across the site are generally loose and dry with some cobbles and boulders exposed on the ground surface.

4. 7. 7. 7 Geomorphic Setting
A Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report was prepared by Petra Geosciences Inc. in August 2024 Petra 2024; Appendix F). The report presents data from background review, field exploration, and laboratory testing, providing conclusions regarding the geotechnical conditions at the Project Site, and provides recommendations regarding the design and construction of the proposed improvements.

Regionally, the Project Site is located within the northmost portion of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province ( PRGP), near the boundary with the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province on a portion of a large alluvial fan that extends southwest from the adjacent San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast.

The PRGP is composed of a series of ranges, separated by northwest trending valleys, subparallel to faults and extends south to Baja California, east to the Colorado Desert, and west into the Pacific Ocean.

Locally, the Project Site is located on an alluvial fan and active wash deposits emanating from Oak Creek, located less than one mile to the northeast. The alluvial -fan deposits in the vicinity of the site are on the order of hundreds of feet thick, and composed of silty sands, sands, gravel, cobble, and boulders.

4. 7. 7. 2 Regional Seismicity and Fault Zones
The California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, defines an active fault as one that has been subjected to surface displacement within the last 11, 000 years. A fault is considered inactive if it has not shown geologic evidence of surface displacement in the last 11, 000 years.

4. 7. 7. 3 Soils
The Preliminary Geotechnical Report prepared by Petra Geosciences encountered five soil units during the excavation of twelve exploratory test pits: Artificial Fill ( af), Alluvium (Qal), Silty Sand ( SM), Sand with Silt SP- SM), and Sand ( SP) ( Petra 2024; Appendix F).

4. 7. 1. 4 Paleontological Resources
The Society for Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) defines four categories of paleontological sensitivity for rock units: High Potential, Low Potential, Undetermined Potential, and No Potential. The County of San Bernardino General Plan EIR identifies the Project Site as within an area of Low -to -High Paleontological Sensitivity (SB County 2019). The Cultural Resource Section of the County's 2019 General Plan EIR, and CGS' s geologic map of California identify the Project Site is underlain by Pleistocene - Holocene Age ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 46 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
178
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Alluvium Sediments ( Q: Younger Alluvium) GCS identifies surficial deposits at the Project Site include Qal Alluvial Valley Deposits), and Qw ( Alluvial Wash Deposits) ( SB County 2019; CGS 2025).

4. 7. 2 Geology and Soils ( VII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Less than
Potentially Significant with Less than
Would the Project:

Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death rii r r involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on 171 C
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ri
iii) Seismic -related ground failure,, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? E7
Less than Significant Impact ( i, ii)
The Project Site is not located in an Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known faults cross the Project Site. However, the Project Site is located in a seismically active region of Southern California, where several fault systems are considered to be active or potentially active. Nearby active faults are present in the San Andreas Fault Zone, located approximately 0.4- miles north of the Project Site ( DOC 2025). The Project Site may be subject to ground shaking in the event of an earthquake originating along one of the faults designated as active or potentially active in the Project vicinity. This hazard is common throughout California. Additionally, the Project would be constructed in compliance with the California Building Code as well as City development standards, and the recommendations presented within the site -specific geotechnical report. Therefore, the proposed development on the Project Site would pose no greater risk to public safety or destruction of property than is already present for the region. A less than significant impact would occur.

Less than Significant Impact ( iii)
Liquefaction is a phenomenon where water -saturated granular soil loses shear strength during strong ground shaking produced by earthquakes. Typically, liquefaction occurs in areas where groundwater lies within the upper 50 feet of the ground surface. The loss of soil strength occurs when cyclic pore water pressure increases below the groundwater surface. Potential hazards due to liquefaction include the loss of bearing strength beneath structures, possibly causing foundation failure and/ or significant settlements.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4- 47 April 2025
Residences at Alta Vista 2023- 095. 03
179
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Project Site is located within a San Bernardino County Liquefaction Zone, generally susceptible to medium liquefaction. However, due to the gravelly to cobbly nature of the underlying alluvial -fan materials, as well as the depth to groundwater ( expected to be deeper than 100 feet bgs), the potential for liquefaction is considered to be very low ( Petra 2024; Appendix F). Thus, neither liquefaction nor dynamic settlement were identified as major geotechnical concerns for site development. Additionally, the Project would be constructed in compliance with the California Building Code as well as City development standards, and the recommendations presented within the site -specific geotechnical report. A less than significant impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.